Send Some Love and Buy Me A Cup Of Joe:
https://www.buymeacoffee.com/jasonbermasShow more ETH - 0x90b9288AF0E40F8C90604460973743dBC91dA680
Watch My Documentaries:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V4VFYRaltcc&list=PL5vtMLUWgYehCTEfSmgEzAEC9Dvt9FZmc
Subscribe on Rokfin
https://rokfin.com/JasonBermas
Subscribe on Rumble
https://rumble.com/c/TheInfoWarrior
Subscribe on YouTube
https://www.youtube.com/InfoWarrior
Follow me on X
https://x.com/JasonBermas
PayPal: [email protected]
Patriot TV - https://patriot.tv/bermas/
#BermasBrigade #TruthOverTreason #BreakingNews #InfoWarrior Show less
We're about to get deep in the weeds with WQUD 1077.
We talk the January 5th, 6th pipe bomber arrest, the moon landing debate, Epstein real ID, digital ID, and so much more.
I want to remind everybody, I cannot do this without you.
$5, $10, $15.
It absolutely means the world to me.
Big donors, please consider donating down via the links down below.
We also have the PayPal and buckle up and get ready to make sense of the madness.
So we were talking on there a little bit.
So there was some sort of four-hour debate on the moon landing that you watched?
Yeah.
So just this week, I was doing my scrolling, if you will, and I noticed that Danny Jones, who, you know, I didn't know who this guy was up until maybe this year, but there seems to be a bunch of these podcasters, him, Sean Ryan, and a couple others that have kind of come up in this, I would say, pseudo conspiracy realm.
They're talking about things that I've been talking about for decades.
And I see that Bart Sobrell, who is probably the leading moon skeptic out there, he's behind the documentary films that have been around now for, I think, over 20 years.
A funny thing happened on the way to the moon and astronauts gone wild.
And if anybody out there has ever seen that viral clip of Buzz Aldrin punching somebody in the face for saying he didn't walk on the moon, that's Bart.
So Bart would go...
Gotta go punch in the face.
Okay.
Yes, the guy that got punched in the face.
Bart would go around to the Apollo astronauts with a Bible in his hand and give them the opportunity to swear on the Bible that they actually walked on the moon.
And let's just say people got angry at him.
In one of the encounters, he was actually kicked in his arnis, and the guy was still mic'd up, his son.
And he literally says on film after Bart walks out, should we call the CIA and have him whacked?
So take that any way you want to take it.
It all really exists.
The reason I thought that this was interesting is that Bart's really never debated people on the moon landing.
He's never done like a formal one-on-one debate.
Sure, he's gone on shows where people disagree with him, but he's never had a formal debate.
And he's always said, I would only debate one of the quote-unquote perpetrators of the hoax.
So Charles Duke is 88 years old and not only one of the final men to walk on the moon, but he was also part of the Apollo missions and mission control prior.
So I thought that this was going to be super interesting.
Frankly, there was some disappointment.
You know, Bart's talking points, I don't think he utilized many of the ones that he should have.
I think the photograph stuff on the moon is just, it's just so debatable and you're never going to really convince anybody of light sources, et cetera.
And I'm always on the fence on that.
But what I did find really, really interesting is the robotic nature of the responses from Charles Duke when he was challenged on landing on the moon.
It was almost programmed.
And what do I mean by that?
Every time something would be brought up about Bart Sobrell not believing that he went to the moon, he would go, wait a minute, you don't believe I went to the moon or we went to the moon?
Just start laughing.
And he'd go, there's 12 of us and the moon rocks.
And he just was on repeat.
And every time there was evidence presented to him on the other end, he just was not able to challenge it or comprehend it.
He would say, I don't understand the point of this conversation.
What is the point of this conversation?
Over.
He's 88, he said, right?
What's that?
He's 80.
But let me tell you right now, a super, super sharp 88.
In fact, for those that don't think that he's sharp, go watch his recent interview with Glenn Beck, of which I actually played a portion of when I did a video on this whole subject, which is about a half an hour long where I go a little more integral into the points that were being made on both sides.
But what really caught my ear, and this is Jason in speculation mode, okay?
I've always talked about how this era was amongst some of the most corrupt eras that we actually found out about within our government, such as the MK Ultra experiments, for instance, and of course, the assassinations of political leaders during that time period.
And that kind of gets brought up in the peripheral.
I'd encourage people to go watch both Manchurian candidate movies, but I would say go watch the Denzel Washington one.
You know, I don't want to give too many spoilers out here, but I really feel like these astronauts have been programmed in a sense to respond and may actually believe that they went to the moon.
And I know people are probably rolling their eyes and saying, Jason, that sounds ridiculous.
But this was a small, tight-knit group that would, I mean, they would be dropped off in the jungle sometimes just for survival to get these skills where they really didn't know where on these flights where they would re-enter the atmosphere and where they would land.
Yes, they had them for oceanic landings, but they had to prepare them for other things.
There's footage of them in fake moon sets picking up these rocks.
They went to rugged terrain to practice for that as well.
And they also put themselves through immense physical trials.
A lot of people have seen, for instance, the machines where they spin them around at extreme g-forces, and most people lose consciousness.
So it just felt like to me that every response from this guy was him giggling, dismissing it, not providing any evidence, going back to things like, well, we brought back moon rocks, talking about the Saturn V rocket and how it's the, you know, it was the greatest thing since breakfast.
And at the time, sure, but we've never advanced past that technology either.
So, you know, I would encourage people to go check it out for themselves.
But at the very end, we're talking the last 20 minutes or so.
Bart Sobrell is a converted Christian.
I told you how he was trying to get these people to swear on the Bible.
He starts bringing up different types of scripture.
And he also brings up the fact that the term Apollo, the God Apollo, was the great deceiver.
Okay.
And as he's doing all of this, yes, absolutely.
Go look it up.
Interesting.
Quite the trickster, Apollo.
So he's bringing all this stuff up with Charles Duke about religion.
And Charles Duke is extremely attentive and knows the scripture that he's talking about.
Again, and again, just agreeing and nodding and agreeing and nodding.
And in this little clip I played from Glenn Beck, he kind of talks about how he had been a Christian all his life.
He'd gone to church, but he really never walked that path until the mid-70s, long after Apollo.
And like I said, the guy was super, super sharp.
So I always posit, and especially after watching this four-hour debate where literally Duke, yeah, Duke could not, I mean, he could not come up with a counter-argument at any extent other than the one-liners that we've all heard and acting surprised that he was sitting there with someone who believed he didn't go to the moon when he knew he was going there to debate somebody.
It's a very, very bizarre debate.
You know, Danny Jones is kind of the moderator in the middle, gets frustrated with Bart quite a few times, which is understandable.
But at the same time, you can see kind of his frustration with having to describe and re-describe the argument to Charles Duke and Charles Duke just kind of looking off into the sunset and not giving an answer or just dismissing it out of hand.
So, well, no, we did it.
So, for all those people out there that are super interested in the moon landing, they want to see the debate.
And I would say this: you know, Bart presents one of his strongest pieces of evidence, which is this footage, which seems to show the astronauts on the original Apollo mission faking a shot of Earth about halfway to the moon.
So, they're filming this shot.
It looks like you're in a totally blacked out environment.
If you didn't know better, you'd think that you were looking all at like the darkness of space and then Earth from afar.
And all of a sudden, the lights come on that Earth is no longer there.
It looks like it's some kind of like a slide or something they were putting up against the window.
And instead, it looks like they're in low Earth orbit as sunlight just floods the entire cabin.
So, you know, and again, they show it several times to Charles Duke, and Charles Duke just acts confused and says, I don't understand the point of this conversation.
Says that about Baker's dozen times.
So, you know, I would again encourage people to go check that out if they want to see what an actual Apollo astronaut has to say in defense of the Apollo missions.
But get ready, in my opinion, to be disappointed.
Well, and so, again, the basis for this, the reason that because I'd always, I'd never really spent a lot of time in my mind about the moon landing.
I just assumed, you know, I was taught that happened as a kid, blah, blah, blah.
And then we started talking about the math with you on the show here as we're deep in the weeds with Jason Burmese watched by River Cities Reader.
And of course, it was the math that got me.
You know, right now we can go 300 miles out into space to the International Space Station.
It takes 15 hours.
Somehow, in 1968, with that technology, they made it 250,000 miles to the moon in, I think it's 76 hours was what they were saying.
So it's a real, when you just, and that's the math.
You can Google that.
That's what it's going to tell you.
I have a very good friend who's a very intelligent guy who's very annoyed by this discussion.
But he is, I just keep telling him, like, I honestly want to believe it too.
I do.
But the math is not allowing me to do that.
Like, and I just need a mathematical explanation that I can wrap my mind around, and then maybe I would come around.
But based on what I know now, it's hard for me to believe.
Well, on top of that, and I'd say that one of his stronger arguments is talking about the fuel necessary to actually get you there.
And Von Braun was on video and in publication several times talking about the fact that they would have to refuel several times in space for them to be able to get there.
Also, we had a recent rocket engineer talking about the Artemis missions that are supposed to return to the moon.
And he's basically saying the same thing that, you know, you can't do this.
When Von Braun originally wrote about going to the moon, he said that basically the jet engines would be almost physically impossible to build because they would have to have three of them the size of the Empire State Building.
Now, you know, the Empire State Building, 100-plus-story skyscraper, the size of the rockets they used, they were about 30 stories.
So not even a third, really, of what Von Braun originally stated.
But hey, we're in the space age, and more and more people are talking about the commercialization of space.
Sam Altman is now talking about obtaining a rocket company.
But I'd say this also, you know, I brought this up on the show a couple weeks ago.
Musk is telling you that Artemis isn't going to the moon and they need many, many more trials.
And Aaron, just to kind of go back to what you got taught in school, my brother often brings this up and we were talking the other day.
He goes, what's the first thing they teach you in school?
He's like, they teach you that George Washington was so upset that he chopped down a cherry tree and told on himself because he could not tell a lie.
He's like, the first thing they teach you is utter fiction.
That's a good point.
I didn't ever make the Apollo connection.
It being the Apollo missions, and then Apollo was actually the god of, you know, deceit, essentially.
That seems like a smart ass like CIA agents, like, let's name it Apollo.
Yeah, yeah, that's a good idea.
You know what I mean?
And it's, I don't know.
It's just a little wild and a little crazy.
Yeah, I don't know.
And I don't mean, you know, and we're not here talking about this to disrespect anybody or upset anybody.
Like, I don't, that's not the point.
It's just, it's very hard to ignore the math.
It's very hard to ignore the fact that we, quote unquote, haven't been back, even though technology has gone, you know, exponential.
We're almost 60 years from this Apollo mission, and somehow we can't figure out how to make it back, and they did it 60 years ago.
Is it just that it'd be really, it's, it's too hard to fake now because of the technology, that people be able to pull it apart?
You know, because back then, people didn't, you know, and nobody was questioning anything pretty much or whatever.
Like, oh, this is cool.
And it was, it was like, you know, and I wasn't alive then, obviously, but, you know, based on what I've read and know, like, it was very much a like everybody was rooting for everybody to go to the moon.
You know, astronauts were heroes.
This was America.
This was awesome.
Like, everybody's doing this, and everybody's rooting for them.
And it was like a good thing to focus on, you know, coming off of, you know, the earlier part of that decade.
You had JFK get assassinated, and that obviously was like a big kind of a dark cloud, I feel like, over our country for a while, at least over for residents of the country.
And, yeah, I don't know.
It's just, it's just the math for me.
Like, please prove me wrong on the math.
And I'm open-minded.
But based on what we know, it's just hard to, you know, be honest with myself in my own head and tell myself, oh, no, it's real.
When, you know, my common sense is like, hmm, highly skeptical.
Again, I would go watch the Manchurian candidate movies, especially the newer one with Denzel.
And even that final Born movie, the Jeremy Renner one.
Have you seen that series?
No.
I haven't.
To be honest with you, Jason Burma.
So I think I've seen one adult movie in completion that I had never seen before, probably in the last 20 years.
Well, good for you.
The Manchurian candidates are over 20 years old.
Both of them.
I've been busy.
Yeah, I've been busy.
But even in the final Born movie, they have somebody, you know, again, spoiler alert, who is working in this part of a program where essentially they're drugging and controlling super soldiers in some ways, right?
And you think this is just going to be kind of like a one-off character, etc.
But then when they need to get rid of all the evidence and quote-unquote clean the area, all of a sudden just a trigger happens and this person just kills everybody.
And it's certainly, you know, he's not some kind of a super soldier, including himself, and wipes the place clean.
I'd say in the final Born movie, they go further into government technologies, corruption than in any of the other pictures.
And it's just kind of worth noting that that's kind of been put out there.
And we accept these things when they're on the big screen and it's just a movie.
But we should always keep in the back of our minds that a lot of this material exists because it's not a movie.
And these things have been done in reality, especially when it comes to human experimentation and our government.
So that is something to absolutely keep in mind.
But I think we should also shift to another story of government corruption.
And that is this pipe bombing case, Aaron.
As you may know, yesterday they picked up an individual named Brian Cole Jr.
And I watched the press conference, all 20 plus minutes of it with Pam Bondi, Dan Bongino, Kash Patel, Gina Perino, the whole nine.
And you know what it was?
A whole lot of nothing.
Whole lot.
If you wanted to know, say why they picked this guy up or what evidence they had or anything about this individual, forget about it.
There's nothing out there.
All I can say is this.
Again, I think I came on this broadcast a few weeks ago, maybe a month ago, and started talking about the work that the Blaze had done.
And, you know, the Blaze is also now reporting that they've arrested this individual.
But the Blaze had done this big investigative piece where they were extremely careful, but they seem to be pointing in the direction that the actual pipe bomber was a member of the DC police who afterwards got a contracting gig with the Central Intelligence Agency.
Color me not surprised that it might have led in that direction, that it took, you know, five years to supposedly find this person.
I think that's totally and completely ridiculous.
It is one of the most surveilled places, not only in the United States, but on the planet.
And when you look at the actual bombs themselves, quote-unquote bombs, they look suspiciously like homeland security training material almost to the T. In fact, ex-FBI agent and somebody who I've interviewed, Stephen Friend, was one of the first people to put that information out now well over a year ago.
Thomas Massey was asking questions about this investigation into this woman, was talking directly to Patel and the FBI, and recently did an interview where he said that his staff member was directly threatened by another staff member of Patel and basically said, you know, you guys keep this up and we'll open an investigation on you.
None of this looks good.
Now, I'm awaiting to see what evidence they have against this individual.
I haven't seen much in the realm of, you know, usually people are posting by now social media.
They're trying to give a political ideology for the individual.
The other thing that's interesting about this is, number one, he's a black guy.
They're always trying to paint, you know, the MAGA or the Donald Trump supporters and the people behind this as white supremacists.
I've seen some reporting saying that, you know, he was close to anarchist groups, et cetera.
Still haven't seen any evidence there.
I know that the right loves to break out their jump to conclusions, Matt, and those that believe he did it are asking things like whether or not he's Antifa.
But I will also say this: it's almost impossible now to find those Blaze articles that are literally just a month old.
Instead, now you're flooded in the zone with this new individual.
And we'll see what kind of evidence they have against him.
But it just seems to me that it's very convenient that the arrest is not made until after these reports by the alternative media, of which was almost none of the mainstream media picked up.
And let's say that they get this guy and they convict him.
Now, whether or not he's actually guilty, this may also open up the arena for this other individual that was accused basically of the Blaze.
Again, they were careful to sue them.
And sue, like this person who the Blaze mentioned gave no public comment, no statements, kept their head down.
But now they have this other individual, if they are able to prove that he did it or convict him, whether or not he did it, I think that opens the door not only for the narrative that we need to stop questioning the FBI and the FBI is good.
And of course, law enforcement wasn't involved in this, but then it also opens the arena for a civil case where this woman might end up going up against the Blaze.
And if winning, who knows, maybe even bankrupting them, like Peter Thiel helped Hulk Hogan bankrupt Gawker.
Good old Hulk Hogan.
It's very strange.
The whole thing, like you said, five years seems awful.
I don't know.
It smells fishy.
It has smelled fishy from the beginning.
I was walking around D.C. on January 5th that evening prior to being at the events on the 6th at the ellipse and at the Capitol.
And I can't tell you how many police officers that I ran into, how many CCTV cameras I must have passed.
I mean, the place was littered with them.
The idea, once again, that somebody could place these bombs with anonymity, and then when they're quote unquote discovered, there seems to be no sense of urgency by the law enforcement officers that even discover these things.
So I think that we're about midway through this story at this point.
We will see what happens after the fact, but I don't necessarily think it's a great look for Donald Trump's Department of Justice.
It also does give Trump, however, another talking point against one of the best, if not the best, individuals in Congress that he's been attacking, and that's Thomas Massey, right?
You know, I'm sure he's going to start calling him crazy Thomas Massey, you know, thought that the pipe bomber was somebody else.
So this does seem, at least this arrest seems to help a lot of the narratives that not only the establishment has been pushing surrounding January 6th, but the narratives that Trump is trying to push via his political opponents that are on the right.
Yeah, just what he needs is another talking point.
I got a talking point for you.
Did you see the deal?
So they've been trying to get everyone to do this real ID thing forever.
I don't know if they're giving up or if this is just a punt down the, you know, kicking the rock down the road or whatever, but now, starting February 1st, if you don't have a real ID, it's going to cost you 45 bucks to get on a plane, which, I mean, whatever, doesn't seem unreasonable.
It seems like it's saving you time from having to go to the DMV and deal with this.
But what's the deal with this thing?
What do you got on the real ID?
So the real ID is just another step to a centralized digital ID that is already taking hold throughout the United States right now and via our neighbors next door, Illinois, in a new trial.
It's not even a trial program.
It's just one that has not been implemented in every state, but there's about another dozen states that are on their way to do it as well.
Essentially, they're telling you, and they've told us for years, by the way, Aaron, I mean, this whole real ID thing has been going on at on for a while.
Yeah, as a mantra well before 2020, they continually tried to use fear-mongering tactics to tell you that you would not be able to board a plane without a real ID.
Newsflash, that's not true.
Obviously, it's not true.
And now they are going to try to squeeze those that have not gotten the real ID because there are many states not only where you don't have to have a real ID, but you can also roll it back.
Iowa is actually one of those states.
So if you have the little star in the corner of your license and for some reason you don't want it anymore because you realize that it is a step towards the consolidation of power and global identification, including a digital ID and a social credit score, you can go do that.
But now they want to squeeze you for another $45 at the airport.
I'm sure there's going to be some fees tacked on to it.
So it's a cool Ulysses S grant at least.
So another 50 bucks to travel without that ID to try to squeeze you into that system.
And then eventually a digital ID.
Now, once you have a digital global ID, you start getting into the arena of China.
And basically, your currency can be turned on and off at any time.
And right now.
This is scary.
Oh, is it?
Because right now, the Secretary of State in Illinois page, if you're watching the video after the fact over on the page, folks, your Illinois ID now on iPhone.
So Apple's wallet now can contain your digital identification, which is valid everywhere in Illinois.
And like I said, there's about another dozen states that are taking to this.
That's what people don't understand.
You're constantly walking around with a type of digital identification with your phone, your phone number, the GPS signal on it, all of your apps constantly moving back and forth through the digital ether with your metadata.
All that is real.
But once they legitimize it to where, just like where you can scan your phone to get your coffee in the morning, that you can scan your phone at the airport.
And by the way, there are airports that are accepting the digital, not just forcing you into a real ID and a paper ID.
They are accepting the digital ID in your Apple wallet.
So, of course, they want to do this not only with the Apple wallet, but with the Google wallet, cover their bases, and further put you down that line of full-on track trace database digital identification.
And then, if you do something naughty, if you say something they don't like, if you challenge the wrong system, forget about just freezing your bank account.
You just can't access anything.
You might even get locked out of your phone.
Sounds like a good time.
Sounds like we should all rush towards that system, Aaron.
Can't wait.
Can't wait.
Yeah, you know, it's, I don't like any of it.
You know what I mean?
Even the tech, you know, where we're at with technology now is, to me, annoying.
And obviously, I'm not super spizzed about the direction we're moving with AI.
I did see an interesting thing that they're saying lawyers may have to start charging by piece rate instead of their $100 to $400 average per hour hourly rate because they no longer need to spend hours researching.
They just type it into AI and they get an answer within a matter of seconds for cases, previous cases, you know, whatever they're looking for to try and find something to do the case that they're on.
And, you know, there's just another impact of a lot of really good jobs disappearing at the hands of AI technology.
And I think there's an even bigger caveat to that, and that is the fact of the laziness now and the idea that you're just going to openly embrace whatever AI tells you when it lies to us on a daily basis.
Not only does it lie to us around general narratives, and it's funny because at one point, even in that debate that we were talking about earlier, Danny Jones kind of acknowledges when they ask the Google AI a question that it's just grabbing all the mainstream articles out there to prove the mainstream point.
I'd be worried about a lawyer that was heavily dependent on AI because we've already had numerous cases where lawyers have cited case law that didn't exist.
And when AI provides case law that doesn't exist, they just go, oh, well, it hallucinated.
This term hallucination is utter garbage.
No, it was programmed to give you a certain narrative and then totally lied to you and made something up whole cloth.
That is not a technology I think that we should embrace.
Also, when you're talking about case law, I think that you will have artificial intelligence purposely dismiss or exclude certain case laws, maybe via the tier of who they're working for, maybe via the tier of who the defendant is, or maybe via that tier of what the narrative of the day allows.
So, you know, I'm very, very hesitant.
I understand why people wouldn't want to pay those extremely heavy lawyer fees, but let's be honest with ourselves, Aaron, guys like you and me probably aren't going to be able to afford those high-end lawyers anyway.
Well, this is true.
And I will say this.
So I've Googled or I've asked AI things like, you know, so I was looking up something for the show about a football game.
Like, hey, when was the last time these two teams played?
Or how the last time these two teams played, how did it happen?
Because they were about to play that Sunday.
And this was like on a Thursday.
AI said it gave me the final score of the game that was going to be played that Sunday.
Like, hey, it hadn't even been played.
And it said the game was going to be, it was the Steelers were playing in Europe.
And it said the final score is going to be three to nothing.
And it was very wrong.
Very wrong.
Not even close.
But it told me the result of the game before the game had, which is kind of Matrix-y for sure, but before the game had even been played.
And then obviously it was very wrong.
Because, I mean, if you could, you know, ask AI what's going to happen in a game and it could tell you, then we'd all be very rich gambling, I think.
So, but it was funny to me that it gave me an answer.
Like, hey, this is the final score of that game.
This is what happened.
Like, no, it isn't.
Like, this game hasn't even been played yet.
And then when it did get played, it wasn't even close to accurate.
So, I don't know.
It's a bunch of hogwash.
I'm backing off the robots and the artificial intelligence.
And quite frankly, I'm pretty done with the AI-generated video slop that is literally everywhere.
You know, I'm sick of seeing, you know, the Sasquatch videos were around for like two, three weeks.
They're pretty much gone.
Now I've got to see videos with overweight people falling off of like zip lines and people with Down syndrome being exploited by AI.
Just not that fun.
You know, don't get me wrong.
Every once I had to watch System of a Down sit there and dance in a hallway to some horrible pseudo cover of one of their songs.
Stop.
Stop, everybody.
Read a book, Jason Burmese says you didn't have to worry about it.
We are deep in the weeds of Jason Burmese, brought to you by a River Cities reader.
And almost every week we get some sort of Epstein update of some kind.
You haven't had much to say.
Didn't some more stuff just come out, some video or something?
So we are now, I think today is the two-week mark.
I think two weeks from today, we are supposed to get all the Epstein.
It's finally going to happen here, and we're supposed to get all the Epstein files.
I'm not holding my breath.
But with that congressional vote and then having the Senate put it out there, I think even Trump signed it.
We're here.
We're at that point.
And just, I think yesterday, there have been some never-before-seen photos of the island.
And again, if you're watching, you'll see a couple of these.
It starts with a no-trespassing sign, but when you click on it, you got some like creepy living room vibe.
I've seen some of this furniture before.
You see one of the washrooms.
There's that no trespassing sign.
You see some of the parts of the estate on the island, these little buildings.
You see what appears to be some kind of an odd mask on the wall with a bunch of other odd masks.
Now, these aren't like CIA type masks.
They're certainly human beings, but they're like cartoon human beings.
And the other weird thing about the masks is that it is in his dental chair.
So Epstein seems to have had a dental chair not only at the Florida Palm Beach establishment, but also over at the Little St. James Island.
I would imagine he probably had one over in New Mexico as well.
Here's a large picture behind me of one of the bedrooms.
Yeah, another one of these houses and bedrooms, just a bathroom.
And then maybe the most interesting ones.
Number one, you have his phone.
Yes, a landline.
And on it, you can read some names, right?
It says Darren Office, Darren Cell, Mike Cell, Larry Cell.
But then three of the names are totally blacked out.
So you got like the New York office there.
You've got Rich's office.
Larry Cell, when I read that, I think to myself, that's probably Larry Summers.
But again, speculating, you know, Larry Summers, no big deal.
Not only one of the most influential and powerful economists and Harvard professors, but also a Bilderberg steering member that Epstein seemed to have in his pocket.
And then you have, you know, we've talked about Epstein and his whiteboard in his New York apartment before and how Lewis Black had a conversation with Epstein about what was on that whiteboard.
And he said he was discussing defense weapons systems with the Israeli defense minister.
Well, you have this really weird blackboard that also has four things blacked out on it for some reason.
And on this blackboard, it doesn't seem like there's anything but handwriting.
So you wonder why these things are blacked out.
But you can make out some of the words like power and deception and music.
So it does kind of, you know, open the mind's eye up to the imagination of what is under these blacked out portions.
And perhaps we're going to see in the next couple of weeks, perhaps this is going to be part of that dump.
But again, I really wonder what that dump is going to be.
The emails that we got about a month ago were pretty revelatory, but small time in comparison to the hard drives that we know exist, the video that we know exists, and of course the photographs that we know exist.
So, hey, we're two weeks away.
Maybe we're going to be celebrating some really big revelations and new evidence a couple weeks from now, Aaron, but it remains to be seen.
I doubt it.
Why does he have dental chairs?
That's a little weird.
A little out there.
I mean, again, I've seen that.
That's not like the only time I've seen that style of if you're now looking at it and you're looking at those four chairs in that living room.
He likes that kind of pattern design.
There's a couple other photographs I've had of Epstein at his estate, and it's probably his island where those aren't the only chairs that look like that.
And there are certain rooms that also look like that.
Yeah, right.
Let's go to the Rothschild party.
Anyway, land with what's that?
Never, never land with Michael Jack.
Have his doctor come in and help him sleep.
Yeah, help him sleep.
Air quote finger, that one.
Help him sleep.
We are deep in the weeds with Jason Burmes here, brought to you by River Cities Reader.
We got a few minutes left here.
What else is going on in the world, Jason?
Well, you know, just to kind of expand on the Epstein stuff for a moment, you know, some of those emails and other revelations included conversations about that New Mexico ranch that I often talk about, Zorro Ranch, and individuals either coming to visit or individuals coming to visit again.
For instance, I know that we've talked about on the program Walter Cronkite.
And it appears that Walter Cronkite not only absolutely went to the island on the flight logs, but may have gotten an invite to Zorro Ranch.
Now, whether he went or not, we don't know.
But somebody like Noam Chomsky, the conversations in those emails, it's, are you going to come back or please return?
So it seems like he had been to Zorro Ranch, whether or not Chomsky himself had been to the island.
And this is interesting to me because, you know, Chomsky, especially when I was coming up, Aaron, with a lot of the 9-11 stuff and, you know, questioning my government outside of what was acceptable in the mainstream, Noam Chomsky would often not only be dismissive of that, but he would attack people for daring to question 9-11.
And this is the guy that's supposed to be, you know, the MIT linguist and he's beyond reproach and he's the academic and he's the one that came up with the term manufacturing consent.
And in that regard, you know, the manufacturing consent regard, yeah, that's great information.
But when push came to shove and he was asked about Building 7, he gets angry and dismissive.
When the COVID-19 4 nightmare came around, he was extremely authoritarian.
He wanted you to inject yourself with hate and lie shots.
He said that you didn't really have any rights.
He took kind of a Dershowitz position.
So that kind of shows you that these people that many times are put out into the forefront as the main dissenting voices and dissidents are nothing of the sort.
Instead, they are the true definition of quote-unquote controlled opposition.
And that's just one of the highlights on the peripheral of these Epstein documents.
We've talked about the fact that, again, Epstein seemed to have Stacey Plasketts in his pocket.
And while we had government hearings with Trump's ex-lawyer, he's feeding her questions.
We talked about a minute ago Larry Summers and his influence.
I mean, Larry Summers was at the hip with Epstein.
And like I said, he is at one of the heads of the most influential tables in the world via Bilderberg.
Peter Thiel is also at the head of that table at Bilderberg.
And, you know, I read an article yesterday on air out of the Times of Israel.
And it was really interesting to me because it was essentially by a longtime feminist mainline journalist.
And, you know, she was Jewish and kind of talked about how the Epstein case and came at it at a perspective I never would and don't necessarily agree with a lot of the time, but said, look, this is about not only America and Israel's conscience, but the rest of our conscience and how the world works.
And about midway through the article, she talks about another human trafficking survivor.
I believe her name is Kelly Patterson, outside of the Epstein case.
And she brings up Henry Kissinger, who is no longer with us.
But again, sat at that very table that I was just talking about via Larry Summers and Peter Thiel.
In other words, he was a Bilderberg steering member and really one of the founding members of Bilderberg.
And the reason I bring that up is because in this article, she talks about how this Kelly Patterson woman who had been trafficked had gone to Bilderberg with Kissinger, had gone to Bohemian Grove essentially as a prostitute, a high-end prostitute for these individuals and discussed this power structure that is outside the purview of the vast majority of us and is still not discussed.
And all these players, not only are they not going to jail or going to be held criminally accountable, Aaron, in about five or six months, I expect them all to be meeting and carving up the world as they often do.
You know, Kissinger, I bring him up.
He, in his twilight years, really partnered up with a guy named Eric Schmidt.
And Eric Schmidt is the ex-head of Google.
Actually, he has a lawsuit just this week where he was accused by an ex-mistress of not only sexual misconduct, but of having access, backdoor access, into every single Google device and sometimes using that access.
Sound illegal?
Sure.
Sound impossible?
Absolutely not.
Sounds parsing.
Is it something illegal?
If you're above the law?
If you're controlling politicians, do you really, I mean, is there an illegal?
You know what I mean?
Is there a line you can't cross and not have to worry about it?
Well, I don't think there's.
I don't think that Eric Schmidt thinks there is that line.
And I don't think the Henry Kissingers of the world think there is that line.
And I played this clip of Eric Schmidt talking about Kissinger and his views on artificial intelligence because one of the last things that they did together was write a book together on AI.
And in this quote.
Interesting.
Oh, very interesting.
Wait, wait, hear or watch this quote.
And you guys can watch this quote over on my channel via the Epstein reckoning video I put out yesterday.
And essentially, he talks about how magic, in other words, technology that is misunderstood by the public, if they don't understand it, they go two routes.
They either get out an attack or they turn it into a new religion.
And Eric Schmidt says that he hopes it becomes a new religion because that benefits him.
Okay, well, at least he's honest.
Well, Kissinger was a fascinating person to me.
I mean, he finally died at 100 years old, but when he was like 98, I don't know what kind of good medicine you get when you're one of those people, the predator class, but it must be some good stuff.
Because remember, he hopped on a plane and flew over and talked to Zhe?
Yep.
You know, because that's just so easy to do for anybody running around in the world.
Hey, I'm going to go meet with the leader of China today.
Oh, okay.
Like, and this was not that long ago.
It was not long before he passed away.
And, you know, it's like, how powerful are if you, I mean, that feels like you're even more powerful than the president, right?
I mean, the president can't just say, hey, I'm coming over to see you.
But Henry Kissinger can.
Like, that seems a little weird to me.
And Kissinger is one of those players, like you said, really right up until the moment he took his last breath, was heavily geopolitically involved and influential.
And that's the thing.
You know, we talk about presidents as though they have this superpower.
But really, you know, you have to look at the bureaucracies and the institutions that surround those presidents that are really around much longer than a four or eight year term.
They are around for decade upon decade upon decade.
And of course, Henry Kissinger is one of those people.
You know, it's funny that you talk about that aspect of it because I watched a documentary last week when it came out.
And it's the Age of Disclosure documentary.
And this is the documentary.
You can go buy it or rent it over on Amazon Prime that is supposedly telling the story of the whistleblowers within the UAP program and those like Louis Alizondo and Grush that you see all the time now saying alien life acts absolutely exists and we're covering it up.
The how put-offs of the world are in this.
And really, when I watched this, there were only a couple of things that rang significant in my mind.
You know, for instance, Marco Rubio, who I do not trust, who is obviously, you know, part of the Trump administration right now, Secretary of State, he actually does a sit-down interview in this thing.
And the one thing that I think that he gets right is he kind of talks about how people just assume that the head of the CIA knows this or the head of the FBI knows this or the president automatically knows this.
And he goes, you know, those are appointed positions.
He goes, the idea that that person comes in and is debriefed on everything, especially things that have been highly classified for years and part of black programs and contractors, he goes, is absolutely ludicrous.
He's like, that's not how it works.
Then he kind of, I think, tailed off into a little bit of delusion where he said that there was the very real possibility because of this that the contractors are the ones that really have this technology and really know what's going on.
And although I think there are certain members of the contracting scene that that may be true to, I also think that the government, these programs, they don't let these things go by the wayside, especially when we're talking about technology that gives us a military or even a consumer advantage.
There were a couple other things about that documentary that were okay, but I always tell people to remain extremely skeptical in regards to this disclosure movement because even in this documentary, people like James Clapper, head of the CIA and somebody that should never be trusted.
Brennan, John Brennan, ex-head of the CIA and should never be trusted.
They're pushing for it.
They're putting out the idea that, you know, alien life does exist and it's being kept from us.
So, you know, I don't know if I'd spend the 20 bucks out there, but I saw it and it just, dude, it has on Rotten Tomatoes like a 90 plus percent positive score from the user reviews and over 500 plus reviews.
So as, you know, as far as the general public watching this thing, unfortunately, I think a lot of them are buying it hook line and sinker, despite the fact that maybe you see four or five videos of supposed craft that we've all seen on the news or in social media dozens of times,
and there is literally no physical or documented evidence to speak of in this picture that would sway me to the idea that aliens are among us.
You didn't watch V enough as a kid, Jason Burmese.
That's the problem here.
Because that sure scared the heck out of me and made me think there was something going on out there.
Well, it's, I don't know.
It's sort of like, you know, we started with the moon landing today and talking now about other space-related things.
You know, maybe space is just a lot harder than they want to admit for us to really, you know, grasp, handle, control.
And that's probably really annoying for the folks in charge, you know, the predator class type folks.
But it also gives people hope.
And it makes people, you know, starry-eyed and they love that stuff.
And then, obviously, aliens, that's a whole nother rabbit hole.
But obviously, a lot of people are very into that.
But also, the idea of, hey, if the Earth ever goes, you know, down or whatever, you know, we can take the space shuttle to some other planet and live there or whatever.
Let me bring it full circle for it.
Maybe not.
What's that?
Let me bring it full circle for you.
Let's close with that.
All right.
So in that same interview with Charles Duke, the Apollo astronaut that debates Bart Sobrell that he does with Glenn Beck that I was talking about where he talks about his religious experiences, right?
He actually and very coherently says that he believes, number one, that we are actually alone in the universe in the sense of extraterrestrial or alien civilizations.
He does not believe those exist.
But he does believe that these entities, these quote-unquote aliens, do exist and that God specifically told him that they are the demons of the Bible.
So he believes that these entities and these craft exist, but he believes that they are of a supernatural and demonic origin.
And look, even in the Age of Disclosure documentary, they don't necessarily say, hey, it's aliens from another solar system.
They talk about the possibility of time travel.
They even talk about the possibility of interdimensional beings.
They talk about the possibility of a civilization of other beings here on Earth or inside of Earth that we have not discovered.
They give all of those options.
But it is, you know, kind of rather interesting that this guy Duke, who is an Apollo astronaut, supposedly walked on the moon, would be probably privy to more things in that arena of outside of Earth's atmosphere, outside of Earth's orbit, to say those type of things with such conviction and clarity.
Again, this guy's an older guy, but I would encourage people to go watch him talk because, in my opinion, he is still sharp as a tack, Aaron.
Interesting.
Yeah, I've heard the, well, there's the stuff that there's, you know, ships that fly right into the ocean and go underneath of it and they live under there somewhere.
I've heard, you know, the concept of aliens aren't actually extraterrestrials.
They're just people from the future or people that were from at some point.
Yeah, you know, time travel at some point becomes a thing if maybe it already is.
I don't know.
But, you know, and then they are coming back to help things.
And that gets us into the whole, you know, Credit Thunberg picture from the 1800s and all that other crap.
So, but anyway, another fun, informative, and always interesting chat with you, Jason Burmese here.
As we've gone deep in the weeds, Roger by River Cities Reader.
Once again, don't forget you can find Jason.
And are all your documentaries free if they go to your page?
Right over on the page, you go over to InfoWarrior.
You just type in Jason Burmese, B-E-R-M-A-S.
You scroll down, you look for the documentaries, and you can watch Fabled Enemies, Invisible Empire, a new world order to find, loose change, final cut, and shade the motion picture for free.
And that is going to wrap it up for us today, folks.
You know the drill.
I cannot do this without you.
$5, $10, $15 via the links down below means the world to me.
Big donors couldn't do it.
Again, without your support, do want to thank someone.
He says, thank you, Jason.
Not on X.
This is just a tag I have on YouTube at the moment, just FYI, since there is no option for YouTube social here on Buy Me a Coffee.
All the best.
I'll continue to help when I can.
We appreciate you because we couldn't do it without you.