Trump DOJ: There's Nothing to the Epstein Story; State Dept: Syria's Al-Qaeda are No Longer "Terrorists"
The DOJ announces that there is no incriminating client list in the Epstein files despite the administration having promised MAGA influencers that there would be bombshell revelations in the case. Plus: the State Department drops the "terrorist" designation for the Al-Qaeda affiliated HTS organization, showing the emptiness of the "terrorism" label. ------------------------------------------- Watch full episodes on Rumble, streamed LIVE 7pm ET. Become part of our Locals community Follow System Update: Twitter Instagram TikTok Facebook
Welcome to a new episode of System Update, our live nightly show that airs every Monday through Friday at 7 p.m.
Eastern, exclusively here on Rumble, the free speech alternative to YouTube tonight.
One of the most significant scandals among MAGA pundits and operatives within pro-Trump discourse generally over the last four years has been the one involving Jeffrey Epstein.
Many leading MAGA pundits, including some who now occupy the highest law enforcement positions in the entire U.S. government, spent years vehemently accusing Biden officials of corruptly hiding the truth about Epstein, about his client list, about his associates, about his ties to intelligence agencies, and about his supposed suicide, all in order, they said, to protect powerful people caught up in his sex trafficking pedophile ring.
That is why it was so disconcerting to many MAGA faithful to watch not only delays for months, but numerous excuses emanating from many of those very same officials as to why they were not yet releasing these documents, one excuse after the next.
Those oddly phrased claims were coming from people like Attorney General Pam Bondi and FBI Director Cash Patel and his deputy director Dan Bongino, all of whom vocally affirmed over and over over the last four years that the U.S. government was guilty of hiding incriminating truths surrounding Epstein, and all of whom vowed to release all those secrets and all those files once they got into power.
They are now in power.
And yet in less than five months there, the DOJ announced today, the one under Pam Bondi, that they are closing the investigation, given the certainty that they say they have that Epstein had no client list.
There's no such thing as an Epstein client list.
That he never tried to blackmail anyone.
That no powerful people were involved whatsoever with him in his sexual abuse of minors.
He just acted alone for his own benefit.
And they say that he undoubtedly killed himself, that there's no question about that.
Now, all of this is such a blatant betrayal of what was promised all of these years, such that all but the most blindly loyal Trump followers, like the real cult members, a lot of them almost certainly paid to be that, are reacting with understandable confusion and anger over what happened today and over the last several months.
We'll delve into all of this and what this means.
Then, as recently as December of 2024, just six months ago, the U.S. Justice Department on its own site promoted a $10 million bounty on the head of someone they referred to as Muhammad Al-Jolani, whose picture appeared on the DOJ site under this red-lettered phrase in all uppercase letters.
Stop this terrorist.
Three months later, the U.S. no longer referred to that person as al-Jolani, but rather as Ahmed Al-Shara, who met with French President Emmanuel Crone in Paris and then with Donald Trump in Saudi Arabia, where he was greeted by both with the ceremony reserved for respected world leaders.
Today, Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced that the group that Al-Jalani once led, long known as Al-Qaeda's affiliate in Syria, is no longer officially a designated terrorist group.
This is al-Qaeda that is no longer in the U.S. mind, at least in Syria, viewed as an official terrorist group.
We'll explore what all this shows about the utterly vacant and manipulative propaganda terms, terrorist and terrorism.
And then finally, President Trump today posted a lengthy tweet attacking Brazil and its government for its ongoing prosecution of former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro comparing that prosecution to the lawfare and persecution that Donald Trump himself says he suffered.
This is almost certainly a prelude to a series of sanctions the State Department has already prepared for Brazil's notorious chief censor and leading judge, Brazil's Alexandro de Maraj.
Brazil's president, in response to all of this, Lula de Silva, quickly posted his own tweet basically telling Trump to mind his own business, arguing that questions about Brazilian justice are for Brazilians only to decide, and that the Brazilian legal institutions are legitimate and independent and therefore don't need any external supervision.
Exactly the opposite of what Lula himself said when it came to his own prosecution in 2018, when he constantly appealed to foreign sources to intervene in his prosecution on the grounds that at the time he said Brazilian judicial institutions were corrupted.
There are several interesting aspects to all of this, especially as Brazil is now hosting right today in Rio de Janeiro, the BRICS Summit, something that Donald Trump has made very clear he regards as a menace, and we'll examine some of the most important aspects to that.
Before we get to all of that, a couple quick programming notes.
System update is also available.
In podcast form, you can listen to every episode 12 hours after the first broadcast live here on Rumble, on Spotify, Apple, and all the major podcasting platforms, where if you rate, review, and follow our program, it really helps spread the visibility of the show.
Finally, as independent journalists, we really do rely on the support of our viewers and our members, which you can provide by joining our locals community.
You simply click the red join button right below the video player on the Rumble page, or you can also scan the QR code that is on the screen.
It takes you to greenwalls.locals.com.
You get a variety of benefits, including interactive features.
We put a transcript of every episode we broadcast, a written one.
We publish there the next day.
There's a lot of exclusive video interviews and segments, Q ⁇ A, and more.
We're actually about to post a video segment there of Michael Tracy and going to Satan Ion on the 4th of July to interview Trump supporters about whether they support his decision to participate in the Israeli attack on Iran and why they support that.
I find it very interesting in terms of giving some insight into how at least some Trump supporters think.
So look for that on the locals platform.
There's things like that all the time there.
And all you have to do is press join and it will take you to that community.
For now, welcome to a new episode of System Update, starting right now.
Earlier today, the Justice Department issued a statement which it essentially announced that they really no longer considered any of the Questions surrounding what had long been the Epstein scandal to be worthwhile of investigation, that essentially all of these questions had been answered, that there's really nothing to look into.
The Justice Department's own statement, which I think we have here, I guess we have the Axios article about it.
No, this is the Justice Department statement itself, which they issued earlier today.
They said this, quote, as part of our commitment to transparency, the Department of Justice and the FBI have conducted an exhaustive review of investigative holdings relating to Jeffrey Epstein.
To ensure that the review was thorough, the FBI conducted digital searches of its databases, hard drives, and network drives, as well as physical searches of squat areas, lock cabinets, desks, closets, and other areas where responsive material may have been stored.
These searches uncovered a significant amount of material, including more than 300 gigabytes of data and physical evidence.
The files relating to Epstein include a large volume of images of Epstein, images and videos of victims who are either minors or appear to be minors, and over 10,000 downloaded videos and images of illegal child sex abuse material and other pornography.
Only a fraction of this material would have been aired publicly had Epstein gone to trial, as the seal served only to protect victims and did not expose any additional third parties to allegations of illegal wrongdoing.
The systemic review revealed no incriminating, quote, client list.
So they're saying this client list that most Trump supporters, I would say, have been accusing the Biden administration, the U.S. government of hiding to protect all the powerful people on this list, now that they're in power, people like Pam Bondi and Dan Bogino and Cash Patel, they're in charge.
Now they're saying, no, you know, actually there is no client list at all.
There's at least no incriminating client list, whatever that means.
I don't know if there is a client list or not, but according to them, there's no incriminating client list.
I don't know how you can have a client list that's not incriminating to be a client of Jeffrey Epstein seems inherently incriminating.
They seem to have said at the White House briefing today when asked about this, because as we'll show you, Pam Bondi went on Fox News and was asked, are you going to release the client list?
And she said, it's sitting on my desk for review.
Trump had strongly suggested he would order it released.
Now they're basically saying, you know what, there is no client list.
They go on, quote, there was also no credible evidence found that Jeffrey Epstein blackmailed prominent individuals as part of his actions.
So all this, these claims that Jeffrey Epstein had recordings of prominent individuals who he invited to his island, who had sex with minors, evidently there's no incriminating material of any kind that would implicate any powerful person.
Just not there.
They checked, they checked the storage closets, they looked under the beds, just couldn't find anything.
All the stuff they had been claiming was there for years, screaming and pounding the table on podcasts, making a lot of money over it too.
Accusing Biden officials of hiding this all for corrupt ends.
Just not there.
They looked, couldn't find it.
They go on, we did not uncover evidence that could predicate an investigation against uncharged third parties.
So let's just think about that as well.
So far, two people have been arrested.
A grand total of two people have been arrested and charged in connection with this entire Jeffrey Epstein ring.
Jeffrey Epstein himself, who never faced trial because according to the Department of Justice, he committed suicide, somehow found a way to commit suicide in a federal prison despite being a very high-profile defendant who had been ordered on suicide watch, still found a way to commit suicide.
And Jazane Maxwell, who was accused of being basically his, I guess you could say, the trafficker, the person who trafficked girls for him.
But apparently this is all just for Jeffrey Epstein.
There's no other person for whom these girls were trafficked, to whom they were trafficked, who had sex with these girls.
There's nobody to investigate.
Jose Waxwell is convicted.
She's in prison for 20 years.
She pled guilty.
Jeffrey Epstein is dead.
That's the end of it.
Those are the only two people who are implicated by all of this, according to the Trump DOJ.
They go on, quote, after a thorough investigation, the FBI investigators concluded that Jeffrey Epstein committed suicide in his cell at the Metropolitan Correctional Center in New York City on August 10th, 2019.
This conclusion is consistent with previous findings.
It lists a variety of autopsy reports.
It says the conclusion that Epstein died by suicide is further supported by video footage from the common area of the special housing unit where Epstein was housed at the time of his death.
As DOJ's inspector general explained in 2023, meaning Joe Biden's administration, anyone entering or attempting to enter the tier where Epstein's cell was located from the SHU common area would have been captured by this footage.
Now, one of the issues has always been, if Jeffrey Epstein committed suicide, was this done with the assistance or encouragement of people who worked in the prison?
I mean, if you go and talk to any prisoner, I don't mean high-profile prisoners in one of New York's most significant federal prisons in Manhattan, but you go just talk to prisoners who have done two years, three years for things like armed robbery or whatever in state prisons,
ordinary state prisons, they'll describe all the different methods used by the prison to prevent you from killing yourself, the sheets that are used, the lack of beams to make you hang yourself, the surveillance, the monitoring.
I'm not saying it never happens, but how is it that federal prisons cannot prevent high-profile prisoners who obviously are the subject of a lot of public, intense public concern from committing suicide, especially when doing so would obviously create this kind of scandal, this obviously valid doubt that a lot of people have.
He was associated with endless numbers of the most powerful people on the planet.
And the FBI and DOJ, again, led by people who weren't suggesting that perhaps there are incriminating facts being held or hid by the U.S. government, but insisting that they know they are, promising and vowing that if Trump wins and they get into power, they're going to make sure the public sees it all.
They're going to expose the truth that has been so corruptly hidden.
They get into power, I mean, real power, leading the FBI, leading the Justice Department.
And they're like, oh, we looked.
We looked in storage closets, looked around, saw some CVs.
We looked.
There's nothing on there.
It's exactly what the government always said.
He committed suicide.
There was no big blackmail ring.
There's no one to protect.
There's no client list.
There's no evidence that any powerful people ever had sex with these girls underage.
There's nothing.
We looked.
Don't worry, time to move on.
Nothing to see here.
Case closed.
Here's the footage from the prison in which Jeffrey Epstein was held that the Justice Department released.
It's from August 9th, 2019, which is the day that he killed himself, designed to show that nobody was coming in and out at the time of the suicide.
And there's a one-minute gap in the video that other people have observed.
I don't think the DOJ has been asked about this yet.
I don't know what their explanation is.
Maybe there's a good explanation.
But there is a one-minute gap.
It goes from 11, 58, 56 p.m., and then you'll see it jump, 57, 58, right to midnight.
So there's a one-minute, two-second gap.
And obviously, this is the kind of thing that fuels people's speculation that things are being hidden.
Here is a video where President Trump was interviewed just two months before the election with the incredibly dynamic, super charismatic, always very insightful and innovative Lex Friedman.
Just a basket of energy and charisma.
Totally see why he just exploded out of nowhere and became this major podcast host.
And he was interviewing President Trump.
It was a pretty friendly interview.
And he asked him about the Epstein case.
And here's what President Trump said just two months before the election.
But a lot of big people went to that island.
But fortunately, I was not one of them.
It's just very strange for a lot of people that the list of clients that went to the island has not been made public.
Yeah, it's very interesting, isn't it?
Probably will be, by the way.
So if you're able to, you'll be.
Yeah, I'd certainly take a look at it.
Now, Kennedy's interesting because it's so many years ago.
You know, they do that for danger, too, because, you know, it endangers certain people, et cetera, et cetera.
So Kennedy is very different from the Epstein thing.
But yeah, I'd be inclined to do the Epstein.
I'd have no problem with it.
So, you know, that's that.
I think what is important here, too, is that you probably remember this preposterous, deceitful spectacle that took place in February, a month after the inauguration when the administration was in power when Pam Bondi and Cash Patel invited multiple Trump influencers.
Libs of TikTok was one.
Mike Cernovich was another.
Jack Pasevich was another.
And they went thinking they were being given what they were promised, which was new revealing previously hidden and unknown documents shedding light on what happened with Jeffrey Epstein.
Who were the people to whom these girls were trafficked?
Which very prominent people went to the island and had sex with girls?
Did Jeffrey Epstein work with or for a foreign or domestic intelligence agency?
This for me is one of the most important questions, if not the most important question, which I would note.
The Justice Department very conspicuously did not address today.
They didn't deny that he had.
They said Jeffrey Epstein didn't blackmail anybody.
Did the intelligence agencies with whom or for whom he worked blackmail anybody using this material?
They didn't say.
But these people were not going around saying, I think maybe there's something here.
Perhaps we should take a look.
They were saying, no, no.
There is explosive, incriminating evidence of serious wrongdoing by very powerful people.
For that reason, these materials are being hidden by the U.S. government, Western governments, to protect them.
Here's Pam Bondi on Sean Hannity's show on Fox News in January of 2024.
And it was when Jeffrey Epstein documents were unsealed by a court, and they were discussing that and the incoming Trump administration.
And here's what she said.
I want to know why A.G. Garland and the Justice Department are so quiet on this tonight.
You know, they're out there labeling parents domestic terrorists, yet they're saying nothing about this.
And these documents were so slow to come out.
Human trafficking is a multi-billion dollar business in this country.
And Jeffrey Epstein is dead.
And Gurlaine Maxwell is in prison for 20 years where she belongs.
And if people in that report are still fighting to keep their names private, Sean, they have no legal basis to do so unless they're a child, a victim, or a cooperating defendant by some chance against a potential case against Gurlaine Maxwell.
And I think Mark Garrigus is a great criminal defense attorney will back that up as well.
So this is actually January of 2024.
So this was, I'm about to show you one from February 2025.
But that was from January 2024.
So this was while the Biden administration was still in power.
And she was obviously implying strongly that they were keeping these documents concealed because they're powerful people who they were trying to protect.
And she was attacking the Biden administration for releasing these documents so slowly, for not being interested in this case, for not revealing to the public the truth.
In February of 2021, of 2025 rather, while Pam Bondi was the Attorney General, she had been confirmed just a little bit before that, she went On Fox News, of course, to talk about the Epstein files as well as the Justice Department's priorities.
And they asked her about the Epstein file and the client list, and here's what she said.
The DOJ may be releasing the list of Jeffrey Epstein's clients.
Will that really happen?
It's sitting on my desk right now to review.
That's been a directive by President Trump.
I'm reviewing that.
I'm reviewing JFK files, MLK files.
That's all in the process of being reviewed because that was done at the directive of the president from all of these agencies.
So have you seen anything?
You said, oh my gosh.
Not yet.
Okay.
Okay, okay.
So I don't know why people behave that way in cable news.
It's just kind of weird.
But the question was, will the Trump DOJ release the client list?
And she said, it's sitting on my desk.
And now, the same Pambandi, the same Justice Department that she leads, in its release today, which I read you, said there is no such thing as a client list.
There's no incriminating client list they found.
So obviously the question that even a lot of conservative reporters had, and a lot of conservatives are very upset about this, very angry about this, very bewildered by it.
And not just conservative journalists, but Trump influencers as well.
Like the, as I said, except for the hardcore, just like brainless cultists who I believe are in some way paid to just constantly defend Donald Trump no matter what he does.
Or maybe they're just actual cult members on their own.
There's a lot of money going around, both DNC influencers and Trump influencers.
But some are certainly doing it just out of cause or belief.
I don't know which is worse.
But Steve Doocy of Fox News and other journalists asked Caroline Levitt, the White House press secretary, like, hey, Pam Bonney said in February when asked, are you going to release the client list?
She said, yes, and it's sitting on my desk for review.
And then she comes out today and says, don't worry, there's no client list.
We don't have any client list to show you.
And here's what Carolyn Levitt said when trying to reconcile those two things.
So the FBI looks at the circumstances surrounding the death of Jeffrey Epstein.
According to the report, this systematic review revealed no incriminating client list.
So what happened to the Epstein client list that the Attorney General said she had on her desk?
Well, I think if you go back and look at what the Attorney General said in that interview, which was on your network on Fox News, John Roberts said, DOJ may be releasing the list of Jeffrey Epstein's clients.
Will that really happen?
And she said, it's sitting on my desk right now to review.
Yes, she was saying the integrity of all of the paperwork, all of the paper in relation to Jeffrey Epstein's crimes.
That's what the Attorney General was referring to, and I'll let her speak for that.
But again, when it comes to the FBI and the Department of Justice, they are more than committed to ensuring that bad people are put behind bars.
They have an operation going on right now called Summer Heats, which has our murder rate trending in the lowest direction in United States history.
I'm going to play the rest of this, but I just want you to see what happened there.
So the question was very, very clear, very specific, very precise.
Will you release the client list?
This client list has become kind of like a fable of right-wing discourse.
There's a client list out there.
Probably has his name, Bill Clinton, Prince Andrew.
Who knows who else?
Lex Wexner, the billionaire who apparently transferred Jeffrey Epstein billions of dollars that fed his lifestyle.
And he's a big, big supporter of a certain foreign country and all of its various arms that exert influence in the United States.
And the idea was that there's a client list, and that client list is sort of the Rosetta Stone for deciphering the corruption and evil of globalism and globalists.
And that's why it's being so aggressively shielded.
So when Fox News asked Pam Bandi, who has been trafficking in Epstein discourse for years, are you going to release the client?
It's not like she misunderstood her question.
She understood exactly what that meant.
She said, it's sitting on my desk.
Now, I understand the claim that, you know, she didn't really mean that, even though that was exactly what the question was.
She kind of meant, just like, in general, I have Epstein documents sitting on my desk, but that's not what was asked.
That's not what was said.
And again, they were accusing Biden officials of the most heinous cover-ups and crimes based on far less incriminating behavior than the kind you're seeing here.
But watch how quickly Caroline Levitt wants to get away from the Epstein files, which again had center stage in MAGA and right-wing discourse for four years at least.
And she immediately just starts, when she gives, oh, that's out of context, she then immediately said, but look at all this great stuff we're doing here to fight crime, which is obviously is the ultimate tactic of distraction.
And the Department of Justice, they are more than committed to ensuring that bad people are put behind bars.
They have an operation going on right now called Summer Heats, which has our murder rate trending in the lowest direction in United States history.
Their emphasis on violent crime and locking up violent criminals has led to the arrest of 14,000 violent criminals.
That's a 62% increase from the same time period last year.
So this Attorney General and the FBI director are committed to putting bad people behind bars where they belong.
They promised an exhaustive review.
That's what they did.
For any further details, I would refer you to the Department of Justice.
Okay, that's not what they promised.
They did not promise an exhaustive review.
They promised to release the documents that they said were being corruptly hidden.
Here's Alina Haba, who was Trump's personal attorney.
She was then nominated by him to be the U.S. Attorney for the District of New Jersey.
And she went on Pierce Morgan.
In February of this year, just four months ago, three months ago, Caroline Levitt just said today, all that was promised was an exhaustive Review, and that's what you got.
You didn't get any documents, you didn't get any facts, you didn't get any secrets that were hidden, even though we've been saying for years they were.
You didn't get any of that because we didn't promise that.
We only promised an exhaustive review, and we did an exhaustive review.
We looked in every closet, we looked in every, like the announcement said, under the beds, we looked, you know, wherever, like it might be in broom closets.
All we scoured all the DOJ, all the FBI, and didn't find anything.
Here's what Alina Haba told Piers Morgan was going to happen now that the Trump administration was in power with regards to the Epstein virals.
Epstein's case, it is incredibly disturbing.
We have flight logs, we have information names that will come out.
Is it going to be shocking?
Okay, listen.
Caroline Levitt today said all that you were promised was an exhaustive review.
Here's what Alina Baba told Pierce Borgin was actually the promise of what was going to come out.
Epstein's case, it is incredibly disturbing.
We have flight logs, we have information, names that will come out.
Is it going to be shocking?
I don't see how it's not shocking that there were so many individuals that were hidden and kept secret and not been held accountable.
Let's talk about the reverse.
I believe in accountability.
So you have to now go through your process.
Now, I won't say they're guilty until they go through their time in court.
But again, now it's time for accountability.
We have seen for so many years, Pierce, in this country, many investigations, subpoenas, testimonies in Congress, et cetera, et cetera.
But there's a general frustration with accountability.
We take it halfway.
We don't take it home.
And I really believe that now with Cash and Pam, there will be accountability.
Cash and Pam are in charge.
There's a new sheriff in town.
And all these people, now that Cash and Pam are there, all these powerful people that she said are directly implicated in these files who have never been held accountable, their identities are no longer going to be concealed.
That's what she said.
She said there's fight logs, there's lists of people who were involved who have never been held accountable, and all this stuff is coming out.
That was the promise that you were given, not just that there was going to be a quote-unquote exhaustive review.
Here's Dan Bongino on the Dan Bongino show, one of the most popular shows in the country.
It was exclusively on Rumble.
It had an audience of hundreds of thousands of people, often bigger than any of the cable shows on at the same time.
Very influential show.
This is just one, I can show you dozens, probably hundreds of clips of Dan talking about this case.
I don't know, this is May 2023, so probably didn't know necessarily that he was going to end up running the FBI with Cash Patel, but now he is.
So here's what he had to say.
Listen, that Jeffrey Epstein story is a big deal.
Please do not let that story go.
Keep your eye on this.
Catherine Rummler, we need to keep the heat on this case, folks.
There are a lot of people who are knee-deep in the Washington swamp who are not telling you the truth about serious allegations out there that Epstein may have had video and audio of people out there doing things they shouldn't have been doing.
And you should be asking yourself the question, how is it that all these people, the CIA director, the Obama fixer, Bill Clinton, all intersected past with Jeffrey Epstein?
Jeffrey Epstein isn't with us anymore, and nobody seems to want to talk about it.
Outside of a few entrepreneurial media outlets saying, hey, this is a big deal.
It's a big deal.
Big, big deal.
And there's all these things going on that are hidden that you ought to know about.
And he said, we need to keep the pressure on.
We need to keep demanding that the people in charge release this and tell us about it.
He's one of the people in charge.
And he went on that Fox News interview six weeks ago with Cash Patel, both of whom have been going around essentially saying they don't believe in any way, shape, or form that Jeffrey Epstein killed himself.
And in a very strange, almost forced hostage video-like way, they were like, yeah, we've seen the proof that Jeffrey Epstein, he looked, he killed himself.
There's no doubt about it.
He killed nobody else involved.
He killed himself.
Just he killed himself.
Here was Kash Patel, the current FBI director, with Benny Johnson in December of 2023.
You know, it's the same thing with Epstein's list.
It's like, what the hell are these Republicans doing?
I saw you make news this morning about that.
I got to get to that.
You say that the FBI has Epstein's list.
They're sitting on it.
That doesn't seem like something you should do.
You're protecting the world's foremost predator.
That seems like an evil thing to do, regardless of who may be embarrassed in the release of that list.
Why is the FBI protecting the greatest pederist, the largest scale pederist in human history?
Simple, because of who's on that list.
You don't think that Bill Gates is lobbying Congress night and day to prevent the disclosure of that list?
No, but as it turns out, there's no list.
They were sure there's a list.
They were pretty sure Bill Gates is on it.
That's obviously what they're implying very, very strongly.
Not really implying, actually saying Bill Gates is if Congress is lobbying for that list not to come out.
They're hiding the list.
The list that these very people, same people, came out today and said does not exist.
And let me just say one thing.
Let's just assume purely for the sake of argument that let's just indulge the notion that all these people are suddenly now telling the truth.
They really did look in every storage closet.
They really did look behind brooms and maintenance buckets for boxes.
They looked like people's computers.
They checked all the files.
They just searched high and low for the client list.
They just didn't find any such thing.
There is no such thing.
They found the proof that he killed himself.
They realized there was no incriminating blackbail.
Bill Gates was never at the island having sex with underage girls like they constantly implied or Bill Clinton that Biden officials were not in fact corruptly hiding incriminating evidence as they claimed for years, because now they themselves are saying there's no such incriminating evidence to show you.
If you really want to believe that they're telling the truth, again, just purely for the sake of argument, don't you think they should be apologizing to the people that they've been smearing over the last many years, either as people who they claim were having sex with underage children at Jeffrey Epstein Island, like Bill Gates, and the Biden officials whom they claimed were corruptly concealing the client list and all this other information to protect their powerful friends at Davos and in globalist institutions.
I mean, don't they owe an apology for all these people they've been falsely and wrongly accusing for all these years?
Now they're saying the same thing as those people they've been accusing.
They have the obligation to say, look, we're sorry for these people whose reputations we did everything we could to destroy and malign, basically accusing them of protecting the biggest pedophile ring in human history.
We're sorry.
Everything we said about it was wrong.
And now that we're in power, we see that.
Don't you think they should be doing that?
Here is the aforementioned Fox News interview.
This is from May with Dan Bongino and Cash Patel about how, just trust them, Jeffrey Epstein killed himself.
You said Jeffrey Epstein committed suicide.
People don't believe it.
Well, I mean, listen, they have a right to their opinion, but as someone who has worked as a public defender, as a prosecutor, who's been in that prison system, who's been in the Metropolitan Detention Center, who's been in segregated housing, you know a suicide when you see one, and that's what that was.
He killed himself.
Again, you want me to get, I've seen the whole file.
Okay.
Now, and by the way, if he really did kill himself and there was nobody involved, that in itself is a scandal.
Shouldn't the FBI director be demanding major reforms in our federal prison system to make sure that people like Jeffrey Epstein can't commit suicide when no one's watching?
Oops, we just weren't watching.
He hung himself with some sheet that happened to be, or some linen that happened to be in the, it was like a beam perfectly placed.
Here's J.D. Vance with Theo Bond in October of last year, literally a month before the election.
And they're talking about the Epstein list, the client list, which turns out doesn't exist.
But at the time, this is what they were saying.
Everybody in politics has a vice that's much worse than alcoholism, is the way that I put it.
But we release the list.
Seriously, we need to release the Epstein list.
That is an important thing.
I mean, okay.
Here is J.D. Vance.
J.D. Vance was one of the leading voices about the Epstein scandal, by which he means, or at least meant, that all the incriminating evidence is being covered up by top U.S. government officials at the FBI and the CIA and the Justice Department to protect all the powerful globalists who had sex with minors with Jeffrey Epstein.
Here's J.D. Vance in a tweet, September 2021.
I think about this Matthew Walter column about once a month.
And this was a column from the journal The Week.
And the headline of it was, quote, the Jeffrey Epstein case is why people believe in Pizzagate.
Basically saying that our elites have been lying to us about Jeffrey Epstein, and that's the reason why Pizzagate conspiracy theories ended up being believed, because our elites are so corrupt and hide and think so much from us and lie to us all the time, like they're doing in the Jeffrey Epstein case, that if you then present any conspiracy theory to them where it suggests that people in power are doing evil things and covering it up,
they're rationally inclined to believe it because people in power do hide evidence of evil and wrongdoing like they're doing with the Jeffrey Epstein files.
This is the article that J.D. Vance not only recommended, but saying that he thinks about at least once a week.
And from the article, quote, oh, wait, actually, so that was the article.
So here's another J.D. Vance tweet.
And this is from September 2021.
He said this, quote, remember when we learned that our wealthiest and most powerful people were connected to a guy who ran a literal child sex trafficking ring?
And then that guy died mysteriously in a jail?
And now we just don't want to talk about it.
Who doesn't want to talk about it?
The White House doesn't want to talk about it.
Pam Bondi talked about it for about four seconds and she's like, hey, look over here, all these bad guys we're arresting.
Here's another J.D. Vance tweet, December 2021.
Quote, if you're a journalist and you're not asking questions about this case, you should be ashamed of yourself.
What purpose do you even serve?
I'm sure there's a middle-class teenager somewhere who could use some harassing right now, but maybe try to do your job once in a while.
Totally agree.
That's why I'm doing this segment.
That's why I'm asking questions.
That's why I've been asking questions about this case for a long time.
And why I'm not satisfied because suddenly the Justice Department comes out and said, nothing here, nothing to see.
Now, again, if it's true that all these people, J.D. Vance, Dambagino, Pambandi, Kash Patel, the whole MAGA world, by the way, it's not just MAGA people, there are a lot of non-MAGA people too, who feel like this seems very strange.
This guy, Jeffrey, let's remember this.
This guy, Jeffrey Epstein, when he was arrested in 2018 and killed himself, this was not the first time he was arrested and charged with trafficking minors for sex.
He was charged with that in Florida a decade earlier, and he pled guilty to it.
He was convicted.
And when he got this shockingly lenient, generous deal, where he spent like three seconds in prison, and then the rest were like, he had house arrest in his Palm Beat mansion.
And when it became known that that happened, they went to Alex Akoste, who at the time was the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Florida.
And then he ended up being in various stages, various other positions in the government, including where he needed Senate confirmation.
And they said to him, why did you give Jeffrey Epstein such a sweetheart deal?
And he said, I was told he was, quote, intelligent to leave him alone.
So it's not like these things just got invented by a bunch of conspiracy theorists on the internet.
There were huge questions about why Jeffrey Epstein got that deal that he got back in 2010, I believe it was, 2009, whenever that was.
And then very powerful people continued to consort with him closely, knowing that he had a conviction for trafficking minors for sex, for commercial sex.
So, of course, there's all kinds of questions about why the most powerful people are there, why we know so little about it, why he mysteriously killed him.
These are all things that did not just emerge out of nowhere.
I'm not saying I believe what I'm about to show you is true, but I do nonetheless think it's worth noting it just because it happened and it didn't just come from a random Twitter user.
It came from Elon Musk, who was as close of a Trump ally and was embedded.
Let's remember, he was embedded in the U.S. government for months, had access to everything as part of Doge, every agency.
He was probably the second most powerful person in the government for the time that he was there.
And on June 5th, 2025, though he deleted it afterwards and apologized, though he didn't apologize for it because he said it wasn't true.
He apologized just for posting it.
He said this, quote, time to drop the really big bomb.
Real Donald Trump is in the Epstein files.
That is the real reason they have not been made public.
Have a nice day, GJJT.
Mark this post for the future.
The truth will come out.
Now, do I believe that Elon Musk is willing to fabricate accusations against people with whom he, toward whom he has a lot of animosity and with whom he's in a major feud like he was with Trump at the time?
Yes, I actually do think both Donald Trump and Elon Musk do that.
I think a lot of people do that beyond them as well.
Nonetheless, that's a pretty heavy accusation to come from somebody in that position who is extremely close to Trump.
And then a month later, none of it gets released.
Again, I'm not saying that I think Trump was in the Epstein files.
Trump was very close to Jeffrey Epstein, but in general, didn't have much to do with him after that conviction.
It wasn't really because of that conviction.
They had a falling out for other reasons.
But I'm not saying that's the reason.
I just think when someone like Elon Musk makes a claim like that, and then a month later, the administration comes out, there's nothing to see here.
Case closed, goodbye, never talk about this again.
Look over here.
We're putting these other bad guys in prison.
It's at least worth noting.
Here is Trump on Fox.
This was before he was asked about this by Lex Friedman.
This is June of 2024, so the summer.
And he was a little bit, people observed at the time, shaky about whether he would commit to declassifying the Epstein files.
This is how that went about.
Would you declassify the 9-11 files?
Yeah.
Would you declassify JFK files?
Yeah.
I did a lot of it.
Would you declassify the Epstein files?
Yeah.
Yeah, I would.
I guess I would.
I think that less so because, you know, you don't know.
You don't want to affect people's lives if it's phony stuff in there because it's a lot of phony stuff with that whole world.
But I think I would.
And, you know, there's been evidence for a while.
I mean, there's no question Donald Trump and Jeffrey Epstein were close friends.
There was a comment of Trump that's on video of him saying, yeah, Jeffrey Epstein's like me.
He likes a lot of really pretty women, though in his case, he likes them really young.
So he seemed to be aware of Jeffrey Epstein's practices.
You know, maybe he thought Young was like 19, but he did say that.
There's Jeffrey Epstein tapes where Jeffrey Epstein, as Daily Beast noted, said, quote, I was Donald Trump's closest friend.
Again, Jeffrey Epstein is not exactly a reliable person either, but he did say that.
Once all this happened today, Elon Musk certainly was ready with a lot of incriminating accusations.
Here is a meme that he posted.
And he put an emoji on top of the meme, which is like this angry swearing emoji.
And there you see the meme.
It begins with, we will release the Epstein list.
It's kind of a guy with a white face.
And then as a clown makeup gets applied, it says, we just need more time, which is what Pam Bondi was saying based on excuses that never made sense to me at the time, as we noted then.
And then the full clown makeup and hair are starting to be applied.
And it says, oh, the Epstein list is on my desk.
And then with the full clown, it says, there is no Epstein list.
And this is not inaccurate.
It's a meme, but it's not an unfair description of what happened.
I really, I never, remember, when people were saying to Pambandi, you promised this, you pretended you released it, when you called those influencers to the White House and gave them a big notebook that conspicuously said Trump Epstein files on it, turned out that they were all publicly available and you didn't give them even a single document that hadn't been seen before.
You created the spectacle, the illusion, the facade of disclosure, but disclosed nothing.
And then people started saying, well, where are these documents that you promised to release?
And she started creating these bizarre excuses, like we have thousands of videos of Jeffrey Epstein having sex with minors.
And it was like, who cares?
No one wants to see these.
No one needs to see these.
Everybody knows Jeffrey Epstein had sex with minors.
The questions people have are primarily, number one, where are the documents about to whom these underage girls were being trafficked?
The client list that many, as we just showed you, people said existed.
Number two, is there really definitive evidence that he killed himself?
Was he helped by that with prison staff?
Did they kind of ignore him or abandon their surveillance to allow him to kill himself?
Did they provide him with the materials to do so?
And then number three, and this is the question that still hasn't been answered, was he working for with any intelligence agency?
These are the questions that people wanted to know.
No one cared about videos showing Jeffrey Epstein having sex with underage girls.
People already knew that he did that.
That's the basis of the whole scandal.
That wasn't so.
Her saying we can't give you the answers to the other questions because we have so many pornographic images and videos of Jeffrey Epstein that we have to go through, it's going to take years.
And by the way, she said, Yeah, it's going to take years, but that never made any sense as an excuse for why the relevant documents can be released.
Plus, apparently, it didn't take years because they're saying we've now looked at everything.
And we don't have any evidence of anyone other than Jeffrey Epstein having sex with underage girls.
All those videos that they said they had, apparently either they looked at them all or they just didn't look at them all and they concluded there's just no reason to look at them.
There's no evidence of any powerful person on them after years of claiming otherwise.
Here's another tweet from Elon Musk today.
What's the time?
Oh, look, it's a no one has been arrested o'clock again.
And it says the official Jeffrey Epstein pedophile arrest counter and it's at zero.
Now, I will say, and I've noted this many times before, that there are Trump influencers, pro-Trump pundits, operatives, who have not been shy about criticizing Trump when they thought it was merited, when they feel like they were promised certain things that were betrayed.
We saw that to some extent with bombing Iran.
We saw it to some extent with bombing the Houthis.
We see it to some extent with cutting Medicaid.
I think we've seen it most on this stuff, on the Epstein stuff.
There are a few people who are out there doing their best to try and say, oh, this is no big deal.
They didn't do anything wrong.
Here's this preposterous person who calls herself Insurrection Barbie, but she's become a popular MAGA influencer.
She's one of the people who just mindlessly defends Trump whatever he does.
She's a fanatical Zionist and supporter of Israel, loves Israel.
That's obviously part of it.
And she has her own history of raising all sorts of serious, scurrilous accusations about the Epstein files.
But now suddenly with this announcement today, she goes and says this, quote, I'm not saying we need to move on from Epstein.
I want to see accountability for everything.
What I am saying, though, is that Epstein is not the end-all and be-all defining moment of the Trump presidency, like people on here are making it out to be so you can sell you some more rage and make money.
It's not the reason why I would support President Trump or not support President Trump.
It's important, but so is 100,000 other things.
What I am saying is that perspective, nuance, patience, and common sense need to make a comeback and fast.
So now it's just, you know, it's like, it's like, no, I'm not saying it's irrelevant.
Yeah, it's like, it matters.
Like 100,000 other things matter, but it's not like it's a big deal to some dead guy who molested some girls.
Like, why are we even talking about it?
And back in February, when there started to be signals that they weren't actually going to release anything, she said this, quote, I'm really annoyed with this Epstein file stuff.
Just once I would like things to be released normally.
I get it.
I'm not blaming anyone, but this topic is just draining.
So back then, she was suggesting, actually, it is really important.
Here's one of my favorite threads ever.
This is from someone named Larry Schweikart, who is a very devoted Trump supporter.
And I don't really like calling people conspiracy theorists because there are a lot of conspiracies and conspiracy theorists are often right.
I don't like that as a derogatory term, but he is someone who just spreads idiotic, baseless conspiracy views.
And here he is, he's offering this excuse, this version of events.
He's here to say that it might seem like the Trump administration is burying the Epstein case.
Why would it seem like that?
Oh, because they came out and said there's nothing here, nothing wrong, nothing to see, move on.
But in reality, it's all a big trick.
They're about to bust the Epstein case wide open.
And they wanted to pretend they're not interested in it just to get the bad guys even worse.
Here's what he said, quote, you guys aren't going to like this, but this is what I think is happening, Ray Epstein.
I think they found the Fort Knox of human trafficking.
Beginning in February, we saw a very sharp uptick in human trafficking busts, 50, 80 people at a time, dozens of kids rescued.
I do not believe in coincidences.
I think these busts were all based on info derived from the Epstein files.
I think they have made multiple large investigations and busts in the works.
Releasing anything might provide a tip-off.
Hence, they're going to say, quote, no, I didn't find nothing.
I think they view the ongoing success in busting these rings as far more important than making the stuff public just to show goodwill toward MAGA.
They think the harms from not releasing are far less than the gains they will get by continuing to use them as a source.
So apparently they're lying to all of us.
They found incredibly incriminating things in the Epstein files.
And when they say they didn't, they're just lying.
And in secret, because they're very humble people, they don't need positive press coverage or credit.
They're very humble people, Trump officials.
They're known for that.
And in secret, while they're pretending they didn't find anything, in reality, they found the Fort Knox of sex trafficking.
They see the whole map of all the global sex traffickers who ran the Epstein ring, and they're going after them, they're busting them, they're arresting them.
But they're doing it in secret because they believe that they're willing to take the political hit for all of us to rid the world of sex trafficking.
Here were the MAGA people, much more representative though, who understandably feel very betrayed.
A lot of these people were told to their face that these files existed, the Epstein filed, the client list existed, that evidence of his murder existed, and it was all going to come out.
They were told that by the very people in charge of these agencies.
Here's Benny Johnson, who we watched Cash Patel tell those things to, who said this today, quote, Jeffrey Epstein and Ghazaine Maxwell were both charged by the feds for operating a massive sex trafficking ring that involved, quote, thousands of victims.
They were both found guilty in federal court.
One of their clients is pictured here, Prince Andrew, the Duke of York.
He paid an Epstein victim tens of millions of dollars for her silence, Virginia Roberts' story is horrific and well documented.
Now she's dead.
To say there are thousands of victims in a convicted sex trafficking ring, and then to say there were no customers when the operation happened right before our very eyes insults our intelligence.
Here's Mike Cernovich, one of the people they invited to the White House, unbeknownst to him, to participate in that utter scam.
He said, quote, no one is believing the Epstein cover-up.
President Trump, this will be part of your legacy.
There's still time to change it.
Jack Posevich said this, quote, when will Attorney General Pam Bondi be filing to unseal the Epstein files from the criminal case we were promised everything.
And that is something I really am happy to see because I watched a lot of establishment liberals, liberal pundits, who constantly accuse MAGA supporters of being mindless, brainless, worshipful followers of Donald Trump who don't question anything he does.
And it's such projection because so many DNC pundits, so many liberal establishment journalists and operatives were so singularly and maniacally devoted to Joe Biden and the Democratic Party that they actually lied and concealed his cognitive decline from the world.
That's how far they were willing to go to protect him.
They lied and said that the Hunter Biden laptop that showed incriminating evidence about Joe Biden was Russian disinformation when the whole time it was obviously authentic.
They lie constantly to protect the Democrats.
The only criticism they ever offer Democrats is, oh, you should be more aggressive to win the election, but they don't criticize them on the merits.
Mogger people have been much more candid and honest about holding their leaders, including Donald Trump, to account when, as they did today, they betrayed their promises or lied to them so blatantly than liberals have ever done that as far as I've watched with the Democratic Party.
So it's good to see, but at the same time, one of two things is true.
Either all these people realize that everything they've been saying for the last four years about the Epstein case is utter and complete bullshit and was a total lie.
They've been smearing people and maligning their reputations unjustly, accusing them of participating in a cover-up of pedophilia or themselves being pedophiles.
And now they discover that everything they've been saying for the last four years is actually a lie, but they're not apologizing to the people who they've been smearing.
Or they are now participating in a cover-up for whatever their reasons and have become exactly what they spent four years viciously condemning and are doing exactly the things that they spent so long vowing to fight against and to reverse.
I don't know which one's worse.
They're both very, very bad.
And that's why a lot of even the hardest score MAGA faithful are unwilling or unable to pretend that there's not something deeply disturbing going on here.
Music Are privacy concerns keeping you up at night?
Privacy is extremely important for every human being.
Sam Altman recently announced that ChatGPT can now reference all your past conversations, feeding on your conversations, storing them, analyzing them, reacting to them, shaping the responses based on them.
Do you feel comfortable knowing that an AI platform chaired by our former intelligence official has access to all your thoughts and dreams?
Luckily, there's a promising alternative.
It's Venice AI.
Venice AI lets you use AI without handing over your sensitive information.
They utilize leading open source AI models to deliver text code and image generation directly to your web browser.
And the interface looks really impressive.
There's no downloads, no installations, and your conversation history is stored only in your browser, keeping your privacy intact.
With Venice AI, you can ask it to explore simulating hypotheticals about future events, generate images without restrictions, upload PDFs or summaries, and even modify how Venice interacts with you.
And with their ProPlan, you can do all of that without any limitations.
I've used Venice AI, and I do think it's a game changer, especially on the privacy grounds.
I can ask it anything without worrying about my data being shared or my inquiries being saved on some server.
It's very versatile.
It allows me to switch between different models and generate unique images.
If you want to use AI without fear of handing over your most intimate thoughts, you can get 20% off of a pro plan using my link, venice.ai slash Glenn.
Don't miss out on this opportunity.
Click the link in the description and use the code Glenn to get started today.
Click the link in the description and click the link in the description.
Probably no word, there's probably no word that has been more significant and influential and central in shaping not just our foreign policy, but also our domestic policy, our civil rights, our civil liberties, government powers, than the word terrorist or terrorism.
Obviously it became an extremely crucial term after 9-11.
An entire war was declared against terrorism, the war on terror.
It became the foundation for bombing whoever we wanted, killing whoever we wanted, invading whatever countries, overthrowing governments, but also very aggressively revoking core rights or at least eroding them with things like the Patriot Act and war with surveillance and kidnapping people off the streets and due process free imprisonment, all based on the idea that we have terrorists who are threatening us and we have to go after the terrorists.
And always the issue was the word terrorist is a newly invented term over the last many decades.
There's a history of how the term has been used and it really doesn't have a very fixed meaning because so often people we call terrorists one day become freedom fighters the next or vice versa, depending on not what they're doing.
They don't change what they're doing.
They don't change what they believe.
They just change what cause they're serving.
And there's a cliché that I think is very actually illustrative, which is that one person's terrorist is another person's freedom fighter.
We funded and heralded and loved the predecessor to al-Qaeda, the Mujahideen, in Afghanistan.
We funded them, we armed them.
They Came to the White House, Ronald Reagan heralded them because at the time they were our allies fighting against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan.
And then after 9-11, those same groups became the terrorists we had to eradicate because now they were no longer fighting against the Soviet Union but against the United States.
And to the extent it means anything, I think the common understanding of the word terrorism has meant the use of violence against civilians or the threat of the use of violence against civilians in order to achieve political aims.
I'm blowing up this building because I want to put pressure on you to stop doing this thing we don't want you to do.
We want to force you to leave our country, so we're going to attack civilian infrastructure or we're going to threaten to do so.
That's what terrorism has always meant.
Now it means basically nothing.
It just means whatever you want it to mean.
But whatever it meant over the last 25 years, one thing was for sure.
If anybody was a terrorist, it was al-Qaeda.
I mean, that was what we were told.
That was our new existential enemy.
It replaced the Soviet Union.
It was terrorism, no longer communism, the terrorist group Al-Qaeda that attacked the United States at 9-11, that was hell-bent on attacking the West again.
Multiple mass casualty terrorist attacks were blamed on Al-Qaeda, including the 20th anniversary today, July 7th, 2005.
Hundreds of British people were killed when Al-Qaeda attacked the British, the London train system and blew up a train.
A similar attack in Spain, U.S. assets all throughout the region.
Al-Qaeda is the epitome of terrorism.
And it wasn't just in Iraq, it wasn't just in Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan.
It was also in Syria.
We were told Syria had a very dangerous affiliate of al-Qaeda's.
And those Syrian affiliates were put where you'd think they would be put, which is on the foreign terrorist list, the list of official terrorists.
And the leader of that affiliate, that al-Qaeda affiliate in Syria, was Mohammed al-Jalani.
And his group was on the list of official terrorists, groups, which gave the U.S. government power to do whatever he want.
And he himself was deemed an al-Qaeda terrorist.
And the government paid $10 million, offered $10 million for someone who would kill him or give information about his whereabouts.
And they had that up on their list until yesterday, the foreign official terrorist designation list, until yesterday, or actually until this morning, when Marco Rubio issued this announcement on behalf of the U.S. State Department, quote, title, revoking the foreign terrorist organization designation of Hayat Tahir al-Sham.
Quote, in line with President Trump's May 13th promise to deliver sanctions relief to Syria, I am announcing my intent to revoke the foreign terrorist organization designation of the al-Nusra Front, also known as Hayat Tahir al-Sham under the Immigration and Nationality Act.
The revocation will be effective tomorrow, July 8th.
This is the last day that al-Qaeda's affiliates in Syria are designated terrorist organizations.
Tomorrow's action follows the announced dissolution of HTS and the Syrian government's commitment to combat terrorism in all its forms.
This FTO revocation is an important step in fulfilling President Trump's vision of a stable, united, and peaceful Syria.
Syria is neither stable nor united nor peaceful.
The previous terrorist group and the previous al-Qaeda terrorists who now lead Syria have overseen the slaughter of LLA Christians and religious minorities throughout Syria.
They haven't changed at all in terms of their tactics, their beliefs.
What has changed is that they are willing to be subservient to the U.S. and Israel and to take marching orders from the U.S. and Israel.
They allowed Israel to overflight rights when they went and attacked Iran.
They're about to join the Abraham Accords where they're going to officially recognize Israel and have official Syria.
So our new friends in Al-Qaeda are no longer terrorists because now they do our bidding.
They're not killing fewer people.
They're not respecting the lives of civilians anymore than they did before.
They're just working with us instead of against us, which means they're no longer terrorists.
That's the only definition, effective operational definition of terrorism.
Here, NBC News, December 20th, 2024, not even six months ago.
Quote, U.S. to lift the $10 million bounty on the de facto Syrian leader's head.
The rebel group leader continues to commit to preventing terrorist threats to U.S. and its allies.
Right.
They're not going to allow terrorist threats to the U.S., though they're still going to commit them in Syria for their own purposes.
They're still terrorists.
They're still killing civilians for political ends.
But we no longer consider them a terrorist organization because they're doing it against people we're fine with them doing it against.
This was on the U.S. Department of State site on the day that Al-Jalani entered Damascus.
There you see it.
It's stop this terrorist.
That's the language of the Justice Department.
Again, this is not 10 years ago.
This is less than six months ago.
Stop this terrorist.
Here's a picture of him looking all terrorist-y on purpose.
Here's his name, Mohammed al-Jalani.
And it says reward for justice, up to $10 million reward.
And it talks about how he has long been with al-Qaeda.
I don't know if I can enlarge this, but he's killed Americans.
He's used all kinds of terrorism.
Here, Muhammad al-Jalani, here's the text that's down here at the bottom, also known as Abu Muhammad al-Ghulani, also known as Muhammad al-Jalani, is the senior leader of the terrorist organization, the Al-Nustra Fund, ANF, al-Qaeda's affiliate in Syria.
This is December 2024.
This group is al-Qaeda's affiliate in Syria.
Under al-Jawani's leadership, ANF has carried out multiple terrorist attacks throughout Syria, often targeting civilians.
The U.S. government is offering a reward of up to $10 million for information about al-Jawani.
Absolute confidentiality is assured, and relocation may be available.
If you have information, please contact the nearest U.S. Embassy.
When he marched into Damascus, I went to the U.S. site and I said, I know where he is.
He's in Damascus.
Please send my $10 million.
I think I have back a form letter saying, no, you have to give us non-public information.
That's how absurd all of this was.
Here's Tulsi Gabbard when she was testifying before the Senate Intelligence Committee in January of this year, and she was talking about al-Qaeda's Syria affiliate and Al-Jalani particularly.
What unsettles my political opponents is I refuse to be their puppet.
I have no love for Assad or Gaddafi or any dictator.
I just hate al-Qaeda.
I hate that we have leaders who cozy up to Islamist extremists, minimizing them to so-called rebels.
As Jake Sullivan said to Hillary Clinton, quote, Al-Qaeda is on our side in Syria.
Well, Syria is now controlled by an al-Qaeda offshoot, HTS, led by an Islamist jihadist who danced in the streets on 9-11 and who was responsible for the killing of many American service members.
There was Tulsi Gabbard explaining why she never looked at the Assad government as this mortal enemy because the alternative was al-Qaeda, which Tulsi Gabbard was taught was America's greatest existential threat.
That's why she went to Afghanistan and Iraq and enlisted in the army to go fight against them because she believed it.
Now she's saying, you're attacking me because I was sympathetic to the Assad regime, which protected religious minorities when the alternative was having al-Qaeda rule Syria?
Here's the memo that Jake Sullivan wrote to Hillary Clinton in 2012 when the Obama administration was running a very expensive and bloody dirty war led by the CIA to try and depose Assad, destroyed all of Syria.
We only know about this because WikiLeaks published it.
And one of the part of the text was, see the last item, Al-Qaeda is on our side in Syria.
Otherwise, things have basically turned out as expected.
They were allies in Syria.
We just pretended they weren't.
And now we're open about the fact that they are.
Here is Donald Trump after he met with Jelani, who now has a much nicer, more westernized name.
That's his war name that they no longer use now that he took off all of that Middle East clothing and puts on Armani suits.
Here's Trump talking about Jelani, who he had just met, shook hands with, welcomed while he was in Saudi Arabia.
How did you find the Syrian president?
Great.
Great Medic, very good.
Young, attractive guy, tough guy.
You know, stroke pass.
Does that worry you at all?
He's got a real shot at pulling it together.
Real strong, real tough.
Yeah, he was an al-Qaeda leader who the United States wanted to kill so badly that it offered $10 million for information leading to his arrest.
And, you know, Trump does, in his defense, like strong leaders, even if they're dictators.
He has a respect for President Xi, he has a respect for President Putin, for Kim Jong-un, for Nicholas Maduro.
If someone's really tough or strong in Trump's view of what strength and toughness is, he has respect for those people.
And here he's saying, like, he has a strong past.
Strong, he was an al-Qaeda leader who, as Tulsi Gabbard said, killed large numbers of Americans, engaged in terrorism, still is overseeing the slaughter of religious minorities, but he's now one of ours.
He does what we tell him to do.
He serves our interests.
So he's officially no longer a terrorist.
His al-Qaeda group, no longer on the list of terrorism.
Back in 2002, this was April of 2002, barely six months after 9-11, Noam Chomsky, to his eternal credit, one of the great things that he did, was one of the very few people immediately willing to stand up after 9-11 and warn of the authoritarianism that was coming in the name of fighting terrorism,
but also questioning all of the propaganda that was being issued to justify everything that was about to come, including the definition of terrorism.
And he was being questioned by this young, very typical neocon Evan Solomon, whose every question was obviously basically saying, it was disputing everything Chomsky was saying from a neocon perspective.
But Chomsky, it was one of the great interviews.
I really recommend the whole thing if you want to see what that climate was like and Chomsky's unique ability to dismantle propaganda.
I understand people have problems with him because of what he did during COVID.
This is 20 years earlier about a completely different topic.
So just try and put that aside.
Here is what Chomsky said about the definition of terrorism.
How do you distinguish between that kind of what you describe as terrorism and what they are saying, Osama bin Laden, who's a terrorist?
Make the distinction.
That's very simple.
If they do it, it's terrorism.
If we do it, it's counterterrorism.
That's a historical universal.
Go back to Nazi propaganda, say, most extreme mass murderers ever.
If you look at Nazi propaganda, it's exactly what they said.
They said they're defending the populations and the legitimate governments of Europe.
Does that disqualify the U.S. from intervening in any other way?
Look, the Taliban are a terrorist state.
That fact doesn't disqualify them from bombing Washington.
What disqualifies from doing that is even if they were Mahatma Gandhi, they shouldn't do it.
Nobody except the ultra-right-wing jinguists like Kaplan is comparing atrocities by various countries.
What honest people are saying is that we should pay attention to our own crimes and stop committing them.
This would be true even if we were killing one person, okay?
And it's even more true when we're killing millions of people.
So that's always been the definition of terrorism.
It's been a very malleable term.
It basically means nothing, even though it was the linchpin of not just the propaganda justifying our foreign and domestic policy for the last 25 years, but also shaping the policies themselves.
While the United States was removing al-Qaeda's affiliate in Syria from the designated list of terrorist organizations, the UK was adding groups to theirs.
And one of the groups they added is a group called Palestine Action, which is a group of British subjects.
I guess if you want to be generous citizens, subjects of the crown, it's a monarchy.
And they are people who protest not just the Israeli destruction of Gaza, but the role of the UK government, their government, in arming and financing that and in enabling it through intelligence and the like.
And they have had some members who have engaged in what is called direct action.
They've entered military bases where some of the planes that the British government uses to help Israel were vandalized or damaged as part of that protest.
They haven't killed anybody.
They haven't threatened to kill anybody.
They haven't threatened the use of violence against civilians for political aim, the traditional definition of terrorism, the way Al-Qaeda and Syria has, even though they're no longer terrorists.
But they were nonetheless added to the list of prohibited groups under the Terrorism Act.
So they're basically being characterized as a terrorist or an extremist organization.
And the Metropolitan Police of London, over the weekend, issued this statement because there was a pro-Palestinian or anti-Israel protest in London.
And in advance of that protest, the Metropolitan Police, their official statement, posted this on various social media platforms, quote, update on policing in London following the prescription of Palestine action.
Quote, Palestine action has now been prescribed by the prescribed by the UK government and expressing support for them is a criminal offense in the UK.
So if you want to go and say, I believe Palestine action is being unjustly persecuted, I believe they have a just cause, even if you're not a member of this group, just defending them itself is a crime.
Quote, there are a number of events taking place in London this weekend, and anyone attending should be aware that officers policing these will act where criminal offenses, including those related to support of prescribed groups or organizations, are committed.
Under the Terrorism Act of 2000, the Home Secretary may prescribe an organization if they believe it is concerned in terrorism and it is proportionate to do so.
Prescription makes it a criminal offense to invite or express support for a prescribed organization through chanting, wearing clothes, or displaying articles such as flags, signs, or logos.
So for those keeping track at home, Al-Qaeda affiliate in Syria, not a terrorist group as of tomorrow.
Palestine Action, a group that has never used violence against anybody, is a terrorist group.
And not only are they legally banned, but you will be arrested if you're in the UK and you even wave a flag supporting them.
One of the people that they arrested under this announcement was an 83-year-old woman who identified as being a supporter of Palestine action.
And the Daily Mail, when the commissioner of the police was asked on the BBC, like, is this really a worthwhile use of police resources with all this crime going around to arrest an 83-year-old woman, a British woman, because she's protesting against this action and the war in Gaza?
Quote, justice has no age limit, Warrens met commissioner after Palestine action protester 83 is arrested.
Quote, the head of the Metropolitan Police has said the law, quote, does not have an age limit after an 83-year-old Reverend, she's a reverend, a Christian reverend, was arrested for supporting Palestine action, which has been banned as a terror group.
Reverend Sue Parfit, 83, who sat in a camp chair with placards at her feet, appeared to have been taken away by officers, quote, if you're supporting prescribed organizations, then the law is going to be enforced.
J.D. Vance went to Europe and denounced the EU and the UK for these kinds of censorship measures, their attacks on free speech.
He never mentioned one of the most common forms of censorship, which is against people protesting Israel.
I'm sure he won't mention this, but this is a very extreme expression, and it's all based on the idea that this group, again, never harmed anybody, never attacked anybody, never used violence against anybody.
It's somehow a terrorist group.
By the way, even if several of their members had to use violence, it doesn't justify banning the entire group.
It would be like on January 6th, and I've long argued that the significance of January 6th has been wildly exaggerated.
I've done debates arguing about the stupidity of calling that an insurrection.
To me, it's a protest turned into a riot that happens a lot where sometimes the most aggressive and violent members end up fighting with the police.
But if you believe that a group can be declared a terrorist organization because of a few of its members commit property damage, then what do you say about a movement, the Trump movement, the MAGA movement that has individuals going to the Capitol and beating the crap out of police officers and then being pardoned by President Trump after they're convicted of using violence?
It would be like saying, oh, we're going to ban the Trump movement.
We're going to ban MAGA movement.
You can't wave a MAGA sign any longer because several members engage in violence.
It would be such a grotesque attack on free speech.
The idea that MAGA movement is a terrorist organization would be preposterous.
But they did try and say it was an insurrectionary movement.
That was the basis for banning it from Facebook and Twitter.
And these are very similar attacks on free speech, all based on the idea that Palestine Action is a terrorist group while al-Qaeda's affiliates in Syria are not.
And I hope this demonstrates conclusively and forever How utterly empty and concocted and fake and fictitious this idea of terrorism or terrorists is, even though it continues to be used as the primary justification for everything we do, from censoring people to bombing Iran, the main sponsor of state terror.
It's really just one of the most manipulated and malleable terms of propaganda.
And I hope when you hear it, you will think about that.
All right, given the time, we're going to leave our third segment, which is about Trump's statements regarding the prosecution of Bolsonaro in Brazil and the response of Brazil's President Lula de Silva and the implications of it to tomorrow.
I think there might actually be some developments in the U.S.-Brazilian relationship over the next 24 hours.
So it might make sense anyway to do it when there's some news.
I do want to cover it.
I think it's an important topic.
We'll definitely get to it tomorrow or Wednesday.
But given what I felt like were the two most important topics and the time we took to delve into them, we're going to go ahead and leave that for tomorrow.
All right, so that concludes the show for this evening.
As a reminder, System Update is also available in podcast form.
You can listen to every episode 12 hours after their first broadcast live here on Rumble, on Spotify, Apple, all major podcasting platforms.
If you rate, review, and follow our program on those podcasting platforms, it does actually help spread the visibility of the show.
Finally, as independent media, independent journalists, we do rely on support from you, our viewers, members.
To join our locals community, you can simply click the red join button right below the video player on the Rumble page.
It will take you to that community, which provides all sorts of unique benefits, exclusive video, segments, and interviews.
We take all your questions from local members.
Then we do a Q ⁇ A show on Friday night where we answer questions solely from our local members.
We stream there exclusively sometimes.
We put professionalized transcripts of every show we broadcast here.
We put those there the next day.
But most of all, it's the community on which we really do rely.
To support the independent journalism that we do here every night, simply click that join button and it will take you directly there.
For those of you who've been watching this show, we are, of course, very appreciative.
And we hope to see you back tomorrow night and every night at 7 p.m. Eastern Live, exclusively here on Rumble.
