reSee.it - Related Video Feed

He claims that someone has repeatedly requested they appear on his show, but declined a moderated debate. He believes this person is not serious anymore, though he used to be. He states that his occasional Twitter responses are due to lies being told about him. He says he doesn't take it lying down and will not apologize for it.

The speaker discusses the sophistication and self-taught nature of the audience, which is feared by the media and established order. They question why Rupert Murdoch paid $878 million to avoid trial, suggesting it wasn't a business or legal decision. They mention Tucker Carlson being fired by Fox News for his views and highlight the irony of paying him not to talk. The speaker emphasizes that Tucker was a valuable asset for populist nationalism. They also mention Governor Ron DeSantis' declining popularity and argue that Murdoch paid a large sum to perpetuate a false narrative. The speaker criticizes the use of threatening letters and the term "election deniers."

I've talked a lot with Tucker. Regarding Congressman Dan Crenshaw's video denying he's ever met Tucker, it's a lie. He's a globalist stooge, and Tucker invited him on his show to stop being a coward. Then Elon Musk questioned Crenshaw's animosity towards Tucker. Crenshaw wanted to debate me on Joe Rogan's show, but he didn't follow through. A lot of people have information on him. His obsession with Tucker is unhealthy. Don't bet against Trump, Elon, or Tucker. We're sick of RINOs like Crenshaw, who will be primaried. We know about his CIA operations moved to England, and he hasn't been keeping it in his pants. America's ready to deal with him nonviolently. He can run his mouth, but we know he bows down to the Democrats and tries to put innocent Navy SEALs in prison. Crenshaw's day is coming. Also, the biggest sale in history is running right now at the alexjonesstore.com.

This whole Elon Trump situation is escalating, and someone needs to step up and deal with it. Ideally, it should be someone already involved. I'm calling on one of you to take one for the team and make history. You know who you are, so it's time to step up and do what needs to be done.

Tucker Carlson, the former number 1 guy on television, was removed from his show due to his controversial discussions. Despite being viewed as controversial by CNN, he and Joe Rogan, the number 1 guy in podcasting, are actually popular figures because they are seen as genuine and not "bullshitting" their audience. Tucker was known for breaking with the Republican Party and having different views from others on his network. Unlike MSNBC and CNN hosts, who have similar opinions, Tucker's views on issues like the war in Ukraine and lockdowns were drastically different. Now, he expresses his opinions freely on Twitter. It is important for people to wake up and be aware.

The speaker believes they are being targeted due to their increasing popularity and claims Candace Owens and Tucker Carlson are colluding in a "hit job" against them. They assert that such attacks will only make them a martyr. The speaker criticizes Tucker Carlson for being out of touch and derisive towards working-class Americans, particularly those who disagree with him. They question Carlson's authenticity as a champion of white males and accuse him of hypocrisy. The speaker contrasts their own background with Carlson's, emphasizing their "real American stock" and involvement in domestic issues. They reject inclusive populism and accuse Carlson of being a "modern Bill Buckley" but less intelligent. The speaker challenges Carlson to have them on his show instead of gossiping. They express disgust for those in politics with privileged backgrounds and accuse Carlson of being "filth." They describe a scenario where J.D. Vance corrals "loser anti-Semites and racists" into a "CIA plantation" to fight a war with China while Israel benefits.

Tucker Carlson is no longer with Fox News, which is a positive outcome for many. While I'm relieved that someone who has been responsible for death threats and violence towards me and others is gone, I can't help but feel like this is just a temporary victory. It's like the scene after the credits in a Marvel movie, where the villain's hand emerges to continue their evil plans. Deplatforming is effective and necessary.

Speaker 0 states that individuals can choose to act independently and reject assistance. However, this independence purportedly lasts only about six hours. The speaker claims "they" want not only defense but also offense. The speaker references a tweet by Tucker Carlson that names names, which the speaker has not verified but acknowledges Carlson is "on fire." The speaker indicates that names are now being called out.

I hate drama. I hate influencer drama. I hate Internet drama. I hate the theatrics of it. And so I want to tell you something. The only reason that I'm going up against Crenshaw is I am sick and tired of watching government officials and people in high places try to silence and bully regular American citizens. I'm sick of saying it. Somebody's gotta stand up to this shit. It might as well be me. It might as well be me. On 12/09/2025, I received a legal demand letter from lawyers representing congressman Dan Crenshaw. They are threatening to sue me for defamation because of comments I made on my podcast about a message that he sent me. So this all transpired from a conversation that I had with Tulsi Gabbard. And I was concerned... Although I didn't mention his name in the interview... I wanted to know how a newer congressman can afford to hire a mainstream DJ, Steve Aoki, to spin at his fortieth birthday party. I didn't just make this up. Somebody sent me the invitation that he had sent out to everybody for his fortieth birthday. And so that's where I got this from. Anyways, here's the clip with Tulsi. Is there any direct money? I mean, know, you see all these people you see all these people show up in Congress, the Senate, the cabinet, whatever, and, you know, not wealthy. Yeah. Speaker 1: I don't have firsthand experience in this. I have often questioned the same thing. I know a big factor is the insider trading that goes on in Congress. And again, some people will say, well, like, hey, I didn't know anything about this. I'm just making investments for my family or my wife or my husband is making investments. I don't know anything about what's going on. Maybe they're being honest, maybe they're not. But the reality is you're in a position where you're making decisions, either in committee or on the House floor, that influence our markets, that influence the outcomes of certain industries, either causing some to tank or others to skyrocket. And the mere perception of insider trading shouldn't exist. This is legislation, again, I introduced in Congress years ago. No member of Congress should be allowed to do any trading of any stocks, neither should their spouse, neither should their senior staff. Period. These are the people who have access to proprietary private information that's not open to everybody in the public, or certainly before it becomes public. And the possibility of the abuse of power in trading on that information should not exist. It's interesting because as we're seeing there are some members of Congress who say that share my view on that, but who are continuing to trade stocks themselves. The Senate just passed, I think out of committee, first step legislation that would reflect similar to banning members and their spouses. We'll see where it goes. In the Senate we've heard a lot of talk coming from leaders from both parties, but no action has been taken. That to me is the most obvious way that people are going from being elected and having no money and you make, what, dollars $160 a year or whatever the salary is now to literally becoming multimillionaires. That is the most obvious way. There are kind of stringent requirements of financial reporting that every member has to do certainly at least once a year, more often if you are actively trading in stocks. But it I think it would be a little hard, not impossible, but a little hard if somebody's just coming and bringing you a sack of cash. Speaker 0: So after the conversation with Tulsi, that's when I got the text or the message on Instagram from congressman Crenshaw that I find threatening, telling me he spoke with his boys at six. Here's a screenshot. Hey, Sean. You have the ability to contact your fellow team guy if you've got a problem with me or have questions about how I'm getting rich. Some of my boys at six told me about your indirect swipe at me. Some of my beliefs are based on trendy narratives instead of facts. And just so you know, I mean, Dan does have a history of threatening people. Once again, here is Dan threatening to kill Tucker Carlson. And then, again, he reaffirms that he's not joking. Speaker 2: Have you ever met Tucker? Speaker 0: We've talked a lot. He's the worst person. Okay. So I get the message. I take it is extremely threatening. It is a tier one unit, the best, most effective tier one unit in the world, deadliest unit. But I don't do anything. I move on. And then a little over a year later, I'm interviewing, oh, a member from SEAL Team six. Maybe he's one of Dan's boys at six. So he brought up the fact that he had asked a congressman with an eye patch, didn't wanna mention his name, to help him with his book debacle. He received no aid. I filled in the blank. I said, oh, you must be talking about congressman Crenshaw. Let me share my experience with you, my interactions with congressman Crenshaw. So I shared him. I told him about the Instagram message, and I told him that I found that threatening. And then I asked Matt if he was one of Dan's boys at six, Maybe he was here to come beat me up. Matt assured me he wasn't. Here's the clip. Speaker 2: I'll give you another example. In the height of my my issues, I contacted a former SEAL. I won't name names, but he has an eye patch, And he's a congressman out of a state You Speaker 0: mean Dan Crenshaw? Speaker 2: I'm not naming names. Speaker 0: Another one of my Speaker 2: favorite Sir, here's my situation. You know, Dan? Speaker 0: Dan actually sent me a message. I should fucking read this to you. But, basically, he tells me I brought something up about him, and I never even met I gave him the courtesy of not even mentioning his fucking name. It was about his birthday party where he hired Steve Aoki to to DJ his birthday. I mean, that can't be fucking cheap. Right? Especially on a congressman's salary. And I brought that up. And Dan sends me a message that says his boys over at six are really upset with me that I brought that up, and they're gonna they might come beat me up. Speaker 2: Boys at six. Speaker 0: His boys over at six. Speaker 2: Well, to infer he's got I don't know why congressman would be Speaker 0: threatening me with seal team six, but I'm still fucking waiting. This is actually a couple years This Speaker 2: is threatened quite a Speaker 0: have not had my ass kicked by a couple of guys over at six. But Dan Crunchy he fits with all these fucking people you're talking about. Speaker 2: So I called him. Right? He's a sitting congressman. He's a former officer. And drum roll, please, he was getting ready to release his book. So I call him up. I get a conversation with him. I said, sir, here's my situation. I hired an attorney. The attorney gave me bad advice. Book was published. I've given up attorney client privilege, cooperated everything I can to to fix this. They've still come after me. We can get into all the the other stuff that I'm dealing with. I said, sir, can you help me out with this? He's like, well, you know, I'm I'm about ready to publish my book, and I'm I'm not getting it reviewed. I'm like, well, sir, same same letter of the law that they came after me for failure to seek prepublication review. I didn't get prepublication review because my lawyer told me I didn't have to, and he could do it. Like, in your case, you know you have to get reviewed. I'm here telling you, confirming you have to get reviewed or the government's gonna come after you. He's like, yeah. No. But I'm not gonna write anything classified in my book. I'm like, there's nothing classified in my book. They they said there was. They went through it. They said, nope. There's nothing classified in it. You just failed to seek review. I'm like, so if I only thing I failed to do was seek review, you're willingly going around that obligation, and you don't give a shit. He's like, yeah. But I'm not gonna write about anything classified in my book. That was his answer. Never talked to him again. So he published his book. No review. Nothing's happened. He's kept his money. He's a sitting congressman. I got a payment plan. So so to say I've been alone So Speaker 0: I guess I guess you're not one of Dan's boys over at six. Speaker 2: That's kinda Definitely not Dave Boys at six. That's a pretty ridiculous statement if I've ever heard one.

Speaker 0 states that after yesterday's episode in which they went “kind of for the jugular” with Turning Point USA, they believe everybody in the entire world has had enough.

The speaker describes a coordinated smear campaign against him, asserting that after he announced he would challenge Trump, a lineup of public figures began attacking him or being described as “feds.” He cites Ian Myles Chong, Tucker Carlson, and Milo as examples, saying the criticism revolves around insinuations that he is connected to or controlled by federal agents. He argues that these accusations are part of a broader effort to silence the American people and dismiss his voice. He contrasts the public’s reaction to his campaign with what he regards as a coordinated “fed” narrative, claiming that Tucker Carlson has insinuated he is a fed, and noting that Carlson’s father was a CIA agent who ran Voice of America for forty years, along with Carlson’s collaborations with people he labels as CIA assets. The speaker provides a cascade of biographical and investigative claims about people connected to Carlson and others: - Eric Prince, described as a CIA asset, appeared in a group chat with Tucker Carlson; Carlson had on Joe Kent, a green beret, who is described as intelligence. - Curtis Yarvin is described as the son of an American diplomat who works with Peter Thiel, who is described as a federal informant. - Peter Thiel is claimed to be an FBI informant; Thiel’s Palantir is said to have contracted with the CIA for almost ten years (2001–2008) and now contracts with the NSA and FBI. - Thiel funded JD Vance’s Senate campaign, giving $15,000,000 to help him secure the Trump endorsement; Carlson allegedly helped persuade Trump to make Vance the vice president. - Carlson is said to have invited Kevin Spacey, described as a close friend of Bill and Hillary Clinton, on a Christmas interview. - The speaker contends that a social media ecosystem includes many who see nothing suspicious about these connections, including CIA involvement, green berets, and intelligence ties that push certain candidates on Trump. He asserts he's been demonized for years: banned from social media, banks, airlines, and credit card processors; subpoenaed; and money frozen. He claims this is because he has grown a substantial, loyal following and uses it to organize and mobilize swing-state voters rather than taking advertising or sponsorships. He says his followers are genuine and committed, which frightens those who want influencers who can be paid to push narratives. The speaker reflects on Charlottesville and white anxiety, suggesting others only recently acknowledge these issues. He asserts he would appear civil in an interview with Tucker Carlson and asks for a platform to “clear the record.” He contends he is being targeted for standing up to the GOP establishment and for criticizing both the right-wing establishment and the left. He predicts he will be “patsied” and that those opposing him will try to take him down, leaving him to be the “dark MAGA” guardian, not the hero, who nonetheless confronts the country’s problems and fights for real change. He closes by declaring he will be the villain if necessary, stating that the country will never give him the credit he deserves, but that he performs this role out of duty, not glory.

Speaker 1 responded to Carlson's criticism by saying he doesn't know what Carlson is saying. He suggested Carlson should acquire a television network to express his views and reach a wider audience. The conversation then shifted to a question about communication with the lessee before bylaws.

Tucker Carlson, calling from the United States, requests the media line to pass a message to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. He mentions that they are coming to liberate Canada and will be there soon.

The speaker believes they are overdosing on "red pills" and that unnamed "they" see them as a problem and are escalating their attacks, possibly even trying to harm them. Candace Owens was deployed to do a "hit job," followed by Tucker Carlson, but the speaker claims it won't work and that such actions only make them a martyr. The speaker accuses Tucker Carlson of being out of touch and derisive towards working-class Americans, particularly those who disagree with him. The speaker contrasts themself with Carlson, claiming to be genuinely American and "America First," while Carlson is not. The speaker rejects "inclusive populism" and accuses Carlson of being a "modern Bill Buckley" but less intelligent. The speaker challenges Carlson to have them on his show instead of gossiping with Candace Owens. The speaker expresses disgust for people in politics whose parents were powerful or wealthy, contrasting their own family history with Carlson's. The speaker believes J.D. Vance wants to corral "loser anti-Semites and racists" into a "CIA plantation" to fight a war with China while Israel benefits.

Tucker Carlson is facing criticism for naming individuals allegedly pushing for US military involvement in Iran, reminiscent of past Middle East conflicts. Carlson stated the real divide is between warmongers and peacemakers, not those supporting Israel or Iran. He identified Sean Hannity, Mark Levin, Rupert Murdoch, Ike Perlmutter, and Miriam Adelson as potentially influencing Trump towards military action. The speaker argues Americans deserve to know who is advising the president on war, and questions why supporters of intervention seem secretive and attack dissenters. Naming those potentially leading the US into another Middle East war is portrayed as a heroic act. The speaker notes Carlson's past popularity as a news host, emphasizing the impact his message would have had on his former show.

Tyrone explains that he and his friends gather every Tuesday to watch Tucker Carlson's show on X, formerly on Fox News. They believe Carlson is now doing even better since he left Fox News, as they perceive it as the most credible media in America. They discuss how the media controls what teleprompter readers can say, and now that Carlson is no longer with Fox News, he is not restricted by that. The conversation ends with a request to get Don back on the phone, as it is clear that he was not a student at Morgan State University.

The transcript centers on a heated, interconnected discussion about Tucker Carlson, U.S. politics, and the perceived influence of Israel, the Israel lobby, and foreign interests on American public discourse. The participants volley accusations, defenses, and conspiracy theories, with several notable claims and counterclaims. - The opening segment portrays Tucker Carlson as a target of powerful actors. Speaker 0 argues that Netanyahu and others have labeled Carlson a problem, suggesting that calling him a “fox in a henhouse” is a veiled call for violence and censorship. They warn that such rhetoric could provoke political suppression or harm toward Carlson, and they reference debates over whether Carlson’s anti-war stance and Iran policy have drawn attacks from prominent Israel-first voices. - The conversation shifts to alleged political interference and investigations. Speaker 0 references Kash Patel and a mid-September claim that Patel confronted J. D. Vance, Tulsi Gabbard, and others about an investigation, asserting Patel was told not to involve certain intelligence matters or foreign involvement in domestic issues. They describe “the Israel lobby literally run by Netanyahu” as attacking Carlson and pressing to “neutralize” him. There is also a claim that Democrats celebrated or advocated harm against Charlie Kirk and that “six trainees” in a town suggested Kirk would be dead the next day, though no evidence is presented for these claims. - Speaker 1 introduces a harsh critique of Carlson, saying he is “the most dangerous anti-Semite in America,” accusing him of aligning with those who celebrate Nazis, defend Hamas, and criticize Trump for stopping Iran’s nuclear ambitions. The comment emphasizes that Carlson is not MAGA, and asserts a leadership role for Carlson in a modern-day Hitler youth narrative. - The dialogue between Speakers 0 and 2 (Adam King) delves into broader political positioning. Adam King says Carlson “left MAGA,” that MAGA is a big tent whereas Carlson seeks a smaller, more controlled sphere, and that Carlson is working against the Trump agenda by attempting to influence 2028 considerations. Speaker 0 counters, arguing Tucker covers a wide range of topics and remains central to the movement, not simply fixated on Israel. - There is debate about the influence of Jewish voters and donors on the 2024 campaign, with back-and-forth estimates of Jewish contributions and skepticism about the degree to which Jews will back Vance or other candidates. The participants discuss antisemitism accusations, censorship, and the difficulty of debating these topics. They criticize the idea of labeling people antisemitic as a manipulation tactic and urge more open dialogue. - The dialogue touches on the media landscape and the limits of speaking on both sides. Adam King argues for more balanced dialogue and warns that the current rhetoric—terms like “neutralize”—fuels violence. He expresses concern about online harassment of Jews and the normalization of violent language in political discourse. - There are tangential conversations about foreign influence in U.S. affairs. Adam King mentions Qatar, the World Economic Forum (WEF), and other foreign money; he cites a Newsmax report about Mamdani’s foreign funding and discusses debates over whether Qatar has a U.S. airbase or is primarily involved in training programs. The participants debate where influence truly lies, whether with Soros, the left, or other actors. - The segment ends with a mix of promotional content and entertainment, including a satirical insert about Ultra Methylene Red, a product advertised with claims about cognitive and physiological benefits, followed by fictional, humor-laden banter about “Batman” and “the Riddler” reacting to the product. In sum, the transcript captures a multi-faceted, contentious exchange over Carlson’s position in the MAGA movement, accusations of antisemitism and censorship, perceived foreign influence in U.S. politics, and the tensions within the right-wing ecosystem, all interwoven with promotional and humorous interludes.

Tyrone explains that he and his friends gather every Tuesday to watch Tucker Carlson's show. They used to watch him on Fox News, but now he's not there anymore. They believe Tucker Carlson is the most credible person in American media. Tyrone suggests that Tucker may have left Fox News because the corporate media controls what the teleprompter readers can say. The conversation then shifts to getting Don from Morgan State University on the phone, as it is clear that the previous speaker was not a student from there.

People are preparing to flood the House of Representatives. They received a note about doing some housecleaning. They are determined and not backing down. They plan to breach the chambers and take Nancy Pelosi's gavel. If she refuses to let go, they might bring her back too. It's going to be a long and intense week. They express support and caution to each other.

Fox News has severed bow ties with Tucker Carlson. After all these years, they are parting ways, which means he was fired. He's already on a plane to Moscow to meet with his manager. Now Tucker can spend more time at home tanning his testicles and touching himself to that sexy green m and m. Sadly, he's probably not done poisoning old people's brains. The question now is where will he do it next? Will he go to OAN? Will he go to Newsmax? Will he crawl back up Satan's fiery b hole from whence he came? We don't know. One of the most despicable Mother Tuckers ever to appear on American television.

The speaker called for a boycott of Tesla, stating a personal desire to bankrupt the company to enhance their resume for future job prospects. The speaker characterizes the boycott as an example of Americans using economic power to send a message to the oligarchy, asserting that the country is not for sale. The speaker criticizes Fox News and Rupert Murdoch, urging them to represent the people's stories instead of working for those trying to buy the country. The speaker claims that the American people are "way scarier than Rupert Murdoch."