Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Feb. 9, 2025 - Info Warrior - Jason Bermas

01:01:07

Mashing It Up With Mel K

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Welcome back to the Mel K Show!
	My favorite guy out there who's been covering all the insanity for way, way longer than most.
	Jason Bermas is back with us.
	Thank you for joining me, sir.
	Thank you so much for having me.
	Wow week, right?
	Mel, like first week of the new Trump 2.0.
	And look, you know, I did my Black Pill panel with Derek Brose and Steve and T-Lab.
	And look, everything we talked about.
	Is absolutely real on what we need to hold to account and what may be negative for the administration.
	But obviously I came at it from a much more positive perspective than I think probably anybody else on the panel.
	There was no denying even amongst them Ross Ulbricht, the January 6th pardons.
	And even though they were skeptical...
	Of what we're going to get with these declassifications on the documents.
	If we get the real documents, and that's a big if, right?
	I'm not in imagination land.
	We'll see.
	But if we get them, it's a feather in this guy's cap.
	You know, I would say, other than the Ellison, Stargate, Sam Altman, the overall tech bro thing, because we could talk Musk.
	All day and night.
	That's an issue that I have not softened on and I will not soften on.
	So while everybody's talking about a Nazi salute, you better beware of what his actual projects are, the defense contracting, what this whole we're going to Mars things about.
	It's fantasy land, folks.
	Even today, and this is what's wild to me, Mel.
	The intelligence apparatus is at least visually shifting for the public.
	So there's two major announcements out there.
	One, the CIA has basically endorsed the lab leak theory.
	I've never endorsed that theory.
	I have only endorsed the facts that you can tell that this is a virus that was created through a network of state-run institutions.
	And private organizations, EcoHealth, China, the United States, you know, you could talk about Chapel Hill, you know, University of New York's that were involved.
	I mean, there is a path of plausible deniability, but it's an international operation.
	Then it's leaked out of one place, that lab blame shift to China, okay?
	Right.
	I don't buy that.
	But that's the shift in the narrative, which is far away from, again, what Bill Gates was trying to sell you on, and I played the clip of it, where all the evidence, it's a natural bat virus.
	Okay, or a pangolin, or soup, I don't know.
	Whatever they told us at the time.
	The other big one that they're putting out now is they are doubling and tripling down on this narrative of a Chinese spy balloon.
	When from the very beginning...
	China said, hey, this balloon is part of a surveillance weather network.
	Okay?
	And no one understands that we have an international satellite network that is held up by balloons that is under, okay, under the region in which these things actually get into orbit.
	Okay?
	They've been around forever.
	And especially in the Arctic region.
	As we put up more satellites that go into orbit, we also put more of these up.
	And as we have more things, mistakes are made.
	Now, I don't think this was purposeful, but it was very strategic to blame China on this balloon.
	And it was close to a military base and yada, yada, yada.
	We better watch out.
	You know, this is like TikTok scare times 100. Times a thousand.
	We need to get off that.
	We need to get into reality, okay?
	We need to understand that this, like, and again, this is something we talked about in that panel, Mel.
	This push now towards automation, tokenization, artificial intelligence is extremely real.
	Mark Zuckerberg, now that he is all bro'd out and sitting up with the gang and he's got a gold necklace on, just announced his new AI data center.
	That's going to cost $60 to $65 billion.
	Have you seen the size of what it's going to be, Mal?
	Like five football fields or something ludicrous like that?
	I wish it were only five football fields.
	Oh, my God.
	Can you imagine?
	Again, Trump, to his credit, has been talking about this now.
	For some time, he talks about the power it's going to take.
	And he's really the only one talking about it.
	And remember, these companies have now talked about the fact that they're going to be building these mini nuclear centers, right?
	These fourth, fifth generation that may not go to the public.
	I'm hoping with Trump in the administration, the public can utilize this as well.
	But let's take a look at what one of these data centers is going to look like in comparison.
	So what you're looking at is lower Manhattan.
	And the purple area right there.
	Well, Mel, that's not four or five football stadiums, is it?
	That is literally a large portion of New York City that if you take a look at the city blocks there encompassing it, it is about five square city blocks.
	Easily, all the way around.
	I mean, it's crazy.
	This is the first one.
	It's not going to be a one-story facility either.
	You would imagine something like this is going to be probably about five to ten stories up, and then it's going to also have an underground facility and basement.
	This thing is, I mean, I know you've been to New York City.
	For anybody that has not been to New York City, that is like...
	The equivalent of even on trekking on foot, that's probably about a one, one and a half hour walk end to end, not around by any means.
	I've walked that for sure.
	Yeah, exactly.
	It's a long one.
	Most people are taking the subway.
	So, you know, given this, I think that we have to be really, really cautious on what we allow and what we stand up and say no to.
	Because listen, we do have ears out there.
	We are being listened to.
	RFK is a big mea culpa.
	Let's be realistic.
	Yeah.
	Yeah, you know, and about those centers, too, I have to say that Google has announced one.
	BlackRock has announced one.
	Bezos has announced...
	A couple, you know, 14 towers.
	So it makes the smart city, 15-minute city make a lot more sense that they have to shove us all into Ready Player One and the metaverse so that they can run it all on the digital public infrastructure, not to mention how much water and fossil fuels.
	And all different kinds of natural resources will be necessary to run them.
	I mean, basically, they're planning their dystopian transhuman future, fourth industrial revolution, and just telling us, don't worry, it'll be okay.
	We're not going to fringe on your lives or your space when it's the exact opposite.
	Well, let's talk about just these data centers alone.
	Number one, you're absolutely right when you're talking about water and traditional energy, when you're talking about...
	What it's going to take to staff these things, right?
	Because they're obviously not knocking down Manhattan.
	That's just a visual representation, folks.
	They're going to put that in a very rural yet accessible area where suburbia or smaller cities will be able to at least build and then manage them in the beginning.
	There's going to be a lot of automation in there, obviously.
	NVIDIA right now, which is like the top stock company out there, the most valuable, is already running digital twins on a lot of these operations.
	But here's the thing.
	When we talk about nuclear energy, it has largely been demonized and these things are going to be new.
	We'll see how much deregulation they're going to be able to get because my guess is that these things are going to be utilized via some defense contract.
	It's going to be part of national security for access to these AI centers.
	And the power that is created from them is not necessarily going to be utilized by the general populace, only this data center.
	So like you said, the traditional stuff of gas, etc., electric, oil, that's all going to be for the people that surround it and the surrounding areas.
	You've got to wonder if this stuff works so great, why aren't we circumventing it and utilizing it for the public as well, right?
	And that's a question that I think people are going to start asking.
	But we also have to see how quickly these things go up, how efficient that power is.
	And, you know, AI right now still is a very different thing, Mel, than I think we're going to...
	Identify as AI in just five years.
	So that acceleration through this administration, I mean, what's the big news story today?
	This DeepSeek, which is China's AI that they've put out there.
	I would encourage people to really think about what's going on.
	Marc Andreessen has been just absolutely phenomenal.
	I'm sure you've seen some of the clips in these interviews.
	For those not aware of Andreessen, he's a billionaire.
	That's now kind of talking openly about his work with the government and contracting, especially in the arena of AI and how he was told it was basically a walled-off garden.
	And he said, well, what do you mean by that?
	He goes, isn't the math for AI out there?
	He goes, yeah, but if we have to, we'll just classify what we need to, just like we did large sections of physics from the research community in the Cold War.
	Cold War started in the 50s and 60s, folks.
	How much technology and physics has been walled off?
	That's a huge question that Andre said.
	Absolutely.
	Again, if you think it's UFOs that are aliens, guys, they have 70 plus years of classification on the science, on the real science.
	That's something to think about.
	Now, as far as walled gardens go with AI. Another thing that Andreessen just said was it was just like mind-blowing and a lot of people missed it.
	So traditionally, Mel, we're told that Ray Kurzweil, who no doubt is a genius, is the guy that developed software that Dragon, which is basically voice-to-text.
	So this was, back in the day, it was the first commercial software, etc.
	Well, now we have...
	Mark Andreessen coming out and saying, well, actually, in the 90s, they already had large language models they were using with DARPA and other programs, which we know about.
	And he goes, somebody just got LLAMA, which is a large language model that does voice-to-text, okay?
	And not just like voice-to-text, but it's beyond, say, Siri.
	It's more like ChatGPT.
	They got it running on Windows 98. And Mark said, think about that for a moment.
	If they wanted to commercially release these large language models in the 90s, we all could have been talking to our computers like we're talking to ChatGPT then.
	That, I mean, no one's reported, I don't know, other than the forum he said, and no one's really thought about the significance of that.
	But that's hugely significant.
	So that lets you know that you're in a three-plus decade period.
	With technology that is now just being streamlined on a consumer level and we really don't know what else they've done in the past.
	Exactly, exactly.
	And yeah, he's been exposing a lot.
	I just played a clip on my other show of him saying that all the ASG stuff and the social credit stuff is all coming from Larry Fink, who he calls, and he calls it retarded, and he said, I'm sorry.
	But all this stuff that's ruining the world, Larry Fink's like the champion of.
	I see also just at the World Economic Forum, a lot of the panels were about AI and all of the things that you're saying.
	A couple of panels about water.
	And I think people need to start looking at why this whole war on fossil fuels and water in relation to AI in terms of what you just said, that this is a long game playing out that we haven't known about, but that quite honestly, if you look back to when Limits of Growth came out and Al Gore and all his friends and Clinton and Obama, they're down there in Rio and they start the whole global climate issues and global all of this.
	It does seem like the long-game plan is to capture all of these resources to run the technocracy AI. And that's what scares me the most about Ellison and everyone else, is I don't think people understand what technocracy is.
	Because I look at China, and when I trace the money in China, and I find Google China and Sidewalk and all these other things there, it does appear to me that the model in China, like many other things, is really the model for everyone.
	And that the whole endgame...
	Really, for technocracy was to have the whole world under that, under the guise of security or making us safe.
	So for me, Jason, I look at China and I see China as a technocracy.
	And a technocracy meaning a society that's efficiently run by technology with, you know, everyone conforming, full track and trace surveillance, all of that.
	I don't want that.
	I don't think most people want that.
	But nobody's looking at the technocracy model that has been around since the 30s.
	And I believe Elon Musk's grandfather was involved in Technocracy, Inc.
	So that's when I saw Ellison come up.
	And then I am not a fan of Sam Altman.
	See him come up and I'm thinking, and I know Elon Musk is a technocrat.
	All these people in my mind, the technocracy mentality.
	As God and humans make mistakes, but technology doesn't, and if they can harness technology to run the planet, resources, people, everything, then everything will be more efficient.
	And it ends there.
	And everything else is about money.
	But technocracy is something I think people need to understand.
	What are your thoughts on the long game plan that might have been playing out?
	Because Brzezinski did not hide it.
	And he was an advisor, both him and Kissinger, until Trump fired Kissinger.
	But Brzezinski's whole thing was technocracy.
	So I recently watched this video of just this guy traveling in China.
	I forget what the shtick was, but he's middle-aged.
	I think he was bankrupt at one point.
	He goes around.
	He doesn't know Mandarin.
	It's not like he's cultured.
	Everything he had to do was through his smartphone.
	He traveled quite a bit.
	Number one, let me say this.
	There are aspects of it that were very appealing to him.
	I mean, the trains were super clean.
	It's almost like you're in a hotel in some of them, etc.
	The hotels were cheap.
	At one point, he gets cut off from the app that he's using and he just can't get on the next train.
	And he has to go.
	No one takes cash.
	And the thing is that like...
	In some of the areas, it looks great, right?
	And then he goes to some of the rural areas, and I forget what he gets done, but he's in, like, what you would, like, look at as almost like a second-world slum, but still just crazy the way it's built.
	Like, at one point, you think you're in a neighborhood.
	That is level on the ground and it's so massive and then you look down and they're actually like three stories up.
	It's pretty wild.
	I would encourage everybody to see this guy travel through China for like a really good indicator of how things work.
	And he had to get, I think, something sewed up.
	So he goes over to these women in this kind of area that, like, I wouldn't have been able to tell whether it was, like, Singapore or Thailand or any of those nations, right?
	And it's a group of women, and they're kind of flirting with them, and they all know a little bit of English, and they're asking him if he's single, and they're doing his thing.
	And at the end of it, he goes to pay, and once again, there's just no money.
	Now, they don't make him pay, but even in this little spot where, like, they're on, like, a...
	Rotting picnic table like the one we were at when we were in North Carolina.
	You know what I'm talking about.
	Yeah.
	There's a QR code to pay.
	Like, you can't give them anything else.
	Everything is digitized.
	So I think you're right.
	That model still exists of they want a track, trace, database, surveillance society that, again, if your apps don't work, nothing works.
	That's very, very troublesome.
	Now, I want to go back.
	Really, to what you started with, with resources and in particular water when it comes to this technocratic agenda.
	I often talk about NASA and that 2025 document.
	We're here.
	We're here.
	And you can check off the boxes of everything that has come to fruition.
	That's the Bushnell document we did on the show?
	Yes.
	I wanted to revisit it with you.
	I'm glad you brought it up.
	Great.
	Go ahead.
	The really funny thing is, what is Dennis Bushnell touring with and what's the main point of that document?
	It's that fresh water is running out.
	We're running out of fresh water.
	So once again, they're creating this scenario where that's the crisis.
	Remember, NASA was big, big into the global warming stuff, even the global cooling stuff before that.
	They're the people that normalized and brought us these large wind farms.
	They were doing those experiments in the 70s.
	And Bushnell is going around and not only talking about water in the sense of fresh water, but equating that's in the document as well with what?
	Population stabilization and control.
	All these other technocratic agendas that go around resources.
	And one of the solutions that's given...
	Is utilizing salt water to grow algaes and other things as both food and energy sources.
	And whether or not...
	You believe that's possible.
	They've run the experiments he's always talking about.
	But those are the talking points.
	So people need to realize that these talking points that are now being thrown out in the WEF have been around for decades.
	Decades.
	And it always comes down to the fact, what?
	That we live in a place of scarcity, not abundance.
	Even though the abundance is all around us.
	And you're telling me, you're so worried.
	About fresh water that in 2025 we just still can't find a way to economically and equitably desalinize ocean water or seawater, saltwater, etc.
	I have to believe that?
	Come on.
	The planet is like...
	85% liquid.
	And that's the next cell that we just don't have enough for us pesky human beings.
	100% because there was a panel there talking about doing the same thing they did with carbon and carbon credits with water.
	And this goes back to Whitney Webb's work on the natural asset class and companies from COP. 26, I think.
	Where Bloomberg and the New York Stock Exchange were going to put all natural resources on a new stock exchange.
	I mean, it's the whole thing again.
	But the lie is that they need that to run their technocratic world.
	And they need to limit it to us because they are God and they get to decide who gets it.
	I mean, it's that...
	It's clear to me that it's just the same model over and over.
	I really hope people are starting to see it.
	Do you think people are starting to see it?
	I did notice that the US did not put out the people that were attending the World Economic Forum.
	I couldn't find a list anywhere.
	That's the first time since I've been following it for six years, I didn't see a list of US government and company CEOs going to Davos.
	Second, it was a lot more low-key.
	A lot of people weren't covering it.
	I did with Noor all week.
	But what do you make of Trump's speech there and the entire looking at Davos now?
	Well, I certainly think that in some respects the wind has been taken out of their sails.
	I think that they are very aware that the global public perception An awareness of them has shifted because most people weren't really even aware of these people.
	Via COVID-1984, that changed substantially.
	At the same time, there are a lot of people that are locked into the idea that these are the big dogs.
	They're the mouthpieces.
	Certainly, there are big dogs there for sure, but we need to be...
	Just as, if not more, concerned about Jen Stoltenberg coming off, heading up NATO, and now being one of the steering members of Bilderberg, right?
	That's a huge thing.
	Their meeting is now coming up in about four months.
	Like you said, Davos wasn't getting as much of a play because of the overlap.
	I mean, you had a lot of things going on, right?
	Martin Luther King Jr. Day, you had Trump coming in there in an inauguration like never before, right?
	They didn't even want it outside.
	That's another – and a lot of people said that was safety.
	They might have sold it to Trump on safety with the cold cover.
	But the truth of the matter is they did not want a visual representation of how much the country was going to come out for him.
	I guarantee it would have been record-breaking.
	No doubt about it.
	But the fact is that still didn't stop him.
	He went from the inauguration to his speech to sitting down.
	And starting to sign all these executive orders while he took a news conference.
	Okay?
	Again, you can hate the guy, the attitude, the hair.
	Like, go ahead.
	He talked to the press in more of an unscripted manner in the first 10 minutes of that than Biden did the whole administration.
	He did so coherently.
	Right?
	So that's a big shift.
	And then bring that into the World Economic Forum.
	I did a watch along with his speech, which was done remotely.
	I mean, I'm just going to be honest.
	They all seem like subservient pets.
	Like everybody in the way they spoke, you know, they had their head down.
	Even when they tried to exude confidence with their questions.
	Didn't work out.
	So one of them was a Trump ally.
	Let's get that out of the way.
	It's not like there aren't allies in the WEF. The first guy that asked the question, it's a padded question.
	But, you know, as I said on my broadcast, don't think for a minute when he's sitting there talking about the Green scam several times, that isn't him, you know, whipping out his wang dangle and taking a hot steaming coffee asparagus piss on the entire audience, right?
	Because that's exactly what that is.
	And then...
	The way he talked to the Bank of America guy, I think it should have been even stronger.
	I'm sick of this narrative of just conservatives.
	How about anybody?
	You should have said American citizens.
	Exactly.
	I agree with you 100%.
	And that's the thing.
	I get it.
	It plays well in this whole thing.
	And you know what?
	Let me discuss this just really quick.
	Conservatives have to do better.
	Traditional, new, alternative.
	You have to do better.
	What do I mean by that?
	You can't endorse Conor McGregor at the inauguration as some sort of good thing when he's coming off a sexual assault conviction that should have been criminal.
	It was horrible.
	You're the only person that I saw cover this at all.
	Exactly.
	I can't even believe it.
	And then he was at the inauguration and I thought, does nobody know?
	This is like, it's just reminiscent of them talking about Epstein, like it's about models, you know, like what is going on?
	I mean, he wasn't at the inauguration, but I'm still seeing admiration for this person, still seeing like people, Andrew Tate is not a good person.
	And not only is he not a good person, he made his money.
	Not just on cam models, but utilizing underage girls in other nations.
	So listen, if you've got a problem with Epstein and 13 and 14-year-old girls, check the tape, bros.
	I mean, they're on camera bragging about all of it.
	All right, so stop.
	Like, great.
	I love fighting.
	He's a great fighter.
	He's a great kickboxer.
	He's a bad dude.
	He's not someone...
	Is he smart?
	Yes.
	Plenty of smart, well-spoken, bad dudes.
	Do better.
	You cannot be a hypocrite and sit there, like you said, talk about an Epstein or a Puff Daddy or any of these people without looking in your own backyard.
	You don't want them.
	When I watched that the night before inauguration and McGregor being there, And I saw the RSBN, the Right Side Broadcasting News, think, oh, him and Trump have so much in common.
	And I'm like, you don't want him to have anything in common with that guy.
	That guy is a literal gangster that works with the Kinahan family that is a cocaine addict and serial abuser of women.
	Why would you want to compare him to Donald Trump?
	I don't believe that's who Donald Trump is.
	Because they don't know.
	Because they don't know.
	Because not everyone is paying attention to, you know, a lot of people.
	Look, we are in a cognitive war.
	And unfortunately, a lot of the voices that are amplified on the right really have no idea who the enemy is.
	Certainly don't understand.
	It's not left and right Republican and Democrat.
	And do not know about the regionalization model that Bilderberg and all of them are running.
	So we're always...
	Also, a lot of people, though, that have become influencers or are promoted, you know, like you and I stay stagnant on Rumble.
	We stay stagnant on X. There's a reason.
	But the ones that are super promoted never go there.
	So it's obviously not an accident.
	It is really because as long as they keep going with the left and right paradigm, nobody will ever see the real enemy.
	And I think that it's still playing out in real time.
	So, you know, let me talk about that aspect of social media that you just talked about.
	Stagging on Rumble, stagging on X. So I just did a video with Grok, okay?
	And I did it.
	For a couple reasons.
	Number one, every time I ask Grock about me, it slanders me.
	It tries to associate me with Sandy Hook and crisis actor nonsense or all that other stuff.
	It's always in like the first couple of lines.
	But if you're asking it questions about its competitors and then you ask it about itself and meritocracy, you get some interesting results.
	So for instance, I started with YouTube and I said, hey, isn't it a problem?
	With YouTube censorship that its parent company, Google, has defense contracts with the Department of Defense and NASA in the realm of artificial intelligence and quantum computing.
	Not only agreed with me, it gave like three pages of examples of how this was a danger and a conflict of interest and dogged it out.
	I'm like, all right, that's fine.
	So then, you know, you have to pay Basically, the only reason I pay for the blue checkmark is so I can live stream or put out long videos, right?
	Yeah, of course.
	I don't have the paid tier where you can become a member and subscribe.
	I'm like, it's not going to work because this isn't a meritocracy.
	So that's what I ask it.
	I ask it whether or not X is a true meritocracy.
	And we start going through it.
	And it has to admit over and over again that it's not and that there's algorithms.
	And so then...
	I actually ask it about my account compared to other accounts of a similar size and what the visibility and engagement rate is.
	And it gives me – it tries to make it sound as good as possible that my engagement rate sucks and obviously I'm being shadow banned.
	But it's like, well, wow, Jason may not be as visible as other accounts.
	You could do this and that.
	And then it starts going into the fact that, again, it's not a meritocracy.
	And yeah, we shadowban people.
	That's it.
	It's all about algorithmic.
	Like you said, they're picking and choosing winners on all of these platforms.
	So none of them are meritocracies.
	Therefore, none of them are free speech.
	Go ahead, Mel.
	Right.
	No, I wanted to say two things.
	I was kicked off after too many shows with Dr. Zelenko in 2020 of YouTube.
	After Trump won, I thought, let's just try and see if we can do a new channel.
	There's been fake ones, but not my own.
	We put it up.
	We were...
	Again, reminded we were banned for life within 24 hours.
	And people have told me when they have me on, it's like either my voice or my name, whatever.
	But then what's weird, and I know a lot of people because I see Chris from Rumble and all the Rumble people that have millions of followers.
	I did Redacted.
	I did Roseanne.
	I did Jimmy Dore.
	I didn't gain any followers on Rumble.
	I did three of the biggest shows about my book, which is really timely right now, and I noticed, yet again, no change in my...
	And this has been for over a year.
	I've had, like, maybe 200 or 300 here.
	And I've been out there a lot.
	I've been on Newsmax.
	Nothing changes.
	So I believe that it's across the board, that it is not, like you're saying, conservative or liberal platforms.
	It is a full...
	Narrative control model of some sort that I am on the wrong side of.
	So let's talk about that also because that's one of the two executive orders that I think I'm highly skeptical of and I don't know what they mean.
	And the first one would be, I'm just saying, I have no idea what they actually mean.
	So when he says that he signed an executive order taking the government out of censorship, I don't know what that means because we still don't either.
	We haven't addressed— I see no evidence of it either because I know what the NSA contract looks like, that they all connected with them.
	I keep saying to people, you know, you're telling me that since Elon Musk bought X that it's no longer controlled by the CIA and the FBI, but I've seen no evidence that it's no longer— that they ended the relationship.
	Certainly the NSA has not ended the relationship with the Five Eyes nations and the sharing data, and it looks like with some new health care thing that Palantir is going to— Enter with HHS, and then they're going to go to the NSA. So, I mean, all of this is so disturbing because, you know, me and you, I definitely think the Patriot Act is the most unconstitutional thing.
	But I don't see any changes that are transparent on any of these platforms.
	Nothing.
	Nothing at all.
	So, again, I don't know what that means.
	When we haven't had a hearing on signature reduction where you have a military outfit.
	Embedded, not just in the foreign populace, but the domestic populace, in the largest household company names in the world, that means they're in Google.
	That means they're in X. That means they're in every—there's 60,000 of them.
	In the most prestigious institutions, and they're in the defense contractors too, there's probably dozens if not hundreds in those organizations or thousands alone.
	We have to grow up.
	Second one.
	Making the cartels terrorists.
	Okay.
	What does that mean exactly when we're talking about the Central Intelligence Agency and them dealing drugs in Iran-Contra in South America?
	What does that mean for the opium fields in Afghanistan that were under control beforehand, but now all of a sudden that rushed in?
	So you've got to convince me.
	I mean, Escobar's own child.
	Has talked about how he believes his father was CIA. And we know about Barry Seal and the boys.
	And we know about Osama Bin Laden.
	I mean, I agree with you.
	They're saying things that are very superficial for people that don't know the history.
	Like, somebody just started sharing Operation Northwoods online like it's new.
	It's been out there for decades.
	You know what's funny about that?
	And that shows you the power of these narratives.
	And look.
	I don't know, Mario.
	I do know that their people have reached out to me several times, and I did do one space with them.
	Great, thank you.
	You know, Derek Brose has been on there, Vedmore, etc.
	They put that document out, right?
	And I noticed other people talking about MLK. No one's, just so everybody knows, when Trump signed that executive order, no documents, new ones have been released.
	It hasn't happened yet.
	It hasn't happened.
	People are, again, the fake news got going quick on all that stuff.
	Nafal puts that out.
	And it has such an impact that the Daily Mail that's actually done several articles on Northwoods over the years.
	It was actually James Banford and I think something Secrets.
	I'm going to butcher it.
	James Banford.
	Oh my god, that's so – how long ago is that?
	The late 90s.
	He's the guy that went into the archives and photocopied that document.
	And put it out into the public arena and then wrote about it.
	Look, before anybody else, that's who you can go to.
	James Bamford, when I still couldn't legally drink.
	And all of a sudden, in 2025, like you said, a big Twitter account puts it out and people are like, oh my god.
	Now, I saw people like actually going, you know, Burmese has talked to, Jones has talked about this for years.
	But you're right.
	A lot of people still didn't know about that document.
	Let me go one step further.
	And so, you know, I get it.
	It's a gag.
	But like, RFK Jr., when Trump announces he's going to declassify him, what speech did he quote from JFK? The Secret Society speech that, again, is the opening credits for my film, Invisible Empire, New World Order Defined, released 50...
	15 years ago now, Mel.
	Right now.
	So, like, that's a full circle that I could have never predicted.
	We'll see what the document, you know, what we get.
	I'm very, very...
	And I don't think I've talked about it on this broadcast.
	One of the reasons we should remain skeptical about those documents is I think the biggest thing that came out of Snowden.
	Now, again, for the general public, the biggest thing is they're spying on Americans.
	But if you were me...
	It's in my, again, it's in Invisible Empire.
	The NSA has had contracts since the 90s.
	Hepting versus AT&T. Norris Insight Systems and others have been spying on you forever.
	Promise Carnivore Software, whatever.
	I already knew.
	But what I had no, at least, acknowledgement of by any government agency or any individual that claimed to see documents as such was when Snowden said, what alarmed me the most...
	Is when I was looking through some of these documents, and he talked about this on the Rogan podcast.
	He's like, normally what you'll have is you'll have a bunch of blacked out stuff, redactions, and then another document with those redactions done.
	And you can look at both of them.
	He goes, I came across a document that was just completely fake to cover up the real one.
	Yeah, that's the problem.
	That's what I'm worried about.
	A, why would these people keep the real documents, first of all?
	People are really hoping for the Epstein thing.
	I don't know if it still exists.
	If it does exist, I don't think it exists in any kind of declassification option that it can.
	But why would they keep these documents if they hid them for so long?
	I think what we're going to get is exactly what you're saying, is blacked out stuff with a little bit of a, you know, you think it was a conspiracy.
	But it wasn't.
	I mean, that's why, because people, I already saw people like, Well, I just hope we don't get fake documents.
	Listen, Mel, it'll be one thing if we get, like, fully censored documents, right?
	I don't think that's coming.
	I think that, first of all, I'm not of the belief that everybody involved in the Kennedy and Martin Luther King Jr. assassination are even dead yet.
	Oh, I don't think they are either.
	No, I think that's a misnomer.
	I think, yes, largely, you want to save institutional face and you don't want to admit to the crimes of the past, but...
	When you're looking at that era, the United States was recruiting plenty of people at 18 or even younger for the military.
	And if you were in those military programs, you were really perfect for them.
	Oswald himself was a very, very young person when he did all these things, when he was going overseas to Russia, coming back.
	Going to Cuba.
	Exactly.
	Some people live into their 90s.
	They could very well still be.
	So if I see a little redaction, okay.
	Big redactions I think people will throw up.
	But again, I'm talking about just fully made-up Johnny Nonsense documents for one reason or another.
	And you talk about the destruction of documents.
	It's funny.
	When I did that interview with Giuliani, after we turned it off and we talked about Building 7 again, and I said, hey, you don't think they demoed that building, really?
	And he goes, I don't because there were so many documents in there.
	He goes, but...
	If they were trying to destroy documents, well, then that's a no-brainer.
	Hello?
	Yeah, yeah, yeah.
	I was like, well, I'd love to discuss that more.
	But he actually said if they were trying to destroy documents, that would be a really good way to do it.
	And I'm open to all the conspiracy theories at this point.
	Oh, wow.
	So, you know, one of the other things that people, what he did say on the air.
	If people doubt that he said that off-air, he talked specifically about the documents because it's in, I think, both Loose Change and Fabled Enemies.
	But they had sniper teams.
	All on the buildings surrounding the demoed World Trade Center because there were so many documents that were classified that were just floating in the wind.
	And they didn't want anybody out there just collecting these things.
	And they had units of FBI and CIA on the ground to get as much of the documentation as possible and ensure it didn't get into the wrong hands.
	Right, and when you look at who was in Building 7, it only makes sense that that might have been exactly what happened.
	I mean, I still look at Oklahoma City, and I'd like to know what really happened there, because I believe the same thing about that.
	But, you know, this is what we're dealing with.
	Since 1963, almost nobody has been held accountable within the government.
	And that's where my frustration is, because now...
	I'm sure you know that not only do I believe that the January 6th people all deserved a pardon because we do not know the facts about the setup of January 6th.
	We don't know everything.
	And these people did not get due process or discovery or anything else.
	They were deemed terrorists, thrown away, and all of that.
	But you see, the entire Democratic Party came out and, I guess, condemned the pardons of January 6th blanket pardon.
	Nobody's mentioned that Biden pardoned his family in a blanket pardon since 2014, which I'm sure that the crime started before that.
	The 2014 date should be interesting to 2024, but I don't see anyone up in arms about that, and no crime was listed.
	And he did Fauci and Millie and...
	I mean, to me, you know, a bunch of people that didn't go in the Capitol and were thrown in jail and their lives destroyed and put on lists as terrorists being, you know, pardoned is a service to the American people.
	What Biden did is the opposite.
	So, to me, I find it all very disturbing that the Biden family got a pass and nobody thought it was a problem.
	But when Trump was leaving and he wasn't going to pardon his family, that's all they talked about.
	Well, let me just say this.
	The preemptive pardon thing is totally garbage, totally dangerous.
	It's so fake.
	It needs to be looked at because we can't have this as a set precedent.
	However, I'd also like to point out, had you told me 20-plus years ago when I got into this game and started questioning things, number one, that Dick Cheney would still be alive, but two, that it's not him that would need a pardon, but his daughter.
	Would be getting a preemptive pardon for essentially crimes against the American people.
	I wouldn't have believed you.
	Like, I would have said, how does that happen?
	And yet here we are.
	And I read those pardons on air, right?
	So the 2014, obviously, is probably because there was some overt money laundering with the family, the relationships with Ukraine and China.
	You know, when I saw the original Hunter Biden, Preemptive pardon.
	I looked at it and I was like, why did they choose?
	I mean, 2014 is basically admitting to all the Burisma stuff.
	They should have just done his birthday.
	But again, I think they want that extra backhand slap in the face.
	They did the same thing with Fauci, which I think was a mistake because a lot of people, I think, wrongfully are saying like, oh, we can get him on state charges and blah, blah.
	Good luck.
	All right.
	You know what?
	And you mentioned the Biden crime family.
	Again, when I had Giuliani on, he was there to pitch his book about the Biden crime family.
	And the first five minutes, he's talking about them, their crimes and them going to jail.
	And I had to stop him.
	And I said, Rudy, stop.
	No one's going to jail.
	Let's not pretend here.
	And I just went through the reasons why.
	I mean, the guy even says on air, it's like one of the best interviews he's done.
	Because he realizes, too, that nobody's going to jail.
	I knew about it the day before, so I knew that you were going to ask him.
	There's a lot he should answer, but what you're saying right now, which is weird, is that you would have thought that, because obviously a lot of criminality happened before when he was vice president, and he didn't pardon him back.
	He could have pardoned him from 2000 forward or 2008 forward.
	So he is still, because a lot of the shell companies and stuff were established when Joe Biden was vice president, which I thought was weird.
	Yeah.
	Well, again, it's funny because I was on air during the inauguration or at least taping my shell when we only had the first round of the pardons.
	His family hadn't been pardoned yet.
	And I didn't find that out until after the show.
	And I was like, oh, he actually – because my guest was actually asking about his brother in particular where you have the overt business dealings again involving the son.
	And they waited to the very last minute, which is also pretty disgusting, right?
	Because I saw these news stories and some of the other people that you didn't mention, Kinzinger.
	Got it.
	Jamie Raskin.
	Adam Schiff.
	Adam Schiff.
	These are the worst of the worst.
	The worst of the worst.
	And their criminality is years before that time.
	I mean, crazy.
	Well, they all got pardoned in relation to January 6th because it was just such a cartoonish criminal show trial.
	One of which that we probably have never had.
	In modern-day American history, let alone my lifetime, I want to remind people they literally hired a Hollyweird producer for the television stuff, and when they were playing parts of this trial, they were playing YouTube clips of Tim Pool and Alex Jones.
	And don't forget that ABC producer is the one who would not allow Jeffrey Epstein to be reported on as well, so they picked a friend.
	Picked a very nice man.
	He's a very, very nice man.
	And you know what?
	Because you bring up Epstein so much and kind of that conversation.
	I do.
	I don't know.
	It just makes me so mad.
	No, it should.
	But like, again, I had that conversation with Rudy.
	And when he was kind of conceding to the points that, you know, there isn't going to be criminal prosecution, he starts bringing up the Hunter Biden laptop.
	And I go, Rudy, you're making my point for me.
	I go, you and I both know that Bill Barr had that laptop for 10 months before and didn't do anything with it.
	I go, Bill Barr's not your buddy.
	He's not your friend.
	And, you know, Bill Barr openly worked for Epstein.
	Like, he worked at Kirkland and Ellis for a long time during his private sector.
	And he even talked about maybe having to recuse himself.
	If you don't think he did something.
	For the Epstein team while he was at Kirkland and Ellis.
	I think, again, you're being really...
	Really naive.
	And don't forget the wacky connection with the father.
	I mean, not that that means anything.
	It's just the Dalton and then to Bear Stearns without a degree.
	I mean, and don't forget, and as everyone knows, but to me, everything Barr did was a cover-up for the intelligence community.
	Yeah, again, no one was going to jail with the Barr or the Durham report or investigations.
	I told people the same thing then.
	I'm not right all the time, right?
	Hey, Trump didn't go to jail.
	They didn't shoot him.
	They tried.
	Awesome.
	You know, I'm glad to be wrong on those things.
	You know, I have an Epstein scoop that no one else seems to have.
	I'm sure that you probably haven't heard it yet, unless you saw that one little clip that I played from last week, trying to get it picked up.
	I don't even know if it's necessarily true, but I know it's about to be reported in this new authorized biography of Alan Dershowitz.
	So the Dersh has a new book coming out about him called Legal Gladiator, okay?
	The Life of Alan Dershowitz.
	And you know how it goes on my show, just like Giuliani.
	I don't know that I'm interviewing any of these people until the day before.
	So I call him a kid because he is a kid.
	I had no idea how young he was when I was talking to him.
	I suspected like 24, 25. He's actually 21 and has been working on this book for three years.
	He did over 50 hours with Dershowitz himself and he literally interviewed every single person still alive that Dershowitz had defended, including O.J. Simpson, by the way, before he died like three months.
	Now, the one person that he didn't interview that I asked about was Leslie Wexner.
	Now, for those that don't know about Wexner, Alan Dershowitz, some of the most recent cases, won.
	Against Virginia Gouffre Roberts, who had to redact her statements about Dershowitz and being raped by him, for those that didn't know.
	And the other one was Leslie Wexner, who Dershowitz was defending.
	And basically, Virginia Gouffre Roberts also lost against them.
	They came to an agreement.
	They're no longer really named.
	So I bring up Wexner.
	And I'm just going to say it like he said it, because I didn't direct this, and I'm not saying it's true.
	He put it in the book, though, so it's at least reported on.
	Dershowitz says that the rumor going around, so again, Dershowitz says he doesn't have any first-hand knowledge of this, and I don't know whether it's real or not, that Epstein and Wexner had a homosexual relationship and that Epstein was blackmailing him from that front.
	Now, I don't necessarily think that that's true.
	Certainly a possibility with the kind of things that we've seen in the Diddy situation, etc.
	That's a huge power play.
	Before that, and maybe this is to muddy the waters, you would think that Epstein was taking direction from Wexner, as Wexner is the billionaire, is the person that gives him that Manhattan spy house that's rigged up with all the cameras for like $10, etc.
	So there's a huge connection there.
	It's in the book.
	Dershowitz is quoted as saying it.
	No one's picked it up.
	Yeah, no, I've heard that before, actually.
	Somebody said that to me years ago, that that's what they thought.
	This is in New York talking to people, but whatever the case may be, the fact that Wexner is so protected is very, very odd.
	I mean, he's the one person, when you bring up the name, nobody knows that he's involved.
	Because he also had the other guy from Abercrombie& Fitch get arrested.
	Well, Mel, beyond just that other guy with Abercrombie& Fitch, you also have the direct connections to the fashion industry and Epstein himself with Jean-Luc Brunel.
	And Brunel died in prison.
	He killed himself in Spain in prison.
	And let's not forget Peter Nygaard.
	Who's not associated but had similar operations to Epstein and Wexner.
	Like if you took both those individuals and slammed them together, you'd get Nosferatu, a.k.a.
	Man, now I forgot his name.
	But he's never getting out of jail either.
	I think he just got sentenced and he's got another trial on top of it.
	So it looks like he's going to die in jail.
	So Nygaard goes under.
	Brunel goes under.
	Ghislaine Maxwell's in jail.
	Epstein is dead.
	Wexner's okay.
	So that's a good question to ask.
	Yeah.
	Last thing, because I want to show that video that you showed me in the beginning of Gates.
	I find it entertaining.
	So it turns out that the 17,000 medical professionals that Bill Gates and Mike Pence rounded up to discredit RFK Jr. is a fraud.
	Imagine that.
	But what's interesting is in the past, I don't think that the fraud part would have gotten out there and only the 17,000 doctors, but I saw Julian Michaels and then a lot of other people picked it up.
	But now, so this is coming up this week.
	I expect that they are going to bring up his personal life in a major way, which you and I both know is very ugly.
	But he always says he's sober now.
	He's straightened his life out.
	I really like what he's saying about recovery, rehab, and all that stuff.
	But what do you expect coming up for RFK Jr.?
	It's very hard to look at because who knows.
	But I do believe a very rough week for both him and all three of them.
	Tulsi, Cash, and RFK Jr., who are the three I feel like, at least Cash and RFK Jr., must get in.
	But what do you think?
	I want all three of them in.
	And I think they are in for a rough road.
	Yeah, RFK Jr. is not a Boy Scout, right?
	None of these people are.
	And I think a lot of people don't know, and they're going to be so ugly.
	But especially because now we know that the whole AstroTurf campaign really is coming from Bill Gates.
	Well, you know, I think this is a good point to play this video recently of Bill Gates being asked about RFK Jr. And really the response...
	Kind of took me aback.
	And I want people to listen really, really carefully to what's said here.
	And then we're going to break down what he said.
	And he's asking you to judge for yourself.
	Well, at least on one of the aspects, there's really no judgment needed.
	But here we go.
	This is Bill Gates being asked about RFK Jr. What do you make of RFK and vaccines and what he's saying about it and the position he's been given in this incoming administration?
	Well, he wrote a book saying that Tony Fauci and I kill millions of children and make billions of dollars with vaccines, and people can judge for themselves whether that's correct or not.
	People can judge for themselves whether that's correct or not.
	Now, he doesn't deny it.
	He doesn't refute it.
	He hasn't sued RFK Jr. for the book The Real Anthony Fauci.
	Now, let me...
	Let me talk just really quickly about what's conflated there and what's real.
	So first of all, he conflates the idea.
	Now, don't get me wrong.
	He does talk about Fauci and Gates being responsible for the death of millions of children.
	That you'll have to judge for yourself based on the evidence out there.
	Read the book.
	Okay.
	There is no judgment of whether or not Bill Gates has made billions of dollars on vaccinations.
	He's admitted it many times.
	And in the book...
	RFK Jr. does not talk about Anthony Fauci making billions, but making millions through the pharmaceutical arena, vaccinations, other places.
	But Gates himself, this is a Wall Street Journal clip, everybody.
	There's a little WSJ on the Wall Street Journal.
	First of all, he wrote an op-ed for the Wall Street Journal talking about how vaccinations were his best investment.
	Then he did an interview fortifying that and from both a humanitarian and economic standpoint, that was at, I believe, Davos.
	And he does another interview at Davos, MSNBC, where he says it's better than 20 to 1. And I illustrate the interviewer and what they say after the fact because a lot of people cut that clip.
	And basically, she says, If you had done the same thing with J.P. Morgan and invested, because it was $10 billion over a 20-year span, and he made over $200 billion in return.
	She goes, just to put that into perspective, if you had worked with J.P. Morgan and put $10 billion in, she goes, in 20 years, you would have had $17 billion.
	So you would have made $7 billion over 10 years just doing it with J.P. Morgan.
	Think about that exponential number.
	Now, let me take it a step further for you, okay?
	Bill Gates, I believe in that same interview, talked about how he met with Trump to try to accelerate a vaccination program for HIV much the way he did warp speed, okay, with COVID. Now, first of all, I don't know if you've known this.
	We'll just bring this up before we get into the HIV aspect.
	Now, this, again, started before the Trump administration.
	So we're going to give them...
	A little bit of a pass here.
	This has been in the works, but it happened under the new Trump administration.
	They were given the money on the 21st.
	HHS just gave Moderna $590 million to accelerate the bird flu vaccine trials.
	Now, getting back to the HIV vaccine, okay?
	I know a lot of people are very worried about Stargate, Ellison, mRNA.
	You should be.
	When we're talking about HIV and Gates and the Foundation, there's a thing called the Global Fund.
	And that's a huge, huge operation.
	Big, big money.
	Everybody remembers when Joe Biden on stage was looking down at the Secret Service guys and going, and didn't know.
	What they missed was that was part of the Global Fund with Bill Gates introducing Joe Biden in front of a panel of people like Justin Trudeau.
	Macron and a dozen other of these guys.
	And instead of a 20 to 1 return for investing, it is a 30 plus to 1 return on investment in the Global Fund HIV project as of a couple of years ago.
	OK, so these things are still happening.
	We have to ensure that we direct this current administration away from those things.
	And look.
	This is the big thing, Mel.
	We're having some wins.
	In order to really regain trust, we've got to continue to have these wins, continue with the transparency, but we need some kind of criminal accountability.
	I agree.
	We're not locking her up.
	Hunter's not going to jail.
	There's no secret arrest at Guantanamo Bay.
	The White Hats are not in control, everybody.
	We need to hold their feet to the fire.
	And get as much criminal accountability if we're going to reshape this system as possible to let people know, all right, maybe I can start trusting in these institutions again.
	Maybe this is a system that is going to benefit me and my family.
	And it's going to be a constant battle, not just for the United States and the Constitution and Bill of Rights, but with this AI, this blockchain, this automation, these data centers.
	It's the battle for humanity itself, everybody.
	So buckle up!
	Because the next four or five years are going to get super weird.
	I promise.
	I agree.
	And I think we also have to keep an eye out on them using the threat of AI, the danger of AI, yet again, as a manipulation and emotional tool, like they have climate change and everything else, and just ask for transparency and, like you said, remain skeptical and keep fighting.
	And no one fights quite like you and has as much fun with it.
	I have as much fun when I talk to you about it.
	But, Burmist, tell everyone where you are.
	You're all over the place.
	Yeah, I still got my show over.
	What's the best place to find you and to find your films, which I love and I highly recommend to anyone looking for documentaries.
	Jason is kind enough to give them out free.
	I want everybody to watch the docs, see how they stand up, share them because the information is still...
	Very vital and very valid.
	You can find them across platforms.
	There's always a playlist, even on YouTube.
	And we're trying to get re-monetized right now on YouTube.
	We're like, 72 hours deep.
	No, I didn't curate my channel.
	I'm not going to go through 3,000 videos and decide what is and isn't dangerous content.
	I'm not dangerous.
	The truth is not dangerous, okay?
	The truth is the truth no matter what.
	And, you know, I'm going to try to put that, On display as much as possible.
	So you can check me out.
	YouTube, Rockfin, Rumble, X. And I really do encourage people for X, not because I think it's a free speech platform, but just like I was able to kind of claw like kicking and screaming like YouTube subscribers back in the day get like 10 to 20 a day and maybe 100 a week.
	We are having that effect on X. Like, I am clawing, like, 5, 6, 10 here, 15. I'll take what I can get.
	And the other thing is, if you don't love Jason Bermas and his blowhard persona, if it's too much joking around and jackassery, I get it.
	My XFeed will at least have the raw content as well.
	So if you just want to show people that clip of Bill Gates, you don't have to watch the half an hour video where I show you like three other videos and do commentary.
	All the raw stuff will be in there as well.
	Well, I love your commentary, so thank you for coming again, and I will see you again, but keep up the great work.
	No one does it quite like you, and you know what?
	We do have to laugh sometimes, so I'm grateful that you make some scary stuff digestible and not so scary.
	Okay, talk to you soon, and everyone support Jamison Burmus.
	We'll see you.

▲