Danny Jones Podcast - #338 - Anna Paulina Luna on Charlie Kirk's Killer, God, Enoch & Government Lies

Episode Date: October 6, 2025

Watch every episode ad-free & uncensored on Patreon: https://patreon.com/dannyjones Anna Paulina Luna serves as U.S. representative for Florida's 13th congressional district. Luna, who established the Task Force on the Declassification of Federal Secrets in 2025 explains the most recent UAP congressional hearings, Epstein Files, JFK files & much more. SPONSORS https://trueclassic.com/danny - Upgrade your wardrobe and save on True Classic. https://shopmando.com - Use code DANNY to get 20% off + free shipping. https://masterclass.com/dannyjones - Use this link for an extra 15% off any annual membership. https://whiterabbitenergy.com/?ref=DJP - Use code DJP for 20% off EPISODE LINKS https://luna.house.gov FOLLOW DANNY JONES https://www.instagram.com/dannyjones https://twitter.com/jonesdanny OUTLINE 00:00 - Congress' assassination task force & Charlie Kirk's death 06:58 - Foreign government involvement in the Charlie Kirk assassination 13:10 - Why Anna sued Twitter & section 230 22:11 - How government censors & influences social media 27:03 - Warrantless surveillance & FISA 34:12 - The Epstein files 44:41 - New JFK files 57:08 - Who really killed Kennedy & why 01:01:12 - The CIA gateway project, God & UFOs 01:08:34 - The only bible translation that has NEVER changed 01:19:09 - Testimonies from UAP whistleblowers 01:30:04 - Government programs that congress doesn't know about 01:34:06 - The Vandenberg 'red square' UFO 01:38:32 - Best guess on what UFOs are 01:43:48 - Why democrats flipped on immigration policy 01:54:44 - Insider trading & lobbying in congress Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Hey there, it's Wayfair here, where delivery and setup are as easy as a few taps on your phone. You're relaxing in an old hammock, scrolling Wayfares app, when you spot it, a brand new patio set. Next thing you know, Wayfair delivers it right to your patio and sets it up. Oh, you need a new grill, too? All right, Wayfair's got you covered. With Wayfair's room of choice delivery and fast experts set up on qualifying orders, life gets a little easier. Visit Wayfair.com or the Wayfair app. So how did you get into this whole political game? So ironically, with everything that just happened with Charlie Kirk, I was actually recruited to work with Turning Point.

So I had this goal and ambition of going to medical school. I had joined the military, so left, you know, pretty young, 19. And after I finished up my undergrad, I was in a gap year. And so for those who have gone through the med school process, there's a lot of volunteer work that you do to kind of build up your application for these schools. And so I started working as a counter-trafficking. activists and started using then social media before political influencers or influencing was really a thing. And Turning Point had found a video that I did on the hypocrisy of what was happening with border security and basically recruited me to work with them. So Charlie called me a

day before I supposed to go to medical school and offered me a job as a national Hispanic outreach director. And then at that point in time, I basically had less than 24 hours to decide was I going to go one path or was I going to go a completely separate route? And so one of my mentors at the time was like, you have the ability if you do get into politics. At this time, I didn't ever think that I would end up in Congress. But he's like, if you can at least work with this organization at the time, turning point was just starting out. And you can be influential in the policy.

You could probably do a lot more than you ever would. So as a doctor, you can always go back to medical school if it doesn't work out. So I ended up taking a gamble, best decision that I ever ended up doing. and worked alongside Charlie Kirk and then realized that the activism was good to a certain point, but if I wanted to really make a change, I had to really focus on what was happening in Washington, and I had to go to Washington to do it. So that's kind of how I ended up running for Congress. Okay.

So long, story short, activism into politics. Were you at that memorial for him? Yeah, I spoke at the vigil and the memorial. So the vigil at the Kennedy Center and then the memorial in Arizona. Yeah. Yeah, the whole Charlie Kirk. thing has just been like, I don't know, it's put like a very weird vibe out in the ether to me. It feels like we're in like a really weird place right now. And I said it there a day.

It feels like the vibe right now almost feels like the COVID vibe. Yeah, it's it's dark, dark energy. What I will say is that with so I was ironically enough filming a documentary on the assassination of JFK because part of my task force in Congress is I'm actually looking into the the historical assassinations for the declassified files that the administration has directed these agencies to release. And I will never forget where it's like when you ask people, where were you at on 9-11? You remember. I remember where I was at when I found out that my friend had been murdered. And David, my comms director, came and he goes, Anna, Charlie's been shot. And I went on X and I immediately saw the video. And I wish to the, I wish that I did not see

that video because it was basically like watching my friend bleed out in real time. And, I saw that and I was like, I generally don't think he's going to make it. And then I called my friend over at Turning Point and he told me at that point of time that it wasn't looking good. And then I found out on the house floor that he had officially passed away. And then that was a whole thing in itself because we had called, which I don't care if this would have happened to anyone else in the country, like left wing or not, I would have still said like, let's pray for the family. And to see people choose that point of time to boo someone, I just felt like it was so disgusting and I think that's part of the reason why people just hate politics is because you have a lot of weirdos and easy.

Yeah. And also all the overwhelming amount of conspiracy theories and like flooding the zone or whatever you want to call it of all the people on the internet trying to dissect the whole thing and do an autopsy on the event. And, you know, it came from here. It came from there. It was this person. They're covering it up. Nothing's real. We don't know what is up, what is down, what is left, what is right. And it just feels like at least for me, it just makes. You don't want to like just step away from the internet. Yeah, I think people need to go outside and touch some grass sometimes and get grounded in reality. It's not to say that people don't have the right to ask questions, right? Like part of what my task force is doing is looking into some of the biggest assassination in U.S. history that we're surrounded by conspiracy. And to speak on just JFK, for example, we have found out that there has been credible evidence that the CIA intentionally lied to Congress, undermine investigations, stonewalled Congress's efforts and then intimidated witnesses, etc. And there's actually a lot of information that has come out where we won't ever have a smoking gun per se, but it creates a mosaic of where you can draw your own conclusions and assume that the CIA definitely likely had a hand in that. Yeah.

I mean, imagine if we would have had social media in 1963. Oh, it would have gone different. I think a lot of the shit that was going down. Yeah. And we're seeing that, though, we happen now. It's kind of weird because like you said, there's kind of this weird energy surrounding what happened with Charlie. But remember, there was two assassination attempts on the president. A lot of people still don't.

The administration doesn't know what happened with Butler. I can tell you that I actually cross-examined the Secret Service Director who lied to me under oath. And I was going to hold her in contempt of Congress. She resigned the next day. But we knew directly from whistleblowers that came forward out of the Secret Service that they intentionally did not send people to the meetings with these sniper teams that were supposed to be pulling security for the president. You basically had an open shot. This isn't conspiratorial. Anyone who's pulling detail, a security company will say, why would you leave that shot open like that?

then we you know it was a slanted roof i mean it was really hard to get snipers up there it's the whole thing is just such a joke in the way that it was handled you know you look at the fact that leading up to that a lot of people have and they still do continue to call people that disagree with them fascist Nazis all this stuff but then you look at the fact that this the shooter was you know he had burner phones whatever happened to the burner phones why did we not find out any information you're telling me that you can find out more information with the nSA on any other American with a FISA warrant than you can on a shooter that tried to assassinate a president. It doesn't sit right. But there are a lot of historical similarities between what happened in the

60s and the civil unrest and now the pendulum swinging, I think, back into more of a pro-America conservative base value system here politically speaking. But it's weird because in the 60s you had Kennedy assassinated, whereas there's two assassination attempts on President Trump. Then you had MLK assassination. You had Charlie Kirk assassinated. There's been a lot of similarities and I just hope that the rhetoric can be toned down. You're seeing a lot of nonsense right now with the government shutdown. But if you think for a second that these people don't know what they're doing, they pull test everything. I mean, like, certain keywords will say that you can pull up the messaging from different political pundits and outlets and even the same messaging topics from the Democrat Party because they know exactly what will sway their voters. So they're targeting a certain sect of their own voting base to get them to turn out. And it's unfortunate because that's that rhetoric is what got Charlie killed. But it goes a lot. deeper than that. So there's been a lot of questions as to whether there was foreign government involvement in which one? In the assassination of Charlie Kirk, right? So like we're going to address these theories right now. Back during the ICE rights, do you remember all of that at the beginning of

the year? A lot of people were like, where are all of a sudden these big violent rights coming from who's funding these organizations? We found out that there was a foreign funding tie to an individual by the name of Neville Shingham, who's a multi-billionaire. And he made his billions by working with the communist Chinese government. And he would take, and he's not a registered agent, a foreign agent, which is a far a violation. So he's taking these millions, funneling it into organizations like the Party of Socialism and Liberation, who then in turn create these very radicalized movements, but they're not even American in theory or funded by American people.

They're actually funded by foreign governments. The irony in all this is that Neville Shingham, not just to Mondani's election, so like Jews from Mandani, but he actually also has. ties to funding the party of socialism, the Salt Lake City Queer Group, which is now being investigated with former knowledge on whether or not they knew Charlie would be assassinated,

who had ties to the shooter. So I do think that there's a foreign funding tie, but the question is which government, and I think it's tied to the Chinese. Interesting. I mean, like, the queer what? Salt Lake City Queers. Salt Lake City Queers. They're being investigated by the FBI, but if you look at the organization and where the funding

comes from, I mean, not just them, they had ties to groups in Cuba for and they are actually calling themselves terrorists. But not just that. They also have ties to the United Nations. So there's this aspect of a very pro-globalist and then a pro-Marxist movement to really so discord and divide in this country.

And that's why I recently posted on my social media. I was like, check out the bot farms that actually exists. And when you see all this shit talking on Twitter, make sure you're not arguing with the bot because that's not like a fake thing. It happens. And so we have to realize that social media is being used to kind of stoke this.

divide, but in the instance of the shooter, Charlie Kirk was almost like a son to President Trump. Don Jr. will tell you it was like his little brother. Right. Very close to J.D. Vance, very close to Kash Patel. So if you think for a second that there will be any amount of resource spared in his investigation, you're wrong. Because I know these people, and I've seen the way that this administration has worked towards at least issuing some of the darkest secrets. For example, what happened with CIA and the connection to JFK's assassination. I've met with the director. But to, I think, really take into account that you have the family that is seeing all this stuff out there right now. I hope that they get every single person involved. I definitely think

that it's likely that more than one person knew about what was happening because the Salt Lake City Queer Group immediately deleted their page. They're under investigation. There's a forward funding tie there. For Tyler Robinson to say that Charlie was, you know, hateful and that he just wanted to eliminate his hatefulness, where does that come from, right? Like if you actually listened to the things that Charlie was saying and you don't clip it, you can realize it was a very logical conversation that he was trying to have. If you don't agree with it, it's still not a reason to kill, to murder someone. Right. Well, I think the problem is people have valid questions about the narrative that was immediately projected out into the media. That obviously,

if anyone with half of a brain can see that there are massive holes in it, there's big questions, there's the things like the Discord thing where Discord came out and like denied it. There's like the rhetoric. Well, they're being subpoenaed too, by the way to go testify before Congress. So they're going to be coming to testify before the oversight committee. And then like the way he wrote the messages, which doesn't seem like something a 20 year old would write. There's the whole history between him and his boyfriend and like the weird love letter he wrote to him, detailing everything he was going to do.

there was the video of him getting pulled over by the cops which didn't seem to like match up with the way he was using his language there the dairy queen casually getting an ice cream you know if you're a sociopath maybe that's a normal thing um there's just so much so many strange things happening with i mean even the guy the pa the the i don't know i've been following the whole candace owen's thing i've been trying to follow have you paid attention to what she's been doing i haven't seen too much of it so she's dropping these videos every day that get five million views in like 24 hours it's insane and she's talking to talk to all these people that were involved in it, politicians running around Utah, and they all have different stories. You know, it's all super strange. Well, the good news is that the trial should be public. So that all come out in discovery. Oh, that would be nice. I'm like the extreme trail. I'm a huge fan and just direct transparency, but you have to understand, too, that there's an open investigation into this. So if you have the FBI investigating Salt Lake City, Queers, Foreign Funding Ties, multiple people under investigation, they're not going to be able to give that stuff immediately. But you should be able to see it. And it's all going to come out in discovery because they have a

full-fledged trial. So I think a lot of those questions will be answered, but either which way, I mean, the reaction of a group of people, even people in Washington, to the assassination of another American was really disgusting to watch in real time. And it was even more disgusting to see that people, instead of saying like, hey, this was like another American that got shut, they were trying to justify it. And then when people were basically held accountable to their employers like, hey, this is not like, if you are representing a company, right, you probably shouldn't be like saying, great, kill his wife next. And that's what some people were saying. I actually worked with some of these different social media companies. And I was like, hey,

there's photoshopped images of children with blood splatter on their face saying Charlie's kids are next. Do you think that this is against your terms and conditions? And I will say to even the attorneys over at Blue Sky, which is a left wing version of Twitter, they're like, this is not what our platform is supposed to be used for. And so when people violate the terms and conditions of usage, we're going to delete the stuff. So that's not necessarily cancel culture. That's just, hey, you guys have terms and conditions you agree to. And by the way, you probably shouldn't be calling for the assassination of his children. Right. Totally. Totally. Totally agree with you on everything. That's like a very common sense. Totally. And the question is when it comes to free speech online on

these platforms, which are public utilities, where do you draw the line? You know, I think it's They have terms and conditions. I actually sued Twitter 1.0. I don't know if you know that. Did you really? Yeah, during my election, this is before it really became a thing in 2020 with kicking Trump and deplatforming him.

So I was throttled on my engagement on X, and they were shadow banning me on Facebook as well, so I couldn't actually get my message out there even to fundraise and all of that. And so this was in 2020 when I first ran. And so I had sued them. And the thing is, is that you, so social media,

is considered, I consider it a public utility, but there is stuff with Section 230 that Congress, I don't think is ever going to want to reform because a lot of people in Congress are owned by some of these tech people. And it gives certain protections to these tech companies. But at the end of the day, these companies, when you agree to use them, there are still terms and conditions, right? Like, you can't go into a crowded theater and yell fire. So if you are saying that, let's call for, for example, the public assassination of the president, you can't do that. Right. You can't do that because there are people that will actually engage in that act.

Now, there's a big difference between like what is considered hate speech. And I think that that's a very slippery slope. Yes. So terms and conditions, what the company then puts it out there for if you use our app, then this is the code of conduct you're expected with the company, way different than, you know, deeming something as hate speech and then moving from that, which I would argue can be very slippery slope, dystopian in form. Today's sponsor True Classic started with one vision.

And that's to bring comfortable, fitted clothes to ever. everyday people because looking and feeling awesome shouldn't come at designer prices. And their customers agree. They don't just sell 25 million shirts to 5 million customers on accident. What sets them apart is the message behind it all, from uplifting men in their daily lives to giving back to underserved communities. And it shows in their brand how they understand the everyday guy. I've been wearing True Classic for a while now and it still impresses me every morning I put

them on. Sometimes it can be difficult for me to get around in public with all the people trying to put their hands on me to cop a feel of this buttery smooth fabric. Forget overpriced designer nonsense and skip the generic cookie cutter potato sacks. True Classic delivers premium essentials built for real life. Whether you're out in the town or working up a sweat, level up your wardrobe with style that fits any scenario. You can grab it at Target or Costco, but for the best deals, head on over to trueclassic.com slash danny. That's T-R-U-E-C-L-S-S-I-C-com slash Danny. get hooked up today. It's linked down below. Now back to the show. And then you have the section

230 thing, which in, I think it was 2020, you had Beto O'Rourke saying that we need to take a look at section 230 and repealing section 230. It was a huge Democrat thing. And now, since the Charlie Kirk assassination, you have people on the right saying we need to question to there. Just the other day, the guy, I forget who the guy was. I don't know these people's names. He was questioning the FBI director saying, look at this. They're talking about your family on these social media. platforms. They're coming up with conspiracy theories about your family. We should talk about Section 230. Like, I think, I think, so Section 230 does give certain protections to a lot of these apps that I would argue immunity and basically makes them almost impossible to sue. So the reason

why we wanted to repeal Section 230 is because they were literally tipping the scale on election. Like if you're suppressing shadow banning people because you don't like their viewpoints and you're interfering with the reach of that person to be able to talk to constituency. Right. That's election law that they were literally meddling in. And I actually found out that after the 2020 election, I was questioning Yul Roth, who was over at Twitter before he was fired before Elon must purchase it and change it to X. So in 2020, and I actually brought this up to Netflix because I was debating this topic.

So on January 6th specifically, President Trump said for people to remain peaceful, I got proof that the Department of Homeland Security under CISO are under a domestic terrorist Watch Division was actually engaging in joint state actor relationships with meta, YouTube, now formerly Twitter, and a few other outlets to suppress the president specifically calling for there to be peace and not to have happened at January 6th. And so we questioned him. He perjured himself. He lied about it.

I had the evidence. I actually had screenshots from a group chat that had taken place. And he did not ever think that that would probably resurface years later. but they're actually communicating on a private cloud server. And it was a big deal. And the fact is that you do have people in government. Many of them are not elected officials, but these bureaucrats that have been there for X amount of time.

And they're behind the scenes doing and operating in a way that's unbecoming of any government official. But I would argue, too, are responsible for American civil liberties being violated. And so this can get into a bigger conversation on Pfizer reform and all of that. But it's a problem. And so you see the corruption. You see how they tip the scale. You see how the social media companies up until President Trump won, really until he got shot. He got shot in the face, Grace's year, but literally the guy would have killed him if Trump didn't move his head.

It wasn't until that point that these social media companies were like, wow, this is actually a problem and then completely pulled back and then got behind the president. Yeah, that's a problem when they can do this throttling stuff and the shadow banning stuff because they don't have to warn you. They don't have to actually say, hey, you violated this rule. it can just be some subjective behind the scenes thing. It's happened to me before. I've talked to people at YouTube about it. There's a whole layer above their head, above the moderator's heads. When they see like, hey, we're looking at a video.

There's nothing wrong with it. You violated no rules. We're looking at the transcripts. There's no words in there that are pulling up any flags. But for some reason, your video is not searchable. So this means this is above my head. This is the floor above me. Yeah, shadow bands information.

Yeah. That's a huge problem. And I get why you would threaten them with the section. 230 stuff over that stuff. That makes total sense. Well, it's literally election interference. We have proof that they did it. And it's dangerous because if it's happened once it's going to happen again, I remember where I was at when I heard Alex Jones got kicked off of YouTube. And I was like, oh, this is going to be a problem. So he's now, I think, since been reinstated. I don't know if that's, is he kicked off

again? I don't know if that's true or not. I keep saying these things about Alex Jones and Nick Fuentes saying that, oh, they were kicked, they were let back on and they were pulled down the next day or something. I don't know what's real. I think people are allowed back on YouTube. And I say that because I saw a statement from House Judiciary saying that people that had formerly been banned from YouTube are now back. So I know that that was like a legit press release. Okay. Can you find out, Steve, if Alex Jones is back on YouTube? Or the press release from House Judiciary, too, that talks about it. But all that to say that there's definitely an issue with 230. Are as Congress going to fix it? Probably not. No, Alex Jones is not back on

YouTube. Also according to AI. Can you find the House Judiciary release on this? It might be on House Judiciary or House GOP on X. This is the question, what's worse? What happens if you remove 230? Now these companies... You can reform it. These companies will go bankrupt, right?

Well, so there's a certain level of two when you are basically blatantly interfering in elections or defaming people, putting out false information that's literally responsible for, I would argue, you remember that faulty lawsuit that President Trump was hit with, or some random woman was like he assaulted me in a changing room. There was no evidence it was hearsay. They basically went after him. It was lawfare in conjunction with a smear campaign.

I mean, these people, if they're knowingly engaging in that stuff, should they not be allowed to be called out and sued on that? I would argue that they would then be more careful in putting out correct information. Maybe there could be carve-outs to if they're actually caught putting their thumb on the scale or doing something like that. You can reform it. You don't have to fully delete it, but at least have the conversation to reform it. But to say we can't do anything about that. To where it doesn't interfere with the user's free speech, but it keeps them accountable for political fuckery.

Exactly. No fuckery. Is this it? Yeah. Hold on. Yep. Due to our oversight efforts, Google commits to offer all creators previously kicked off YouTube due to political speech violations to return to the platform. But that's not all.

What does this? So it goes into all of it. When did this come out? What day? September 23rd. Oh, okay. interesting. So Google

And they paid Trump $25 million bucks. They just paid out and I think that he probably I mean his lawsuits are not done with but I mean

think about how much if people had to argue just on truthfulness alone I think it would really change the game of politics but you always know too like in you know there's these like October surprises

right before an election season they'll save the worst smear campaign right before an election to the month of October because they're like we're going to hit voters and if we do it truly then they can diffuse it

or get ahead of it Social media has actually contributed, though, to the ability of many people to, I think, refute false narratives right away. So thank you to Elon for purchasing X. We'll forever be happy. And allegedly, Google is going to move in this direction, too, with these community notes. They should. However, what I have seen is the issue with community notes currently is there's still an issue in way that people can stack it. So going into, like, the whole bot farm aspect of it, if you get a bunch of people to file the community notes, it can kind of sway.

the direction of the community know in a direction that might not necessarily fully transparent in the truth but might kind of more direct you in a way that they want you to go. So it might be a half-truth. So obviously we don't want, you know, better than, I mean, yeah, I don't know.

I don't know what the alternative is. Yeah, we don't want like the Department of Truth Ministry here. But I do think that, you know, with what happened with Charlie, influencing, I do think that there should be some mechanism on these social media apps to track if someone's a bot farm, which you can't tell me that they can't come up with that tech.

So track the bot farms, at least engage in flag if you're engaging with a bot. And then also to, in the way that you have to be a registered foreign agent, if you're an influencer taking money from a foreign government, you should be required to divulge that to the American people. Right. Influencer taking money to the government. Yeah, which I...

Are there influencers taking money from foreign governments? I would assume so. It seems pretty apparent. Do you know of any? Not personally. everyone's accused of. I'm accused of taking money from the CIA. I wish I could get money from the CIA.

Well, I would tell you that even if you're taking CIA money is to give me some I feel like get me money from the CIA. USAID was paying influencers, so it's definitely a thing. Oh yeah, that's true. We had Mike Benz in here yesterday and he was blowing our minds. I love him. He calls me tip of this year and Congress. He was showing us all of these crazy, these crazy carveouts, these companies that are taking billions of dollars to.

to draw these crazy heat maps of words, hate speech words, COVID disinformation, pharmaceutical words, and like mapping them across all the social media companies. And it was like some crazy minority report social media AI. I told you though. Remember said they like pull tests and like sway influence. So it's like half the time you go on the internet's like are you even interacting with a real person or is this a shop? Right. Yeah, it's insane. He was scaring the shit on me yesterday with all the money that they were dumping into that stuff. All that just like the taxpayer dollars that are going into these basically CIA carveouts to to regulate free speech online.

Yeah, the CIA has, it's been going through its own cultural change, I'll say. So the current director is a like-minded individual and very much aligned with the president. But he's not controlling everyone at the agency. So these different intelligence communities, especially, there's a lot of people that have their own goals and objectives. Yeah. And like when it comes to people like these guys who like the Tyler Robinson guy or the I forget the guy's name who tried to shoot the president and shot his ear. Like when it comes to the FBI and the CIA, at what point are like obviously they are using some, a lot of crazy super advanced surveillance tools that we probably never heard of to monitor people's communication online. line, their search history, all that kind of stuff. And going back to like the, the moment that we live in today where like nothing is real, we live in this like fake reality matrix.

Well, do go to Blackpill. I mean, there's still a good that's happening, but in a sense, you just don't know when you're arguing with them. I don't know what's real anymore. So I just like let all the influencers battle it out. And then I sort of like, I'll take the scraps. But like when it comes to monitoring, when it comes to these agencies, the FBI and the FBI and the, the CIA trying to monitor terrorists. I mean, after 9-11, they did so much, so much. Like, I had a NSA whistleblower in here who was first day at NSA was 9-11. And he was explaining to me how they basically implemented this dragnet system. I forget what it was called now. It was under the Patriot Act. Yeah, it was the Patriot Act. This was a specific software that they

were using in the NSA and the CIA. And it was like a dragnet, right? Basically. That on January 6th, too. Right. Right. And to surveil and try to track terrorist activity. Now, all the stuff that came out on the shooter that shot Trump, searching the internet, how to assassinate somebody, the best weapon to use to assassinate somebody from 200 yards away. Like, all the videos he was pushing.

It was insane. Like, this guy would be the top of the red flag list if I'm in any of these agencies. So you're getting into, though, the reason. why we need to repeal the Patriot Act, FISA reform, all of that. To be clear, I was one of a handful of Republicans that voted down FISA. And as a result of that, I was kept off as a female veteran on housearm services that comes up with the policy and appropriations for the Department of Defense. Can you explain what FISA is for people? FISA is basically what they use as a means of violating your civil liberties in the name of protection and keeping you safe. It was put up

as a result of, I think, people wanting to push more of a police state, to be honest with you. But the reforms that currently exist, I mean, President Trump was illegally surveilled and prior to him getting into office. And we all know that by the information Tulsi's put out at the direction of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. But he was under surveillance because they got a FISA warrant in a secret court and got permission to surveil him. And that is completely unconstitutional. But there's some reforms that can take place to ensure that. good Americans aren't having their civil liberties violated and they don't want to put those reforms in place.

FISA is up for renegotiation, if you will, this year. But I don't know that Congress has a stomach to actually put those reforms in place. So we'll see how much pressure the White House puts top down to actually get that done. But all that to say, because I voted down FISA, because it does violate your civil liberties, I was kept off committee assignments because of it. And it goes both ways for people too. John Kariaku is a CIA whistleblower, tried to blow on the whistle on the torture program. And he tried to, he's supposed to go in front of like a, get some sort of like secret court to explain this stuff.

There was a there's a whistleblower protocol in the United States. And they denied him. And or maybe he did do it. I don't remember exactly. Anyways. And they'll hold their intelligence. Yeah. To like the other, all the other judges.

And then they alerted the head of the fucking CIA and the NSA. This guy's blowing the whistle. Well, the former directors, a lot of them not so good people. Yeah. Yeah. So there's still, there's a cultural change in the CIA and the FBI. But there's still a lot of growing pains as a result of that. But all that to say.

If you are a good, God-fearing American that believes in the Constitution, you should consider going to work at both those agencies because right now they were recruiting from a lot of left-leaning colleges. And what we're finding, at least on the polling, is showing that there's literally this assassination culture that exists on the left wing or means to say that if you're an American, but you disagree with what I have to say that it's okay to kill you. As a result of that, and that's kind of the radicalization.

I think a lot of it is due to foreign influence, but a lot of people, unfortunately, are being pushed in the wrong direction. So we need people that generally have a passion for that job to go into these career fields. Now, in regards to the Patriot Act, I think that that was done in the name of the American people being afraid. And so people wanting more of a surveillance state push that. And I do think it still needs to be repealed. If you ever said that before, you'd probably kill your political career. We actually have a number of bipartisan supporters to repeal the Patriot Act.

But I don't think it'll ever be voted on because I don't think they'll ever be. bring it to the floor. Right. How would that happen if it was if you did actually. So how it works with legislation is you have to either get a certain amount of co-sponsors, but they can even then block it from coming to the floor. And then there's something called the rules committee. And it's a number of Democrats and Republicans. It's usually like six and six. So 12 members total. And they take the direction of the speaker on what legislation to bring from the floor working with the House majority leader, which would be Steve Scalese. And then so they determine the legislation that comes to the floor for the House of Representatives. Ah, okay.

That makes sense. So it's not like, you know, I'm just a bill in schoolhouse rocks. There's some people that, yeah, I wish it was, but it's not like that. Yeah. Yeah, no, the social media stuff is, it's crazy. And, you know, it does feel like it's getting better right now. And, you know, I know, especially ever since Elon purchased Twitter and made it X, things have been getting a lot better.

And this news with, like, YouTube, reinstating people and letting off. the boot on the neck of the people who are violating these quote unquote hidden policies like in the COVID era and all this stuff. I just always, I always worried what's going to happen with these social media companies when Trump's no longer in office and when the pendulum swings. So we have to evolve with the times, right? Because like no one thought even 50 years ago that there'd be apps and people would be talking in apps. Like people used to read the newspaper. Now they go to X and do it kind of the same way. My dad still reads the newspaper. Okay. Your dad's a cool guy.

But most people are on social media, especially if you're under the age of like 45, you're on social media. But it's definitely something that we have to take a look at. I think Trump has a pretty good finger on the pulse because he was personally impacted by it. And his son, Baron Trump, Don Jr., Eric Trump, they're all very active on social media so they understand. And so I think a lot of good reforms will happen. But after Trump, if it's JD Vance, it's going to continue to kind of force the country in the correct direction, at least in regards to protecting freedom of speech. but then also ensuring that if you are straight up putting out defamatory information or you're allowing your platform to call for the assassination of sitting members of Congress

or people that you don't agree with, you can't do that. By the way, also too, I think we can also say like, hey, you know, maybe these companies should be a little bit better at allowing snuff films to be publicly circulated, right? Like you, stuff film is like someone getting killed. In the last week leading up to what happened with Charlie, I saw a black woman executed, broad daylight shot in the head in, I think it was Philadelphia, Philadelphia somewhere that was circulating. I then saw the poor Ukrainian woman that was stabbed in the neck and then the assassination of Charlie Kirk. And it was like this stuff, you know, you have 12 year old kids on these apps. Do they really need to be seeing that? There should be at like a certain level of like warning or like put up something, but warn people ahead of time. Yeah. Fall is finally here. And that means yard work, football and hunting trips. And the only way I'm staying fresh through all that is with Mando deodorant. From your pitch to your package and everywhere. in between mando controls body odor for 72 hours and that's perfect for long game days or hiding from

the feds in a crowd of fanatics it's clinical strength two times better than the standard after just 12 hours sweat was reduced by 92 percent and it doesn't just mask odor it prevents it 100 percent of study participants experienced all day odor protection and that's why i use mando it's absolutely wonderful in hot situations try bourbon leather it's delicious mando is known for using premium ingredients like gentle mandelic acid. Don't wait. Grab yours now at shopmando.com and experience double protection today. Mando starter pack is perfect for new customers. It comes with a solid stick deodorant, a cream tube deodorant, two free products of your choice, like mini body wash and deodorant wipes, and free shipping. And as a special offer for our listeners, new customers can get 20% off

sitewide with our exclusive code. Use code Danny at shopmando.com for 20% off site wide plus free shipping. S-H-O-M-A-N-D-O.com. Please support our show and tell them we sent you. Mando's got you covered. With deodorant plus sweat control, say goodbye to sweat stains and hello to long-lasting freshness. Did you do any work on or have anything to do with the push to release the Epstein files? Yeah, I was the only member of Congress calling for this back in January. And then people decided to make it political. So I'm not going to use it to smear the president. But yeah, I was actually very, I was very pleasantly surprised to see people all of a sudden care about this until I realized they were trying to smear the president with it. What do you mean like all of a sudden care about it?

So back in, or I think it was last. What made you? What made you? Why were you the only one talking about it in January? Well, I'll get to that. So in November of last election cycle, there was a Democrat senator that actually blocked Marshall Blackburn's push to release the Epstein flight logs. So that was, remember, Joe Biden era blocks a release. in the Senate and she was pushing for it.

Yep. So then you saw the new DOJ come in. I had been pushing, I think it's starting in January. So my task force would stood up. It was January, February timeframe. My task force was stood up and this was part of our purview of jurisdiction, but we don't hold declassification authority. So we basically wanted to see if there's any ability for us to investigate the files.

So we kept calling for it publicly. Around end of February time frame, I had become aware of a whistleblower that came forward that was formerly at the FBI that was alleging destruction of evidence at the agency under the former FBI director prior to Trump getting into office. pertaining to, of all things, Jeffrey Epstein, among another

other bunch of things. Destruction of files. Evidence. Yeah, so I was like, this is interesting. So I actually introduced a piece of legislation in March that actually was called, I think it was the Stop the Shred Act. You can pull up the Fox News article on it.

And I reference it right then and they're like, hey, there's something shady happens. at the FBI. Here's the person that's doing it. I had actually reported it to the FBI. And I was still calling publicly for the release of the documents. And no one gave a shit. No one gave a shit. There was not one person that was a Democrat that cared about it. And then all of a sudden, we started seeing them realize that you could probably try to use this to smear the president. What's been interesting is I have a paper trail laying up to this. Not one person said anything. All last Congress. They didn't care about this. And then I actually take the

this topic obviously very seriously. And I actually went into the room with both Democrats and Republicans and the victims and their attorneys that came to talk to Congress. And they actually themselves said President Trump had nothing to do with it. So the question I have is that you had the Democrats in Senate blocking this last cycle. Then you had them try to use it to smear the president. They're up there was like these protesters had showed up completely separately and unrelated to the press conference that they were hosting on this, but with signs that were basically alleging that President Trump had assaulted people. That's all political theater.

They don't really give a shit. If you're telling me that the same group of people care about victims, yet they did nothing when they're allowing literally Hispanic women and children to be trafficked across the U.S. and Mexico border and they're like, no, please, come on in and they did nothing about it. Yeah. I think it's completely hypocritical. Sure. Now, House Oversight, which I encourage Chairman Comer to do this, and I'm glad he did,

release information and documents. I think it's to the tune of over 30,000 documents, which they should. no new information. There actually was new information. And by the way, I don't know any member of Congress or investigator that's gone through all 30,000 documents. And for people to say, well, that was publicly available, really were you had to go physically to court, request the documents. It was nowhere housed online. So we've been able to put that information out there. But interesting to note, there is currently an active lawsuit with the victims and the banks that allowed for these transactions to take place. And some of the perpetrators that were

involved in what happened with the trafficking, their attorneys have contacted. contacted the victim's attorneys to settle. So you have an active lawsuit right now. So we can't tip the scales of the lawsuit because that's using your position of influence in a legal matter. You can't do that. That's illegal. So yes, we want to find out who's involved and we want to know. But to say that this is all of a sudden done in the good heart and good nature because you believe it should be released. Where the hell were you back in January? Where are you in February, March, in April for all of this stuff? And then you see them to be the president and I'm not going to get behind that. Yeah, totally. But I think that. Actually, I should pull up the shred act.

It was a good one. Yeah, try on Shredd Act on a Google, Fox News. I was astonished at the response to the Epstein files because it seemed to me like it finally seemed like we had one topic that both the left and the right could agree on. Right. We need to see the freaking Epstein files because it, if you do any kind of research into the guy, you can tell that he is connected to both sides. there's one common denominator with all the people that are attached to Jeffrey Epstein and that is super wealthy powerful people. Whatever is in that list or those files or whatever, it is without a beyond a shadow of doubt, it's going to be the Rosetta Stone to all the most powerful people in the world.

Sorry, so check this out. So this is look at the date, March 14th, 2025. Okay, so I'm like going public with us. And I'm the only one screaming from the rooftops. Now go down and read about it. It even references it down here. So this is right after we were notified. up a little bit that there was destruction of evidence under the former deputy director at the FBI.

Okay. So it's a legislation. It wants federal agents caught destroying or concealing government documents to be eligible for a life sentence in prison. Luna, who is leading the task force on the declassification of government records, is introducing a new bill called Stopping High Level Record, Elimination and Destruction, Shred Act of 2025. It would levy mandatory sentence up 20 years to life for any government official or employee, the Department of Justice or anyone in a wider intelligence community found to have concealed,

removed, or mutilated federal records according to the bill text previewed by Fox News Digital. Wow. So you can go down and actually references the conversation that I had with the whistleblower. So go down. Blah, blah, blah. Oh, and this goes to the Secret Service allegedly had destroyed documents with Kennedy. So that's why it's referenced there too. But, yeah, you can, Benny Johnson reported whistleblower allegations with an FBI.

in a bid to Block Patel's work and then if you go down declassified documents about Epstein Paddlewood Puscher. So like I reference all of it. So all of that to say I do think that it's possible that information could have been destroyed and are planted

and so that's when I think they're like well we're going to release credible information and whatnot but I also think at the end of the day so the one thing and I put out a tweet about this on my ex platform because people wanted to know what the victims had alleged in regards to foreign government ties.

Yeah. And so the attorney spoke for the group and said that they were made aware of foreign ties to Jeffrey Epstein, specifically had reference. Actually, pull up the tweet. Go to my Rep Luna account and type in just like on the search and you can actually get the verbatim posting right there. Yeah, type in Epstein or like foreign ties and Epstein, see if that works. I've seen victims maybe. Yeah, see if it's on there. Go down.

Hold on. Yeah, that one. September 4th. There we go. This is, what is this from? This is my ex account, my official account. I mean, like, what is this information from? This is from the witnesses?

Hold on. This is directly from the witnesses. Okay. Their attorney. Got it. Read that second paragraph. In my opinion, there is definitely an intelligence connection. countries named by the lead attorneys for the witnesses included Saudi Arabia, Russia, and Israel, as well as former CIA director, inferred to be the CIA director under the Bush administration based on the attorney's description of interactions while Epstein was in work, in his work, arrest program. Yeah, so they named those countries.

What's interesting is that they forgot the, he forgot England or the UK. Well, they didn't, that's, they didn't reference that from what the witnesses. So that came directly from the witnesses and the attorney. So this was specifically, though, alleged who he had worked with, right? Yes. So what's interesting about that, though, is that this was, like, I didn't see many people talking about what the victims were telling us directly. And they did promise to get us a list of names, but we have not gotten that list of names yet.

And I think that's because there's a pending lawsuit. Who promised? The victims. They promised to release the names of their perpetrators, but we haven't gotten that list yet. And I think it's because there's a pending lawsuit. And that's why they're saying the Jeffrey Epstein, only traffic to himself. He's a lone trafficker. Well, that's, that would be a question for the victims, right?

Like, I don't know who they're going to have on the list. Everyone's asking for the list. Both Democrats and Republicans are like handed over if you have something. But again, going back to the statements from the attorney. Yeah. Their clients are being contacted by these people that are allegedly involved. So we're very careful to make sure that we don't tip the scales of the lawsuit. Yeah. Yeah. It's just so. It's just like the whole cluster fuck of all of it is just like,

It just hurts my brain. It's like, it's like, look, it walks like a duck. It quacks like a duck. It's probably a fucking duck. It's just like the JFK thing. If you ask everybody, if you poll every American and ask him, do you think Lee Harvey Oswald was acting alone on November 22nd, 1963, 93, 99% of people that are paying attention at least would say absolutely not. Well, they are now vindicated with our findings because we have now testimony that he was shot from both the front and the back. There's multiple shooters and yeah.

Right. I mean, anyone with two eyes can see that, right? Like it's the same thing with Jeffrey Epstein. Everybody with two eyes can tell you. But the CIA at the time, too, anyone that did question that, they had people at the Washington Post that would discredit people. They were threatening doctors license if they went forward that were actually in the operating room when Kennedy was brought there. So there's been a lot. You could talk about the intelligence influence in old media, which is now different because we have social media.

Right. Yeah. Right. Well, didn't Obama? Didn't he do something like a new age project mockingbird? that would open the American people up to propaganda. Yeah, it was like opening the American people up to propaganda. Yeah, so they wanted to repeal it.

Mike Lee was talking about that. Smith-Bundane Act, something like that. Yeah, that sounds about right. Smith-something Act. Anyways, we wanted to rename it the Charlie Kirk Act. But I don't think that'll happen either because Congress is. Mm-hmm. Yeah.

It should happen, though. Well, I mean, like the Epstein stuff, look, I'm not optimistic that any of the stuff's ever going to come out. Same thing with the Kennedy stuff. Well, the Kennedy stuff, we've got. gotten some pretty wild stuff. So they've literally basically admitted out. If you want to, like, if you want to find it, the documents have been, have been uncovered and declassified. If you actually. And we're still getting more documents though, because there's like this was

decades of hidden information. By the way, the Secret Service did destroy certain documents that they were told not to. Why would the Secret Service do that? Seems kind of shady. But there's still documents that we're still gathering to include stuff that we're getting from the presidential library. So we're still, and as soon as we get it, we upload it to the archives. But it's like, how many people are going to go through that. So we're doing it in the name of historical significance and transparency, but a lot of people just have moved past it because it's not a hot trending topic anymore. Have you ever talked to John Newman? I think he's a professor at the University of Washington in, I think that's the name of it, in Washington, D.C. And he is, out of all of the JFK

experts and authors I've talked to, I asked them, like, I'm like, who's the top guy that knows more about this stuff than anyone. And they all say John Newman because he's the guy. All JFK authors, they base their books on previous books, right? Instead of going to the source, they just, they read a bunch of other books and they compile their book, right? They all base their books on this guy's work and this guy's books. John Newman. He has literally like schizophrenically drawn out the map of everything that's happened. Yeah, it's the always sunny meme. And he's read every document, forward and backwards. Oliver Stone's film. I interviewed

Stone. Yeah, he was for the first JFK film. He was a super advisor for it. Yeah, so we work with Jeff Morley and an investigative team. Yeah, so Jeff Morley, he's like a Bernie Sanders Democrat. So, I mean, this is truly bipartisan. But they won't tell you that. Yeah, it's definitely bipartisan. Obviously, it's bipartisan.

And so one of the biggest smoking gun that John Newman explained to me was that Oswald a two-time Russian defector, Soviet defector, was on the parade route on November 22nd. He had like the highest level of FBI flash stops on his file. He had a CIA, an active CIA file and an active FBI file. Well, they're observing him and they lied to Congress about it. Like observing him like on the on the threat list. He was at the top. Yeah, they were reading his mail. We have all that evidence. They were tracking him through new, through, through, uh, New Orleans, Dallas, Mexico, Mexico City.

And they, Newman got all of the, all of the files on him, all of the cables that were going between the CIA desk in Langley, between the CIA desk in Mexico City. And he has the evidence of all of them. And he has all the people who signed off on him. So there was one lady who was the counterintelligence liaison for the CIA. Her name was Jane Roman. And she was still alive, like maybe 10 years ago. And I think Morley and Newman went to go visit this lady, Jane Roman, because there was all these files on one hand that were saying the FBI was monitoring him through New Orleans.

Yep, FBI and the CIA through New Orleans, Dallas and New Mexico. And then there was another CIA file after or I think it was maybe like a week before. they shot the president that was signed off by Jane Roman, the same lady who signed the other ones, saying that we have no contact or no records of Lee Harvey Oswald since January of 62, which when he was still in the Soviet Union. So they went up to her and they interviewed her. They say, look, why did you sign off on this saying that there was no contact with him or no records on him since 62 while over here there are these other records of him you guys were following

him up until the day shot the president and she like stopped and like grinned and she said uh obviously this is obviously evidence of something about lee harvey oswald that they wanted to keep very close to the vest yeah so i actually um went and met with the ambassador to russia and his team and what's interesting is when Lee Harvey Oswald went to Minsk, they actually had him under observation. They did a full psychological profile on him and they thought he was a freaking kook. And they're like, so the Russian government at the time was very friendly with Kennedy. And I'll get into this in a second because in the 90s, the investigative body of Congress, it was looking back into the JFK files after Oliver Stone's movie, try to get these documents

from the Russian government. And they said no. So we've been the first delegation since the 90s to meet with the Russian government, which is separately crazy. Like, why have we waited that long to meet with another superpower? By the way, and this could go back into like 2016, the Russia collusion thing was total nonsense. We knew that for a fact. But look at how it's impacted and affected foreign policy.

So this is something completely separate. So I met with them and they agreed to release these files publicly on their KGB findings. But they actually brought these documents to the American government at Kennedy's funeral. The ambassador to Russia brought these documents saying, this is who we think that actually did it because they had these people under surveillance as well. I was like, hey, we want to be friends like, let's figure out who killed the president. And we never got this files. I think that the CIA destroyed them. And so all of that to say that in the psychological profile that the

KGB put together on Oswald, they thought he was a kook. He was not a good shot. There was a famous story of him being under surveillance in Minsk, and he tried to go hunting to feed his family and he couldn't shoot for shit. And so they're like, there's no way that this guy could actually pull the trigger. And then in addition to that he showed up to the Russian embassy in Mexico City with a pistol.

And the head of the KGB was like, you're crazy. Like they thought he was just 5150 in that job. Right. So yeah, he was a patsy. Yeah. So this was the text from John Newman that he basically wrote up the story about how him and Jeff Morley went to visit Jane Roman. And she signed off on the October 10, 1963, CIA HQS cable saying that the latest HQS, whatever that I don't forget what that stands for. Headquarters.

Maybe. Information on Oswald was dated to May 62. She replied, yes, I'm signing off on something I know isn't true. And then she asked what she thought about the false HQS cable from John Witten. She replied, to me, it's indicative. of a keen interest in Oswald held very closely on a need-to-know basis. Oh, yeah, no.

We recently, too, found out last week. I'll actually read this to you. So I actually went on with Morley to talk about this because this was a finding that was released in the JFK files. Pull up the cable, Steve. I think I sent you a photo of the actual... Yeah, yeah, there is.

So this one actually broke on Monday. So this is on Will Harvey's travel log. So, yeah, so... Let me get through this. Hold on. So there was a CIA assassination program at the time known as ZR-Hifin rifle. And ultimately what they found out is that an individual by the name of Harvey had defied Kennedy during the Cuban Missile Crisis in the fall of 62. Harvey was transferred to Rome in June of 63.

And within two months after he was assigned to Rome, he had received authorization to covertly travel back into the United States. and it became apparent in this release of the document. The CIA told the church committee in 1975 that Harvey did not use the alias William Walker after June 1969, which we now know is completely false. And that the FAA in supporting Harvey's secret travel in late 1963 is entirely new unfounding documents. So he basically used a fake name to travel back to the United States running a assassination program and just so happened to be here when JFK was assassinated. And this was been released. So we're still getting new documents. And this is just the length of time that it's taken for the task force and really Morley's team to kind of go through all this.

Yeah. But all that to say, when I first started the task force, they thought that we were going to post a bunch of conspiracy theories. When I said that there was multiple shooters, they said that I was pushing conspiracy theories. Yeah. And I was right. And so we're interested in facts and we can let the American people draw their own conclusions. Yep. It's pretty crazy when you really dig into the, I like to call them the boring details because it can be boring.

reading through some of these old reports. But the director, Radcliffe actually has a great perspective. He goes, I'm the new director. So whatever sins were committed of past agencies, I'm not going to take responsibility for and I'll let the American people know the truth. And so he's been releasing all this stuff. Yeah, but does he have the power to let the American people know the truth? Well, yes. So previous directors, even though presidents had authorized to release, did not release the files. But we have Tulsi, Rodney, Odie and I, Radcliffe at the CIA and Patel at the FBI. So under their direction, they can push for the authorized. release of these files and not undermine the president.

This was all previously Stonewall. In fact, there was documents that came out in the Kennedy release that Biden had also tried to release and the National Archives refused to release them. Really? Yeah, so there's been a big push for this. And we're going through, we have the MLK hearing next. So we're going to be going through that, working with some expert investigators. I think they're just going to wait for everyone need to die.

I think there's a couple people still alive once they're dead, maybe. They released the MLK files and they release the RFK files. We just haven't had a chance to fully go through this stuff yet. Right. Yeah. Have you ever spoken to Danny Sheehan? Mm-mm. He's fascinating.

He's a Harvard lawyer who was, he worked on the Pentagon, the Pentagon Papers. He worked the Pentagon Papers thing all about the, the Watergate scandal. Oh, that's an interesting thing there. He, he, look up all the cases Danny Sheehan worked on a bunch of really famous cases. And he is like a galaxy brain on the whole. UFO topic and the JFK topic. And I had him in here. We were talking about JFK. He was explaining to me basically how like the mob and the, yeah, let's get the Pentagon papers, the Watergate Berger-I've seen him at my hearing on UAPs. The Iran. Oh yeah, he was he was on the Iran-Contra.

He deposed everyone in Iran-Contra. He's like, yeah, he's a, oh, he's a, he's a legend when it comes to all this stuff. But, you know, because he was around and deposing all these people during this time in the middle of the Cold War, he had like firsthand knowledge of all the people that are peripheral to the Kennedy assassination. And there's a lot. And yeah, it's crazy how connected it all is. Well, speaking of his work, I mean, he reminds me of George Knapp. So at the UAP hearing, George Knapp is like, yeah, I smuggled these Soviet files on a program called Thread3 that was looking into UAPs. It was like a UAP task force because they had a lot of weird interactions in the Soviet era. And yeah, we were like, well, how the heck did you get these out of Soviet rush?

He's like, why just ripped off the top paper and stuck them in my bag? Like, you probably deserve a start Langley for that. I mean, like, you weren't at the agency, but the fact that you're able to like Soviet era documents to, you know, the United States is pretty wild. Yeah, that's insane. My free time is short. And the way I see it, why would I waste time binge watching actors on a television when I could learn something from people I admire? That's why I've been using today's sponsor, Masterclass. On Masterclass, you're not killing time. You're getting inside of the heads of some of the most interesting people of all time. I can watch Metallica talk about leadership and dealing with ego over decades. Then I can flip over to Warner Herzog talking about filmmaking and telling stories

that feel true. And then I can dive into Noam Chomsky, dissect how power works and how language is used. And to me, that's a night way better spent than watching reruns or scrolling. It's easy for me because the classes are broken down into bite-sized lessons and I can watch it in 10-minute chunks or sit down for a full hour if I really want to dive in. With over 200 classes across business, writing, music, politics, you name it. It's like having a library of mentors on demand. Masterclass makes me feel like my downtime is actually paying me back. And right now our listeners can get an additional 15% off their annual membership at masterclass.com slash Danny Jones. That's 15% off. at masterclass.com slash Danny Jones.

It's linked down below. Now back to the show. But Danny was explaining to me how these anti-Castro Cubans were working for the CIA. And tied into the mob. And they were tied into the mob as well. And basically when Kennedy did the Bay of Pigs thing and basically didn't send the air support and all that stuff,

the Cubans despised him, they were training hit teams. And he was calling them triangular. hit teams, the CIA was in Miami, to take out Castro. And there was, I forget the names of one of the guys who was in those triangular hit teams who was a Cuban dissident, went to Cuba twice to try to assassinate Castro. They failed. And Danny was like, they basically used the same Cuban hit teams to assassinate the president. And he goes, I had evidence that these Cubans were there on the route in 1963. And I was like, that's weird. I'm going to

interview an ex-CIA anti-Castro Cuban guy who's like 95 tomorrow. Oh no. He goes, what was his name? I go, uh, Felix Rodriguez. He goes, oh, he was on that team. And I like almost, I almost fainted. So did he kill Kennedy? I didn't want to ask him.

You should have totally asked. But I went in there. I went into his museum in Miami and he had all these like Cuban armed commandos everywhere. And I was just like, one guy had an office with a picture of Kennedy and like a strike through his face. and yeah it was crazy but it's all connected.

I think a lot of people sought to benefit from his elimination and so it's interesting because you know obviously we're very you know we also know that the Kennedy family is still around

so we want to be respectful of that but also the American people deserve to know if there was a coup against the American people in the US government by an intelligence agency or people connected

to an intelligence agency well long story short John Newman his his overall theory on this whole thing is that it was a military coup. He thinks it was the joint chiefs of staff who wanted like an all out nuclear war with China and Russia. Oh, they definitely, what I can tell you is from the Russian perspective. The CI did not, and this is just based on the documentation that we've also gotten

from the release of the files, there are certain actors within the CIA that did not like that Kennedy was so openly friendly with the Russian government. And I think that they viewed him as a communist sympathizer. And he did not have his cabinet with supporters and his own vice president at the time, I believe was seriously undermining his efforts. So he had his brother, but then they killed his brother too. Right. So would they turn a blind eye if they knew about an assassination attempt? Probably because they looked at him as a sympathizer. He also was at the time working on a joint, he wanted to do a joint mission with the Russian government and American astronauts to the moon. A lot of people don't know that. And so he's very, very friendly with the Russian

government and was back channeling communications, even despite what the CIA was trying to push in Bay of Pigs and all that, because they did want war. And then a day after Kennedy was assassinated, we find ourselves up for Vietnam. Yeah. LBJ did that. There's these sci-op meetings, not PSY-O-P. It's called, I think it's like SCIOP meetings. I forget what it stands for.

But there was these meetings that him and RFK were both in where the Joint Chiefs, Lemitzer and Maxwell Taylor had this crazy plan because that was the point in history where we had the most nukes. And the Soviet Union had the least amount of nukes. Like that was when they first started to build up their arsenal. So we thought we could get away with just nuking. half the planet. Not good in theory. We don't ever want to watch a nuke.

Yeah. Yeah. And then he was obviously back channeling with the Russian president and trying to stop all that. And then, you know, obviously like the CIA was involved. A lot of people like to say the CIA killed him. But John's theory is just like the CIA. There was certain elements of the CIA who were involved in the cover up. Exactly.

So definitely certain factions involved in the cover up. Obviously, you can't just like blanket label an organization. However, the CIA is does. some interesting stuff. And I think when you look at some of the declassified files on their readingroom.gov website, you can see for yourself what they've looked into. It's a very wild reads on a Friday night. Yeah, I heard you talking about this. There's lots of crazy, kooky. Have you ever heard of the CIA Gateway project? Stargate? No, not Stargate. This was called the Gateway. No. There's this guy named, um, Eatsok Bentov, who was, uh, I think,

I forget what his specialty was, but he was like a genius. And, and he was, and he was a genius. And they were studying him and they were studying the brain with this gateway process with a way for figuring out a way for the human brain to transcend dimensions. Weird. And it's all declassified. It's on there. Steve, pull up the gateway. Bring us to the reading room.

Yeah, yeah, yeah, pull up the documents. I was on this. I mean, sometimes when I'm bored, I'll go on it. And it's just the stuff that we've looked into.

And it's funny because you say it. And if you don't have the documents to prove it, people think you're crazy. Yeah. But it's some pretty interesting stuff. weird than science fiction. Yeah, it's very weird. Some of the stuff that they've gone into. It's like, you know, you've seen all that stuff with the whole Captain America movies and, you know, Hydra and all that crap. But I think it's largely based on these declassified documents

because you look at what really the relationship on MK Ultra that the U.S. government had with certain scientists and it's very creepy. So this Gateway Declassified program, they, they declassified it, I think, with the, I forget when they declassified. I want to say in the 90s, maybe. And they redacted one page. Like one whole page. So it's just like a black blur. Yeah. It was like page 24.

And then somebody, I think it was Robert Monroe. Released it. Oh, wait. Go back to the illustration. I want to see what that. The top one. What is that? Galactic South.

So that's a representative of what is that an atom or like a version of our universe that we're unaware of? White hole. Oh, yeah. So this is the brain. It's a depiction. It says universal nucleus hologram. Can you punch in a little bit so we can read that text?

Diagram of the cosmic egg. Go to the right. What does it say? Is this supposed to be a representation of our universe? I think it's like, I think it what is doing is it's, it's saying that the brain in the universe are like one thing. Like it's like, like, we are the universe. Like it's like the whole point of it is like when we die, our consciousness molds into one

universal consciousness. Or created in God's image. Well, here's the thing. There was one page that was redacted until Robert Monroe let it out. And the whole reason they redacted it is because it was like all about who God is. So confirming God is real? I don't know exactly. I don't think I've read it, but something about God and for some reason the CIA was

like really interested in this stuff and like throwing money at it. I mean, they threw money at trying to find the ark of the covenants. Why would they redact a page about God? I don't know. I think a lot of people, it's a lot easier to control people. If you convince them that God's not real. Really? Oh, yeah.

Imagine if people realized there was accountability after this life. How much society would change? Yeah, but wouldn't it be? easier to control. Oh, I've seen this before. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. Yep, yep, I've seen this. So the left hemisphere is like... So the way that the brain dissects into interact with the right, right. Yeah, this is just, it's trippy stuff. And if you watch videos of this guy, Esock, Bentoff talk about consciousness, it's bizarre. I think it's interesting though, because people, I think there's a very new age perspective on consciousness that tries to remove God

from the theory and topic. And then you have a lot of these people, it's like kind of weird. And the UAP space we meet a lot of interesting people. Yeah, I bet. You know, but the God, the religious stuff and the UAP stuff is like melding. But the thing is, is that it, the failure to recognize that God is real and that to cut God out of the equation, I think, you know, like I'm a Christian through and through. So I don't look at it from that type of perspective because I think that when you're opening yourself up to these energies, how the hell you know what kind of energy you're opening

yourself up to. So I think that that's a very interesting thing, especially if like you're newer and your spiritual walk and you're kind of looking towards some of this stuff can be dangerous. But definitely interesting the CIA has looked into it. I think if you have time, go to the CIA reading room and you will find some most interesting reading material on Friday nights on that website. Well, the crazy thing about the UFO stuff. The crazy thing about the UFO stuff is there's so many parallels in ancient texts and the Bible and accounts of these UFOs like before before people could do anything except for like right and write down accounts of things like there's there's accounts of like objects coming out of the ocean in like I think

Richard Dolan was explaining to us this was like in 1700s maybe where just like these glowing orbs the size of football fields would come out of the ocean where these like sailors on this ship would see it and then they would like write the account like find it later and like find drawings of it And this is like, this goes back into, to antiquity. So the question is like, you know, were the angels, UFOs or are the UFOs angels, what came first? What did, you know what I mean? Yeah, I was just listening.

I wish I would have brought in the paper. But, you know, Plato talks about the legend of Atlantis. Plato was a smart guy. People read that and forget that the Atlantean civilization was a very advanced technological civilization. Where did they get that tech from? And then you read the book of Enoch, which I would encourage everyone to, read a lot of people are like oh that's fake you know should have been in the bible well actually um it

was removed from the bible because people wanted to gate keep that information it's still in the ethiopian orthodox text which i would argue is the least watered down version of the bible that you will get because it has been in its original form since basically the beginning and a lot of people don't know about the Ethiopian Orthodox church or the fact that they can trace their lineage all the way back to the ancient Israelites okay um but why would they specifically remove this text? And it does talk about fallen angels and information knowledge, all that that was handed over to mankind.

All I'm dealing, though, with in my task force is on the facts. And so the facts are there's stuff that we can't explain and there's information that's being handed from the American people in Congress regarding that topic. So usually if someone's hiding something, you should probably ask why. And so the information that we released from our last hearing, actually, Representative Burleson released it. It was a piece of footage that was dead drop to him. And you can look at that and that's pretty wild.

You have a hellfire missile hit one of these things and it deflects it. That's not a balloon. That's not a balloon. Who filmed that? How did that get filmed? Was that radar on a plane or something? Yeah, yeah. It was from MQ9.

What's that? In English. We'll Google it for the viewers. It's a surveillance. Okay. A drone? Well. Okay.

MQ9. Oh, there you go. Yep, it's our drones, aka the Reaper, is its common term. Okay. But it was some surveillance footage. But you can pull that up and a lot of people were like... Find the video of it, Steve. Yeah, so even right before hearing, we had the former director of Arrow, Sean Kilpatrick.

The guy's a total clown. Yeah. He was attacking our witnesses. You know, why is he even involved in what Congress is saying or doing when he's like a documented liar? So, yeah, we kind of proved him right with the hearing. That was good. So proved him right and the fact that you know or proved him wrong in the sense that he has been gaslighting the American people.

Right. Going back to the Enoch stuff and the religious stuff, I've noticed a lot of, well not, I mean, there's a lot of people online and there's also a lot of people that write about like this connection between like biblical stuff and like the modern UFO stuff. and I feel like there is a weird faction of people in the government who are like battling on this UFO narrative. I don't think it's like a battle. I think there's certain people that want to release classified videos

and there's other people that don't. The fact is that these things, if they were a foreign government that had this type of tech, we wouldn't be number one and we're still number one. But I think there's like very separate. So like we're talking specifically on like tech advancement and national security. Yeah. But then there's like a very separate religious perspective.

And like I think when you're talking about like biblical texts, do many people know that the new Kings James Bible was actually rewritten? And why was it rewritten? Why were books removed? Why are there different bibles? Right. Now why are there different Bibles or books of the Bible and the Ethiopian Orthodox text? So there's like eight books in total total and Ethiopian Orthodox text. And so like I think that.

that this gets into like a very religious perspective. But if you interchange, you know, the term alien, I don't call them alien. I say UAP unidentified aerial phenomenon. That's what they commonly are termed as. We actually have a really high number of reporting here in Pinellas County. Really? Yeah, a very high number of people in the county have actually reported to see these things. And there's different hotspots around the world, but specifically in Alaska,

definitely off the coast of Florida, around the Bermuda Triangle. So, you know, it's like not something. When I first started this stuff, they were like, oh, you're going to ruin your political career. And I've actually gotten more questions on this from people, very wealthy people and very powerful people to your average Joe that pays attention to this because they realize they're like, there might be something there. So the problem with the biblical stuff is that it's like this game of telephone, right? It's hard to know what actually happened 2,000 years ago or more than 2,000 years ago. In what context, though? Going back into antiquity.

Mm-hmm. In a textual context or in a literary context. When it comes, I'm talking about like going down to the bones of the language, right? Because, like, how many people do you know that can read ancient Greek fluently? Or Aramaic? Well, Aramaic in Hebrew. I mean, Hebrews only has, what, 7,000 unique words. That's why I like the Ethiopian Orthodox Bible.

Ancient Greek has over 1.2 million. unique words. The library of Alexandria was all Greek. There was no Hebrew. And when you go into antiquity, everything was written in Greek. The medical text, the legal text, the philosophical text, the historical, the comedy, everything was Greek. The only Hebrew is the Dead Sea Scrolls. The only Hebrew is religious stuff. And there's only 7,000 words. I've never met, I met maybe one or two people that can read Greek really, really well. And they're all, and, you know, on top of that, there's like you said there's the enoch book there's all these other books that are left out that like go way against the narrative and you know you can imagine if you're trying to create some sort of

like plato would call it a noble lie for society to keep society in line and to help your civilization thrive you would want to take out some of that stuff and put in some of the good stuff maybe change the meanings of some words and over 2,000 years just think like something you you had for lunch 10 years ago or even last week, like your memory is so inaccurate from what actually happened. Now take it 10,000 years or I'm sorry, 2,000 years and translating it through different languages, through different text, through church fathers who are making money by preaching this stuff and, you know, having the council of Nicaea, depending on trying to come to an agreement of what's going to be. Yeah, which Bible. Like, it's just like, we don't know. We have no clue what

actually happened back then. And there's absolutely people who had an axe to grind and a narrative to push. And Ethiopian Orthodox text is direct translation hasn't changed. It literally, in the fifth century. What language is it in? The Ethiopian language. If we can pull it up. Find out what what language the Ethiopian Orthodox text is. The whole story on how they, and allegedly the Ark of the Covenant is housed in Ethiopia, allegedly. Right. There's a story there. But you kind of look at the fact that I believe it was the Council of Nicia that actually replaced the book of Enoch with Revelations. You read Revelations.

You're like, what the heck? So I would encourage everyone to read it. It makes a lot of sense. If you read it perspective. Have you ever read the infancy gospel of Jesus? Yeah. Where he kills a kid. I've looked into it.

Well, he technically gets like angry. The kid falling. Yeah. And he brings him back to life. Yeah. No, he doesn't bring him back to life. I think he calls him back to life because they're like, did you do this? And then he comes back. And he's like, no, I fell. Jesus didn't, um,

or yes, you didn't do it. Uh, Ethiopian Orthodox Church uses guess. Yes. That's what it's called. Oh, interesting. Yeah. So it's just like, it's preserved for spiritual and scholarly purposes. So it really hasn't changed. It's a very ancient language. Right. And then like also, I've had a lot of theologians in here I've talked to. Um, and it's like there's, it's just kind of weird to me how people will, dedicate their entire education, go to college for eight years, and to get a PhD in a science, right? Like you're studying the science of these ancient texts and translating the Bible and figuring out what it meant, but simultaneously subscribe to the belief. I don't have a problem with it.

Right. I have no problem with whatever your belief is. You know, if it makes you a better person, God bless you. But isn't it a conflict of interest when you're actually studying a science of something and you simultaneously believe? in it, you know, like people, it's a self-fulfilling prophecy. And then, yeah, it's to be a system. Well, I like the stories of people that have not started out as believers and then try to debunk the Bible and then end up not being able to and then becoming believers. Yes. It goes both ways. It goes both ways. And there's there's people who train. I think though, there's a really

big portion of this discussion that when you have certain texts that are removed and have been known to be removed because they didn't adhere to whatever standard was. So I think the book of Enoch was removed in the 5th century because it wasn't in line with what the Torah was, but the ancient Ethiopian Orthodox do have ties to the tribes of Israel. They do think that it was actually something that they would consider a sacred text. And then you actually read what Enoch talks about. It's not like too crazy to be like, there's something there on this. But that would get into the more philosophical. So then you have this aspect of the UAP. So what are these things? And I mean, it talks about in ancient history, the legend of Atlantis and the technology that was given to mankind,

maybe it could be an explanation. I don't know. People should look it up. The Atlanta's thing is so interesting. It's so fascinating. But like, again, it's so, it's such an old text. And the game of, Steve, I know you have this. We got to pull this up.

You have the chain of transmission for Atlantis. We've talked about this so much on here, like, at nauseam. So I'm sorry for everyone who's listened to this 100,000 times. The chain of transmission for Atlantis is actually like 10 times crazier. than any, any religious text. Oh, and like the legends of Atlantis? Or legends. Like, there's thousands of years of just verbal.

Yeah, Plato had to go to Egypt to hear about the legend of Atlantis and then reported it in his texts. Yep, yeah. And there's Pliny the Elder, Plenty of the Younger, Solon, the Egyptian priest. And it wasn't written down until like 10,000 years after it was orally, orally orally explained to somebody. Yeah. Pretty wild.

But like Plato, he was also not a historian. He was a philosopher and he would come up with theoretical, hypothetical, like, social experiments or like, what are they called? You're good. Like war game experiments. And some people think that, like, you know, he came up with the allegory of the cave. And they think that this was like some people, like the people who, the skeptics, I guess you could call them, try to say this was like a hypothetical war game between Athens and like some other advanced civil. civilization. Okay, so the destruction of Atlantis. It's a pretty wild war game. Glad our U.S. government doesn't do this. Oh, yeah, of course not. Nine thousand years before Solon's,

Critias, right? So was the destruction of Atlantis. So, oral history goes on for 1,000 years, written down by the Egyptians 8,000 years before Solon. Of course, there's no actual writings. Priest records it or the priest reads the records years pass tells the memory to Solon without consulting written records. Solon tells his relatives Droppides tells the son his son, Corteus the elder at age 90

tells his grandson. And then 50 years later Plato writes it down. Like wild. 10,000 years. How many years of oral transmission is that? 8,000, 9,000 years? It's just like it's wild. We had a time machine. It would be interesting to go back and see what happened.

Give me a time machine for a day. I'll get back to you. Yeah, for real. But yeah, no. So like the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, is evidence. I mean, I don't know if you want to call it evidence, but there's, there's, there's connections and things like Enoch and these stories that suggest and philosophers have

suggested this and like, like, you know, people like me who nerd out in the UFO topic that this could be some civilization that's lived here on earth for over a million years. And they could just be underground or they could have been a breakaway civilization or something like this. Part of Atlantis. If Atlantis was real and it was a super advanced civilization and there was a cataclysm, if God sent the flood, they escaped. And now maybe they've come back when things have calmed down and they live here in like a higher dimension similar to like we live on the same like we live next to ants, but they don't know we're there. Yeah. So in the whistleblowers that I've talked to, the ones that Grush, explained it the best, but never calls it alien interdimensional.

Maybe. What's interesting is based on the videos that are publicly out there, these things are operating in a way that defy physics as we currently know it. So there is some there to this, but I'm just going off of what I've seen and what evidence has been presented to me and then testimony from whistleblowers. What's the craziest thing you've seen? probably the one of the craziest would probably be the video of the Hellfire missile being collected by one of these things that's pretty wild if you think about it but you know we've had different briefings and we want to push for the declassification of the stuff that we've seen because I think that there's over classification and

there's been other governments that have basically already decided to do the same thing and talk about this publicly I think that the U.S. government set a trend with a our neighbors in South America for sure on this topic, yeah, in regards to addressing it. But, you know, this stuff doesn't need to be gate kept. And I think there has been a generational change in how we approach this. So the baby boomer generation was largely the generation that was impacted by the whole Project Blue Book to kind of take this stuff and really make it sound crazy. whereas millennials and even Gen X are like,

there might be some there there. Now that there's been this evolution of tech and people being able to record things on your cell phone. I mean, we've had many credible people, military service members, pilots, Commander Fravor that literally was like a top gun pilot, be able to say, hey, we don't have this in our arsenal. We don't know what it is.

We've had whistleblowers come forward saying that they were intimidated not to come forward or they were in fear of their life because they came forward, all this stuff. there's something there. We have the open door policy and that we'll talk to people. We'll bring people in a skiff. But then also at the same sense, I've seen kind of this disinformation campaign online specifically with whenever we try to do this, people coming out trying to discredit. It's like, well, if we're not asking questions, no one's not going to ask questions. And then there was a lot of chatter trying to discredit the task force prior to the hearing. And then after we had the hearing,

they disappeared like cockroaches with the lights on. And so I think that there is an effort to try to still kind of keep this stuff under wraps, but I think there's too many people. The Boeing whistleblowers. We should have called in Boeing and asked about that. But we've had, it's the biggest bicameral and bipartisan issue. What made you want to get involved in the whole UFO stuff? I did not lead out the efforts. It was Representative Burchett, who's been on this for a while.

And then we suggested a hearing on it last year or last Congress. And that's when you saw the David Grush hearing take place, which was one of the most widely watched and attended hearings in congressional history. And then after people realized that they wouldn't be called crazy, then they designated the task course to kind of look into it because everyone in Congress is curious, everyone. So that's what we do on our free time. And there's a lot to do. So this is kind of something that we've been able to do when we're not, you know, battling it out on other issues in Washington. Yeah. It's just crazy that it seems like these private contractors have been able to get away with this for,

so long. It seems like since the creation of the CIA. So I've yet to, I've had a lot of people say that it's contractors that are housing this tech, but I haven't been able to get a whistleblower to come forward yet on that because of fear of retribution from what we're hearing from these whistleblowers. But the information that we have seen has come out of the Department of Defense. And we have been personally denied access before by the DOD. And even up until recently, we're told that we do not have access as members of Congress to these programs. So we have to then go above the DOD to the executive branch and request access to investigate. But there have been other agencies that have briefed us on certain things. And I was pretty, I mean, I already know that these

things are out there. So I'm not like, it's not changing my mind or perspective, but it's just confirmation of what we're doing it. Wasn't that the whole purpose of pushing this stuff into private contractors? So it wouldn't have congressional oversight and we wouldn't be able to FOIA it? But there's still certain parts of the federal government that deny Congress access, right? So that's a problem, because we're supposed to be the check and balance. And I think that that's been like decades of lazy Congress. So I'm one member of Congress. I know I'll get people all the time that are like, you know, I'm not going to vote for you again. I said, well, that's great because you're in California. You can't vote for me anyways. So, you know, we'll get those starting calls from like

California, New York. But the good news is that residents and Pinellas appreciate it. And one of the top issues is looking into government corruption. And I would say if you have whistleblowers or being threatened by government contractors or there's allegations of it, well, we're going to fall up and kind of see what's there. But it is kind of funny. People are like, you're basically asking the question that every kid asked in grade school growing up and like you're actually bringing the answers like, JFK, UAPs, you know, we're looking into it also. They're the biggest questions. And we're finding answers and we're like, here's the evidence. This is what we got. And people

are like, hmm, and it's kind of, you know, so there's a lot of people that are curious about it at this point. What do you think it's going to take to actually get some sort of real substance stuff instead of just random grainy videos of like. Well, that's not just a random, greaty video. That's off of MQ9. Can you find it, Steve? Can you find it?

How do we search for it? It should be on my X platform. Yeah, just MQ9, Hellfire Missile deflected by UAP. Is that it? No. Is that it? Yeah, that's it.

Is there any audio, Steve? Boom, deflected. Deflected. It's crazy. I know there's no audio. And then it does this weird blob thing, and then it just rolls together. And where was this?

allegedly. Off the coast of Africa. Whoa. There's Burleson. Go to Burleson. There's a whistleblowers. Steve, I got new volume. Oh, there we go. The little blob thing kind of moved in its other direction with the blob.

That's so crazy. But if I was a foreign military or a private military contractor and I did have this technology, I would absolutely try to convince everybody that it was aliens and not my stuff. If I was government, I would definitely do that. Based on the testimony from this, back in the 90s,

the Soviet government had a task force looking into this because these things flew over a Russian nuke siler and activated all their nukes. Yeah. And those nukes were aimed at the United States and they were freaking out and they weren't able to shut them off and then these things shut them off and then they left. And the Soviet government was like, don't engage with these things ever again. And that's actually part of the documents that George Naps muggled out of the Soviet Union at the time. Wow. That's crazy because the same exact thing happened here. Yeah. So it's interesting. And then you can hear the testimony from the witnesses. So it's like

not me making the stuff up. I'm not just like pulling this out of. This is directly and you can see the documents that have been actually entered into the congressional record. I would use an app to translate it. But those are all Russian documents and they were confirmed separately by the DIA. Did you pay attention to any of those Wall Street Journal articles that came out? about a month or two ago about how saying that it was a disinformation it was a disinformation sayop against people working at the nuclear sites specifically the one in montana um the name of it is escaping me right now but they were saying that like it was the military testing EMPs to see if they could take the nuke softline yeah very interesting that they've had these issues around the

world so and uh big sci up jesse micha was did a amazing video about those articles and he He, like, found that one of the primary contributor to that first Wall Street Journal article on her LinkedIn, just open in broad daylight, go to her LinkedIn. Like, the first thing on her LinkedIn says, head of psychological operations for Northrop Grumman. Very interesting. Yeah, that's weird dot to connect. Saying that these are, like, some, like, elaborate hazing rituals for these nuclear base commanders and these Air Force guys. Wild. They apparently did that in Russia too. I don't believe it. Yeah. Yeah, no. There's no way. It doesn't make any sense why we would test EMPs on live nukes.

And then the nukes would just come right back on right afterwards. I think I saw that, but it didn't get much traction. I think videos like this are a good way to inoculate with the truth. But I mean, at the end of the day, I don't hold subpoena authority. It's up to my chairman. He'll issue certain subpoenas depending. So we've been, you know, going back to what happened with, you know, some of these apps. Discord coming out with the whole Charlie Kirk shooting saying we have no information The CEO of Discord's coming in Reddit some other apps are going to be coming in as well to testify before Congress on what they're doing about this stuff because

Discord's been very interesting to not to pivot fully from this but in the fact that a lot of this rhetoric and weirdly enough a lot of these shooters have been using these apps and we don't have any information on who's contacting or handling or encouraging these people and it's something that we should look into especially because politicians are literally getting killed and people that are engaged in the political discussion are literally getting murdered. Yeah. Yeah, it's definitely crazy that our FBI and our CIA can't track that stuff down. Well, they can now, I think before they didn't want to. At now, meaning when? Like, so when did that start? With the change of administration. So the secret service was at the direction of Joe Biden prior to President Trump assuming office. Wasn't the lady who was ahead of secret service? Was it she like previously working for Pepsi or something?

I don't think so, but I know that she resigned shortly thereafter. So she was not. Maybe you can find that, Steve. I heard that. I forgot who told me that. It might have been Mike Ben's. I don't know. I wouldn't be surprised based on her response.

I would not be surprised. But, you know, all that to say, we need more young people to run for office, more good people. I got in and I have been very disappointed with how it functions internally. And then you realize a lot of these people, they could make a difference, but they don't don't want to and they fall within this kind of group thing. Yep, PepsiCo. Director of Global Security at Pepsi. So that's interesting.

She was recruited. Fantastic. What were her qualifications? Yeah, I mean, both Democrats and Republicans were like, you need to resign. And she perjured herself and then she resigned. Yep. Yeah. So who are the reptilians that are controlling all this, Anna?

I don't know that there's lizard people that I've seen yet. So. They didn't. they didn't come sit you down on your first day at Congress and say, Anna, listen. Because you imagine there's like, there's got to be somebody. No, I don't think it's somebody. There's got a group of people, whether they're connected or not, whether it's like a decentralized group of folks that have had discussions about like, look, if we, like, if they've had this

stuff since the 40s and they've like been able to sigh out people and obfuscate and throw disinformation at this problem for this long, there's a very strong reason that they've come to or conclusion that they've come to that the public knowing this stuff, it would be very bad for national security. Like I imagine they have a very legit reason for not letting it out. I don't know. I think it's just, I think, perspective generationally on how to address it because videos have come out. I mean, literally Tucker Carlson showed a declassified. video and everyone was like wow that's wild crazy what is it we'll never know now move past it now is there what is the isn't there an issue of like they should on fox news certain people would get in trouble

if this stuff came out like there would be like financial crimes black budgets and like there would be like lots of definitely an issue with the amount of government wasteful spending and the Pentagon up until recently hasn't passed an audit and i don't know how many years by the way i mean this goes into why are we sending money to ukraine apparently zolenski's like wiring 50 million dollars a month to some Saudi bank. That's weird. 50 U.S.D or 50 million U.S.D. But this is, you know, I get it for issues of national security. There are certain programs that should not be public for the American people. However, when you have people coming forward and saying that there is no government oversight, right? Like, we're given classified briefings on a

regular basis to information, but when you have Congress that's supposed to be the oversight authority being denied access or told that they don't have clearance, that's a problem because then you have that information that's now operating without oversight. And that's a problem. Like, how is this being done legally if you don't have accountability for that? But that's not just this topic specifically.

There's that issue that also exists with covert programs that previously existed with the intelligence agencies. So this is an ongoing issue, which is why we should publicly talk about and discuss it because sunlight's the best form of disinfectant. Right, right. So this is like not just specifically to this issue.

Yeah, but there's, and there's people that speculate that this like 25 trillion, whatever dollar black hole in the Pentagon's budget could have been contributing some of this stuff. I know that Tim Burchett has definitely gone on record with that. And I don't think that he's necessarily wrong because we've been denied access to certain clearances or been denied access to certain programs, which is wrong. If you're an oversight arm of the federal government, why would you not be given clearance, especially when you do have a top clearance for that? So definitely problematic in that sense, but I have yet to see evidence on paper of that specifically, if that makes sense. So I like to talk about, I don't necessarily like to speculate. I like to just go off basically what I have been presented with and the fact-finding mission that we've been given. And so I think that we will continue to push for the declassified version of stuff that we've been able to see because I think that that belongs to the American people.

but the perspective on whether the American people can handle it, the American people can handle it. I think that this gets into the sense of if you can't explain something, how do you then present that? But the good news is that it's not a foreign government because if it was a foreign government, we would be number two and we're still number one. So I do think, though,

that there are many governments that have looked into this based on what we've been told and what we have now evidence of according to the documentation submitted by Jordan NAP. What was the thing you were asking, Ryan Graves about, like the red, something red that came out of the ocean? So he, Ryan Graves had initially told me about the Vandenberg Air Force Base incident and actually the individual that witnessed that, the firsthand witness actually testified

to me at the last hearing. And you can actually pull up, if you go to YouTube and you type in Rep Luna Vandenberg Air Base, you'll probably see the witness testimony as to what they saw appear over the Air Base. It was wild. I mean, this is like firsthand witness accounts of the Security Force. And it was allegedly like in the early 2000s. Yep, and it was, I think, like, a football field or too wide, which is wild to hear. And then just, oh, here we go. No, don't go to that one. Go to the first hand.

No, no, no, no, go down. It's going to be at the last hearing. Wow, there's a ton on. There's a lot. UAP. Type in UAP hearing Vandenberg Air Base. Don't put my name on it. UAP hearing Vandenberg Air Base.

Oh, there you go. Yep. The top one? Yep, yep. That's him. First hand. whistleblower account. Morning.

Thank you. At six minutes. It's a minute. Ranking member Crockett and members of the Oh, is that James Fox right behind him? Look at that. Giving us the opportunity to test. So this is the actual witness.

My name is Jeffrey Neustatelli. I'm a former military police officer. See, he hit a double speed. He was 16 years of active duty service in the U.S. Air Force. I'm here today because the American people have both the right and the responsibility to know the truth about unidentified aerial phenomenon. That truth remains hidden. Classified and silenced by fear, retaliation, stigma and confusion.

He goes into. a full description of this. Also later on in the questioning, you have to watch the hearing. It was like two hours long or something like that. Right, right. Top national security priority. At the time, we were conducting launches

deemed by the National Reconnaissance Office as the most important in 25 years. These were historic launches. These facilities were vital and they were repeatedly visited by UAP. Each incident was witnessed by multiple personnel, documented, investigated, and reported up the chain of command. We sent information up, but we got no guidance down

on how to handle these events. I personally witnessed one of these events and investigated others as they occurred. Six other service members have provided me with the information that I will share with you today. The incursion began on October 14, 2003, when Boeing contractors reported a massive glowing red square silently hovering over two missile defense sites. After several minutes, it drifted further

east onto the base and vanished over the hills. This event, now known as the Vanberg Red Square, was referenced by Representative Luna at the first hearing on this topic. Official Air Force records of this event are in possession by Arrow and the FBI. Later that night, while I was on duty, security guards at a critical launch site reported a bright, fast-moving object over the ocean. I responded to the incident. Chaos ensued over the radio as the object approached rapidly. I heard my friend screaming, is coming right at us, it's coming right for us, and now it's right here. Moments later, I heard them say that it had shot off and was gone. When I arrived on scene, I talked to five shaken witnesses who described a massive triangular craft larger than

a football field that hovered silently for about 45 seconds over their entry control point before shooting away at impossible speed. About a week later, another patrol reported a light over the ocean, behaving a ratting. And these guys are so nervous-upress in other car. That's crazy. That's crazy. So we had him, the chief next to him, is still actually active duty in the Navy. So we had active, for the first time, an active duty service member coming to testify on the topic.

And then two other, we had George Knapp and then another individual. who actually who Borland I think is his last name he actually based a lot of retribution for coming forward on this so they try to yeah

like they try to go after his VA medical history all of that and we actually saw Who went after it whoever these people are like people within the government but that's not the first time that we had a vet

have their records leaked or attacked after coming forward so Grush had his So like just shadow people are releasing this like we don't know who well yeah it's like an inside a job, botched job on their reputation to try to discredit them. So shortly after Gresh had testified, someone leaked his medical records out of the VA. Right. Right. To try to discredit him.

That's great. I mean, this is like the Streis hand effect, right? Like when you, when you're attacking these people who are coming out and saying this stuff and trying to like deliberately ruin their reputation. They try to ruin Borland's life. He's late on. You need to watch the whole hearing. It was pretty wild. So anyways, all that to say that we just go on facts. The facts speak for themselves. I don't tell people what to believe, but I can tell you that I've seen some pretty wild stuff in this task force. The giant red square coming out of the water is just totally insane. But it's not just him. It was multiple other people that saw it. Yeah. And there's reports allegedly has to Arrow. I've had not a good experience with Arrow. I would like to defund Arrow all

together. I think they're a waste of a program. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Out of all the people you've talked to and like all the skiffs you've been in and all these whistleblowers that you've interacted with, if you were just to take, I know you don't like to speculate, but if you were to bet on like what this stuff could be coming from, like what do you think? Do you think intergalactic space aliens?

Do you think it's time traveling humans, breakaway human civilization? I call non-human intelligence. Angels and demons like Tucker Carlson thinks it is. So Grush does a good way of outlining this in a way that's very factual. And he calls

a NHA. I think, think an older term for that would be what Tucker Carlson probably calls as angels and demons. So, but it's interesting. But that's the thing. We don't know. Like, it's not like I can be like, beam me up,

Scotty, answer the questions. But I know you don't know. But I'm saying like, what would you're, if you were in Vegas. I don't know that answer. But what I can tell you is it's been interesting because, you know,

we go back to some of these very old texts that talk about this that were somehow removed from the Bible, which is also a weird conversation. But it's pretty straightforward and what those things are. So I don't like to tell people what to believe. What I can do is present you with the facts and tell you to read a book. You should probably read the book and then draw your own conclusions. I had this NASA dude on here, Kevin Canuth.

You know, so he works for NASA for a while and he was a physicist for NASA. And he believes that these things, whatever they are, they are in the oceans exclusively because all different planets throughout the solar system have crazy different atmospheres, right? Like they have different gravity. They have different levels of gas and oxygen and whatever it is in their atmosphere. They're highly vulnerable to like meteor impacts or comet impacts, volcanoes, you name it. Also, atmospheres can be gas, all different kinds of the temperature can vary like thousands of degrees. in the atmosphere, but what he was explaining was on all the different planets, all the different moons in our solar system, the water temperature, water can only exist between 33 degrees and like 200 degrees.

It's a controlled state. So it's like a very, very controlled environment. So if you were another species and you were hopping from planet to planet, you would look for the plants with the water. And we're like, like we are a water. Waterworld. If you can look at our planet, look at the Pacific Ocean, and there's no land. It's just all ocean. So like that would make, and that kind of like blew my mind the way he explained that to me. He's like, you would just hop from water world to water world to water world because you have this perfect environment. I would say that you would want to hop. You would do time travel. If you could have interdimensional something. Look, I don't have all the answers, but what I will say is that just based on the stuff that we've seen, there's definitely something there. I don't believe when people try to gaslight the situation because I've just seen too much publicly out there available evidence. include things that I have seen that aren't publicly available, that I do believe tell a different story. And I think, though, that with social media, the ability for people to do their own research, I think that it's really kind of created this environment where people have access to more information than any other time in U.S. history. And so I'm simply here to present the facts. And I think that this is one of those questions. I think when you don't talk about these things or you try to prevent the conversation from happening, that's where you get

the weird conspiracy theories, right? I think the way that the federal government handled GFK was wrong. I think that the way that the federal government handled MLK was wrong and RFK. And so being able to just put this out there and let people do their own homework and research is the best. I think that as soon as everything is concluded with the trial for Charlie Kirk, I think that they need to release that information too because I do think that in the name of Charlie receiving justice, the American people need to know the truth. And I do trust that J.D. Vance, the president, myself, Cash Patel, all have an invested interest in figuring out what actually happened and who should be held accountable.

If Tyler was acting alone, fine, he was acting alone, but like, let's see the evidence. But I do think that there were people that had knowledge of that because of how they reacted after the assassination. Everyone freaked out, deleted pages and information. China is tied to this foreign funding aspect of Salt Lake City of Queers. It goes back to Singham who's targeting and doing the violent rights even just months ago. There's targeted media campaigns calling people that are typically conservative leaning or right-wing leaning as fascists, Nazis that deserve and make it okay to assassinate these people. And then you have your stupid idiots that repeat the narrative talking points and they fundraise off of it in Washington. So yes, they are responsible.

They do own that because you have to realize that when you're an elected official and in that position, you have a certain level of influence. And you have to be careful about demonizing. Steve, is her audio okay? Sorry to interrupt. I just want to make sure you kind of fall off in the mic. Are she good? Scoot a little that way. That's right.

Make sure you're in the center of the frame. And stigmatizing Americans in that way. Because really, like, even just on the topic of ice raids or immigration, Barack Obama was known as the deporter in chief. And Joe Biden put kids in ConEx boxes. Everyone forgets about that right prior to getting elected. You had Hillary Clinton that had the, the same perspective and Chuck Schumer on illegal immigration.

And yet all of a sudden, you have Republicans or conservatives or people that want strong, even moderates that want. Hillary Clinton was Maga as hell in the 90s. Yeah. She's like based 101 in the 901 in the 90s. What happened? Yeah. Was it bad for fundraising for the Clinton Foundation?

We watched this clip of her talking about deporting illegals from like 98 or something like that. Yeah. She would be the face of Maga now. She would. She really would be, which is the irony in all this. I actually was just on a documentary on the 14th Amendment with Netflix. and we were talking about this. And I'm like, these are the same perspectives.

Like the Republican Party hasn't shifted perspective on their perspective on immigration. The Democrat Party has. Like they literally, so not, and I'll get into the specifics of this. So when I started to get politically involved in active, like really 2018. But you can see in 2016, Democrats and Republicans, for the most part, had a very strong perspective in standpoint. It was the tail end of Obama administration, right, on illegal immigration. Obama said, don't come here.

He literally is on record saying that. Yep. Then you have in 2016 the start of outpacing of the black minority community by the Hispanic American minority community. And not just any Hispanic minority, it's specifically Americans of Mexican descent. So why all of a sudden in 2016, with the rise of Hispanic Americans now being the largest voting minority, do you have a shift in the talking points from black Americans to now Hispanic Americans and specifically on immigration? What could possibly cause that? well, it was because they were trying to target the voting minority block for election purposes.

They didn't realize is that Hispanic Americans, specifically Mexican Americans, actually largely voted in favor of President Trump's platform because they don't want illegal immigration. So it backfired. But you see this all of a sudden. The Cubans especially. But specifically, they're targeting the largest voting minority in history. So why do you think we saw Neville Shingham funding the Timu riots, which is what I call it, rights in L.A. on ice. They were literally passing out Mexican flags. Brand new Mexican flags.

Why just the Mexican flag? Why not the Honduran flag or El Salvadorian flag or the Cuban flag? Why specifically that flag? And it was because they want to create the optics to resonate with a voting base or you now have people that are of Mexican descent saying, oh, you know, they're deporting my people. Bullshit, they're deporting sex offenders. Are your people sex offenders and child molesters and rapists? Last time I checked, I'm American, but I don't know in that shit.

Deport them. I don't want them here. In fact, I don't even know why we're deporting them. I think that they should, if you are victimizing children like that, especially, why deport them capital punishment all the way. Like I do not think that people like that can be rehabilitated and I think that they're very bad people. This gets into the whole like argument of due process. Due process applies to American citizens. Just because you're here illegally does not believe or there's not guarantee you due process because you're not a U.S. citizen. So fine, deport them.

But in general, these people for them to exploit specifically because of polling to target for elections, they don't actually care who's hurt in the process. They just care about getting elected. And that's what this is really about. I remember in, I think it was 2018, and I don't personally agree with a pathway to citizenship for DACA, okay? But President Trump had a plan that he presented to Nancy Pelosi on DACA. And she did not take the plan. Remember, Barack Obama created DACA. I think that they created it to create a... What does it stand for? Deferred action. Okay.

Yeah. Can you look at the full... Yeah, look up DACA. But it was created by Barack Obama at that famous Rose Garden ceremony. I believe that that was done not as a solution, but as a foreshadowing feature political talking point and leverage point for that demographic because they sought that point of time the rise of Hispanic Americans as a targeting voting minority. And it's all about controlling the election cycle and the voters. So Pelosi, the Democrats actually at that point in time, and she was largely. protested because of it.

They actually did not do anything about it. So immigration has been one of those things in Congress that both sides benefit from the division on it. Both sides fundraise. I don't think they'll ever actually provide a solution for it because they benefit from it. But that's the truth because they've had multiple options to and they didn't. Then you have on my side where you have Republicans that represent large agriculture communities that don't want E-Verify that would actually force farmers to actually hire American citizens

because it's cheaper for them to hire illegals. But then they're also hiring children. And so hiring children, that's not hiring children. That's slave labor. When you hire a 16-year-old, you know, 14-year-old Tyson chicken farm got busted on that. A kid lost his arm in one of their meat processing facilities. But there's like a, why is a 14 or like 14, 14 or 15? And you can look up that article.

But the point is, is that this has been very frustrating because the system, because of decades of this mentality, is broken. So the only way to actually fix this system is to put a temporary pause in the immigration process and let it catch up for people that are trying to come here legally, which by the way, my office handles a lot of cases for people that are trying to do it the right way. And it can take sometimes up to 20 years for people now because of how bogged down the system is, because there's not enough judges, attorneys, all of the illegals that came in are taking away resources, time, court appointments, all of that. They're not actually waiting in line. They're breaking the law and coming here and they're essentially trying to cut the line and doing what they're doing. And that's not fair.

And so you put a pause, you let the system catch up, deport the illegals. And if people want to come here the right way, do it the right way. But you can't cut the line and you can't just show up and expect us to roll out the red carpet for you. And the cartels are making money hand over fist, trafficking people over here. Well, now they haven't, right? So like we've seen a decline in the number of illegals coming here. But during the Joe Biden, Kamala Harris administration, when they were running on this stuff, absolutely they were making a killing. And they're killing people in the process. Yeah. There was a...

By the way, there's like separately aside from like the Hispanic voting block issue and targeting of politics, they literally were letting in terrorists. Like multiple members of the known terrorist watch list were released into U.S. territory. Yeah. Which is wild. That they allowed that to happen. The best immigration policy that I think made the most sense that I've ever heard of was I came out right before. 9-11, I think. And when 9-11 happened, like, the whole thing just got exploded and it never happened. And I think it was, um, the basis, basically what it was was that, um, Mexicans could

come across the border legally to work. And they would, they would able, they would have to spend at least six months of the year in Mexico. So they could come here. They could work for six months. They would always have to pay taxes and all that stuff. They would be action for childhood arrivals. DACA. Oh, that's what DACA is. Yeah. Yeah. And then for the remainder of the year, they would have to go back to Mexico.

And I was like, man, that makes so much sense. Like, come here, find a way to get them to pay taxes. They can work their job. These people that are running these companies that benefit off them, they're going to have to, they're going to have to find a middle ground where they're not just going to have to pay, you know, get out of jail free car to pay these people nothing and benefit from illegal immigration. You know, I have a friend who runs a huge commercial. concrete company and 99% of his people are Mexicans and a lot of them are illegals and like because

no one else wants to work like these guys their biggest these guys aren't this are not serial killers they're not committing crimes they're young Mexican dudes with families who like all they want to do like their biggest gripe is they can't work 10 days a week they want to work Monday through Sunday all day long and they're not and and you know this gets into a larger discussion though and like in the 90s you had, and previous to that, I think it was under Clinton, NAFTA, which completely destroyed the Mexican economy. And then you have cartels literally running Mexico. So it is what it is with that. You have people, and there's been a vacuum created by, like, the amount of drug dependence from Americans onto the drug economy that the countries in South

America, with the exception of El Salvador and a few others. We know the gangs are essentially running these countries. And so we're the biggest consumer for that product. And so there's been decades long things that have been flawed within the institution of government and Congress because I think just good people don't want to run for office. I'm like very convinced. Some of the people that I deal with, wow, I sometimes question why do it. But the perspective up there is that, you know, this is just kind of the status quo. And if you have good relationships, if you have a zero tolerance on drugs in this country on a lot of the crimes that we're seeing, it does have a ripple effect, third and fourth order.

It does impact other countries. The things that we say our policies here do impact the countries, people wanting to come here, work, economy, all of that. I mean, you have a lot of people that were programmed into thinking that you're a typical four-year degree is like the way of making it in life. Meanwhile, we have, I actually was actually just at a meeting with a couple of manufacturers. and construction-based companies here in Pinellas County. And we have a really good program that exists for people that are doing trade schools.

But a lot of people look down on if you're in the construction industry or you're an electrician or you're a welder or a crane operator, I got news for you. Those people straight up out of high school are making six figures. You can make great money in those industries, but we've been so programmed and like dumbed down a society. Everyone wants to be a YouTuber. Yeah, everyone wants to be a YouTuber and or Instagram. person and when you tick tocker and china has been largely a part of that they don't show their kids twerking videos on tic-tok in china they show them how to be an astronaut you want to be a physicist

like that's cool to them here it's quite the opposite so you have society that's really been dumbed down and it's because of how lazy and i think the lack of oversight and conviction of elected officials but this has been decades long like you have people that have been in office for longer than i've been in life like that's so crazy significant yeah and they're like the the government's broken. Yeah, because your ass has voted us into this brokenness and we're trying to fix it. But there's not enough young people with that perspective. So Congress is true. I think the average age, we're in one of the oldest Congresses. I think in U.S. history, I think the average age is like 60 plus, you know, 70 years old. So when you have people that are on the way out, do you think

they really care about ballooning debt? No. No. They're just trying to line their investment accounts. Yeah. And so we try to ban insider trading. And I actually am leading that charge right now. with actually 27 other Republican and Democrats members of Congress. And I was told that I was going to prevent members of Congress from sending their children to college. And I was like, I don't think insider trading. You're going to prevent them from sending their kids. I was like, I don't know that. I'm pretty sure that that's illegal.

But so, yeah, I was told that I was going to, you know, destroy the Republican cost us the midterms and force my colleagues to take bad votes. And I was like, well, if they want to go trade stocks, do it on Wall Street, don't do it in Congress. So we're trying to force that right now. But Congress does get access to information. we have meetings with CEOs, market information. We know when the policy is going to be hitting the markets. We know when to buy. And anyone that tells you that they don't have some special knowledge into stock trading is lying to you because we do.

And that's why you see these people go and making 175,000 a year become multimillioners. What about lobbying? What about it? Seems kind of like a dirty game. Yeah, it is. And you can be a member of Congress and go right into lobbying. And that's also illegal, which is also not good. Yeah.

Yeah. It seems like it's just crony away for corporations to, around the country. Yeah. So I was talking to a parliament member in the UK and they actually don't, the UK does a lot of stuff backwards to be clear. But the one thing that they do do correctly is the finance law that they have. So there's only a certain amount of money that you can spend. Lobbyists don't typically meet with, they actually don't allow lobbying directly to members of the parliament like they do here. And it is crazy. You can see on open secrets.org who takes what money. Because of, I guess, like my brand of elected official, I don't really get a lot of

of special interest money from D.C. So I have a lot more small dollars. But also initially in my first election that I won in 2022, my seat cost an estimate combined between both Democrat and Republican money spent. It was like upwards of $20 million. So what people can afford to do that or even fundraise like to the tune that you need to for a congressional seat? Like millions of dollars.

That's why you have a lot of self-funders, which there are some people that are self-funders that are doing it for the right reasons. But then you have a lot of people. people that are not doing it for the right reason. So I joke that this is my $20 million piece of jewelry because it's my pen for Congress and it's how much it costs to get elected. But that's ridiculous. $20 million can do a lot and it's just ridiculous that it takes how much money to get elected. Yeah, it's crazy. You can like look up the people who are funding everybody and then you can just basically it translates directly into the laws they try to pass or they vote against or

don't vote against. Yeah, exactly. There's people on both sides. So it's transparent, which is crazy. Yeah. So like here's an example. I don't take pharmaceutical money and I'm one of two members of Congress that's a Republican that sponsored a bill to codify President Trump's capping of prescription pill prices. Try to codify his capping of prescription pill prices. Yeah, he did an executive order to cap the prescription, like so that they can't price gouge Americans on prescription pricing for drugs, basically. Right.

And I'm one of two Republicans. Really? Yeah. It seems like that Massey dude's pretty cool. Yeah, he's, it seems like he's like. He marches to the beat of his own. drum. Yeah. It seems like he can't be controlled by anybody. He just like roams around with his chickens. I will say this. I like Massey on his second amendment standpoint and perspective,

but I think that his, um, I don't even know if he's a Republican or Democrat. What is he? He's a, is he independent? I think he's more independent. But the thing is that I think that what happened with the Jeff Free Epstein personal attack with the president was not cool. What did he say? I don't, I didn't follow that. He was the one that has been largely accusing President Trump of having, you know, a reason to hide the Jeffrey Epstein files. And I think when you're looking, everybody's been doing that, to be fair. He's the one that specifically has been making it personal with the president. And you can see that based on the press conferences. So what I will say is that Massey's good in certain things. But I think that he tends to make things very

personal with the president. And you can still push for transparency. I did. But I didn't make it a personal attack on the president. Yeah. It just seems like he's just like an everyday dude who has chickens and lives in a trailer. He definitely doesn't live in a trailer at all. Oh, no. I thought maybe it was like an RV. I don't know what it was. No.

He definitely, he's a very smart guy. He actually designed this really cool thing called a clux capacitor that actually, yeah. So he's very, he's actually very smart and we, we connected on our chicken issues. But I'll tell Thomas that I think that the way that he handled it was wrong.

Yeah. And I think that's something that he'll have to work out with the president. Yeah. The Epstein thing is crazy because everybody's implicated in it. Like it's every single high ranking official when it comes and banker. Not you. I'm not on it. Thank God you're not old enough to be on.

But I mean all these, you know, all these people that were running around on Wall Street and in Miami, Fort Lauderdale in the 80s and 90s, these powerful people were one way or another connected to them. And there was a lot of innocent people connected to him. Tons of innocent people, I'm sure. Like all the physicists and scientists and actors and stuff that he flew around, I'm sure a majority of them are innocent never did anything. But, you know, I don't know. I think it's pretty obvious. His intelligence ties with the CIA and Israel and Saudi Arabia and the people he was around.

I mean, he was definitely, he was friends with Trump for over 10 years, was really close with him. He went to his townhouse. I mean, a bunch of witnesses. I think it was Virginia Goufrey. It was the one who said that Trump was at his townhouse, you know, multiple times every week. And I don't know. Well, I don't know if he's guilty or something. I don't know.

I mean, I think he was definitely the right choice to be the president. I mean, whether or not. Of all the elected officials, Trump and presidents, because Bill Clinton was also on there. Yes. Trump was the only one that cut ties with him. And to my knowledge, was able to out. was able to at least cooperate when investigators approached him. And so a lot of people are saying, well, you know, you have people that are implicated in the

investigation, right? You have innocent people. So the question is the information that's been out, obviously the victims asked for their information not to be released. We don't want to docks victims and we're not going to. Yeah. But didn't they say they wanted this information to come out, but they can still remain anonymous? Correct. Yeah. But that means that their names are going to have to be redacted. But also at the same time, remember what I told you about the victim testimony and from the witnesses and from the attorney, they told us they would give us a list. We have not gone on a list yet. Yeah. The crazy, yeah, right. There's an active lawsuit, and these people are contacting them to settle. Right. So, yeah, there's a, there's a victim

compensation fund as well. Yeah. So I'm not, I'm not an attorney and I'm definitely not involved in the case like that. But what I will say is that do these people deserve to be ignored and removed from polite society if they are engaged in sex trafficking? Absolutely. Should they face justice? Absolutely. Right. However. There's nothing more deep state than covering up for profiles. Correct. Correct. No one likes profiles. I have a bill called, well, you can look it up as cap them, but we want capital punishment for paragraphs, which by the way, majority of Congress does not have that perspective. They're a minor attracted people. Yeah, that's crazy that they even try to make that, um, a, uh, a sexual identity. It's like completely opposite and really gross,

especially if you have kids to think that that's okay. But the fact is, is that the way that this has been ballooned into my opinion, a direct smear campaign against specifically the president is what I don't like about how this has been handled because you can see the paper trail that I provided. Not one person would help me with this. Not one. No one wanted to help. Towards the end, some of the members of my task force signed on to a letter to the Department of Justice. And then everything started to come out. Well, I have proof.

We have witness statements that are investigating. I presented the document that there was destruction of evidence. The point is, though, is that the way in which Democrats chose to handle this specifically, Joe Biden was in office for four years. They blocked the release of flight logs. Yes. No one talks about that. Yep.

why all of a sudden now information was released by the White House. They want names specifically. The victims told us they would give us names. We haven't gotten the names yet. And wasn't Bill Gates pushing hard to have them not release it and to keep it? Wasn't he like lobbying hard to keep them to suppress it? I have not talked to Bill Gates. So I wouldn't know.

But based on. That's what I think. The rumors. Yeah. The rumors of what we have heard specifically is that, and this is directly from the attorneys, is that when they found out that the witnesses were coming to talk to Congress, they got very concerned. I am your host, Stasi Schroeder.

Welcome to Tell Me Lies, the official podcast. What's the most unhinged thing of season three? Stephen, because he's so evil. I do think he is misunderstood. You see everyone face consequences. It's intoxicating. The writers just know how to trick you. There's always a twist in this show.

It's nothing you would expect. Tell Me Lies, the official podcast now streaming and stream the new season of Tell Me Lies on Hulu and Hulu on Disney Plus. so then their phone call started ringing. So when we get the names and Comer's decided to send subpoenas and all that, that will all be public for the American people to see. But I would just encourage people to understand that at the end of the day, this is politics. Yes. And so when you see a timeline of people not caring, the same people that claim to care about this that have used us to spear the president specifically, knowingly for also four years, did nothing when they knew that women and children were trafficked at the year.

Mexico border. In fact, they encouraged it. So if you're trying to tell me now that they all of a sudden care, I don't believe it. Right. Because I was on this issue way before and no one spoke up. Yeah. No, it's being used as a political football on both sides. Absolutely. But like I just think that the whole Epstein files thing is a limited hangout. Yeah. It's a piece of paper like bullshit. There's a fucking hard drive sitting somewhere in another country. There was photos that, you know, he would allegedly had like during the investigations in West Palm Beach. There was like server or like up. Oh, yeah.

Like the towers, old school computers. One of the witnesses said there was an entire room, the size of this room, that was literal servers and monitors. Like he has to have a freaking vault of hard drives. What we do also know, though, from the victims. And I'm sure Democrats would also testify to this if you bring him in and interview him, is that we were told that there was a lot of CSAM materials in that, child sexual assault material.

So obviously not going to release that information. But for people, where is the accountability for these victims and who they were involved with? Virginia Dufre, before she passed away, had alleged a number of people that were on this. The attorney and lead attorney that's now working with House Oversight on this, I hope can provide a list of names. But ultimately, my task force doesn't have recipient authority. It's up to Chairman Comer. And because of the nature of the investigation, it's now been designated to the entire committee to deal with. Right, right. Yeah, it's just, you know, it's just frustrating. And I think it's, I think all the evidence and all the stuff that the FBI has come out with is straight up an insult to our intelligence. Just like showing the video of his cell. Like that wasn't even his cell. I would say if I was in charge of the initial rollout, I would not have done it like at all. I would have just put everything on the National Archives the way that they did with the JFK files. I've been encouraging this since day one. Put it all up there. How is it in one area? It was like also done in like a Google. I think.

It was like Google Drive or something. They should have done it directly on the National Archives the way that they did with JFK, allow for easy PDF search on all of it. And then as we get more information, just upload directly. I think it's like when you give the illusion that you're hiding the ball or you are hiding the ball, that's when it's like, hey, there's something all right here. Right. Yeah.

Yeah. And it's just like, it makes me just wonder, like, what happens to people? It goes back to my lizard question to you earlier. Like what did the lizard people say to you when you finally enter the government? No lizards yet. And if I do, I probably. Gosh, what a tell looks like he saw. lizard when he was sitting there the other day. I've yet to see lizards. Now, really stupid people I've

come across, very stupid people that you'd be surprised during government totally come across as unfortunately on a regular basis. Yeah. Well, Anna, thank you for doing this. This has been a fascinating conversation. I appreciate it. Is there anything that we should cover that we haven't, like what you're working on or what you plan on doing? So our next hearing is going to be on MLK. we are pushing for the banning of stock trading from members of Congress. That's made me incredibly popular among my colleagues. Also going to be forcing a vote on term limits

or at least calling people's bluff to see if they're actually serious about it because everyone campaigns on term limits. Forcing a vote on term limits. Yeah. So I'd say three terms. But, you know, right now a lot of people, again, you have people that have been there literally for decades. If you're, you know, in your late,

80s and you're still in Congress, like, go joy, enjoy the rest of your life. You don't need to be in Congress at 80. And also, it's probably a health risk to you because there's so many stairs and a lot of marble. You could like break your hip. Yeah. But there's also this aspect of, I think people tend to prioritize this and make this their life when in actuality you should also, if you want to be like a really grounded representative,

you should, I don't know, go back to your district and interact with the people that vote for you and maybe have a family. and love your children and be a good parent. And then you can bring that perspective to Washington. I think that that's what's needed is a pro-family environment up there. So it'll be interesting to see kind of what happens. With what happened with Charlie, I think a lot of people kind of took a step back and were like,

well, who is this Charlie Kirk person? And then they hear the things that he's talking about and how much sense it actually made. And the fact is that we've gotten to a political climate now where people thought it was okay if they disagree with you to kill you. So just think about that. If someone doesn't like what you're saying because of the political nature and environment that we're in,

maybe they don't like that you have me on here. In some people's perspectives, they can shoot you in the head. And it's supposed to be okay. And that is the problem that we have culturally right now. And so I think that that's why collectively ever needs to kind of push back against that. Yeah, I totally agree with you.

Question everything, but read the facts and verify for yourself. Bring on the AI government. No, no, no, no. We need some interface with humanity and soul. You think? Yeah, we don't want AI government. government in that sense. As long as it's not owned by Palantir, it'll be okay.

Oh, well, that's too bad. Palantir might own it. So. But thank you. We appreciate it. And yeah, my pleasure. Thanks, Jack. All right.

Thanks a lot. Good night, everybody.