Tuesday War Room: Bombshell New Docs Show Trump Called Police About Epstein in 2006: ‘Thank Goodness You’re Stopping Him,’ Lutnick Testifies He ‘Barely Had Anything’ to Do With Epstein
Donald Trump’s 2006 call to Palm Beach police—"Thank goodness you’re stopping him"—about Jeffrey Epstein contradicts his denials, while unsealed court files reveal six redacted figures (including Leslie Wexner) later unredacted, exposing potential FBI scrubbing. A $105M lawsuit and coded emails suggest Epstein’s crimes were systemic, not isolated, yet redactions protect non-victims while omitting co-conspirators. Meanwhile, Trump’s Religious Liberty Commission clashes over anti-Zionism vs. anti-Semitism, with Carrie Prajan Bowler refusing to resign despite accusations of undermining Jewish interests. The episode ties Epstein’s legacy to broader free speech and political power struggles, warning of elite manipulation under the guise of protecting minorities. [Automatically generated summary]
I'm your host, Harrison Smith, Infowars.com, banned.video.
I cannot tell you what a gigantic show we have for you today.
It's been one of the craziest 24-hour periods of all time.
And I got more videos than I know what to do with.
We've had a couple major hearings on Capitol Hill, including the questioning of Howard Lutnick, as well as a religious liberty committee, which turned out to just be an anti-Semitism committee.
And the Christians participating on that panel are now being threatened with their lives by the other people on the panel because I think they misunderstand the whole concept of religious liberty over there.
So we'll get into that very much so.
But we just have, I mean, from the Epstein files, and mostly it'll be about the Epstein files today.
But of course, the war with Iran, and of course, the anti-Semitism attempt to censor America and get rid of our First Amendment.
They're all tied very, very intimately together.
And we'll explore that tangled web being weaved that's, frankly, strangling us to death.
We'll begin today, as we do every day, with our Daily Dispatch.
All right, here it is, folks, your Daily Dispatch for Tuesday, the 10th of February, 2026.
Trump says he might send second carrier for Iran strikes if talks fail.
President Trump told Axios in an interview on Tuesday that he's considering sending a second aircraft carrier strike group to the Middle East to prepare for military action if negotiations with Iran fail.
Iran and the U.S. have resumed negotiations as of last Friday in Oman for the first time since the 12-day war in June, but Trump has simultaneously launched a massive military buildup in the Gulf.
Either we will make a deal or we will have to do something very tough like last time, Trump told Axios.
And of course, Benjamin and Yahoo will be arriving in D.C. tomorrow.
And the discussion of going to war with Iran continues to simmer.
Hasn't quite boiled over yet.
But this is absurd.
And we'll get into how absurd all of this is because, of course, the talks are not going to go anywhere because they're making unreasonable demands of Iran that they know they're not going to capitulate to.
So we'll get into like what could possibly happen here because it's very troubling.
And of course, the absurd thing, and I'm sure Iran knows this, is that even if they give up their ballistic missiles, that's really just leaving yourself defenseless.
And then they have absolutely no way to stop Israel from carpet bombing them at will.
So they're probably not going to do that.
They also have the ability to strike Israel pretty much with impunity because their missiles are too fast for the Iron Dome to stop.
So that's going to be troublesome.
But even if they give up their ballistic missiles, it's not going to stop the aggression from Israel and America.
And even if we take over Iran, do you think that's going to be the end of it?
Do you think if we finally just bomb the hell out of Iran and we do some 24-hour blitzkrieg where we just kill everyone in the country, do you think it's going to be over then?
Do you think then we'll have world peace?
Or do you think then Russia will be the next country on our chopping block or China or whatever else?
It's not going to end.
It's not going to end.
So I don't know.
I don't know what Iran's going to do here, but I doubt it's going to be capitulate and surrender without a fight.
That's just me.
Leslie Wexner And The Epstein Files00:15:34
Meanwhile, Howard Luttnick now says he met Epstein twice after 2008 conviction.
We'll get back into this as he's being questioned over this, and it's not going well for old Howard.
Trump reportedly called police about Epstein in 2006.
Newly unsealed Epstein court documents reviewed by the Miami Herald include details from a 2019 FBI interview reportedly by former Palm Beach police chief Michael Ryder, in which he describes a 2006 phone call where President Donald Trump said of Jeffrey Epstein, quote, thank goodness you're stopping him.
Everyone has known he's been doing this for a long time, even though the president has repeatedly said he didn't know about Epstein's alleged crimes at the time they were happening.
Wow, they're actually trying to frame that as if it's, wow, you caught Trump in a lie.
No, he was actually one of, if not the first person to blow the whistle on Jeffrey Epstein and call out Ghillane Maxwell.
We'll read the emails a little bit later.
Meanwhile, Trump Religious Liberty Panel's first anti-Semitism hearing turns contentious over Israel.
We'll show you lots of clips from that later in the show.
And finally, six men likely incriminated by links to Jeffrey Epstein, lawmakers say after reviewing unredacted files.
So this, of course, was Thomas Massey revealing not just the identity, but the names, like not just the career or positions of the people in the files, but the names of them, including Les Wexner, who we've been telling you is involved forever.
Why did he get his name redacted?
He's not in the government, he's not in national security, but he is a part of a cabal that's even more important to the government than the government.
We'll be right back on the other side with more.
Share this link, folks.
It's going to be a huge show.
Welcome back, ladies and gentlemen.
This is the war room.
Things are heating up when it comes to Jeffrey Epstein.
And it's getting very interesting, folks.
More and more discoveries contained in the Epstein documents are giving us a better view of exactly who the players were here and exactly what game they were playing.
And we'll start with this.
Thomas Massey has revealed the names of some of the people involved in Epstein that were redacted inexplicably from the releases.
Of course, we showed yesterday when he came out and talked about having gone and looked at the unredacted files and said, well, a lot of them were still redacted because it turns out they were redacted before they were ever submitted to the DOJ.
A little interesting.
Headline from the New York Post: Six men likely incriminated by links to Jeffrey Epstein, lawmakers say after reviewing unredacted files.
Six associates of the late pedophile Jeffrey Epstein were likely incriminated by their inclusion in voluminous files detailing the years-long investigation of the notorious financier.
Representatives Roe Khanna and Thomas Massey told reporters Monday after reviewing documents at the Justice Department: quote, we went in there for two hours, said Massey.
There's millions of files, right?
And in a couple hours, we found six men whose names have been redacted who are implicated in the way that the files are presented.
The congressman who co-authored the Epstein Files Transparency Act that forced the release of the documents late last year did not name the men or specify the conduct they believed would be to be illegal.
They did say one suspect was, quote, pretty high up in a foreign government while another was a prominent individual, a CEO of a company, in fact.
And we have a couple statements from these guys.
Let's go to clip 65 here.
This is Ro Khanna giving an address on the Epstein files that he saw.
Here he is in Congress giving that address.
Mr. Speaker, yesterday, Congressman Massey and I went to the Department of Justice to read the unredacted Epstein files.
We spent about two hours there, and we learned that 70 to 80 percent of the files are still redacted.
In fact, there were six wealthy, powerful men that the DOJ hid for no apparent reason.
When Congressman Massey and I pointed this out to the Department of Justice, they acknowledged their mistake.
And now they have revealed the identity of these six powerful men.
These men are Salvatore Navora, Zorab Micheladz, Leopig Leonor, Nikola Caputa, Sultan Ahmed Bin Sulyam, CEO of Dubai Ports World, and billionaire businessman Leslie Wexner, who was labeled as a co-conspirator by the FBI.
Now, my question is: why did it take Thomas Massey and me going to the Justice Department to get these six men's identities to become public?
And if we found six men that they were hiding in two hours, imagine how many men they are covering up for in those 3 million files.
But the story gets worse.
The reality is that Donald Trump's FBI scrubbed these files in March, long before Thomas Massey and I passed the Epstein Transparency Act.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Now, my bill is clear.
The Epstein Transparency Act requires them to unredact those FBI files.
And yet the Justice Department said to me and to Congressman Massey, we just uploaded whatever the FBI sent us.
And guess what?
The FBI sent scrubbed files.
That means the survivor's statement to the FBI, naming rich and powerful men who went to Epstein's island, who went to his ranch, who went to his home and raped and abused underage girls or saw underage girls being paraded, they're all hidden.
They're all redacted.
It's a little bit of a force.
They're inviting all the members of Congress to go to see the Department of Justice, quote-unquote, unredacted files, but they've got all redacted files from the FBI.
And it's not the fault of the Justice Department attorneys.
They were just told upload things that Donald Trump's FBI had already scrubbed.
It's a blatant violation of the Epstein Transparency Act, but it also asks a fundamental question.
Who are they protecting?
Why are they protecting these rich and powerful men, people I call part of the Epstein class?
Why are we in a country where there is no elite accountability for people who do the most heinous things?
You have in England the king now calling for an investigation and possible prosecution of his own brother.
You have in Norway the princess who no longer has support to be the queen.
And yet in the United States of America, we have someone in the cabinet, Howard Luttnick, who is all over these Epstein files, who allegedly had business with Epstein after he was convicted of pedophilia, and he still is in the cabinet.
We need to ask ourselves, are we in America going to have elite accountability?
Are we going to call on rich and powerful people who broke the law or cavorted with a pedophile, a convicted pedophile?
Are we going to call them to account?
Are we going to have prosecutions for billionaires who went to this island and either raped underage girls or saw underage girls being raped and didn't say anything?
Are we going to have investigations?
I'll tell you what this is about.
It's not just about the 1,200 survivors.
It's about two tiers of justice in America.
It's about people who can accumulate wealth and power and don't have to care about the rest of America.
They have destroyed so much of this country.
Income inequality is at a 60-year high.
Workers' salaries are less than they have been for 75 years as a part of GDP.
Somehow this country seems to be working for the rich and powerful, but it's not working for ordinary working class Americans.
I say enough.
It's time to begin with accountability for the Epstein class.
Hold them in front of Congress, those people who visited the island or did business with Epstein after he was a convicted pedophile.
Investigate them, prosecute them, and let's return to democratic accountability in the United States of America.
Let's return to one system of justice in the United States of America.
Let's return to a place where every American has a stake in this country.
Very powerful stuff from RoCanna.
And there he mentions some of the guys, some of the men that were exposed by Rokana himself and Thomas Massey when they were able to see the unredacted names.
Makes a bunch of good points about why are these men being protected.
But of course, to ask the question is to answer it.
They're being protected because they're elite members of this society.
It's like, why are all of these powerful, important, dangerous people not being arrested?
It's like, well, because they're powerful and important, and they use their power to avoid consequences for their actions.
It's not actually all that complicated.
And he mentions Howard Luttnick.
We'll get into him in just a second, but let's go now to clip 29 here.
This is Representative Thomas Massey revealing that Les Wexner was, of course, one of the names being redacted in the Epstein files.
Now, we've been telling you about Les Wexner for a very long time.
His name has not been, you know, out of the Epstein orbit.
It's always been right there next to Epstein.
I believe Les Wexner, unless I'm mistaken.
I mean, he sold Epstein's house for a dollar, the most expensive private residence in the entire city of New York.
He gave to Epstein for free.
He was his sole banker for a long time.
I mean, he was Epstein's handler, essentially, and funder, and he got all the money through Les Wexner because Les Wexner represents a kingpin in the mega group, which is the international Jewish conspiracy you've been hearing so much about.
Let's go to clip 29 here.
This is Representative Thomas Massey talking about Les Wexner in the files.
Here it is.
An example of something.
Maybe it wasn't intentional on their part.
I'd like to hear his take on the redaction of the CEO who's listed as a co-conspirator in the 2019 child sex trafficking case.
So can I ask you, because, and I want to ask you, this is the same person, Todd Blanche also said about that tonight, that the document you're citing there has victim names in it.
So I think to say that's why there are redactions.
He said, we have just unredacted Les Wexner's name from this document, but his name already appears in the file thousands of other times.
And he says the Justice Department is hiding nothing.
Is that the retired CEO that you're referencing?
It is.
He unredacted it after I found it.
That's a problem.
And I'm glad they've admitted they made a mistake by redacting that.
So you're saying it was redacted when you went in there today.
And after you tweeted that, they unredacted it?
Correct.
Now he's got four other names he needs to unredact.
Did he respond to that?
There's a list of 20 people.
And there's four men in there that need to be unredacted.
Here's another troubling thing that I found.
Can you say who those four men are tonight?
I don't think they're well known.
And so if I did, it wouldn't matter, but I could probably say them on the floor of the House.
But I'll give the DOJ a chance to do what they did in these two examples, where I've discovered something and now they've responded.
So there you go, Thomas Massey, appearing in the Epstein files is not proof guilt, but Leslie Wexner was designated as a co-conspirator of Epstein for child sex trafficking in a 2019 FBI document.
And the Sultan's email address was used to send correspondence about the torture video.
So he identified who the one that said, oh, I liked the torture video.
That apparently was this Sultan guy who is some sort of prince from Saudi Arabia, I believe.
The story is at Zero Hedge.
Massey exposes Les Wexner as Epstein co-conspirator, opening door to criminal charges against Kash Patel, actually.
Yeah, Solomon Ahmed bin Suliem and billionaire businessman Leslie Wexner.
Although President Donald Trump has amplified his attacks against Kentucky Representative Thomas Massey on the basis of diluted claims that he is a radical un-American liberal who's hell-bent on sabotaging his administration, it is the congressman's continuing crusade to expose the crimes of Jeffrey Epstein that shows the actual threat he poses to Trump.
The latest development in the Epstein files fallout has clearly proven that the Trump administration's best attempts to continue to cover up the crimes of Epstein and his accomplices are no match for Massey's vigilance.
After granting members of Congress access to view unredacted versions of the Epstein files in response to the pressure mounted by Massey, the revelations therein have shown the lengths that the Department of Justice under Trump and the FBI have taken to continue the Epstein cover-up, going so far as to break federal law in an increasingly futile attempt to keep the truth from the American public.
So essentially, they're saying the law that was passed, which, by the way, it's worth noting that the entire reason we have Epstein files, like it is a actually monumental victory for the Republican system, because this did not come from an executive order.
It did not come from the executive at all.
This was a bill that was passed through the House, passed through the Senate, and that Trump was pressured and politically obligated to sign.
It was a ground-swell, grassroots operation headed by Rokana and Thomas Massey, who whipped the votes and got agreements.
And of course, this was only really possible because the left and the Democrats thought they were going to get Trump over it.
I mean, it was kind of ridiculous how it turned out, but at the end of the day, this was how our system is supposed to function: that the people elect representatives who go and pass bills to do what the people want.
We want the Epstein files released.
They passed the bill to release it, and now we have them.
So, just kudos again to Thomas Massey and Rokana and everybody else that helped get this over the line because this is actually an effective usage of our system.
The problem is the law they passed demanded that these files be unredacted, except in cases of national security or to protect the identity of victims.
If they're censoring and redacting names of CEOs because they're simply prominent in American society or have leverage over the people in the FBI, then they've committed a crime.
They've violated the statutes of the law that was passed.
So, unless they can give a reasonable, justifiable answer as to why these things were redacted, then they broke the law and should probably be punished for that.
So, you know, amazing stuff from Thomas Massey.
They're going to go look at the files again today.
So, we'll probably get more revelations from them very soon.
But, yes, high-profile Epstein associate and billionaire Les Wexner was identified as being a co-conspirator in the files.
There he is posting.
This is a well-known retired CEO, and you can see here it says co-conspirator.
And actually, they have now released the unredacted version of that.
And you can, if I pull it up here, you can see that Leslie Wexner is the co-conspirator there that whose image was censored in the official release.
So, he's just one.
Other people have found other potential co-conspirators that they think they've identified, including, maybe I shouldn't mention it because it hasn't been officially noted.
But if you want to find out, maybe I'll tell you a little bit later.
Maybe I'll tell you a little bit later, but we're going to move on.
Potential Co-Conspirators Revealed00:15:09
But, of course, you know, these things should have massive consequences for the American political power structure, but they're not.
They're just not for some reason.
The UK is collapsing under the weight of these revelations.
People all over Norway and Germany and elsewhere are resigning in disgrace because of their inclusion in the Epstein files.
Meanwhile, people included in the Epstein files in a way that exposes that they were patently dishonest in the past are clinging to power and refuse to even acknowledge the implications of their name being included in this stuff.
They're not going to do it on their own.
They have to be forced to do this.
And unfortunately, the left doesn't seem all that focused on them.
They really only care about getting Trump.
And by the way, Trump is totally exonerated by these files.
I'll get to that in just a second.
But let's talk about Howard Luttnick here.
Yeah, we'll go to Howard Luttnick.
We'll go first to clip number six here.
Or actually, sorry, we got to go to clip number 16.
Let's go to clip number 16.
This is Senator Van Holland questioning Howard Luttnick, who, of course, is a key figure in Trump's administration and was exposed in the Epstein files as having contact with Epstein years and years and years after he vehemently denied ever having anything to do with him.
Let's watch.
Lutnick, I think you understand the root of concern here.
It's the way you described very emphatically your first encounter with him in his apartment, said you were disgusted, would never have any contact with him again.
Did you, in fact, make the visit to Jeffrey Epstein's private island?
I did have lunch with him as I was on a boat going across on a family vacation.
My wife was with me, as were my four children and nannies.
I had another couple with they were there as well with their children, and we had lunch on the island.
That is true for an hour, and we left with all of my children, with my nannies, and my wife all together.
We were on family vacation.
We were not apart.
To suggest there was anything untoward about that in 2012.
I don't recall why we did it, but.
Mr. Secretary, again, as I said, there.
Okay, so that's a lie, but I mean, what's being exposed is that he lied.
I mean, from AP News, Howard Luttnick now says he did meet Epstein twice since his 2008 conviction.
And he says, oh, there's no reason for us to think this was untoward in 2012.
Well, four years earlier, he'd been convicted of child sex trafficking.
So what are you talking about?
You're acting like you didn't know that.
On your questioning from Democrats on Tuesday, Commerce Secretary Howard Luttnick acknowledged that he'd met with Jeffrey Epstein twice after the late financier's 2008 conviction for soliciting prostitution from a child, reversing Lutnick's previous claim that he'd cut ties with him after 2005.
Luttnick again downplayed his relationship with a disgraced financier who was once his neighbor in New York City, next-door neighbor.
In fact, they shared a wall.
As he was questioned by Democrats during a subcommittee hearing on the Senate Appropriations Committee, he described their contact as a handful of emails and a pair of messages that were years apart.
I did not have any relationship with him.
I barely had anything to do with him, Luttnick told lawmakers.
But of course, this was exposed as a lie from the Epstein files.
And there's things like this.
Howard Luttnick went to Jeffrey Epstein's island just five days before Luttnick and Epstein went into business together.
So he apparently lunched on Epstein's island on the 23rd of December 2012.
And just five days later, on the 28th of December 2012, Luttnick and Epstein signed a stock purchase agreement.
So he's not even being honest about that.
It wasn't just a brief lunch on vacation that was totally innocent.
It was probably some sort of business meeting.
And there's probably some, as he puts it, untoward things that occurred there.
So again, he's just lying on top of lying.
I would think you'd be held in contempt of Congress for that, for such a flagrant act of dishonesty right in their faces.
Let's go to clip number six here.
This is Senator Merkley to Luttnick.
I'm sorry, Senator Van Holland again, same guy.
So this is a follow-up to the last question.
When he talks about the nannies, he's like, I was there with my family and my wife and my kids and our nannies.
And this leads to another question.
Let's watch.
Questions I have before we close.
One is just to follow up on one of your responses with respect to the Epstein files, specifically the visit you and your family took to Epstein's private island in 2012.
And I think you also said you went on his yacht.
Is that right?
Or both?
No.
No.
Okay.
At that time, I think you mentioned that you were accompanied by your wife and kids and nannies.
My question is, do you know whether the nanny that you had on that trip was the same nanny that Jeffrey Epstein expressed interest in meeting?
No, I have no idea about that whole thing.
I mean, I don't recall it having anything to do with me.
And I don't know that.
It's just, you know, this guy was a convicted sex offender and obviously not a great place for kids and nannies.
Was Jelaine Maxwell on the island at that time?
No.
He seemed to know that with certainty.
So, yeah, Luttnick is in these emails talking about one of his nannies to Jeffrey Epstein.
And then he mentions he has nannies with him on the island.
They're like, were you bringing a nanny to Jeffrey Epstein?
He was like, I don't know about any of that.
What?
No, me?
Howard Luttnick?
This is a face you can trust.
Of course, not when it's staring down at you from a mask on a wall and you're tied to a dental chair, but that's beside the point.
Let's go now to clip number seven.
This is Senator Merkley to Lutnick talking about the angst in his voice.
All these people criticizing him over being best friends and business partners with a pedophile.
Poor Howard, let's watch.
I want to just summarize the reason, and I can hear the angst in your voice over the Epstein files.
The reason people are bothered is because last year you said you had cut off all contact.
But there are eight incidences of interaction in the files after 2005.
In 2009, you wanted to speak with Epstein.
You asked for his phone number.
In 2011, there was the appointment for drinks.
In 2012, you were planning a trip to the private island with your family.
That sounds like somebody you know well enough to call up and say, let's get our families together.
Let's visit each other.
In 2013, the exchange of information about an article relating to intellectual property and gambling, topics that you have an interest in.
You both signed up for an investment.
It's not clear if you had conversations about that same investment, but you were neighbors.
You made the same investment.
Maybe, maybe not.
And then in 15, Mr. Paulson, in 2017, Mr. John Paulson wrote to Epstein saying, hey, why don't you contribute to this event?
You're a close friend of the Luttnicks, and it's honoring that.
Long story short, he was very, very well tied in with Luttnick.
And as Patrick Howley reports at Howley Reporter, in November 2015, as we in the America First Movement were working to defeat Hillary Clinton, Howard Luttnick was inviting Jeffrey Epstein to his intimate Hillary Clinton fundraiser.
Luttnick now works in the Trump administration instead of us.
So it's an email exchange to Jeffrey Epstein from Howard Luttnick, inviting him to a fundraiser for Hillary Clinton.
And this guy is now the one handling Trump.
Gee, I wonder why Trump hasn't been given access to the Epstein files.
Maybe it's because everybody around him is a traitor and betraying him and has been his enemy this whole time, or only pretending to help him because it benefits them.
Maybe that's why.
I don't know.
All right, welcome back, folks.
This is The War Room.
I'm your host, Harrison Smith, Infowars.com, banned.video.
I'm about to expose the craziest parts of the Epstein files.
Stuff I guarantee you are not prepared for.
I was not prepared for this.
This has honestly blown my mind what I'm going to reveal to you in this segment.
Let's just go over real quick some developments over the last 24 hours, okay?
Thomas Massey's gone in, seen the unredacted files, at least part of it.
Massey exposes Les Wexner as Epstein co-conspirator, opening door to criminal charges against Kash Patel.
Sultan Ahmed bin Suliyem, named as Massey over Epstein torture video email.
Thomas Massey named the Emrati businessman Sultan Ahmed bin Suluyam as the individual Jeffrey Epstein had emailed about a quote torture video.
Now, if you don't know who this guy is, Sultan Ahmed bin Suliyem owns a company called DP World.
It controls about 10% of global container shipping.
That may not register yet until you hear Thomas Massey just named him as the sender of the torture video.
Flashback to 1982, Los Angeles authorities opened a repossessed shipping container and found over 16,000 preserved fetuses, that is late-term abortions to many, floating in formaldehyde, dumped like trash.
Shipping containers glide across oceans carrying everyday cargo, hidden secrets, and unspeakable depravity.
So apparently the guy that controls 10% of the world container traffic is emailing Jeffrey Epstein on his Gmail account about torture videos.
That's how confident these people are.
They always get away with it.
From Lebanon underscore John on X, my co-host at Moonbase Live, put this list together.
Epstein files rip through Europe's elite like wildfire with silence in the U.S. With the UK, Prime Minister is on the brink of resignation, the cabinet in turmoil, the entire government on the brink of collapse.
In Norway, criminal investigations into the former prime minister have been launched.
The World Economic Forum is probing an ex-foreign minister.
Two diplomats have stepped down, and the royal family is mired in this scandal.
In Slovakia, a national security advisor has stepped down.
In Sweden, a Swedish UN-linked diplomat has resigned over the Epstein files.
In France, former culture and education minister is now under investigation and resigned from the Arab World Institute over the Epstein files.
And despite the fact that the vast majority of the people included in the Epstein files are from America, we have seen practically no resignations or firings or anything of the sort.
One of the more disturbing revelations made today was that a UAE diplomat offered her 13-year-old sister to Epstein, saying, quote, she's even prettier than me.
That's Hind Al Oweis, the same woman who those earlier emails coordinating Jeffree's schedule.
She's walking around free right now.
And again, literally offered her 13-year-old daughter saying how, or sister rather, saying how pretty she was.
Newly released documents show Epstein owned a girls' clothing store called Justice.
Internal Epstein financial records show that Les Wexner transferred TOO Inc. to Epstein's financial trust company in 2001.
TOO Inc. owned Justice and other girl brands.
So again, they were just sort of shifting money and businesses and women between themselves endlessly.
Of course, the discussion of the code word jerky has been disturbing, to say the least.
And this may be the craziest email.
Quote, this is from somebody named Francis Derby to somebody who's blacked out, but it's in the Epstein files.
The subject is jerky.
Just wanted to touch base about jerky with capital J. J.E., Jeff Epstein, said he was going to start eating regular food again, so he might be eating less jerky.
That said, he has six bags of it in the downtown freezer for his next trip.
I believe it should be enough to get him through.
Any other questions, let me know.
Thank you, Francis.
What do you think jerky means?
What do you think it means?
He's going to start eating regular food again, so he might be eating less jerky, but he still has six bags of it in the freezer for his next trip as he's got his assistants coordinating and like putting on a calendar, moving his jerky around the world.
I don't believe that they're talking about jerky.
I don't think they're talking about beef jerky personally.
But then again, that would make me, obviously, a crazy conspiracy theorist because according to the FBI, the FBI has concluded that Jeffrey Epstein was not running a sex trafficking ring for powerful men.
It just decided that's not what was happening, I guess.
It's just one of these headlines.
It's like, okay, well, I'm not sure what outcome you expected to come of this.
We were going to go, oh, well, the FBI says it wasn't happening.
So I guess we believe them.
Like, no, just what?
Why would you even, I mean, it's obvious.
It's just really not a smart move to try to cover this stuff up.
The FBI poured over Epstein's bank records and emails.
It searched his homes.
It spent years interviewing his victims and examining connections to some of the world's most influential people.
But while investigators collected ample proof that Epstein sexually abused underage girls, they found scant evidence that the well-connected financier led a sex trafficking ring serving powerful men and Associated Press review of internal justice department records show.
Again, I mean, the fix has been in the whole time.
The fix has been in the whole time.
I mean, the fix was in when he was first caught in 2005.
It was in again in 2019 or 2008 or whenever else he, I mean, he's just the investigation in him was always managed by people in his ring.
So it just never came to anything.
And anybody that tried to do anything about it had the authorities from higher up in their organization come down and slap it out of their hands.
And that's not just law enforcement, by the way.
Reporters who had this story had their story slapped down by the people above them at ABC News.
The people who wanted to investigate this had it slapped down by people in the FBI who were covering it up.
The people who wanted to charge him, prosecutors who wanted to charge him were told hands off, he's intelligence, and they gave him a sweetheart deal.
Anytime a person of moral character and, frankly, a lack of courage, but enough to actually go after him in the first place, they were shut down from somebody higher up in whatever organization they were in, whether it's the federal government, the local police, or the mainstream media.
Somebody at the top of every one of these organizations is in with Epstein and is willing to commit heinous crimes to cover it all up.
So just so we're aware, the one person that that doesn't apply to, as we've been telling you the entire time, and this is just absolute confirmation of what we've been saying.
Trump And The Palm Springs Investigation00:08:37
And what we've been saying has been a combination of both our hunches and our reading of human behavior, but also a plethora of evidence that Donald Trump was not friends with or involved with Jeffrey Epstein in his criminal activity.
And now that has been proven out incontrovertibly by the Epstein document releases.
Trump reportedly called police about Epstein in 2006.
Newly unsealed Epstein-related court documents reviewed by the Miami Herald include details from a 2019 FBI interview, reportedly a former Palm Beach police chief, Michael Ryder, in which he describes a 2006 phone call where President Donald Trump said of Jeffrey Epstein, quote, thank goodness you're stopping him.
Everyone has known he's been doing this, even though the president has repeatedly said he doesn't know about Epstein's alleged crimes at the time they were happening.
But of course he did.
And we've been saying, I mean, the whole time, the evidence of Trump not being involved or actually being actively opposed to what Jeffrey Epstein was doing.
I can think of no less than like half a dozen examples.
There was the first time it was brought up in 2015 when he was still a candidate, hadn't even gotten the Republican nomination.
He's asked about Epstein, his first response.
There was creepy stuff that went on that island, and you should go ask Prince Andrew.
Of course, even before that, you've got him kicking Jeffrey Epstein out of Mar-a-Lago, and you have him being asked by lawyers of the victims if he would help.
And Donald Trump was the only one of Jeffrey Epstein's supposed friends that said, What can I do for you? and offered to help in any way that he could.
All of the victims themselves, when asked about Trump, all of them said, No, he wasn't involved.
So, I mean, the whole time, there's been more than enough reason to believe that Donald Trump was opposed to Jeffrey Epstein and not involved in him.
But now, this is sort of the final nail in that coffin.
More evidence that Trump was the original Jeffrey Epstein whistleblower is coming out from court documents.
Trump was responsible for Epstein's first conviction, and Epstein knew it and was livid.
And so, you actually have the document here that says that Trump, quote, knew Epstein was disgusting.
Trump said Maxwell was Epstein's operative.
She is, quote, evil.
And to focus on that, on her, right?
So, Trump said Maxwell is evil.
She's his co-conspirator.
You should focus on her.
Trump told Blank that he was around Epstein once when teenagers were present, and Trump, quote, got the hell out of there.
Trump was one of the very first people to call when people found out that they were investigating Epstein.
No one could explain how Epstein made his money.
They knew he worked for Bear Stearns.
Blank was told that Epstein was kind of a technical guy that would make it happen, but you didn't want to know how.
None of the victims that we spoke with said they had sexual contact with men other than Epstein while in Epstein's orbit.
Blank had their one time, one time went out screaming.
Okay.
Prince Andrew is a fixture in Palm Beach and has no protection while there.
Blank has done interviews in the past with blank people.
Victims thought that PPD was paid off by, or Palm Springs Police Department, was paid off by Epstein, which is why Blank went and did these interviews.
He felt he needed to defend the Palm Springs Police Department.
So there you go.
Trump was one of the first to report Epstein, said Ghislaine Maxwell was evil.
And when he was actually in a situation with Epstein and teenage girls, he quote, got the hell out of there as quickly as possible.
Okay, so vindicated.
Total vindication, just absolute, absolute vindication for Donald Trump.
The Epstein files, where they contained Donald Trump, now completely exculpate him or exonerate him from any participation with Jeffrey Epstein whatsoever.
After this, private investigators began harassing and playing games with Blank.
Epstein had Blank go to Blank and tell him these girls are just prostitutes.
They're just happy innings.
These are minor cases.
Private investigators began pulling the police officers' trash.
After six months, somebody retired.
So this is about how Jeffrey Epstein was harassing and trying to intimidate the police officers investigating him in Palm Springs.
The Palm Springs Police Department referred this case to the FBI and introduced the victims to the FBI.
Everyone was very motivated.
Eventually, there was a lack of communication.
Blank heard there was discussions of a plea deal, of a non-prosecution deal.
Blank was asked to speak to the U.S. attorney, Alexander Acosta.
Blank asked him if he was going to own up to what he promised when he was sworn in.
Acosta said the defense had him very frustrated with the case.
There was a lot of interest from higher up.
The state did not want to take it back.
It took months to convince them to take it back.
It was very disappointing that the system convinced them to take it, or it was very disappointing that the system failed in this case.
Blank was told that the non-prosecution would include a fund for counseling and medical.
There was a hurry to make this case go away.
So once again, we're getting sort of the down and dirty inside sausage making details of how this worked.
After giving the $90,000 check, Epstein came back to Blank's office.
He talked about Harvard donations.
Epstein just wanted to know about Blank.
It was like he was sizing Blank up.
Afterwards, Blank walked with Epstein to the lobby and Blank and Blank was there.
She was like a statue.
Palm Beach County Country Club.
Oh, Palm Beach, sorry, not Palm Springs.
My bad.
Kept saying Palm Springs.
Palm Beach Country Club is a Jewish country club.
A lot of wealthy people there, and they flock together.
Mar-a-Lago is a mixture of everyone.
Donald Trump told Blank that he threw Epstein out of his club.
Trump told the Palm Beach Police Department to tell him, thank goodness you're stopping this.
Everyone has known he's doing this.
Trump told him that people in New York were involved as well.
So there you go.
Trump is fully and completely exonerated as far as I'm concerned from inclusion in the Epstein files.
The only conclusion of him to be found is the fact that he kicked Epstein out, like we always said he did, and actually, you know, actively helped the police and encouraged them and informed them that Ghislaine Maxwell was the power behind the throne, as it were.
So, again, from ABC News, they're having to admit this.
Ex-police chief says Trump told him, Thank goodness you're stopping Epstein in the 2000s.
Okay, so that's just like, somebody get this to Trump.
Somebody let Trump know you're exonerated, dude.
You're free and clear.
You don't have to fear the Epstein files anymore.
Okay.
However, your second in command and your Secretary of State are in fact included in the Epstein files.
They lied about their participation with Epstein.
And there's plenty of information about how not only were they deeply involved in the Epstein network, but when it comes to Marco Rubio, he's basically an open and acknowledged puppet of theirs.
So that's your worm tongue.
You might want to expel from the castle before you get us all killed.
That's just my advice.
So that would be one of the most important and bombshell revelations that has yet been found in the Epstein files, completely exonerating Donald Trump and totally humiliating and destroying the Democrats who want to twist this to hurt Donald Trump.
I mean, I read it in the article just now where they're like, you know, Trump said he didn't know about the criminal activity, but actually he called the cops on Epstein in the first place.
Like, okay, do you think that's a gotcha?
Oh, he lied about knowing.
Well, he called the cops on him.
He obviously wasn't participating in it.
And the way Trump talks, it's, you know, pretty obvious when he says, I don't know anything about that.
What he means is I wasn't there.
I wasn't involved in that.
I wasn't participating in it.
He knew about it because he got the cops on them.
So that's very good news, and that's very bombshell information.
And once again, it just makes Trump's behavior up till now completely inexplicable and confusing and nonsensical.
It's very weird because he's been totally, completely exonerated in all this.
And you know what?
Before we move on to the next major crazy thing, I meant to play this video in the last segment because Howard Luttnick, who's now been forced to admit that he was more involved with Epstein than he said he was, met him and knew him and talked to him years after he said he completely cut off contact because of what a horrible guy that was.
And that he, you know, is in the emails investing in the same companies as Epstein and living right next door to him in New York and all this stuff.
So he's not exactly laughing about it now, but that's exactly what he was doing the day before when he was behind Trump and Trump was giving an address about Jeffrey Epstein.
We've got a clip number 43.
This is Howard Luttnick, who has now been caught being in the Epstein crime ring.
Laughing at Epsteins Deception00:02:47
This is him laughing at the fact that he thought he was getting away with it at the time.
Let's watch.
Clip 43 here.
Respond to the Epstein situation.
Is he hosting some kind of gathering of top advisors this evening to talk about how to respond to?
I don't know.
I could ask you that question.
I don't know of it, but he's not going to respond to the Epstein.
Just like laughing his ass off.
I could ask you that question.
When asked about Jeffrey Epstein raping kids.
It's like a fake laugh, too.
It's almost like not even a real laugh.
He's doing like a Santa Claus or like your whole belly goes up and down.
It was a belly laugh.
It was a real, you know, hardcore.
I'm getting away with this kind of laugh.
It's called Duper's Delight.
It's a well-known. psychological phenomenon.
People think they're getting away with something.
They tend to laugh and smile.
He's not laughing and smiling anymore as he's being questioned about it.
But that's the mindset of the people we're dealing with.
That's his mindset of the Howard Light.
He genuinely thinks it is hilarious that they're asking about his participation with a group of criminals that systematically trafficked and raped little girls.
It's very funny to him.
So he's a demon.
I think what I'm saying here is that he is a demon.
He's possessed by demons.
Now we're going to get to the craziest thing.
All right.
We're going to get to the craziest revelation of all from the Epstein files that I have not heard anybody report on to a degree that it demands.
And before we do that, let me tell you to go to the alexjonesstore.com.
You're going to need to, folks.
You're going to need the ultimate gut and brain bundle to handle what I'm about to expose to you.
It's a 50% off discount when you bundle together some of our best-selling products, bovine Colostrum Plus, Methylene Blue Tincture, and the Methylenore Red Tincture, all three together can be bought at 50% off their normal price.
Bovine Colostrum Plus supports your gut lining integrity, digestion, digestion, and immune health.
A strong gut improves nutrient absorption and whole body resilience.
The methylene blue tincture, of course, supports mitochondrial function, mental clarity, and cellular energy.
It helps the brain and body perform at higher levels under stress.
And then methylene red tincture, of course, superpowers methylene blue by supporting circulation, oxygen utilization, and metabolic performance.
Better oxygen delivery supports energy, endurance, and recovery.
And of course, everybody knows that you're supposed to trust your gut most of the time and that your gut is almost a second brain in your body.
Like it literally is a second brain in your body and dictates so much about how you perceive the world comes from your gut telling you things that never rise to the level of consciousness, but are even more accurate than your conscious observations.
So this package, these three products together, it's the brain and gut combo because they work in tandem and they work as like partners to one another.
And if your gut flora, gut fauna, if your gut is all messed up, it's going to make you mentally unwell.
Covid's Dead Man's Switch00:06:30
It's going to make you sluggish and stupid, basically.
So you can't ignore your gut and only treat your brain.
You can't treat your brain.
You can't ignore your brain and only treat your gut.
You got to treat them both together.
And so that's what we do with the brain and gut combo at thealxjonestore.com.
Ultimate gut and brain bundle on sale now, 50% off some of our top-selling products when you bundle them together.
The alexjonesstore.com, the alexjonstore.com slash Harrison, if you want to let them know who sent you.
Okay.
This is the craziest thing I've seen from the Epstein files so far.
And we're going to go to a video here that we went to the same guy yesterday, Trevor Moore from The Widest Kids You Know.
We showed the video yesterday where, you know, it's the fake Illuminati setup and they're talking about, all right, you're going to have to give us your firstborn kid or whatever.
Very funny.
People are posting that going, oh, see, they tell us what they're doing.
This is revelation of the methods.
Like, no, Trevor Moore was an info warrior.
Trevor Moore knew what was up and was using his position in Hollywood to subtly red pill his audience.
They killed him for it, by the way.
Before they killed him, he fell off a balcony and died at a very young age.
I think he was under 40, if I'm not mistaken.
And it happened shortly after the video I'm about to show you.
The video I'm about to show you is probably the reason he was killed.
And it exposes something completely insane about Jeffrey Epstein, his network, and the coronavirus.
We've already seen through Epstein's emails that he was in contact with Bill Gates.
He was in contact with other people involved in the COVID conspiracy.
There were, you know, communications about mRNA and all this sort of stuff.
He was somehow involved in the creation of COVID.
And it's always been a little bit obscure what his role is.
Well, here's a video from, I believe, 2021 or 2022.
I think this is from 2021.
It's Trevor Moore of The Widest Kids You Know talking about something he discovered during COVID just before he was killed by being thrown off a balcony.
Let's go to clip 10.
Like a bioengineer.
So he had all of these scientists on that he would donate money to their charities and he would have them work on things and stuff.
But what I heard, and this is completely unsubstantiated, but I heard it and I thought it was fascinating, was that he also had these same guys because they were disease specialists and everything like that.
He had them design a novel coronavirus that was his kill switch.
Basically, like that was his Trump card, which is like, I don't go to jail or I release this shit.
And like, it's like one of these things where if I don't keep entering in a thing every 30 days, I die.
In like October or November, his kill switch went off.
And that's when the disease got introduced into the world until it became what we knew that.
I don't believe it.
I don't know.
I don't believe that for a second, but that's a goddamn great conspiracy theory.
I love it and I'm going to spread it as much as I can.
I think he may have been onto something.
I think he just may have been onto something.
So the crew just told me he died in 2021 at 41 years old, falling off of a balcony shortly after that video was made, where he claimed that COVID-19 was a kill switch for Jeffrey Epstein and said Jeffrey Epstein paid people to create a novel coronavirus and then wielded it as blackmail, saying if anything ever happens to me, this stuff gets released.
It was a dead man's switch.
The way dead man's switch works, you have it automatically set to disperse information or in this case, a disease.
And unless you put in a code every 24 hours, every 48 hours, then it automatically releases.
You have to actually actively stop it from being released.
So if you die and no one stops it, then it automatically gets released within 28, 24, 48 hours, whatever it is.
So that was Trevor Moore from Wise Kid You Know, who was killed by being thrown off a balcony shortly after that in 2021, saying Jeffrey Epstein was tied in with the creation of COVID and the fact that he quote unquote died and then COVID immediately hit the ground running.
Remember, COVID came about in probably September, October, maybe November of 2019.
That's why it's called COVID-19, even though 2020 was the year of the lockdowns and everything.
It was COVID-19 because that's when it first started spreading shortly after Jeffrey Epstein died.
So that, you know, as he puts it, is a kind of crazy conspiracy theory from the outset.
And he's like, but I think it's great.
So I'm going to keep spreading it.
Now we have evidence.
Now there's evidence in the Epstein files that that was probably true from Invasion or Invisodon at Quantum Altered X on X.
The idea for the pandemic was born in these emails.
While it was, quote, wild polio here, the rest describes exactly how they portrayed COVID.
Not getting three vaxes is the problem.
People who aren't sick and have no symptoms are the problem, quote, the invisible enemy.
And so you have this email to Jeffrey Epstein from this scientist with the headline with the title, Invisible Enemy, saying most of the 22 cases of polio-like paralysis in Syria, 10 of which have been confirmed by polio virus tainting, are among the children below the age of two that were unimmunized and had not received three doses of the vaccine.
The WHO warned last month that there was a high risk of polio spreading internationally because of the movements of refugees across the region and low immunization rates in Syria.
The WHO wants to get rid of polio completely and got pretty close until recent outbreaks.
The fact that most of those infected do not display symptoms but can still spread the disease makes it very hard, makes a very hard virus to get rid of as it is like fighting an invisible enemy.
And this was in 2013 that these emails were first exchanged.
Then you have this: Epstein files reveal yet another critical COVID-19 figure with close relation to the late pedophile, none other than the Proximal Origins author Ian Lipkin.
In this 2012 email from Lipkin to Epstein, we can see them scheduling a meeting with Lipkin bragging about how he quote directs the largest and most productive center for pathogen surveillance and discovery.
The proximal origin paper and the subsequent firestorm he created are well documented.
This is yet again another tie between prolific pedophile Jeffrey Epstein and the COVID-19 pandemic.
It was COVID-19 a dead man switch from Jeffrey Epstein.
A Bungled PR Disaster00:15:39
He was certainly involved with all the people.
All right, welcome back, ladies and gentlemen.
We're going to be joined shortly by Viva Fry to give us his breakdown of what the heck is going on with Jeffrey Epstein, especially when it comes to Donald Trump and just how confusing all of this has been.
And in fact, if he's ready, let's just go ahead and bring him in now.
Viva Fry is my guest, David Freihart.
Fry Heit is a Canadian lawyer, former political candidate for the People's Party of Canada and YouTuber under the pseudonym Viva Fry.
In 2022, Rumble announced his proposal for an open source content moderation policy and process, attributing Fry Heit as being a key legal contributor.
You can follow him on X at the VivaFry and vivabarnslaw.locals.com, where of course he streams along with our good friend, Mr. Barnes.
Mr. Fry, thank you so much for being here with us.
My pleasure.
Thank you for having me.
Well, there's so much about Epstein coming out.
Give us just your bird's eye view, your takeaway.
How are you feeling about the avalanche of information we've heard so far?
Well, I say vindication is not necessarily the right word because it's not a question of proving yourself right or wrong.
Two things are the themes of this: the rollout, the release has been bungled, and one can only conclude that it's incompetence of certain individuals to the point of sabotage.
And Trump was not personally implicated or incriminated by the documents in there.
I've been saying it for a while, been taking a little flack because people say, Viva, they're all in it together.
They couldn't, you know, selectively disclose documents on Trump without taking down everybody, left and right.
I'm like, if they had anything incriminating on Trump himself, they would have released it in 2016.
They would have released it in 2020.
They would have released it in 2024.
And the Clintons are not now going to start spilling the beans.
Nothing was going to incriminate Trump as an individual in this.
It might embarrass people in his entourage, which I think it has.
And unnecessarily so, like, Lutnik is, I say, in hot water.
It's going to make headlines.
It's not clear that he did anything incriminating either, other than not be entirely forthright about his interactions with Epstein and his, you know, visiting the island with his family.
And but for that answer that he gave a while back, he wouldn't be in so much hot water right now, except for the fact that if he had answered it honestly back in the day, maybe he wouldn't be where he is right now.
All that to say, the rollout has been bungled to the point of it cannot be explained by incompetence or strategery.
But what we're learning is more of the same.
We're not getting any massive smoking guns that are going to name names.
We'll see what happens with Thomas Massey's pressure campaign to release some of the names that he says are redacted that would incriminate others that shouldn't be redacted.
But no, it's more of the same.
It's what we've all been saying for a very long time.
But it does prove that there's not so much a there there that we didn't know about, but that this was an extensive network involving a lot of people.
And whether or not it was blackmail or greasing the wheels, you know, if you visited Epstein's island, I would say you had to have a good excuse to do it, but I don't think there's any good excuse to knowingly visit a sex offender's private island where nothing good happens.
Right.
And of course, you know, you're right about Howard Luttnick, what's been discovered.
He's not in emails saying, you know, I love the torture video or anything like that that other people are incriminated in.
But why would he lie about it?
Like that alone is cause for suspicion, right?
You don't lie unless you think there's something that you need to lie about.
I mean, that's a risk, too, because he probably knew it could have been discovered that he was lying.
I doubt he just completely forgot about this.
So, I mean, to me, that's a pretty big deal that he thought it was important enough to lie about in and of itself is worth suspicion, isn't it?
Well, for sure.
And especially remember what his statement was, which was he went and met Jeffrey Epstein after buying his neighboring, the neighboring property, which Epstein owned before transferring it to the Comet Trust, no relation to Comet Pizza.
And then Luttnick bought the property from the Comet Trust and went to meet Epstein and said it was such a, it was so disgusting that he remembered it forever and it was the first and last time.
It's obvious that people felt pressure to downplay their connections because it was guilt by association.
But you don't lie because you have to believe that there's a camera in the sky or a god that will eventually the truth comes out.
And so yeah, he got caught in a lie.
It's going to be embarrassing, but it doesn't look like it's more serious than that, but it's a lie.
It is.
They're just not handling you well.
Worth Viva Fry in 90 seconds.
Don't go anywhere.
Welcome back, ladies and gentlemen.
There has been a ton of bombshell information that's been revealed by the recent release of the Epstein files that feels like it was three years ago that they got released.
There's been so much information coming out.
And we're just trying to collate all of it and figure out what the heck it all means.
My guest is Viva Fry.
You can follow him on X at the Viva Fry.
And of course, follow him on locals, he and Robert Barnes at vivabarnslaw.locals.com.
He, of course, is a former lawyer.
Are you practicing now, Viva?
Last I heard you weren't bothering to re-up your, because you'd moved to America, right?
I proudly relinquished my Quebec bar license because it was serving no practical purpose other than people thinking they could get me in trouble by filing anonymous ethics complaints to the Quebec Bar Society because they didn't like some of my tweets.
But no, I don't plan on practicing.
I think I, you know, I don't think I could practice without being a liability to my clients, but we'll see.
You never know what the future holds.
But yeah, so former attorney, I had 13 years plus of experience, so I can sort of think like a scoundrel, even though I am not one myself, despite what some people might.
That's why I want to let the people know in case they haven't heard of you, which would be weird.
Everybody should know you by now.
But you're not just some guy.
You're an attorney for a long time, have a lot of experience in this.
I just didn't want to say practicing attorney if that wasn't totally accurate.
And in the last segment, you know, you said you didn't think there was anything really indicting President Trump in any of these files.
Seems like today, it's the exact opposite.
It's now been revealed that he was one of, if not the first person to like blow the whistle on Epstein, talk to the Palm Beach police saying, go after Ghislane.
She's the, you know, she's the real kingpin here.
I mean, that is massive bombshell news that to me totally exonerates him because nothing else has even indicted him in the first place.
What's your take on that?
How do you think the left is going to respond to this?
Uh, this new news they're not going to.
You can't, you can't have a meaningful discussion with people who are deliberately trying to misunderstand.
So, don't even try.
This exonerates him.
Everybody knew that Trump had already excommunicated what's his face, Epstein.
Everybody knew that he was pivotal in working with the attorneys to bring this to light, which makes the bungled rollout even more inexplicable.
But it was in the prior disclosures where you had what's his face, Michael Wolf colluding with Jeffrey Epstein to suborn extortion material on Trump, which neither of them had.
So, the exoneration of Trump is nothing surprising, except it's just it doesn't make any sense as to why they blew this release as badly as they did.
And so, from what I understand, some of the people involved in the redactions may or may not be good faith players or may or may not be deliberately trying to sabotage Trump because you can't have redactions that are so bad.
They redact that which need not be redacted, which could be against the law that was signed that bill that was signed into law, or they don't redact the names of the people that they were claiming they couldn't release this to protect.
You can't have those types of mistakes at this level with this level of importance, with this amount of time to prepare for it.
So, I say politically speaking, there should be hell to pay for how this was dealt with within the DOJ.
And, you know, a number of things going all the way back to when we were told that there's video proving that Epstein killed himself in his cell, and then there's a whole problem with that video because apparently Pam Bondi didn't watch the entire thing or didn't know that three minutes was cut out.
And now, from this latest disclosure, you have evidence suggesting that there might have been someone in the backdrop who actually seems to have gone up to the area of Epstein's cell.
You know, we're seeing a lot of interesting things come out.
Unfortunately, no, no, I say no smoking gun, no dagger in the heart of the deep state.
But, you know, I went back and refreshing everybody's memory on the United States Virgin Islands lawsuit against Jeffrey Epstein's estate, which had a number of allegations in that lawsuit testifying or attesting to the fact that other people were involved in the Epstein enterprise.
That lawsuit was settled for $105 million.
And when people say no one else was involved, and yet we need to redact names, there were no other alleged co-conspirators except for the ones who got the blanket pardon.
You know, the idea that people stubbornly cling to the idea that Epstein only partook in this for his own puriant interests, they're ignoring everything that's in all of the lawsuits that have already been filed, settled, all of the witness testimony.
And now we'll just see if Thomas Massey is, I won't say, you know, not barking up the wrong tree or chasing red herrings, whether or not he's making a mountain of a molehill of some of the redactions.
But Harson, did you see the email about the gynecologist?
I don't know if you've seen that one.
I did.
I did.
And I haven't printed it.
It's one of these that I'm just like, I'm not even going to touch it.
I mean, it's, but yes, I did see that.
To give everybody the low down that, I just saw it break from another Twitter account.
I forget whose it was.
It's misspelled, by the way, not probably for any tactical reasons.
Go into the Epstein files and put in the word gynecologist, G-Y-N-O-C-O-L-I-G-S, and you'll get it.
And, you know, again, maybe there's in a perfect universe, there might be a normal explanation.
Oh, it's just someone bragging about his sexual exploits.
But in it, it's Mark Epstein, Epstein's brother, asking for the name of the gynecologist that he took his victims to.
Quote victims.
And then it says, you know, you single-handedly kept that gynecologist in business.
And when you couple that with you might also remember the viral clip that when the transcripts were released of Jeffrey Epstein's being deposed and then he's asked about his misshapen penis and then they end the deposition.
You could, in theory, if you want, I mean, nobody in here deserves the benefit of the doubt as far as Epstein's concerned, but you could say, all right, it's just somebody bragging about going hard as a whatever.
But it's suspicious.
You know, the stuff about the talk of jerky, the talk of torture videos.
They're clearly using code, much like they were with the Podesta emails back in the day.
They're clearly using code.
It's not the way normal people talk.
And so the only question is, what are they using code for?
But, you know, we'll see what happens if and when names are released because they were only supposed to redact names of victims to protect victims.
And apparently they're redacting other names that, you know, might not be victims, but might be co-conspirators.
And whether or not that should be done, whether people like Thomas Massey and Rokana or not, they have arguably been pivotal in bringing about this outcome where we're getting disclosure of three plus million documents that six months ago we were told were not didn't exist.
It was not a hoax.
Bad advice that Trump was getting from whoever didn't look through those documents to know that Trump might be named 5,000 times, but only because people try to suborn perjury or extortion material and can't.
So he got terrible advice.
It's been a bungled, unnecessary PR disaster.
But who knows?
Not 4D chess, but chess is about turning mistakes into opportunities.
You've got enough time.
And depending on what comes out of this, you could play it very usefully for the upcoming midterms.
But no, I just say that, unfortunately, it's been an unforced error bungled of a release.
And what we're seeing, look at this.
It's abject perversion.
And you're not going to convince anybody that the banks that paid out tens of millions of dollars in settlements because they didn't do the KYC and they facilitated Epstein sex trafficking, that they weren't doing this for and on behalf of other people, especially given some of the documents that we're now discovering.
It is so creepy.
Yeah.
Do you remember the gynecologists you sent your victims to?
It reminds me, if you ever read The Godfather book, there's a whole subplot where they have a woman who and they have like plastic surgeons and gynecologists on staff basically to perform abortions back when it was illegal.
And, you know, you'd want medical doctors there to cover up the damage you do to women.
And they were on the payroll and totally off the books.
So again, the mafia, you know, tactics at play here, it really is sick.
And of course, the UK government is like on the brink of collapse over Peter Mandelson's connection to Epstein.
Why are we not seeing anything even remotely like that here?
Because yeah, maybe there's not like a bombshell smoking gun, but I mean, it's pretty damn close.
And a lot of these people are saying things that you don't want leaders of companies or countries to be saying.
What do we need to do to get a similar response that they're having in the UK, where it looks like Kier Starmer is being forced to resign and people have already been ousted from their position and the whole government's on the brink of collapse?
Meanwhile, 90% of the people involved are here in America and there's crickets.
What do we have to do to get some justice around here?
I don't know what you have to do because it seems that a lot of them are on the Democrat side of things.
Like who is it?
It was the Joanna Rubinstein, the woman from Sweden from the United Nations refugee entity who resigned after having gone to the island with her family, after knowing that Epstein was a convicted sex offender.
And when you look into the connections between the UN and Haiti and human trafficking, you can try to, you can maybe connect some dots that you don't have the hard evidence to connect.
But when she resigns, it's not a question of cancel culture, you know, like just forcing people to quit over tangential ties to Epstein.
I just said there's no good reason to have fraternized with a known convicted sex offender to that degree, especially when you're in those types of positions.
So I don't, but the problem is when you get the Stacey Plaskets of American politics, British Virgin Islands, no less, not British, United States Virgin Islands, sorry, texting Jeffrey Epstein when everybody knew everything so that they could get questions to Michael Cohen to somehow get Trump politically sunk.
And there's no political hell to pay for her.
I mean, unfortunately, with the party that the Democrat Party that you have in America today, you might be beyond the point of that type of not social retribution, but social, oh, geez, the word I'm looking for is like holding him to account.
Exactly.
Social responsibility.
The party might be beyond that at this point.
And they so badly want Trump that they'll jump on the tangential connections, such as Luttnick.
I wanted to say something important about Luttnick as well, because, you know, when he probably felt compelled to downplay or ignore or not disclose the full extent, and I'll put it in quotes because it's not clear, you know, to what extent it is.
He obviously knew that there would have been this cancel culture, like when Acosta's deeds with Epstein became known, he was out.
Party Beyond Logic00:16:44
And so if anybody went to the islands, even I say innocently with their family, which is weird, but whatever, or invested in a business in which Epstein was invested, he probably knew there would have been that type of cancellation back then.
And so why not lie?
And then the only problem now is, well, the lie has come out and it might not have on its own been totally damning because, okay, so fine.
Lutnik invested in a company that Epstein invested in.
All right, fine.
He bought his property from a trust that Epstein sold his house to.
He visited him a few years later for Lord knows what reason.
There are some connections which are, I say, more forgivable, more understandable, but some of them do require swift political consequences, which we're seeing in the UK.
But I do think, unfortunately, that the Democrat Party might be beyond that type of social responsibility or political responsibility in America.
Yeah, it kind of stinks.
It kind of stinks.
They're so obsessed with Trump.
And even the way they're covering it now, I read the article earlier where it's like, Trump may have been the first one to report Jeffrey Epstein to the Palm Beach police, but he said he didn't know about their crimes.
And it's like, but yeah, but he called the police on them.
So what are you trying to prove here?
It's all very bizarre.
And again, you get this thing where it's like, yeah, Howard Luttnick lied.
And it's kind of like, why'd you lie, dude?
And it's like, well, if I told the truth, you wouldn't have picked me.
It's like, well, yeah.
You know, I just, I posted this commercial from the, it's got to be the late 80s, the Church of Latter-day Saints.
And it's a song, it's a song.
When you tell one lie, it leads to another.
Then you tell two lies to cover for the other.
And then you tell three lies.
And boy, oh, brother, you're knee deep in a tangled web.
You know, everybody knew it.
And then the reality is he was, you know, whether or not the sex crimes are actually, you know, the biggest tip of this iceberg.
I listened to a lot of Mike Benz and I just listened to Mike Ben's latest podcast with Rogan.
And he focuses on the element that the bigger scandal here might be the deeper, not the sex crimes per se, because maybe it was part of the deal with the devil that they had with Epstein is to either turn a blind eye to or facilitate.
That's it right there.
It's classic.
You got to go watch that.
But this might be the limited hangout where, okay, this is the distraction now with these sorted emails and apparent code talk and ignoring the deep role that Epstein played in intelligence and in arms dealing and whatever.
And if that became known, that intelligence was either turning a blind eye to or facilitating, even if there were sex crimes only relating to Jeffrey Epstein, that might cause a irreparable loss of trust in these institutions, which I think is warranted.
And that might be the deeper angle here to what some might say is a limited hangout of saying, all right, here's some of the dirty emails, but let's ignore the entire intelligence potential to all of this.
All that to say, however, Trump got terrible advice in all of this.
And when he came out and said, if you're still talking about this hoax, I don't need your support.
I didn't take it personally because it's just a poor decision made on bad advice.
He needs to clean house in the DOJ to make sure that they can right this ship and right this wrong and to make sure that the people who are responsible for this monumental debacle are not further advising Trump into future similar debacles.
It's I, I mean somebody's going to make a movie about this 10 years from now or something.
Because, just as you're, as you were relating earlier in the in our conversation, I I totally forgotten about some of the stuff, the Binder thing that came out and then the video that had a minute missing.
It was like it was like they were trying to like make us think they were covering up.
It's been crazy.
The lawyers, the lawyers for some of the victims I forget the exact quote, but they were in front of a judge and they said, there's no level of incompetence that can explain away these errors in the redactions.
You know, go back to the first one, the redactions, remember they're where they?
They they blacklined it out, but if you put it in Adobe Whatever yeah, you could remove the redaction.
So you know it starts off with whether or not it was a campaign promise, it was a political messaging and it was a politically important thing.
You know uh, not retribution but uh, addressing the deep state issues which people think is underlying Epstein, getting to the bottom of Epstein the client list 2016 2020, 2024.
Then whoever's in charge there says no, you know, it's no big deal, he killed himself.
Move on.
And here's your unsigned memo that we're now saying the FBI signed on to.
Then you have Bindergate, inexplicable, inexcusable bungle.
I don't even fault the.
Call them influencers, I call them alternative journalists.
I don't, I don't fault them.
I had Liz Wheeler on who explained it to me at the time and their explanation made total sense.
But you had Bindergate debacle.
That was phase one.
Phase two turned into.
There's nothing here.
Go home and it's a hoax and we don't want your support if you're still talking about it.
And the flack I took online from certain twitter accounts which need not be named.
But you know, the biggest cheerleaders of people running off a cliff were like, stop talking about Viva, it's irrelevant.
I've been sort of you know, not obsessed, but talking about this consistently since 2019.
I'm not going to stop now just because you think I need to cheer on somebody who's making a mistake.
Phase two turned into nothing.
Now it's turned into 3 million documents, so much we need more time to properly redact and then we screw up on the redactions both times.
I said the first time when they when they blacklined it out and you could remove the blacklines.
That would be one hell of a sneaky way of allowing people to see behind the redactions and say oops, you know my first day, the second time, where you say we can't release this to protect the victims and you allow information to identify the victims.
It's there's no level of incompetence that can explain it away.
And then you find out who might be behind the redactions and whether or not they were bad elements within the FBI who are now empowered to do these redactions that have done nothing but embarrass the administration.
Dude, it's like you know, It's fractal wrongness.
And if anybody doesn't know the concept, fractal wrongness, everything you do is wrong.
Every decision you make is wrong, like flipping a coin.
You can't get it wrong too many times in a row, just statistically speaking.
These are statistical anomalies in terms of the fractal mistakes that have been made here.
And I do dare say, you know, at some point you say, don't account, don't attribute to malice what can be explained away by incompetence.
There is a limit to that.
And I think we've long breached that.
We've seen the political consequences to that now, and they're not good for Trump, the administration, or even its ability to focus on the tasks at hand because of this, what is an unforced distraction.
And I would say at some point, you can start to ask whether or not it's deliberate, malicious sabotage by bad elements within.
I mean, I think it has to be.
I think just like you said, I mean, never attribute to malice what can be explained by incompetence, or the flip side of that is never call incompetence something that is clearly the outcome of malice or deliberate obfuscation, you know, which is what's happening at least with Thomas Massey exposing Les Wexner.
I mean, he's there in the document as a co-conspirator, and yet they black him out.
There's no reason.
There's no national security reason to do that.
Massey's come out and said it.
What do you think explains?
Is there an explanation for that?
Again, I can't say that that was incompetence.
That seemed like a deliberate attempt to violate the law as it was passed.
I mean, what do you think the outcome of that's going to be?
I mean, I don't know why they would be doing it.
And then the argument is people say, well, they're blacking out co-conspirators now because there's ongoing investigations and they're going to charge them.
Well, first of all, we're told that that's not happening.
I appreciate the FBI can't talk about the existence of or any ongoing investigations.
We're told that there's nobody else to prosecute.
And so the explanation for why these redactions are the way they are need to make sense and they just don't.
And I mean, so I don't know.
Is it just to keep people distracted while other stuff goes on behind the scenes?
We're going to fight over the improper redactions.
Lex Wesner, he's lobbying.
I don't know if I want to think of when he died, but there's no good excuse.
And also the redactions are inconsistent.
They redact some email address in one place and then not in another.
And so, look, I don't know.
It's not the way it could possibly be handled.
And if this were a private enterprise, whoever was responsible for handling it would have been fired, period.
And so the only question is, and I don't adhere to it, is this four-dimensional chest that Trump is doing all of this on purpose?
The dude's at the helm of the biggest corporation on earth.
He's relying on the people who are handling these sub-sections of this enterprise.
Whether or not he's, you know, his first term, he was accused of not being sufficiently loyal to some of the members of his administration, Michael Flynn just in particular.
And so whether or not it's an overcompensation now to be overly loyal to those who don't, who have long since proven they don't deserve that loyalty, maybe it's that.
But it is, it defies logic how this has been rolled out.
It's out now.
And I don't fault Massey.
I understand why Massey might be politically unpopular among people who are tangentially caught up in this and say, I'm innocent.
And if this comes out, people are going to think I'm guilty.
And Dershowitz, I think, is the prime example of someone now who is sort of caught up in not just guilt by association, but wrongful suppositions of criminal wrongdoing or at least criminal affiliation.
So you can understand maybe why some people are pissed at Massey for doing that.
But Massey and Rokana, I think they've done what they said they were going to do, which was righteous from the beginning.
And it should have just been owned from the beginning instead of fought tooth and nail to the point where people say, why are they fighting tooth and nail disclosure that is in theory in everyone's best interest?
And I completely agree with you where you see a Trump's maneuver, and I totally agree he's getting bad advice.
I don't see 4D chess being played.
But then it's like he's got all the Democrats clamoring for the file releases.
And it turns out he's the one that called the cops in the first place.
It's like, is this 4D chess?
I can't even figure it out anymore.
I must tell you, I was sort of taken aback when Trump said, you know, I like Bill Clinton.
But even when he said that and people play the cliff, yeah, I like Bill Clinton because he says nice things about me.
I mean, even in his way of complimenting Bill Clinton or saying, you know, I don't think he's trying to protect Bill Clinton.
I'm curious that I would have thought if there were more incriminating evidence or stuff on Bill Clinton, we would have seen it by now.
Well, I mean, well, the Clinton thing could be something that they could theoretically say this is national security.
So maybe all the Clinton stuff has been excised, which is why maybe Bill and Hillary are so excited about testifying.
Because that's what I'm really worried about is that because Trump hasn't led the charge on this, the Clintons are going to go do their testimony and go, we know what happened and we need to get to the bottom of it.
And they're going to put themselves as the champions of the exposed Jeffrey Epstein thing.
And it's like, we are in topsy-turvy upside-down world, Viva.
What we do.
That's a good point.
I didn't get the impression that they're eager to testify.
And I suspect they're probably, I don't know, plead the fifth more than we might think.
But that's one hell of a way to think about it is if they know all of the incriminating evidence on them has been excised for national security reasons and now they can lie about other people's involvement or at least lie about their own involvement.
Interesting.
We'll see.
But they didn't look too eager to testify, but I'm eager to hear what they have to say under oath or at least get the transcript afterwards.
They weren't eager before, but then recently they're like, we want it to be broadcast.
So it's like, all right, what's going on here?
These are the most dishonest people in the world.
VivabarnesLaw.locals.com.
Don't say we didn't tell you, folks.
You can't say that you never knew there was a global elite pedophile ring running the world.
I mean, we told you, folks, we've always known.
And as I've been saying since these files got released, we're not learning anything particularly new.
We're just getting the details.
Like we've always had the black and white image.
Now we're filling it in with color.
Helping me do this is my guest, Viva Fry.
Follow him on X at the Viva Fry, VivabarnesLaw.locals.com is where you can follow him and Robert Barnes as they stream and break down some of the biggest issues going on.
And in fact, there's like three huge issues going on right now, Viva, that are clearly intertwined somehow.
Figuring out exactly where the overlap is is kind of confusing.
It's the Epstein file document release, the war with Iran, and then the anti-Semitism hearings talking right now.
And I'm seeing a lot of people trying to defend Epstein by saying you're anti-Semitic if you talk about it.
Alan Dershwitz is one of these.
Do you think these are related at all?
Because this has been my theory for a while.
And I don't know if it's Trump blackmailing them with the Epstein list or Israel blackmailing Trump, but there's been this like, you know, it's the war with Iran and the Epstein files, and they've been just sort of on parallel tracks the entirety of Trump's second administration.
How do you, do you think they're related at all?
And if so, how so?
I don't know.
That would be those are dots that you can connect.
I wouldn't venture there just because I wouldn't have a confident enough opinion based on any we've seen these things evolve together over time and whether or not it's always been the question as to which tail is wagging the dog is is it Netanyahu who's trying to drag the U.S. into a war with Iran or is it the U.S. using Israel as the tip of the spear for whatever aspirations it has with Iran?
I tend to think it's more the former than the latter, that, you know, having evaded a deeper conflict with Iran back when at the same time we were being told, if you talk about the Epstein files, you're being disloyal to Trump.
And if you don't cheer on a prolonged war with Iran, you're being disloyal.
They certainly have evolved in tandem, but I don't know.
It's just interesting just to go back to what Mike Benz talks about, the Epstein arms dealing going back to the early 80s, what that might have to do with anything, but no.
The anti-Semitism, however, like I'm not an authority and I don't ever say as a blank, my opinion means more.
There's nothing anti-Semitic about observing that people, that they happen to be whatever religion they are, are involved in nefarious elements of politics, period.
It might even be the soft bigotry of low expectations to say you can't observe or comment on this because if you comment on Lex Westner, what I have to pronounce his name, Epstein, and a slew of other interconnected secular Jews who are statistically overrepresented in politics, it's on the one hand, it's a source of pride.
People say, look, that's how influential Jews in modern politics are.
To say that you can't criticize a state or to say that you can't criticize individuals or observe a statistical overrepresentation is itself the bigotry.
Where you're saying like, you're only doing it because they're Jewish.
No, I'm just doing it because they are apparent criminals who are apparently up to supreme nastiness.
And we're seeing it black on white that they happen to be X, Y, and Z. You can figure that into geopolitics.
But no, supreme nastiness.
I like that phrase.
Anyone who knows Clapwork Orange is going to get that reference.
That's Stanley Kubrick.
Yeah, up to supreme nastiness.
Yes.
But no, look, we're seeing it.
To pretend it's only Jews, it would be, okay, then you ignore Prince Andrew.
To pretend it's only Israel, then you ignore MI6.
So depending on your level of focus, if it's to ignore all that which doesn't fit within your narrative, you know, then whatever.
You're a horse with blinders on.
But to say that it's anti-Semitic to go after these people because they're Jewish, that's not something I've ever adhered to.
And it might be why, you know, I don't get invited to some holiday parties.
You don't want to be invited to those parties.
You will not find my name in those documents.
I do not fraternize with people who I know have are convicted sex offenders.
And I always say you keep your schmekel in your pants.
You don't cheat on your wife and you go to bed at 10 o'clock because nothing good happens after 10.
Yeah, you're not getting invited to any of the islands, my friend, with an attitude like that.
But yeah, that's exactly, you know, Dan Bongino comes out and says, oh, all these anti-Semites.
And it's like, look, I'm reporting on this because it's creepy behavior by the elites.
I'm not doing it because they're Jewish, but you are telling me not to do it because they're Jewish.
I'm not the one whose action is being dictated by the identity of the people involved.
I would do this no matter who it was.
You know, the people not covering this and saying they're doing president's anti-Semitic, they're the ones with the bias that needs to be overcome.
Cautious Elites00:03:10
Now, I know you got to go.
And thank you so much for giving us your time already.
Just in the final two minutes, what can we do to get something from this?
What can we do to get through to Trump or somebody around him?
Just, I know, you know, final minute or two, give us your prognosis here.
I'll tell you this, and it's people power.
And I'm not trying to be cliched about it.
Back with the, you know, the 12-day war with Iran that wasn't a war.
And anybody who said it's a war is an idiot, it's arguable, and you'll never know, whether or not the pushback from the populist base actually got to Trump and got in the way of what would have otherwise been a disastrous prolonged conflict.
Trump listens.
He is on social media.
He cares about what the people say.
And so you just keep your voice out there.
You retain your integrity.
Don't become a yes men because yes men will yes men you into the grave and then they'll just find the next person to yes men.
Yes men are parasites and do not become a yes men.
When their host politically suffers or whatever, they move on to the next host.
Keep your integrity, keep your intellectual honesty, and don't let defiant L's have your tweets saying, we want disclosure on the Epstein files from six months ago and move on.
It's a hoax from now.
So you don't want that.
Just be true as though there's a camera in the sky, whatever you perceive that camera to be, and remain honest to what you think is important and just hope that people listen.
And I think we're seeing the impact of that.
I think Trump does listen.
And I think we will see some positive net improvements now.
And hopefully the ship can be righted before the midterms.
Cross our fingers for that because that is the deadline and it is rapidly approaching.
Thank you so much.
As always, Viva Fry, follow him on X at the VivaFry.
Vivabarneslaw.locals.com is where you can find his live stream with Robert Barnes.
Thank you so much for being here with us, sir.
Thank you.
Pleasure is mine.
All right, folks, we're going to move on a little bit.
Now, I understand Thomas Massey just gave a little hearing or a little question and answer session about some of the things that he's revealed.
But the crew tells me there wasn't anything too bombshell there.
And I still have a lot more to cover from over the last 24 hours.
So we're going to get into that.
I do want to remind you to go to thealexjonesstore.com right now.
We got a 50% off bundle deal.
If you bundle bovine colostrum plus methylene blue tincture and red tincture, it's the gut and brain power bundle available now at thealxjonesstore.com.
We also have a modern world survival stack.
So this is something that we've started doing and they're all absolutely fantastic.
We're bundling our supplements together so you can really make the most out of them.
Now, these supplements are more than well worth the price at full price, but you're getting them at 50% off when you bundle them together.
So you have the brain-gut or gut and brain bundle, the ultimate gut and brain bundle, which is the colostrum, the methylene blue, and the methylene red.
But you also have the modern world survival stack, which is the Shilajit complex, the CMOS capsules, and the Atomic Defense.
If you get those three together, you also get them for a combined 50% off.
So go now and get half off some of our best-selling supplements at thealxjonesstore.com, thealxjonstore.com slash Harrison.
If you want to let them know who sent you and see for yourself what the power of these supplements can do.
Brains and Gaza Jokes00:15:04
And of course, you keep us on the air and in the fight in a very real way as we continue to battle this multi-front war against our rights, liberties, ability to speak freely, and of course, just our general way of life.
And the biggest story on X today was a hearing that was technically a religious liberty hearing, but it's become kind of something else entirely.
It has become a battleground for some of the most contentious argumentation that I've seen online in a little while.
And I want to show you some clips from this, but it's basically they've minted a star, this woman named Carrie Prajan Bowler.
I think is how you pronounce her name.
But she is a Catholic woman that was invited to the Religious Tolerance Committee Summit and sort of had to battle some of the people there talking about Zionism or relating it to anti-Semitism.
And I think it's important that you understand sort of the construct of the censorship apparatus that's being built right now.
And I think this sort of goes to the heart of it.
So much of what is being pushed now as censorship, like the different programs being pushed, they depend on a document that we've been talking about for years.
It's the IHRA definition of anti-Semitism.
The International Holocaust Remembrance Association's working definition of anti-Semitism, because that is the definition of quote-unquote anti-Semitism that gets adopted by governments, but it's not a definition of anti-Semitism.
It is a wide-ranging definition that categorizes any and all criticism against the state of Israel as anti-Semitism.
This is something I did in the Eighth Front War, the compilation I made, I made that a repeated sentiment because everybody in that video at some point makes the connection that anti-Zionism is anti-Semitism.
And if you can get that keystone in place, then it upholds the rest of the construct because then anybody opposing the actions of the state of Israel is categorized as an anti-Semite.
And if you have laws against anti-Semitism, the nation state of Israel can silence you through your own government.
And it's not good.
And it's not an accurate definition of anti-Semitism by any stretch of the imagination.
And it's just very clearly an act of political sleight of hand.
Say, oh, we're going to ban anti-Semitism.
Don't you hate anti-Semitism?
Don't you hate hatred of Jews?
And people are like, yeah, of course.
We don't like that.
It's like, well, okay, then we're going to ban it.
And then you ban it.
And it turns out, all right, anybody protesting Israel is now a criminal.
It's like, what?
That's not anti-Semitism, obviously, but they're trying to define it as that.
And this is not going over very well with free-thinking Christians in the world, one of which is this woman, Carrie Prajan Bowler.
And she says, forcing people to affirm Zionism on a religious liberty commission is the opposite of religious freedom.
I will not resign.
I will not be bullied for following my Catholic conscience.
This is a response to Shabos Kestenbaum, who for some reason, inexplicably, is on this committee, which I posit sort of confirms the existence of some sort of international Jewish conspiracy.
Because if Shabos Kestenbaum is being appointed to this, there's been some nepotism involved.
Who is this guy?
Who is this guy?
And why is he promoted so much?
Shabos Kestenbaum is the lifelong and to this day avowed Democrat who, for some reason, was given a prime speaking spot in the Republican National Convention in 2024.
How does that happen, I wonder?
And now he's on this committee hearing meeting just being utterly insufferable.
And it's like, how does this guy get invited to these things?
It's certainly not on merit.
It's certainly not because anybody cares about what he says or agrees with him or is convinced by his rapid-fire, you know, Adderall-fueled nonsense that he spews constantly.
That's just a supposition.
Everything I'm saying here is a joke and alleged, by the way, because I have a feeling Shabos is a little bit willing to sue people for insulting him.
So, you know, everything I'm saying now is just a big joke.
I'm totally joking about all of this.
I love the guy, Shabos, me and him.
We're best friends, actually.
But we joke each other like this.
So, you know, we joke, we go back and forth.
It's very fun.
Let's go to clip 52 here.
This is Carrie Bowler or Pray John, Kerry Prayjan Bowler saying, asking about Israel and the genocide they've been carrying out against Palestinians over the last two years.
Let's go to that video now.
Yeah, one last follow-up.
Since we've mentioned Israel a total of 17 times, are you willing to condemn what Israel has done in Gaza?
No, because I unilaterally rejected.
Hang on.
I unilaterally reject that it's not a genocide.
The only genocide ever carried out was on October 7th when a mom's tried killing every man, woman, and child they could possibly find.
Hang on, let me refrain from that.
100,000 innocent civilians killed.
Let me respond.
So first of all, you won't condemn that?
And Karen?
Just on the record.
No, Lindy's already.
Excuse me.
As chair of the committee.
I think it's important we have this discussion.
I agree.
I'm happy to answer.
And Kerry?
I think we'd be great friends.
Yeah.
I'm happy to answer.
Carrie, we have had the discussion.
Good questions, good answers.
This is a commission of religious liberty.
If there's another commission on this issue, I don't know why we're talking about a foreign country.
To be fair, you brought it up.
You did.
At no point in my testimony did I mention Israel.
I was very clear about American Jewry.
Again, I did not mention Israel.
We'll talk about this later.
But that's technically not true.
I did not mention Israel.
This can be another discussion on another day, and you two can have coffee.
Let's go to Rabbi to close this up, and then we'll wrap this panel up.
Thank you, Chairman.
I thought I'd conclude this session.
All right.
So, again, it's like not a only genocide carried out was October 7th.
Everything since then has been totally good, and you're an anti-Semite for questioning it.
Let's go to clip number 55 here.
I'm not sure how much of this we're going to be able to get to, but this is the clip that went totally viral.
Incredible exchange today between Kerry Prijon Bowler and a group of Jewish Zionists at the White House's Religious Liberty Summit.
And in case you're forgetting, maybe we need to, I won't play it, but Chabos does have a starring role in the Eighth Front war where he is both bragging that Jews control the media, saying, What are you going to do about it?
Tweet about it.
Go ahead.
We're going to own more of the media by the time you're done.
And then he says that the way you deal with anti-Semitism is you throw them in prison.
Of course, he says for committing crimes, but it's like, okay, we already have laws against crimes.
What are you talking about?
You're talking about a law against anti-Semitism.
You want to throw people in prison for that because they want to eliminate the First Amendment because people are questioning them.
It's very despicable and un-American, frankly.
So let's go to clip 55 here.
This is the one that went totally viral.
We'll interrupt and comment as it plays.
Let's watch.
Thank you.
Mr. Frankl, this is for you.
You described very painful experiences at UCLA, and I take that very serious.
At the same time, many of the students who I've spoken to personally who created those encampments say that they were protesting the killing of tens of thousands of Palestinian civilians in Gaza and their university's financial ties to that war.
So I need to ask you, in a country built on religious liberty and the First Amendment, do you believe someone can stand firmly against anti-Semitism, including what you experienced, and at the same time condemn the mass killing of Palestinians in Gaza or reject political Zionism or not support the political state of Israel?
Or do you believe that speaking out about what many Americans view as genocide in Gaza should be treated as anti-Semitic?
Because in my view, the United States cannot and must not make loyalty to a particular theology about Israel a litmus test for protected speech or moral legitimacy.
Charlie Kirk said that Jew hate is brain rot.
Some people don't have brains.
I don't need, I'm not going to.
Could you pause it right there?
Like, this is the type of thing that they just say this stuff, and does nobody find this weird?
So the woman asks a very pertinent and well-thought-out question, which is basically saying, is it possible to both oppose vile, like actual anti-Semitism that people face where they're being cursed at or spit on because they're Jews, right?
She's saying, is it okay?
Like, is it possible to both oppose that and also not be a Zionist?
And does that still make you an anti-Semite, even if you just oppose Israel on a political level?
And his response to that is: Charlie Kirk said that anti-Semites don't have brains.
What?
The hell are you talking about?
Like, is that, does he think that's a good point?
Like, they just say this stuff, that it's just like, answer the question.
The hell are you talking about?
And this is something I'm going to have to get into in the third hour, like very deeply, because it's the same tactics over and over and over that are used.
And they're very blunt.
Like they're not incisive.
They're not clever.
It's just sort of everybody saying the same lie all at once and hoping that nobody checks them on it.
And so we'll have to. you know, really dig into the method by which they're essentially trying to frame all criticism of Israel or Jewish people at all as anti-Semitism.
The question is, basically, can you be anti-Zionist but not an anti-Semite?
So far, his first response is anti-Semites don't have brains.
Okay, great, great point.
And the reason I'm saying we'll have to continue this on the other side is because this is one of the key components of their campaign right now is basically to say any criticism whatsoever of any of these groups, Israel, the Jewish people, anything, they cannot give it the credence of even like recognizing it's a valid criticism.
It all has to be artificial.
It all has to be fake.
The people saying it aren't real thinking, intelligent, loving human beings with opinions well formed by acknowledgement of reality.
No, they're just brainless zombies that just have to be destroyed.
That's like such a key component of their operation here is basically, you know, it's like when Dave Chappelle talks about somebody being called crazy, and that just means like you don't even have to address what they're saying anymore.
You just label them as crazy.
So that's what they're doing here.
They label you as anti-Semite and then they go, so you don't have a brain.
You're not worth arguing against.
Your complaints are not worth even recognizing.
You just have to be crushed and destroyed.
So that's what he's setting up here.
Let's go back to the dumbass little tyrant that doesn't know how to tie a tie.
Assist them in setting a double standard for the Israeli government and the Jewish people as they fight to defend themselves.
These were students calling for intifada within days after October 7th, before Israel had even entered Gaza.
So it's not about them and their using Palestinian civilian death, which is horrendous and horrible.
They're using it as a prop.
And it doesn't matter.
My religious beliefs are not.
Let's pause there again.
This is just an attempt to undermine and decertify any complaints about Israel.
It's not, you know, oh my God, it's just so it's just so deceitful what they're doing.
They're saying that they were calling for infatata.
Basically, the Palestinian protesters were protesting Israel after October 7th, but before Israel really started its campaign of massacring innocent women and children.
And so he's basically saying it can't be because of that as if there hasn't been 70 years of systematic depopulation in Palestinian lands.
Like as if the Gaza war started on October 7th rather than being October 7th being a continuation of a war that's been fought for decade upon decade.
Yeah, now Laurel Loom is trying to get this woman fired.
Why?
Because she asked questions like this.
And they think they get to do stuff like this because they don't actually believe in religious liberty because they're just lying to you, hoping that they can use your own values to destroy your own values.
Like don't fall for it.
These people genuinely do not give a damn about religious liberty.
They want everybody except for them to be shut up with force.
Okay.
It's just, it could not be more obvious.
This whole thing, everybody in there on the side of the Zionist is deliberately and desperately trying to destroy the First Amendment with everything they've got.
Because as we've said a million billion times, and it's self-evident, if you think about it for 10 seconds, The right of freedom of religion means you have the right to hate, disparage, demonize any other religion.
That's the point of it.
You don't have freedom of religion just to worship how you want, but you can't criticize anybody else.
No.
The freedom of religion is to be able to say the Pope's a jackass and Benjamin Nyahu is a dirty scoundrel that should be arrested for genocide and who predicates his genocide on his religious teachings.
That is the First Amendment.
It is absolutely, incontrovertibly the right that gives, that the freedom of religion is the right that allows us to criticize Jews or Judaism or the state of Israel, and they are attempting to destroy that.
So let's not be obscure about this.
Laura Loomer and everybody on the panel wearing a tiny hat, their whole point of being up there is to use the First Amendment and claims of religious liberty to destroy your liberty to criticize them.
Okay?
I just want to be perfectly clear.
Let's go back to this video.
I won't be able to get to all of it, but let's watch a little more.
You want to protest Israel?
Great, 100%, go ahead and do it.
But the university let them wear masks, even though there's a mask ban.
They violate all time, place, and manner restrictions, amplified sounds.
It went on for years.
They kept doing this time after time again.
And that's what the judge saw and said, that's not okay.
They can protest.
They can't block Jews, and you can't assist them in doing it.
I'm really grateful that we're having this discussion because I think this is a topic that is really affecting so many Americans.
Anti-Zionism and Anti-Semitism Conflated00:11:32
Rabbi Shapiro, he's based in New York.
I invited him here today, but he's not here today.
He says, and I would love your opinion on this.
American Jews are increasingly treated as less fully American, our loyalty question, our belonging made conditional, because Zionist ideology falsely claims Israel is the nation state of Jews everywhere and that every Jew is nationally tied to it.
He says this framing is anti-Semitic at its core.
It strips us of our rights.
It's hugely damaging to anybody in America that doesn't agree with these scumbags.
We're going to play the rest of this on the other side.
So there's about five minutes left and we'll play the whole thing and then go back to some other clips because this went on and then we'll discuss the way that Laura Loomer and others are just foaming at the mouth, viciously trying to destroy this woman's life because she stands up to them essentially and doesn't like that they're trying to destroy the First Amendment over their desire, their need to commit genocide without anybody complaining about it.
Because remember, that's all that this is about.
If Israel just stopped killing kids, nobody would be angry about them anymore.
They want to be able to kill kids and have you shut up and praise them for it.
Without that combo, they're pissed and they're going to destroy your country and everybody.
I'm really grateful that we're having this discussion because I think this is a topic that is really affecting so many Americans.
Rabbi Shapiro, he's based in New York.
I invited him here today, but he's not here today.
He says, and I would love your opinion on this, American Jews are increasingly treated as less fully American, our loyalty question, our belonging made conditional, because Zionist ideology falsely claims Israel is the nation state of Jews everywhere and that every Jew is nationally tied to it.
He says, this framing is anti-Semitic at its core.
It strips us of our identity as Americans, recasts us as foreigners in our own country, and arms anti-Semites with accusations of divided loyalties and collective guilt for actions we neither chose nor control.
No other foreign country does this.
No sovereign state claims to politically represent an entire worldwide group defined by religion or heritage and bind its members to its deeds.
Yet Jews alone bear this unique, unjust burden.
That dangerous lie must be rejected openly and firmly.
The remedy is clear.
Civic education that teaches unconditional American belonging through citizenship alone, not ethnicity, heritage, or any fabricated foreign tie.
We are Americans, full stop, and we reject any doctrine that treats us otherwise.
Would you say that statement is anti-Semitic?
What I'll say is that Natan Sharansky says there's three things that you shouldn't do with Israel.
You shouldn't delegitimize it.
You shouldn't demonize it.
You shouldn't apply a double standard.
You can abide by those three things.
You're not anti-Semitic.
So by not being a Zionist, does that make you an anti-Semite?
I don't think you need to be a Zionist to support a country that defends itself and is free and religious in a hostile neighborhood.
So is anti-Zionism?
Yes.
It is.
Yes.
To take that point for a second.
Let me back up.
I didn't want to step over that answer.
I didn't know you were still, both of you still talking.
Just to be clear, is anti-Zionism anti-Semitism?
Yes.
It is.
Under IHRA?
Rabbi?
Sure.
You're up next.
You're not sure?
So what is the definition?
I would love to speak to that.
Undoubtedly, anti-Zionism is anti-Semitism.
And undoubtedly, one does not have to support the specific policies of the government of Israel, but to not support the right of Israel to exist, which is what anti-Zionists do, while not taking that same stand to the 28 Muslim countries and 13 Christian countries in this world, is a double standard, is hypocrisy, and is absolutely anti-Semitism.
I think it's also important that we not make Islamophobic remarks while we're here today.
I would appreciate that.
I just want to say God forbid was anything like that said.
But if the Jewish people are the only people that you deny the right to have its own state, that is absolutely a double standard hypocrisy and anti-Semitism.
Well, as you know, I'm a Catholic, I'm a Catholic, and Catholics do not embrace Zionism, just so you know.
So are all Catholics anti-Semites, according to you?
As I said, anti-Zionism by denying the right of the Jews to have their own state while not saying the same for any other peoples, that is a double standard hypocrisy and anti-Semitism.
So just to be clear, are Catholics anti-Semites?
Excuse me.
I'm going to interrupt the discussion.
Our committee is focused on religious liberty taken from all people, whether it be Muslims, Jews, Christians, Sikhs.
We've had all those witnesses here.
This is not a commission on defining religions or calling out any theology.
This is not the commission for that.
Right, but we're talking about a foreign nation, so I want to be clear on what the definition of anti-Semitism is.
If I don't support the political state of Israel, am I an anti-Semite?
Yes or no?
They already answered.
Ask and answered.
According to you, on the record, yes.
I don't support the political state of Israel.
I don't personally label people, but what I'm saying is if somebody has, if somebody states an anti-Zionist, if somebody says they're an anti-Zionist, they are saying about themselves that they have a double standard and hypocrisy, and they're taking anti-Semitic positions.
Okay.
Kerry, do you feel like you have your questions then?
I don't agree with that because as a Catholic, I don't agree that the new modern state of Israel has any biblical prophecy meaning at all.
All right, welcome back, ladies and gentlemen.
Kari Prijon Bowler is battling it out with the Zionists right now because she dared to express her religious opinion on the Religious Liberty Panel.
I mean, how dare she?
It's crazy.
And they came with her with knives out, time to destroy her life for daring to point out the obvious.
That conflating Zionism with anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism is just an obvious, sleight of hand trick to silence criticism of a foreign nation state, which is currently actively involved in the most horrific acts you could possibly imagine.
And she did a great job and continues to battle with these.
Cree Prijean Bowler says, can you even imagine?
Basically, they're saying she should be removed.
She should be removed from the Religious Liberty Committee because she is not sufficiently Zionist and actually believes in the Catholic teaching about the blessing of Israel having now applies to people of Christian faith, not to Israel.
So they're going to try to fire her.
So she says, can you even imagine this?
A Religious Liberty Commission prepared to fire a commissioner for her Catholic faith.
If that happens, it proves their mission was never religious liberty, but a Zionist agenda.
I refuse to resign.
Laura Loomer responds, you're not going to be given the opportunity to resign.
You're going to be fired and rightfully so.
Just like, just lovely, lovely people.
Carrie Prijan Bowler says, if they try to remove me, it will prove they don't really care about religious freedom.
Laura Loomer, here comes the victimhood.
You don't care about religious freedom or speak for anyone on this matter.
You're a pageant participant.
What qualifications do you have to be sitting on a White House committee on religion?
You've been a Catholic for 21 weeks.
Give me a break.
You'll be fired and then you'll be shamed as you deserve to be.
Then you can go to church and cry in a box about your sins and try to be a better person.
Jesus.
Yeah, you really hate Catholic people, huh, lady?
I mean, Laura, I mean, I haven't seen any anti-Semitism from old Carrie, but Laura Loomer genuinely hates Catholic people.
I think it's pretty obvious.
It's like, can you imagine?
I mean, it would be one thing if Kari Prijon Bowler was like, why don't you go kiss your stupid wall?
Won't you go wear your stupid hat?
You're going to die just like you deserve.
She's like, nope, just the Zionists saying that type of stuff constantly, always.
It's always them.
Jewish activists are lobbying the Trump administration to remove Kari Prijon Bowler from the White House Religious Liberty Commission because she actually took this hearing, the hearing seriously and spoke out in defense of Christians' religious liberties and of all Americans' First Amendment rights.
Scoop from Laura Loomer.
Senior Trump admin officials tell me there are internal discussions being taking place at the White House to remove White House Religious Liberty Commission member Kerry Prijon Bowler after her outburst today on Religious Freedom Panel.
She used her time to harass Jewish panelists and blame them for military access to Israel.
And then she tried to claim she was a victim.
Can you believe it?
She was harassing the panelists by talking to them on a panel she'd been invited to talk to.
How dare she?
How dare she?
Moderators had to intervene to get her to stop because she was so disruptive at the event.
Yeah, because she was asking uncomfortable questions that reveal that you dumbass scam artists don't believe anything that you say.
You absolute intolerable liars.
You absolute demons.
You utter demons.
Honestly, they're just going full mask off and it's utterly unbearable.
Trump Religious Liberty Panel's first anti-Semitism hearing turns contentious over Israel.
It's like, yeah, because they don't want religious tolerance, because they want abject submission, because they dress that up in claims of religious freedom because they're liars trying to take advantage of our freedoms to destroy them.
These people, man, honestly.
Trump's Religious Liberty Commission sued over lack of diversity.
Interfaith Alliance and Hindus for Human Rights were among those accusing the Commission of violating the Federal Advisory Committee Act, which requires such groups to have a balance of viewpoints.
The Commission includes Protestant, Catholic, and Jewish people, but no Muslims or any other member of minority religious groups.
There's Muslim representation on its Muslim representation on its advisory board of lay leaders.
And gee, I wonder why.
I wonder why they didn't allow Muslims to be involved.
Now, I'm not particularly excited to have Muslims in there in the first place because I don't like Muslims trying to take us over, but they're certainly excluded strictly so that the Jews could have uncontested ability to spread lies about the state of Israel that a Muslim person almost certainly would be able to contradict and beat back.
I guess they thought the Catholic would go along with it.
She didn't.
And so now they're trying to destroy her.
And they'll try to destroy her life.
It's not just about getting her off the religious liberties panel.
See, she's questioned them.
Therefore, she is now a terrorist who wants them all to die and she has to be killed first before she can kill them.
Breaking Down Censorship Slogans00:03:11
That's the way these people's mindset works.
And I'm not even kidding.
I mean, we've shown the, you know, go watch the Eighth Front.
I mean, they're bragging about it.
People who are anti-Semitic, aka criticize Israel, having their lives destroyed, celebrating it, gleeful about it, bragging about how efficient they are in destroying people's lives, ruining their business prospects, ruining their dating lives.
I mean, they're like really dedicated to this.
I mean, we have a video from the Super Bowl of Robert Kraft, who put out that anti-anti-Semitism ad, was bragging about the brain trust he has, the giant technological surveillance, private surveillance grid that he's running.
And basically, they just brag about surveilling colleges and reporting students that aren't sufficiently pro-Zionist to the college authorities to have them expelled.
It really is sick.
I mean, these people are just vicious tyrants and they have to be stopped at all costs.
Religious Liberty Commission tussles over anti-Semitism as a lawsuit challenges its legality.
Now, I want to talk about what is the actual way that they're trying to impose total and absolute control on the West.
And I got a couple ways to break this down.
And I think a good way to do it is because they all say exactly the same things in exactly the same ways because they're following orders.
And I think this is an important thing to understand about how they operate.
It is a hive mind to a certain degree.
There are obviously communications going on behind the scenes.
Again, you can watch the Eighth Front, where they talk about every week they get together, they train people how to make the arguments that they want them to make, and then they put them on shows, you know, to have them make the argument.
But the way that they coordinate is through slogans.
It's sloganeering.
They have these slogans that they say that they all repeat ad nauseum, and the usefulness is to align the thought of their followers to that particular slogan.
It's the same way they do with climate change or anything else.
The slogans themselves are, in many cases, meaningless.
In other cases, actually the opposite of what's true.
But it doesn't matter because they say them over and over.
And each slogan of theirs is sort of a building block of an argument of an entire holistic argument that they're making that if you accept the building blocks, the argument makes sense.
If you point out or ascertain that the building blocks themselves are utterly ridiculous, then the whole facade falls.
So I'm going to try to explain these building blocks, how they're used.
And once I say them to you, you'll recognize them and be able to see them everywhere.
And I've got examples to show you.
So I think first, if we go to clip 49, this was actually from the White House Religious Liberty Committee hearing.
And this is sort of the first of the lies that is used to build up the censorship program.
Claims of Divine Retribution00:04:57
And it's basically the claim, it goes hand in hand with the claims of religious Zionists that those who bless Israel will be blessed and those who curse Israel will be cursed.
It's sort of a ahistorical version of that.
So let's go to clip 49 here.
This is one of the Zionists on the religious liberty panel basically threatening America that if we don't do what they say, then we're going to be hit with plagues.
Let's watch.
Societies that fail to protect their Jews or worse, turn against them, often hasten their own decline.
Ancient Egypt enslaved the Jews, oppressed them harshly, and defied their cries for freedom, only to be broken by devastating plagues that struck at the heart of its power.
Babylon raised Jerusalem, exiled its people, and soon vanished from history stage.
Mighty Rome crushed the Jewish quest for self-rule, destroyed the temple, only to fade into the history books.
These are not coincidences.
They form solemn, recurring patterns.
Societies that oppress the Jewish people sow the seeds of their own erosion.
America's extraordinary success flows from its historic embrace of Judeo-Christian values.
I offer my assistance to this commission and the White House, recommendations, implementation, whatever is needed.
This is the hill I am willing to die on.
I'm Israel Chai.
Thank you.
Okay.
So now that's just utterly ahistorical.
And it's something that they just all say, and it's just not true.
I mean, the examples he gave aren't true.
The Roman, the Rome took over Jerusalem and destroyed the temple in 70 AD.
Rome continued to expand and grow until the 400s and continued to exist for a thousand years past them through the Byzantine Empire.
So that in and of itself, absolutely ridiculous.
And of course, the functions of the Roman government were transferred to the Catholic Church, which still sits in Rome and is still the heart of basically a giant religious empire that still speaks Latin and is in the same place that they were during the time of Jesus or shortly after.
So again, it's just that doesn't make any sense.
Egypt is the same way.
Egyptian civilization existed for 4,000 years, for thousands of years after the Exodus, if that even is historically accurate.
I mean, you can go over all of them.
We've talked about how Spain, their golden age, began literally the year that they kicked all the Jews out of Spain.
And then, of course, the flip side of that is things like the fact that Spain was taken over by Muslims in the first place because Jewish people in Toledo opened the gates on Christmas and let the army in.
So I'd say historically, if you were to actually look back in the historical record, you'd see really kind of the opposite from what these people keep saying, but they all say it, but they all repeat it over and over.
It's one of the slogans that they've decided to issue.
And it's not actually just a slogan.
It's a threat.
It's a threat, right?
What they're saying is you treat Jews nicely, over and above nicely.
You can't just treat us equally.
You can't just be opposed to anti-Semitism.
You have to actively go out and fight our enemies for us, or else we're going to destroy your country.
And it's kind of like, you know, you can look at like Nazi Germany.
Did Nazi Germany collapse because they didn't like Jews?
You could kind of make the argument, like maybe, you know, through the actions of their Jewish enemies, then they were destroyed.
But this wasn't God, right?
It wasn't like God hit Germany with plagues.
Germany basically became an economic powerhouse.
Hitler was Times Man of the year.
And they had a lot of economic and military success, but they were destroyed by armies that were sent in large part due to Jewish lobbying.
So again, I'm not even saying it's like, it's just like the way it's presented as if like there's some sort of metaphysical reality at play here.
There's not.
It's just like if you go against the Jews and the Jews will see you as an enemy and will destroy you.
Like that's what they mean when they say that.
And again, you can get into the history.
And like I've talked about a million times, it's just the opposite of what they say.
Alexander II was a Tsar of Russia.
And you can look at the history.
I actually did it with Grok and I was like, you know, tell me who the Tsars were and tell me their position on the Jews and anti-Semitism.
And it's like, yeah, you know, some of the Tsars like didn't like the Jews and crushed them and had pogroms during them.
And then Alexander II actually was very liberal and opened up things to the Jews.
And then a Jewish cabal killed him and assassinated him.
And so then the next Tsar was like, all right, we're going to crush these people.
The last guy tried to open up Russian civilization to them and a conspiracy of Jewish socialists killed him.
Rising Empire Come Israel00:08:43
So we're not going to do that anymore.
But again, it's just like ahistorical.
In a word, this is utterly ahistorical.
And again, I can go over example over example over example, but it doesn't matter because this is now being seeded into the public consciousness so that any retribution taken against America for not being sufficiently pro-Zionist will be interpreted as God's will or something.
It's completely absurd, but happens over and over.
And again, you don't have to take my word for it.
We can go to, I mean, I have a lot, but let's do this.
Let's go to clip 50.
Actually, let's go to clip 45 here.
Let's go to clip 45.
This is Prime Minister of Benjamin Nanyahu, again, saying what I just said.
It's not enough that you just, you know, not tolerate anti-Semitism.
You're actually supposed to actively go out and fight on their behalf, or else you're, you know, hate God or something.
Let's go to clip 45 here, Benjamin Nanyahu.
He says, I demand that Western governments do what is necessary to fight anti-Semitism and provide the required safety and security for Jewish communities worldwide.
It would be well advised to heed our warnings.
I demand action from them now.
And it's like, who the hell are you?
And what gives you the right?
But it's a demand.
But it's a demand.
And our politicians are conceding to that demand.
Let's go to clip 56 here.
Should we go to this now?
I think in the buildup to this, actually, I want to go to the last five minutes or so of the Eighth Front war documentary I made.
And we'll close out this segment with that just to give you the ground, lay the groundwork for you here.
Because again, I think the end of this, clip 64, Sort of lays out again what you just heard about Benjamin and Yahoo demanding that Western countries basically create a parallel legal system exclusively for Jews.
And we're actually seeing this come into play in a place like Australia, where the Israeli president just visited, and they basically just like brutalized everybody that was protesting him and just created this, you know, cordon around him where, you know, no normal Australians were allowed to go because, you know, he has to be treated like some sort of holy figure or something, and to where none of your, you know,
long-held religious or national liberties are to be maintained, not in the face of, you know, an Israeli person wanting to do things.
And now, you know, that always will supersede and overwhelm whatever concerns you have.
Let's go to the end of this, clip 64.
This is the last five minutes of the Eighth Front documentary that I made.
And again, it sort of exposes to you the underlying threat at the heart of this claim that, like, if you don't support the Jews, your country is not long for this world.
Let's watch.
The solution right now is for the governments to decide that all the Jews are a protected minority.
That means that the government will be obliged to provide the security.
Upgrades to security.
Jewish community shouldn't have to be paying for it.
But we have to pay for our own armed guns.
Are you serious?
To fund institutions, culture, and that everybody in Europe will learn about the Jewish contribution and why they should cherish Jewish presence.
All your synagogues, all your shuls, all paid for.
Everything.
Everything that you need is paid for.
I, for one, as a Jewish leader, will no longer talk about anti-Semitism in isolation from Israel.
It's what we want immediately.
If you ask any Jew, what do you want?
What do you want?
No more protests.
No more protests.
I'm not an anti-Semite.
I just don't like the government of Bibi Netanyahu.
No, you're a Jew hater.
Would a group be banned if it accuses Israel of genocide or apartheid?
If those criteria are satisfied, then that is the case.
Any candidate running for a seat in this building, whether for Congress or Senate, we will target them as they target us.
Accordingly, we will start a fund to help their opponents.
Beginning already in Q1, hedge funds get set up in Israel so we can become another capital of finance.
I'll argue we will beat London within a short decade as a second capital of finance.
It's going to be New York as a gateway to America, Hong Kong a gateway to China, Dubai a gateway to Southeast Asia, and Israel as a gateway to other parts of the world.
So we heard earlier about a mission, a goal to bring a million immigrants to Israel.
History has proven that when a country starts with allowing anti-Semitism, the results are not kind to that country.
I want to make a warning to somebody else, and that's American Gentiles.
The minute your country is taken over by anti-Semitism, the minute you start to be a country that's not blessing Israel but cursing Israel, you have begun the process of shrinking away from your empire.
And you can decide.
You can stay here in New York in a declining empire, or you can come to Israel, which is part of the rising middle of the world, which is moving south and east.
That's what I encourage you to do.
Our faith in the American project itself has been shaken.
The only serious answer to this challenge is to believe again that being Jewish is the most important thing in the world.
When we're kicked out of America in America, you know, the whole thing is done, the whole American Jewish project is done, we're going to be fine for decades.
American society allowed Jews to live normal lives.
This was a pleasant holiday from our destiny.
The holiday is over.
The Western culture that stands against the Jews is going down.
The West will survive only if it decides to love itself and if it decides to love us, the Jewish people.
The Jewish people are not normal.
We never really were.
And now that Israel has turned the entire geopolitical situation on its head, our job in the diaspora is to leverage those wins and win here.
do to our enemies here what israel did to its enemies there and to the world i say this History will not remember those who merely denounced hatred in polite language.
History will remember those who acted.
This is a small bunch of wannabe Nazis.
That's what they are.
Anti-Semitism is pure evil.
If we have to hunt you down the way they hunted down Nazis for decades, we will find your identities.
We will find you.
We will achieve justice.
I think we're at the cusp of a new age because I think that we will achieve the expansion of peace.
I think that we are in a new age because I think that the possibilities of technology, with their risks, especially in AI, but where their positive benefits are enormous in every field.
I mean, from agriculture to health to transportation to.
And I think that we are together, we can lead this and become not a secondary power, but a primary power.
We can be not a secondary power, but a primary power with the expansion of peace.
What does he mean by expansion of peace?
He means Iran being destroyed.
He means the enemies of Israel in the Middle East being eradicated so that the Greater Israel Project can be achieved and they can then basically be as powerful as America with the land, mass, and resources to basically go toe-to-toe with us.
So this is the strange thing.
They are desperately trying right now to get America to destroy Iran because they're desperate to destroy America, but they need us to destroy Iran.
So like as soon as we destroy Iran, there's no reason for us to be useful anymore.
And so you're hearing those people who are all very important people in charge of organizations like the Tikva Fund or billionaires and market controllers.
Strategic Misdirection00:14:54
And they're sitting there going, America is the dying empire.
Come to Israel where it's the rising empire.
Well, the empire, our empire is not dying from natural causes.
It's being murdered by the people telling their fellow Jews, it's time to end this American experiment.
You're Jewish, not American.
Come with us to Israel.
It's sick.
All right, welcome back, folks.
I'm going to try to fit a lot of videos in this last segment.
I think it's probably the most important thing to understand right now in terms of politics, the info war.
Like, this is it.
This is the most important thing to understand.
And I'm trying to figure out how to even lay this out because it gets a little bit confusing on purpose.
By the nature of the arguments being made, it's confusing to unpack and untangle them.
I think I can do it.
Because, as I said, they use sloganeering.
They use slogans as a way to unify arguments, basically.
And when somebody is sophisticated in this sort of info war spectrum, they can hide the fact that they're using slogans.
But then you have people that aren't as sophisticated and they sort of just come out and say it.
Now, Dan Bongino is one of these characters.
So I played this video on Friday, but I want to go through it again because he basically lays out the four or five pillars of the operation going on here.
And again, I think I can explain this well and holistically.
But we're going to go to Dan Bongino, clip 56 here.
And I'm going to show you how he just follows the talking points point by point.
And it's ones that we've already seen used today in some of the videos that we've shown.
So 56, here's former FBI deputy director Dan Bongino from last Friday, as he lays out his opposition to so-called anti-Semitism.
And in doing so, gives us the blueprint for how they plan to hijack and destroy the Republican Party and manipulate the vast majority of Western people into a state of willing slavery.
Okay, so let's go to clip 56 here.
This is Dan Bongino.
Finally, there's a third class of people.
The third class of people after October 7th went crazy.
Ladies and gentlemen, I don't know how many times I have to tell you this.
I stand fully, completely, and strongly against anti-Semitic bullshit.
I don't know how many times I get to.
Pause right there.
That's the first pillar.
The first pillar is the IHRA definition of anti-Semitism.
That's sort of the king pillar.
It's the keystone.
And that's the first pillar.
And what he's saying there is people criticizing Israel are anti-Semites.
And I don't want anything to do with that anti-Semitic BS.
It's like, it's not anti-Semitic.
It's us observing Israel carrying out a genocide in full view of everybody, doing the most horrific things you can possibly imagine, including cutting off water, just shooting children for fun.
I mean, I can go into some stories, but it's not anti-Semitic to oppose this stuff, but he's framing it as anti-Semitic.
So that's the first pillar right off the bat is that all of this criticism, it's all anti-Semitic because you hate Jews.
It couldn't possibly be legitimate concern and criticism.
No, no, it's got to be some sort of mental illness you have that has to just be crushed, not ever addressed.
Okay, so that's the first pillar, anti-Semitism being the cause of all criticism.
Let's go back to Dan.
Against anti-Semitic bullshit.
I don't know how many times I got to tell you this.
It's amazing how many people think it's like the current thing to say like they hate the Jews or something.
Really?
You believe that?
You realize where that's led throughout human history?
Probably immorality.
That's the second pillar, as I just went on 30 minutes talking about.
One, IHRA definition of anti-Semitism, any criticism of Israel or Jews is automatically anti-Semitism.
And the second pillar being this is, you don't know what it's led to throughout history.
Throughout history, people who are anti-Semitic just immediately die and they become poor and God punishes them for opposing his chosen people.
Now, he just sort of says this as an offhanded comment, but again, it's because he's not very sophisticated.
He doesn't actually make the argument.
He just says where that's led throughout history because he expects we all know this talking point has been implanted.
The talking point is false, but that's how effective they are at their messaging.
They just say it over and over and over again.
So somebody like Dan Bongino can just reference it offhanded as if it's true and implanted in your mind that way.
Okay.
So anti-Semitism is all criticism of Jews are in Israel is anti-Semitism.
Anti-Semitism destroys countries throughout history.
Totally false.
Back to Dan Bongino.
Now, you may say, oh, gosh, Dan, I can't believe that that's actually happening.
Really?
I promise you, go look at the Twitter.
The botting that does happen, and again, it's not all botting.
The botting that does happen is very well organized.
It is totally synthetic.
That's the third.
It is all the same.
And this sort of underlies all the other ones, but it's a key component.
Again, you'll see they all use exactly these same arguments.
Oh, all criticism of Israel is just because they're viciously anti-Semitic.
They just hate Jews and are using this as an excuse.
And hey, you know what happens throughout history when that happens?
I mean, countries get destroyed.
Bless Israel or God will kill you.
I mean, that's in the Bible, I'm pretty sure.
And then the third is none of this is authentic.
None of it's real.
People are paid.
It's bots.
It's Qataris.
It's, oh, the algorithm has tricked you into thinking this.
And again, this is like calling us crazy.
No, we have very particular and specific criticisms that are backed up by evidence, both admitted and video evidence and statistical evidence.
None of this is invalid.
And even saying that is such an insult.
It's like, again, we can't think for ourselves.
We're all just victims of an algorithm.
We all just are bots that you can just ignore.
It's just an easy way to attempt to discredit all of the valid criticisms by basically taking your agency away and saying, you don't actually believe that.
You're just being tricked.
You're just a bot.
You're just, you know, inauthentic, insincere.
No, we're very authentic.
We're very sincere.
Hi, I'm Harrison Smith.
I'm a human being.
And I hate Israel and I hate what they're doing.
And I hate you for covering them up.
Not a bot, bro.
Not my algorithm.
Literally felt this way since middle school.
Not something new for me.
Not something I just picked up in the last little while, not because I think it's cool to do this, but because the Israeli government is just flagrantly evil in like a million different ways and has been since their inception.
And they're now trying to get America to do their dirty work for them, which has worked in the last couple decades and has left America in a, as a basically shattered, you know, shell of its former self.
So let's listen to the fourth pillar here.
But again, Dan Bongino is laying out all of the argument you'll ever hear from any of these people.
Okay.
It's inauthentic.
It's botting.
It's Qataris.
They're paid to say this.
It's all projection, folks.
Israel has announced that they have a bounty program where they'll give you $7,000 for supporting them.
They brag about spending $100 million to try to psyop all of America.
They invite our pastors over there and bribe them to teach submission to Israel as part of their religious sermons.
They are the ones paying for people.
They are the ones running bots.
They are the ones who are, you know, obsessed with trying to get control of the algorithms by forcing the social media companies to be sold to their co-ethnics.
I mean, it's pure projection on one hand, but more importantly, it's there to totally undermine and undercut any valid complaints that you have by claiming that you're just a bot.
So let's go.
So that's the third pillar.
Let's go to the fourth now.
It's all anti-Jewish nonsense.
Read the comments.
It's from like, I hate the Jews 101 and stuff.
Just look at it.
You can see it.
It's so clearly fake.
Fake.
But it's an organized movement of people, and it's not a very large group of people who've learned to amplify social media to attack anyone in the administration or outside who doesn't go and attack the Jews.
100%.
Look at, just read the comments.
Don't take my word for it.
Just go and look.
Go look.
You'll see it.
It's everywhere.
They all have the same goal.
It is to dismantle this movement, take it apart from the inside, cause disruption, pick up the pieces, and rebuild it into something far different than a movement that actually conserves liberty.
They all have the same goal.
Libs, the anti-Jew crowd, and the doomers.
The exact same goal.
That's the fourth pillar, and it's probably the most important one.
And again, this is where it's going to get a little bit confusing, but let's review.
Here's the four pillars that they're running with to try to shut down criticism of Israel in America.
It's all anti-Zionism is anti-Semitism.
All criticism of Jews is born from some uncontrollable hatred of Jewish people, and it's not valid criticism whatsoever.
It's just anti-Semitism.
All right.
That's the first thing.
The second thing, throughout history, countries that do this fail.
They collapse.
They're hit with plagues, right?
Totally ahistorical.
It doesn't match up history whatsoever, but just a lie that they repeat enough that everybody thinks it's true.
Three, to claim that all of this is bots, an algorithm, and being paid for by the Qataris.
It's all inauthentic.
We don't have to pay attention to it because it's all botted activity or mind control somehow.
And then four is the false dichotomy that is the most important thing being pushed right now.
And it ties into a bunch of stuff.
And I'm going to try to lay it out for you here.
And he just said the liberals, the anti-Semites, and the doomers, but essentially what they're trying to do is create a dichotomy that says you're either with the Jews or you're with Muslims and libtards, leftist socialist communists, and anti-Semite Nazis who hate America.
And that's the dichotomy they're trying to push forward.
Now, this dichotomy is impossible to justify or to rectify or to align with all of their other statements.
And again, I'll try to lay this out in a way that comes across.
Let's go to clip 40 here because we played this on Friday as well.
And it's a woman named Melanie Phillips.
Clip 40.
This is her comments about what has allowed the Jeffrey Epstein scandal to take place.
And she blames us.
Let's watch.
Just think for a minute what the West now takes pride in.
Sexual morality?
Destroyed.
Lifestyle free for all?
You bet.
Non-judgmentalism?
Mandatory.
The nuclear family?
Smashed.
Good riddance, eh?
Girls have been taught to be shameless.
Result?
Young men have been licensed to be sexual predators.
Me and my desires are now the center of the universe.
So we've waved goodbye to accountability in politics as in life.
Nihilism is flaunted as idealism, and hypocrisy has been rebranded as conscience.
So why on earth is anyone remotely surprised by the global cesspit that has now been revealed as Jeffrey Epstein's world?
Okay, so there she says that the reason Jeffrey Epstein was able to flourish in quote-unquote the West is because, you know, we, in a word, we failed to uphold our traditional beliefs, our traditions, our traditional, you know, construct of family.
And basically, we're too tolerant.
Basically, the problem is our tolerance, and we've been too tolerant for too long.
And we allow sexual immorality and all this sort of stuff to destroy the fabric of our society.
And it's led to things like this.
Now, she goes even further than this.
And she was actually featured in the Eighth Front.
We can go to that video, hear that clip from it.
Because again, it just, you know, maybe she thinks this comes across as like beneficent or like advice for us.
But for those of us who are Western, who are Christian white Europeans in America, this just straight up sounds like a threat, just like a black male threat.
Okay, so let's go to clip 36 here, Melanie Phillips giving a speech basically saying, love and uplift the Jews or be destroyed.
Let's watch.
The Western culture that stands against the Jews is going down.
The West will survive only if it decides to love itself and if it decides to love us, the Jewish people, instead of disdaining us and trying to erase what makes the Jewish people special and what's made the West special too.
Okay, so what's made the West special is what makes the Jews special, except the West is arrayed against the Jews right now, and they're not going to survive if that's the case.
The West has to embrace Jews in Judaism or else it's going to collapse.
And she goes farther than this in that same speech, Clip 34, where she claims that all of the things we've lost in the West are all Jewish values that we have to reclaim.
Let's watch.
We can only understand this if we understand that what the West has done to itself over the past half century is to collapse its own conscience, justice, and rationality.
But conscience, justice, and rationality are in fact Jewish values.
The unprecedented onslaught against the Jews has occurred because the Jews are central to Western civilization.
Jews are central to Western civilization, and the very concepts of justice and these things are Jewish concepts.
Okay, so I have some bad news.
I have some bad news for Melanie Phillips.
And it's that what she's saying right there flies in the face of 80 years of Jewish participation in our systems.
Jews And Liberal Values00:10:14
Now, I'm not the one saying this.
They are.
Okay.
So in a way, like fundamentally, I completely agree with Melanie Phillips' sentiment that it is our tolerance and our lack of like hard-nosed, traditional, like adhering to our foundational beliefs.
Like she's right, we've lost that.
Only it's not because we've gone away from embracing the Jews.
It's actually the exact opposite.
Again, don't take my word for it.
Let's go to some of these videos.
We'll go to clip 39 first.
So as we hear that the reason the Jeffrey Epstein scandal happened is because the West is degraded and too tolerant and degenerate, let's watch this commercial advertising how we got there.
I am Jewish and proud because Jews have always done what's right.
We've led the fight for gay rights.
Harvey Milk fought to ban discrimination based on sexual orientation.
Eddie Windsor was a leader in the fight for marriage equality.
Miriam Ben Shalom challenged the ban on gay people serving in the military.
We've helped lead the fight for racial justice.
Our rabbis are BFFs with MLK.
Together with black leaders, Jews helped to establish over 20 HBCUs.
During the civil rights movement, Jews were disproportionately involved in the protests.
We've led the fight for women's rights, for equal pay and the right to choose, and against discrimination in the workplace.
Jews were also among the first on the ground in Turkey, Ukraine, and Haiti.
In Judaism, when it comes to helping others, no action is too big or too small.
The Jewish principle of Tikkun Alam tells us that we have the power to change the world.
And there are so many ways to do that.
And this is why I am Jewish and proud.
Okay, so that's from the World Jewish Congress.
Of course, their leader, Ron Lauder, his son-in-law, has now just been appointed to the Fed, and he is the one demanding that basically Jewish people be given total control over all education, K through 12, including and colleges as well.
And basically says that anybody elected to any position in the government of America has to first and foremost be subservient to them.
Otherwise, they're going to really bring out the big bucks to try to shut down their candidacies.
Of course, it's not just them.
Here's Brett Stevens.
This is a New York Times writer.
He's sitting next to Rabbi Shmuley when he again lays out the absurdity of what Melanie Phillips was saying.
Melanie Phillips is there like, you know, justice and tradition, these are Jewish values.
And it's, you know, the West is moving away from these, away from these core Jewish values.
And so we have to move back towards those core Jewish values if we want to, you know, continue to exist.
Here's Brett Stevens saying the exact opposite.
18.
Jews, I think, have only really thrived and are only really safe when liberal values are the dominant prevalent values, those panoply of values, which are the DNA of what we call liberal democratic society.
Trump administration represents a substantial and dangerous regression from those values.
The attitude of this administration towards immigration, Mexican immigration, Latin American immigration, is a scandal.
So how do you square this circle, right?
How do you justify this?
Melanie Phillips is saying it's the West giving up their traditional values, giving up their core fundamental beliefs.
Well, simultaneously, you have Jewish organizations like the World Jewish Congress bragging about their active and leading roles in the movements that have systematically destroyed these traditional values, as well as people like Brett Stevens saying Jews are only really safe in places where liberal values reign supreme, which would be the opposite of what Melanie Phillips was just saying.
And yeah, he just gave a speech at the 92NY talk.
And I could show you clips from that all day.
But I'm trying to lay something out here in particular.
And let's go ahead and go to clip 35 here.
This is a really famous one, but we might as well play it since it contributes to the argument here.
Clip 35.
I think there's a resurgence of anti-Semitism because at this point in time, Europe has not yet learned how to be multicultural.
And I think we're going to be part of the throes of that transformation, which must take place.
Europe is not going to be the monolithic societies that they once were in the last century.
Jews are going to be at the center of that.
It's a huge transformation for Europe to make.
They are now going into a multicultural mode.
And Jews will be resented because of our leading role.
But without that leading role and without that transformation, Europe will not survive.
Okay, so that again is a very famous clip that has been spread for years.
And I'm going to finish off with this clip from Bataya Ungar Sargon talking about this.
And okay, let me try to wrap all this up.
So we've got the four pillars that we talked about.
The anti-Semitism means everything that criticizes Jews, that if you do that, your country will be destroyed.
Now, Melanie Phillips adds to that.
Basically, it's because you're losing the core values.
Now, she claims those are Jewish values.
They are, in fact, Christian values.
And this is the real absurd part of this is that you have all sorts of people.
I mean, Caleb Hammer and like all sorts of people over and over, Rabbi Schmuelie, Benjamin Nyan himself has said it, saying that European DNA is anti-Semitic, that there's something in the European character.
And you hear them say, you know, Spain, Germany, France, Rome, like these are the people that tried to destroy the Jews and have been destroyed themselves.
Of course, that's not true.
Rome still exists.
Persia still exists, just called Iran.
Egypt still exists and is thriving.
And by the way, they're actually the descendants of the people there, unlike the Eastern Europeans who just moved to the Middle East and changed their name.
But that's beside the point.
What they're saying is that there's something in the European DNA that's intrinsically anti-Semitic.
And yet they're also saying that the West, which is just another word for Christendom, and just another word for Europe and white people speaking European languages and worshiping Christ and Christianity,
that that both somehow is intrinsically anti-Semitic and has a history of anti-Semitism that's tied into their very DNA, while also saying that the civilizations that came out of this anti-Semitic DNA is somehow dependent on Judaism and Judeo-Christian.
This is totally incompatible and nonsensical.
Here's Bataya Ungar Sargon, clip 51, talking about how this plays into American politics.
And we'll wrap it all up here on the other side of this video.
But suffice it to say, the Israeli community in America, the diaspora in America, has abandoned the left, has now taken over the Republicans, and are trying to define opposition to their takeover as un-American, anti-Western, and you therefore belong in the category of the Islamists and the leftist progressives, the climate change fanatics, and the anti-white people.
That is a false dichotomy.
And that's what I'm trying to highlight here is the false dichotomy that's being used right now to try to force anybody that's not a die-hard Zionist out of the Republican Party and claim that they're with the left in an effort to basically silo them and expel them from any legitimate conservative pro-American America first movement that they've hijacked, even though MAGA was always against the wars in the Middle East and specifically against American submission to Israel.
So here's Ungar Sargon explaining this move away from the Democrats and how it's kind of pissing some of them off.
Let's watch.
According to John Fetterman himself, his Zionism puts him out of step with the rest of his party, which I'm sorry, only 13% stand with Israelis against the Palestinians.
This is a party whose grassroots is right now captured by the left.
And so Zionism does not have a future in the American left.
The Democratic Party's relationship with Zionism depends on whether it's willing to repudiate that far left.
And the thing that makes this so appalling is that Jews built the left in this country.
We built the labor movement.
We broke the New Deal.
70% of the lawyers who worked on civil rights cases were Jews.
We've been at the forefront of every liberal and leftist issue in this country.
So again, there she is saying, you know, the Democrat Party basically is the party that supports the Jewish values, but they don't like Zionism, so they have to be, you know, abandoned.
And this is the really important thing I think everybody needs to understand.
They're trying to force anybody that is not a Zionist but is right-wing into the category of a leftist, an anti-white person, anti-civilization.
You're with the Islamists.
That is a false dichotomy.
And yet I see people on our side pushing this.
If you're somebody that thinks you either support Candace Owens or you're Israeli, that is the exact dichotomy they're trying to push.
You are playing directly into their hands.
Here's somebody that says, oh, you have to abandon Trump or else you're with the Zionists.
That's the dichotomy they're trying to push on you.
It's a false dichotomy.
You can be against Zionism and still be a right-winger.
It's actually the way you should be, according to the people who are bragging about creating the left wing as Jews.
I mean, stop pushing the false dichotomy already.
Whatever the future may hold, InfoWars will always live forever.
The fights will continue.
Ultramethylene Blue Boost00:01:17
Be sure to follow us on X at RealAlexJones and at AJN Live.
And now you can download the number one news app in the world.
Go to alexjonesapp.com and let the Democrat Deep State Party know that we will never be silenced.
One of the most important things to me in my life is to get things right and to tell the truth and to be accurate.
That's why they say Alex Jones is right.
But it's not just our news, our prediction, or information that are incredibly accurate.
It's the products.
And out of all the amazing supplements at thealoishomestore.com, our methylene blue, ultramethylene blue, is the best you're going to find on the market.
It's so good for your body.
Instant, clean, amazing energy.
You owe it to yourself if you sat on the fence to go to thealoishimpstore.com right now and get ultramethylene blue.
And believe me, you are going to want to reorder it again.
We have an 84% reorder on that product.
No other supplement anywhere has anything even close.
That is how amazing it is.
Secure your ultramethylene blue now at thealoishimpstore.com.
And thanks for keeping us on the air.
Repeat what you said is happening.
You feel in the air.
I feel like that stuff in my fingers.
I feel tingling fingers.
There's the camera blasting with full power right there.