reSee.it - Tweets Saved By @thedreydossier
@thedreydossier - Drey
The prosecution rests. https://t.co/N1L1I9EJcH
Video Transcript AI Summary
Elon Musk appears to be descending quickly, and the speaker tracks his aircraft’s route. They identify Musk’s location as being in California, first noting San Francisco, then Hawaii (Honolulu), and later focusing on Los Angeles—specifically Santa Monica—where they say he landed.
The speaker then checks where the plane came from and says it departed from Van Nuys, California, describing it as a “private plane panopticon” traveling from Van Nuys to Santa Monica. They estimate the travel time: about 14 nautical miles between the airports, about 20 minutes in the air, plus taxi time of roughly 10 minutes on each end, for a total trip of about 40 minutes.
They compare this to driving time, saying Van Nuys to Santa Monica takes about 24 minutes by car and, even during rush hour, still under 35 minutes. They note an inconsistency—only a four-minute difference between air and car—and explain the difference as arising from the airplane needing to follow a route that is not a straight line: “you gotta go out of your way,” requiring “this little woot right here.”
They argue that the route choice is inefficient, describing it as “the least efficient way” to travel between the two locations. They also claim Larry Ellison is “bankrolling the takeover of your news and media,” saying Ellison wants to “own this town” but cannot tolerate viewing it through a car window for more than ten minutes. The speaker frames this as a refusal to participate in ordinary life, and suggests it reflects fear of being tracked by cameras or location data being stored or categorized.
They conclude that this situation should be “exhibit A” against a merger on business and economic fundamental grounds, adding that if someone is too detached from ordinary life to travel by car between Van Nuys and Santa Monica without leaving the Earth’s surface, then their family should not be entrusted with deciding how ordinary life is portrayed, reported on, or understood.
The speaker ends by asking whether Peter Teal is also present.
Full Transcript
Whoa, Elon Musk is descending pretty fast. Wonder where he's on his way to that sneaky little fox. He better not- oh, is he in California? Oh no! Oh, thank God. Okay, San Francisco. Let's see where my bestie is, Ellison. Okay, oh, Hawaii, Honolulu, yeah, that makes sense. Wonder where his other plane is headed. Let's see, does that say Santa- no! No. Oh God, no, is he like Los Angeles proper? Oh, damn it, Santa Monica! Are you kidding me? He landed in Santa Monica, that bougie... Oh no, what's he doing in LA? I knew I had OSHA for some reason. God, where'd he fly from? Let's see, from... New... Oh, oh, what airport is that? Oh God. It's Van Nuys. This privacy pillaging private plane panopticon of the Pacific just flew from Van Nuys, California, to Santa Monica, California. Oh! How long of a flight is this? See. Okay, so I looked it up, and it's about 14 nautical miles between both airports, and it's about 20 minutes in the air, plus taxiing about 10 minutes on each end, so that's a 40 minute trip in total. How long is it? It can't be that long to drive. I've driven that before. Van Nuys is- It's 24 minutes, and during rush hour, still under 35 minutes. Bike or, oh, this guy. Wait a second. How is it, wait, 20 minutes in the air, 24 minutes by car? How is- The airplane only four minutes faster. Wait, that doesn't make sense. Oh, it's because you gotta do this little-- Here, I'll show you. See, it's 'cause you gotta do this little woot right here. So you can't do a straight line, you gotta do this little-- You gotta go out of your way. You have to go out of your way to go from Van Nuys to Santa Monica, California. You mean to tell me that, mister, oh, let's make it Government frictionless, mister, let's streamline Hollywood production. Chose the least efficient way to get from Van Nuys to Santa Monica. Larry Ellison, ladies and gentlemen, this is the man who is bankrolling the takeover of your news and media. He wants to own this town so badly, but apparently can't stand to look at it through a car window for more than ten minutes. You know what this isn't? This isn't elite efficiency. This is an incredibly expensive refusal to participate in ordinary life. Oh, what happened, Larry? Didn't you wanna drive past some flock cameras? Were you maybe afraid of where that location data might end up? Larry? Larry, were you afraid that maybe some database might try to categorize you, sort you, and decide what your movements mean, Larry? I'm welcome to everybody else's life, screw you, man. Frankly, this should be exhibit A as to why the merger shouldn't happen, just on like a business, economic fundamental level. Like, if you are too detached from ordinary life to travel from Van Nuys to Santa Monica without leaving the surface of the Earth, then perhaps your family shouldn't be entrusted with deciding on how ordinary life is going to be portrayed, reported on, or understood. Just a thought Wait a second. Oh, man, is Peter Teal here too?
reSee.it AI Summary
I’m pulling one of my favorite episodes from the “Who TF Am I Working For?” archives: a secret six-year marriage revealed through the biggest college quarterback deal in history, plus Dave Portnoy accidentally doing investigative journalism. The “Larry Ellison cinematic universe” keeps expanding—follow the full timeline on the original Substack post.
@thedreydossier - Drey
Pulling one of my favorite episodes from the ‘Who TF Am I Working For?’ archives, where a secret six-year marriage (with kids?!) is revealed through the biggest college quarterback deal in history, and somehow Dave Portnoy accidentally does investigative journalism. The Larry Ellison cinematic universe is nothing if not expansive. For the full timeline and journey down this rabbit hole, the original Substack post is here [https://open.substack.com/pub/thedreydossier/p/part-8-who-tf-am-i-working-for-the]
Video Transcript AI Summary
The transcript discusses Larry Ellison and a woman allegedly married to him whose identity “seems to dissolve” when investigated. The speaker says they have been tracking her for nine months and frames the content as a Substack series.
The first focus is the Ellison Institute of Technology (EIT) at Oxford. In December 2024, the University of Oxford announced a long-term strategic alliance with EIT, described as involving $130,000,000 from EIT with Larry Ellison behind it. The speaker notes that Ellison posted about the partnership on X, despite allegedly rarely posting. The speaker then references a New York Times investigation describing EIT as a “complicated web” of largely for-profit companies, with Ellison entities taking “51% of stakes or more,” functioning as a venture capital engine disguised as a research institute.
The speaker then asks who runs the institute and says it was led up until recently by Professor Sir John Bell, described as a Canadian British immunologist and geneticist and the “credible face” of the institution. The speaker claims that in September 2025 Bell stepped down after an all-staff email from Ellison and that internal reports suggested Ellison became unhappy as he grew more hands-on, leading to departures of high-level executives. The speaker says Ellison announced Bell’s successor as Santa Ono, the immediate past president of the University of Michigan.
This connection leads to the alleged wife. The speaker recounts receiving a Google alert in November 2024 about University of Michigan football and seeing Larry Ellison pictured beside a young Chinese woman at a tennis tournament. The article discussed a University of Michigan booster group, Champion Circle, announcing it flipped quarterback Bryce Underwood in a record-setting deal, and it thanked two people: Larry Ellison and his wife, Jo Lin Ju.
The speaker says they searched for information and that message boards and University of Michigan posts did not reveal who she was. The speaker then cites a Daily Mail investigation claiming she was a University of Michigan alumna and an international student from 2010 to 2012, and that she and Ellison had been married for six years. The speaker says Ellison’s wife identity may not be her real name, suggesting “Karen Zhu,” because enrollment verification reportedly found no record for Jo Lin Zhu, while there was a Karen Zhu graduating in the same time frame in the same international studies program.
The speaker further claims that multiple people from that era (classmates, professors, neighbors in Redwood Shores and Woodside, and a sailing community in Newport) allegedly did not recall her. The only potential lead mentioned is an alleged roommate, a nuclear engineering PhD student named Aang Xu. The transcript claims even financial journalists could not verify the relationship.
For the “only” public account, the speaker says it comes from David Portnoy of Barstool Sports. The speaker summarizes Portnoy’s account: Portnoy claims he is a Michigan fan trying to help land Bryce Underwood with his own money, receives a call from Michigan football about another donor, and is told JoLynn is a Barstool fan and is married to Larry Ellison. The speaker highlights Portnoy’s quoted comments in which JoLynn says she went to Michigan during the Brady Hoke era and that she has two kids, with the speaker asking why those details imply a hidden family.
The transcript then describes the speaker’s suggestion that someone anticipated media spread by giving Portnoy a Zoom call experience to make the participants “exist,” enabling the story to spread through Barstool’s audience without anyone meeting her in person. The speaker also claims this could create media capture, noting CBS and Fox air Michigan games and discussing Ellison’s ownership of Paramount Pictures.
The speaker ends by saying the topic will continue in a part two, including further discussion of the roommate “rabbit hole” and findings about University of Michigan international students during Trump’s visa crackdowns.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: A $130,000,000 institute in Oxford, England. A six year secret marriage finally revealed. And Dave Portnoy? We need to talk about a woman who everybody just recently learned is married to one of the most powerful men in the world. A woman whose identity seems to dissolve the second you look at it.
A woman who I have been tracking for nine months. And many of you know the drill, this is primarily a Substack series, so you should go follow me on the Dre dossier. Link is in my bio. Now there's a lot of ground to cover here. Okay?
So we've gotta kinda move through this whole thing quickly, but we should probably start with the public face of this whole operation, and that's the Ellison Institute of Technology. In December 2024, the University of Oxford announced a long term strategic alliance with EIT. This was going to have a $130,000,000 from EIT, Larry Ellison behind it. And this partnership seemed to be a pretty big deal. And the reason I know that is because Larry Ellison even posted about it on X this summer, which if you've been following this series, then you know as well as I do that he does not post on social media ever.
And basically he posted that he's in his philanthropic era and he's ready to give back to humanity and and do things like, you know, end world hunger using technology. Which is a wild thing to say for someone who just used technology to starve Gaza for how many? A year and a half? Allegedly. But despite what I'm sure Larry Ellison would love for you to believe, EIT is not exactly charity.
It's far from it, in fact. The New York Times investigation recently found that it's more of a complicated web of largely for profit companies, which is strange for academic research institutes. And it's because this model spins successful research in commercial ventures in which Ellison's entities take 51% of stakes or more. So it's a venture capital engine disguised as a research institute. Great.
And so I'm thinking to myself, like, well, who's running this thing? Like, who's running these programs? And so I look it up and I see that up until this last month, this ambitious research institute, to put it nicely, was led by Professor Sir John Bell. He's a Canadian British immunologist and geneticist. He was more of the credible face of the institution, that is, until this last September 2025, when everything changed.
Apparently, Ellison himself had sent an all staff email that was announcing that Bell was voluntarily stepping down, but internal reports had suggested that Ellison was getting very unhappy with how the institute was being run as he became more and more hands on. This was leading to a swift departure of several executives at a very high level. So I guess this for profit vision was clashing with the academic world. Who would have thought? And this is when the first big connection kind of snapped into place for me because Ellison had immediately announced his successor, who was a guy by the name of Santa Ono, the immediate past president of the University of Michigan.
When I saw Ono's name, I froze. Like, University of Michigan. Why did that sound so familiar? Like, Larry Ellison didn't go there, but I had heard it somewhere recently in relation to him, and I just couldn't remember where. Then it hit me.
And I remembered the Google alert that I got back in November 2024 because that's when I first learned about her. I had gotten this alert in my inbox, and the headline had read something along the lines of, like, University of Michigan football. And I was thinking to myself, well, I only get Google alerts for one person, which I'm sure you can guess who that is. Like, I don't care about football, why am I getting this? And I opened the article to a picture of Larry Ellison sitting next to some young Chinese woman at a tennis tournament.
The article itself was about the University of Michigan's booster group called Champion Circle and how they were announcing that they had flipped star quarterback Bryce Underwood from LSU to Michigan in this record setting expensive deal worth reportedly, like, 10 to $12,000,000 or something like that. I don't know much about college football stuff. Okay? And in their statement, they thanked two people, Larry Ellison and his wife, Jo Lin Ju. Wife?
Did you just say wife? I'm sorry. Isn't he, like, divorced five times over and 81 years old? Like, who is this woman? I'm scouring the Internet.
Right? Like, looking at message boards and University of Michigan blog posts and stuff to see if I can find anything out about this woman. And, like, nobody seems to know who she is. But then I came across this investigation by the Daily Mail, which I so appreciate that they jumped deep into this because it was wild. And according to that report, the claim is that she's an alumna of the University of Michigan, that she's an international student who attended the school from 2010 to 2012.
They also claimed that she and Ellison had gotten married six years ago. Six years ago. How do you have a secret wife for six years and it's all just now coming out through a college football announcement? Like, so my mind is racing. Right?
Like, why did Larry Ellison just spend $10,000,000 on a kid playing football for a university he didn't go to? And why is he married to a woman who's forty two years his junior? Oh, and apparently, Jolyn Zhu may not even be her real name. It could be something like Karen Zhu because here's the thing. When they went to go verify her enrollment at the university, they said that they couldn't find any record of Jo Lin Zhu ever attending the school.
They do have a Karen Zhu who graduated the same year and and went within the same time frame and was in the same international studies program. So, like, I guess that's that's the winner. Okay. So she's got a nickname. Fine.
It's not abnormal for international students to have, like, an Americanized name when they come to study here. But it gets stranger from here. Okay? Because when the Daily Mail went to go talk to other people who would have known Jolyn or Karen, like students from that era, professors that were in our program, not one person recalled her. In fact, the only potential connection that they could find was an alleged roommate, a nuclear engineering PhD student named Aang Xu.
And we're gonna come back to him in a minute because he's really fascinating. But beyond that and the University of Michigan claiming that she attended there, nothing. I even made a list of everyone who claims to not have met Karen. Listen. Her Michigan classmates, obviously, don't remember her.
Her roommate's PhD advisor was never mentioned. Her roommate's research collaborators apparently never met her. Her neighbors in Redwood Shores don't know her. Her current neighbors in Woodside, California never met her. The sailing community in Newport where Ellison Summers never met her.
Not even financial journalists could verify the existence of their relationship. Six years. You know what? Actually, I lied. There is one person who claims to have met her.
The only public account of her entire personality, her motivations, what she's actually like, all of that comes from one source, and that source is David Portnoy from Barstool Sports. Like, Ariana, what are you doing here? So David Portnoy tells the whole story on his podcast, but the t l d r is that he's a big Michigan fan and that he had been publicly trying to help land Bryce Underwood, this five star quarterback, and he was gonna put up his own money to try to help the University of Michigan. And then he gets a call from the University of Michigan's football program, and they tell him that there's another donor who wants to help. And at first, says no, that he's, like, wanting to do it independently, and then they mention, like, oh, she's such a big Barstool Sports fan, and, oh, did we mention that she's married to Larry Ellison?
Like, okay. Now, I'm sorry. Wait a second. You're telling me that the second richest man in the world has a secret wife of six years who nobody has any recollection of, but she's just, like, such a Barstool sports fan. Like, okay.
They get on the Zoom call. Right? And according to Portnoy, JoLynn says, like, I went to Michigan during the Brady Hoke era, and I never wanna live through something like that again. I have two kids. I can't stomach waking up on Saturday mornings knowing that we're not the best team on the field.
Wait. Wait. Wait. Wait a second. Slow down.
Two kids? Is that what you said? You have two kids? You mean Larry's two kids. Right?
Like, the two kids in Hollywood? No. You mean you have two kids? You have a secret family potentially that nobody's known about for six years? You've hidden these kids?
And and now you're, what, revealing this on a Zoom call to David Portnoy? Why would you tell David Portnoy this? Like, none of this was adding up. Also, let me be clear. I'm not saying that Portnoy is making any of this up.
Like, I believe this is his account of what happened. But I also felt like this was too weird not to be calculated. You know, like, especially for Larry Ellison. Like, this can't be the first time everybody's hearing about all of this. Right?
Like but it is. You know? Dave Portnoy is breaking news here for us. And here's the gag. Portnoy now becomes the source because Larry Ellison and Jo Lin Zhu have never actually publicly confirmed their marriage.
They just don't speak on it when journalists ask. What I'm suggesting is that somebody knew exactly how this experience would play out. You know, like, give Portnoy just enough of an experience, like a Zoom call with real people so that he can establish that they do exist. He talks about it on his podcast because that's what Portnoy does, and he becomes a credible witness. And the story spreads throughout Barstool's massive audience, and the narrative gets felt without anyone actually having to meet this woman in person.
It's peak PR, and it worked perfectly. Think about how good this is in terms of media capture for Larry Ellison because guess what networks air Michigan college football games? Yep. CBS and Fox. And guess who owns CBS?
Paramount Pictures. And guess who bought Paramount Pictures for their son this year and then fired Stephen Colbert? Yeah. Larry Ellison. And you know that $10,000,000 investment is going to drive a lot of traffic to his network now because I guess Underwood's a really good player.
I don't know. Like I said, I'm not a football guy, but it is just worth considering, like, you know, thinking about that the next time you're watching one of those games. Like, pay more attention to what the commercials are and, like, there's a reason he wants eyeballs on his network. Lest we forget the quid pro quo deal where he promised Trump some PSAs and stuff. It's just worth considering.
Okay. So we're running out of time, I'm gonna make this a two parter. I'm gonna make the next part, like, right now though and post it right after this because we are not finished here. We're not even close to done. Okay?
Because the roommate situation and zoo, that's a whole rabbit hole. Oh, and then I've gotta show you what I found today with the University of Michigan and their international students programs during Trump's visa crackdowns because statistically, it just doesn't make any sense. And just go watch the next video.
@thedreydossier - Drey
Flock around and find out. https://t.co/rAaGEIn42I
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker says West Hollywood approved a 2026 amendment to a Flock safety agreement despite local opposition, including the speaker raising concerns before the vote about weak data protection. The speaker requested postponing the vote so data protection provisions could be tightened or reviewed by the city attorney, not rejecting the system that night.
After the council voted to approve the amendment, the speaker questioned the rush, especially given Los Angeles officials reportedly raising concerns about moving forward with Flock due to data issues and appearing close to resolving them. The speaker states Los Angeles did not approve Flock and was not planning to approve it, so they ask why West Hollywood moved quickly.
To investigate, the speaker reviewed the city agenda materials and says they initially missed an attachment: the staff report. The speaker describes a staff report as a summary of agenda items given to city council members, explaining the agreement and framing issues so council members know what they are being asked to approve. The speaker claims council has little reason to question the contents when the staff report is signed or prepared with attorney involvement.
The speaker claims the staff report does not match the actual amendment in attachment B. For data access, the staff report allegedly says access requires a valid court order and written consent, while the amendment allegedly adds “or by applicable law,” making access broader. The speaker also says the amendment excludes specific task force personnel, embedded personnel, and city-facilitated personnel. The staff report allegedly states Flock receives only the right necessary to provide contracted services, while the amendment allegedly grants perpetual and irrevocable aggregated data rights, including machine learning training, other offerings, and post-term use indefinitely.
The speaker further claims the staff report lists indemnification as a meaningful remedy for the city, but the actual city agreement says indemnification is omitted.
Based on these discrepancies, the speaker says they are challenging the approval vote and requesting the item be brought back for additional review and another vote, arguing the original vote was based on a misleading staff report. The speaker says they created a digital copy of the materials, marked discrepancies, compiled them, and submitted the report to the city as a basis for additional public review, while noting they are not a lawyer.
The speaker urges viewers to check their own city’s Flock-related agenda items by downloading the staff report and the amendment/contract, compare them, document discrepancies, call them out publicly, send findings to council members, and submit them to the city clerk.
The speaker also says they are curious whether similar discrepancies are occurring in other cities, suggesting it could indicate a larger investigation if found elsewhere.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: They don't match. The staff report does not match the flock city agreement. Now if you too are pissed that your city passed one of these flock safety agreements, then listen up. Okay? Because I think I just found a loophole.
So my city of West Hollywood recently passed a new 2026 amendment to the flock safety agreement, even though the people here had been fighting like hell against it, myself included. And before the city vote, I raised some concerns with the city council at one of the meetings about the amendment's weak data protection laws. And all I asked was that city council postpone the vote until these provisions could be tightened or just looked at again by the city attorney. Like, I wasn't even asking them to reject the entire system that night, the whole lord knows. I would love that.
But I was just, you know, trying to buy us some time, and I feel like it was very reasonable to ask why these provisions were so much looser than the ones that we had in 2023. Tonight, that space is attachment b of the city's revised contract with FLOC. The staff report safeguards. The revised contract narrowly redefines or omits altogether. So I'm asking you on the record to withhold the approval of this contract until the following concerns are appropriately addressed.
Nevertheless, they were in this huge rush. It seemed to get this vote done, and they voted to approve it. The majority did, which was both infuriating and very confusing to me because what was the rush? I mean, Los Angeles officials, which, by the way, if you don't live here, West Hollywood is a separate city technically from Los Angeles, so we have separate agreements for stuff like this even though we share a sheriff's department. It's very confusing.
Los Angeles officials were very much raising concerns about moving forward with Flock as a partner because of all these data issues. And they were making it seem in the council meeting that Los Angeles was, like, very close to figuring it out, and we were just first. Therefore, we're gonna approve it because Los Angeles definitely will. Turns out Los Angeles did not approve it and are not planning to approve it. So why was West Hollywood in such a rush to push this shitty contract through?
The whole thing felt very suspicious to me. So I went back to all of the agenda items, the materials that were linked to the corresponding meeting, and as I was going through them, I realized that I missed one of the attachments. It was the staff report. Now for anyone who doesn't know, a staff report is this thing right here. And what it is is it's this report.
It's a summary of the agenda items that are given to the city council members, and it explains what the agreement is, and it frames all of the issues, and it tells council members exactly what they're being asked to approve. And so when you think about it, that makes city staff some of the most influential members of local government because council members are relying heavily on these reports when they're making decisions. And when a staff report has, let's say, been signed by the city attorney or even prepared by the city attorney, then the council has very little reason to question whether or not it accurately represents what they're being asked to vote on. I, however, don't trust anybody. And so I read through the city staff report, and I was comparing it to the most recent amendment that was voted on and approved.
And you guys, they don't match. The staff report is not reflective of what is in the actual amendment. For example, when it comes to accessing the city data, the staff report presents this as you have to have a valid court order and written consent in order to obtain that data. However, attachment b, which is the new flock amendment, adds at the end of that or by applicable law, which makes that much more broad. Not to mention that excludes specific task force personnel, embedded personnel, city facilitated personnel, and the report states that Flock only receives the right necessary to provide the contracted services.
However, the amendment grants perpetual and irrevocable aggregated data rights, including machine learning training, other offerings, I guess, and post term use. Indefinitely. Irrevocable. But not to worry. The staff report lists indemnification as a meaningful remedy for the city.
Meanwhile, when you look at the actual city agreement, it says indemnification is omitted. Omitted. Anyhoo, so I'm using this as grounds to challenge the approval, the vote that went through, and request that the item be brought back for additional review and another vote. Because the original vote was apparently based off of a staff report that was incredibly misleading. Now should council members have read the actual flock agreement themselves?
Yes. Probably. But this report has been prepared by the city staff, and the attorney signed off on it, and it's not accurate, which is a huge problem. I made a digital copy of all of these, and I marked up everything, every discrepancy, and I compiled together this report and submitted it to the city as that basis to bring it back up for additional public review. And granted, I'm not a lawyer, so I have no idea if this will work.
But in the meantime, if your city has approved these flock cameras, then I strongly urge you to go online, find your city council meeting, go to the agenda items, and download the staff report and the amendment or the contract. And read what the city staff told council to vote on. See if they match, compare, contrast. And if they don't, then start documenting every single discrepancy and call it out publicly. Send your findings to your council members.
Submit them to the city clerk. Do what you have to do because that should be brought back up for additional review, if not. In my opinion, I know. We'll see. I'll let you guys know what ends up happening here.
But, also, I'm extremely curious to know if this is happening in other cities as well. Because if we start finding that these kinds of discrepancies are in multiple places, then we could be looking at a much, much bigger investigation on our hands.
@thedreydossier - Drey
I’m sorry. My computer drew WHAT for Larry Ellison? https://t.co/ExduNyBExk
Video Transcript AI Summary
The transcript claims that Larry Ellison, via Oracle, has sought “every state's voter rolls” because Ellison has wanted such data since 2014. It describes a chain of Oracle acquisitions and surveillance tools that allegedly built dossiers on people across the United States.
It says Oracle bought BlueKai, which allegedly embedded code on many websites and copied what visitors read, searched, and typed into “one Information” to Oracle. About ten months later, Oracle allegedly bought DataLogics, which the transcript claims obtained what it describes as receipts rather than online activity—such as loyalty-card swipes and phone numbers given for points—and warehoused the information. It then says Oracle acquired AddThis in 2016, which allegedly placed share buttons across about fifteen million websites and created a “fingerprint” by drawing an invisible picture on each user’s device, varying slightly by graphics, fonts, and screen characteristics. The transcript claims ProPublica identified this fingerprinting on sites including WhiteHouse.gov and adult sites, and states that clearing cookies or using incognito would not stop it.
The transcript claims these systems together identify a person: BlueKai supposedly knew what a user read, DataLogics what they bought, and AddThis that it was the same user. It then alleges Oracle instructed business customers to provide users’ personally identifiable information (PII), such as names, addresses, and emails, which Oracle matched to browser activity it had tracked. It further claims Oracle opened a marketplace where advertisers could buy audiences by category, including segments for political views and demographic descriptions, and that politics, race, income, and neighborhood were attached to a name “for sale.”
It says it took eight years for anyone to make Oracle answer in court, and that in 2022 privacy researcher Michael Katzlikov used a California law requiring companies to disclose stored information, then sued based on the dossier Oracle allegedly kept. The transcript states a judge dismissed the “wiretap claim” but allowed another part of the case to proceed to trial; it also claims Oracle avoided a jury and settled in 2024 by paying over $115 million and agreeing to stop two “tricks”—reading what users searched and no longer reading what they typed into forms. The transcript claims the marketplace, fingerprinting, and matching were not mentioned, that Oracle shut down only the business that used the specific promise, and that no one was appointed to verify deletion of dossiers. It claims Oracle continued the matching technology through an Oracle product called Oracle Unity, which allegedly connects with Oracle’s “ID graph.”
The transcript then claims the same approach appeared on National Design Studio websites, describing a site (genesis.energy.gov) using “AutoMonitor” code that purportedly copied page traffic and sent it to a private server, and that after reporting and coverage, the code was pulled down. It connects these claims to subsequent events described as White House demands for voter rolls, Oracle winning Medicare/Medicaid contracts, and federal login systems being linked to Social Security and a citizenship database—arguing this resembles the same dossier-building approach “cooked up” earlier, but now in government-linked forms. It ends by claiming there is a data center “shaped hole” going in under the White House.
Full Transcript
You wanna know why Trump wants every state's voter rolls? It's because Larry Ellison wants every state's voter rolls, and he's been wanting them since 2014. Larry Ellison built digital dossiers on every single person in America. In fact- In fact, the way that he built the dossiers was almost creepier than the fact that he built them at all, because nobody saw it coming. And it all started when his company, Oracle, bought a little known firm called BlueKai. Yeah, you see, BlueKai paid websites to hide a little piece of code on their page, and it had code on so many websites that it was watching more than one percent of all web traffic on Earth. And every time you loaded one of those pages, the code would copy what you were reading, what you searched for, what you typed into one Information back to Oracle. And then ten months later, Oracle bought a company called DataLogics, and DataLogics never watched what you did online. No, no, it bought every one of your receipts. Yeah, so every loyalty card you ever swiped, every phone number you gave to a cashier for points, all of that went to DataLogics, and then they bought it from the stores, and then warehoused it. And it was two trillion dollars of what Americans carried out of actual stores. Then in twenty sixteen, Oracle bought the creepiest one of them all. It was called AddThis, and it made those little share to Facebook, tweet this little buttons on about fifteen million websites. And maybe you're thinking, "Well, I never clicked any of those buttons." Well, it doesn't matter. You didn't have to click them. You just had to load the page, and then the code secretly told your browser to draw an invisible picture. And every computer draws that picture a tiny bit different because of your graphics card, your font, and your screen, and so that tiny little difference became your fingerprint. And ProPublica caught Adith doing this on everything from the White House dot gov website to adult pleasuring websites, and you could do nothing to fend it off. Cleaning your cookies wouldn't help, going incognito wouldn't help, nothing would help. The call was coming from inside the house. And here is the clever part, because Bluekai I knew what you read, and DataLogix knew what you bought, and AddThis knew it was you. And so alone, those are just three companies, but stack those together, and that's a person. And then Oracle added the last ingredient. It told all of its business customers that they needed to provide all of the PII that they had on users. So like names, addresses, emails, all of that. And so a company would upload its customer list, and then Oracle would match it to the browser that it's been following for years. And then Oracle opened up a marketplace and would create these buyers guides so that advertisers could buy people by category. It sold over a hundred and ninety million American voters sorted by party. It even sold a segment called likely pro-life and pro-second amendment voters and likely supportive of traditional marriage, oppose Obamacare, support Obamacare, undecided on Obamacare, like it even sold a segment called tough times in which Oracle described as older Lower income, ethnically diverse people who were living in inner city apartments. So your politics, your race, your income, and your neighborhood were all attached to your name for sale for whoever had the money to pay for it. And it took eight years for anybody to make Oracle answer for any of it. In fact, it wasn't until twenty twenty two when a privacy researcher named Michael Katzlikov used a California law that lets you demand all of the information that a company is holding on you, and he sent that demand to Oracle. And he took one look at the dossier that Oracle Oracle was keeping on him, and he freakin' sued. And oh, get this, so the judge threw out the wiretap claim, because apparently federal law only punishes secret recording when it's done to commit a crime or to hurt someone. And because the websites had agreed to download Oracle's code, then it was legal, because Oracle was just doing it to make money. What law is that? In fact, there is only one law in the entire United States that doesn't have an exception for making money, and that is California's wiretap law. And so the judge let that part of the case go to trial, but Oracle didn't want a jury looking at any of this, because he knew damn well what would happen if a jury looked at all of this. In fact, some of them might see their names in these dossiers. So in twenty twenty-four, Oracle ended up paying out over a hundred and fifteen million dollars and promised to stop two of its tricks. It Read what you were searching, and it would no longer read what you typed into forms. Yep, that was the whole promise. So the fingerprinting, the matching, the marketplace, none of that was mentioned. And then Oracle shut that part of the business down in twenty twenty-four, and what do you know, that promise expired the same day. Because the whole thing only applied to the business that existed, that one specific business. Here's the important part: nobody was actually appointed to check to see if a single dossier was deleted. Yeah, so to this day, the matching technology lives on a product that Oracle still sells, that's called Oracle Unity, in which its own press release says that it connects with Oracle's ID graph. And so you can imagine my rage and fear when I went to go look in May of this year under the hood of the National Design Studio's websites and found more or less the same recipe. However, I found that on the Genesis Mission website, you know, genesis.energy.gov, which was also a National Design Studio website, was running this hand-built code that was called AutoMonitor, in which it would- Copy the page's traffic and ship it to a private server with no public address. And then when I published my reporting and then The Guardian reported on top of it, of course they panicked and pulled it down. Except sucks for them 'cause I knew they would do that, and so I copied the entire script onto a separate document anyway. And I say all of that because then you look at how the White House is demanding voter rolls from every state, and you see how Oracle just won a Medicare and Medicaid contract, and you see how your federal login is being wired to Social Security and a citizenship database, and all of a sudden, voters' health identity, wait a second, that sounds like Chef Larry cooking up the same thing that he was making back in twenty fourteen, only this time the ingredients belong to the government, and the law that's supposed to stop the government from doing this has a White House shaped- hole in it, and it doesn't reach the offices where the people who are building this were put, so nobody gets to sue, nobody gets to demand their file, nothing. And where would you keep dossier data like that? Well, funny enough, there's a data center shaped hole going in under the White House.
@thedreydossier - Drey
Funny how every legal threat to the ballroom suddenly becomes a threat to Trump’s life. Meanwhile the real threat may be what’s being automated underneath it. https://t.co/zsKJI6miQe
Video Transcript AI Summary
Trump’s ballroom project was shot down in court on Friday, with the D.C. Circuit ruling construction could not continue without authorization from Congress. The judges stated the president is a temporary tenant of the White House, not the owner, so whether anything is built is up to Congress, not the president. The above-ground construction was halted, while below-grade construction could continue.
The transcript traces a sequence of “ballroom lawsuits” beginning with Trump’s July 2025 announcement of a $200,000,000 ballroom funded by donors rather than taxpayers. The National Trust sued on December 12, asking Judge Richard Leon to freeze construction as an emergency and alleging that underground work could eventually determine what is built above. Three days later, the administration submitted classified declarations to Leon about what was going on underneath. Leon questioned Trump’s lawyers directly, asking whether continuing to dig would later be used to argue the ballroom must be built because of the underground work already underway. Trump’s team said the underground and above-ground projects were separate, with separate funding, and that the design was reversible and still changing. Leon allowed the digging to continue on the condition that if the underground work dictated what went above, the entire plan would have to stop, reverse, and comply with that notice.
On February 26, Leon ruled for Trump on a technicality because the Trust sued under the wrong law. Leon then indicated the key question was whether the president had authority in the first place to demolish the East Wing and build a 90,000 square foot ballroom without Congress’s permission. The case was refined and refiled March 2, and Trump lost nine days later because no letter of law in the courtroom supported presidential authority to do so without congressional approval. The transcript emphasizes that private funding does not remove Congress’s role in approving what is built.
After this, Trump shifted messaging, describing the ballroom as a “shed” for military infrastructure beneath it. The transcript claims that on the evening of the White House Correspondents Dinner, after a gunman incident, MAGA supporters and Trump promoted the idea that the ballroom was a necessity. The next day, the Justice Department reportedly suggested the dinner could be held in the ballroom once built. Two days later, Lindsey Graham proposed a bill to cover $400,000,000 for the ballroom and the military installation underneath, which Congress rejected. Leon then criticized the approach as going beyond what was agreed, stating national security is not a blank check.
By May, with construction delayed and options running out, Trump held a site visit for reporters and described how the ballroom integrates systems such as air conditioning, heating, drone capacity, and shielding, asserting that the features were “knit in.” The transcript claims this conflicted with the assurances made earlier to Leon that the above-ground and below-ground elements were separate.
The transcript further alleges that architect Shalom Bouranes’s submitted drawings show ceiling heights and a remaining gap between the ballroom’s top and the building’s roof, with the top-level schematics shown as darkly grayed out or labeled as a penthouse. The transcript argues this could indicate the ballroom functions as a cooling tower component for an underground automated government/data-processing system, with cooling and heat-exhaust equipment placed on the roof. It then returns to Friday’s ruling: Leon’s final decision affirmed that Congress must approve the below-ballroom infrastructure and that the roof might be designed for purposes beyond drones, potentially shielding an automated government from what it is intended to replace.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Trump's ballroom got shot down in court on Friday, and he is pissed. Ho ho ho Is he pissed? The DC circuit ruled that construction could not continue without the authorization from congress, and the judges all put it pretty plainly. They said that the president is a temporary tenant of the White House, not the owner. Therefore, whether anything gets built is up to congress, and congress has the decision, not the president.
But what I don't understand is why he's in such a hurry, why he's so mad about this, because the ruling was that the above ground construction could not continue, but the below ground, the below grade construction, that could continue. That was fine. And he's been saying this whole time that the ballroom is but a shed for all the military stuff that's underneath. And if the military stuff is allowed to continue underneath, then what's the hurry? Well, let's go through the evolution of these ballroom lawsuits, these freaking ballroom lawsuits, because each one is wilder than the last, and it reveals a piece of information that when you look at it sequentially, well, it kinda makes sense.
So in July 2025, Trump announces this $200,000,000 ballroom that he wants to build, and it's all gonna be paid for by donors, alright, not the taxpayer. And that seems to be the whole strategy where this whole thing started because if taxpayers aren't paying, then that means congress has nothing to appropriate. And with no appropriation, that means congress doesn't need to vote on anything, and that means congress can mind its own business. But the way I interpret that is that whatever you're building must be very consequential to either our freedoms or to congress's authority or likely both. And I said as much in my theory, which I published on November 8, stating that I believe A lot of these tech pros have been talking about automating And if you want to automate federal operations or create a single digital platform for the government, then that means you need a supremely secure physical home for that system.
And by placing it directly under the White House, you eliminate latency problems and you ensure that the president of The United States has direct physical control over the system's core. Because remember, it's about centralizing control. So the first lawsuit comes on December 12 when the National Trust is suing saying that the whole thing should be declared unlawful, and they ask judge Richard Leon to freeze this whole construction as an emergency in the meantime. But because lawsuits have a way of making people have to answer to a judge, three days after the trust sued, the administration was handing judge Leon classified declarations stating what was going on underneath the ballroom. The trust had a very well founded concern.
They were afraid that if Trump keeps pouring concrete down there, that it could eventually dictate the size of whatever was going to go on top. And so judge Leon turned to Trump's team and asked his lawyers just that. He said, if I let you keep digging, are you gonna come back later and tell me that this particular ballroom has to be built because of the underground work that's already been locked in? He said, what? Us?
No. Oh, god. No. We would never they're two separate projects, two separate fundings. Like, don't worry about it.
The design is reversible. In fact, it's still changing. Nothing is gonna be locked in. And judge Leon said, alright. You can keep digging.
But if I find out that what you're building under there is dictating what's going up there, you have to stop the whole thing, reverse it, you're done. You're on notice. And so that was the deal. Okay? Remember that.
And then on February 26, judge Leon had reviewed the entire case that the trust had brought to them, and Trump wins the case. But it's on a technicality. K? It's because the trust apparently had sued under the wrong law. So judge Leon handed their lawyers a better argument.
He said forget about whether or not the administration had followed the right process before knocking down the East Wing. Ask instead whether or not the president has any authority to do any of this in the first place. And so they scuttle away and refine, and they refile it March 2. And then nine days later, Trump loses the lawsuit. Because to judge Richard's point, nobody in that courtroom could point to any letter of the law that would let a president demolish the East Wing and build a 90,000 square foot ballroom without congress's permission.
Because private money means that congress doesn't have to pay, but private money doesn't mean that congress doesn't get to say yes. And so the whole premise for having this privately funded was just eviscerated, which is when we see him eighteen days later on Air Force one deciding to throw out the whole razzle dazzle. He whips out the old poster board with these giant AI renderings of the ballroom on them, and he starts talking about how this is not just any ballroom. It's a shed for the military installation that's gonna be built underneath. Because now he's got a woo congress, and so he's selling it.
Right? He's going, this this is the safest building there ever was because, you know, a judge blocking a ballroom is embarrassing, but a military installation? Now this is a national security emergency, all of it. And congress isn't biting. Right?
Even the Republicans can see that there's no law that actually let him do this. And so while Trump's lawyers are appealing judge Richard's ruling to a higher court, the DC circuit court, he decides it's time to amp up the theater. He's gotta pull out the Teddy Roosevelt classic, the old electoral winning move. He's gotta dodge a bullet. It's the evening of the White House Correspondents Dinner, and Trump is having a glorious time with all of his enemies when suddenly a gunman rushes towards the door with the gun to, you know.
Right before he reaches the doors, he is tackled to the ground and everybody scatters. Within, oh, I don't know, twenty minutes, every MAGA mouthpiece is on x saying that the ballroom's a necessity. Trump even finds it within himself to go on to Fox News and start proclaiming that this is what we all really need. Oh, and get this, the next day, the Justice Department writes the trust's own lawyer suggesting that the dinner could just be held in the ballroom once it's built. And two days after that, Lindsey Graham is proposing a bill on the floor for $400,000,000 to cover the ballroom and the military installation underneath, all of which congress rejects.
And judge Leon starts getting pissed and says, this is not what we talked about. National security is not a blank check to be doing all this tomfoolery. Okay? You don't get to build whatever you want. Come May, Trump is out of options.
They are now a month behind on beginning construction on the ballroom. He's panicking, and so he plays the hail Mary card. He pulls all of the reporters over to the construction site, buys them breakfast too, by the way. And he's walking them through explaining how this whole building works, how it's going to be constructed.
Speaker 1: Again, the ballroom, it's necessary. It's the ballroom to be built with
Speaker 0: what you see up here. It's all knit in. The air conditioning, the heating,
Speaker 1: the drone capacity, the shield.
Speaker 0: And there it is. The exact thing that his lawyers swore to judge Leon was not happening is happening. The bottom depends on the top, and it's all knitted together. Meanwhile, the whole reason they were allowed to keep digging was because those two things they said were separate. Nay, they put on the record, swore swore we're separate.
And so, obviously, they're not separate, and he must really need to get this ballroom built in order to get anything running down there. And so I listened back to that video of him walking the reporters through the construction, and that's when I noticed something.
Speaker 1: All of these columns, they go directly right to the roof of the building. And, again, we call it a drone port. It's set up for unlimited numbers of drones. Purposely, we don't have any air conditioning equipment up there because we don't want anything coming down through the pipes if anybody gets normally, you'd a lot of air conditioning equipment on the roof. We built it all inside, the building, inside the case of the building.
Speaker 0: Flat roof, you say? Inside the building, you say? So I went back to the drawings that Shalom Bouranes, the architect, submitted, and the numbers were a bit strange. The 1st Floor starts eight feet above the ground and has about 16 foot ceilings. And the 2nd Floor, which is where the ballroom is, has 40 foot ceilings.
And when you add those together, that comes out to 64 feet, but the building is 72 feet tall. So there's about eight and a half or nine feet left between the top of the ballroom and the roof. And that's across an acre of floor space, by the way. And the drawings don't say what's going up there. Right?
It's darkly grayed out. And there are some instances where it looks like the floor drops into a deeper space. I mean, they call it the penthouse, or at least that's what the schematics are calling it. That's when I thought, what if the ballroom is the cooling tower for the automated government? I mean, think about it.
High density computing generates an enormous amount of heat. Right? And if there's going to be so much data processing down there, you can't dump that into the soil or bedrock. That'll just insulate it, so it has to be carried out to the outside air. Evaporative cooling is one way to do it, but that requires those giant evaporative water towers and plumes of water vapor coming out, and it requires just constant water supplies, which is why companies such as Oracle are pursuing something called closed loop direct to chip cooling.
The coolant circulates through this sealed system much like a car radiator does to cool itself down. So it absorbs heat through water, and then it transfers it through these heat exchangers and returns the water cooled, all without evaporation. But the heat still has to go somewhere, which is where these dry coolers, fans, and chillers come into play. And so if the data center underground is in a dense historic city, where is all of that ugly equipment going to go? Oh, I know.
On the roof of the building that you put above it. I made a diagram. When the computing gets hot, it cools off with water. The water then gets put through this little transformer that then sends it to the pipes that go up through the walls or pillars of the building and then get exchanged through the heat exhaust at the top, which then carries the cool water all the way back down and into the same system in that closed loop cooling. And if part of that facility underground is ready like Trump says it is and they need to start running some of that compute, well, then they can't do that until they have a way to cool it from above.
Which brings us back to Friday where Trump lost in a two to one vote affirming Leon's decision. The decision was just that congress needs to approve before he starts building. Congress would require him to write down what he's building beneath the ballroom. And if that's infrastructure for automating the government itself, well, then the roof may be designed to stop more than just drones. It may also be shielding an automated government from the government it's meant to replace.
@thedreydossier - Drey
We once turned contempt into solidarity and laughed at anyone who mistook status for strength. What happened to us? https://t.co/HmezRzUhiB
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker explains that “Yankee Doodle” began as an insult from the British, likely around the French War period. British soldiers allegedly coined “Yankee Doodle” to mock colonial troops fighting alongside them, contrasting colonials in ragged, makeshift uniforms with the British redcoats’ appearance. The speaker claims every word in the famous verse is a jab: “Yankee” was British slang for colonial simpleton, and “doodle” meant fool.
The speaker adds a twist tied to the 1760s “grand tour” trend, when rich and young Englishmen traveled Europe and returned with elaborate wigs and flashy Italian fashion. Upon returning, they purportedly called themselves “Macaronis,” after an “exotic pasta” tasted overseas. The speaker compares this to someone returning from travel and name-dropping a city to seem cultured, describing the term as an equivalent of a pretentious, overstyled dandy.
According to the speaker, when the song says the colonials “stuck the feather in his cap” and called it “macaroni,” the joke is that the “hicks” think a feather makes them high fashion, but they are not sophisticated like the travelers. Instead of letting the song defeat the colonials, the colonials allegedly leaned in and mocked the British back. They reportedly adopted the song as “our song,” repeating “macaronis” louder and adding their own verses.
By the end of the Revolution, the speaker says, Continental Army musicians were playing “Yankee Doodle” while the British retreated after losing battles.
Full Transcript
Fun fact about Yankee Doodle, it started as an insult from the British. I believe it was like sometime around the French War, and the British soldiers had made up Yankee Doodle to mock the colonial troops fighting alongside them, and the colonials had showed up in like these ragged makeshift uniforms next to these immaculate redcoats, and the Brits thought that they were basically rube, like these colonial, tattered-looking guys, and so every word in the famous verse is a jab, these Yankee Doodles, and Yankee was British slang for colonial simpleton, and Doodle- Literally meant, I think, fool especially at the time. There's a little bit of a twist because in the 1760s, rich and young Englishmen would do their grand tour of Europe, right? And they'd come home wearing these absurd wigs and flashy Italian fashion, and they'd call themselves the Macaronis after like this exotic pasta that they tasted one time overseas. This is like the equivalent of someone who goes to Spain and says Barcelona afterwards, right? It's like, look, your mom paid for you to go do a, a semester over Is a word for pretentious, overstyled dandy. And so when the song says the colonials stuck the feather in his cap and called it macaroni, the joke is these hicks think the feather in their hat, you know, makes them all the high fashion, but they're not high fashion like us. He's so unsophisticated, he doesn't even know what real sophistication looks like. Instead of letting this song defeat the colonials, where they're like, "Oh great, these redcoats, what are they doing?" They leaned in and they started mocking the Brits by The colonials, and they're like, "You know what? This is our song, yeah, macaronis, we'll, we'll do it." They started saying it louder, and they added some of their own verses, and then by the end of the revolution, the Continental Army's musicians were blasting "Yankee Doodle" while the British retreated after losing battles. And if I can just say the pettiness-- I love the sophistication of pettiness in that, and that's what I aspire for us, you know, as the Rough Riders. We do the equivalent to Larry Ellison
reSee.it AI Summary
While researching Section 219 on U.S./Israel military/tech integration for a video, I found a Reagan Library dossier from the 1980s that turns out to be the real “Star Wars” prequel. It’s clippings on Israel’s entry into SDI via joint research, missile-defense contracts, and tours—mocked as the “Star Wars project”—plus a shout-out to Yitzhak Rabin. Now Congress is back, swapping Star Wars for data fusion and Stargate LLC.
@thedreydossier - Drey
While researching Section 219 of the U.S./Israel/military/tech integration for a video, I stumbled across a fascinating and strangely familiar collection of documents from the 1980s... the real Star Wars prequel, as it turns out, lives in a Reagan Library dossier. It’s mostly a collection of clippings, documenting Israel’s entry into Reagan’s Strategic Defense Initiative(SDI) through joint research, missile-defense contracts, and tours of Israeli defense companies. While mockingly referred to by media as the “Star Wars project”, the parallels with today are difficult to miss. It even features a special shout-out to Israel’s [then] Minister of defense, Yitzhak Rabin, who has since become a muse for Tel Aviv’s [current] Sith Lord, Benjamin Netanyahu & inspired the name behind Larry Ellison’s cat, Yitzhak. Which seems healthy. Now, four decades later, Congress is back at it; only this time has traded space mirrors and Star Wars for data fusion and Stargate LLC. Read the prequel before the ‘Empire Strikes Back’: [https://www.reaganlibrary.gov/public/2024-05/40-219-6927378-013-004-2024.pdf]
@thedreydossier - Drey
The database is becoming the state. https://t.co/oRWBUau4Fg
Video Transcript AI Summary
The Defense and Health Agency is handing Oracle a direct sole source contract for MHS Genesis, the electronic health record system covering nine point five million active duty troops, their families, veterans, and the Coast Guard, among others. The contract has no competing bid, and the transition is scheduled to finalize this November. The transcript also references Oracle CEO Safra Catz, stating she admitted on camera that Oracle was involved with building “undisclosed technology” for foreign militaries, “to advance the agenda for the Israeli military,” with “profoundly scary technology” that she said they wanted to make available for the effort.
The transcript then connects this to Section 224 of the Defense Bill, the US-Israel Defense Technology Cooperation Initiative, describing it as formally opening a pipeline for Israeli-origin technology to enter American testing, procurement, and military integration, and vice versa. The transcript lists functions included in the initiative: cyber warfare, biotech defense, artificial intelligence, sensing, data fusion, and “anti-tunneling and subterranean threats.” It further claims that a change in wording appeared in section 1222: “anti-tunneling threats” becoming “subterranean” threats, deleting “anti,” removing an $80 million spending cap that had applied to the program, and extending it into 2029.
The transcript contrasts typical technology-sharing arrangements with what it characterizes as this agreement, stating it authorizes joint testing and experimentation and gives override authority to one single executive agent, which it says can bypass the Defense Technology Security Administration, described as the agency built to screen foreign access to American systems.
It also describes the “trade” as involving Israeli surveillance technology being “built and refined through actual military and surveillance operations conducted on Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank,” with the United States described as supplying manufacturing, money, and infrastructure to scale it. Researcher Sophia Goodfriend is cited as having documented the process, including that Israeli soldiers used an app called Blue Wolf to photograph Palestinians into a biometric database, with quotas and rewards for more faces, and the claim that most people never consented to be in the database. The transcript states that Palestinians became “unlimited data supplies” for algorithms to train, and says Section 224’s language on sensing, data fusion, and biometric integration matches those categories. It concludes by stating that a bill “names them” and “gives them a clear legal path to come over to the US,” while also claiming that Oracle is becoming the default vendor for nearly every piece of American military, intelligence, and healthcare infrastructure.
The transcript ends by mentioning policy enforcement regarding “hate speech” on LinkedIn, specifically referencing “From the River to the Sea.”
Full Transcript
Right now, the Defense and Health Agency is handing Oracle a direct sole source contract for MHS Genesis, which is the electronic health record system covering nine point five million active duty troops, their families, veterans, Coast Guard, you name it. Yeah. So there was no competing bid for this, and the transition is scheduled to finalize this November. And in case you've forgotten what kind of company Oracle actually is, well, here's their CEO, Safra Catz, one year ago. There's a few things that we did that I really can't talk about, to be honest. Because to advance the agenda for the Israeli military, we have some really profoundly scary technology at Oracle, and we wanted to make sure that it was available for the effort. Let's just say that. Yep, that's Oracle, and it is about to become the sole database holder for US military and veteran healthcare, while its own CEO admits on camera that they are building undisclosed technology for foreign militaries. Or I'm sorry, at least a former foreign military, 'cause thanks to Section two twenty-four of the Defense Bill, known as the US-Israel Defense Technology Cooperation Initiative, we've formally opened a pipeline for Israeli-origin technology to enter American testing, procurement, and military integration, and vice versa. The list includes a number of functions such as cyber warfare, biotech defense, artificial intelligence, sensing, data fusion, and something called anti-tunneling and subterranean threats. Sorry, subterrane-what? The last phrase kinda threw me for a loop, because what do you mean anti-tunneling? As far as I knew, the US was pro-tunnel, that we liked tunnels. I mean, just look at Manhattan, I don't know. So I looked into it, and what it led me to was section one two two two, which used to be about anti-tunneling threats, where basically we were helping aid Israel in defeating Hamas through their tunneling efforts in Gaza. Which the tunnels in Gaza are a whole fascinating thing unto themselves that are worth going through, because, oh my gosh, it 222 deletes anti from antitunnel and replaces it with subterranean, and it also removes the previously eighty million dollars spending cap that we had on that program and extends this new program into twenty twenty-nine. Hey, so follow-up question, why are we building a massive underground military complex underneath a ballroom in the very same year that we just opened a legal pathway for Israeli subterranean technology to enter American systems? You might say Calm down, Dre, because allies share military technology constantly. You know, NATO does it, the Five Eyes intelligence alliance does it. What makes us any different? It's just that most technology sharing agreements involves two governments that are handing finished products back and forth, whereas this one authorizes a joint testing and experimentation, and it hands override authority to one single executive agent who can bypass the Defense Technology Security Administration, which is the actual agency that was built to screen foreign access to American systems. So one guy, and that term experimentation, is exactly what is at the heart of this trade between the US and Israel, because Israel's surveillance technology is built and refined through actual military and surveillance operations conducted on Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank, and the US supplies the manufacturing, the money, and the infrastructure to scale it. Researcher Sophia Goodfriend documented exactly how this process works. She found that Israeli soldiers used an app called Blue Wolf to photograph Palestinians into a biometric database that most of them never consented to join, with quotas and rewards for more faces, by the way. In her words, Palestinians became unlimited data supplies on which algorithms could train. And this is why Section two twenty four's language matters, you know, with sensing, data fusion, and biometric integration, these are the exact categories that Goodfriend just described in the field. And now there's a bill that names them, funds them, and gives them a clear legal path to come over to the US, right, as one company becomes the The default vendor for nearly every piece of American military, intelligence, and healthcare infrastructure all at once. I will tell you that, you know, it violates our policy to have From the River to the Sea on your LinkedIn, like all that kind of hate speech, 'cause that's not like a poem. That's From the River to the Sea, you know, Palestine will be free of Jews. That's what that is. You wanna boycott us? Buckle up
@thedreydossier - Drey
Sounds an awful lot like a cooling loop to me… https://t.co/tsAjAZaXBf
Video Transcript AI Summary
The discussion centers on allegations that US attorney Jeanine Pirro’s vandalism case involving the Lincoln Memorial reflecting pool was handled in a way that would serve political and logistical goals.
About a month earlier, Pirro was described as being “10 toes down” that the Lincoln Memorial reflecting pool had been vandalized, leading her to indict a 67-year-old Olympian on a felony with a stated potential punishment of ten years in prison. The transcript claims Pirro held a press conference, said the man was “violently ripping up the pool lining with his bare hands,” and stated that the evidence was clear. It further claims the interior department provided “expert testimony” and an “eyewitness account,” and that every piece of evidence needed was given to her.
The transcript then says that over the weekend Pirro reversed course, claiming the interior department “didn’t give” her the needed information. It argues this reversal is inconsistent with Pirro’s earlier “slam dunk” position and her public certainty.
A counterpoint within the transcript says that vandalism exists and references the indictments as reflecting it. It adds that the pool liner was cut at the base across “several yards,” and claims there was intent to cause “incredible damage,” followed by continued damage.
The transcript then focuses on Pirro’s background, saying she is not an independent neutral prosecutor, and asserting she was a former Fox News host selected for the role by Trump. It claims Trump framed the situation as polite disagreement, citing statements that he was “disappointed” and saying she “folded,” while also portraying Trump’s typical approach as harsher. The transcript interprets these public exchanges as performance.
The core theory proposed is that major work is not being done “in the pool” but “beneath the pool,” in plumbing and pipes, and that the pool must be drained to reroute irrigation and cool technology for a “data center” beneath the ballroom. It includes a specific quantitative claim: 6,500,000 gallons of water moving through the pump network every two days, broken down as roughly 3.25 million gallons per day. It also ties the timing to algae by claiming that water carrying heat from technology absorbs minerals such as calcium, magnesium, and high levels of silica, and that silica supports diatoms with glass-like cell walls.
It then states the supposed vandalism narrative was used to justify draining and fencing off the pool and to obtain a felon-related explanation for emptying it again. The transcript claims that once a court case begins, the pool becomes “evidence,” with a judge ordering work to halt because the pool’s coding is evidence and the defense must test it first—described as legally preventing further touching. It says this creates a need for someone to reverse the case so the court order and evidence restrictions end, and claims Pirro returned to drop the case, saying it was a botched installation and that she lacked all evidence.
Finally, the transcript argues that these actions are performances, asserting they are meant to enable data-center-focused initiatives involving AI data processing, and concludes by stating that it is implausible that the same technocrats would not treat the stated large water-cycling loop as a data-center cooling resource.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Oh, come on. I can smell a fake Trump beef a mile away, and him and Janine Piro are not beefing. In fact, let's roll this back for a second here. Okay? Because about a month ago, US attorney Janine Piro was 10 toes down that the Lincoln Memorial reflecting pool had been vandalized.
In fact, was so certain that it was vandalized that she indicted a 67 year old Olympian on a felony. Ten years in prison, a felony. Listen, she's the one who decided to hold a whole press conference about it. She said that the man was violently ripping up the pool lining with his bare hands and she said the evidence was clear. She said that the interior department gave an expert testimony, an eyewitness account, and that every piece of evidence that she needed was was given to her.
And then what? This weekend suddenly she drops the whole thing and she claims that the interior department didn't give her the information she needed? Come on, do you take us for fools? I mean you don't go squawking on Fox News about how you have this slam dunk vandalism case, indite a man on a felony, and then two weeks later turn around and say we didn't have all the information.
Speaker 1: What happened with the pool didn't believe the president that there was vandalism. That's not the case. Yeah. It's not the case at all. In fact, I was at the reflecting pool yesterday.
There not only is a vandalism that is reflected in today's indictment, but there is a cutting of the liner of the pool at the base of the pool for several yards across the pool. And someone was intent on doing incredible damage to the pool. But what we've seen after are other people who wanna do continuing damage.
Speaker 0: Let us just be very real about who Janine Pirro actually is because this is not some independent prosecutor who's just following the evidence wherever it leads. No. No. No. This is a former Fox News host that Trump handpicked for the job.
Don't be fooled in thinking she's watching the administration from some neutral perspective on the outside. She is one of them. Do not forget that. Honestly, the biggest tell is Trump himself. Every headline is playing this as, like, some kind of polite disagreement.
With Trump saying to reporters, I was really disappointed with Jeanine Pirro, Really disappointed with Jeanine Pirro. She folded like an umbrella. I'm sorry. Folded like an that's the nicest thing he's ever said to a woman. To him this is like a pet name to him.
I don't even think Melania is called an umbrella. Instead of spiraling out on Truth Social, he's just writing I disagree 100% with Janine Piro, the US attorney for the District Of Columbia on the reflecting pool. I don't know what she was thinking. Like, this is not what he does. He goes full scorched earth.
He does not rely on evidentiary claims in order to fight against somebody. No. He just starts throwing harassment and and names. He called a reporter miss Piggy to her face. And the reason I think this is a performance is because they needed two things to be true at once.
They needed a reason to empty the pool again, and then they needed a reason to get rid of the reason that they needed to empty the pool again. Let me explain. You see, because I think the real work is not happening in the pool. I think it's happening beneath the pool, in the pipes of the pool, in the plumbing of this entire water system. And you can't reach the pool's pipes if it's full of water, so it has to be drained before any serious work gets done.
You see, think the work they're doing specifically is rerouting some of these irrigation systems to cool the new technology that's going to go beneath the ballroom, the data center. And I know that that sounds crazy, okay, but hear me out because once you look at the reflecting pool as a piece of a pump network that is cycling out water from the Potomac through all of these different pipes all day, the picture kind of shifts a little bit. And we're talking 6,500,000 gallons of water moving through that loop every two days, which for comparison Google's highest water intensive US facility averaged 2,700,000 gallons per day in 2024. We're talking 6.5 every two days. That's 3.25 every day.
And this is also when the algae comes into play because water that is carrying away heat from technology is also going to absorb minerals, right? Minerals such as calcium, magnesium, and high levels of silica. And silica specifically triggers growths in diatoms. And there's this major group of single cell microalgae that require a dissolved form of silica in the water in order to build their unique glass like cell walls. But anyway, back to the point of this video.
So they needed a reason to drain the pool and bring the crews back out because I believe that they began working on this repiping before the July 4 and they probably needed to finish doing it after. And so how do you justify that? Well, maybe you create a vandalism scene, so now you have a reason to fence it off and empty it out again. And if you're going to cry vandalism, then of course you need a vandal. So they pick a 67 year old Olympian who merely touches the already peeling liner, and suddenly, he gets a felony.
He gets ten years in prison. Except here is the problem that they've now created for themselves, and this is where the real incompetence comes in. Because the second you have a vandalism case, okay, the second you give someone ten years in prison, they're gonna take this to court. And the second you have a court case, the pool now becomes evidence of And the judge said exactly that, and so he told the government that they had to halt working on this pool because the coding of the pool is now considered evidence and the defense has a right to test it first. You know, the pool is a crime scene and legally they're not allowed to touch it, which is the opposite of what they needed.
Like, do come on, Janine Piro, aren't you a federal judge? Didn't you know that this is what was gonna happen? Which is when US attorney Piro comes back into play because now they need somebody to go out, eat crow, and walk it back. So she comes out and she says, just kidding, it's actually not vandalism. I didn't have all the evidence as it turns out.
You know, this was a botched installation, case dropped. And the second the case is gone, well then so is the evidence, and so is the court order that's keeping them out of the pool. And look beyond any of my speculation of what is or is not happening in or beneath the pool, I think it's important that we talk about these moments when Trump is clearly performing because our job is to ask what these performances are for. It's not enough just to say like, this is a distraction. Remember, he's a puppet.
Everybody in this administration is a puppet for one of these technocratic CEOs who are obsessed with processing AI, getting AI trained on data faster, and the only thing that they are looking at that they have a tunnel vision for is data centers, because data centers is the only way that they're going to get more data to train that AI. And in a world of complete media capture by the same tech bros that are building these centers and the synthetic media that gets put out there, I think this kind of literacy is more important than ever. But come on, do you really think a bunch of tech bros in DC are going to see a government funded 6,500,000 gallons of water just cycling by, and they're just not going to turn it into a data center cooling loop? You damn lost your mind.
@thedreydossier - Drey
Substack’s newest subscription model: guilty until proven human. https://t.co/LK9jGmWXie
Video Transcript AI Summary
Substack announced a partnership with Pangram, an AI company that uses AI “to detect artificial intelligence on your writing.” The plan adds buttons to Substack posts so readers can scan someone else’s writing and receive a percentage estimating how much of it a machine thinks was written by another machine.
The transcript argues this is a “spectacularly bad idea,” describing a training-and-detection chain that, it says, repeatedly relies on synthetic imitation and stolen human writing. It also claims Pangram acknowledges that its boundaries between levels of AI assistance are more “art than science,” yet markets results with claims like “99.98% accuracy,” turning probabilistic scores into public accusations.
The transcript describes how Pangram allegedly works after an investigation called “91% Human.” It says Pangram chops writing into blocks of roughly 50 words (described as the smallest unit it can reliably evaluate). Because it cannot identify which sentences are human versus machine-written, it evaluates entire blocks and assigns each a score between zero and one based on patterns associated with AI.
It then explains Pangram draws a line at 0.5 and converts a spectrum into a binary verdict: if a block scores 0.51, it receives an “AI” label, the same categorical label as a 0.99 score. The transcript claims this creates major downstream effects at scale. For example, it says a 1500-word post could be broken into roughly 30 blocks, and a single 50-word passage crossing 0.51 could cause the entire post to be publicly labeled as “3.3% AI generated.” Placing the detection button at the top of an article is described as ensuring the score is seen before readers engage with the content, replacing engagement with “suspicion,” “aesthetic policing,” and arguments over scores that the transcript says no one knows how to interpret.
The transcript also reports a Substack CEO position: readers wondering whether content is “real” undermines trust in authorship and threatens writers’ livelihoods. The speaker counters that the true threat is public accusations built on AI scores that reduce a body of work into a decontextualized percentage.
It then recounts an incident involving Pangram CEO Max Sparrow. The transcript says Max Sparrow publicly posted a Pangram score claiming that 78% of a debut author’s novel was AI generated, and the New York Times reported the number as part of a story that led Hachette to pull the novel and terminate the author’s contract effective immediately. The transcript claims no other evidence was made public proving the Pangram score was accurate, and that when the speaker looked for Pangram’s detailed report, Max Sparrow had not fed Pangram the actual manuscript. Instead, it alleges he scanned a “bootleg copy” obtained via “oceansofpdf.com,” then produced the figure used in the fallout.
The speaker concludes by arguing Substack is turning accountability into conflict—“writer against writer”—and that this environment benefits those using AI detection, while keeping users too unsettled to trust their judgment. The speaker says they have downloaded all 102,000 subscribers and plans to move to Beehive if this continues.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: So Substack just announced its partnership with Pangram, an artificial intelligence company who, get this, uses artificial intelligence to detect artificial intelligence on your writing. It's going to be putting buttons on our posts to allow readers to scan someone else's writing and receive a percentage estimating how much of it a machine thinks was written by another machine. And somehow nobody involved seems to recognize what a spectacularly bad idea this in fact is. Like, do we think that maybe outsourcing human authenticity scores to AI is the last thing that we should maybe be outsourcing to AI? Because just think about the process that happens here, right? Because Pangram feeds your writing into its own AI that was trained on human writing and synthetic imitations of human writing that was produced by generative AI that itself was trained on from stolen human writing. There is something that is so profoundly anti-intellectual about measuring originality with tools that by definition cannot comprehend originality. Pangram acknowledges itself that these boundaries between these levels of AI assistance are more of an art than a science, and yet it markets resulting classifications with claims like 99.98% accuracy. But that kind of contradiction doesn't stop Pangram CEO Max Sparrow, the self-appointed AI slop janitor of the internet, from turning probabilistic scores into public accusations and then repackaging all of the fallout from that into marketing for tool that started all of it in the first place. Last year I went digging through Max Sparrow's janitorial closet and I found the fundamental fallacy that is at the heart of pangram. It was through an investigation of mine called 91% Human that I was able to find out how pangram actually works. And I want to show you how it works because it's not as clear cut as it makes it seem. The way it works is that it chops your writing into blocks of roughly 50 words, which is the smallest unit that the model claims that it can reliably evaluate at a time. And because it can't identify which sentences came from a human versus which ones came from a machine, it evaluates the entire block and assigns it a score between zero and one based off of patterns it associates with AI. And then it does something that you would never accept from anything else claiming to be evidence. It draws a line at the 0.5 mark and it turns a spectrum of uncertainty into a binary verdict. Meaning that if a block scores 0.51, that it receives a stamp saying it's AI, receiving the same categorical label as a score of 0.99. So think about what this means at scale, right? Like on Substack. So if a 1500 word post gets roughly broken into 30 blocks, let's say, then a single 50 word passage that crosses the threshold at 0.51 suddenly means that your entire post is about to get publicly labeled as being 3.3% AI generated. By placing the detection button at the top of an article, Substack is basically ensuring that the score reaches the reader before they have even had a chance to engage with a single word that you've written. What you're doing is installing a panic button above posts that is going to replace the engagement of ideas with suspicion, aesthetic policing, and endless arguments over scores that no one even knows how to interpret. And whenever the model gets it wrong, a real writer will carry the accusation. But according to Substack's CEO, they think that this feature is going to protect writers because, quote, when readers have to wonder if what they're reading is real, it undermines the trust in authorship and threatens the livelihoods of writers. Yeah, you know what I think actually threatens the livelihoods of writers, Chris? is the public accusations that are built on AI scores reducing an entire body of work into a decontextualized percentage. That's what I think does it. But hey, don't take my word for it. Why don't you ask your buddy, Max Sparrow? He knows better than anybody about that, don't you, Max? Yeah, remember that investigation I mentioned earlier? Well, it began after I found that Max Sparrow had publicly posted a pangram score claiming that 78% of a debut author's novel was AI generated. And the New York Times reported this number as part of a larger story that led to Hachette, the publishing house, pulling the novel from the shelves and terminating this author's contract effective immediately. And yet there was no other evidence that was made public that shows that pangram score was even accurate. And so I went looking for Pangram's detailed accusation, report, sorry, report, only to find that Max Spiro had not fed the actual manuscript into Pangram. No, no, no, instead he had scanned a bootleg copy that he had obtained through the illegal piracy site oceansofpdf.com. He fed that into Pangram. and got that number. So you're telling me that a young woman's career was effectively derailed by a number that was generated from a stolen copy of her own work in a scandal supposedly concerned with the theft of creative labor. Max Sparrow, ladies and gentlemen, the slop janitor extraordinaire and Substack's newest loaded gun. I mean, Substack cannot possibly call itself the last home to independent journalism while handing every reader a button that is designed to turn scrutiny inward. You're essentially taking a space built for holding power accountable and turning it into a brawl, writer against writer, and every comment section mutating into its own purity tribunal. And that atmosphere is exactly what AI slot janitors like Max Sparrow need in order to keep himself paid. They need to keep institutions panicked, keep users under-informed, and keep everyone too rattled to trust their own judgment. Otherwise, his company doesn't need to exist. So Substack, if you want to platform Max Sparrow and hand his machine authority over everyone's work, fine, but it's not going to be mine. I've already downloaded all 102,000 of my subscribers and I'm ready to walk. In fact, I'm ready to walk all the way over to Beehive if this kind of nonsense is going to keep up on your platform. I guess I'm just so fucking tired of getting caught in the crossfires of some tech bro's manufactured crisis only to watch them build a predatory product to police it while calling the whole cycle innovation.
reSee.it AI Summary
Last night, I urged the West Hollywood City Council to delay approving its revised Flock Safety agreement until three revisions ensured it matched the staff report. I still can’t understand why key protections from 2023 were weakened or omitted, their definitions hollowed out, and no consistent explanation was given. I asked the Council to withhold approval; it passed 3–2. Prevention would have taken only a few revisions.
@thedreydossier - Drey
“Stand before the people you fear and speak your mind – even if your voice shakes." Last night, I asked the West Hollywood City Council to delay approval of its revised agreement with Flock Safety until three revisions were made to ensure the document accurately reflected the staff report. I still do not understand why key protections in the 2023 agreement were weakened or omitted, why the definitions of those protections were hollowed out, or why no one could provide a consistent explanation. I placed three of those discrepancies on the record and asked the Council to withhold approval until they were addressed. It seemed like a no-brainer to me, as the existing cameras would have remained operational from the 2023 contract, so public safety would not have even been interrupted. Even Los Angeles was still reviewing its own ALPR agreements. There was time to get this right. Instead, the agreement passed 3–2. Every generation inherits a technology whose convenience arrives before its consequences are understood. Government’s responsibility is to confront those consequences while prevention is still possible. Last night, prevention would have cost only a few revisions — and the willingness to wait.
Video Transcript AI Summary
Audrey Henson, an independent journalist covering data sovereignty, asked the city to withhold approval of the city’s revised contract with Flock and urged the city to address multiple concerns on the record. She focused on “attachment B” and said the staff report promises safeguards that “narrowly redefines or omits altogether” key provisions.
Her first concern was that the staff report claims ICE and CBP may only receive data pursuant to a valid court order, but she said the contract adds, “or by applicable law,” in section 462, which she characterized as a “far wider door.”
Second, she said section 464 offers $200,000 as the city’s “sole and exclusive remedy,” while then excusing court orders, task force access, and any “circumventation of FLOX controls.” She argued that this remedy would answer to a breach effectively without punishing. She cited page 5 of the March 16 staff report, which she said stated the city recently discovered one breach where 14 out-of-state agencies (including one federal) had accessed over 26 months of plate data without the city being notified. She asked whether this remedy would actually pay the city $1 if those 14 agencies returned tomorrow.
Lastly, she said section 4.2 grants FLOC a “perpetual irrevocable license” to the city’s data, while section 4.5 permits training machine learning algorithms on the data without any promise of anonymization. She asked why the contract is lowering the definition by adding “wherever possible to anonymization,” and said leadership should confront technology consequences while prevention is still possible, asserting that “it only costs a few revisions.”
After Henson spoke, a question was raised about how the city is taking into account public feedback. The questioner referenced Henson’s detailed breakdown of three missing provisions, asked how that kind of information will be incorporated into contracts or reviewed more thoroughly, and noted that the city already has ALPR cameras and is creating a policy. They asked what the city’s process is for incorporating more responsive community comments into ALPR-related policies and contracts.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Thank you. Audrey Henson to be followed by Christoph Aldenderfer and then James Kirk.
Speaker 1: Hello. My name is Audrey Henson and I'm an independent journalist who covers data sovereignty. My work asks three questions. Who owns our information? Who can reach it? And what the law permits in the space between those two answers? Tonight that space is attachment B of the city's revised contract with Flock. The staff report promises safeguards the revised contract narrowly redefines or omits altogether. So I am asking you on the record to withhold the approval of this contract until the following concerns are appropriately addressed. First, the staff report claims ICE and CBP may only receive our data pursuant to a valid court order, but the contract adds or by applicable law in section 462, which as we know is a far wider door. SECOND, SECTION 464 OFFERS $200,000 AS THE CITY'S SOLE AND EXCLUSIVE REMEDY, ONLY TO THEN EXCUSE COURT ORDERS, TASK FORCE ACCESS, AND ANY, QUOTE, CIRCUMVENTATION OF FLOX CONTROLS. THIS REMEDY ANSWERS TO A BREACH IT EFFECTIVELY WOULD NOT PUNISH. PAGE 5 OF THE MARCH 16 STAFF REPORT STATES WE SAW ONE OF THESE BREACHES HAPPEN RECENTLY, FINDING OUT 14 OUT-OF-STATE AGENCIES, INCLUDING ONE FEDERAL, HAD ADDRESSED OVER 26 MONTHS OF OUR PLATE DATA, AND THEN THE CITY WAS NEVER NOTIFIED. I would be curious to ask the city attorney whether this remedy would actually pay the city $1 if those 14 agencies were to return tomorrow. Lastly, section 4.2 grants FLOC a perpetual irrevocable license to our data, with section 4.5 permitting the training of machine learning algorithms on said data without the promise of anonymization. Why are we lowering the definition by adding wherever possible to anonymization? Every generation inherits a technology whose conveniences arrive before its consequences are understood. Leadership means confronting them while prevention is still possible. Tonight, prevention is still possible. It only costs a few revisions. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you.
Speaker 2: One of the public speakers, I believe it was Audrey, thank you so much, detailed three different provisions that are missing in the contract. When we hear that sort of information come up, how is the city taking into account that feedback? I think part of the issue and the concern that we're getting, we're hearing from people with backgrounds that are, journalism in this space. We're hearing information and feedback. I would like to be able to see that incorporated into these contracts or reviewed in a more thorough way as we get that information. And I'm aware that we as a city have already had these ALPR cameras up and we're in a process right now of creating a policy that is more responsive. So when we hear more responsive comments like this from the community, what is our process for incorporating something like those into this?
reSee.it AI Summary
I found an SSA announcement saying the hospital birth registration form will automatically create a “Trump Account” for your child via the Enumeration at Birth program when a Social Security number is issued, with no unbundling option. This clashes with IRS/Treasury claims these accounts open only if parents elect it. If a parent doesn’t want a biometric-linked investment file created at birth, who explains? We need answers now.
@thedreydossier - Drey
Trump Accounts are no longer going to be optional- so if you ever plan on having a child in the USA, you should read what I found: According to the @SocialSecurity Administration's announcement last week, they are modifying the hospital birth registration form so that a Trump Account is AUTOMATICALLY created for your child through that same process. It will be bundled into the Enumeration at Birth program (EAB), which is the already automated gov pipeline that gives your newborn a Social Security number. It’s one box that you check, you don’t have the option of unbundling it. So if you want your kid to have a Social Security number, they have to have a Trump account. Which is strange, because according to the IRS and @USTreasury’s public announcements, these accounts only open when a parent actively elects to open one. So which is it? Why is nobody in the government interested in explaining this flagrant contradiction? Who is going to answer the basic question of what a parent does if they don’t want a government-linked investment account (one that collects biometric data, by the way) created for their child at the exact moment their child’s Social Security number issued? They can call it a savings account all they want, but a $1,000 deposit is a hell of a cheap price for building a lifelong financial file on every American child before they can consent to anything. And once the government normalizes linking a person’s identity, financial activity, and predictive systems from birth, who gets to decide what that data will be used to predict later? We deserve answers immediately. @ndstudio @WhiteHouse
@thedreydossier - Drey
The machines are entering the building. https://t.co/nV9Gc2KdZe
Video Transcript AI Summary
The discussion describes live activity at the White House North Portico on the North Lawn, where scaffolding and renovation work were said to be “standard renovations,” but large sheets have been hung over the structure. The question raised is whether more than routine architectural upkeep is being done.
The second speaker claims the sheets are effectively a printed cover of the White House that preserves the appearance of the building from Lafayette Park while work continues out of view. They argue this is connected to construction they say is occurring in the East Wing, including ballroom construction and an underground military facility center, rather than merely column restoration.
They contrast the North and South porticos: the South portico is described as the prominent scenic entrance where Marine One helicopters land; the North portico is described as the covered motorcade entrance on Pennsylvania Avenue for vehicles to unload and enter directly. The speaker says the North portico is the one covered over and alleges that a chandelier was taken down during restorations, suggesting workspace for infrastructure “underneath the ballroom,” including “technology” installed below.
A third statement is introduced: “The ballroom essentially becomes a shed for what's being built under the military, including from drones.” The speaker then portrays the covered area as holding physical tools for a classified military facility, including “GPU racks, server racks” and “secure communication skills.” They connect this to concerns about sensitive data and a supposed rush to place it “under the executive office of the president” before legal processes like subpoena or FOIA could occur.
The transcript cites claims involving “Doge” and unauthorized handling of sensitive government data, including an assertion that Social Security Administration confidential data was sent through unauthorized servers and that the SSA could not confirm what was taken or where it ended up. The speaker further claims a unified database is being built under the East Wing, framed as dangerous because it unifies information that has historically been kept in separate agencies and databases, creating access rules and safeguards.
They also list related developments they say support the unified-database idea: a “modified version of the SAVE Act” described as narrowing immigration status and fusing social security identity records and citizenship information with bulk searches of state voter rolls into a single lookup. They reference the “Genesis Mission” as training and deploying AI using sensitive federal data, and they state that on June 4 Trump ordered multiple agencies and the NSA to share AI models and data and expand secure computing infrastructure. They add that three weeks later the White House Office of Administration signed a long-term data storage agreement and funded a building alteration contract with minimal public description, and then sheets went up at the North Portico.
Finally, the speaker predicts that around July 22, when “Genesis Mission Awards” are announced, journalists should watch the North Portico because the sheets may come down, and they suggest that any “GPU” entry would be consequential.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: So this is happening in real time outside of the White House. This is the North Portico here on the North Lawn. And we had seen the scaffolding up here around those columns. And the White House had said that they were going through standard renovations. But now you're seeing this sheet go up. And so the question begs, is there something more that is being done here?
Speaker 1: Ladies and gentlemen, it is go time. This is not a drill. They are hanging up sheets in the North Portico. They have literally printed the White House onto a sheet and hung it over the White House so that it still looks like the White House from Lafayette Park. And they're claiming this is just some architectural upkeep, right? Just some basic construction on the columns, right? They're restoring the columns. They're repairing the columns. But you're not going to fool me because I don't think this has anything to do with construction, at least not with the restoration construction that they're claiming that it is. I think that the construction this has to do with is the east wing construction, the ballroom construction, the underground military facility center construction. That's right. I think it's server rack time. I mean, think about where they put the sheets, where they're doing the construction right now. Because the White House has two porticos. You've got the South portico, which is the big scenic one that you see in all the movies and TV shows, right? It's where Marine One lands, the helicopter. And then there's the North portico, the covered motorcade entrance on the Pennsylvania Avenue side. It's less visible, and its purpose is built for vehicles to be able to pull under cover, unload, and move directly into the building. Yeah, that's the one they decided to cover up. And allegedly, that's the one where they took down the chandelier as part of part of these restorations and construction. You know, the big hanging light that's overhead in the portico, they took that down, which, If you're just redoing the columns, why would you need to take the chandelier down? Unless, of course, you're making room, because we're at the part of the project where the actual technology goes in underneath the ballroom. What, like that's so crazy to think about? I mean, Trump said himself that...
Speaker 2: The ballroom essentially becomes a shed for what's being built under the military, including from drones.
Speaker 1: And a shed holds tools. And the tools for a modern-day classified military facility are physical, like GPU racks, server racks, secure communication skills. And if data being stored under the executive office of the president sounds insane to you, then I fear you do not realize just how much of a data tear this administration has been on since they got into office. Doge ransacked the place in a very, very serious way. I mean, they took some of the most sensitive data that the government has on American citizens, and we have no idea where they put it. Straight up nobody knows. When they were asked to account for it, the Social Security Administration had admitted that confidential data had been sent through unauthorized servers and couldn't confirm what was taken or where it ended up. Now we're talking about your Social Security records, voter data, system after system besieged by Doge and his little minions. That is why I don't think it's all that disillusioned to think that they are rushing to get all of this physically under the executive office of the president before anybody can subpoena for it, before anybody can FOIA for it, somewhere where nobody can ask any questions about what was done and what's held down there. Which is the really scary part, because I think that they are building a unified database under the East Wing. In fact, I know that they are building a unified database, and it's important that we all talk about why this is so dangerous. because the government has always held vast amounts of information on its people, but what it has not had, at least not in the same way, is the ability to treat all of that information as one unified record. And it's kept in separate agencies and databases because those boundaries have always created a legal and a practical friction. They require officials to justify access and follow very specific rules and to seek authority before using any of that information that they gathered for one purpose in another context. And that friction, while viewed as a bureaucratic inefficiency, has also been a very huge safeguard for us. And the ballroom shed may still be under construction, but you know what's already standing and already has a covered vehicle entrance and is already connected to the East Wing through a series of underground tunnels? That's right, the White House. And even putting Doge aside for a moment, look at what has been coming together. I mean, you've got the modified version of the SAVE Act, which has just become a narrow immigration status system. And the modified version has fused social security identity records and citizenship information and bulk searches of state voter rolls into a single lookup. That's what a unified database does. And on the compute side, the Genesis mission has been building out the government's capabilities to train and deploy AI using sensitive federal data. And it just so happens that on June 4th, Trump ordered the Pentagon, intelligence agencies, the Energy Department, and the NSA to share AI models and data across all of these classified systems and to expand the secure computing infrastructure to run them. Then three weeks later, on June 30th, the White House Office of Administration signs a long-term data storage agreement and funds a building alter contract whose public description says almost nothing and then sheets go up at the North Portico and then in 13 days on July 22nd that's when the Genesis Mission Awards are announced and that's when we find out who gets plugged into the system so if you're a journalist and you live in DC then please for the love of God keep an eye on the North Portico because the sheets will come down around that time and if so much as one GPU sneaks through that door then I don't know, we might all be screwed.
reSee.it AI Summary
I think about doorbell cameras a lot. The old doorbell felt hopeful—installed by someone ready to be surprised, welcoming whoever arrived with a pleasant sound. The camera is its opposite: placed by someone wary of what might come. It’s the same porch and wall, but a completely different wager about the people walking past.
@thedreydossier - Drey
I think about doorbell cameras a lot. The doorbell used to be a hopeful piece of hardware, installed by someone who expected something good to arrive at the door. Someone who was still willing to be surprised by whoever showed up, and wanted a pleasant sound to greet them to. The camera, however, is the doorbell’s opposite. The camera is installed by someone who is afraid of what might come to the door. It is the same wall, the same house, the same porch, but a completely different bet about the people walking past.
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0 says that taking large amounts of data can be used to train supercomputers and create a dossier on a kid that grows into an adult. They compare this to how ring and doorbell cameras work, stating they “really hate doorbell cameras” while also saying they do not hate people who have them and understand why people use them. They add that a doorbell camera has done more for a single mother who lives alone than current laws have, in terms of safety.
They then focus on neighborhood children, arguing that kids who play in the streets are watched by cameras they “didn’t consent to.” Speaker 0 says this information can later apply to those same children as adults—for example, a “13-year-old riding a bike” when they are 30 might want to do something that the law does not favor. They conclude that this leads to “all this information that they didn’t know,” which “doesn’t feel good.”
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: This is a lot of data that will, once you start in taking it, can just run and train a lot of these supercomputers and create a dossier on a kid that grows into an adult. It's kind of like when you think about ring cameras. I really hate doorbell cameras so much. I don't hate people who have them. I understand why people have them. And I think that in many ways, a doorbell camera has done more for a single mother who lives alone than any of our laws have. in terms of safety. However, I think about the kids who play in the streets of these neighborhoods, and they have all of these cameras watching them that they didn't consent to. The 13-year-old riding a bike when they're 30 might want to do something that the law does not favor. And all of a sudden, there's all this information that they didn't know. It just feels not good.
@thedreydossier - Drey
A few people asked me for the actual documentation showing biometric data is collected when you open a Trump Account for your kid. Sharing here so you can see it for yourself, because the paperwork is more damning than any summary of it. 1. Robinhood’s own privacy statement admits it, in writing. The Trump Accounts Privacy Statement on http://trumpaccount.com says, verbatim: “Biometric Data: We extract facial geometry data from selfies/photographs/videos to verify your identity and detect/prevent fraud.” That sentence sits inside a section describing information collected about “the Responsible Party and the Account Beneficiary.” The Responsible Party is the parent. The Account Beneficiary, for the record, is the kid. 2. Treasury’s own privacy assessment confirms selfie collection- and then DENIES using AI in the same document. The Trump Accounts Privacy and Civil Liberties Impact Assessment, signed by Treasury on May 18, 2026, contains two checkboxes that cannot both be true. Section 4, titled “Biometrics / Distinguishing Features / Characteristics of Individuals,” has this box checked: ☒ “Photos/Video: Selfie images collected for identity verification through third-party identity verification services” And section 2, “Artificial Intelligence,” has this box checked on page 3: ☒ “None of the above. This information system does not utilize AI.” Same document. Same signature. Selfie biometric collection acknowledged in Section 4. AI usage denied in Section 2. 3. And to top it all off, facial-geometry extraction (measuring the distances between features on a face to produce a mathematical identifier) is definitionally an AI/ML process under the statutory definition of AI that Treasury itself cites in the same document, 15 U.S.C. § 9401(3): “a machine-based system that can, for a given set of human-defined objectives, make predictions, recommendations, or decisions.” That is exactly what a face-geometry algorithm does when it decides whether the selfie matches the ID. So either Robinhood’s privacy statement is wrong about what its vendors do, or Treasury’s checkbox is wrong about whether AI is being used. One of these documents is not telling the truth. Both of them were signed by people whose job is to tell it. I know that’s a lot to hold in your head at once, but that’s the point. The confusion isn’t a side effect of how this demonstrous thing was built.
@WhiteHouse - The White House
Trump Accounts are here, and there's no reason not to cash in. 💰 If your child was born from Jan. 1, 2025 - Dec. 31, 2028 and they have a valid SSN, they are eligible to receive $1,000 from the United States Treasury to jumpstart their future. https://t.co/SaAt1D7uWh
@thedreydossier - Drey
Let the record show that I do not consent to being bunk buddies with Israel and Palantir https://t.co/hnjN2t8WOO
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 1 and Speaker 0 discuss Trump’s repeated, “salesman-y” updates about a ballroom, contrasting them with reports of “utter chaos,” stonewalling, shifting cost figures ($300 million then $600 million), allegations of stealing from Congress, and expanding security budgets. Speaker 0 argues Trump’s glowing updates appear aimed at someone other than the people pressing for information, and that Trump often forcefully inserts the ballroom into unrelated questions, notably amid discussions of Iran and Gaza. Speaker 0 identifies a specific pattern: the ballroom is raised in contexts connected to broader geopolitical discussions, including a moment when Benjamin Netanyahu and Donald Trump were supposed to discuss a Gaza peace deal.
Speaker 1 cites an example from Trump’s remarks about the renovation cost “more than any building has ever spent per square foot” for a “magnificent, big, beautiful… ballroom.” Speaker 0 recalls that Trump’s mention of winning a lawsuit over the ballroom happened during a Hanukkah party at the White House in December 2025, when Trump said, “We just won the case,” and described turning down people for White House parties while anticipating a ballroom “so big” he could handle.
Speaker 0 questions why Israeli government officials would cheer an American president over a lawsuit framed as benefiting “the American people,” and interprets Trump’s “we versus them” language—“we” being the room and “them” being leaders seeking information on behalf of American citizens—as a key to understanding who the facility is being used for.
Speaker 0 then connects the ballroom to provisions of the National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2027: Section 224, the U.S.-Israel Defense Technology Cooperation Initiative. Speaker 0 states Section 224 spans 500+ pages and specifies domains for fusion between the two militaries, including artificial intelligence, quantum, machine learning, and data fusion. Speaker 0 says there is also a section dedicated to expanding U.S.-Israel “underground” collaboration through 2029, the year the facility is supposed to be ready.
Speaker 0 explains the practical implications of “military fusion,” describing modern warfare as autonomous warfare reliant on AI training data and arguing that the most valuable data is “population level biometric and behavioral data.” Speaker 0 claims Israel collected this data from its own citizens and from Palestinians, and that adding American biometric data creates “one of the largest data sets in the world.” Speaker 0 adds that Israel has “combat tested” military AI systems, while the U.S. provides “compute,” “contracts,” and “infrastructure,” producing a system neither country could build alone. Speaker 0 concludes that once operational, whatever is built under the ballroom remains locked in and hardened underground, so later U.S. administrations “don’t get to choose” vendors, data, or whether American military AI is permanently fused with a foreign military’s AI.
Full Transcript
Speaker 1: The more I listen to Trump talk about this ballroom, the more that I'm starting to realize that he's not talking to us.
Speaker 0: Is he? The language is always very salesman-y and very reassuring. It's under budget and ahead of schedule, always. Meanwhile, everything we read about the ballroom is utter chaos and Trump stonewalls us. and won't answer any of our questions. And so we're hearing one week that it's $300 million, and then $600 million, and then they're stealing from Congress, and then the security budget has gotten bigger. And in fact, we've had to sue him for every piece of information that we've gotten about the ballroom and what's being built underneath. And then what, he turns around and volunteers these glowing updates anyway? Which means that these updates are for someone else. The question is, who? And so I went back into the archives and I watched every time that he brought up the ballroom and what the context was in. And I noticed a pattern start to form. It's always forcefully surfaced, almost never ever talking about construction or anything adjacent to the ballroom. It just gets thrown in there. And it's usually in the middle of questions about Iran and Gaza. And then there was the time when Benjamin Netanyahu and Donald Trump were supposed to be discussing the Gaza peace deal.
Speaker 1: He's spending more money than any building has ever spent per square foot on the renovation of... As an example, I'm doing a magnificent, big, beautiful... ballroom.
Speaker 0: Why does Benjamin Netanyahu look so pleased with that performance? And then I got to thinking about it, and it reminded me of the last time that Donald Trump brought up the lawsuit with the ballroom, and it was during a Hanukkah party at the White House in December of 2025.
Speaker 1: A lot of you are right in this audience, very special group of people. You know, for every time we have one of these parties, we have to turn down 10 people for everyone that makes it. It's the White House. Soon you'll have a ballroom that's so big I can handle. You know, And we just won the case today. Did you know that, Mark? We just won the case.
Speaker 0: Hey, quick question. Why would a room full of Israeli government officials be cheering on an American president for winning a lawsuit over a construction project that's supposedly being built for the benefit of the American people? Hmm? Also, notice the syntax in which Donald Trump creates a separation between, like, we versus them. You know, like, he says, we won the lawsuit against them. We, meaning we, the people in this room, one against them you know the leaders who are trying to get basic information on behalf of the American citizens in which they represent about the ballroom so we are the they in our own country and Israeli officials are the we they are the we the people and we are the they the them and this is when it clicked for me, what this military facility underneath the ballroom is going to be used for. Because right now, and I mean literally right now, moving through Congress is something called 8800 National Defense Authorization Act for the fiscal year of 2027. And there's this provision in it that's called Section 224, the U.S.-Israel Defense Technology Cooperation Initiative. It's 500 plus pages, so it covers a lot, but it lays out exactly which domains our two militaries are wanting to fuse together. You know, things like artificial intelligence, quantum, machine learning, and data fusion. I'm sorry, U.S. of Israel say what now? In fact, there is a whole separate section just dedicated to expanding the U.S.-Israel underground collaboration, the subterranean cooperation. And this collaboration is supposed to go through 2029, you know, the same year the facility is supposed to be ready. Now let's talk through what this means in a practical. sense, right? Because I think when most people hear military fusion, they're picturing soldiers like the IDF and the US military marching together, holding guns together and walking around the Pentagon together. And that's not what modern warfare is. Modern warfare is autonomous warfare. It's AI and AI comes down to needing training data. So whoever has the most data to train these AI warfare systems on has the most powerful system. And the most valuable data for military AI is population level biometric and behavioral data. And Israel had already collected that kind of data from its own citizens. And then on top of that, collected it from every Palestinian. And well, we saw what American AI tools did with that. And now add American biometric data on top of the Palestinian data and Israeli data. And you have one of the largest data sets in the world. And think about what the trade-off here is because Israel has spent the last two years running the most combat tested military AI on the planet. know live targeting systems that were refined in a real war meanwhile the us brings the compute the contracts and the infrastructure now fuse those together and you get a system that neither country could build alone and whatever gets built and switched on under that ballroom stays under that ballroom you know once trump leaves office in 2029 and the next president comes in they don't get to choose what vendors, what data, or whether American military AI has to be permanently fused with some foreign military's AI. They're inheriting a system that's already locked in, hardened underground, and was running before any of us were even able to ask what it was.
reSee.it AI Summary
I’m told to watch for telltale shifts showing an illegal unified biometric database: language changes from anti-counterfeiting to identity verification; “just on your passport” is claimed though it’s actually searchable identity linking; “voluntary” pilots replace the old option with faster travel; new biometric contracts appear; verification turns from 1:1 to 1:N; datasets across agencies get centralized; “limited access” expands via carve-outs.
@thedreydossier - Drey
Lessons from Israel’s lies #250 The tale-tell signs your country is building an illegal unified biometric database on you, laundered through “passport modernization”: 1. The language shifts from “anti-counterfeiting” to “backend identity verification” 2. Officials say the biometric data is “just what’s already on your passport,” as if scattered government files and a searchable national identity system are the same thing. They are not. 3. A “voluntary” pilot appears, paired with faster processing, longer validity, dedicated lanes, easier travel. The old option slowly disappears. 4. New contracts appear for biometric matching, deduplication, facial recognition, or ABIS-style systems 5. The system moves from 1:1 verification (“does this person match this document?”) to 1:N identification (“search this person against everyone”) 6. A central identifier starts linking State, DHS, CBP, ICE, FBI, DMV, TSA, immigration, and law enforcement datasets 7. “Access is limited” until carve-outs arrive for police, intelligence, military, border control, and national security Don’t get distracted by the passport chip. That is not where all the wrongdoing lives. The tell is when “secure documents” become a searchable identity layer across government. REMEMBER FOLKS: If they already had this data the way they claim, they would not need new laws, new vendors, new pilots, new exceptions, and a whole new backend architecture to unify it.
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0 describes a “slow rollout” in which a select few can opt in to receive a “Trump” passport with his face and a watch certificate, and then sign up for associated passport data that includes QR codes. Speaker 0 says this passport data feed will be among the first feeds into “supercomputers.”
Speaker 0 then refers to the “National Biometric Database Authority for Israel,” stating that it “started as a passport pitch about the National Biometric Database.” Speaker 0 claims the data in the database “do not facilitate any facet of Big Brother that is not already possible today,” and emphasizes this with repeated assertions: “Lies, lies, and more lies.”
Speaker 0 argues the system is “absolutely different than any database facility” in existence, explaining the difference between having biometric and personal information accessible in separate places versus having it consolidated in one database. Speaker 0 states that because fingerprint data, iris scans, health care information, and other information are not all in one database, there would be no need to ask people to sign on to a “full biometric database” if everything were already accessible. Speaker 0 concludes by asserting that if all the information were already accessible, the request to sign on for the full biometric database would not be necessary.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: And so I think that what they're doing is this slow rollout of like, right now it's opt-in and you can be like a select few that get this Trump, you know, passport that's got his face on it or whatever with the little watch certificate. And when you sign up for whatever that passport is and whatever QR codes it gives you, I think that that's going to be one of the first passport data feeds into those kinds of supercomputers. I want to show you the... National Biometric Database Authority for Israel. This also started as a passport pitch about the National Biometric Database. The data contained in the database do not facilitate any facet of Big Brother that is not already possible today. Lies, lies, and more lies. It is absolutely different than any database facility that we currently have that I know of. Because the difference in having my fingerprint accessible over there and my iris scan accessible over there and my health care information accessible over there and then all my other stuff accessible right here is that it's not in one database. Because if it were, if all of this was already accessible, then you wouldn't be asking for this. You wouldn't be asking for me to sign on to whatever this full biometric database is because it would already be accessible, just like you're saying it is. So don't you dare. Freaking liars.
@thedreydossier - Drey
Happy 4th of July. These passports are suss. https://t.co/lRgLKQq0xy
Video Transcript AI Summary
When the passport box is opened, it contains a certificate attached to the passport, described as a certificate of authenticity. It is presented as something similar to the certificates provided with watches and jewelry. The speaker then points out that the actual passport is included, emphasizing a redesign intended to better reflect the country and its stature.
The conversation turns to what is different about the redesign. The visible change described is that the passports have had the top and bottom swapped, with “the United States” moved to the top and the design described as more sophisticated. They also comment on scale, noting that the passport’s elements look small, implying that someone’s hands might be big.
The speaker clarifies that the only change so far is the top and bottom swap, and attributes the work to “national design studio people.” The speaker refers to the design passport as being shown and then notices red marks already on one passport, moving past that part.
They describe additional features that some people have not picked up yet. The speaker says that one thing that is not yet a feature will be added in the future: a QR code attached to each passport image. For the permanent passports, the QR code will lead to a video presentation tied to that specific moment in American history.
The speaker adds context for why this will be useful, saying that flights are often delayed and passengers may be bored, so they can use the QR code to access “key moments.” They also describe the QR code experience as prompting a video of what is “this moment in history,” and respond to questions about whether history is being erased, asking whether the Constitution still exists.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: there's more when you open it and when you open this passport box you will find that there's a certificate attached to it which is like a certificate of authenticity like we do with you know watches and stuff like that and jewelry but again it's something that we think a lot of people will tremendously value and well okay so wait the certificates are important with watches and jewelry for like resale value now so I'm sorry
Speaker 1: Is there a resale value with my passport? What is a certificate? Is the certificate the Constitution? Because otherwise I don't want it.
Speaker 0: And then, of course, there's the actual passport. If you'll notice, I'm not good at any of the aesthetic things, as you want you to know, but I value what this means. You see the redesign that I think more appropriately reflects our country and its stature. Whose passport is this? Because I'm about to open it.
Speaker 1: Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait. What does that look like? Let's go back. Does that look all that different from...
Speaker 0: Reflects.
Speaker 1: Okay, so they swapped the passports now at the bottom and the United States is at the top and it looks more sophisticated. Also, is that really small or is his hands really big? His looks really small, does it not? Interesting.
Speaker 0: our country and yeah but to be just for clarity the only thing so far that they have swapped is just the the top and the bottom of can't with these guys stature national design studio people the great design passport is this because i'm about to open it is this yours oh there's red marks all over this already it's not good let me skip that part for a moment there's some features in here that a lot of people haven't picked up but you'll notice as you work through it what the one thing that's not a feature on this yet will but will be a future a feature in the future again i'm giving away you know a lot of great secrets but they'll actually be like a qr code attached to it so each one of these images that are on here and they'll be different for the permanent passports will have a qr code and when you go on that qr code it will prompt you to like a video presentation of that moment in american history
Speaker 1: and so what we're thinking is that because flights are so often delayed people are going to be bored out of their minds and they can go on the qr code and pull up these key moments nobody's gonna watch the government's qr code of uh here's what this time and hit what does that mean in this moment in history the qr code is going to show us what i mean you guys are erasing all of history as far as we know does the constitution still exist i mean for
@thedreydossier - Drey
The lesson from Israel is how much infrastructure can be built before the public can even see its shape. They sold the biometric database as safer passports. https://t.co/v8BqD7z56V
Video Transcript AI Summary
The discussion claims that “beneath” the White House is a high-compute facility—a data center—and that the “reflecting pool project” may be part of the plumbing used to cool it. The speaker frames this as a claim supported by “a pretty big stack of evidence.”
The speaker says the first questions are why such a facility would be built under the White House and whether it could even be built there. As an example, they cite Israel’s biometric government database, described as storing parts of individuals’ bodies used as identity markers such as face and fingerprints. The speaker says Israel sold the system as safer passports and better ID cards by stopping fake documents, reducing identity theft, and making borders safer, while also describing it as an apparatus holding “every bit of you,” rather than a normal database at a passport office.
The speaker quotes Israel’s biometric database authority as stating the purpose is to ensure every person has one official identity—their “true identity”—and claims the database is kept in a physically secure facility monitored 24/7 with security procedures at every level commensurate with “top secret.” The speaker adds that the “clearest version” is set up underground in Jerusalem, describing it as involving a large underground data center built by Binet, and reporting that SeaTek reported it held government servers tied with the population registry database containing citizens’ biometric information.
The speaker states that Larry Ellison’s Oracle set up its Israel cloud region with Binet inside the Jerusalem site, and that Oracle is planning a second Israeli data center nine stories underground. They attribute this to Safra Katz, saying Israel needs a secure cloud.
They connect this to Ellison’s prior efforts, citing a 2002 New York Times opinion piece advocating copying government database information into a single national security database combined with biometrics (thumbprints, handprints, iris scans) to detect false identities.
The speaker says the focus is on the “back end” rather than the name of the infrastructure, and notes that Oracle is building a supercomputer called Solstice through the Genesis mission, described as a classified-capable supercomputer with over 100,000 Nvidia GPUs and allegedly “no clear permanent home,” leaving its eventual location unknown.
Finally, they link this back to the reflecting pool by arguing that a facility like this would have physical needs: power in and heat out, and that “one of the most practical ways to move heat is through water.”
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: What I think is going on beneath it happens to be a high compute facility. aka a data center. And now I'm starting to think that the reflecting pool project is part of the plumbing to cool it. And I know that's a pretty big claim. But I have to tell you, I have a pretty big stack of evidence that's getting harder to ignore. But before we get to all of that, I think the first questions that come to people's minds are why would anybody want to build something like that under the White House? And could something like that even be built under the White House? Well, Israel has a great example, because Israel built a government biometric database, which means that parts of your body essentially are stored as your ID, like your face, your fingerprints, you know, the things you can't change about yourself if the system were to get abused, hacked, expanded, or turned against you. And they sold it to the public as safer passports and better ID cards, essentially. You know, stopping fake documents from getting made, stopping identity theft, making borders safer. But the passport is just the thing that you hold. The database is this whole apparatus that is holding every bit of you. Israel's own language says that the purpose is to make sure that every person has one official identity, that person's true identity. And so they're not treating the system like a normal database sitting at a passport office. Their own biometric database authority says that it is kept at a physically secure facility monitored 24-7 with security procedures at every level commiserate with top secret. And the clearest version of that is set up underground in Jerusalem. Binet built a huge underground data center and SeaTek reported that it held government servers tied with the population registry database, which contains all of the citizens' biometric information. Now, Larry Ellison's company, Oracle, set up its Israel cloud region with Binet inside that Jerusalem site. And the Israeli government is so pleased with their services that now Oracle is planning a second Israeli data center, nine stories underground, because as Oracle's other CEO, Safra Katz, put it, Israel needs a secure cloud. Now, this is nothing new. for Larry Ellison as he's wanted the American version of this for years now. As early as 2002, he wrote an opinion piece for the New York Times stating that information from government databases should be copied into a single national security database and combined with biometrics like thumbprints, handprints, and iris scans to detect false identities. Basically that if we had that before 9-11, it wouldn't have happened. Like, which is just not true because that's not how 9-11 happened. Like, it just doesn't make sense. So call it data center call it a secure cloud call it national security infrastructure a ballroom a shed call it whatever you want i'm calling this my vigilance okay because the name is not what matters most right now because they're not selling us the name yet They're building the back end of it. And it's worth noting that Oracle is already building a supercomputer called Solstice through the Genesis mission. And this is a classified capable supercomputer with over 100,000 Nvidia GPUs and allegedly no clear permanent home. So we have no idea where it's going to live. And so if this database facility, right, that's going to live underneath the ballroom is going to house something like, I don't know, a supercomputer made by Oracle, then this brings us back to the reflecting pool because a machine like that still has physical needs. I mean, it needs power going in and it needs heat coming out. And one of the most practical ways to move heat is through water.
@thedreydossier - Drey
NBC got spun off, and now I’m worried we’re one bad merger away from ‘Meet the Press’ becoming ‘Meet the Guy Who Bought the Press’ https://t.co/tR88cqnxY8
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0 says it has just announced it is spinning off NBC Universal, cutting loose NBC News, Peacock, Telemundo, and Universal Pictures into a standalone company. Speaker 0 is concerned about what a spinoff can mean—separating assets to make them easier to sell—and specifically points to Larry Ellison, Oracle billionaire and “Trump’s literal neighbor in Palm Beach,” as a person to worry about buying NBC. Speaker 0 is not claiming NBC is for sale or that Ellison is behind it, but notes that Ellison made a $111 billion bid for Warner Brothers Discovery, which includes HBO and CNN.
Speaker 0 says Ellison’s bid is backed by about $24 billion from three Middle Eastern sovereign wealth funds: Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund, Qatar’s sovereign wealth fund, and Abu Dhabi’s Lamad Holdings Company, described as 40% of the equity in the merged company. Speaker 0 adds that Paramount filed with the FCC requesting a special waiver because foreign ownership in that deal would reach almost 50%, double the legal limit for broadcast license holders. Speaker 0 says Paramount would describe these investors as silent shareholders, but emphasizes that nobody spends $24 billion to stay silent.
Speaker 0 argues that NBC is in a vulnerable position: NBC carries real debt, Peacock is losing the streaming race to Netflix, and there is no corporate parent behind it once spun off. Speaker 0 also claims Comcast CEO Brian Roberts has had frequent trips to Saudi Arabia appear on his calendar, and says this can be found via Google.
Speaker 0 says there are “giveaways” to determine whether to increase concern, including who ends up on the NBC Universal board, because control is where the board sits. Speaker 0 says to watch Peacock subscriber numbers every quarter because a financially distressed NBC would be an easier acquisition target. Speaker 0 also says to watch the California AG’s lawsuit against the Ellison and Warner Brothers deal. Speaker 0 concludes that the regulatory environment is effectively a green light, foreign money is already present, and “we’ve seen this playbook before.”
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: has just announced that it is spinning off NBC Universal, which means that NBC News, Peacock, Telemundo, Universal Pictures, all of that is getting cut loose and made to be its own standalone company. And this scares me a lot, like a whole lot, because we all know what a spinoff means, right? It's usually when a parent company is separating the assets to make them easier to sell. And there's one person I'm worried about buying NBC, Larry Ellison, Oracle billionaire, Larry Ellison, Trump's literal neighbor in Palm Beach as of this year, Larry Ellison. And just to be clear, I'm not saying that he is doing that or that NBC is even for sale. But what I am saying is that that didn't stop him from putting in a $111 billion bid on Warner Brothers Discovery, giving him HBO and CNN. It super sucks because Larry Ellison is not the only one backing that bid. It is also backed by around $24 billion of Middle Eastern sovereign wealth funds. Three of them, to be exact. You've got Saudi Arabia's public investment fund, Qatar's sovereign wealth fund, and Abu Dhabi's Lamad Holdings Company, which I believe is 40% of the equity in the merged company? In fact, Paramount had to file with the FCC asking for a special waiver because foreign ownership in this case was going to hit almost 50%, which is double the legal limit for broadcast license holders. And Paramount will tell you that these are silent shareholders, but I have enough respect for you to tell you as someone who has covered money and power that nobody spends $24 billion on an investment like this just to stay silent. And now NBC carrying real debt with Peacock losing the streaming race to Netflix and no corporate parent company behind it is just floating free in that exact environment. And I'll tell you this, I was at an industry event earlier this year in DC and someone who works at Comcast told me that Brian Roberts, you know, their CEO, has been having these frequent trips pop up in his calendar to Saudi Arabia. Like, constantly. And look, I can't independently verify that. but I can independently Google that, and Google says the same thing. There are a few giveaways that will tell us whether or not we need to escalate our level of panic, which is who ends up on the NBC Universal Board because that's where the control actually lives. I'll be watching Peacock subscriber numbers every quarter because a financially distressed NBC is a far easier acquisition target. And we need to watch the California AG's lawsuit against the Ellis and Warner Brothers deal. We need to keep that loud, keep that at the forefront of our attention because it truly is the last real institutional check on this kind of power remaining. And right now, the regulatory environment is a green light and the foreign money is already in the room. We've seen this playbook before.
@thedreydossier - Drey
Follow the data far enough, it will always lead back to one man: Larry Ellison. https://t.co/eEwSoDBOUG
Video Transcript AI Summary
The records Joe Gebbia was trying to digitize were stored at Iron Mountain, about an hour north of Pittsburgh, in Boyers, Pennsylvania, where there is a limestone mine 220 feet underground. Since 1960, the federal government has used the mine as a retirement office. The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) keeps about 450 employees working down there full-time alongside 26,000 file cabinets holding over 400 million paper records. The site processes about 10,000 federal retirements every month by hand.
A key point discussed is that the issue is not that technology has failed to digitize the records. Every administration since Reagan has tried to digitize the records, and the attempts failed for multiple reasons. The transcript says that doing it correctly, lawfully and with the Federal Office of Personnel’s required legal protections, is very expensive and politically contentious. It also claims that physical paperwork in a mine has a different level of protection than digitized paperwork.
The transcript then describes a strategy attributed to Joe Gebbia and his team at Doge: they began moving the records onto the digital infrastructure controlled by the White House. Rather than digitizing under legal guardrails, the transcript says they worked around the legal guardrails and “called it a day.”
The speaker describes an investigation into what Gebbia was doing with National Design Studio, saying they ran into roadblocks when trying to follow the money. The transcript states that the work appears to be done “off the books,” with no contracts on USAspending, the office not registered on SAM.gov as a federal procurement entity, and National Design Studio not technically existing.
When the speaker could not follow money, they say they followed the data instead, arguing that data leaves residual traces.
The transcript then connects this approach to what Larry Ellison’s company was doing over the prior decade. It describes Oracle running a network of tracking tools embedded across the internet to build “digital dossiers,” files containing very sensitive information about people, including where they lived, where they banked, what they bought, and political views, race, and other information. It says Ellison publicly claimed in 2015 that Oracle had dossiers on roughly 5 billion people. The transcript adds that Oracle was sued in federal court in 2022 for building those files without consent, and that in July 2024 Oracle settled for $115 million and shut the entire operation down.
The transcript concludes by stating that five months after Oracle’s dossier operation ended, Joe Gebbia joined Doge in the White House.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: And this is actually where it gets really interesting and connects a little bit to some of this East Wing ballroom underground bunker stuff. See, the records he was trying to digitize live in a place called Iron Mountain. About an hour north of Pittsburgh in a town called Boyers, Pennsylvania, there's a limestone mine 220 feet underground. And the federal government has been using this limestone mine as a retirement office since 1960. What do I mean by that? Well, the Office of Personnel Management, OPM, keeps 450 employees working down there full-time alongside 26,000 file cabinets holding over 400 million paper records processing about 10 000 federal retirements every month by hand and i know the first thought that comes into a lot of people's minds is why the hell do we have that like why do we still have physical paperwork for processing people's retirements and the reason is not because we technologically have not been able to digitize it i mean every administration since reagan has tried to digitize these records and every single one of them has failed for a multitude of reasons. It's because in order to do it correctly, meaning lawfully, you know, with the legal protections that the Federal Office of Personnel requires, is genuinely a very expensive thing to do, and it's politically very contentious. Because the reality is, is that physical paperwork in a mine has a different level of protection than digitized paperwork. And so Joe Gebbia and his team over at Doge said, we can do it, and they started to move these records onto the digital infrastructure that the White House now controls. Yeah, instead, they just worked around the legal guardrails and called it a day now i wanted to learn more about what he was doing with national design studio so i started this investigation like i do all of them by following the money except i hit immediate roadblocks because i remember that this is all being done off the books right just like doge did i mean there are no contracts on usa spending the office is not registered on sam.gov as a federal procurement entity the national design studio doesn't technically exist which is probably the point You know, because it was certainly the point with Doge, so I don't see why it would be any different here. And so I did what I always do when I can't follow the money. I followed the data instead. I promise you following the data is just as good as following the money and you can't cover it up as easily because data always leaves behind residual data. It leaves behind a little trail like dust on furniture that you think you just cleaned. And so when I was thinking through how I was going to follow the data for this investigation, that pattern recognition part of my brain started tingling, you know, because I remembered what Larry Ellison's company had been doing for the last decade. I remember reading about the time that Oracle ran this network of tracking tools that were embedded across the internet to build what they were calling digital dossiers. And basically they were these files of very sensitive information on people containing like where you lived, where you bank, what you buy, your political views, your race, like everything. And Oracle CEO Larry Ellison at one point in 2015 was even publicly bragging on stage claiming that the company had dossiers on roughly 5 billion people. And I go into these digital dossiers in more depth in another video which I recommend watching after this. But the TLDR is this. In 2022, Oracle got sued in federal court for building those files without consent. And in July of 2024, they had settled for $115 million and shut the entire operation down. But that operation was obviously valuable enough to Ellison that he ran it for over a decade and only quit when he was forced to. And so I just think it's, I don't know, funny timing that five months after Oracle exits the dossier business, Joe Gebbia joins Doge in the White House.
@thedreydossier - Drey
Plot twist: Doge never left. In fact, they barely rebranded. https://t.co/SGGbhAiZC9
Video Transcript AI Summary
A discussion introduces the National Design Studio (NDS) as an office described as “one of the most dangerous offices in the White House,” characterized as building “a parallel federal government inside the executive branch on private infrastructure,” and staffed by people previously linked to legal action involving federal data.
The speaker notes that the TrumpRx federal prescription drug pricing website contains a footer line stating “designed and engineered in DC by National Design Studio” above the privacy policy. The speaker contrasts this with other federal websites, claiming they do not credit external design studios, and adds that the NDS name is hyperlinked to NDS’s website. The speaker says the TrumpRx site appears to have been created with Wix and widgets, and that the byline is “pretty weird because federal websites don’t have design bylines.”
The speaker describes the NDS website as startup-like, with mainly mission-statement language and recruiting copy, and no page listing team members or leadership. During “digging,” the speaker says they found Joe Gebbia as the key name associated with NDS and identifies him as the chief design officer of the United States working with NDS. The speaker states that Joe Gebbia is the co-founder of Airbnb, stepped back from Airbnb in 2022, and that in September 2022 Tesla appointed him to its board of directors to fill a seat vacated by Larry Ellison, founder and chairman of Oracle.
The speaker then ties Gebbia to a federal role: the speaker says that in August 2025 Donald Trump signed an executive order creating the National Design Studio and created the federal title “Chief Design Officer of the United States.” According to the speaker, Gebbia was named to that title on day one, and he reports directly to the White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles. The speaker says this reporting structure is unusual.
The speaker claims NDS is staffed under a federal hiring authority called Section 3161, originally written for temporary advising bodies. The speaker asserts this means many people at NDS are “part-time advisor[s] or … volunteer[s],” which would result in them not appearing on the White House salary report and not filing financial disclosures. The speaker further claims NDS staff were not confirmed by the Senate and that they answer to no Inspector General because the Executive Office of the President does not have one.
The speaker compares this setup to “DOGE,” stating DOGE gutted federal agencies, fired tens of thousands of career civil servants, and is currently a defendant in multiple federal lawsuits. The speaker specifically mentions lawsuits alleging engineers gained access to Social Security data and Department of Homeland Security data and shared sensitive federal data with outside parties attempting to overturn elections.
The speaker then claims personal connection: the speaker says they found Joe Gebbia was a member of DOGE, that he spent six months there before his current position, and that one of the initiatives he personally led at DOGE was digitizing federal retirement paperwork. The speaker indicates this connects to “East Wing ballroom underground bunker stuff.”
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: the next three years how do we touch every digital service of the united states government and the private sectors reach out as well so the support of founders fund and peter thiel 816z and mark andreessen hbc and joe wansdale thrive and josh kushner that my friends is joe gabia
Speaker 1: He runs one of the most dangerous offices in the White House right now, and it's called the National Design Studio. Yeah, this is what I like to call DEFCON 1 territory, okay? Because what I believe they are doing is building a parallel federal government inside the executive branch on private infrastructure. And it is all being built by the same people who got sued the last time they touched any federal data. So earlier this week, I was perusing TrumpRx, right, as one does, the new federal prescription drug pricing website. I was curious. I just wanted to see what they had going on. So I was scrolling around, and at the bottom of the page, I noticed something that I have not noticed on any other federal website. In the footer of the page, it said, right above the privacy policy, designed and engineered in DC by National Design Studio. The whole website, by the way, looks like it was created on Wix with widgets and it's bizarre. But that line in particular is pretty weird because federal websites don't have design bylines. I mean, the IRS does not credit the design studio for that website. Neither does social security or the FBI. Nobody does that with federal government websites. Moreover, the Design Studio is hyperlinked to it. So when you click on it, it takes you to the National Design Studio's website, which I don't love, and in a minute, you're gonna see why. Now National Design Studio, which I'll be referring to as NDS throughout this video, reads more like a tech startup than anything else. And the site itself doesn't really tell you much beyond the mission statement language and recruiting copy. Like it's very boilerplate and very in your face with how hip and cool it is. You know, very Silicon Valley. And there was no page telling you about who was on the team or who was running it. So I had to do a little digging and the first name that came back to me was somebody named Joe Gebbia. He is known as the chief design officer of the United States working with NDS. Now you probably have never heard of Joe Gebbia. Lord knows I hadn't before this. But fear not, he's the co-founder of Airbnb. So you know, if anybody knows how to improve public spaces, it's the company that took residential spaces and made sure the public could never actually afford them again. He stepped back from Airbnb in 2022, but it's the years since then and now that really interest me. Because in September of 2022, Tesla appointed him to their board of directors. Yes, in fact, the seat he took had just been vacated by Larry Ellison, Yes, that Larry Ellison, the founder and chairman of Oracle. And hold on to old Larry Berry and Oracle in the back of your head, okay? Because this is going to come back up in a moment. Then in August of 2025, Donald Trump signed an executive order creating a brand new federal office called the National Design Studio. This is also when he created the brand new federal title to go with it, the Chief Design Officer of the United States. And Joe Gebbia was named that title on day one, and he reports directly to the White House Chief of Staff, Susie Wiles. Which is bizarre. Right? I mean, a National Design Studio reporting to the White House Chief of Staff, like that's not how this works. Why is it working like that? Well, it's because the National Design Studio is staffed under a federal hiring authority called Section 3161, which was originally written for temporary advising bodies. And since they're working under that authority, that means almost everyone working at the National Design Studio is either a part-time advisor or a volunteer. You know how billionaires like to volunteer their time for federal design agencies. And so they don't show up on the White House salary report, nor do they file any financial disclosures that the public who has a financial stake in what they're doing can see. They were also not confirmed by the Senate and they answer to no Inspector General because the Executive Office of the President does not have one. Well, where have I heard this before. See a brand new office inside the White House staffed by people who are invisible to the federal disclosure process answering to no independent oversight. Where have I heard that before? Oh, that's right. Because that's exactly how Doge was run. And Doge, lest we forget, in its very short, very horrific run, gutted federal agencies, fired tens of thousands of career civil servants, and is currently the defendant in multiple federal lawsuits. And more specifically, those lawsuits are for letting engineers access social security data and the Department of Homeland Security data and share that sensitive federal data with outside parties trying to overturn elections. That.
Speaker 0: Oh, and what do you know?
Speaker 1: I found in my investigation that Joe Gabbia was also a member of Doge.
Speaker 0: Yep, he spent a whole six months there before his current position.
Speaker 1: And one of the initiatives that he personally led at Doge was the digitization of the federal retirement paperwork. And this is actually where it gets really interesting and connects a little bit to some of this East Wing ballroom underground bunker stuff.
reSee.it AI Summary
I see “Dialog” as accountability being swapped for exposure. Leaks and names only count as accountability if people with power can and do act; if nothing changes, it becomes mere content. The audience is trained to treat the feeling-outrage loop as the end. The result is exhaustion, engagement, and real powerlessness, with media designed to keep the gap between information and action wide.
@thedreydossier - Drey
The Dialog story is the epitome of accountability being replaced by exposure. Exposure feels like accountability, sure. You’ve got names, leaked documents, and secret networks- but it only is accountability if someone with power to act on it actually does. When nobody acts, when nothing changes, exposure is just content. And the audience has been trained to experience the exposure itself as the resolution. You saw the list. You felt the outrage. Story complete. The fact that nothing happened doesn’t register as a failure because the consumption loop already closed. What that produces is a population that is genuinely exhausted, genuinely engaged, and genuinely powerless because every story is framed as something to feel about rather than something to understand well enough to act on. The gap between information and action has never been wider, and the media ecosystem is almost perfectly designed to keep it that way.
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker argues that coverage of a “Peter Thiel social network story” is wasting attention. They say the story is a list of rich people who know each other and paid large amounts to attend the same conferences, allegedly carelessly left in the front end of someone’s website code. The information is described as not hacked, sourced from two anonymous sources, and released without the methodology of how it was found, so it should be treated with a large grain of salt. The speaker insists the story does not affect the audience and says it does not change how power works, offering “no” answers to whether it impacts anything, whether anything can be done with it, or whether it changes power.
They contend that news incentives have shifted so that making people feel informed is decoupled from the obligation to actually inform them. They argue accountability has been replaced by exposure—leaked documents, names, and “secret networks”—but only if someone with power acts; when no one acts, exposure becomes content. They say this produces a population that is exhausted, engaged, and powerless, consuming lists like a “scoreboard of names” rather than actionable information.
The speaker contrasts this with a different story they consider important: the Trump administration shifting over $352 million of federal funds from the treasury to the “ballroom,” bringing the total to a $600 million ballroom. They describe it as covering a military apparatus almost certainly intended to surveil the public. They add that Palantir, Peter Thiel’s company discussed in the earlier conversation, is said to be central to the military apparatus beneath the ballroom. They argue that discussion of the ballroom on social media gets reduced to “grift” or conspiracy jokes instead of being treated with the severity they claim is involved.
They conclude that the ballroom will “touch every single person in this country” every day for the rest of their lives and that the time to ask questions is closing. They emphasize that attention is the last thing the audience owns outright and urge viewers to act.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: I do not care about the dialogue Peter Thiel social network story and honestly neither should you and I am not usually in the business of telling people what they should and shouldn't care about but I'm going to make a special exception this time because what is going on with this coverage? I feel like I am losing my mind here. Our attention is just about the only thing that we have left that holds immense value and it just pains me to watch people spend it on stories like this that I don't even understand what the story is. You guys, it is a list of rich people who all happen to know each other, who all happen to pay absurd amounts of money to go to the same conferences that was carelessly left on the front end of the code of somebody's website. That is what this is. Like, it's not a hack. Nobody hacktivists their way to this information. In fact, it was sourced from two anonymous sources and without the methodology of how they found it. And with any story like that, I'm sorry, take it with a huge grain of salt, okay? Because this does not affect you. It doesn't. This story of these billionaires who are all kind of gross knowing each other is just a Tuesday. It is stories like this, in my opinion, that is everything wrong with the consumption of news today. I don't know when this happened, but at some point, the incentive to make you feel informed decoupled from the obligation to actually inform you. You know? And then, as a consequence of that, accountability all of a sudden was replaced by exposure. And exposure feels like accountability, you know, names, leaked documents, and these secret networks, but only if someone with power to act on it actually does. And when nobody acts, nothing changes, and exposure is just content. And the result of what all of that produces is a population that is genuinely exhausted, genuinely engaged, and genuinely powerless. a list like this without fail every time always gets consumed as this scoreboard of names you know not as any information that you can actually act on and look the test i run any story through before i decide if i'm going to pay any modicum of attention to it is asking does this affect anything Can you do anything with this information? And does it change how power works? Dialogue answers no, no, and no to all of them. And yet here we are still bleeding attention to a freaking guest list. You know what does check all of those boxes? A story that drops the same day as the dialogue story, okay? It is the fact that the Trump administration has shifted over $352 million of federal funds from the treasury over to the ballroom. That's right, we are now at a $600 million ballroom, sorry, shed that is covered covering a military apparatus that is almost certainly going to be used to surveil you. And Palantir, you know, Peter Thiel's company that everybody's talking about right now in the dialogue conversation, they are the ones that are going to be the center of that military apparatus underneath the ballroom. This is probably the most important story of the century, if I'm being honest. Yet anytime anybody is talking about the ballroom, especially on social media, it either gets simplified down to being a grift or a conspiracy theory, or people make the joke that it's a ballroom or whatever, but it does not get taken with the weight and severity that actually is underneath it, quite literally, because the ballroom is going to touch every single person in this country. And I mean that every single day for the rest of your lives. And the only window we have to ask any questions about what is going on down there is right now, and that window is closing. Like I said, your attention is the last thing that you still own outright. So for the love of God, act like it.
reSee.it AI Summary
Yesterday, the Washington Post reported that Trump’s ballroom is now a $600 million project, with taxpayers covering about half. I wrote this piece in April, when the claim was privately funded with no government money. Now I’m sharing it again because I’m counting the line items in projects everyone keeps insisting are privately funded, and more of the accounting has come into view.
@thedreydossier - Drey
Yesterday, the Washington Post reported that Trump’s ballroom is now a $600 million project, with taxpayers covering roughly half. I wrote this piece back in April, when the line was still being delivered with a firm hand on the podium: privately funded, all donors, not a dime of government money, nothing to worry about. Well. This girl doesn’t count sheep at night. She counts line items in projects everyone keeps insisting are privately funded. Sharing it again below, now that a little more of the accounting is in public view.
reSee.it AI Summary
I swear, if I hear “shed” one more time. The FBI says there’s a terror plot tied to UFC Freedom 250, with 18 suspects still unidentified. Meanwhile, Oracle has a defense AI summit in 9 days pitching surveillance tools.
@thedreydossier - Drey
I swear to God, if I hear the word “shed” one more time. The FBI announced a terror plot today tied to UFC Freedom 250, with 18 suspects still unidentified. Completely unrelated, Oracle has a defense AI summit in 9 days, where it will pitch the exact surveillance tools that would find them.
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 1 says a case described by the FBI shows a group moving from being “strangers on TikTok” to “operational planning within three months” on a combined total budget of $1,300. Speaker 1 says the FBI found out about the plot on June 10 and had it “wrapped up within four days,” calling it “a good OSINT puzzle” that is “perfectly wrapped.”
Speaker 1 then summarizes the FBI announcement: the FBI “thwarted this attack” at the UFC Freedom 250 match at the White House that took place over the past weekend, which Speaker 1 says kicked off the country’s 250th anniversary celebrations.
According to Speaker 1’s description of the FBI case filings released that day, a group calling themselves the Vanguard of the Old found each other on TikTok in March. Speaker 1 says they then moved into encrypted messaging apps including Signal and Telegram and were allegedly planning a coordinated attack targeting government officials and wealthy attendees. Speaker 1 also says the FBI chose to unseal the documents, and that Kash Patel was praised on the record for the FBI’s “rapid response.” Speaker 1 notes Kash Patel was “sitting front row” at the event while taking credit for protection of the weekend.
Speaker 1 says the grievances listed in the court documents allege they are anti-government, anti-APAC, anti-capitalist elites, and anti-data centers, described as “fringe beliefs of a minor few.” Speaker 1 adds that these grievances are “things that millions of people are openly talking about” online and that they have been listed as motivations in a single federal terror case.
Speaker 1 says an Eskridge affidavit includes a statement that Eskridge was preparing his residence “to be a safe house and making a bunker under the floorboards of his shed,” and Speaker 1 remarks that only one other person had used the word “shed” in a similar context. Speaker 1 then provides a parallel described by Speaker 0 about a “massive underground complex” under a military construction ballroom, where the ballroom becomes a “shed” for what is being built under the military, including “from drones.”
Speaker 1 says if the government needed to work the case quickly, it would need “a pretty serious tech stack,” including tools to scrape TikTok content, analyze seized phones, identify “18 unknown people” from encrypted chat fragments, and enable intelligence sharing across four states’ agencies. Speaker 1 then references Oracle and Eris Labs, saying Oracle partnered with an AI company called Eris Labs that “turns user-generated content into searchable military intelligence,” and that Oracle announced the partnership on June 4, about six days before the FBI discovered the plot. Speaker 1 says Oracle would bring the tech stack to a Defense Tech Summit in Brussels on June 25.
Speaker 1 concludes by saying there are still 18 suspects at large and that the “sales pitch starts on June 25,” adding that it will be seen which gets resolved first.
Full Transcript
Speaker 1: Okay, so let me get this straight. A group went from being strangers on TikTok to operational planning within three months on a combined total budget of $1,300, and the FBI found out about this on June 10th and then had it wrapped up within four days? Well, come on, you don't think I know a good OSINT puzzle when I see one? And they don't come more perfectly wrapped than this.
Speaker 0: So let's play.
Speaker 1: So the FBI announced today that they thwarted this attack at the UFC Freedom 250 match that was at the White House this past weekend. Keep in mind that this was the event that kicked off the country's 250th anniversary celebrations. Now, according to the case filings that were released by the FBI today, a group calling themselves the Vanguard of the Old had found each other on TikTok back in March. And they had then moved into these encrypted messaging apps like Signal and Telegram and were allegedly planning a coordinated attack targeting government officials and wealthy attendees. Yeah, and instead of keeping quiet, you know, so the remaining 18 on the loose don't run, the FBI has decided to unseal everything today, and Kash Patel went on the record praising the FBI's rapid response. The same Kash Patel that was sitting front row at the event that he is now taking credit for protecting this last weekend? Sure. And it's worth noting that the grievances in these court cases are documents alleging that they are all anti-government, anti-APAC, anti-capitalist elites, anti-data centers. You know, just the fringe beliefs of a minor few connecting them together. I mean, these are all things that millions of people are openly talking about on the internet and organizing around literally every day. Now they've all been listed as motivations in a single federal terror case. Oh, and speaking of sharing uncommon words and phrases, get this. According to the Eskridge affidavit, he was preparing his residence, quote, to be a safe house and making a bunker under the floorboards of his shed, end quote. Now, there is only one other person that I have ever heard use the word shed used in this very particular context before. And it is.
Speaker 0: Recently, because of a stupid lawsuit that was filed with the military's building gate, massive complex under the ballroom and that's under construction and we're doing very well. So we're ahead of schedule, that's part of it. And the ballroom essentially becomes a shed for what's being built under the military, including from drones and including from any other thing.
Speaker 1: Okay, we don't have time for you. Shed. And so it's interesting the parallels, right, of this complex, this massive underground complex that's got drone-proof glass and is built to be retardant from drones and protect against that very threat just at the exact location of where this drone plot just showed up from this other guy who also has a shed that's covering his underground bunker. Here's where my brain goes as an OSINT journalist. If you wanted to work this case quickly for the government, you would need a pretty serious tech stack in order to help you do that. Something that's going to help you scrape TikTok content, something that can help you analyze seized phones, something that maybe can identify 18 unknown people from encrypted chat fragments, something that lets four states' worth of agencies share intelligence. You know, something like, I don't know, Oracle's new defense ecosystem that I reported on two videos ago? The company that holds all of TikTok's user data has just partnered with an AI company that turns user-generated content into searchable military intelligence. The company is called Eris Labs, and what they say they do versus what they're capable of doing
Speaker 0: are two very different things.
Speaker 1: Mind you, Oracle announced this partnership on June 4th, about six days before the FBI discovered this plot. And Oracle is also going to be bringing all of this tech stack to its Defense Tech Summit in Brussels on June 25th. You know, the place where military buyers and intelligence officials decide what to purchase for their governments. And so remember, folks, the only thing more useful to the government than a surveillance tool is a reason to use one. And there are still 18 suspects at large and the sales pitch starts on June 25th. So I guess we'll see which one gets resolved first, won't we?
@thedreydossier - Drey
And then I found the brain surgeons.. https://t.co/XAFasYTTH4
Video Transcript AI Summary
He moved to Texas, and it became harder to track him because he stopped using his own name and instead used the name of his personal money manager, Jared Burchall. Accession LLC is described as one of Elon Musk’s main LLCs, acting as his family office that organizes his money, with Musk’s name not appearing on the document.
The other speaker described this as a “crazy story” from The New York Times about Elon Musk’s sprawling multi-company shell network in Texas, noting they had reported on it in November of the prior year. They said they thought the owner of a Texas property in Austin would have to pay taxes, so they checked the Texas Comptroller’s website for Riverbottoms Ranch LLC. They reported that the name Jared Burchall appeared as president. They said Burchall runs Accession LLC, described as Elon Musk’s family office, and that he manages Musk’s personal fortune and handles paperwork when Musk does not want his name directly on something.
The speaker also connected the reporting to a separate question about Neuralink building a 112,000 square foot clean room manufacturing space despite having only two implanted patients at the time. That concern led them to check LinkedIn hiring and find job postings for OR nurses and neurosurgical PAs, described as roles for actual operating rooms rather than preclinical or animal research work. They said that, for a Texas facility not showing up on any clinical trial site, it appeared to be “a farm” where such work was occurring.
They concluded by saying the experience reflects how people doing independent work can feel others hedging against them or speculating because they lack institutional backing. They noted that seeing The New York Times report on it in February, after their own November reporting, reminded them that work can be done independently as well. They said they hoped their reporting helped The New York Times and compared their contribution to building blocks that come together to reveal the full picture.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: He moved to Texas. It started getting a bit harder to track. That's because he stopped using his name quite so much and instead started using the name of his personal money manager, Jared Burchall. Accession LLC is one of Elon Musk's main LLCs because it's his family office, which is actually organizing his money. But Elon Musk's name isn't on this document.
Speaker 1: This is a crazy story the New York Times put out about Elon Musk's sprawling multi-company shell network that he's building out in Texas. And I should know because I reported on it in November of last year.
Speaker 0: Thinking to myself, well, whoever owns this property in Austin, Texas is going to have to pay taxes on it.
Speaker 1: And tax filings are usually public or at least accessible. So I went over to the Texas Comptroller's website and I typed in Riverbottoms Ranch LLC. And whose name do you think popped up? Jared Burchall, under president. I'm sorry, Jared freaking Burchall, president? Do you guys know who this guy is? He runs Accession LLC, which is basically Elon Musk's family office.
Speaker 0: This is the guy who manages all of Musk's personal fortune, who handles, I guess, all the paperwork when Musk doesn't want to put his name directly on something.
Speaker 1: And a little peek behind the curtain on my pro I had found this because I was trying to answer one very basic question, which was why was Neuralink building a 112,000 square foot clean room manufacturing space when they only had two patients who they had implanted these chips at the time. That made me nervous enough to want to go check LinkedIn to see what kind of hiring they'd been doing lately. And that's when I found these. job postings for OR nurses and for neurosurgical PAs. Not preclinical roles, not animal research testing, but like actual people who work in actual operating rooms. Mind you, for a facility in Texas that doesn't show up on any clinical trial site, it's a farm essentially that that's happening on. So that's what took me to Texas. I share this to say that I think anybody who does independent work in any capacity, I think knows the feeling of people constantly hedging their bets against you or speculating against you just because you don't have that institution behind you. And seeing that the New York Times had reported on this in February of this year, and I'd reported on it back in November of last year, just reminded me that it's not only institutions that can do this work. Like we can do it too, and we should do it. And I genuinely hope that my reporting helped the New York Times in any capacity. Like what an honor to be like a building block of someone else's journalism, because that's what this is. It's just a bunch of building blocks that we're all, you know, putting on top of each other to see what this house is. And as our girl, Charlie XCX would say, I think I'm going to die in this house.
@thedreydossier - Drey
SMILE! you’re on camera ☺︎ (… in Tel Aviv) https://t.co/KYxfpJUDCy
Video Transcript AI Summary
The transcript claims that Eris Labs, described as the company holding “all of TikTok’s user data,” partnered with an AI company that converts user-generated content into “searchable military intelligence.” The transcript says Eris Labs and this partnership were described in a June 4 post on Oracle’s blog, and that Oracle is “the other company” involved. It further states that Eris Labs and Oracle began working together “a little over a year ago,” and that Eris Labs has been operating “in stealth for a little over two and a half years,” making the exact start date of any work with Larry Ellison or the American government unclear. The transcript says Eris Labs is operating out of Washington, DC.
It describes Eris Labs as headquartered in Tel Aviv, Israel, with “most of their team and all of their R&D out of there,” and notes that “three of their founders are veterans of Israeli intelligence.” The transcript says Amos Lahav spent “nineteen years running operations out of the Israeli Prime Minister's office,” and that the year he left that job he started Eris.
The transcript says Eris Labs markets itself as a military software company that “processes battlefield footage,” which Oracle’s blog calls “Accelerating Media Exploitation.” It asserts that this same technology could be used to identify individuals in TikTok videos taken from a protest live stream, stating that the tool could produce identification of “every- single person in it,” depending on the query.
The transcript says Oracle’s blog post includes content about domestic threats, claiming “Domestic terriers pose a significant threat to the US according to the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security,” and that domestic terriers “often use online platforms such as social media and gaming to communicate radical ideas” and “mobilize” people. It then quotes a separate Israeli newspaper interview in which Eris Labs’ CEO is said to have stated that after the October 7th attacks, they began “extracting intelligence from even TikTok videos.”
The transcript emphasizes timing, stating that the White House signed an executive order giving Oracle custody of TikTok on September 25, 2025, and that “18 days later,” on October 13, 2025, Oracle added Harris Labs to their defense ecosystem. It claims this supports the view that Oracle is a “national security threat,” adding that defense contractors of Oracle’s size “shouldn't be allowed to invest in media properties,” while stating that a law is not in place.
The transcript also references statements attributed to Larry Ellison about citizens being on “their best behavior” because they are “constantly recording and reporting,” and links Ellison’s investments to control of media outlets via “Oracle stocks” to buy CNN and CBS, then concluding by describing a scenario where one family holds “one hand on the surveillance infrastructure” and another holds a social media platform. It ends by claiming that “so is Eris” and instructs viewers on TikTok to “share accordingly.”
Full Transcript
The company that holds all of TikTok's user data has just partnered with an AI company that turns user-generated content into searchable military intelligence. The company is called Eris Labs, and what they say they do versus what they're capable of doing are two very different things. And I say just partnered with because this was posted on June 4th on Oracle's blog. Oracle is the other company, by the way. But they actually started working with Oracle a little over a year ago, at the very least that we know of. And what I find interesting is that they've- They've been operating in stealth for a little over two and a half years, so we can't really say for certain when they started working, I guess, with Larry Ellison or the American government, but we do know now that they are operating out of Washington, DC, I suppose. And while operating in stealth is, I guess, kind of normal for tech companies, I really find it disconcerting whenever there's an Oracle element involved, you know? Because defense companies that operate alongside Oracle tend to have a certain, I don't know, je ne sais quoi about them. The first day they went public, was their first post on LinkedIn, which is awfully patriotic, especially for a company that's headquartered out of Tel Aviv, Israel, with most of their team and all of their R&D out of there. Three of their founders are veterans of Israeli intelligence, with Amos Lahav spending nineteen years running operations out of the Israeli Prime Minister's office. In the same year that he left that job, he started Eris. Now they market themselves as a military software company that processes battlefield footage, mean Oracle's blog calls it themselves, "Accelerating Media Exploitation." But what that can also look like is somebody using TikTok to, I don't know, take a live stream of a protest, and then Eris later on using AI to identify every- single person in it. You know, it's the same tool, same technology, just a different query. But Ray, they're not gonna use it to do that, really? Well, then why was this linked in the footnote of Oracle's blog post? Let's read this together. Domestic terriers pose a significant threat to the US according to the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security. Domestic terriers often use online platforms such as social media and gaming to communicate radical ideas to a wide audience and mobilize like-minded people. Sorry. And their CEO says it even more plainly than that, because I found an Israeli newspaper that he gave an interview to, and he said verbatim that after the October 7th attacks, that they began extracting intelligence from even TikTok videos. And the timing is worth noting here, okay? Because the White House signed the executive order giving Oracle custody of TikTok on September 25th, 2025, and I believe it was 18 days later, on October 13th, 2025, that Oracle then added Harris Labs to their defense ecosystem. This is what I mean, by the way, when I say that Oracle is a national security threat, okay? Because defense contractors of that size shouldn't be allowed to invest in media properties of this size or any size, and I don't know why that's not a law yet, but holy crap, it should be. Because people like Larry Ellison, who invest and build companies like Oracle, say things like this. Citizens will be on their best behavior because we're constantly recording and reporting everything that's going on. And it's un- it's unimpeachable. This is the same man whose son now controls CNN and CBS, thanks to Daddy leveraging his Oracle stocks to buy him those newsrooms. So now it's one family with one hand on the surveillance infrastructure and trying to privatize America, and the other on a social media platform, and I don't know, a foot in the newsroom. And if you're watching this on TikTok, oop, you won't be for long, because so is Eris. So, share accordingly.
reSee.it AI Summary
I’m working on a parallel dot-gov website investigation, and honestly I’m baffled by what I’m finding: every thread leads to more sites, acronyms, and code I didn’t expect. I’ve made calls to federal agencies to understand what’s known at the executive level, so I haven’t posted yet. I’m preparing a first live next week and part two is coming soon.
@thedreydossier - Drey
Quick update on the parallel [dot]gov website investigation: I want to say this professionally… but what in the federal Russian nesting doll is going on here?? I wish I could tell you this got clearer the more I dug, but every thread I pull leads to five new websites, a new acronym, and a weird string of code I now have beef with. It’s also led me to make some phone calls to different federal agencies to see how much the government actually knows about what’s happening at the executive-branch level and, well… my face in this outtake kind of says it all. So that’s why I haven’t posted the investigation yet this week. I’m taking a little extra time with this one to make sure I’m connecting the dots responsibly, being as thorough as possible, and turning a very dense, and honestly pretty alarming, set of findings into something clear enough for people to actually follow. I appreciate your patience (because Lord knows mine left the building about three phone calls ago). I’m also planning my first live next week as a companion piece to this investigation. A casual deeper dive on the deep dive, talking through some of the evidence that didn’t make it in the video. I’m still figuring out the best day and time; trying not to overlap with Candice, Baron, or other creators a lot of you also watch. So drop suggestions below if you have a preference! Regrettably, there is more. Part two coming soon.
@thedreydossier - Drey
I made this video back in January 2025. I wish it had aged worse. https://t.co/kiSMQwTrGj
Video Transcript AI Summary
The discussion argues that the media has been focused on “the wrong billionaires” regarding a potential TikTok buyer, pointing to a Tuesday moment when Donald Trump was asked if he would consider letting Elon Musk buy TikTok. Trump responded that he would “really consider Larry Ellison.”
The transcript proposes an “entirely different strategy.” It claims Zuckerberg “was never up for consideration” for TikTok, arguing that if Meta acquired TikTok it would have “way too many antitrust issues,” and that Trump “doesn’t trust him” or his loyalty. It characterizes Elon Musk as “the agent of chaos,” distracting attention with “drama and pageantry.” It describes Trump as “our queen,” “the salesman” orchestrating deals by allowing distraction from “shiny objects,” while pitching Larry Ellison as the next buyer.
It states that Ellison has a strong position because Oracle already stores “a lot of TikTok’s data,” and because Oracle “basically controls the cloud,” described as infrastructure “that holds all of our data.” The transcript further notes that Larry Ellison bought his son David Ellison’s Paramount Pictures in the prior year, portraying it as Paramount stepping up with “the majority of the money,” with David running day-to-day operations, and the merger of Skydance.
A key claim is that Ellison is “particularly dangerous” compared with Mark Zuckerberg and Elon Musk because Ellison “doesn’t crave attention,” but “understands how powerful attention is.” It says TikTok is “the most powerful social media engine to shape public opinion and narrative,” so owning TikTok would mean owning substantial influence over public narrative.
The transcript argues that Hollywood PR professionals are struggling to control narratives in real time, and asks the audience to imagine Ellison owning TikTok while already owning data and major media assets, including “Paramount Pictures and all their IP,” with examples given such as “CNN, et cetera.” It frames this as the source of “monopoly,” not only in technology but in how tech interacts with government, wields influence, and creates “a new kind of monopolistic power.”
It concludes that the central question is not whether Ellison is a better buyer than Zuckerberg or Musk, but why any of these individuals are allowed to wield so much power, calling the situation an “absolutely deplorable” representation of government.
Full Transcript
I think we're watching the wrong billionaires. I realized this on Tuesday when Donald Trump was asked if he'd consider letting Elon Musk buy TikTok, and he said, "Like, yeah, sure, whatever, but I would really consider Larry Ellison." I feel like that moment told us everything that we need to know. In fact, I think there's an entirely different strategy going on here that nobody's considering, and I would like to explain it. Zuckerberg was never- Actually up for consideration for TikTok. I think Meta acquiring TikTok would have way too many antitrust issues, and honestly, I think at the end of the day, Donald Trump doesn't trust him. Like, I don't think he truly trusts his loyalty. Then we've got Elon Musk, the agent of chaos. He is doing what he does best, which is distracting everybody, grabbing headlines with all of his drama and pageantry. Then you've got Donald Trump, our queen. Yes, he's the most versatile, he's dynamic, but he doesn't work alone. He's the salesman of it Orchestrating the deals, he's, he's letting us be distracted by the shiny objects. Meanwhile, he's pitching Larry Ellison to be the next buyer of TikTok, and it sounds like it's probably- Probably a pretty high possibility considering Larry Ellison owns Oracle, which already is storing a lot of TikTok's data. See, Ellison isn't a household name, but that's exactly how he likes it. His company that he co-founded, Oracle, basically controls the cloud. It's the infrastructure that holds all of our data. It's basically a cloud filled with gold, and it's the only cloud I've ever heard of that rains for just one man. He also bought his son, David Ellison, Paramount Pictures last year. For those of us in Hollywood, this was like a huge story. Paramount Pictures sold Larry Stepped up, put up a majority of the money, and was like, "David, you'll run it, I'll be behind the scenes, and you can do the day to day running of it," and they merged Skydance over. See, what makes Larry Ellison particularly dangerous in comparison to Mark Zuckerberg and Elon Musk is that Larry Ellison doesn't crave attention, but he understands how powerful attention is. TikTok is the most powerful social media engine to shape public opinion and narrative. I mean, owning TikTok would be owning a lot of power. We are Seeing in real time how these Hollywood PR professionals are having a hard time orchestrating narrative and taking control of the storylines that are going on. Now, imagine being Larry Ellison, who already owns all of your data and already owns Paramount Pictures and all their IP and like all the assets that come with it, like CNN, et cetera, and now owning TikTok. You see where the monopoly comes in here? This isn't just about tech, it's about how tech interacts with the government and how it wields influence and how it creates- This new kind of monopolistic power. And to me, the question isn't about whether or not Larry Ellison is a better choice to buy TikTok than Mark Zuckerberg or Elon Musk, right? The question is, why are we letting any of these people wield so much power? To be quite blunt, this kind of opportunity even being presented to him is absolutely deplorable. It is a deplorable representation of government. It just makes me laugh that Mark Zuckerberg's the bishop, and he can only just run sideways and that's hilarious to me.
@thedreydossier - Drey
I wish I could say I didn’t see this coming https://t.co/VQGEga2cy5
@thedreydossier - Drey
passport[dot]gov is really freaking me out. https://t.co/kCgJI00MX0
reSee.it AI Summary
I say the veteran yelling “I went to war for a First Amendment zone?” is exactly why I keep asking people in power those questions. If the Constitution is sacred enough to draft someone’s kid, it must be upheld when people protest at home. They may dodge, but they heard me, on the record—especially @elonmusk.
@thedreydossier - Drey
A veteran yelling “I went to war for a First Amendment zone?” is exactly why I ask people in power the questions I ask. Because if the Constitution is sacred enough to draft someone’s kid for, it should be sacred enough to uphold when people protest at home. They may dodge the answer. But they heard the question, on the record. @elonmusk for someone who cosplays as the First Amendment’s divorced dad, you are awfully quiet when actual people are being told where their speech is allowed to stand.
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker argues that they have a “designated First Amendment zone” and rejects being told otherwise, referencing six years of a broken back, one deployment to the Middle East, and “three friends” lost in service to the country. They connect current debates about war with Iran and “bringing back potentially a draft” to the idea that defending what the country stands for includes “a free press.” They question how the country can ask a nineteen-year-old to die for the Constitution while “selling off, you know, parts of the American press to countries that throw their own journalists in,” noting this as “the quiet part out loud.”
They say there are soldiers abroad defending the Constitution and that, at home, Republican senators are refusing to uphold the Constitution. They then address a “merger to bring it all back,” citing a Secretary of Defense who characterizes “the fake news” as writing the truth and says, “I cannot wait until the Ellicons control CNN,” stating that such comments “should be send a chill to—To everybody.” The speaker also reports speaking with journalists who were in town for the White House Correspondents’ Dinner and says journalists believe the First Amendment is facing some of the biggest assaults they’ve seen.
They list examples they say demonstrate these assaults: “sixty minutes” being stopped from publishing something; CBS and “what’s happening with Stephen Colbert”; settlements after settlements granted to Donald Trump on “bogus claims” for defamation; and what the speaker describes as the White House doing what they say Erdogan does in Turkey and what other “would-be dictators like Putin” have tried to do—“try to render take control of… the press and the media.”
Full Transcript
I mean, that's my designated First Amendment zone. Get the fuck out of here. You know what I'm talking, you laughed at me. Do you understand what I'm talking about? Six years of broken back, one deployment to the Middle East, three friends lost in service to this fucking country. You gonna tell me that's my... First Amendment zone with this conversation of being at war with Iran right now and even this conversation of bringing back potentially a draft, you know, we're gonna, we're potentially gonna be asking men and women to be risking their lives to defend what this country stands for, and one of those things that this country stands for is a free press. And so I guess something that I am wondering is how do we ask a nineteen-year-old to die for the Constitution when we're selling off, you know, parts of the American press to countries that throw their own journalists in? They're saying, they're saying the quiet part out loud. we have soldiers, as you said, sworn oaths to the Constitution, defending the Constitution abroad. We have at home senators, Republican senators, who are refusing to uphold the Constitution. But the point that you're saying is about this merger to bring it all back, is you have a Secretary of Defense who's saying, "Hey, the fake news is writing the truth basically about this war. I cannot wait until the Ellicons control CNN." And, and that should be send a chill to- To everybody, and I will tell you this, I talked to a lot of journalists that were in town for the White House Correspondents' Dinner, and obviously all of us find that, the violence there grievous. But the thing that I heard from journalists themselves was they think that this is one of the times that the First Amendment is facing some of the biggest assaults we're seeing this with sixty minutes being stopped from publishing something. We've seen this with CBS and, and what's happening with Stephen Colbert. We're seeing this with a settlement after settlement given to Donald Trump on his bogus claims, legal claims for defamation. We're really seeing this, this White House do what we've seen Erdogan do in Turkey, we're seeing him do what other would-be dictators like Putin have tried to do when it comes to one of the first things they do is try to render take control of, of the press and the media
reSee.it AI Summary
I visited TrumpRx, a federal drug pricing website that looks like Wix collided with a Pinterest board. It has a gold 3D eagle, floating pills, and the nonsatirical tagline “TrumpRx the price.” The typography feels like a Brooklyn juice bar, matched by the site’s self-regard. It’s a total aesthetic catastrophe—almost the point.
@thedreydossier - Drey
If you have not had the profound misfortune of visiting TrumpRx, it is a federal drug pricing website that looks like Wix and a Pinterest board threw up on each other. There’s a gold 3D eagle, there are pills floating across the screen, with the tagline “TrumpRx the price,” which is unfortunately not satire. It has the typography of a Brooklyn juice bar and the self-regard of a man who has never been told no. It is, in every conceivable aesthetic sense, a catastrophe. But that’s almost the point. Because while you’re busy looking at the website, the website is busy watching you.
@thedreydossier - Drey
Don’t be fooled by the wellness language. They are building the infrastructure to make your body readable — genomics, biometrics, risk scores, wearables — and once the body becomes data, it can be priced, ranked, denied, and controlled. https://t.co/lhVMp3nmMc
@thedreydossier - Drey
Trump said “there will never be another building like this.” Buddy, there already is one. It’s in Jerusalem. It has the population registry in it. https://t.co/cZFMp8acGq
reSee.it AI Summary
I introduced a campaign called WhereIsTheFirewall, focused on Oracle Health, patient data, and AI. Oracle Health is tied to major health infrastructure and also serves defense, intelligence, immigration, and policing. We asked what prevents its data/AI outputs from informing those uses, but got silence and comment shutdowns. We now demand Oracle publish a written firewall guarantee.
@thedreydossier - Drey
(1/) Hey X! I wanted to introduce you to something I’ve been working on over on Linkedin/Reddit called #WhereIsTheFirewall. It is about Oracle Health, patient data, AI, and one very normal request: if a company is trusted with medical records, patients deserve to know where the walls are. (See video from early April below) 🧵
Video Transcript AI Summary
On March 31, Oracle announced an AI platform for the United States government that combines civilian agency data and defense agency data to enable mission-critical decisions at scale. The platform is intended to unify critical information across civilian and defense agencies to reduce information silos and speed up decisions, including making both types of data accessible on the same platform so AI tools can reach both and cross-pollinate.
The speaker describes this as “not good at all,” pointing to China’s “military civil fusion” approach. Starting in 2017, China built a system—described as developed with help from Larry Ellison—where hospitals, tech companies, and universities made their civilian data available to the People’s Liberation Army, blending civilian life and military operations. The speaker says the idea is that the government, through the military, has ownership over infrastructure and information, and references the U.S. efforts to draw a line against this kind of integration, including sanctions and bans tied to Huawei and TikTok.
The speaker emphasizes a principle of keeping military and civilian spheres separate, linking it to the Third Amendment and the prohibition on quartering soldiers in a civilian’s home. They argue that when an American company announces a platform that unifies civilian and military data under one government AI system, it should be addressed.
The speaker claims Oracle is already working to unify this kind of data: Medicare and Medicaid data are moving to Oracle’s platforms, described as health records of tens of millions of Americans. The speaker also states Oracle holds Air Force, intelligence community, and defense agency contracts, and says there is currently no law requiring that those data streams stay separate—no firewall or rule in place—beyond Oracle’s own policies.
The speaker proposes that separation needs to be required by law, but argues Congress will not act if it is only asked politely. They say Congress listens more to the health care industry and hospital systems, and they single out HIPAA compliance risk as a key pressure point. Under HIPAA, hospitals are responsible for what vendors do with patient data, and the speaker says no one can prove separation right now, making this a compliance risk that is expensive. They argue that if something goes wrong and hospital entities were aware but did not investigate, hospitals could be liable.
The speaker’s plan is to get involved publicly: ask Oracle a single yes-or-no question repeatedly and force attention on the answer or lack of it. The question is: “Is there a firewall separating Oracle Health patient data from your defense and intelligence infrastructure? Yes or no?” They call for posting the question across Oracle Health’s social presence, especially LinkedIn, targeting hospital executives, legal teams, and compliance officers. The speaker says that if Oracle responds “no,” hospital boards will face a problem; if Oracle responds “yes,” Oracle must provide documentation and audits; and if Oracle does not answer, hospital executives will become nervous. The speaker ends by urging coordinated action “right now,” framing it as “congress” and asking the audience for support.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: You and me, we're congress now. Okay? Because something pretty big happened while congress was away on spring break, and we don't really have time to wait for them to get back just to not care. But I do have a plan, so let me catch you up. On March 31, Oracle announced this new AI platform for the United States government.
And what it does is very simple, but it's also very terrifying because it takes civilian agency data, and it takes defense agency data, and it mixes it all together. And the idea is that they wanna be able to make mission critical decisions at scale using AI. Enable civilian and defense agencies to unify critical information so they can move faster, reduce information silos, and make informed mission critical decisions at scale. Now having civilian and military data under the same company roof is one thing, but having it accessible on the same platform so that AI tools can reach both of them and cross pollinate, that's not good at all. And we don't really have to guess as to how this would turn out if we did it.
Okay? Because there's already a country that does this, China, and it's called military civil fusion. Starting in 2017, China built a system with the help of Larry Ellison where hospitals, tech companies, and universities all made their civilian data available to the People's Liberation Army. So all of your military records, your research, your business data, all of that goes to the same military that has their missiles pointed at Taiwan. Because the idea is that you're blurring civilian life and military operations.
You don't create a distinguishment between it. The idea is that the government, through the military, has ownership over all of the infrastructure and all of your information. And The United States has spent literally years pointing at that and saying, boop, that's the line that free countries don't cross. We sanctioned Huawei over it. We banned TikTok over it.
That was kinda the whole argument. You know how the CCP and TikTok were kind of too intertwined? That was our whole point. We didn't want that happening with us. See, we love our military here in America.
Okay? But we love our military separate from our civilians. Military stay over there. Civilians stay over here. We care about this so much as a country that we put it in our bill of rights.
It is the third amendment. You know how you can't quarter soldiers in a civilian's home? That's where this comes from. Everyone treats it like it's some weird historical footnote, but the principle behind it is dead serious. So when an American company announces a platform that unifies civilian and military data under one government AI system, we should probably talk about that.
No? Oracle is already well on its way trying to unify all of this data. Right now, we have Medicare and Medicaid data that is moving over to Oracle's platforms as we speak. That is the health records of tens of millions of people around America, your parents, your grandparents, anybody who is on the federal health care coverage, this is affecting. And at the same time that's happening, Oracle already holds air force contracts, intelligence community contracts, and defense agency contracts.
And here's the thing. Right now, there is no law that says those two things have to stay separate. Your health care data and air force contract data, nothing. No firewall, no rule, nothing in the books that says legally they have to stay separate. The only thing separating your grandmother's health care records from defense AI systems like Palantir's is Oracle's own policies.
Now we need a law that requires that separation. We we we need that written down on paper, but if there's anything that Delta Airlines has taught me about congress, it's that it's not gonna happen if we ask them nicely. We have to make everybody very, very uncomfortable if we want something like this to happen. And we need something like this to happen because the clock is counting down. We don't have much time.
Outside of Delta Airlines, you know who congress does listen to? The health care industry, hospital systems, the people who spend billions of dollars on health care technology. Why would hospital executives scare you? Ask. I'll give you one reason.
HIPAA compliance. Because under HIPAA, hospitals are responsible for what their vendors do with patient data. And so it's not that Oracle holding health data is illegal or them holding military contracts is illegal, but no one right now can prove that those two things are separated, and that is a compliance risk. And compliance risks are very expensive. We need to ask a very important question, and we need to make sure that they hear it because if something goes wrong with our data and it comes out that they knew the question and didn't investigate, well, then they're liable.
So the plan is I need you to be a troll with me. Okay? We need to ask Oracle one very simple question, a yes or no question, and we need to force these hospital executives to see them answer this question or not answer it. The question is, is there a firewall separating Oracle Health patient data from your defense and intelligence infrastructure? Yes or no?
And we need to hit Oracle Health hard all over their LinkedIn pages on every single post, on everything that they ever do. We need to be loud about it. It's hospital executives, legal teams, compliance officers. They love themselves some good thought leaders. Okay?
They are all on LinkedIn all the time. And think about it. If we all copy and paste that same question everywhere, it's perfect because Oracle is trapped. If they say no to that question, then every hospital boardroom in the country has a problem. If they say, yeah.
We have a firewall, then great. Prove it. You have to show the documentation now. You have to show the audit because the boards and the hospitals and the executives, they're all gonna be watching. And if they say nothing, well, that's gonna make a lot of hospital execs very nervous.
In fact, I'm gonna kick us off. I'm gonna get started on this right now. Okay? And don't you dare leave me behind, suckers. Alright?
Remember, we're congress now, and do something for me that congress has never done for me before. Have my back. Hey. The 30,000 of you that just got let go, you got a new part time gig, baby. Let's do this.
@thedreydossier - Drey
(2/) The short version: Oracle Health is deeply involved in health records, health AI, and major government health infrastructure. Oracle also serves defense, intelligence, immigration, and law-enforcement customers. I would like the medical data world and the war machine world kept very far apart, personally.
@thedreydossier - Drey
(3/) So we started asking a simple question: what prevents Oracle Health patient data, de-identified data, metadata, AI outputs, or model weights from being used to train or inform defense, ICE, policing, or intelligence AI? Instead of a clear answer, we got silence(d). They turned off comments across LinkedIn.
@thedreydossier - Drey
(4/) So now we are done asking like this is confusing. The demand is simple: Oracle Health owes patients a written guarantee: our medical data and AI derivatives will never feed defense, ICE, policing, or intelligence AI. Publish the firewall. #WhereIsTheFirewall
@thedreydossier - Drey
(5/) If you want to participate, please keep it clean. No threats, no harassment toward random employees, no weird behavior that lets them pretend this is something it is not. This is a patient-data accountability campaign. Stay focused on the demand.
@thedreydossier - Drey
(6/) Most of the receipts, updates, and organizing are happening here: https://www.reddit.com/r/TheDreyDossier/s/NiHnfDu2hc If you want to follow along, help track posts, or understand the campaign before jumping in, start there.
reSee.it AI Summary
I hadn’t heard of the US CLOUD Act either, but it allows the US government to demand data from American cloud providers even if the servers are abroad. Oracle is already embedded in UK government systems like the NHS and immigration. So when digital ID advances under King Charles, I see a UK surveillance story—and an American one too.
@thedreydossier - Drey
Have you ever heard of the US CLOUD Act? No? It means the US government can demand data from American cloud companies, even when the servers are in another country. And Oracle is already embedded across the UK’s government plumbing: NHS systems, tax records, benefits, employment, immigration, justice, and defense cloud. So when King Charles confirmed today that digital ID is still moving forward, just remember: this is not only a UK surveillance story. It is also an American one. Didn’t we fight a whole war to stop being one country? So why is our data infrastructure doing Pangea cosplay?
reSee.it AI Summary
I note three takes on Marco Rubio: one jokes he’d earn combat pay for looks; another calls a meeting with him a signal of imperial decline; the third says he has the energy of the worst arts-and-crafts bin—not useless, just deeply uninspiring.
@thedreydossier - Drey
Making Marco Rubio look hot should qualify for combat pay. https://t.co/s3EFJoejxn
@thedreydossier - Drey
“great meeting with marco rubio” ok talent scout for imperial decline https://t.co/4brfS2uBGI
@thedreydossier - Drey
@cymianx He has the energy of the worst thing in the arts and crafts bin. Not useless, just deeply uninspiring.
reSee.it AI Summary
I note MHS GENESIS holds the military health records of nearly ten million Americans. It’s moving to Oracle Cloud and deployed inside the NSA. Oracle is building Solstice, the largest AI supercomputer the DOE has announced. And no one seems to know where it’s going. Well. Almost no one.
@thedreydossier - Drey
MHS GENESIS holds the military health records of nearly ten million Americans. It is being moved onto Oracle Cloud Infrastructure and deployed inside the NSA. Oracle is also building Solstice, the largest AI supercomputer DOE has ever announced. And no one seems to know where it’s going. Well. Almost no one.
@thedreydossier - Drey
babe wake up, public health infrastructure just got nerfed. https://t.co/Q4YwsJZTT7
reSee.it AI Summary
I’m Audrey, aka Drey, founder of The Drey Dossier. I’m an independent journalist with a soft spot for 1940s pulpy noir, posting weekly deep-dives with sources on Substack and YouTube. Since Nov 2025 I’ve chased a Larry Ellison‑shaped thread. Newton is my research associate who peer‑reviews my work. I fight for We the People and keep a ledger on who’s buying our politicians—through foreign governments (cough) Israel (cough). Nice to meet you.
@thedreydossier - Drey
After three years of a mostly dormant X account, I have finally decided to lean in. Allow me to properly introduce myself. My name is Audrey, but my friends and family call me Drey (shoutout to my brother for that one), which is how the name, The Drey Dossier, came to be. (Plus, every generation needs a good dossier.) I am an independent journalist and researcher with a soft spot for pulpy noir thrillers from the 1940s, which isn’t exactly subtle in the branding. Back in November of 2025, I started pulling on a Larry Ellison-shaped thread that has not stopped unraveling since. I typically publish a weekly deep-dive (with sources) on Substack and YouTube. The investigations are free and always will be. This is Newton, my research associate. He peer reviews all of my work before it goes out. Any grievances with my sourcing, please take it up with him. What drives me in this work is simply my love for this country. We the People deserve better than being lied to about where our money goes, who is buying our politicians, and who is watching us. I also believe the legacy of those who fought hard for this country deserves to be protected. And if we want any kind of future worth having, we have to fight for that, too. I, like many of us, am a witness to the erosion and capture of this country and our government through foreign governments *cough* Israel *cough*, and the most important thing a witness can do is keep a ledger. That is what The Drey Dossier is. It’s nice to meet you.
@thedreydossier - Drey
why is Argentina looking so suss tho- GOODNIGHT https://t.co/kTvyIcAfbB
reSee.it AI Summary
I’m noting concern over Brenda’s stomach‑flu post on the cruise and the hantavirus tag. I echo that Tristan da Cunha is described as one of the most geographically isolated locations on Earth. I add, Let the record show. I reply to @chaztradez: it’s not “not that much” content, it’s no content from anyone but those two for a $22k cruise to the most remote places. I question @cymianx about Yahoo as a work email.
@thedreydossier - Drey
if Brenda with the stomach flu can post, what’s this #cruise #hantavirus https://t.co/HxTYPUZKhZ
@thedreydossier - Drey
Also the stops, like Tristan da Cunha was described by Oceanwide and others as “one of the most geographically isolated locations on Earth”
@thedreydossier - Drey
@chaztradez Oh it’s not “not that much” content, it’s no content from anyone but those two. Do you truly believe there’s only two influencers on a $22k cruise to the most remote places on earth?
@thedreydossier - Drey
@cymianx Yahoo as your work email? 🚩🚩🚩🚩
reSee.it AI Summary
Discussion notes that the “ballroom” donor list features industrial and defense-linked companies (Caterpillar, Booz Allen Hamilton, Blackstone, Union Pacific) rather than luxury brands, implying a procurement focus for a classified data center. A reply identifies Shalom Baranes Associates’ Shalom Baranes as the lead architect, with details on his background.
@thedreydossier - Drey
The anatomy of a… ballroom? Back in October, I started pulling the donor list for Trump’s ‘ballroom’ expecting the usual suspects- luxury brands draining their marketing budgets for a White House photo op But there was no Steinway. No Hermès. No Baccarat. In their place were names like Caterpillar, Booz Allen Hamilton, Blackstone, and Union Pacific. Companies that build classified networks, industrial generators, and military infrastructure. That was the first moment it clicked for me, and I realized I wasn’t looking at a party planning committee. I was looking at a procurement order for a classified data center.
@hippyresident - 𝕻𝖆𝖓𝖓𝖘𝖙𝖎𝖌𝖆𝖙𝖔𝖗
@thedreydossier @MissKatyAllison Shalom Baranes (of Shalom Baranes Associates) is the lead architect for Trump’s White House Ba’alroom project. Sephardic Orthdox foreign-born. Lived in Italy and Libya. His family came to the U.S. through the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society (HIAS) when he was about six.