Subscribe
Share
Share
Embed
Seth Holehouse is a TV personality, YouTuber, podcaster, and patriot who became a household name in 2020 after his video exposing election fraud was tweeted, shared, uploaded, and pinned by President Donald Trump — reaching hundreds of millions worldwide.
Titled The Plot to Steal America, the video was created with a mission to warn Americans about the communist threat to our nation—a mission that’s been at the forefront of Seth’s life for nearly two decades.
After 10 years behind the scenes at The Epoch Times, launching his own show was the logical next step. Since its debut, Seth’s show “Man in America” has garnered 1M+ viewers on a monthly basis as his commitment to bring hope to patriots and to fight communism and socialism grows daily. His guests have included Peter Navarro, Kash Patel, Senator Wendy Rogers, General Michael Flynn, and General Robert Spalding.
He is also a regular speaker at the “ReAwaken America Tour” alongside Eric Trump, Mike Lindell, Gen. Flynn.
Welcome to Man in America, a voice of reason in a world gone mad. I'm your host, Seth Holehouse. If we're looking at what's happened since Trump took office, there's been some good things. There's been some wins. The fact that I can speak to you and not be censored is one of them.
Speaker 1:But if we're being sober and honest, there's been a lot of things that, I guess, you'd say, have not been wins. I think there's a lot of gaslighting going on. We're being told that the economy is in the best shape it's ever been. We're being told that they caught the shooter for Charlie Kirk as a lone gunner. Don't look any further than that.
Speaker 1:We're being told that the, you know, Thomas Crooks, the guy who shot at Trump at Butler, was a lone gunner. Don't look any further than that. We're being told that the Epstein files are a hoax. Don't look there. There's a lot of very significant things that are happening that I would say are quite concerning, very concerning to say the least.
Speaker 1:Because if we're looking forward, if we're looking where's the country headed, what direction are we going, where will we be in one year, five years, or ten years, Unless something drastic happens, which I think some people were really hoping for under this administration, the country is still gonna be the same controlled by the deep state, by the bankers, by the elites, you know, pushing for depopulation agendas and, you know, more vaccines and operation warp speed and get your booster. If there's no big change, it's hard to imagine on the current trajectory as getting to a place where you're looking around with just such pride for being an American, seeing how beautiful the country is and that you're living in the golden age. So where do we go from here? My guest today is Ivan Rakeland. You're probably familiar with him.
Speaker 1:He's quite a how would I put it? He is a disruptor, I guess, to put it kind of lightly. He's a guy that speaks his mind, former special forces. I think, you know, he's a constitutional attorney. I forget what his background in law specifically is, but he knows his stuff.
Speaker 1:He lives in the you know, is is in the DC area, and he's from my experience with him, someone who just speaks his mind and is very open and honest. And so today's conversation is just with Ivan and I talking about where's the country at? What's going on? What's happened, you know, since January 20 in this country? What about the, department of retribution, right, that Ivan had been really kind of bringing forward and hoping to have citizen arrests?
Speaker 1:And what what's happening with that? Where are we going from here? What's happening with the Epstein files? So there's a lot of discussions that I think we have to have, and that's the point of today's talk. It's just a sober discussion about where is our country at right now, where is it headed, and what can be done about it.
Speaker 1:So I hope that you enjoy this conversation before we jump in. Just a reminder, if you're watching on Rumble, thank you for support supporting a free speech platform. Make sure you hit that thumbs up. Make sure you subscribe to the channel. That's really important.
Speaker 1:Hit that little subscribe button. Leave a comment. I love seeing those too. Just And again, thank you for being here and supporting this platform, which allows me to reach an audience without being censored. Most of my content, I can't even put up on YouTube because I mentioned the vaccine or election fraud, and we know YouTube is, you know, they their old tagline, don't be evil, is gone now.
Speaker 1:And now the opposite's happening. So thank you for being here. Let's go ahead and dive into this discussion with Ivan Rakeland. Ivan, man, it's it's been a long time since we did a show together, but there's a lot to talk about. So thank you for Mhmm.
Speaker 1:Being here with us today, man. It's good to have you on.
Speaker 2:I always love being on your program because the voice and the serenity and the of the the vibe of your show. It's definitely a different tempo and cadence than I normally do. Yeah. Well, we'll other shows
Speaker 1:such as the out. One Right?
Speaker 2:No. I think I'm gonna try to keep it more calm because as we talked before we went on air is, I think we need to keep it somber so that the emotions don't start flying because this is more of a message, I think, for those that are essentially all on our side mostly. Right? And we're just trying to get to better than where we currently are.
Speaker 1:Exactly. So framing today's discussion, there was a lot of hype 2024. Trump wins. He magically has the the the backing of big tech, a lot of people that you would never guess. Elon was was a big part of that, know, opening up x for for free speech, which has been a great benefit.
Speaker 1:You know? I mean, I think that in the old x, you would have been canceled in about six seconds on there, or the old Twitter per se, but you're still
Speaker 2:That was.
Speaker 1:Alive and kicking on there. But I I do well, let me first take a look at just a few kind of objective things. Right? So I have a few different polls to kinda bring up. So this was a, poll from, Real Clear Politics.
Speaker 1:This was, you know, about a week and a half ago or so of Trump's, job approval. And you can see is this guy, rams Paul over on x, who says that he makes a statement. He says Trump's approval rating is collapsing. And, yeah. I mean, you can see that.
Speaker 1:It's it's it's a very kind of objective statement, right, based upon this data, this poll that, yes, approval is if you look at the black, which is approved and versus disapproved, yeah, I think collapsing. He looks especially at that last little kind of drop off there, which started happening October heading into November. I also wanna pull up this is from, Nick Fuentes who says that this is, earlier this month. Says Trump's approval is down 50% with eighteen to twenty nine year olds since the 2025. And he he I'm not sure where
Speaker 2:he's sourcing that.
Speaker 1:Not sure.
Speaker 2:Interesting to know.
Speaker 1:So take it with a grain of salt, but I think he's he's, you know, relatively like, he's well sourced, and and, typically, he he doesn't make because he has so many detractors, if if he's not properly sourced, he'll get, you know, people very quickly kind of poking holes and stuff. But
Speaker 2:I'd yeah. But what I'm getting at is I'd rather stick to sourcing that I think most people within, I guess, the MAGA and the right circles would consider as a legitimate source. I'm not discrediting this source at all, but I think maybe Erasmussen, if we would bring that in. Yeah. That may overlap with what Nick and what RealClearPolitics also oh, you have it right there.
Speaker 1:Yes. This this is the Rasmussen. This is the, the daily presidential tracking poll here.
Speaker 2:Yeah. Because I think this one, this pollster is probably the one that's most
Speaker 1:Have you heard of the Bearskin hoodie? Well, the smart people are locking in their winter gear now because this is hands down the best time to prep for the coming winter. So Bearskin's running a 60% off deal right now, but that's only if you get your hoodie earlier. This hoodie is built like a tank. 340 GSM micro fleece, 10 pockets with a clean rugged look.
Speaker 1:This looks awesome. Plus, it zips right into the heavy storm rain jacket to become a 100% waterproof when you need it. So when it turns cold, wet, windy, you're not scrambling last minute. You'll get free US shipping, fast delivery, and you've locked in your winter gear already. That's a win win.
Speaker 1:So do yourself a favor. Text the word Seth to 36912 to lock in your 60% off. Again, text Seth, s e t h, to 36912. You'll get a link sent straight to your phone so you can check it out later if you're busy right now. And one more thing, when you support Bearskin, you're also supporting the fallen outdoors and the hope for the warriors veterans programs.
Speaker 1:You're not just buying great gear, you're backing a cause that matters. So don't wait till you're freezing to realize that your hoodie sucks. Get a Bearskin now while it's 60% off. Text Seth to 36912.
Speaker 2:Reputable and accurate in our circles.
Speaker 1:Oh, I agree. And I guess it's a is it Mike Mitchell or Mark Mitchell? Forget.
Speaker 2:Yeah. It's Mitchell.
Speaker 1:Yeah. I've interviewed him before, and and yeah, I I trust a lot of the great methodology. Yeah. And so, you can see, right, going up from
Speaker 2:And so I guess before we go into this, I wanted to say that just to begin with, remember, I used to teach intelligence analysis, and I want people to, and they're gonna ask the question, why are you using polls now when we didn't trust them earlier? And that's where I want to inject a little bit of context, is that previously, those polls measured sentiment based on underlying censorship at scale, so it was already skewed from the reality of the base and the voting population. Now we have a much more robust First Amendment than we did previously before the election. Right? I think most people would agree to that, especially like you said and laid out.
Speaker 2:That Elon Musk's opened up, Rumble is much more prominent now. I mean, you had Nick's account up on Rumble. I mean, he gets on average over a million views, it seems like lately. And so you don't get that in other platforms, but still that is accessible to the people, and then those that are, they're part of the class that's being polled. It's not just Fox News people that are being polled.
Speaker 2:It's not just Newsmax or others. I mean, these other platforms are flourishing. So it's a more accurate, I would say that nowadays, especially if you're a pollster in our ecosystem, you're probably gonna be even more accurate if your finger is on those separate pulses of streams of information and consciousness. Does that make sense? Oh, That's the assumption that I'm in, why I put a little bit more weight in polls nowadays, because we're kind of back to that open access to information.
Speaker 1:Yeah. It's not like CNN running a poll in 2024 that says, you know, that 87% of Americans prefer to have, you know, Kamala Harris in office. Right? Right.
Speaker 2:Right. Yeah.
Speaker 1:Okay. Who who do you pay for that poll?
Speaker 2:It's CNN viewers that don't really have access to other free speech platform or door you know, care to. So Exactly. Going back to that poll that you had, if we could
Speaker 1:The Rasmussen one or the clear yes.
Speaker 2:No. The
Speaker 1:Clear Policies?
Speaker 2:Yeah. The Rasmussen one.
Speaker 1:Okay.
Speaker 2:Let's dig into that a little bit, and let's I want everyone to look to see not only the graph, but the times. So let if you scroll all the way to the bottom.
Speaker 1:This is right here.
Speaker 2:Right? Yeah. Let's just stay on that one. So let's just ballpark it looking at it. It's probably June.
Speaker 2:Right? Beginning of the year all the way to the left. So say January 20, can see that just ballpark on the left side. You see that the green actually, yeah, it'll it'll actually show the date. If you go all the way to the left, that's probably January 20 would be my guess.
Speaker 2:So just about there. Right?
Speaker 1:Yep. Yeah.
Speaker 2:January 20. Move forward to the next peak that you see in the March time frame. What date is that peak? March 20 So March 26, and let's keep going. What's that peak all the way to the right?
Speaker 2:Yeah, May. Let's go to about May 31. What are we doing there? That's a key date, I think, as I present my analysis. So that's pretty, you know, that's one of the peaks in there throughout the administration.
Speaker 2:Now I would say that I would give the administration going up to, say, May 31 a pretty good grade, because let's go back to January, what happened? A lot of executive orders that de weaponized our government, that de weaponized, and the decensorship started to kinda occur at scale. We had almost all the J-sixers that were pardoned, although the promise was all of them would be pardoned by President Trump, and J. D. Vance said that all the nonviolent ones should be pardoned.
Speaker 2:That threshold was not met, and so a lot of folks still to this day are concerned that if you can't do the easy things, it's gonna be very difficult to do the harder things, right? Because to do it on day one, it's a lot easier, and so then it begs the question, who's behind the blocking, or is President Trump himself making the calculus to not do things that are well within his purview? So I'm referring to, there were 12 that are still not pardoned. Technically, would say that there are 14 January that I'm tracking for affiliates that still have yet to be pardoned, and what I mean by that, devil's in the details, but there are eight that were clearly not violent, and then there were another category of four where one arguably, possibly may have been violent, and I'm referring to again, the Oath Keepers and Proud Boys, right? And so only one of the four Proud Boys was even charged with a violent crime, which was much less of a charge than about 200 plus other ones that were pardoned, so it doesn't make sense, right?
Speaker 2:So if you're looking into this very closely, it doesn't make sense. So I would say that that sentiment analysis that you show in the chart, you start to see J-sixers, their family members, those aggrieved, those that attended January 6, I mean, they're probably in and out during that twenty four hour period. I would say that there may be a million folks, right? And those that were, and family members beyond, and those that know someone that were destroyed because of the events of January 6, we're probably looking at five to 10,000,000 people in total, would be just a ballpark rough estimate when you're looking at friends, family that know the circumstances of the weaponization, that are now losing a little bit of trust in a nascent second term. Does that make sense so far?
Speaker 1:It does, yeah.
Speaker 2:And then on top of that, you put, which most people haven't heard of, but a lot of people want the truth about January 6 to be released as soon as possible, even though it's already been four years, and we finally struggled into getting this new subcommittee under judiciary headed up by Barry Loudermilk. Well, one of the key witnesses that Congressman Loudermilk could debrief and interact with and essentially source is yet another individual that was charged by the Democrats because he was called by the Proud Boys to be a witness without his knowledge or permission. It was just, he was put on the list of witnesses in the Proud Boys trial, and as soon as that took place, the left immediately charged him with obstruction, him being the Metropolitan Police Department officer that was head of intelligence on January 6, and head of intelligence for the five, six years prior to that, so he would know all the details and nuances of the BLM, the Antifa activities, the network analysis. So like you literally, we just literally lost the best source within Metropolitan Police Department to start to tear and take down Antifa, who's now designated as a domestic terrorist organization, the best MPD officer that could lay out any nefarious activity of DC Metro Police on January 6 related to supporting Nancy Pelosi's fedsurrection, and then the subsequent cover up, and he could list you the names of the individuals, because he used to work with them.
Speaker 2:He knows them. So this person is still in jail. His name is Shane Lamond. So as somebody that looks closely at this, that's another issue that has still not been addressed. I mean, that's a federal charge.
Speaker 2:That's an easy federal pardon. So why is it that those in the DOJ, there you go, those, you know, whether it's Ed Martin, he's been, I would say, an A level player since the get go, but he's been balanced around like a punch, you know, what do you call it, a punching doll because the deep state is trying to neutralize him, and he's still surviving and still punching back. But there needs to be folks at the higher levels that in the DOJ, whether it's your Todd Blanches of the world, who's the deputy attorney general, which many have concerns with, and rightfully so. The attorney general, does she even live? I mean, I think she mostly spends her time in Florida, and when she's in DC, a preponderance of that time is advocating for ratings on Fox News, and being a news like, an anchor on Fox News.
Speaker 2:People see that. I mean, you can't hide it. You can put a facade on and say, oh, she's doing great. People see it. I mean, people aren't dumb.
Speaker 2:We have access to information. We have x. We have rumble. We have long form critical thinkers like you and me that are breaking down the analysis, and in some instances, we're getting much more views than the legacy media platforms of the Sunday talk shows, right? For example, like today, we're probably gonna get more than, I would say, at least one, maybe a couple, not combined, but possibly the independent platforms get more than ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, State of the Union, right?
Speaker 2:What are the other ones? Fox News, Sunday combined. And so we are the sentiment. And so the sentiment is you're kind of missing a lot of key things. And I haven't even hit the, probably the most important one when it relates to January 6, and I'm gonna save it for now, is Tina Peters.
Speaker 2:Tina Peters was downstream weaponized, so it started off with the Pelosi fedsurrection. Was then covered up by the Nancy Pelosi committee, led by Benny Thompson and Liz Cheney for that Fedsurrection cover up to begin the evidentiary manipulation to then go after every J-sixer through the US Capitol Police and legislative branch, sent over to the DOJ. And in some instances, instead of going to the DOJ, whether it was Jack Smith, this weaponization continued downstream to attack the electors in Georgia, Wisconsin, Arizona, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Nevada, and in Colorado, Tina Peters, because she was trying to protect and safeguard the twenty twenty federal election. The only one county level or equivalent officer of the 3,100 plus in America that had the courage to essentially retain the records of the federal election, the electronic records, to then be able to prove that the election was not done according to the law, illegitimately, illegally. And for that, the very secretary of state that benefited from that illegal election was the one to criminalize Tina Peters for that.
Speaker 2:I'm not gonna go into details on that, but I mean, these are basics. I mean, these are just simple lifts. I mean, this is While you focus on foreign hostages, I'm talking to the admin right now, you can't even get Tina Peters out, and the response is, Oh, it's a state case. Yeah, but guess what? She's a federal witness to federal crimes being conducted by Jenna Griswold, the secretary of state.
Speaker 2:I put out a tweet yesterday or the day before, a couple days ago, listing all the federal statutes that Jenna Griswold, the secretary of state in Colorado, violated, and Tina Peters would be the number one witness to prove all of that. So if I were the president, I would tell the attorney general, and then if I were the attorney general, I would tell the director of the federal air marshals, and if I were the director of the federal air marshals, I would go into mission planning and order my 4,000 federal marshals to physically extract Tina Peters from the Colorado insurgent, domestic terrorist controlled Colorado prison at about two or three in the morning when there aren't that many security guards, okay? Physical extraction, using all means necessary to safely extract her. And if there is pushback, then there may have to be collateral damage, but that is up to the officers that represent the belligerent insurgent, insurrectionist state of Colorado if they want to escalate. That's really it.
Speaker 2:I mean, are simple things. The first ones I started off with was simple, right, politically. This one requires courage, which is lacking.
Speaker 1:And so-
Speaker 2:That's just one aspect of why the poles are going down, because not even the simple, betrayal, it's just betrayal upon betrayal upon betrayal. Depending on how far we go, I mean, I got a laundry list of more.
Speaker 1:Oh, I know you do. I know you do. And so, let's just well, okay. I'll I'll jump back into the, that pool because we're kind of walking through the timeline, and I wanna you then Yeah.
Speaker 2:We're still at January 20. Exactly. Twenty first.
Speaker 1:You know? But then kinda taking easy. You know, kinda stepping into the the bigger picture of what's really going on because we haven't even touched on
Speaker 2:The big pic yeah. May is when Elon Musk was, let's just start with the facts. On May is when Elon Musk, depending on how you want to view it and frame it, either left because he was a special government employee, and that was the date, the one hundred and thirty day date upon which he could perform his duties as America's tech support, right? But there's more to it than that. When you start to peel the onion a little bit and you look at the reporting on it, the primary reporting states that it was the White House presidential personnel office director, if you will, that was instrumental in the removal of Elon Musk because of whatever ego issue that took place.
Speaker 2:Okay, that's when I would say that we started to see a significant, what's the word I wanna use, rapprochement or, no, like pulling back of significant wins, even though I just laid out some of the negatives. I mean, at the end of the day, those first six months, we had some significant wins from the director of national intelligence, releasing and declassifying and firing and pulling clearances. You know, JFK, MLK, RFK files, the Russia, right, the Russia, Russia, Russia hoax origins and information, and while I'll give credit where credit is due, many of those releases, or several of them, were done inside of the White House, so that does not occur without the chief of staff's approval. So while I am and continue to be critical of everybody to include the chief of staff, Susie Wiles, on that occasion, a couple times, I have to say thank you for allowing Tulsi Gabbard to actually expose and showcase the findings that she had. Now you can argue that there was no option.
Speaker 2:At the end of the day, she could have stopped it, right? Susie Walls, I'm saying. So there is that. The Elon Musk push, I mean, even though it may have been Sergio Gore, I mean, I would say that Susie Wallace could have easily said, you know what? You guys make up.
Speaker 2:I mean, this is a very important alliance. But I think this this is where my analysis kicks in, if I may. I think the relationship that Susie Wiles has with the donor class is more long term, and there's more loyalty to the interests of Miriam Adelson. Is that? So for those that aren't aware, I would say the top two biggest donors and influencers into, from the political financial perspective of any one individual, to ensure Trump's reelection, and I get it.
Speaker 2:I would say that January are the reason why Donald Trump is in office. Without that, there's no way the political comeback takes place without their zeal and support, but when it comes to later on in the campaign after the primary, after the attempted assassination, it's Elon Musk and then Miriam Adelson. And when you start to dig and peel into Miriam Adelson, there you go on the right, you start to see that she represents establishment, globalist, Israeli, whatever you want, these are all factual interests, and they're her interests, right? And even using Donald Trump's own words when he spoke at an event a couple weeks ago in Israel, he even called her out and said she has more loyalty to Israel than The United States, and that's why you're starting to see this rift. You have those that are aligned with Israel, some you could say they have dual loyalties or maybe even more loyalties to Israel, and then you have those that have really no international influence or interests that are Trump supporters, such as myself, that would rather that the president focus on domestic issues that he campaigned on.
Speaker 2:So the angst and the civil war is, well, most people may not be able to articulate it in eight ks fidelity, like nerds like you and me that are in this every day, but I think the gut feeling is, Nick's addressing it, right, from an emotional perspective, and several others are, it's essentially a divide between most of those that are not in DC and in this political class. They just want to do what's best for themselves, their family, their community, their state, America, right?
Speaker 1:Ladies and gentlemen, our world is being poisoned. Every day, we're exposed to more chemicals sprayed into our skies, leaching into our food, and polluting our air and water. From pesticides and heavy metals to hormone disruptors and synthetic additives, these toxins are bombarding our bodies and silently destroying our health. But there's something you can do to fight back, and it starts in your gut. Kimchi one from Brightcore Nutrition contains over 900 strains of beneficial probiotics that will help flush toxins, restore gut balance, and support your immune system.
Speaker 1:Because when your gut is strong, your body can resist. You'll feel the difference. Better digestion, more energy, clearer thinking, stronger immunity, and even improvements in your skin, hair, and metabolism. And this isn't just hype. Studies show that fermented foods like kimchi can reduce the risk of obesity, improve blood sugar, and support a whole body wellness.
Speaker 1:Kimchi One is all natural, non GMO, dairy free, gluten free, and a 100% made in The USA by a company that actually cares about your health. And today, you can get an exclusive offer just for my viewers, 25% off with your code MAN IN AMERICA by clicking the link below, or call my friends at Brightcore for up to 50% off your order and free shipping. So give them a call now at (888) 575-6488, and their educated staff will make sure that Kimchi One is right for you. Again, that's (888) 575-6488. All the links and information are in the description below.
Speaker 2:And I mean, they could care less, you know, what religion, what pigment you are. That's just inconsequential. But there's like a US constitution last I checked, and it affords more rights to a US citizen, and we kind of want that to continue. And just like we saw in the last belligerent, illegitimate regime under the Biden criminal syndicate, we weren't quite happy with the Chinese control agent in the White House and his family. And since Elon Musk left, there are more and more indicators showing that this White House is steering away from the domestic issues that still have yet to be addressed, the Tina Peters, the J6ers, the Shane Lamans, the truth of January 6, arresting traitors to the tune of, well, let's just start with Kash Patel's government gangster list, which is only a few dozen.
Speaker 2:That's nothing compared to my list. Let's just start with Kash's. But no, ten months in, squandered because the diversion and focus has been on attaining the Nobel Peace Prize through conduits and surrogates such as Miriam Adelson, such as son-in-law Jared Kushner, such as Susie Wiles, who used to be, very close with Miriam Edelson, and actually even was on BB Netanyahu's twenty twenty reelection campaign in Israel. When you peel the onion, especially now that we have the AI chat tools that make it so much more efficient, the scale and quickness with which people that just want to look at something that can find the truth, it surpasses their ability to counter with a not so factual narrative. You know what I mean?
Speaker 2:And so that's my long way of saying that in the big picture, I would say that analytically, when Elon Musk was pushed out, possibly with those forces, the Miriam Adelsons of the world, obviously Sergio Agora's listed as one of the individuals that pushed him out, but I think it's more than that. It's that donor class that's reasserting its influence into the presidency and into the policy making process in order to protect itself. So that's why DOGE is no longer essentially alive, because it exposes that international interaction and corruption where the blame rests on the donor class as well, right, both Democrat and Republican. And so I view it as that benchmark of June 1, and then even more so the period from June 1. So you lost Elon, but you still had Charlie Kirk having his voice and an ear with the president up through September 10.
Speaker 2:So he was kind of like that last firewall and voice that was starting to note things. If you look at his speeches, he was starting to also notice that effect that I'm articulating, but he's much more in the mix, in the know from a personal perspective with a lot of these different players, and he was making that conscious choice based on, you know, all the things that I've read, listened, and watched to kind of call it out publicly, and sometimes he didn't call it out publicly. He would use affiliates to make the statement that he couldn't, such as Tucker, right, at Turning Point. You saw that video where behind the scenes, him and Meg and Kelly, or the three of them, were like, hey. I can't remember the quote, but he was like, just go score truth.
Speaker 2:Just say what you need to say, which is like the task that you know exactly, because I'm sure they, you know, they communicate regularly, right? Because those are leaders in the movement. I mean, I talk to a lot of people. Some of them on occasion I would talk to, whether it's Tucker infrequently, and then Charlie every once in a while at different events. And so that took us to September 10, and then there was the assassination.
Speaker 2:Most of America still doesn't believe the narrative of what happened, would be my guess. Now, the official narrative may be true, but most of America doesn't believe it. Would you agree with that?
Speaker 1:Oh, I would say so. And maybe I can find a poll on that too. But just sort of looking I mean, you can
Speaker 2:Because that trust is not there. Institutionally, there is no trust. It has to be rebuilt, and so far, it hasn't been rebuilt.
Speaker 1:I'd say it's being dismantled. Because if you look at actually, I'll pull a quick post up from, Emerald Robinson. Right? Just just in kind of a sentiment. This is, a couple days ago.
Speaker 1:She said the Trump admin is a hot mess. That's why his poll numbers are tanking. MTG is bad. Mamdani is okay. It's just a strange interaction with him and Mamdani.
Speaker 1:Massey is bad. Borla is okay. Meeting with convicted Israeli spies, okay. Meeting with ISIS terrorists to to run Syria, okay. Dinners with Zuckerberg and Bill Gates, okay.
Speaker 1:More CCP students, okay. LOL. I mean, this is this is it. I mean, this this is these are only these are the more recent things. But if you take a step back, looking from the big picture, I mean, like, I similar to you, I think I I know a lot of the people that are key figures in the administration.
Speaker 1:I've interviewed them or met them backstage at different events, and I think there's this expectation The
Speaker 2:same with Emerald. The three of us, for example, are, we're in the mix. I mean, we're not in the admin, but we're in the mix. We talk to these. We're essentially many times in the same room.
Speaker 2:So we but we also have a better finger on the pulse of what's going on in the court of public opinion.
Speaker 1:Well, and then that's it. And that's it. And so you're asking about, you know, Charlie Kirk and or even Butler. Right? Like, what really happened there?
Speaker 1:You know? And so what you're seeing is that the administration is kinda just, I mean, just kinda hunkering down on the same things, I think, in a lot of ways that we're seeing under Biden. Right? Just kind of covering things up, don't look here. Whether it was, know, how, you know,
Speaker 2:Biden handles And it's not RJ's helpful, it's not helpful those in our movement that have big audiences, that are blind sycophants, that it would be better if they articulated and defended their position kind of with evidence on why we are wrong in our analysis, because then I could see their point of view, and I would say, Okay, now we're just debating on what's more important in the hierarchy of priority from your perspective versus mine. I mean, I think I pretty clearly, from my perspective, identified what is important to me. Life, liberty, pursuit of happiness is pretty much up there. So if Tina Peters rots and dies in prison in Colorado, this government just violated her right to life. They're complicit in allowing and enabling a terrorist organization headed up by Jared Polis in Colorado to literally enable the murder when you have the capacity to extract her legally, constitutionally, but it requires courage.
Speaker 2:Liberty, same thing. She's robbing. Same thing with Shane Lemaughan. Pursuit of happiness. Well, J Sixers are still trying to get their life in order.
Speaker 2:Meanwhile, we all know that this was a total entrapment, ensnarement, political hit job by the other side. Sorry, you give me too much air space to talk, so I'll just take it.
Speaker 1:Well, no, same thing with Charlie Kirk, right? It's like, you you talk about the, you know, the government's complicit, you know, being complicit with Tina Peters. It's like, is the government covering up something significant with Charlie Kirk? Like, you know, earlier on, they said, okay, hey, we're seeing some signs of foreign interference that quickly disappeared. And now it's like what you mentioned too.
Speaker 1:There's a lot of people with with very, very large audiences that are just it was Tyler Robinson, and if if you second guess that, you're just anti American, and you're insane. It's like, well, like, yeah, I agree with you. It's like, they they'd be better off saying, look. I I most likely I do believe the FBI story. I think there are some holes in it, which need to be investigated.
Speaker 2:Mhmm. And here's why. The story. But
Speaker 1:instead, it's like it's just like, this is exactly how it happened. And if you don't agree with this, you are anti American, and you're not MAGA. And that that's what I'm seeing kind of
Speaker 2:You know what's anti American? When you have loyalty to another country.
Speaker 1:Yeah.
Speaker 2:Yeah. That's Or dual. Right?
Speaker 1:Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. And so and this is why I think that kinda looking at just, like, what's really going on here. Because I know that, you know, for you because, you know, one of the interviews that we did was shortly after you had a a very viral interview.
Speaker 1:You're kinda talking about your banner behind you, the Department of Retribution, and, you know, getting into, okay, if Elon can release some of these receipts, and, you know, we can see justice.
Speaker 2:He still hasn't moved, unfortunately.
Speaker 1:And it's and it's not just No
Speaker 2:Fauci files. He still considers Twitter one point o a crime scene, which means there's evidence of a crime scene. It would be nice for Elon Musk, maybe. At any point in time, he can do it. I mean, think about all the direct messages that Jack Smith used of Trump, the electors.
Speaker 2:I mean, I was just listening, finished listening to Christina Bob's book, who was an attorney for the campaign, and she was essentially laying out how the governor and the a excuse me, the AG of Arizona, the Democrat, was essentially unlawfully piercing into all of her direct messages on Twitter and was asking her specifics. Who do you what do know about this individual? And she's like, I mean, that guy is I went to, elementary school with him, and twenty five years later, he hits me up after seeing me on some interview, and they thought there was some nefarious intent. What I'm getting at is that they looked in the DMs. So imagine Elon Musk produces to America since he can't produce it to the institutions because they've shown that they they're not gonna do the right thing with it.
Speaker 2:It's almost at the point where he releases the criminal evidence of the crime scene to America on Twitter or on X, of every member of the House, of every member of the Senate, of every staffer of both, of every member of the executive branch and their staff that has previously or currently engaged in what, if he wants to lead a task force to sift through all this so that we can take that and then essentially produce criminal referrals that we then publish online, and then say, Hey, this needs to be filed in this federal district, and this is the US attorney that should file it, and literally using Grock to draft the entire charge sheet and all the necessary documents, right, the referral, and just await the signature of the competent authority of that jurisdiction, whether it's here in my backyard, Eastern District Of Virginia, Lindsey Halligan, etcetera, etcetera. But that hasn't been done. One other point I wanted to make when you said Charlie Kirk's murder. I mean, you have Kash Patel. Let's just say my sources tell me that either Kash Patel, Todd Blanche, or somebody at the DOJ, but with those top two, effectively leaked to The New York Times that Tulsi and her team were trying to look at foreign interference, and that was a bad thing.
Speaker 2:That was an own goal, I think, when everybody read that, meaning, yeah, we're not taking your side on that, Kash. You're trying to do your little, you're being handled by James Comey and Christopher Wray employees that you still haven't fired cash. You're being owned and controlled by them because you haven't done anything. They're still there, and so what they're telling you to do is focus on things that, the mandate for Donald Trump, like we didn't ask the director of the FBI to blink and breathe, right? And what I mean by blink and breathe, oh yeah, we're gonna go after violent criminals that have a federal nexus.
Speaker 2:I mean, that's like blinking and breathing level of expectations. It's like having a pulse. Hey, we voted to make sure you have a pulse, Kash. No, we voted for you to go scorched earth and create accountability against those that weaponized against you, that those against, weaponized against us, all of us, at scale, because they're still out there flapping. James Comey is still freely treasoning, with impunity, without any speed bump.
Speaker 2:Okay, every few months he has to go to a courtroom, but other than that, he doesn't even have to go to the courtroom, but he chooses to, and he can continue, 99.9% of his day, communicate and coordinate email, phone call, meetings with John Brennan who's still walking the streets, with Rod Rosenstein, with Sally Yates, with Bill Barr, with Eric Holder, who are still controlling the DOJ. So right now we're in a spot where we have to push so that we have a success, or we talk about civil war. There's a civil war in our government, and there's only a few people that are on our side, but they have barely enough influence and courage to reject the 99% that are on the other side. And so that's why they know this, and they're forcing this conversational division. So we have to quickly subsume those that are the sycophants to know exactly what's going on, take our side so that we can lock arms against the very deep state that is undermining Trump's objectives during his campaign.
Speaker 2:Kash Patel's objectives went before he became the director, Dan Bongino's objectives when he was a podcaster, and so on and so forth. And it's frustrating to me that they don't leverage, like the only way we succeed is if us, the base, is working hand in glove with the leadership in this administration to go scorched against the deep state. If they want to do it by themselves, they will get completely subsumed by the FBI employees that are still loyal to Chris Wray and James Comey and the DOJ employees still loyal to Rod Rosenstein, Bill Barr, Eric Holder, Sally Yates.
Speaker 1:And so then we come to Epstein, which which was
Speaker 2:So September yeah. That this is key. I think we hit September 10. Yeah. Which one?
Speaker 2:And that's when, to close that side out, is that from May to September, it was really Charlie Kirk that had that voice, independent voice to inject the sentiment of the non foreign influence base, because you gotta remember, Donald Trump is significantly influenced by the conversations and activities of Jared Kushner, who's the point man for all Middle East and Israeli interaction, right? Let's just be honest with ourselves. Good or bad, indifferent. It just is, and that interaction covers and spans interactions with Benjamin Netanyahu and Miriam Adelson, okay? But Charlie Kirk up until September 10, what did he advocate for?
Speaker 2:Please don't bomb Iran on behalf of Israel. Well, that still happened, right? And other things. So September 10 is when we had a massive void in conveying anything really, right, from the base to the president. You could argue that there's some folks tangentially, but not like on a daily basis sort of access, right?
Speaker 2:And so when did we start seeing Mark Levin and Ben Shapiro's of the world start to come out swinging against Tucker Carlson, against Nick Fuentes. I mean, this is before the interview that Tucker and Nick did, right? I would say it's within a couple weeks right after that, right? So they're trying to consolidate their influence to focus on maintaining the established order, protecting themselves from making sure that nothing happens on January 6, for example, until 01/06/2026, because then the statute of limitations on many things expires. So the deep state can be like, oh yeah, this is all that happened, and we're gonna release it on January 7.
Speaker 2:Just like the Brennan fifty one Spies Who Lied crew allowed John Ratcliffe to release on 01/07/2021 the assessment that China interfered in the twenty twenty election. It happened the day after the certification or hours after the certification when it was released, after they stole it. So they're doing now. It's cover up after cover up after escalatory cover up. I've covered it numerous times over the years, but in this instance, you have I mean, they're very shrewd.
Speaker 2:They have the money, the influence, and I think the way they sell it to Donald Trump, to the president, is that the only thing he does not have that he needs others to achieve and obtain, this is my analysis, is that coveted Nobel Peace Prize, and in order to get that, they have to work with Jared, Yahoo, Miriam Adelson, who has that. She's essentially the Soros of the right, if you will, right? So she has that global reach and influence, and at the end of the day, if you also have that influence and leverage into Israeli institutions, I would venture to say, correct me if I'm wrong, you also have different data points, Seth. I think at this point, most people would agree that the Epstein op was an Israeli Mossad led op, and probably a joint op with MI6 and the CIA. I don't have a full 100% evidence to say that, but all the indicators lead me to believe that that is a more than even chance likelihood.
Speaker 2:And I'm using very specific language of analytic thought and process based on my multi disciplines of sourcing that I use to come to that conclusion. Everybody else can use their own, but if you agree with that, so Miriam Adelson has the downstream dirt on many people that are in that Epstein list, and so while I don't believe that Donald Trump is in there in any way that would implicate him in any nefarious activity, I can't say the same about those in his cabinet that he's appointed, those big donors that got him into office, and so he has to walk this fine line. Do I get the truth out, which will destroy the reputations of at least one, maybe more than one of my cabinet, and the massive donor base, which will then move to make sure that the House is Democrat in 2026 to then impeach and destroy my family, right, which is a legitimate concern, or do I delay it as long as possible so that I can finish off the second term without too much of a pain, and if I do that, in return, they'll give me the Nobel Peace Prize. It's kind of craving, but that's the only logical conclusion that I can make of what this, the big picture civil war that's going on, and I think a lot of the folks that are interacting, I do a lot of interacting on X, there's one side that's being funded.
Speaker 2:They may not know. They may just be acquiescing to what they're being asked, because I mean, it would be disingenuous to say, Oh, no way that I can give you a list of names that are being directed in a Twitter group by probably the White House comms team on what the messaging should be, because it's like copy and paste for a lot of these accounts, right? And they're some of the biggest accounts on the right, and it's the more independent ones that are rejecting it in some way, shape, or form. And so going to the Epstein thing, I think that that right there is the most significant anti corruption move by our institutions after what Elon was trying to do with Doge. I mean, what happened with all that?
Speaker 2:We exposed corruption, not a single arrest, right? No one's been arrested. It's just, it's evidence beyond any doubt, let alone beyond a reasonable doubt, and yet our institutions aren't gonna police themselves. So we're approaching that, I mean, the only way this is resolved is through massive, I mean, the truth's out there. I think good Samaritans are gonna start to take matters into their own hands.
Speaker 2:This is an assessment, by the way, just keep in mind. My assessment that I would not be surprised if good Samaritans start to address the current state of inaction and no justice for those that require it. And I'm not advocating for vigilantism, but at some point you have to defend yourself from foreign encroachment, and you have to defend yourself from domestic terrorists that are tied to those interests encroachment, and there's the right to self defense. We'll see where the limit to that is.
Speaker 1:And I think that a big part, which we've touched on this a little bit with this, is just the gaslighting of the American public. And not just the American public, you you know, globally, but I think that for a lot of people in America, especially you know, obviously, the majority voted Trump into office. There were these hopes and aspirations. And, okay, finally, right, after Obama and Clinton and Biden and, you know, Crossfire Hurricane and Spygate and j six, they people, I think, are just they're begging for justice. COVID.
Speaker 1:Right? Operation Warp Speed, which is,
Speaker 2:you know, it's like No one buys into that. No.
Speaker 1:You know? So I think that the the this is a double average person exactly in America now is being told that we've got the best economy we've ever had, which in my experience is, like, far from the truth, that they're doing all these great things. Of course, there's there there are some good things. Right? There's obviously there's been a a pullback in censorship.
Speaker 1:There's been pulling men out of women's sports. There's some things. Okay. I I appreciate those things. But the fundamentals, it's like the the the our our institutions, it's like there's cancer in the bones of these institutions.
Speaker 1:That cancer's not even being looked at. In fact, it's being covered up and hidden from the general public. And so I think that we're hitting a point where, again, you go back to these kind of this drop off, especially what we're seeing is that we Can you
Speaker 2:put the poll up, and then on the side, I don't know if you can do a dual image with that Emerald Robinson post.
Speaker 1:Here's the hard truth. Every six years, your dollar loses half its buying power. That means a $100,000 savings account today could feel like $50,000 by 2031. And you see it every time you fill up your tank, buy groceries, or pay the bills. Prices are up.
Speaker 1:Your dollar's down. But there's a simple way to protect the value of your savings with something real, something proven, gold, an asset that holds its value over time. And that's why I trust Noble Gold Investments. They make it simple to protect your savings with physical gold or silver. No high pressure sales, no call centers, just honest guidance, one on one support, and transparent pricing.
Speaker 1:And right now, when you open a qualified account, Noble Gold will send you a free 10 ounce silver American flag bar as a thank you. So head over to goldwithseth.com, or call (626) 654-1906 today to learn more. Again, that's goldwithseth.com or (626) 654-1906. Don't just protect your wealth. Preserve its power.
Speaker 2:I think that would be key.
Speaker 1:Like, it's tough to do that. I'll I'll show this, not like because I I had to do it ahead of time. But I think that it's like for the average person okay. Let let's just look at the few areas where the the word I think we're being gaslit. It's like the average person, I think, right, the average thinking person, maybe I'm wrong, I'm not a pollster, thinks that they don't believe the they don't believe the Butler that that the Butler shooter was a lone gunner.
Speaker 1:They think that Secret Service or someone else was involved. There's one thing. They don't believe that Operation Warp Speed was a good thing that benefited people. They're seeing their friends and family die from the the vaccine. Right.
Speaker 2:And who was be who was at the epicenter of that?
Speaker 1:Trump.
Speaker 2:You know? Was Jared Kushner.
Speaker 1:Okay. Yeah.
Speaker 2:It was Mike Pence. It was Deborah Birx, Anthony Fauci.
Speaker 1:Fauci.
Speaker 2:But the first one that I mentioned, no one talks about. Jared Kushner.
Speaker 1:So I'll finish my list real quick here. Right? So we've got just and this is so quick. I didn't have it written down, but people aren't believing what what happened with Butler. Now they're being told, okay, case closed.
Speaker 1:They don't believe what happened with Charlie Kirk. They're being told, sorry, case closed. They they know that something's up with Epstein. They most people think that they know that he was trafficking children, etcetera. Now it's being called a Democrat Right?
Speaker 1:They are
Speaker 2:Now there's an attack on Marjorie Taylor Greene.
Speaker 1:Exactly.
Speaker 2:Thomas Massey. And I mean, what's that all about? He's endorsing COVID Democrat criminal and nearly campaigning for Andrew Cuomo, the guy that admitted to murdering thousands. The day before on TV, live, he said, It was on my watch. I'm sorry that I literally slaughtered your grandparents.
Speaker 1:Exactly.
Speaker 2:And Donald Trump endorses this? To me, that's a total betrayal. Yeah. That's unacceptable.
Speaker 1:And to see him kind of, you know
Speaker 2:And go after
Speaker 1:market. Glasses with Bill Gates and and Zuckerberg, the same people that were censoring and and that ruined people's lives. Borla. Right? It's just and that's just that's just the beginning game.
Speaker 2:The biggest the CEO of the largest DNA mutilation distribution platform on the planet known as Pfizer. K? This guy Burlow is invited not once, but twice, and then he's hobnobbing with two seats away from Elon Musk. Right? I mean, it's good that Elon Musk's back, but to have Berle in the same room there, I mean, is such a betrayal, and he still lauds the shots.
Speaker 2:Every time he says it at any rally or event, he's just booed off stage practically, and it's the same thing with Epstein. And so it was good to see that a near unanimous vote essentially called on the release, and guess what's going to happen? They're going to fight tooth and nail to avoid the release, even though December 19 is the deadline, and so the fight only begins. So in the process, they're ejecting Marjorie Taylor Greene, who was instrumental in pushing for that as the biggest voice along with Massey Chris Lasavita, who was a campaign co chair for Donald Trump, whose daughter was working for the attorney general here in Virginia, who was instrumental in removing the only Patriot Deputy Attorney General that was hired for Attorney General Jason Miyares. She was fired because she said something to the effect that January 6 was some sort of entrapment.
Speaker 2:It was factual. So you have these deep entrenched political class operatives that are making money hand over fist that Marjorie won't call out, but she knows who they are. She won't call them all by name. Thomas Massey has, on occasion on X, called out that name, and when they had the press conference last Monday at the Epstein press conference, right afterwards, as Thomas Massey exited, and I posted this on my X, I said, Congressman Massey, why do you think Chris Lasavita is trying to block you from releasing the Epstein files? And he looks up and is like, you know exactly the reason, and he appreciated the question, although he didn't respond.
Speaker 2:And then this is the same guy that's fundraising to primary Thomas Massey. Well, where is the money coming from that Chris Lasavita is obtaining to be able to manage the primary Thomas Massey? Use your favorite AI chat tool. It's pretty clear. Mariam Adelson funds tens of millions of dollars to Chris Lasavita's PACS so that he can go ahead and stop the Thomas Massies of the world from exposing the very leverage that Miriam Adelson allegedly relies on through the Epstein component, right, to then go and stop the exposure of that.
Speaker 2:So again, this is all assessment, I'm not accusing anybody of anything, but when you watch the money flows, it's becoming more and more clear.
Speaker 1:Is there
Speaker 2:some noise in the background?
Speaker 1:I heard something very faintly, but think nothing came through too I'll let you know if I hear anything more. I'm nothing I'm picking up on anymore. There. There we go. So, but I guess
Speaker 2:in
Speaker 1:this, when I take a step back and look at this, I just feel like, as much hope as there was, it's kind of a sobering thought to to look at and say, well, it's all one big club, and you and AI you and I, we ain't in it. Right? We see
Speaker 2:Guess what? I don't wanna be in it.
Speaker 1:Oh, I agree with I don't want to be in
Speaker 2:I want to destroy the party so that no one's in it.
Speaker 1:Which would be great.
Speaker 2:That would be much better, because then guess what? If we don't fund this party, then the party can't weaponize against us, and we can roam freely. That's freedom. And I guess in essence, Mr. Delicate Dan Bongino, couple days ago, just blocked me on X out of nowhere.
Speaker 2:And so I'm gonna have to use the Thomas Jefferson quote. When the government fears me, Dan, that's called freedom. So apparently he fears me. And then the other aspect, the other kind of the other side of the, or another coin to that, if you will, in the pocket of change, would be private citizens are innocent until proven guilty. And on the flip side of that coin, once you become a government official, and even the ones that I voted for, supported, campaigned for, donated to, fundraised for, as well as supported for cabinet level positions, you are guilty until you prove your innocence.
Speaker 2:And right now, you're even going the other way. You're proving more and more being guilty based on your actions of blocking, of not really giving any confidence, I'm talking about right now the FBI and the DOJ, to those of us that demand, like the number one thing was accountability for the previous criminals. Nothing. Brennan walks, Comey's walking, Bolton's still walking. They're still having, they're probably having a meeting right now with John Brennan and the incoming attorney general and governor in Virginia right now.
Speaker 2:Guess what they're doing? If you can pull up my last tweet, it literally says what they're likely doing coordinating. It's coordinating the next escalatory campaign against this right there on January 17. Weaponization against the admin will restart and escalate via John Brennan's lackey, Abby Spamburger. On January 17, that's when the swearing in is, the inauguration, and the Democrat attorney general, Jay Jones.
Speaker 2:Remember he was The text messages between him and others where he said, I hope to I can't remember exactly what it was, but he was basically advocating for the slaughter of his political opponent and their children. So think Jay Jones is going take what Leticia James was not able to do and put it on steroids. The six Northern Virginia counties that house a good chunk of the federal government, the national security apparatus, etcetera, all six of them, Alexandria, Arlington, Fairfax, Loudoun, Prince William County, Stafford County, those are Democrat DAs known as Commonwealth's attorneys in Virginia. So they're going to take what the example of Fannie Wallace and Alvin Bragg and decimate this administration, because most of them live or work in those counties. Additionally, not only are you going to have a Democrat governor in AG in Virginia, but also a state house and state Senate.
Speaker 2:So you now have a trifecta for them to pass laws to escalate what they're going to do even more than what California is doing. So you're going to start seeing more laws to facilitate and enable the mutilation of children, the mutilation of adults, the promotion of all the policies that this administration is trying to reverse. But guess what? They're not only going to do it in Virginia, you have trifectas in DC and Maryland now. Literally the entirety of all the federal government is inside of those three jurisdictions now that they've taken over Virginia.
Speaker 2:In fifty, what, four days, this administration is toast. The only way out of it is if this administration says, Ugh, I don't want the Epstein leverage to blackmail other people. Let that all out. Ugh, I don't want the hundreds of millions of dollars of Miriam Adelson. Ugh, I no longer want the Nobel Peace Prize, Trump should say, or Jared Kushner.
Speaker 2:And then instead, rejecting that, they say, you know what, we're going to listen to the people that voted us in, and we're going to go ahead and conduct mass arrests, working with Glenn Youngkin, the current Republican governor, and the current Republican attorney general, who, by the way, is leveraged by Chris Lasavita, right, through Miriam Adelson money, and ask them to go ahead and do the right thing and work with the federal DOJ, who's controlled by Rod Rosenstein, Eric Holder. We didn't even mention Jolene Ann Loria, the person that controls all money at the DOJ and all HR decisions, who comes in, who comes out in terms of the mid and lower level, high mid low level employees, right? And then you work with them to conduct mass arrests before Spamburger and Jay Jones takes office, and maybe even also swoop in Abby Spamburger as part of that seditious conspiracy with John Brennan for the escalatory Russia, Russia, Russia hoaxes and all the cover up since then.
Speaker 1:Unfortunately, it's like those things you listed off, like, maybe I'm wrong, but that's just not gonna happen, right? It's like-
Speaker 2:So now that I've laid it out like that, does it all make sense now?
Speaker 1:So but where I mean
Speaker 2:You see why they hate
Speaker 1:me? Of course. But but, like, where do we go from here? You know what I mean? Because it's like feel like that we we we we have one window to to fix these things.
Speaker 1:And and so far
Speaker 2:I'm not sure we fix it under, like, conventional political posturing and maneuvering.
Speaker 1:Right. It's impossible.
Speaker 2:It can be fixed.
Speaker 1:I mean, I I
Speaker 2:But not under normal conventional
Speaker 1:procedure. Because it's like, okay. Well, where's the country at six years from now, three years from now, two years from now? Right? It's Yeah.
Speaker 1:Like
Speaker 2:But we also ask the question, how do they gain so much leverage and influence to be where they're at? Epstein, Butler, Charlie Kirk, Ashley Babbitt, Roseanne Boylan, minimum of tens of thousands slaughtered by Albert Burla's products, right? So at what point do the men in this country look in the mirror and say, You know what? Maybe it's time to be a good Samaritan to extract Tina Peters. Maybe it's time to be a good Samaritan to create accountability.
Speaker 2:Again, I'm not advocating for anything unlawful. It's always legal, moral, and ethical, but how do you fight an enemy that is completely conducting itself in an anarchy fashion with no rules, nothing constraining it? And in fact, they just co opt whoever's the current political force in our country. But we did get that win with the vote, So now the fight begins to release the Epstein file, so more whistleblowers have to I mean, there's gotta be one person that has access to something that's willing to put it on the line to release the info.
Speaker 1:Man, I I certainly hope so. I I hope so. I mean, for me, it's like my It
Speaker 2:would be Elon. Elon is lit we have to have Elon on our side to have any opportunity against the Miriam Adelson, Bibi Netanyahu, Mossad Epstein leverage?
Speaker 1:I I don't think that we're gonna see that, because I think that he's you know, he he he's a he's a technocrat. You know what I mean? He's building his his his robot armies, and and it's like, to to think that he's as the the on paper, the richest
Speaker 2:man in the because he no longer needs human humanity
Speaker 1:Well, exactly.
Speaker 2:For his success.
Speaker 1:He needs robots and solar panels and and and data centers, and he's getting them. Right? He's getting them now, like, more so under Trump than ever before. Right?
Speaker 2:And his buddies What's the solution?
Speaker 1:I well, I mean, God, for one, that, you know, it's like, okay, please, you know, we're waiting. It's like, you know, this is Sodom and Gomorrah. We're heading off a cliff. I think that's part of, I think, focusing on building community, know, strengthening ourselves locally, preparing.
Speaker 2:Well, maybe even this interaction of peeling the onion maybe will awaken some folks to say, You know what? There's something here, and I don't want to be a part of it. So then that starts to chip away at their influence and their control
Speaker 1:of the
Speaker 2:narrative, and it's a hard one. It is. But I like action myself, so I think I probably need to focus my attention on essentially, maybe my next broadcast is going to be doing live in public a mission analysis and verbalizing an operations order of if I were the director of the federal marshals what resources and people I would need to successfully extract Tina Peters. Just lay it out. Give the answer sheet to America.
Speaker 2:And then that answer sheet, when this administration doesn't move, it will start to waken them up to understand that there are other forces that need to be addressed. And I think everybody listening in needs to learn as much as you can about Miriam Adelson and her influence over Susie Wiles, over Donald Trump, over Jared Kushner, over Benjamin Netanyahu, the relationships to the Epstein stuff, and I think most people will come to the same conclusion. And so now with a little bit of trillion lumens on her by another billion people, maybe we get somewhere where they start to back off.
Speaker 1:We can hope.
Speaker 2:With the appropriate motivation.
Speaker 1:We can hope. So Ivan, as we're wrapping up here, we're passing an hour so quickly here, as expected would happen, where's the best place for people to follow you? Just your Twitter? Is that where you kind of, you a sub stack?
Speaker 2:Yeah, as long as Elon allows me. I'm on X. I have a Rumble content that I have. If you want longer form analysis, and I'll repost certain interviews on Rumble, I'm on Substack. We didn't even get to one of the things that I'm doing.
Speaker 2:We didn't even talk about, we got a couple more minutes for COVID?
Speaker 1:Yeah, go ahead.
Speaker 2:We can address that.
Speaker 1:Jump into it. Okay. Right on, I'm all ears.
Speaker 2:So when you go back to the list from Emerald Robinson, couple things I wanted to point out. So Operation Warp Speed, and then next thing you know, he's shilling for Burlow, and next thing you know, he's putting out a truth about how he got a booster, and then everybody else should. Next thing you know is Thomas Massey did not take the jab, neither did Marjorie Taylor Greene. So is there some overlap there as well? It's like it's betrayal after betrayal, right?
Speaker 2:And then he brings in, like you said, ISIS terrorists. You got the Zuckerberg, the Bill Gates, the students. But taking that, and let's go back to that poll. I think this is what we should close off on. When you look at that poll, that poll doesn't represent the Miriam Adelson donor class of the world.
Speaker 2:That represents me and you, and all the people listening in and tuning in to Tucker, to Nick Fuentes, to the Fresh and Fit podcast on Rumble, for example, to your podcast, like I said, to Alex Jones, and those numbers are growing and growing daily. So Alex just said a couple days ago that he's inches away from dropping his support of Donald Trump because he sees the same thing, that Donald Trump is focused more on that Nobel Peace Prize and protecting the Epstein syndicate, okay? And those shills, the sycophants that are trying to carry water for that failing narrative and objective are going to get decimated and rejected by those that have been the most loyal to this movement, and to include Donald Trump. And we have to go through this process. We have to expose it all.
Speaker 2:I don't know what to say. You said the solution. We have to take wins where we can. We have to punish as many people as we can for their transgressions, and it doesn't matter if you have an R or D by your name. As we saw, Donald Trump decided to betray us and the movement and his campaign promises by going after the most America first individuals in the Republican Party.
Speaker 2:Thomas Massey was the one that has been focused the most about the January 6 pipe bomber. Is that why Donald Trump's going after him? Oh, he's a pureblood. Is that why Donald Trump's going after him? So is Marjorie Taylor Greene.
Speaker 2:They were both instrumental at pushing back against Operation Warp Speed, the COVID jabs, and all the tyrannical lockdowns. Who benefited the most from that? His little buddy, Albert Burlow. How close is he with Miriam Adelson, Mr. Albert Burlow, and how much did Miriam Adelson fund and donate?
Speaker 2:I don't know that answer yet, but I will probably later today as we look into that. So bottom line here is the betrayal continues, and more and more people are going to call it out, because I'm available to do any and all interviews, even with those that are calling me out as being bad, even if you're blocking me. I got thick skin. Call me whatever you want. But once you're done calling me names, you know, for some it'll take a minute to get it all out of the system.
Speaker 2:For some it'll take a couple weeks. After you're done calling me names and you've exhausted your lexicon of name calling and you come up with a few extras, then I'll say, okay, great. Let's just assume that everything you called me is true. Now present the evidence why you come up with that conclusion. Duh.
Speaker 2:I don't need to. You're irrelevant. Right? It's it's the same techniques of running and hiding. Well, great.
Speaker 2:We'll see how it plays out, because in a game of chicken, when I play, either I win or you lose, So choose wisely.
Speaker 1:Some bold words for our conclusion. Ivan, thank you for coming on. And I felt that, you know, we managed to have a nice, gentlemanly not really been attacking each other, but we know this is a very calm analysis, which I think I think it's needed.
Speaker 2:Very sobering.
Speaker 1:It's needed. And I hope that more Americans, especially heading into Thanksgiving and the times when they can sit down with others, are having these kinds of conversations and just saying, What's going on? Because that's what we have to be asking ourselves. What's what is the direction our country is headed in? Where do where are we in ten years from now?
Speaker 1:Or when my little girls are, say, getting married in twenty years, what's the world look like for them? What's the country look like? Because I think that we're not at a place where you know, say it was, 1980. You know, you look ahead to the future, and the future's forever. Right?
Speaker 1:But now, I don't see that anymore. I I see that we have to make some pretty big changes or some other pretty big changes will be forced upon us that will
Speaker 2:And we haven't even touched upon the AI component, how humanity is almost obsolete-
Speaker 1:Oh, I know, that's a whole
Speaker 2:new In the coming months, if not next year. I say that next year AI takes over, surpasses human cognition. This is the last year. So how do we deal with that?
Speaker 1:Yeah. Big questions. Ivan, thank you again, man. It's been good I speaking with
Speaker 2:appreciate you. Man in America.
Speaker 1:There we go. Always. Thank you, man. Take care, and God bless.
Speaker 2:God bless. Absolutely.