The Last American Vagabond - US Illegally Targets Water Infrastructure In Iran & Trump Lies About An Iran Deal (Again)

Starting point is 00:00:00 My father told me when I was a child, people in authority lie. It starts with a simple question and ends in objective reality. Through our journey from there to here, we find one another and ourselves. And as the next 24 hours breaks free from our last, we gaze onward and reflect. of the day. Welcome to the daily wrap up. Thursday, June 11th, 2026. Thank you for joining me

Starting point is 00:00:50 today. We've been streaming on Substack, the last so many shows. Let me know if you've been doing that and if you have any complaints, criticisms, the video, the audio, because it's new for me. So we're streaming on Substack yet again today. And it's, I think, a good new avenue to reach new

Starting point is 00:01:06 people. So let us know if that's working for you right now. Important show, I think, today to follow up on the absurdity of the Iran conversation, but kind of with a new, I wouldn't call it a new perspective, but I think there's, it's an interesting moment right now. And I mean, I've been discussing this. The interesting, however, whatever many different words you can apply to this, of Trump continuing to either lie about this or be lied to. And to the same point I bring it up the last few times about this, either way you look at this, it makes a very clear point. Because why would he at this point either continue to sell the same lie knowing we see through it,

Starting point is 00:01:42 or why would he continue to accept the same lie, whether that's from Israel or Iran, over and over and over. I mean, the more I think about this, the more it confounds me because it doesn't seem to fit in to, there's only a few things I see that make sense of that. One of which would be that Trump is absolutely completely not in control of everything that's happening. and then the only reason he wouldn't speak up about it is because somebody has something over him. And that doesn't fit with all the boxes and all the information that I have. But that's the only thing that I can think of that makes this make sense for why he would keep doing this.

Starting point is 00:02:14 Because it embarrasses him. And because it's verified after the fact every single time because of what ultimately happens next. And it's almost comical today. Like I bet you'll laugh more in today's show than you have in a long time because of how many just absurd things we're seeing from basic realities like Trump coming out and saying the deal's made and we're all going to sign it. Israel said it was okay. And Iran, Iran agree. And then Iran says, that's not true. Israel says, I didn't even know about that. And you stand back and go, what just happened right there? Is Trump being made a fool of? Or are we all being played? And the deal's going to come out tomorrow. And then I'll have to

Starting point is 00:02:51 come back and report tomorrow that it's hard to really wrap your mind around because there's more to the story. That's the easy thing to understand what it is. We can decide. You can decide. But there is a missing piece to this that I'm sure will, I mean, I would like to believe we'll come to play at some point. But there's agendas in the past that a lot of them, for that matter, that just sort of drift. I mean, look, we have some recently, even like Trump's assassination conversation. Many of these different events like Charlie Kurt, for example, that just kind of never get resolved and just get set on the shelf. I guess that is sort of a more common tactic today. But we're going to talk about the realities of basically last two days of the back and forth of Iran.

Starting point is 00:03:31 what Trump is claiming today, a follow-up on the Apache helicopter conversation, which I still stand by exactly what I thought happened there. I still can't tell whether or not I feel, my opinion, that this was something that was taken advantage of, that happened randomly or that they drove into reality, or if there was another element involved making that happen to get the United States to react, either way, the evidence still to this day backs up basically what we were reporting the day before yesterday, that this was either some sort of allowed to happen false flag situation, or it was something that they just took advantage of after the fact, which is kind of the same point.

Starting point is 00:04:06 But it's interesting because it's now been used to justify the attacks that followed and was supposed to be followed up by a whole lot more attacks today that even stated we're going to happen today and then didn't. Because the deal's coming, except it's not. It's ridiculous. And of course, the discussion of whether or not there is financial manipulations happening because of that, I find hard to believe that's the only reason he would keep doing this. There's also the larger point that we haven't touched on in the last so many shows

Starting point is 00:04:34 about whether or not there is an element of this that is about some larger transition. And more and more, it seems like that might be the more likely option, seeing as how this continues in a direction that doesn't make much sense. But that would have to mean in some way that Iran, I mean you don't have to, but likely mean that Iran in some way was involved with that. And that doesn't line up for me. Doesn't mean that's not true, though. Interesting conversation to have about that. People like, um, uh, uh, but, on his name on top of my head, Richard Meadors has been making some pretty good arguments about whether or not this is by design and the argument that it's driving, and what she's correct

Starting point is 00:05:10 about, driving the interest, the business towards the United States. But I've just, it's where it ends up, we'll make a lot of difference. But in addition to that, I wanted to talk about one story today that had to do with the EPA. And the best way to put it is more failures by the Trump administration, but it gets taken as partisan. The idea that the false maha movement, not the people involved, but the government that lied about it, have repeatedly failed to do what they promised. But guess what? That's the entire administration. Every single thing they claim has been going the direction. But this has to do with chemicals in deodorants and food and everything that seems this government, the CPA in particular, is now currently doing their best to hide from you.

Starting point is 00:05:50 I mean, I wouldn't say on the record, but it's being basically discussed openly amongst the administration itself and the people involved who are now speaking out and saying we were told to basically hide the problems. not try to fix them, but hide them from people. And we talked about the fluoride discussion. That's something we're going to start with. The quick point about censorship, and then largely, again, one point about FISA 702, which you should see, but largely discuss the ongoing Iran conversation and Israel's involvement in all of it. So to start, two quick points about censorship. I wanted you to see or rather, I guess, censorship. And I guess the first one is more about just impersonation.

Starting point is 00:06:24 I added this last, but censorship as well we're going to point to. One thing I wanted to highlight. This is our show from, this is the episode we played yet. yesterday and it's a great commentary from Robert in Likesh. He's going to be doing more of these throughout the month, or throughout, you know, monthly now. And he was doing it before, but ultimately we want, we both agree that right now it's important that his perspective and his insight.

Starting point is 00:06:45 And amazing insight that it is gets more attention in the video form. And so he's been doing some breakdowns of what's going on. And guys, if you look back at his work, I mean, years ago, even before we were in a, you know, he was part of he lab. And then since then entirely, he has been calling this stuff, stuff for such a long time, in particular around the Middle East conversation. Go back and look for yourself, just like most of TLAB, by the way, and that's not some kind of, you know, that's simply us demonstrating our value. Go back and look at all the stuff we've done over the years, and you

Starting point is 00:07:12 will be blown away how many times we've been dramatically ahead of stories that were barely addressed by the mainstream, even, but let alone independent. But I digress. This is a video we just put out. How Iran's counterstrikes on Israeli bases are reshaping the Middle East. But something I thought saw what was interesting here. So this is not new. It's happening all over. And by the way, we are going to be having an IMA panel coming up. I believe the 29th of June is where it's tentatively set for the idea of impersonation and a through AI largely. Catherine Austin Fitz and Whitney being two of the people affected more than anybody. And so they'll be both be there. It'll be a good conversation. The plan is I'll be hosting it. But as always from the from way

Starting point is 00:07:49 I am as IMA has been going, I would like it to not feel like it's only TLAV. That's just kind have been by default, but I'm happy to host them every time. But I was glad to see Corbett hosting one and actually two now. And it's just the idea is to get it more broad and expand the idea. But this is a post from a channel that is not ours. And it says the last American vagabond channel. So obviously, that's not our name. Our name is the last American bagabond. And it has the same icon. So no videos and whatever else. But what it says is some argument about financial stuff, which I always point out to my audience, whether it's on telegram or literally anywhere, you will never see. me hawking something on Twitter or anywhere else, selling you some kind of supplement or giving

Starting point is 00:08:29 you a link to another telegram channel or telling you to buy this crypto. Even if I think those things, that's not ever what I will use my platform for. I've said that my entire time. So just understand that. This person's trying to get you to go to this weaponized telegram link for who knows what it's for. And it got six likes, unfortunately. So I guess you guys thought that was me to some degree or somebody, but I would have ignored it and voted it down, which would have made it drop to the bottom. But because it got the likes, it's up to the top. So I wanted to make it. sure people saw it. The fake T-Lat channel, don't click on it. The reason I'm bringing it up is because, one, I want you guys to go in there and report it because what happens through

Starting point is 00:09:02 these is people then get manipulated within these to click on things that then steal their financial information or whatever. And worse yet, then might even think that happened because of us. So help us out, report this because people are doing this all over the place. And this, by the way, is what our normal channel looks like. So you guys can see it with the checkmark and whatever else. This is what the other one looks like. Now on that note, I just want to get that out there so you guys saw it and so you weren't taking advantage of by some manipulator. As always, it simply means we're over the mark, guys. It means they're afraid of what you know and what you understand and they want to try to side that, couch that, sidestep and manipulate it,

Starting point is 00:09:36 stop you from continuing to watch this platform. Now, here's another point that I really wanted to share with you. I'm just, I'm kind of blown away by this, to be honest. Now, I briefly, briefly mentioned what happened with this podcast. Now, I was, I was helped supporting, but I mean, I still support pitch, shoot. I believe. even what at least I hope is still their direction and their message. That's not about gaining from it for me, especially like when they reached out and wanted me to sort of like promote the channel, I said, well, I'm already doing that.

Starting point is 00:10:05 You know, that's already what I do, but I'm happy to do so. And so I made that public. And then, of course, I think it's this, I forget the time exactly, but Jeffrey Warnick took over or basically kind of the financial backing behind this platform now, and he started this podcast. And I'm happy to join. Dennis Kucinich, Jeffree, Bruce Fine. I respect. So I went on and we had some great conversations about constitutional issues,

Starting point is 00:10:28 especially during the peak of the ice issue, which is not going away. Now, long story short, I brought up things that I argue Dennis and Bruce were in line with and agreed with, but overall, regardless of that, discussion about broadly things like globalism and having an effect on the conversation, Zionism, as a political organization, as the stated representation of what Israel is, and simply discussing that as a relevant factor in these conversations and he freaked out. They're all in there. You can check the links. And basically try to kick me off the show. Bruce and Dennis sort of tried to, you know, I guess petition for me to stay.

Starting point is 00:11:01 So we came back, we did another one. And then ultimately, same thing. And you guys know what my conversations are, that it's not some kind of fringe, radical idea. I'm talking about the actual things that have definitions and how they represent within the conversation. And for whatever reason, you can decide for yourself, he just kind of freaked out on me. And he kicked me off the show. And I, you know, I've interviewed Dennis since then. And, you know, point is there was a very personal, weird kind of focal point on that topic.

Starting point is 00:11:26 And it got booted off the show, which I thought was crazy for a censorship-free sort of idea. But, you know, it's his own podcast or whatever else. And so it's not the same idea. Now, all of that to say, just to understand why I care about this is that this is something that I largely supported. And, you know, and I just thought it was his issue. I just let it go. Now, what's frustrating to me is on this platform. And this is something that I already got wind up from people behind the scenes and bit shoot,

Starting point is 00:11:48 that there was discussion about censoring comments. and I thought that can't be right. That can't be what's happening on this platform because that's not what the platform represents. Now, unfortunately, this is what I saw. And the reason I think it's important is because this person is just not on this podcast, but is the back behind this entire platform.

Starting point is 00:12:05 And so he posted this and says, comments that have nothing to do with the content of this video will be removed. Now, I find that it could just be related to just his podcast, but I really find that disconcerting with what I was hearing before and understanding that this is the person behind this platform who is now openly telling you that will remove, comments that they don't agree with.

Starting point is 00:12:24 Worth noting. So I just wanted to point that out. I thought that was important to see. And if it matters, I mean, look, I don't think we should stop supporting this platform because of that, but I thought it was important to see. And I think that I've got rumblings from people on this platform that that might be where this person is driving that. I think that's worth noting.

Starting point is 00:12:43 Also, on censorship, I keep seeing this on stack, by the way. And I just want people to know that this is not something we're doing. And we were already worried about substack doing this. I think Vanessa Bealey had pointed out that there was some concern about where Substack was going. I'm starting to see comments that are being like hidden, grayed out. I can still respond, it looks like, but they're grayed out. And I'm guessing that means nobody else can see them. And that's not from me.

Starting point is 00:13:07 It just says hidden comments. I started seeing that the other day. This one, it simply saw, I guess, I mean, I think the only reason it's happening is because this platform doesn't like the fact that they're making an argument about Jewish people. I just still find that insane that any platform can argue that they will be, I mean, whether I agree or not is not the point. It's about the idea that people have a right to say what they want about things.

Starting point is 00:13:27 And if it's some, like, if you argue, anyway, you know the point. You know what it all comes down to. It's incredible to me that these platforms that were built on the idea of giving the voice to people who were removed from other platforms are starting to do the same thing. Worth noting.

Starting point is 00:13:40 Now, on the EPA point that I think is important, this is something that I wanted to include just because if I don't talk about it today, I feel like it'll drift in the background because there's so much kind of swirling around this conversation. It's about the idea of the Maha movement and rather, I should, again, the false Maha government side of that movement. Political pressure threatens to undercut EPA science evaluating chemical safety for consumers. Now, the sources say are coming from people within

Starting point is 00:14:09 the EPA. Now, just to cut to the point about the fluoride aspect, which is one point after I read this, Derek's been covering this since the moment this started. Well before, I mean, even the independent media was covering this. I mean, I should actually grab this for you. Now, for those who don't know up here on the top, you can check out the TLAV team and you can go down to check out the different articles and different, you know, Whitney series that were unique to TLAV, Derek's series and so on. Here's the fluoride trial. And the oldest one goes back. I mean, I'll just show you this. There's six pages or more of these art going well, well back.

Starting point is 00:14:47 Here, I'll just do this real quick. Showing you that this is, I think, under hashtag fluoride trial and fluoride lawsuit. goes back to whatever the date was on this, November 10th, 2020. And Derek has been doing an excellent job breaking this stuff down. Now, to the article, this is the last one, the one before last, actually, on January 28th. Maha bait and switch, Trump's EPA calls for review of fluoride science. And at every step, the fake Maha and fake MAGA, the ones who don't believe in what he originally promised them, but still support him today, we're defending it.

Starting point is 00:15:24 Oh, well, it's this. Oh, it's an issue with procedure. going to fit and still to this point, they're defending it. Now, it has carried on, if you haven't seen it. He recently just covered this. Federal court overturns historic fluoride ruling as Trump admin fights to keep fluoride in your water. And this is exactly how I've been framing it. The entire time, Biden or Trump, they've known before, by the way, but since Judge Chen and Michael Connett and the Florida Action Network, well, specifically Michael Connick, but Judge Chen is the one that ultimately allowed the evidence to be seen or admitted. Ultimately, the point is it shows it's dangerous.

Starting point is 00:15:54 And even Judge Chen ruled that way that said it is a. clear risk for children's IQs. They know that. And both people, both administrations have fought to keep it in your water. You can't misunderstand that. There is no other point to be made in regard to how this is rather in the sense of whether they care about your health or not. They're choosing to do this. Now, of course, in this discussion, it's clear that they're using some procedural misstep or they frame it that way and the court was amenable to them, I think, obvious reasons. They use that to suppress this and push back. Not because they say it's wrong, but because, well, you use the wrong thing to make this happen.

Starting point is 00:16:27 It's just so, it's politics, guys. So back to the point, here's a bigger example of those kind of exact same things. Inside the Trump administration's EPA, scientists say they're under pressure to alter safety reviews of chemicals commonly found in consumer products, like household cleaners and cosmetics to make risks to human health and the environment disappear on paper. Not in reality, but just on paper look like they're not dangerous. Multiple current and former career employees at the EPA's Office of Chemicals, safety and pollution prevention, recounted being pushed by supervisors to downplay the potential

Starting point is 00:16:59 risks of chemicals that are already used in products on shells. Now, it's interesting to me. I'm already seeing people that I would argue again to the fake MAGA side of this who act like this is somehow woke, right? Like caring about the health of stuff now has become woke all of a sudden back over again, even though they were the ones going, maha, you know, make healthy again, but just because that was something Trump's team used to get people on the RFK side to believe he was on their side. My point is you have the current team who've sort of pointed at this going like, oh, you guys are, this is all that woke, special climate change stuff. I'm out there, I'm telling you.

Starting point is 00:17:31 But what's interesting is the same people that were supposed to be on their side of the ones that cared about this more than anybody. The actual Maha movement. This is not about any kind of left, right, woke, left, whatever, left right dynamic. This is about the reality of stuff we know is dangerous, stuff like dioxins, stuff like PFAS, stuff that they've admitted, stuff in fact that RFK Jr. has said he promised to get rid of and fight. And so now our current EPA that they just praised, by the way, is making sure that these things stay in your food. Multiple current to former career employees have been pushed by SuperPers to downplay the potential risks of chemicals that are already used in products.

Starting point is 00:18:07 While the EPA and told CNN a once testing that reflects real world exposure, some veteran employees say they have been pressed to make chemicals appear safe by coming up with the test parameters that aren't realistic. Now, of course we should question this because of course there's politics involved and just about everything today. So could these people be lying in order to make Trump? Of course they could. And if that's enough for you, the hypothetical possibility that could have happened to ignore it all, then you're the problem. Understand that regardless of whether that's the case, and it's not as far as I can tell, the evidence is pretty clear. There's a thousand other examples just thus far showing you that they are doing stuff just like this.

Starting point is 00:18:46 I mean, it's not, it's just looking to anybody that was actually a genuine part of the Maha movement, none of them are supporting these administration anymore. What we've been told is, it's a quote, let's look at the alternative scenarios, one employee said. Like if putting two hands in a chemical shows risk, this person said, as supervisors might ask, what if you put only one hand? What if you just dip one finger? Right. Basically, going down to the smallest degree until you can find something that appears to be not dangerous.

Starting point is 00:19:12 Quote, we are considering scenarios we don't have any basis for. The EPA's chemical safety office conducts health risk assessments for a slew of chemicals because of corners or because of concerns, excuse me, over potential impacts on human health. Such as cancer, endocrine disruption, birth defects and reproductive harm, you know, the small, woke things that nobody cares about, right? And realize that's a huge category. I mean, everything we've talked about is involved, the COVID shots, by the way, endocrine disrupting chemicals is, I mean, the list is insane. And I've covered this extensively. In fact, I'll grab at least one. This article is an important one.

Starting point is 00:19:51 It goes over kind of a broader example. We had an interview with Dr. McCullough, Peter McCullough, about that the actual COVID shots were, in fact, an endocrine disrupting chemical. But are endocrine disrupting chemicals causing gender dysphoria? The evidence says, yes, by the way. Include that for you. But there's so many things, including dioxins and PFAS and all these different chemicals that are affecting your body in a thousand different ways,

Starting point is 00:20:14 and they're making sure that doesn't get removed, is the argument today. It says, for example, one chemical being reviewed, a silicon compound known as D4, which we've discussed before, is used in products including deodorant, hairspray, cosmetics. Up to 500 million pounds of this solvent is produced in the U.S. every year, but it has been banned by the European Union. So many things that are regularly used in this country are banned like everywhere else in the world because it has been shown to be toxic and linked to infertility. Well, so is PFAS, by the way. That's something they don't seem to care about, though. even though this study shows that it can, you know, reduce your fertility by up to 40%. And then we just ignored that and move forward.

Starting point is 00:20:53 Typical. Continuing, it says, when the nation's first chemical safety law, which, by the way, is the toxic substances control act, the very same thing they're trying to use to expose fluoride that the U.R government's pushing back on, when that was adopted in 1976, some 62,000 chemicals were already in production or on the market and were got grandfathered in with no requirement for EPA to conduct risk reviews. Does that sound in any way like a group? that cares about your health. We're not talking about seatbelts here, guys, or whatever,

Starting point is 00:21:26 some kind of, you know, an accessory to a vehicle or a device. We're talking to the fact that these are things that they know are dangerous, but well, because they were already in existence, we can't just destroy their business. We'll keep poisoning you instead. Yeah, because that's always what's driven, I would argue, the majority of her government interest. Money. Many remain in consumer products today. Environmental advocates say that's because the original law lacked teeth. Exactly. That's the truth. It was designed to. really stop. They were, rather, the most particularly was things that they knew were important to the people

Starting point is 00:21:56 that were important to them in government at the time, right? Just like every other thing in history, major business rules the day. It was nearly impossible for the EPA to effectively review already existing chemicals. In 2016, however, the law was updated, requiring the EPA to review existing chemicals on the market to assess the potential human helpers. Why? Because people were caring about it. People like us were talking about it.

Starting point is 00:22:18 That's what led to the false Maha movement from the Trump side. not the movement that really cares about those things, but the government that saw that you cared and pretended to try to fight those things. And whether RFK was co-opted or blackmailed or whatever else, he seemed to care before that. Now he's just in line with whatever Trump does, it seems. He's like a veneer that makes them think

Starting point is 00:22:37 he's going to do something good and then never does. Trump. It says since early this year, the EPA has been under court-ordered deadlines to complete risk assessments for certain high-priority chemicals after environmental groups and the chemical industry sued the age. agency prompting efforts to speed up the process. Like the idea that they can even do that, like from a business perspective,

Starting point is 00:22:58 we're talking about the EPA's job is to worry about the environment and, you know, the same thing with like a CDC point or any of the rest of these groups. It's almost as if their job is not to worry about your health or your safety, but rather to make sure that that complies with the business interests of this country. So at this point, they're forcing them to hurry. And overall, the point comes down to the fact that they're not, it seems like they're going to do nothing about it. The agency proposed a new rule last year with respect to the toxic,

Starting point is 00:23:20 toxic substances control act that streamlines the review process. Great. Makes it go faster. Which advocates said would, of course, weak an oversight, shorten reviews and discount real world exposures that threaten communities across the country. So what happened? Biden, Trump, same deal, right?

Starting point is 00:23:37 They're just rapidly moving this so it goes faster for business interests. Now, on top of that is what's being said today. That while that's the reality, they're now trying to find ways to circumvent the risks even within that that you can still see. It says now pressure is being applied at multiple points. in the assessment process. Three of the sources said in the EPA, they describe a pattern of internal meetings rapidly convened by superiors at the first sign of potential health risks or a chemical in early stages of scientist review process, where scientists feel forced to defend

Starting point is 00:24:07 preliminary findings before the analysis is to plead. Some of these meetings are attended by political appointees because that makes sense, doesn't it? No, it shows you politics. Put simply, politics should have a place and discussion about what's safe or not. But we all know it does, and that's just like a political representation of your interest, rather business interest over health interest. The administration has placed them in this role, leadership roles, in the chemical assessment office. Do you think they're there to make sure that they're safe?

Starting point is 00:24:35 No, they're literally there to make sure this is what makes Trump's look, what Trump makes the government look good. Same thing it did with Biden, anybody else. They're there to make sure that the agenda goes well. And so right now, my argument with all this is that this is something Trump's, Trump is doing because he doesn't want to deal with it. I don't even argue he cares or not. My opinion, this is nothing. It doesn't even matter. He's not interested in these things. And so what it means is let's not make this an issue. Let's not find out that what everyone's

Starting point is 00:24:59 using is dangerous. Only so many things we could lump on to previous administrations, which would still be fair. This has been going on long before he got here, but he's also been here a previous administration too. So overall, it's about trying to just not have another problem to deal with. But this is my view, but either way, whatever the driving forces, the argument is they're trying to hide this so they don't have to deal with it. They don't even let you finish the risk analysis, one EPA staffer said. It's like you've got to brief immediately on the risk that you found. It's more like, how can we fix this?

Starting point is 00:25:30 What can we do to make this risk go away? The staffer said, sure cares about your health, doesn't it? The second career employee echoed that experience. Basically, the moment you calculate risk, there's some sort of meeting and they push you to figure out how to make the risk disappear. Not in the sense that they don't have the risk, but that on paper, which is what multiple people have stated, it's about making it look like it's not there. I just don't know how anybody can see that as anything other than people trying to hide risk from you for their benefit. It's exactly what it is. Important, I think. But like a lot of these

Starting point is 00:26:04 things, it'll get dismissed by the mainstream political conversation, which is chock full of a bunch of people that don't really care about most of these things they pretend to care about. How funny and ridiculous is that. Now, FISA 702, we've talked about, it's ongoing. It's just, it's kind of the same idea, really, in a broad sense that we're talking about yet another thing that they told you they would do that now they're pretending is bad. I don't, I don't even know how this continues. This is one of the most disjointed, clumsy agendas I've ever seen in my life. Like, they could have, literally, they could have made up a better narrative to make this make sense. Like, why not try to rationalize why 702 is suddenly now in their interest, right? Like, I know we talk. We're

Starting point is 00:26:48 told you it was bad, but guess this is what's changed, right? Here's what Iran is doing and why we need it. You know how many Republicans would fall for that? But they don't, it's like they don't even think. They just go, well, it's good. And Democrats are trying to stop it. Like, it's like they're phoning it in, guys. So here we are yet again. And what I love about this post, Thomas Massey, post Charlie Kirk's interview with him from 2024 about what? About why Mike Johnson defended shredding the Fourth Amendment and passing FISA. You got to love that. And now Mike Johnson is out there going FISA's the best and we've got to stop Democrats and Trump and everyone of the fake MAGA team in the government is acting like that's the right thing to do and going Democrats

Starting point is 00:27:24 are trying to stop it even though it's Democrats and Republicans. I've just never seen it so blatantly like on the surface dishonest. They've always been lying to us. But the last couple of years has been like comically on the surface like they're like kids with their hands in the cookie jar. It's insane. And part of me wonders whether that's by design. I make that point every time. But he says hopefully turning point USA is still opposed to warrantless buying. Guess what? They're not because Trump's not. A vote to extend the unconstitutional Pfizer-702 program without warrants will likely happen today in the house. Now, this was today, 5 in the a.m.

Starting point is 00:27:59 Let me know in the chat if you've seen anything since then. He said he was going to be debating it in the House today. Sometimes that can take quite a while. Either way, I kind of think it's going to pass. I think this is going to be allowed because the government wants it. Simple as that, all sides of it. This is Secretary Bessent saying FISA is a critical tool that allows Treasury to stop terrorists from utilizing the financial system. Well, look, even if you actually believe that, which is kind of laughable based on what they're actually doing in the world, it doesn't matter based on what they were saying before.

Starting point is 00:28:30 These were the people that were telling you not maybe a percent personally, but Trump and his team. But this is something that the Democrats were abusing, that we can't allow. Like, I played the clips already. I try not to be as redundant. You know, every day I can replay these same clips because it seemed relevant. But I played the clip of Trump telling you FISA was bad, not if and when, but bad. Sort of like he told you mailing ballots were bad, no matter what, and then used one himself in this administration.

Starting point is 00:28:54 Just stupid. But to carry out attacks against the United States and, you know, to stop terrorists doing so, he says, and continues to be a critical component of our national and economic security. It's the most important tool we have to collect information. It's like tone deaf. Like, he doesn't know that we know that they told us the opposite of this 30 seconds ago. but of course just in mass she's been just calling out for this entire time on this

Starting point is 00:29:16 buys as a critical tool that allows the u.s government to spy on american citizens without a warrant translating scop asette fourth amendment be damned like these are people acting like they care about this country the constitution and everything they do challenges that here's mike johnson as millions of americans gather for large events and summer celebrations democrats just blocked fisa 702 i think it was um uh dana macadams that said are you going to to spy on those Americans in those gatherings because that's what this does guys he says national security statute hampering our ability to defect uh detect foreign terrorists this comes after democrats shut down homeland see and you this got back it's again right there i didn't it wasn't

Starting point is 00:29:57 even here before like they keep yelling this out over the last three days and here it is nope it was actually democrats and republicans like you must understand that people are not this stupid republicans democrats people that are where it's all stupid everyone can see this and now they're going, well, he just lied about that. Why would he lie about that? I think it needs to be acknowledged now that this is undeniably clear. Most Americans are very aware they're being misled. Who knows what the percentages of people that are choosing to still support them.

Starting point is 00:30:26 But again, like we were saying in January, and I still think holds true, it was clear if you were looking closely enough. Now it's obvious with Tucker and Dave Smith and all the rest, these huge people on the right who said, guess what? They lied to us. I just want to point out again to demonstrate our value that that was, something we were discussing in the beginning of this administration. In fact, we were concerned about it before it all happened. That's why we started the IMA. You know, just noting this way,

Starting point is 00:30:52 way, way ahead of the story point in case that matters to people out there. But anyway, he says there are so many things to criticize Democrats over, but here you are slamming them for blocking on constitutional spying on Americans. You absolutely suck at this. But even then, the point is some of them did not. Or rather, ultimately, some of them, whether, that's just, I said that confusingly, not all of them did. Bottom line is both Democrats and Republicans were voting to stop FISA 702, and it seems that largely the Republican side of this is pushing for it to happen. Tom Cotton, he says to be frank, failing to extend FISA 702 could be fatal. This is what they do, guys. And there's a low-hanging fruit. There's a lowest common denominator that it falls for this stuff.

Starting point is 00:31:34 It's not even close to the majority. That's why everything's spinning out right now. Democrats need to put policies aside. See, they just can't stop lying about this. Let's see if they put a back check on this. Not yet, it appears. Here's 10th Amendment says, you are a traitor who hates the Constitution. Yep, I agree. Remember, Tom Cotton is we'll come back to it a second, is the one that actually rolled out this,

Starting point is 00:31:55 which is the Senate intelligence side of this, which we discussed, I don't know what, a week ago. It's only now kind of spinning through a lot of the conversation. But it's important to see that Tom Cotton was the one, as we showed you then, it's behind this. And it's another example of him blending Israel with the United States. Now, before we get to that, Derek Evans here posted something, I appreciate it. Now, I wasn't familiar with him. Looks like he says former member of the House of West Virginia. It's interesting.

Starting point is 00:32:21 He says, I no longer care that the left is stealing elections. I care about the fact that Republicans have done nothing about the left stealing elections. I thought, how fascinating is that? Because you know I've been making this point. And it's important, I think. Like, do, just because I haven't been covering what the arguments about manipulations of California does not mean I don't care about election fraud and, and just criminality. I do. And in fact, I've covered it going back a decade of both sides, routinely cheating and lying and, you know, voting fraud and voting machine, I mean, extensively over the years.

Starting point is 00:33:01 I've just gotten really tired of continuing to point out that it's not just one side every other. other four years. So I point to this guys, they all cheat. And I know we know this somewhere in our minds. So my point, though, is not about whether you care, like this point, rather, is not about whether or not you think that 2020 was stolen. They all cheated, whether or not California right now, or specific elections were. It's about the fact that even if it is the reality, that most people calling it out don't seem to care that Republicans don't ever do anything about it, which means they either are lying or they don't care that it's happening. You choose, it still makes my point. And so I do believe they're cheating, but it's kind of irrelevant to the point.

Starting point is 00:33:38 It's like all the rest of it. It's like the Epstein files. It's like James Comey, which I'm telling you is likely going to go nowhere just like it did last time. Or Leticia James, who they've tried three times and failed or Bolton, which I get the sense is likely going to be not even a slap on the wrist. Nothing's happening. Not that Clinton or Klaus Schwab or Bill Gates or all the rest.

Starting point is 00:33:56 Not even you have to think that those things are supposed to happen, but they promised all of these. And the real criminals who they said they would go after are not getting even a slap on the wrist. Now, if you believe they're stealing from you, you really need to focus like he's saying on the fact that they don't seem to care either. Pretty clear. Once again, nothing is being done about it. There have been zero consequences.

Starting point is 00:34:17 Trump has been back in office for over a year and a half. There have been zero arrests, been zero investigations into any of the election fraud that's taken place in 2020 or since then in 2022 or, you know, smaller races all across the country. Nothing's being done about it. Stop getting mad at the left for stealing elections. When the Republicans aren't doing anything about it, President Trump's not doing anything about it. There's been zero consequences. Sooner or later, you've got to start getting mad at the people

Starting point is 00:34:42 who's not doing anything about it and start asking, why are they not doing anything about it? Maybe it's because they're all part of the same big club and we're not in it. What he's showing for the podcast is a leading report, which I'm not a fan of, saying Skid Row homeless claim they have been paid to vote for Kyle Bass, which, you know, good luck, fair or fine. These things happen every time. and I mean on both sides of it, meaning that it happens,

Starting point is 00:35:05 but it also ends up being lied about extensively where people just manufacture narratives online that you can never verify. As if you even need to do that, I don't even believe your vote translates to the outcome, guys, based on a thousand different data points. That's not to say that it shouldn't or that I don't, you know, that if we're stuck in a state of society,

Starting point is 00:35:21 I believe that this is something that should be believed that, you know, at least tried to maintain the idea of the constitutional check and balance system. Now, wouldn't be my choice for the reality of the world. I would like to see a world with no government at all. But if we're stuck in this, the idea being that that's the way that's supposed to work, some kind of check and balance. And so overall, we just need to understand that this has been obvious for a very long time and that this has been a system that has been deliberately broken so that there isn't. I mean, look at what's happening with Trump and everything he's doing, whether it's the illegal war, the actions with ICE.

Starting point is 00:35:51 I mean, trying to deport Americans. Like, Congress has barely tried to even hint at an impeachment effort. It just doesn't happen anymore because there is no enforcement. this is one thing in my mind a problem. But either way, back to the focal point, it's saying if you care about this, you should care that they're not doing anything about it, which is just a larger point for all of this, guys.

Starting point is 00:36:13 Here is Trump making this very point. I find that to be perfect. The election, the second election, as you probably hear and probably now, most of you know that happened, and now it's been proven, and it will be proven as time goes by even more so. We have things that you want.

Starting point is 00:36:30 Okay, so is it or is it not? It was proven, but it will be proven. He does this all the time. He speaks off the cuff and he makes himself look like the kind of, whatever you want to call it. At one point, I believe he was better at this, whether it's old or whatever you want to call it. The idea is he does that it's one point today, in fact, where he says something that then contradicts it by the next sentence he makes. Funny to me. His time goes by even more so.

Starting point is 00:36:55 You know, most of you know that happened and now it's been proven. And it will be proven. It will be proven. Okay, got it. We have things that you won't believe. When we release the full files, you're not going to believe how crooked the second the 2020 election.

Starting point is 00:37:08 What? Wait, wait, wait. You're telling me that you've got files that show that they've been cheating and you're just holding on to them. That's very, you know, I can already hear them. Oh, it's a plan and it's all going to work out. They're going to expose themselves. And it'll give me 40 years and we'll go,

Starting point is 00:37:22 it's all going to come down. Why don't they just put them in jail right now? I know. I'm totally going to, I'm just a normie. I understand. You've got evidence of crime. and you don't put him in jail. Look, it's the same point, guys.

Starting point is 00:37:34 Either they don't care or they're lying to you. You really can't misunderstand this. And the idea that he can go through the last administration and do nothing. And of course, we're talking about the previous crimes before the stolen election. And I only do it like that because I believe they were all cheating. And I don't even believe that's what we deal with anymore. But point is, you've had a year plus, two years to do something about it. And you're telling me you're, you just wait and don't we put the files out.

Starting point is 00:37:58 Come on, guys. I mean, we just, some of us. us, I'm sure will be, but we just can't be this naive. It's very obvious to see that they're lying to you. Now, on a point about the Israel kind of, what was the word we've been using, it's infiltration, but the idea of conflating, whatever the word was the time, the Israeli military with the U.S. military. Drop site news posts this. And this was the report after that that came out for the Pentagon that says that they're a critical risk. The highest level risk, that not even every adversary is at critical risk. But the Pentagon has listed Israel as a critical risk for national

Starting point is 00:38:38 security. And this is insane to me. Now, this was a very public report. It very much did come from the Pentagon. That means Trump's Pentagon. And yet they denied it, apparently. And yet we're talking about many sources that we went over this in the, I think the show before last, many sources from within the Pentagon and the, you know, the US government. And what he does here is he goes up to many different members of Congress and ask them about this. What do you think about that? This is going to blow you away because it's not just the usual denial. And I'm remembering right now there's one example that I didn't grab and I'm mad that I

Starting point is 00:39:12 didn't think about it. There's one guy, who knows, it may even be in here. I don't think I watched this exactly. I just straight through the whole thing. It's about three minutes. Nope. The point where there's a guy he goes up and asks about this one of these very conversations. And the guy pretends to get on his phone and walks for like two minutes.

Starting point is 00:39:30 minutes rambling about some and you can see that he's not actually talking you can see the apps blinking because he's touching his ear i mean these are american members of congress and they're so afraid of answering basic questions that they'll pretend to be on the phone and embarrass themselves and so similar idea here is you've got members of congress left and right who are simply saying i don't even know what you're talking about what is that i don't even know i don't read the new york times all the time acting like they don't know about this major report that everyone's talking about we know they know guys let's be real about that. We know that they know. And so they're just pretending they don't. And in some cases, acting like, well, they denied it. So it's false. Even though the Pentagon

Starting point is 00:40:05 is the one putting this out. And it's arguing that it's a risk. And the whole point is that the government of the executive branch is the problem. And they deny it. And Israel denies it. And people like Randy Fine go, well, it's not true then. This is alarming. And I'm telling you, Americans every day are waking up to this. That's on the Pentagon reclassifying Israel as a critical level threat, a counterintelligence But I didn't see that story. In the New York Times this week? I don't read the New York Times cover to cover every weekend.

Starting point is 00:40:33 You know, sometimes. That's a big story, though. Sometimes I'm with my children. I mean, if our allies being classified as a counterintelligence threat, I mean, what would you advise? Oh, I think every country spies on each other. Oh, don't you love how that's become a normal thing now? Where they used to vehemently deny that even possible. But now it's like, well, we all, something I've been telling you for years,

Starting point is 00:40:48 which is not even a secret. We all should know that by now. That every country's doing their best to manipulate and spy. Yes. That's why. And the reason they don't usually make that clear is because in other cases, they clutch their pearls of the tiniest thing because they want to use it against them. But, you know, I guess that's out of the bag now, but watch them use it again tomorrow because

Starting point is 00:41:04 these people are incompetent. But he said, well, everybody spies. Oh, yeah, I agree with that. But that's never really been stated that way. And even though everybody spies, it should still matter that your allies spying on you. Isn't that just strange? I mean, it was just, Ruby was just doing the same thing or our advance as well in that recent interview. And then he got criticized like crazy from Israel, which is usually how that goes. Vance is lying to us to defend Israel, but does it in a half-hearted way, so it gets attacked by the Zionist movement. Just perfect. But critical level, that's like with our top adversaries.

Starting point is 00:41:37 That's higher than some of our other adversaries. Yep. Doesn't care. Dropside's Capitol Hill correspondent Julian Andrioni here. I was up on the hill today asking members about the defense intelligence agency reclassifying Israel as a critical level counterintelligence threat against the United States. What does that mean? Now Israel, supposedly our special. ally is on the same playing field in terms of the threat that they pose in espionage to the

Starting point is 00:42:01 United States as our top adversaries. They are even above some of our other adversaries. So I wanted to ask members of Congress, are they being a good ally by supposedly bugging our secret service vehicles and tapping the phones of our top White House officials? And let's not forget, guys, this is not new. Just because they want to deny it now, like, fine, pretend you argue it didn't happen. There's a long track record of, in fact, both of Trump's administrations of Israel putting spy devices on cars on the White House. And I mean, ask people like John Kierkeau, people that have witnessed it through the intelligence services, everybody knows this. I could play the clips again of Wilkerson telling you that they have

Starting point is 00:42:39 a backdoor access to the Pentagon. It's not secret, guys. And that's why this is being covered up. Let's see what they had to say. I mean, they drug us into the Iran war and they're keeping the president in the Iran war. And that's not much of an ally, frankly. And it's no, it's shouldn't be a surprise that Israel is spying on American officials. Well, I mean, I think there's always kind of been some of these intelligence questions around the Israeli operation in terms of what's getting picked up in the United States and what's getting picked up otherwise. So I can't say that I find it.

Starting point is 00:43:14 Yeah. Would you consider someone who's bugging R.C.? Think about how benign it is. Like, remember, these are supposed to be the ones that are fighting them. Like, this is the illusory nature of the left-right paradigm. They're all completely recalled into this foreign entity, whether, I mean, it was to one degree or another. And so what she's doing right there is kind of trying to give you the, well, you know, it's going to not like I ignore it doesn't matter, but also not saying it matters. I just find this to be so frustrating that these people are framed as the ones that are supposed to be the ones, you know, standing up against Israel when they vote to support and fund and do all, you know, the same stuff ultimately happens.

Starting point is 00:43:48 Or they'll take advantage of votes where they know it's going to pass to stand up and say, no, knowing that this is going to pass anyway. That's my opinion and it happens, but I can't speak to their intent in every time. Secret service vehicles and spying on our White House officials' phones to be an ally. I mean, it's absolutely aggressive behavior for sure. Thanks. Yeah, the White House denied that report. And you believe that. Absolutely.

Starting point is 00:44:14 Why would we do that? Well, they're our best ally. Why would we do that? Well, that's sort of why that's relevant, right, the reporting. Yeah, and the White House supposedly bugged a secret service. vehicle and spied on top White House officials' phones. I mean, is that something that if an ally were to do it, it would break off ties? And the people who they supposedly did said it didn't happen. No, no, you see, that's Trump and his team said it didn't happen. The Pentagon said it did.

Starting point is 00:44:39 So basically that's like Trump saying it. Yes, Van's saying no. Like you're talking about the same administration here, guys. Brandy Fine is just a completely un-American traitor. I mean, whatever you want to frame it as, somebody who does not fight for this country. He is ignoring a threat because he stands with Israel. He's made that clear a thousand times over. Thanks. I didn't see it. You didn't see that at all. I did not. No. You see that?

Starting point is 00:45:02 Debbie Washington Schultz? I don't know. Does anybody believe that? You're spying on us and they need to cut it out. We do too much. You go over there to go to Israel and you have to, you can't take your cell phone because it gets, it gets bugged. Of course, and then he will go on to toe the line, which he does. This is, other than Massey, just about the most pushback you'll get, but it's ultimately not going to mean anything because these are state,

Starting point is 00:45:30 what I believe this person's playing right now more than anything is sort of a release valve in a lot of ways. That's not the way allies are supposed to trade us. Thanks. Now, just watch. Take note. If you want to focus on him alone, watch as nothing actually happens, even though he said those things very strongly. But I think that it shows you just exactly where we are.

Starting point is 00:45:47 And the people are going to continue to remind us that the biggest threat right now is the wars that Vivina and Yahoo continued to send us on. I am not surprised. It's why they have the control over so many of our colleagues here in so many ways. We'll be brief. That one's interesting, right?

Starting point is 00:46:04 But ultimately she's pointing out the problem. Now, this is an example of things that usually get like a massy situation. Now, however you want to see it. Like, you know, it's hard to know. Even like an AOC. Early on, she was a lot more aggressive about it. And then after she was in the position,

Starting point is 00:46:19 she very clearly softened up. Now, was that a play? Was she threatened? I mean, you never know. Today, that person saying that, she'll probably end up not being a position later. Or if she does, it's because arguably somebody's being, I would argue, driven to make that, kind of play that counter role. Just question those things, not that we know that for a fact, but recognize the reality of how many people in Congress are acting like one.

Starting point is 00:46:39 It doesn't even exist, let alone that they care about it. But on top of that, just ignoring it entirely, even if they've read it, like Randy Fine. Don it. And, you know, me, I'm not going to make comments prior to understanding the full scope of... What a coward. You see, and this is Democrat as well. You know, exactly what is of what's going on. Yeah, mumble your way through that.

Starting point is 00:47:00 I'm not going to, you know, respond without the full scope. You mean the entire investigation the Pentagon put out that you were ignoring? Coward. So here on this same direction, Ron Paul put this out yesterday. Just days after news broke that the National Defense on. Authorization Act for next year would virtually merge the U.S. and Israeli militaries. Make sure you're watching the Ron Poll Report, by the way. We now are hearing that the Intelligence Authorization Act is doing the same thing with the U.S.

Starting point is 00:47:27 intelligence community. Introduced by Senator Tom Cotton. I just think it's important again. I highly respect this show. I'm proud of the fact that a lot of us were talking about this a while ago. In fact, years ago, years ago, in this show, we go over the reality that this is something that's been going on a long time. These are just new examples of an ongoing problem.

Starting point is 00:47:47 important to understand. Now here's the point. He's behind landing again, and this is important for you understand. This link actually goes directly to the 622 section. And we already went over this. It's included yet again. But this one is in particular about the intelligence side of it, but it ultimately meets the same agenda. And there's a lot more than just the pieces of legislation that are causing this to be the reality. I'll include this show. New NDAA further integrates U.S. militaries. And of course, there was an ongoing deception of the Iran deal, which is where we are again today. Now, one more thing I want to add, I saw this, Ben Freeman was sharing this, the director democratizing foreign policy. Oh, I guess he works with the Quincy Institute.

Starting point is 00:48:25 He says key provision buried at the very end of the just released House defense bill, which don't forget was the bill that people like lives of TikTok and the rest are saying, look, the Democrats tried to vote against the child. What was it, the money they were spending to stop child trafficking, even though they were ignoring the Epstein files. But that's not at all what actually happened, even though I'm not supporting Democrats. I don't think any of them care about you. It's about the fact that it was a $70 billion bill, not an $100 million bill for the thing that they're trying to point to. This is the best they can do right now. And think about that. We're talking about Democrats and Republicans, very obvious criminals, and that's the best they can do.

Starting point is 00:48:59 It's because if they highlight the criminality of the Democrats in earnest, they inadvertently highlight the criminality of their own side because it's only one party, guys, it's only one government. But his point is within this, in addition to the other examples, and there's five of them out there, you have this little nugget supporting our close ally by providing $500 million, just on top of all the billions and billions that are being sent, for the Israeli cooperative missile defense programs and $122.5 million for the U.S. Israel cooperative development programs. You know, just another casual $650 million. Just insane, guys. It is insane how much of this is happening. Now, this is a good clip. it is tagged on with this clip of Professor John Marsheimer, who's discussing a book that was censored

Starting point is 00:49:48 by the Israel lobby, because that happens often in regard to their rather largely their influence over media, over content in general. A boxman here, Chris Mayhem shares attacking Mersheimer Walt in 2007. What a classic anti-Semitic canard. We're at war with Iraq because the Jews got us there. Now they're here to remind you that the next war, Iran is going to be put. by that same Israel lobby. And he says, boy, were we wrong.

Starting point is 00:50:14 This is 2007. Let's say they said. The reason America went to war in Iraq is because of the Israel lobby. The Israel lobby is so pressured, so manipulated, Congress, the administration, the president,

Starting point is 00:50:32 because it is their belief that in Israel's point of view, Iraq was against Israel, therefore was important for Israel's safety insecurity for the United States to destroy Iraq. So the conclusion that we are in a war today because those Jews, those friends of Israel, so manipulated, wow, we've heard that before. Wow, what a classic anti-Semitic can art. We're at war because the Jews got us there. Now, there is a nuance changed from the article that they wrote to the book. So in the article, they said it was

Starting point is 00:51:10 because of the Israel lobby that were in the war in Iraq. In the book, they say, if it wasn't for the Israel lobby, we wouldn't be in a war in Iraq. And now they're here to remind you that the next war, Iran, is going to be pushed and is already being pushed by that same Israel lobby that has already brought you the war in Iraq. Yeah, right. And so he's trying to go, like, how crazy is that?

Starting point is 00:51:37 And here we are. It's just wild to me. how clearly, like so censored content that was trying to let you know this is what they were doing, like it's even difficult to see, is just being, you know, censored by the Israel lobby. And he's there to act like, you know, how dare you, you racist? And it's exactly where we are. And so what's interesting is here's the clip of Netanyahu literally driving the U.S. Congress to go to war with Iraq and fighting for the one with Iran.

Starting point is 00:52:00 If you take away the Soviet Union and its chief proxy, the PLO, international terrorism would collapse. If you take out Saddam, Saddam's regime, I guarantee you that it will have enormous positive reverberations on the region. Obviously, we like to see a regime change. At least I would, in Iran, just as I would like to see in Iraq. And by the way, quickly, these are just his statements publicly. It goes, as you all know from this show and plenty of others, this goes way beyond public statements in front of Congress. We're talking about threats and subversion. I mean, everything we see today.

Starting point is 00:52:34 So understand, that's the driving this to, we're right. I mean, this is public knowledge at this point. Now, the Iran element is undeniable. Even Netanyo came out himself and said that he's been fighting for this for 40 years. I mean, even Rubio came out and admitted that it was because of what Israel was doing that they had to act first. I mean, you can't hide from this stuff. The question now is a practical question.

Starting point is 00:52:53 What is the best place to proceed? It's not a question of whether Iraq's regime should be taken out, but when should it be taken out? It's not a question of whether you'd like to see a regime change in Iran, but how do it... Are there any other nations that you would recommend that the United States launch preemptive attacks upon at this point. The answer is categorically yes. The two nations that are vying competing with each other, who will be the first to achieve nuclear weapons, is Iraq and Iran.

Starting point is 00:53:19 A third nation, by the way, is Libya as well. Libya is trying very rapidly to build an atomic bomb capability. So you have here now three nations. All stand together to stop Iran's march of conquest, subjugation, and terror. No matter on which side of the army. you sit, you stand with Israel. I don't know if she has a statement for the podcast. It's a complete of a two minutes.

Starting point is 00:53:59 It's been a firm hearing every time. Because black militantly to a higher administration, the Alabama and there is no place. You've never seen a foreign agency deal with just to stay up to speak in Congress. You're not even talking to the president of the branch. This is what happens. And the same kind of standing ovations,

Starting point is 00:54:16 even right now, by the way, even with everything going on, You have people in this country, government entities saying that this person will end with that, in fact, is a good, a good partner. He made a few mistakes here and there, but, you know, just it's absolutely wild where we are. I'm glad to see it that people are finally recognizing the dishonesty of all of the players in this. Now, the show on the ninth, we discussed the Apache false flag, the secret deployment in regard to what potentially happened in deploying troops, as well as the assassination lie and the information that was released on Tucker Carlson through Ken, Silva and understanding that, you know, things that were out there, by the way, that was just discussed on that platform that he's done great work on in regard to the many, many anomalies

Starting point is 00:54:56 of the conversation. We only played one small part of it showing you somebody involved with the actual autopsy process with somebody who was a dual citizen who happened to be involved with October 7th. It's just insane to me. But overall, the whole interview is riddled with information that should show you that we are being lied to. Now, whether you think the assassination happened or not, even though it's pretty obvious, as we've been saying from the very beginning, day one, that there's very clear

Starting point is 00:55:17 deceptions going on. The point is that there are lies around it, just like with Charlie Kirk, just like with any number of examples. And the people that would usually be the first to call it are the ones that are suddenly quiet about it. Now, back to the Apache false flagpoint. Now, the reason I called it that is because the evidence that I saw that day seemed to be pretty interesting to me. One, Ron denied it, which they, possible they could deny something they've done, they've done it before. But then the way that the narrative went, the way that the timing went, the way that the information was put out by Trump, I mean, the timing of it all, to me, it sounded like, And when you got into the actual reports coming from the sentcom and from the, was it the Pentagon,

Starting point is 00:55:53 the reports were saying that there was a, what was it a, a malfunction of some kind. It was the word they used, a technical malfunction, I think. I thought, well, that's strange because it wouldn't be a technical malfunction if it was hit by something, let alone shot at like Trump claimed. Then it became, oh, wait, though, it was, it was, they ran into a drone. That was another narrative from Trump's side. But then they were saying it was shot down. and then eventually evolved into the idea that they drone ran into it. But at that point yesterday, I'm thinking, okay,

Starting point is 00:56:20 they're getting conflicting narratives from people in Trump's team and then from the actual government, like the Pentagon saying critical risk of Israel and then denying it. There's clearly some kind of an issue. I think it's because, my opinion, that there's an element of a vein of people in the administration in the Pentagon who believed America first,

Starting point is 00:56:38 who still do, maybe all of them. And yet are now becoming very aware that that's not actually what Trump's team means when they yell America first and then go do things for Israel, right? I think that's an important thing to consider at the very least. But overall, the information seemed to suggest either something that was like allowed to happen, right? Like whether they kind of set it up to where they would let this thing fly into them or fly into

Starting point is 00:56:59 themselves or bump it or something to then act like they were hit and then use that to justify attacks at Iran, which is what happened. To me, that sort of sounded like, you know, that's blaming them for something that you cause. So that's where I lean with a false flag. Or that Israel made this happen to justify the same thing. Those are all just considerations. The evidence seemed to suggest that there was something that was being lied about. It's only gotten more clear, I think, today, in regard to the dishonesty around it.

Starting point is 00:57:21 Here's Larry Johnson telling you what he thought about it, and this was actually from the night, the same day. Well, they've already hit several targets on Kamsa Island and Syrick Naval Base. Look, this is a lie what the United States is doing. It's a pretext. They're claiming that this helicopter was shot down. How exactly was it shot down? I mean, if an iglet, you know, a surface-air missile impacted in the cockpit, those pilots would be dead. If the main rotor, the thing that spins over the top, if that's taken out, that helicopter crashes to the ground.

Starting point is 00:57:59 The pilots are dead. Right. So in the day, Trump said it got shot down. So if it ends up being a drone that hit it, which is even where the narratives today, well, then it wasn't shot down. So why would Trump lie about that? Was he misled? was he just speaking off the cuff? People loved to give him benefit of the doubt.

Starting point is 00:58:18 Or was he lying to you? Or you could make it simple. And the only lie involved was that he wanted to make it sound like it was something more than it was. And said what ended up being some kind of an accident over this, you know, in the air was, well, let's call an attack. We were shot down. Use it. I don't know how you. Either way, he called it shot down.

Starting point is 00:58:36 And that's not what even today they're saying happened. So at this point, Larry's saying, well, based on what they're claiming, which is Trump saying it's shot down, there's only a couple of ways that could happen. and they're claiming the pilots were rescued. So that doesn't make any sense. So that's very logical, right? But then it evolves beyond, I guess, Trump's lie about being shot down and do hit by a drone. So here is the example of that drone. Now, what they're claiming is that essentially this thing, like ran into the helicopter,

Starting point is 00:59:05 which then you could, how in the world you then argue that's a direct attack? Even like, if it was a suicide drone, it would explode. If it was something that ran into them, either way, the point is they say it lodged itself between the two pilots. just a quick look here as Daniel's saying Trump wants us to believe that a drone that size look at these people staying next to this drone lodged itself between two Apache pilots the man cannot stop lying I mean I don't even know how we take that at face value that's insane so I don't know if Trump this I tend to think that Trump lies so habitually that he says things that with he

Starting point is 00:59:39 in his mind he sees some tiny drone and so he makes a lie that that makes sense in his mind and they just kind of casually drift away from it and change the narrative and his own team doesn't want to revisit it because it's embarrassing. But overall, that's obviously not what happened, guys. Here is what Iran says, and this is from the ninth. It says Iran's deputy foreign minister told Al Jazeera that a U.S. Apache helicopter that went down over the straight on Sunday, and this is what I find interesting. Because depending on what you look at, Al Jazeera's own report, this is coming from an Iran platform, but I've gotten mixed, you know, I wouldn't take any of these at face value. Point is, the argument was that it was not their, they

Starting point is 01:00:17 didn't do it. Now, directly what he said first, actually, is it says Iran was not behind the attack. Such incidents may occur unintentionally because of the tense atmosphere in the Strait of Ramos, meaning that any number of reasons things could fly into each other. There could be, you know, whatever. There was no deliberate targeting of Iran by the helicopter of the Strait of rumors. That's what they said. But so weirdly, that then gets framed as was not deliberately targeted, which is now being used by other sides to make it sound like, well, they did it, but it wasn't on purpose. Because I understand right now, or last I heard him,

Starting point is 01:00:48 Trump was saying that Iran admitted to this. They have not. If you look into what they're saying, they're not admitting it again. Iran was not behind the attack. So even within the media, it's being sort of water, I think that's by design.

Starting point is 01:01:03 Even saying not deliberately targeted would say the same thing. But if the drone was involved, then it would mean it was either an accident or that Iran is lying about the fact that the drone actually was driven at them for some reason. reason. But then I go back at the same point. That doesn't make it not the case, but from a logical perspective, why would they do that? When they just shoot it down? Why wouldn't they, it doesn't make much sense to me? But that doesn't mean it didn't happen. But overall, I find that to be pretty clear

Starting point is 01:01:28 at this point in the sense that it's not what we're being told. I'm sure more will come out about this as more as usually does about whether something is recovered or, you know, whatever ultimately happens. But where this stands is where we're going to get to you next is this act was used to spin right in some major attacks on Iran in the ongoing illegal war that they're conducting. Even if they did attack him with this drone, they're still conducting an illegal war based on the fact that they attacked for no reason, or rather just no legal reason. Now, on top of that, they went on to then directly target water infrastructure. There's no denying that at this point, guys, it's very public.

Starting point is 01:02:04 And on top of that, even though some of them are trying to, are we going to pretend like they didn't just tell us for weeks that they would target bridges and water infrastructure? So let's not act like it's not obvious. So overall, it seems like this was something that was used. Even if it was some kind of weird accident, they ran into each other, which is probably the most likely excuse or justification here. And then they just use it anyway. And that would tell me that this is something that was used because Israel wanted an excuse.

Starting point is 01:02:29 Because I think Trump is looking for a way to not let this destroy whatever semblance of respect he might have from certain people in a very fringe group. Now, Iran accuses, and this is from this kind of thread of live updates from NBC, Iran accuses U.S. of using helicopter crash as pretext for strikes. So this is after that initial report, I believe this went later that day. Iran's foreign minister condemned the U.S. military strikes this morning, accused Washington of using, okay, so that would have been, yeah, so actually the next morning. It says, where was, military strikes this morning,

Starting point is 01:03:06 accusing Washington of using the downed Apache helicopter as a pretext to launch attacks. The ministry said it believed the attacks were a flagrant violation of the United Nations Charter, adding that Iranian armed forces struck the U.S. bases and assets in the region in response, which they did. And it says Iran has not taken responsibility for the incident, even though Trump is claiming that they admitted that they did it. Every day we get stuff like this. And I still can't tell whether Trump is being misled and yet just doesn't seem to want to question it or is lying to you over and over. I can't tell. Probably a mix of both somewhere. But overall, this is interesting to me because

Starting point is 01:03:41 this, even if it was something they did, it was still obviously used. If Trump is telling you they want to make an agreement and they're just about to make an agreement, why would then they use this to spin into something when it could have very well been an accident? But overall, a violation of the United Nations Charter and that they then responded. Now, they went on to then say, see terrorism as they bomb the other people that are clearly involved with waging a war against Iran. I, you know, I just still want to argue, guys, that any, I don't think any group is really this stupid. Americans are not this stupid. Like, it's, there's a, there's a very clear scale of intelligence in this country.

Starting point is 01:04:18 The point, though, is that it's, these are basic things. I think the reality of this is that people can very clearly see that, like, for example, with the basis. All, even with Trump's narratives and all the claims, the reality is, it's obvious they're in league with this agenda against Iran, right? They're not denying that. Trump's not denying that. They're telling you their bad guy terrorists. We're all fighting to stop them. And then when Iran responds to those people that are involved, that's somehow terrorism.

Starting point is 01:04:44 Like people will lie about that and just go along with it because no matter what Iran does terrorism, that's the mindset some have. But honest people, no matter their level of intelligence, you're going to go, well, come on, we just saw you tell us the opposite. Israel does it every day. They lie one day and they spin the next lie of the neck. It just happens constantly. I find that to be desperate. You can decide what it means. Daniel McAdams,

Starting point is 01:05:05 flash report says the A-864 Apache helicopter that crashed Tuesday was protecting ships in the Strait of Ramoose. Now this is what Trump said after this. From Iranian drones and missiles,

Starting point is 01:05:16 a senior U.S. official said, don't you love just like Israel propaganda? The narrative sort of morphs and evolves as new claims come to play and they go, oh, well, then this too. Oh, is that what they said? Well, this is why then. Why didn't you tell us that

Starting point is 01:05:30 when it first started? Because they're lying to you. It's very easy to see, guys. And it says the two pilots escape from the burning aircraft after it hit the water, getting out in seconds before it sank. On the secondary point, let's not forget, they used AI drone boats to pick them up. Interestingly, the 82nd airborne that was secretly deployed to Israel, suddenly was involved with, it's very strange how this is all coming together.

Starting point is 01:05:50 Something tells me this was organized. On top of the idea that this was apparently the first example of them using AI drones to sweep in and rescue people with all that we see going on in the world, it could just be coincidence, but maybe not. Daniel says, in other words, and this is what's important if you understand the basic reality of what's going on.

Starting point is 01:06:09 An illegal war, and then illegal blockade, even within Trump's discussion of a ceasefire, it would be argued a violation and the ongoing bombing of Lebanon, and all the rest of these things that are continually argued to be violations of the deal, even according to Trump's earlier statements,

Starting point is 01:06:23 that he said Lebanon was part of it until Netanyahu said it's not. And he lied about it. So the point is, in other words, an American attack helicopter, the Apache, was operating in Iranian waters. That's clear. During a U.S. blockade, which is undeniably by definition an act of war. So why does the U.S. government keep using our military members as bait to escalate?

Starting point is 01:06:42 The point meaning is that if it's an attack helicopter, in the midst of a war that you claim you're fighting while you have an act of war going, which means there's legally no ceasefire, why would they not attack you? That doesn't say they did, you understand. But what's funny is that even if you're claiming they did, why the fact that they'd turn around and go, oh my God, what a crazy out overstep or whatever. They act like it's some kind of unprecedented act of terrorism when you've been blowing up their cities this entire time. Again, I don't think people are this stupid. Now, in regard to one example I want to include because we're

Starting point is 01:07:16 not really going to get into the nuclear side of this today. In that same thread, this was from one day ago. Iran decries the U.S. backed resolution, oh, excuse me, it's actually here first. So this is important because we've been discussing what the International Atomic Energy Agency said on June of 2025, which to remind you was simply, and the document is right here in the link, which was that the Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency, that's who wrote this post, said very clearly in June of 2025 that they had 60% enriched about 400 kilograms, like 1,000 pounds. That was within their safeguard agreements that was inspected and remains under safeguards

Starting point is 01:07:55 in accordance with their agreements. Now that was in June of 2025. Now, the 12th day war discussion changed things because from that point forward, they've been in the midst of a war. And the International Atomic Energy Agency has not been able to go and double check what's happened after they bombed those locations. But you see, this is what's being misused and misrepresented. If they were within their safeguard agreements, which they were, according to the very

Starting point is 01:08:19 group that Trump and the rest are pointing to, so you can't say you trust their information, I don't trust anybody. But if you're telling me that that's what they're looking to, then why would you not trust when they tell you, it just makes any sense. Or the fact that Whitkoff and the rest came out and tried to use the 60% number to scare people. And then when I point to the International Atomic Energy Agency saying it's not a problem, they go, why are you trusting the UN, not realizing that they were using their numbers in the first place? There's so much stupidity out there.

Starting point is 01:08:43 But the point is that if they were within the safeguard then, which is what this group says and what Tulsi Gabbard said, everybody else. And then they supposedly obliterated everything, even if they didn't obliterate it, that would mean that they're literally still within their safeguard agreements within the legal reality of the agreement with the international atomic energy agency because if they were obliterated how would they be i mean it's just basic guys that's very important i think and he basically the agency saying that they can guarantee through their inspections which they were doing that they'll never have a nuclear weapon which iran has agreed to in the previous jpioa and other discussions

Starting point is 01:09:20 at this point it's up in the air only because what trump and net and yow have done is open to all back up. Before that, they were agreeing with this. And even in the 28, they said publicly that they would give it up and let them take the uranium. And that's when Israel bombed them. For those, they haven't heard that because I brought it up in a while, or at least not pointed to the article, I'll include it. So you can watch that this was the negotiator for the former minister of Haman who was there, who on the 27th, the 28th heard them say, we will give up these things and we will make the agreement. And so we came up to the press, face the nation interview, and he said it's unprecedented.

Starting point is 01:09:54 This is actually going to happen. And then Israel bombed them to make sure that didn't happen. It's very simple. So back to the point, the International Atomic Energy Agency, the board passes a resolution. They write demanding, but that's an easy, it's just a word, either way, basically Iran, saying that Iran has to verify their stocks. Demanding is a word used to make it sound like they're saying, you better hurry up and do it. That's not from I can tell what's actually happening.

Starting point is 01:10:23 because the International Atomic Energy Agency is seemingly very aware there's an ongoing war and aware that they just confirmed this before the war started. So there's no reason to think there's some kind of pressing issue, understanding the reality of which they would not have more than they had before. It seems pretty basic. So it says the UN nuclear watchdogs, 35 nation board of governors, passed a U.S.-backed resolution,

Starting point is 01:10:45 telling Iran to declare its remaining in rich uranium stocks and let inspectors verify them, which could complicate Washington's talks. So this is wildly manipulative. because you understand what they're really saying is let us rather declare what you've already said publicly 14 times declare what you told Whitkoff that he pretended you bragged about declare what we told you you already had so it's not declaring anything they're at the statement implies that they hadn't already done that that's a lie because this is a political organization that's being manipulated by israel in the united states which is what iran has been saying for a long time

Starting point is 01:11:16 even though they've actually been in compliance and even that group continues to make that point over that to say that they have to declare its remaining and then let them inspect it. Well, yes, but that's expected, you understand. That's not new. The only reason it hasn't happened is because they're in the midst of a war. So this is what the U.S. government is driving this statement to make it sound like they're correct about what they said. It's very simple.

Starting point is 01:11:40 And this is not my opinion, guys. These are facts you can easily verify if you're just not blindly following politician statements. Now, this says Iran decries the U.S.-backed resolution to declare these stocks. it says the U.S. back resolution passed by the U.N. by the International Atomic Energy Agency, called for Tehran to declare its remaining enriched uranium stocks that Trump said was obliterated, by the way, and let inspectors verify them. Hold on, where was I, rich uranium stocks, and let inspectors verify them.

Starting point is 01:12:08 Was devoid of professionalism expected from a technical body, Iran said. They said in the statement, meaning what they're doing is obviously politicized. Iran questioned how the International Atomic Energy Agency could, quote, be trusted, when instrumentalized by warmongers and decapitated in a way that is not even able to express a simple concern over the most extensive lawful armed attacks, meaning there have been bombing locations that they claim are nuclear, you know, the idea of any of these discussions, nuclear facilities, like the Zaporocia plant in the Ukraine discussion, but they all cluster pearls about, why haven't they made a point about this?

Starting point is 01:12:42 Unprecedented in its history, it says, on peaceful, safeguarded nuclear facilities of a member state, meaning they're a part of this group, the International Atomic Energy Agency, they're a party to the discussion, and that they are agreed to the JCPOA in the first place, and now in the secondary discussion with them right now that they've already said was with their safeguards. So they have an agreement with them. They're staying within safeguards. They are a member state to the conversation, and yet this is how, it's so obvious that this is politicized. Now, if you're out there still saying, but Iran is danger, terrorist, you're just not paying attention. because even if you think that, where is the facts of any of the stuff you're saying?

Starting point is 01:13:18 This administration and people like Tulsi Gabbard and people, they're the ones telling you this stuff was not true in the first place. Quote, the resolution hypocritically expresses support for a diplomatic solution, while the U.S. simultaneously engages in further acts of aggression, including against Iranian's civilian infrastructure and promotes confrontation. Iran will protect its inalienable rights, including in response to this flawed resolution. So I really think it's important to understand that. people that don't want to hear this are still going to ignore it and act like we're taking a side. It's my side are the facts and what we can verify. And so the point would be, again, if they did, which they did state this, that they had this amount before and it was within the safeguard.

Starting point is 01:13:58 If they bombed it all, there's no reason whatsoever to pretend that it would somehow be unaccounted for in the sense of the amount or that they would somehow be able to have more or that you would expect them to have an inspection in the midst of an ongoing war. These are just basic things, guys. and yet it's going to get yelled by people who don't know what they're talking about. Like this very post from the White House itself, where they're talking about the numbers I just explained as if it's somehow a big problem, even though it was within their safe broken record. Now, if you're just a person they're saying that because they have any of it,

Starting point is 01:14:29 that they're a big terror problem, then you are completely blinded by narrative. You should care about Israel or the United States or any of the rest of these countries that have far more and actually have weapons and clearly intend to use them before you start considering that Iran because of the narratives they've spun are dangerous because of things they may eventually be able to get based on things that

Starting point is 01:14:46 everyone's legally allowed to have. It's just common. It's logic. It's deductive logic at this point. Now, Robert put out his show, I was just discussing, how Iran's counter strikes on Israeli bases are reshaping the Middle East. And in this, he discusses the responses. And what Iran did, and this was really from the 10th and ninth before it in regard to the

Starting point is 01:15:10 bombing of Lebanon and how Iran said clearly, if you bomb that location, if you bomb Lebanon, we will respond. And they chose to respond, not in bombing other bases, but bombing directly into Israel, which hadn't happened before. Before, they would bomb Israel if Israel bombed Iran. So there was sort of like a de facto rule of engagement there that they, which is an escalation scale. But they simply said, if you do this, we will bomb Israel. And they did. And it really did. It really has changed the current dynamic. It's a good show for you to watch. I recommend you watch it because he gets into quite a few details about this. But talk about the actual attacks. We'll get into that right now. First, this is Colonel Daniel Davis speaking with

Starting point is 01:15:49 Redacted who simply points out what he claims are the statistics of what's able to get through either. Like how much the U.S. is stopping, how much Israel is stopping, rather, and how much Iran is stopping. Now, this is his statements based on what he's researched, but I think it's relevant and I think the facts largely back this up, based on the satellite imagery we can see and the many different lies have been proven from the United States. The weekend, Iran launched True Promise Operation True Promise 5, which was an attack on Israeli military bases. Now, Israel says, oh, no, nothing got through. We're totally fine, although video evidence shows that things did get through. Israel saying that was just a scratch. It's a flesh wound. We're fine. Do you know anything other than that?

Starting point is 01:16:34 Do you have any reporting that possibly that was, in fact, a more harmful strike and that Israel would not sustain in strikes from Iran? Yeah, well, I'll just say that the minute that I heard that claim that they had knocked down everything, just like I think in the previous round, we had claimed we knocked down everything when Iran struck back against us and then, oh, now when Iran struck the Kuwait, the Sincom immediately said, we knocked down everything. And then I think when the sun came up the next morning, then there's all these video evidence of the airport in Kuwait being crushing and some other things too.

Starting point is 01:17:10 So again, you can't take anything at face value. But look, unless some incredible new technology emerged in the last 60 days since we stopped the active war here, there was, by one accounting, an intercept rate on both Israel and the United States of about 5%. Not 95% like we claim, but 5%. So I'm like, okay. 95% gets through? Someone in our chat room just said almost everything got through. Yeah, I think that's, yeah. Whoa.

Starting point is 01:17:42 In fact, we're going to do a show here pretty soon with Professor Ted Postel, who's really good on this because he puts together video evidence to stuff. He doesn't just suppose on anything. He says, here's the evidence to show what I'm doing with the intercept rate and all this kind of stuff. He said, it's nowhere near what you're being told. And then he shows you why. So you don't have to take his word for it.

Starting point is 01:18:01 So when I hear then that all of the, I think it was around 20 ballistic missiles by Iran was fired against Israel, that no. None of them got through. I doubt it very seriously. And just like every other example in the past, like the, like, pretty much all of them. They've later been shown that they were lying. And in the cases of Iran, like the 12-day war example, they apparently demolished them. Like, and this is why they actually pulled back. And then, of course, we have the discussion of the alleged rescue operation, which Iran clearly completely destroyed all the planes.

Starting point is 01:18:34 And they lied about that. And the pilot, I guess, doesn't exist. And I guess no one cares about that. insane. But who's to say whether those things are accurate? I think based on what we can see, I think that the slant is correct that I think Iran is getting more through than they're saying, and I think the U.S. and Israel are not getting as much as they're saying through. But who's to say if it's 95 percent? You can take it for your, you know, who knows if the guy in that random chat knows anything, but he has a colonel, maybe he actually has some insight. But worth considering that. Now, on the actual, now, we went over the some of the discussion, the attacks in the first

Starting point is 01:19:04 response over the last two days. There was kind of back and forth. All of it's standing to the same conversation kind of on the heels of that, what I argue was it kind of organized or taken advantage of drone incident. And now they bombed water infrastructure, which this is Sean Hannity with Lindsey Graham. And Sean Hannity, mainstream corporate journalist, if you will. And he has been doing this for such a long time. I refuse to believe that he is this stupid about not. knowing what the basic understanding of international law is. He's telling you what he wants you to hear, I would argue.

Starting point is 01:19:44 And I'll say one thing to people that don't understand. The very people that say hitting their infrastructure, those are legitimate military targets, A, B. Right. So what he means is that if, you know, Russia or China or Iran or anybody decided to bomb water infrastructure in the United States, well, apparently it's a military target, according to Hannity. Holy. Where's your criticism? Where's your criticism of a grand targeting? And laughs about it. This guy isn't, I mean, one of the most monstrous people in all of this.

Starting point is 01:20:17 Like, it's not just that he's like just cold about it. Like he gets pleasure out of watching these terrible things happen. That's my opinion. But I don't know how else you frame this. He's so giddy talking about blowing up Cuba or destroying Iran. These people are absolute monsters. Hannity is either that bad at this job or is willing. to lie to you about something so important for the team.

Starting point is 01:20:41 Targis A. Infrastructure. Those are legitimate military targets. A. B. Where is your criticism? Where is your criticism of Iran targeting densely populated areas in Israel? Don't you love when they do that? You mean aside from all of our criticism of any of those things happening?

Starting point is 01:20:59 And by the way, they're not happening. In by and large reality where you can see that Iran is not. And you know why I know that? because if you ask any if you do your due diligence on this outside of what israel claims which you can later prove is not true if you look into it even from their ministry of defense you can get information that shows that at the top the people that have died in regard to bombing israel had 2425 last time i checked and that's not something to ignore people's lives matter but here you are telling us they're targeting densely civilian pie okay and we have 24 people after what months of this war

Starting point is 01:21:32 how about you look at the other side Hannity how about you look at the reality how about you look at the of all of the thousands of people that have been killed in Tehran, in Beirut, in Gaza, anywhere else. But let's just take it to Iran. Thousands or in Beirut, which is part of this in regard to Lebanon, which is part of the conversation. And the idea that he goes, he who didn't criticize this, well, maybe somebody didn't, but what does that even matter? You're arguing that this is legal because they could, but you don't care that you didn't criticize when they did something that we can largely prove they didn't do?

Starting point is 01:22:02 Again, part of me does think that he's just a lot of these like dying, media. whatever you want to call them, are trapped in this old, like they, I think they truly, to some degree, believe some of these intelligent sources or believe what the government tells them. And so here they are blindly reporting what Trump says that day, as if we know for sure. And part of it, I think, is because they choose to,

Starting point is 01:22:23 because there's an agenda, because there's a team, because there's an interest in promoting Trump, probably financial, probably plenty of things. But either way, that you didn't criticize when is the stupidest thing in the world to say when you're discussing something on one side, the other side of it matters, but there's separate conversations. It's like saying you didn't protest when Iraq was, yes, we did, by the way, but what the F does that have to do with what's happening in Iran or Gaza?

Starting point is 01:22:44 That we didn't care then means we shouldn't care now. That's a bad argument, but it's the argument used to make you feel like you're wrong for caring now. Disgusting. Tel Aviv or targeting the infrastructure of all these Arab countries and there. Oh, whoa, whoa, wait a minute. I thought you just said infrastructure was a military target. Don't you love how Hannity in one sentence can conjure himself? Very, very trump of you.

Starting point is 01:23:08 People that say hitting their infrastructure, those are legitimate military targets, like Tel Aviv, or targeting the infrastructure of all these Arab countries. How dare you target the infrastructure of those Arab countries? They're allowed to target the infrastructure of Iran. Good luck, guys. How in the world people can't see through these ridiculous clowns? And their entire economies and, you know, they're... the infrastructure of all these Arab countries and their their entire economies.

Starting point is 01:23:38 Oh, yeah. So now we care about the economic situation. It's okay to utterly destroy and proudly brag about doing so in front of Congress, the entire economy of Iran. Openly tell you this is why it's happening. And this is why we're proud of what we did, an Operation Economic Fury, and then gripe about the secondary effects of other economies because of what you started. These people are laughing stocks to anybody with a brain who's been barely paying attention. and, you know, they're, you know, refineries and capable.

Starting point is 01:24:10 Just sad. It's kind of depressing, to be quite honest, even though I know what they are. Look at how Lindsey Graham laughs about Iran's infrastructure getting hit. Now, just before we even show you the infrastructure that was hit in regard to the water, specifically, maybe Sean Handy should pay attention. Here is the International Humanitarian Law Database. Rule number seven, you should read through all these. The principle of distinction between civilian objects and military objects. the parties to the conflict must all at all times distinguish between civilian objects and military objects.

Starting point is 01:24:39 Attacks may only be directed against military objectives. Attacks must not be directed against civilian objects. Next part, rule eight, definition of military objects. Insofar as objects are concerned, military objectives are limited to those objects which, by their nature, location, purpose, or use make an effective contribution to military action, and whose partial or total destruction, capture or neutralize in the circumstances ruling at the time, offers a definite military advantage. And included, Oracle 54, protection of objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian population. So you see, all of these things, these three points together, and all of it really together, show you very clearly.

Starting point is 01:25:26 Because you could have said that second point meant, well, the military uses water, then therefore, but you see, that's not. not logical because then that you could say anything is a military target based in the fact that anybody in the military might use it. The roads, the air you breathe. But you see, that's not the point. The first point was clear. The second point made it clear that it has some military involvement. This point makes it clear that you cannot target things in general that are important for the survival of the civilian population. You see, this is why they love to use these excuses because Israel and the United States utilize this. They attack civilians. They target civilians knowing that groups by the way, like Iran, don't seem to at least want to do that.

Starting point is 01:26:05 You can dispute that all day long. Look at the history for yourself. Look at how many times they've had, including right this moment when you have the U.S. continuing to bomb Iran and Iran not bombing United States, showing restraint for crying out loud. And the point is that there's an example of them choosing to drive this to bombing civilians because they know people largely don't do that. And I sense, not that they're really averse to it from a government to pursue,

Starting point is 01:26:30 position, but that most governments realize that it hurts their interest because we don't like it. And so what the U.S. and Israel seem to do on a regular basis is just push that line because they know that people won't do it back, or at least they believe they won't. And so in this case, starvation of civilians as a method of warfare is prohibited. Well, there you go. Number one, Israel and the United States have been doing this my entire life. They're starving Yemen. They're starving Gaza. This is what they do as a matter of policy. Number two, it is prohibited to attack, destroy, remove or render useless objects indispensable to survival of civilian populations like water, such as foodstuffs, agricultural areas, and the production of foodstuffs, crops, livestock,

Starting point is 01:27:09 drinking water installations, and supplies, and irrigation works for the specific purpose of denying them for the sustenance value to the civilian population or to adverse the adverse party, meaning the military that might also benefit from that, whatever the motive, whether in order to starve out civilians, to cause them to move away, or for any, other motive. You can't get much more clear than that. So the first reasons were important to highlight the distinction between the focal points. This shows you that there is no world in which you can say but water and they use that like this ridiculous clown named Sean Hannity. In no event shall actions against these objects be taken which may be expected to leave the civilian population with such

Starting point is 01:27:50 inadequate food or water as to cause the starvation or force of its movement. That is what happened in Gaza. That's what happening in Lebanon right now. That's what they're doing every person. place of war they're involved in, guys. You don't, I shouldn't even need to verify that for you because they basically brag about it. It just pains me because people are suffering. People in Gaza right now are being

Starting point is 01:28:10 bombed and starved and deprived of water. People in Lebanon. The same things are happening. And now you've got people like that trying to argue that it's not a crime for this government to not just attack broadly, but target. The same kind of pinpoint targeting they don't do.

Starting point is 01:28:26 You see, when they bomb in civilian areas like downtown areas, but this was a pinpoint target of this one building. The building next to it, apparently, or one of them, was not even touched. Last on this, interesting overlap, violence aimed at spreading terror among the civilian population. Acts or threats of violence, the primary purpose of which is to spread terror among the civilian population are prohibited. This is a policy by Israel.

Starting point is 01:28:50 Like, you know, Ben Gavir saying, kill their women or kidnap the women and children. That's how you get them. By on the suburbs, that's how you really get them. He said both those things in the last week. you just can't hide from this guys people know what they are when i'm talking about the israeli government specifically right now sarah abdala reported this as the night 605 trump didn't just bomb iran he bombed water reservoirs in syrac these are not battlefield targets they are critical civilian infrastructure and as a result

Starting point is 01:29:18 supplies to communities in iran's bimani district have been cut off this is directly from cbs news when it got reported first 20 000 people reported without drinking water, as I understand it's worse. In Iran, after Trump makes good on his promise to conduct illegal attacks on civilian infrastructure. Because he's told you he would. He's promised bridges and water. He said these things repeatedly. And now you got people acting like he didn't do it. That seems a bit hard to sell, doesn't it? Here's New York Times. Analysis of satellite image and videos suggest precision U.S. strikes on Iranian water facility. Early strikes early Wednesday destroyed what appears to be a drinking water. You've got a buy.

Starting point is 01:29:58 by the way, you got to love the kind of passive writing of the New York Times. Just so it's clear, guys, this is not hard to verify. Not only has it been very, I mean, not only has Trump been telling you is going to do it, not only have they then targeted this and bombed it. Not only is it clear that it happened on the ground, not only can you prove that the water is not going to places that it should, all of the stuff that makes it very clear this just happen. But watch how they love to frame this.

Starting point is 01:30:20 It's like acting like people die when you have Israel bombing civilians, right? They don't get killed. They just randomly die, it seems. strikes early Wednesday destroyed what appears to be a drinking water facility. No, it very much is, and they know that, on Iran's southern coast near the street of Ramos, according to an analysis by the New York Times. So they do their analysis and they still have to say what appears to be a drink water. Around the time of the strikes, the U.S. Central Command said in a post on Twitter that it had

Starting point is 01:30:45 conducted strikes near the strait with precision munitions from U.S. Air Force and Navy fighters. So on top of everything, they then tell you that they did bomb its exact location. Just don't say water infrastructure. Iranian state media reported that the U.S. had hit water storage buildings, and a local official said that water was cut off to more than 20,000 people living in a town and in a town and villages nearby. Temperatures in the area have reached above 100 degrees this week. Farronite. It is unclear if the U.S., they write, intentionally struck the water facilities or knew that it was in the buildings. That's what they wrote.

Starting point is 01:31:21 Deliberately targeting civilian infrastructure could constitute a war crime. could, are you serious? Guys, this is so hard to not laugh at. Deliberately targeting civilians infrastructure could constitute a war crime. Well, we just clearly read what the international law very, like, you have to understand. This is what happened in Gaza. First of all, just claiming that there's like a Hamas member in the building does not then make an illegal target. But proving that there were Hamas members in the building still does not make a hospital or a church. if you were arguing they had turned it into a base and there were no civilians in that location,

Starting point is 01:31:57 that then would open the door for what they're trying to say as a, you know, could, could become. But what they do is simply make the argument, never verify it, and bomb civilians all over the place. This was called out by international experts around the world when they first started bombing hospitals in Gaza, you know, after the first one they tried to deny, of course. And they said, look, there's no world in which they can say bad guys in there and bomb civilian hospitals. It's not the reality. And they kept doing it anyway, and the U.S. government backs it up.

Starting point is 01:32:23 Doesn't make it the law, though. So what we're saying here is that they clearly, intentionally struck this because Trump told you he would do it. They then bombed the location and told you they bombed that location. We see the water then dimently, and it's a pinpoint target of this one building. The water gets turned off. They investigate all this, and that's how they frame it.

Starting point is 01:32:40 These are cowards, in my opinion. A photo of fragments that Tasneem, the semi-official Iranian news agency, said were recovered from the site, showed remnants identified as a GPU-39 bomb. by researchers with open source munitions portal. You know, the same GPU 39 bombs that are regularly used by the Air Force

Starting point is 01:33:00 in the U.S. military. So, you know, all this data and evidence, they're going, well, we can't be sure. They bomb the thing. A database of weapon fragments documented in conflict zones. Both buildings stand outside the village, and there is no other infrastructure in the immediate vicinity.

Starting point is 01:33:16 Hitting remote buildings and striking the center of a roof are considered likely indicators of a precision strike. And that's how they write that. I mean, can you imagine if this was Russia or some argument about Iran? This would be like exactly what the U.S. government said and maybe even later like they, you know, claims Trump or claims the U.S.S. government. It would be framed as absolute and they would barely water it down the end. We've seen it over and over. This is what they do when they have basically absolute

Starting point is 01:33:42 evidence. Again, Assault Rod has been breaking this down about all these platforms since October 7 forward. It's just demolishing them. You know, comparing the Ukraine coverage to Gaza, for example. I mean, it's just night and day. Ryan Rosbiani. He says the U.S. knew it was a water tank that Iran bombed and bombed it anyway. Or excuse me, that was bombed in Iran and then U.S. bombed it anyway. Remote hilltop, zero military targets nearby. A clean G.B. 39 hole dead center in the roof.

Starting point is 01:34:12 New York Times says it's a signature of a deliberate strike. And here's the information on the ground. Again, these are not things that you can, at this point, the evidence is pretty damn obvious. Question everything, as always. but there's not some secondary side of this conversation. You have all the evidence that I showed you, and then that's it. So you can decide for yourself. Video of the attack on the U.S. Army on drinking water tanks in the Bimani District of Sirk County.

Starting point is 01:34:36 Here's in video of the actual location. Treasury Secretary Scott Besant says the Iranian regime will lose. It's the zero-sum game it's playing. Well, that doesn't appear to be where we're going. Any damage, it can, it inflicts on our allies, meaning the groups that are fighting alongside them against Iran, whether it's refueling or direct bombing, it is a co-belligerent. That is the reality. It means they have a legal right to attack them, is the point.

Starting point is 01:35:01 It says any of our inflicts damage on our allies in the Gulf will be paid for with funds exacted from Iranian accounts. Now, you understand, guys, we just talked about this. They were stealing random Iranian cryptocurrency accounts, not government accounts, just cryptocurrency accounts that exist in Iran, is stealing them. He was laughing about this, going there, probably going, in there now and realizing it's not even there, acting like he's fighting for Iranians. Or the fact they're stealing Iranian government money on top of that, meaning things that are not

Starting point is 01:35:31 legal for them just to arbitrarily take because they claim they're a bad guy. But either way, they're saying we're going to, if you do bad things, they claim, you know, bomb the people bombing you, we're going to take your money and pay for that. Any tolls paid to Persian Gulf straight authority, meaning going through the toll right now, will be offset by funds extracted from their accounts. I mean, why this is such a blatant, like, this is piracy. Okay, this is criminality. There's not even a way around that.

Starting point is 01:35:59 Every attack Iran launches will only deepen the economic and financial consequences at basis. Think about continuing to push this. Like, if you were at such a strength of position, you would not, I mean, every other, every day, they're, you know, we're going to do this. You better not do that. You guys are screaming weakness every day. And what is Iran doing?

Starting point is 01:36:19 Basically nothing. They're saying, we demand this. that's it. Oh, you're making a deal? That's not happening. Oh, you want that? Trump says this. That's not true.

Starting point is 01:36:27 You see, there's not some them going, we want this, and you better not. You better do this, Trump. There's comments of saying, well, that's going to only make this worse, but you can continually see that they've made the same stance with the same information since April with minor variations. And yet Trump and his team have been waffling and screaming and going back to the table, talking for ceasefires.

Starting point is 01:36:46 It's just basic deductive logic at this point. They are not in a position of strength. And if you want to pretend for some reason, like this is restraint on their side, guys, look at what they're doing. They don't understand the meaning of the word restraint. This is them trying to weasel they were way out of a position that they've worked themselves into that is not in their interest, rather the U.S. government, to be clear, even though Israel clearly is getting bombed.

Starting point is 01:37:09 Like I said the other day, the only group benefiting from any of this is Israel. I'm even arguing like the larger part of like China and Russia. I don't argue any of this is even in their benefit outside of maybe dementia. the strength of the United States, because there's interest they have in the Middle East like anybody else, with the Strait of Pramuse and everything else. Everybody's suffering from this. Israel is benefiting from this because they've been aiming for this their entire existence. Saudi Agri says, they're not attacks, by the way.

Starting point is 01:37:36 They're defending themselves from you psychopaths and your bosses in Tel Aviv. Now, Menjolson also points out the Arab states they're discussing, all the ones that are co-belligerents legally in this war, Arab states condemn Iranian attacks on U.S. basis. located inside their country, calling them unjustified, even though those same bases are being used by the U.S. Israel Axis to wage war on Iran. Not only is that pathetic, that like you're crying foul while you're bombing them, like what a pathetic, floundering thing to do. But it's also justified because you're involved in the war. So they're responding. So I argue this is a push from the U.S. and Israel kind of access to drive them to make these statements.

Starting point is 01:38:22 But it says, sadly, it further confirms they're just U.S. Israel puppets states with no sovereignty. Their peoples don't support Israel. They don't support this war. They largely support Palestine. And so these are regime change elements that have been put in place in all these locations. We've talked about this for the longest time. And guys, these aren't debates like Sisi, like Egypt. These are examples.

Starting point is 01:38:41 And even after people change after that, the point is they put someone in place and they try to control it going forward. We see this all around the world. And so in this case, these groups are not fighting for their peoples, but fighting for the groups that are controlling them. Same things happening in the U.S., by the way, in my opinion. He says, if they had any honor, they'd at least admit they have green light to use of their air bases and airspace to war on Iran, but they still denied it after three months.

Starting point is 01:39:09 And these aren't debatable, guys. I mean, somebody was just pointing out that even Saudi Arabia has been used for refueling recently. So that means Saudi Arabia would be legally on the potential. target list. Now, to get into what happened after this. So this is on, this is on the 10th. And this is Trump saying we hit them really hard yesterday and we're going to hit him again today. And of course, the point was this goes into today as well, right? He was saying similar things right up until early today. Let's play this clip first. Working with Iran for a number of months. Nope. And they should sign their deal.

Starting point is 01:39:49 it's a good deal that doesn't give them the right to have a nuclear weapon. In fact, it totally prohibits them from ever having a nuclear weapon. Okay, well, then I can tell you right this moment that that's not going to happen, which, by the way, is already we're going to go because Iran's already saying that, even though what you're going to hear from him is that it's already done for the thousandth time. Because what they keep telling you over and over is that they'll discuss the nuclear conversation like they were already doing before you bond them illegally, but they'll do that after they initially get past these first three points.

Starting point is 01:40:17 They say it was like 30, 60 days beyond when this has been agreed to, and there's no bombings, then we'll get into this conversation. He knows that. They know that. And this is what keeps happening. And this is after you just threatened them 30 seconds before this, and after you've been bombing them illegally based on something that I think you manufactured. But, you know, they're great and we're making a deal and we're talking really close.

Starting point is 01:40:38 He's not involved. He's not talking. I argue not even the people on his side are talking. They're getting mediation through largely Pakistan. Now, again, this is me speaking for. what I've seen, what I can verify, that's not to say that right this moment, something different might be happening. Or rather, that's, it might be is the case. I'm only speaking on what we have seen so far, but up until what I can prove yesterday, they're not speaking to them. In fact, Iran has

Starting point is 01:41:01 said even recently again that we're not even talking to them anymore. And we're going to get to the point to where they said the straight is completely shut down. They said that publicly, even though it doesn't seem to be. And I'll show you in a second. But either way, same thing with Trump's side. But back to what he said. and they should sign their deal. It's a good deal that doesn't give them the right to have a nuclear weapon. In fact, it totally prohibits them from ever having a nuclear weapon. And it was just tap, tap, tap, tap.

Starting point is 01:41:34 I don't know what they're doing. So they then shot out a shot at. It's just like he's barely phoning it in. You know what I mean? Like he's not even like barely mumbling without, you know, ad or whatever. What was the narrative? I don't know. A helicopter, very expensive helicopter, by the way, but much more importantly, the two men, fortunately, they're okay.

Starting point is 01:41:57 But, uh, no, we know when we find out who those people were. We never got the last names. Who knows if they even exist? An amazing rescue. If you ever get a clip, you won't believe the rescue how cool it was. Yeah, yeah, you know, a boat picked them up out of the water. Amazing. But, you know, it's just, this, this guy can't.

Starting point is 01:42:16 He is incapable of not blustering. I mean, he'll talk about his bowel movement for earlier and he'll give you a 30-minute discussion about how outstanding and the best ever of every toilet he's ever seen. Everything he does is like that. It's just, I don't know why anybody can respect somebody like that. It's just, it's not just dishonesty. It's just like insecurity. The equipment we have, look, we have the strongest military in the world.

Starting point is 01:42:40 And I gave them a break at the request of Pakistan, the field marshal, and the prime minister of Pakistan are great. We stopped them from going to war with India. You would have had a nuclear war, but it wasn't for me. But they became friendly to me, very friendly, and they stayed close to Iran, and they work, and they still are working on trying them to do what's right. But trying them to do what's right.

Starting point is 01:43:04 Like, you could just be these very tired, right? I'm never suggesting, you know, who knows? I mean, he's an old guy, but he's tired, I think. Or just, you know, he's just not really there. We want a deal that's meaningful. We want a deal that works. We don't want to just have a Barack Hussein Obama deal. Yeah, you know, like a deal that actually happened and was functional and was successful and that they abided by.

Starting point is 01:43:24 And that Donald Trump ruined because Netanyahu drove him to based on the lie that they were cheating on the deal. When everyone said they weren't and you could prove to this day that they were not. And that was one they started increasing enrichment because that was what the deal legally allowed. Again, I believe it was Article 36 within the JCPOA that if the U.S. unilaterally pulled out, they were allowed to enrich. And they turned around and said, you're breaking the rules. You're enriching.

Starting point is 01:43:47 You want bombs. And Netanyahu says, they're 30 seconds away. And then didn't happen. That's what he means by that whole Obama deal didn't work. You know, what's not working is whatever the hell you're trying to do right now. Those do Iran and they work and they still are working on try them to do what's right. But we want to deal that's meaningful.

Starting point is 01:44:05 We want a deal that works. We don't want to just have a Barack Hussein Obama deal, JCPOA, the worst deal. that was a path to a nuclear. It's the exact opposite. You know, I like on television. Not even close. He loves to ramble about things. He's like, let me tell you about the thing.

Starting point is 01:44:19 And he just goes on to state, very surface level statements that repeat, basically in a slightly different way, exactly what he just said. No insight, no details. Watch, he'll just ramble around the same point in a different way. The reality was it absolutely maintained it, what, under 3%,

Starting point is 01:44:33 under 4% rather? Everyone knows that. It's very easily identifiable. No, look, is it possible there was some other part that we never saw? Of course. But that's, he's our, we everybody knows. We prove this.

Starting point is 01:44:44 No, we didn't. The evidence to this day shows you they maintain that right up until you unilaterally pulled out of the deal. Everybody knows that, guys. And it's in for, and again, there's not an argument that says, here we can prove they were actually doing this over here. Netanyahu yells things like that, but there's no evidence to back it up. And our government and the International Atomic Energy Agency from multiple

Starting point is 01:45:05 administrations has always maintained that they were complying with that deal. you can't hear you ready to lie about it or maybe he doesn't know and i actually genuinely think that's part of this that he doesn't actually understand he believes ms 13 he believes these things people tell him things and he repeats them i think that's one of the easiest ways they abuse this guy dpoa the worst deal that was a path to a nuclear it's the exact opposite you know i like on television they say oh they should have kept that deal first of all it was over it was a short-term deal but that deal was a path to a nuclear weapon. This is a path against a nuclear.

Starting point is 01:45:45 You can't have a nuclear weapon. Again, the thing they agreed to before you bomb them. His was a path to a nuclear weapon. They were developing during his administration, nuclear weapon. If they had a nuclear weapon, there'd be no... Okay, now we're in hypotheticals. If they maybe did, then they would be, okay, well, it's irrelevant. It's not happening.

Starting point is 01:46:06 They weren't doing it then, not doing it now. if they had aliens this pick you know whatever if they have dolphins with laser beams they could throw them at us tomorrow you know it's like dr evil it's not doesn't matter make up any hypothetical you want it doesn't change the reality of what we can prove they'd be no middle east and they would have absolutely shot at us right absolutely shot at us yeah well done wait strong finish trump way to sell so yeah so we'll see what happens but we hit them hard yesterday and we're gonna hit them hard today. Oh, they are. They didn't do that, by the way, in case you didn't catch on already. What's funny, though, is he keeps doing that, doesn't he? Well, we're so close to a deal.

Starting point is 01:46:47 And then in like the same sentence, he'll be like, and we're going to bomb them into nothing. If they had blah, blah, blah. This is just, it's anybody who's not, I guess, blindly supporting a political side is going to go, that's just not even like Donald Trump wouldn't respond to that as the Mr. Negotiator, because you're not negotiating. You're threatening and demanding. only works when you're in an actual position of strength, which apparently he always thinks he is, but he's not right now. Maybe that's the whole problem. Yes, you miss if in case you don't turn on your television.

Starting point is 01:47:18 But we hit them hard yesterday, and we're going to hit them again hard today in case you miss if in case you don't turn on your television set. And they didn't, by the way. And we'll see what happens with the deal. We were really close to a deal, but they keep tapping us along. They keep playing us for suckers because. Now, look, that may actually be true. That's one of the possibilities that maybe Iran keeps lying to him

Starting point is 01:47:41 and yet has stated clearly that we will not move from this points. And then I guess somehow tricks him into thinking, I guess we change our mind just now. Let's do it. And then goes back and goes, we're almost there. And then he goes 40 times in a row. I mean, does that even actually make sense? Do you think he would blindly take Iran's word for it's about 40 times? If you look at the all said and done, the casual statements and everything,

Starting point is 01:48:03 where he's stated this. I don't believe that. I just don't believe it. And so there's a mixed bag in this whole thing. But overall, I think that this is more than that. I think that he's being lied to. I think he's trying to lie. I think they're trying to maneuver around them failing this entire war.

Starting point is 01:48:19 The deal, we were really close to a deal, but they keep tapping us along. They keep playing us for suckers because, you know what? They dealt with some very stupid presidents. I have to say that. I'm embarrassed to say some very stupid people who said, oh, wait. So they dealt with really dumb people before. and that's how they were able to trick you? Did you think that through before you said it out loud?

Starting point is 01:48:39 Because if you just said they're playing us for fools over and over and over, which would be the implication, since you just said that, right, they're tapping us along, they're playing us for fools. But we had bad present. So basically what you're saying is we got tricked too, but they're worse.

Starting point is 01:48:54 I don't even know how you don't laugh at this guy on a daily basis, guys. It's just hard to watch sometimes. So here's this post. We hit them hard yesterday. We're going to do them super hard today. So then he goes on to say two things. The I love inflation statement that everyone laughed about because that's just yet a long, you know, it's like we love COVID shots and we want food dies in your food and we

Starting point is 01:49:16 want to, you know, it's like the opposite of everything I've ever said. You know, inflation's great now because something else, which is just stupid. But overall, it's because it's happening. And so what he thinks is I can just convince these morons to think it's good now because it is happening. Even though when it was Biden doing it, I said it was bad. We want to stop that. And I'm going to come in and I'm going to stop it. And then we get there and I don't do that.

Starting point is 01:49:35 So I'm just going to pretend it's good because they'll follow me. He might actually think that. And some of them actually will. I think it's a very slim minority. But either way, he comes in and says, it's good now because we secretly shipped out, what is it? What do you say again?

Starting point is 01:49:50 Millions of barrels of oil. It didn't happen. Just like the last, as I said, just like the last 10 ships that Iran allegedly gifted to you in the very beginning, when you said Ghalibov was your secret contact, who then you lied about, didn't happen. So maybe they did play him then too, and yet he still keeps falling for it. You can decide.

Starting point is 01:50:07 I think it's largely Israel probably playing a factor in all this. But they lied about that. The GPS, you could prove that didn't happen. They said 10 ships were gifted and they were going to make a deal. That was like three days into this. Now, what do you think? You think he's lying about this? Do you think he's being lied to?

Starting point is 01:50:23 I mean, how in the world could he not see through one way or the other? But overall, 22 ships, he just says, they secreted through. that Iran, Trump was secretly moving through over all this time, millions of barrels of oil, but yet oil still like $90 a barrel. And ultimately, the argument is somehow that you've pulled one over on Iran. We'll get to the calculus in a second on this. That that would mean that the helicopter and all the ships and everything that's happening is all so you could secret this out. And you're risking lives to do that.

Starting point is 01:50:52 Well, it doesn't even border. It doesn't even, it barely lines up in the first place. But here's what he says. I can say it now. something you didn't know you know we've been taking out millions of barrels of oil nobody knows it

Starting point is 01:51:07 you know who doesn't know about it Iran until right now okay so even if that was the truth which it appears to not be like everything else he's doing or maybe he was lied to by people and he just keeps falling for it I don't know but the point is that that wouldn't that be theft

Starting point is 01:51:20 I mean understand just like everything else we're talking about like they stole the oil in Syria that's a crime the idea that they're allowed to just reap just steal the resources of a country has never been within the legalities of international law. Israel and the U.S. do it every single time. Trump says, take the oil like it's not a crime because he doesn't care.

Starting point is 01:51:41 Like they're stealing from Venezuela, it's everything else. It's clearly a criminal act. But it's actually not even happening based on what I can tell. We took out the other night, 22 ships late at night with no lights. Yeah, because, you know, it's not like we can't tell that. Like there's not many other dynamics that include Like somehow I think he actually was small enough To think that because there's no lights

Starting point is 01:52:05 That people wouldn't be able to tell This is just the dumbest thing in the world, guys. It didn't happen. They don't have any radar because we blasted the crap out of it. Not true. We took that. That's why oil is $85 a barrel. Oh, is it?

Starting point is 01:52:19 Like, as if that's a positive thing? Like, this is what's funny to me is before this started, it was much lower than that. And now that because it went up over 100 and now it's back down in basically 90 last time I checked. That's somehow a win because it didn't go. You know, it's like, it's just, it's mission creep. You're resetting the bar.

Starting point is 01:52:35 You're moving the goalpost. It's just insane. But overall, 22 ships full of millions of barrels of oil. It's just, it's kind of hard to even take a base value with what's going on right now. So here is where he said, no, no, I love the inflation. Just the point was, actually, I don't think I grabbed that one, did I? Yeah, just him saying the same idea. Let me just grab it a quick.

Starting point is 01:52:59 The point being simply that inflation is a positive thing now because, well, the only reason it's happening is because I'm doing this with the oil, which, by the way, doesn't even make sense. There's the idea that that would be the loan factor in why inflation was increasing when you have all the other obvious things that are doing that. It's like he doesn't think these things through or he really thinks that you're that stupid. It's not hard to see. The right people come into our credit. I will. Are you concerned, Mr. President, about the latest inflation number which came out this morning? Could that be a...

Starting point is 01:53:41 No, I love it. The numbers were right. You know what I really love? I love the inflation. You know why? Because as soon as this war is over, you know, I can say it now. Something you didn't know. You know, we've been taken out.

Starting point is 01:53:54 So it goes on to say the same point. So the point here, guys, he always loves as soon as the war is over, everything's going to... Well, yes. whether or not it's because of you. The point is once a war stops that is affecting the flow of oil, well, shocker, the price is probably going to go down. And he'll love to make it about something he did. Well, that doesn't change the reality.

Starting point is 01:54:14 The argument was never that it'll go up like crazy, but we'll get down eventually. Nobody would have been in support of that. His argument was it won't go up. Lower gas prices, lower costs, smaller government. He's lied about literally everything. And who knows, maybe he meant to do it. It doesn't change the reality. It's not happening.

Starting point is 01:54:29 And so the funny thing is he's sitting there trying to scream that inflation is now somehow good because eventually it's going to go back down. But this is where we get, you know, I guess more comical when you get people like, well, here's this post, by the way. Last month, I directed the U.S. military to actually get a secret mission to support oil tankers last month, by the way. Now what people have turned this into is somehow he's been doing it the entire time. This platform is hilarious to me sometimes. But it says, today I am pleased to announce that this effort has resulted in more than 100 million barrels of oil making its way through the straight and into the market. more than 200 commercial ships have safely traveled.

Starting point is 01:55:02 I mean, does any, I mean, how would the idea that you could secret through 200 ships in a area that is tightly surveilled and is literally the focal point of this entire thing is just laughable to me. Now, Energy Secretary Wright has said he's not aware of the oil that President Trump claimed the U.S. is taken out of Iran. Of course, because Trump just, I guess just makes things up with no conversation with people in his own administration. President Trump said the oil, the U.S. has been taken out of Iran, is the big reason why the oil is fallen.

Starting point is 01:55:33 Well, right now, again, unless I checked, it was almost 90. But it goes up based on things he says, up and down, rather. But great. So his own administration goes, that's not happening. I don't know about that, like everything else he's doing. Sagar points out, well, let's say what Trump said is true, hypothetically. Well, that roughly two million barrels per day would have made it through in the last 40 days. that is roughly 10% of normal traffic at the cost of an Apache helicopter, several drones,

Starting point is 01:56:03 and God only knows how many billions of months it cost to sustain the blockade. So what he's saying is even if you take it at face value, he's selling you something, what is it? What's the old term for that? Anyway, he's lying to you. This is not in your interest. This is a bad deal. From somebody who claims to be the dealmaker, he's saying he exchanged all of this

Starting point is 01:56:24 and sacrificed American lives for something. that barely affected the reality. This is, again, basic deductive logic shows you that this is not the reality of the situation. But of course, the excellent journalist like Ben Glenn Beck blindly takes it at face value. Trump dropped an absolute bombshell yesterday. This is what Glenn Beck posted. The media focused on him saying, I love the inflation because that was dumb, Glenn. It was a stupid thing to say.

Starting point is 01:56:52 But did you hear the Venezuela raid-sized news he announced after that? Oh, you mean the illegal regime change in Venezuela that is completely illegal across the board? And nobody seemed to care about that. These fake American patriots kill me. These guys love to scream about constitutional rights and liberty in America and the troops. And then go on to support the most criminal attacks. These are the very things that you, the same old joke. If the United States saw what the United States was doing,

Starting point is 01:57:20 the United States would invade the United States over to the United States. It's exactly what they claim to fight around the world and never really actually fight. they literally legally regime changed somebody in power, shuttled them out of the country, and then picked the person who went next. And they're like, yay, freedom. These guys are like laughing stocks, in my opinion. The U.S. military, he says, has been secretly taking millions of barrel.

Starting point is 01:57:43 You know, so hypothetically, even if it was happening, it's not, though, as far as I can tell. But Glenn just takes it at face value because Trump yelled it out, impromptu meeting, out of the straight of Pramuse in a massive operation. That's what he says. Not even Iran knew this. I mean, this is posted 10 hours ago. Did you check that with Iran?

Starting point is 01:58:02 Did you ask them? He's just repeating, guys. This guy's Nick Sorter, basically with a larger audience. Everyone thought the tankers were just sitting there. They weren't. That's why oil prices didn't reach the deadly levels. That's what I guess you could just assume all of that based on a story that I think we can prove didn't happen. This is one of the most impressive military operations I've ever heard about.

Starting point is 01:58:22 Are you serious? So why announce it to the world now? Why not let it keep going in secret? Yeah, that would be logical, wouldn't it? Here's my guess. Oh, good. Guess more. It was a massive poker move against Iran,

Starting point is 01:58:34 showing them they have no leverage. Oh, you want to expose your thing that should be helping us to show them that they're not in control so then they can stop it and take control over a passage that they clearly control. You can't, this is just blind support, guys. I mean, I don't think Glenn's the brightest tool in the box, but at the end of the day, rather it was the brightest bunny in the forest.

Starting point is 01:58:53 At the end of the day, though, I feel he's smart enough to recognize that this is a, this is not journalist. You are leaning into a statement from person who has lied repeatedly. And by the way, it's a president of politician. Aren't you supposed to be speaking truth to power, checking the system, and not just blindly repeating what Trump says without any due diligence? But it says, it let China know America still controls the seas. But it doesn't, though.

Starting point is 01:59:17 And it let American people know that Trump has a plan. Is it working? Glenn? Exactly how is that working? How did that work in any way? didn't change much, did it? Sure sounds like America first to me. Sure sounds like you're desperately trying to grasp at straws to make your narrative make sense.

Starting point is 01:59:34 And I said, so that really obvious lie Trump told that my 10-year-old neighbor laughed about, this is why you claim it's okay that Trump does a 180 on yet another agenda point. You are either this dishonest or this gullible, you know, call me, call me. Chris Martinson said, are you seriously saying you 100% believe what he says? I think it's not. I don't, really, not a lot of these people. I don't think he, I think what he believes is irrelevant. It's team sort politics, guys.

Starting point is 02:00:00 It's not even about whether he thinks about it or not. Glenn, Alex, Benny John, all of them. They regularly embarrass themselves in front of ostensibly massive audiences in order to support the government narrative. I think everybody sees it personally. You know, the government, the very same government thing they said they were fighting up until they were suddenly supporting it. Now, Mentholson also points out,

Starting point is 02:00:21 CENTCOM claims they control the Strait of Phrmuse, which is what they're all pushing right now, even though it's clear they don't. One must not forget that a few days ago, one of the oil tankers they were escorting, they were trying to anyway, not this secret dynamic, but the ones they were actually claiming

Starting point is 02:00:34 they were going to publicly do as a show of control ended up on fire without it being reported. We point at the time. Now here is, this is what, it's right here, actually. The United States is putting out, or wait, where it was further down?

Starting point is 02:00:53 Oh, hold on. right here. It's further over here. Right there. U.S. Central Command, the Strait of Ramos remains open for transit. Okay. Even though that's obviously not true.

Starting point is 02:01:03 I mean, it's there, like I want to show you, it seems that there are, oh, look, that says two transiting now, but what it says is we'll come back to this. Where was that? This has changed quite a bit since last time I looked, too. Waiting. Oh, here it is.

Starting point is 02:01:19 Normal. Oh, this is only today. Damn it. I wanted the numbers that were showing from yesterday. So that's actually interesting, though, because it does show basically that it is more so shut down than before. It's saying ships transiting now, and it does say two. It said 30 something before. And it's clearer that Iran is, like, changing the dynamic right now because of what the U.S. did.

Starting point is 02:01:38 But even so, if there's two going through, that still shows you something. But different than before. But I'll come back to that. The point is they're saying it's still open, even though it's never been more closed. It's just hilarious to me. And acting like, we control the straight. when clearly if they did, as DD Geopolitics points out, they wouldn't need to do this. If the United States controlled the strait, your great military would not have to execute secret missions, would they?

Starting point is 02:02:04 That's just embarrassing. Yeah, basic logic. So you're telling me you control the straight, but yet you secreted things through it, hiding it from Iran. Why would that be? Harry Trump says, again, we'll attack Iran very hard. So again, this was him just before all this going, we're going to go after them even harder. to a deal and I want to make sure I quote you correctly. You said that now they will have to pay the price.

Starting point is 02:02:28 What did you mean by that specifically? Now remember that. Now they have to pay the price. We're going to be attacking them and attacking them very hard. You're resuming bombing? Yeah, well, we are based on the helicopter. I guess we have the right to do that. So remember, just remember the simple point, you know, that they have to pay.

Starting point is 02:02:45 They have to pay for what they've done. So here on a Fox News interview, he says some interesting things. As Dave McAdam says, this man is insane. truly unhinged. He's talking about what he could do. So remember, this is kind of the juggling of, we're going to bomb them, but they're so close to making a deal and they want the deal, right?

Starting point is 02:03:05 Here's what he says. One second, there it is. A minute left, but will it be more bombing tonight? Yeah, there will be more bombing tonight. It'll be a bigger, bigger, more powerful. Don't forget, we've knocked out all of their anti-aircraft. They don't have any anti-airdain. They may get lucky.

Starting point is 02:03:30 with a shoulder weapon or something, but for the most part, you know, they have no, they have no defense. What did the representative say in your phone call with them? They're finished, excuse me, they're finished, but the papers, the media refuses to write it. They're finished. We can walk in there tomorrow. We could take soldiers. I don't want to have boots on the ground, but if I wanted to, we could put a small group of soldiers and take over the whole place. They're finished. Okay, so then that means you're willing to keep risking American lives to not do that? I mean, the idea is not advocating for a ground invasion.

Starting point is 02:04:09 It's just that this is not true. It's just, if this was, are we going to pretend that with what we know about Trump that he wouldn't do this with how embarrassing this has been for him? I just, it's impossible not to laugh at, but it's also alarming because this person is very powerful and is murdering people every day. And he's sitting there going, we want it to do, we can just march in there and take it. I mean, isn't that what he told you he was going to do? A couple days to be over? And the media is crooked. They're just like our elections.

Starting point is 02:04:38 The media is crooked. Mr. President, thanks so much for joining us. Mr. President. It's amazing. Thank you, Mr. President. They're also not saying that, but, you know, whatever. So we could just march in there and take it tomorrow. Like that would be legal, by the way.

Starting point is 02:04:54 Well, of course, here he says about, and there's two points about this in the same interview. In one case, he says that America does. doesn't have the stomach for what I really want to do, or that they don't have the appetite for it. What does that mean? You can decide for yourself. But think about this.

Starting point is 02:05:08 He's saying he wants to go further. I don't actually believe him, by the way. I think this is his effort. I'll say my point after I play these. I have an opinion about why I think he's saying this. Look, my preference has always been take Carg Island. That's been Brian knows that. I spoke to a long time ago.

Starting point is 02:05:25 Lawrence knows it. That's the oil. And we talked about that right in the beginning. And that 80 second airborne will probably come into play if that's the, the move they make. I spoke to him a long time ago. I said my preference would be that. I don't know that America has the stomach for it, to be honest with you. You're going to make a fortune. But I don't know. Or you're going to make a fortune because that's what we're doing, profiteering. So that America has the stomach. I think you'd like to see us come home.

Starting point is 02:05:49 By the way, that means not you, by the way, but his inner circle and the oligarchs and the companies. That never means you, by the way. But when he thinks about America, he thinks about those people and stock market and your 401k. and the people in that upper 1%, not you. He doesn't even think you exist, I understand. He thinks that everyone's the stock market. Listen to him, talk about it. He says it every time.

Starting point is 02:06:08 It's not true, guys. The vast majority of people are not doing that. We did it with Venezuela. A Venezuela has worked out great for everybody. We've taken millions. Not true. Talk to Venezuelans. Not working out great.

Starting point is 02:06:18 The point is reality is that they illegally removed a person that was in charge of that, was elected by a democratic country, or a process that was acknowledged by everyone other than the U.S. and their allies. It's obvious. And then at the end of the day, even if you don't think that, they just illegally invaded, removed him, and put the person they want it in power.

Starting point is 02:06:37 So even if you want to pretend, that guy deserves to go to prison, wouldn't they then go, then you guys should elect someone new? That would be democracy, wouldn't it? But no, they just pick somebody and go democracy, and we all just move forward. That's my point, guys. Everyone sees that. We just, it's this mass delusion we go through. And millions of barrels of oil out of that as well, or we brought them to Houston and

Starting point is 02:06:58 various other places. Stole their oil. proudly, apparently. No big deal. Another crime. Louisiana. We're, you know, refineries that we have that are incredible. We're fighting for the Venezuelan people.

Starting point is 02:07:10 Now steal or oil. They're always going 24 hours a day. Making a fortune. And, you know, I like that in this case, too. But I'm not sure that America has a long time. You know, it's a little longer process. Something that. Oh, so it might just happen to go on a little longer.

Starting point is 02:07:30 but you may not have the stomach for it. He's drowning, guys. It's a guarantee if I want to do it. Mr. President. I'm not sure the country has the appetite for it. Does that make sense to you? I understand where you... As good as it is.

Starting point is 02:07:43 By the way, as good as it is, that's always been my number one thing. But as good as... It's the number one thing. As good as it is? What? Your plan? That's what I've always said.

Starting point is 02:07:54 I don't even think he knows what he's saying at the time. Because it is, I'm not sure the country has the appetite for it. And that's okay. I understand that. I mean, would you take that for what you will? The appetite for what? The illegal regime change war? The thing you intend would never happen?

Starting point is 02:08:07 Like, think about the mission creep in all of this. Three days, four weeks, right? I mean, and now we're at a point where he said, I might go a little longer, but I don't know. You guys might not be ready for it. He's talking about sacrificing thousands, possibly tens of thousands of American soldiers' lives. So he and his buddies can make a fortune, Mel says.

Starting point is 02:08:25 That's what he thinks we don't have the stomach for. That's her opinion. I agree. But we can't know for sure what he means. I simply said this. So Trump is now blaming Americans for not having the stomach for what he'd prefer to do against Iran to win. So it's your fault, America, that he has not yet won the war that he's also told you he's won over 40 times. You really cannot teach this special mix of narcissism and stupidity.

Starting point is 02:08:50 I mean, think about that for a second. The idea that, you know, we, we, they have the stomach for, well, if you've won already, how does that statement even make sense? Just take it then. It's your. You won, didn't you? Guys, laugh at this person. He deserves to be ridiculed. I'm telling you, this is insane levels. This is not about left or right. Biden was a bumbling senile fool. This guy just apparently can't even tie his shoes without asking Israel's permission. It's wild. But overall, it's your fault, right? They don't have the stomach for it. I mean, that's what I feel from this. That's the way I felt this meant that ultimately, we don't really do it is because Americans just don't want the illegal war theft and pirating

Starting point is 02:09:29 that we want to do or whatever you think he means. It's your fault. I think this is a coward and not a leader, a person who was trying to shuck responsibility for his failures, now on to the people that actually still support him. Justin Amash simply says Trump is constantly reporting imaginary conversations happening in his head as though they are real. Iconda, you're slowly squeak, you'll talk to them,

Starting point is 02:09:53 but you're slowly squeezing them to death. Oh, I'm not good, too. Hey, I'd sort of like, I mean, I'd like to get a deal now less than three or four weeks to go. Because, you know, once you do this, I just, you could just go a step further. But I don't know that America... I don't even know what that means.

Starting point is 02:10:12 Has the appetite to do what I would really much prefer doing. You remember in Iraq, I said, don't go in. Again, that's like, I mean, I think he said it like four times in this interview. But they went in. They made a big mistake. It should have never let... You know, that war lasted 10 years. So what are you saying right now?

Starting point is 02:10:28 So you told them not to go in. They went in. Okay. Fair enough. So did a lot of people. I agree with you. And I think he did say that. Are you suggesting that you should have gone into Iran? Like, what is he arguing? So if you want to get it done, right, we should have done a quick, make a deal. And they should have gone. I told not to, but they did. But you haven't gone in. So I don't even get the

Starting point is 02:10:46 context of what he's trying to argue. Maybe that he should go into Iran because that'll get what we need. It doesn't make sense to me. Tens of thousands of people. Millions of people on both sides. millions of people. Nobody ever reported that. We've lost 13 soldiers in two wars. In Venezuela, we lost none. Venezuela was not a war. It was an illegal, surreptitious regime change action that simply removed a president and put

Starting point is 02:11:11 somebody puppet in place. It wasn't a war. You can call it an act of war if you want, like in a military sense of the removal throughout like a kinetic action, but it was not a war. Like if that makes sense to you, it's not like the idea is this is not some kind of even from a non-ground deployment kind of situation. He's trying to make it sound like he engaged in some long war and didn't get anybody killed because you did not do that.

Starting point is 02:11:35 On top of that, people did get killed in your ongoing manipulations of Venezuela. But the bigger picture is all of the other people that you're not mentioning, all of the gossans that you murdered, all the Lebanese people that you murdered, all the people in Bolivia that you murdered, all the people in Bolivia that you murdered, all the people in over and over. I mean, follow anti-war.com. There's so many war fields right now that nobody's really talking about that they continue to bomb.

Starting point is 02:11:58 Sudan being one of them. But we all these wars and we didn't kill anybody. And he's talking about 13 to 14 Americans that got killed in a war. He promised wouldn't happen. And he's using that to brag to you. This guy is a special kind of something. I'll tell you. Over the country.

Starting point is 02:12:14 And in Iraq, we've lost 13 soldiers in two wars. In Venezuela, we lost none, took over the country. And in Iran, we lost 13. In Vietnam, we lost hundreds of thousands. Again, guys, he is using dead Americans to brag to you. I only got 13 killed. Look at how great I am. In the midst of an ongoing illegal war that nobody wanted that he swore wouldn't happen.

Starting point is 02:12:41 Does he even think about these things before he speaks? 15 years. Nobody says that. They say, you've been there for three months. In Vietnam, we lost hundreds of thousands, 19 years. Nobody says that. Nobody says what? States the facts about Vietnam.

Starting point is 02:12:54 I'm pretty sure they do. They say you've been there for three months. Three months, you know, they're going crazy because I've been. Because you said three days, then four weeks and that it wouldn't happen the first place. That's why Trump. After three months, they've decimated the country. No, you didn't. Are you thinking next?

Starting point is 02:13:08 No, they blame me, Brian. They said you said you'd be. You know why he loves these places because they let him say whatever he wants. They barely push back. He and he muscles them and just, oh, that's not, let me talk and just goes over him all the time. That's why he gets red-faced and flustered when he gets basic questions. basic questions, even from other fake news platforms, because he's so used to these softball. You're so great. You're the greatest. Tell me how you're great, Trump.

Starting point is 02:13:32 Well, it's a much bigger situation now because we've got a better job. Oh, right. So the same situation is suddenly bigger because you stepped in it. I mean, what are you talking about? What's suddenly bigger, the ongoing war with Iran that you started? Of course it's bigger. Why would you think that wouldn't get bigger? Because Netanyahu told you that it would be over in three days and the whole world will support you. And that didn't happen. You got played. Did anybody anticipated you could do it?

Starting point is 02:13:59 Look, we were in Vietnam 19 years. So now he's griping that you guys are angry that he's not over because, well, Vietnam was 19. Give me five at least. That's just so stupid. And we didn't do the job because we didn't have the right leadership, to be honest. That would have been, if it were me, I would have had that war done in three months, four months. But for victory.

Starting point is 02:14:20 Right, right. As he's now passed that in his own war. that he's comparing it to because I guess he doesn't think before he speaks. Okay. So here's what happened. He comes out today, after all of those statements and all of the war, we're going to bomb harder and even, we'll just get ready. It's all coming down. They're going to pay the price. And then he goes, wait, never mind, like he did last time, based on the fact that discussions with the Islamic Republic of Iran have been brought to the highest level of Iranian leadership and approved, nothing has changed. It's the same level with the same people. And the only thing that's

Starting point is 02:14:51 change is the way Trump and his team frame what's happening. As best I can tell, going back to yesterday, it says, I have, as president of the United States of America, canceled the scheduled strikes and bombings against Iran this evening. Discussions and final points have been in both concept and great detail approved by all parties, even though Iran denies that, including the United States, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Israel denies that and all the rest of them apparently. The naval blockade will remain in full force in effect until this is finalized, even though Iran says that has to stop before this can happen. So yeah, literally nothing has changed. So ask yourself why he would put this out yet again. Of course, saying it's going to take a minute, probably over the weekend,

Starting point is 02:15:32 and they're all betting and they're all making money because the prices are fluctuating every time. I don't think that's the driving force. It certainly could be. That just seems a little bit short-sighted to me, but maybe that's what they're doing. So Nick's order comes out and says, breaking, President Trump announces he's canceled tonight's strikes and saying, all parties have agreed to the final points of the deal. The U.S. blockade will remain in effect based on just yells out what he says. And I'm just thinking to myself, God, imagine blindly reporting this for probably the 40th time at this point, even though every, not some, not most, every report prior to this was later

Starting point is 02:16:08 shown to be a lie, or rather maybe he was lied to by Trump. Imagine doing that. Like, this is my point, guys. These guys are not even concerned with the reputation. They have an artificially bolstered Twitter type reputation. Like, I'd love to, anyway, the point is, I don't even think they care about that, though, because it's artificial, like a loomer. She's laughed at by half of the people on the magicide right now, and yet she continues to

Starting point is 02:16:31 grow in her weird reach on this disgusting platform. The point is that they continue to just blindly tow the line, because that's what benefits them right now. But I just think it's funny to laugh at how dumb that is and how consistently they blindly shout the thing that we know, more other, is likely to be false that tomorrow will be shown, and I think right now is the same point. even Zero Edge came out before his post, by the way. Iran has not yet approved any text for this agreement.

Starting point is 02:16:57 That was according to Iranian media. And this is what I said last time. Right now, like all day, you got Fox and CNN and Washington Post and New York Times and all of them come out and go, a deal and it seems close. And Trump says the deal is welcome. These are supposed to be the adversarial media. I mean, some of them have quoted what Aragachi said, but most of them seem not to. And I'm going, you wouldn't even go, hey, Ron, is that true?

Starting point is 02:17:20 like even day one that would be the case because you know journalism but after getting caught lying over and over and over you think maybe they go let's just double check but nope nope which shows you something here is um what dd you politics laughed about based on the fact that discussions with them are you know we've withheld the strikes i just ran it to you and dd says breaking tacos for everyone on us don't trump once again is backed off from his threats against iran we've lost count how many times this has happened and then says from their agency. Trump has announced 38 times

Starting point is 02:17:54 it's from Tasneem agency in Iran. 38 times in the past two months that an agreement is eminent. Within three days, he had imagined sending Vice Vance to Pakistan, four times. So you have to understand that.

Starting point is 02:18:09 He can't believe that, right? If you're pretending, you're sending it four times in three days, well, that's not possible. So he's either lying and pulling back lies or being misled or narratives are changing I think he's not in a position to even push back. I don't know how else to explain that.

Starting point is 02:18:25 Until the possible understanding is announced by Iran, any news from Trump in his regard should be considered as part of the previous messages. That's from Iran's news agency saying, don't listen to Trump. In fact, I recently got win from people, like basically the argument is being put out that within the inner circle,

Starting point is 02:18:40 people for Whitkoff and Jared Kushner are being, they're telling the other side, don't listen to Trump's tweets. I can't confirm that. But, I mean, it certainly makes sense, doesn't it? Because everyone can see right now that this is bluster. And so the possible understanding is announced by Iran, right? Not that you should trust Iran, but clearly that matters that both sides are agreeing

Starting point is 02:19:00 that something's happening. Clown country USA strikes again. I'm sure there's an Axios article accompanying this charade again. I bet you so. Because Barack Reveed seems to be the one pushing the narrative every time. Now, this is from today. Let's go through a few articles that discuss what seems to actually be happening, even from Jerusalem Post.

Starting point is 02:19:18 Trump says agreement with Iran approved by all parties involved, including Israel, even though Israel spoke up and said, well, I didn't even know this was happening. Seems funny. Well, here it says the deal was approved, both in concept and great detail, as Trump wrote, by all involved, including U.S. Israel and all the rest. Block A will stay in place. No date was given for the signing, of course, but Trump said it could happen this weekend. You know, of course, of course the weekend argument,

Starting point is 02:19:43 because then they can manipulate the stock prices and manipulate the oil prices, and they can all bet on polymarket. that's what happens every weekend, it seems. Notably, Israeli sources told Channel 12 that Israel does not recognize reaching an agreement. So again, is Israel lying to Trump? Is Trump lying to you? Does he know Israel publicly just said,

Starting point is 02:20:03 that's not true? I didn't do that. And yet, Nick's orders like, oh, my God, it's, guys, it's almost like a sitcom at this point. This is Jerusalem Post. The Iranian news agency, wrote that Trump has announced an imminent deal 38 times, as we just reported. The Farras news agency cited a source as saying Iran had not yet agreed to a memorandum of

Starting point is 02:20:26 understanding. Okay, so neither Trump nor Israel agreed, and those seem to be two very relevant parties to this agreement, and Trump has already yelled out, it's happening for sure. Now, tell me in the chat if something has shifted. I'm sure it might have already, based on where this seems to go every time. Here's even the New York Post, one of the most shamelessly propagandized platforms for, like, Trump's team and the like the GOP type arguments. Trump calls off Iran strikes, tells the post-U.S. Tehran deal. It's all wrapped up. That's his quote. All wrapped up. Again, some of these overlap.

Starting point is 02:20:59 While Iran has repeatedly demanded economic incentives before they would sign a memorandum of understanding, Secretary of State Marco Rubio last week told Congress that lifting sanctions would only be considered in exchange for real nuclear concessions. Okay. Well, there you go yet again. Seeing as how Iran has maintained the same point for a long time now, which is the that we will not discuss nuclear until we get past the first three points of the straight. Yep, same thing. So that right there tells you probably not. But maybe something changed.

Starting point is 02:21:25 We'll wait and see. You know my opinion. Trump, meanwhile, has repeatedly refused to release frozen Iranian assets. Again, even New York Times can admit that they're frozen Iranian assets. This whole conversation is so broken. Because that's what it is, by the way. Not money, it's money they stole from Iran. Just like with Obama gave back.

Starting point is 02:21:44 It's what it was, even though Trump lies about it. Now, what's funny is that now apparently last I checked was one of the things that Iran was still demanding as the early agreement. And Trump's saying it's not going to happen. So there you go. Number two point. Iran finalized its latest draft of a proposed agreement. New York Post writes, I don't think this is true, with the U.S. as missiles whizz back and forth. They want you to believe that Iran finalized its latest draft.

Starting point is 02:22:06 You mean agreed to the same points they've demanded since April that Trump doesn't align with? That's where we are. If Iran is right now saying, as they'll write at the bottom that that's not even happening, how is they writing up here that they've finalized the prime because they're repeating what Trump says. That's what this platform does. Submitting to Qatari mediators to Washington, U.S. and his regional sources familiar with mediation told the post.

Starting point is 02:22:29 Oh, okay. So the U.S. government said Iran's about to finalize, even though Iran in their own article down here says that's not true. But they wrote it. The text of the agreement was completed and finalized on Wednesday evening, according to familiar Iranian leadership. Not true as far as I can tell. If final approval is granted, the implementation process of the understanding will begin.

Starting point is 02:22:51 Now, the apparent breakthrough happened after U.S. forces pounded Iran's coastal overnight, targeting a missile and radar systems, basically suggesting that because they bombed them, they gave in. I don't know why that makes sense to anybody with all that we've been through so far, but whatever. It goes on to say prior to Thursday, the president had claimed a deal was close, at least 37 times. New York Post can't even get that right. It was 38. Good journalism.

Starting point is 02:23:17 Anyway, the point was an informed source all the way at the bottom of the article told Iran has not approved any draft agreement. Great. So they didn't agree. I'm glad you buried that at the bottom of the article about how it's all happening. BBC. Trump says Iran deal largely negotiated, including reopening the Strait of Ramos. An Iranian foreign ministry spokesperson, spokesman earlier told state television that the U.S. and Iranian positions had been convinced.

Starting point is 02:23:44 verging in the last week, but warned that did not mean agreements would be reached on key issues and accused the Americans of contradictory statements. Ah, so stupid. Trump also said he had a call on Saturday with his Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, which went very well. And by very well, he means he lied to you about what he told Netanyahu not to do, and then Netanyahu went on and did whatever he wanted. Iranian foreign ministry spokesman also described a memorandum of understanding telling

Starting point is 02:24:12 state television on Saturday that Ron's intention was to reach an agreement in the form of the same 14 points they've been pointing to since, well, I guess, slightly past April, because 10 points was what they started with. And I believe there was points added in times beyond that. And that was largely coming from the discussion of what was that again? Anyway, it's relevant to the point right now. The point is that the 14 point deal is the same one that Ska Hill, we've been pointing to for a long time. So for them to frame it as somehow working on this, to me, that sounds like we're pointing to the same. same thing and waiting for them to acknowledge it or not, which gets framed as some kind of ongoing

Starting point is 02:24:46 negotiation. Now again, maybe today, but looking back every day, you can prove that's not what's actually happening. The guy I've said from Tehran said that the process of finalizing the memorandum so further talks could be held within 30 to 60 days. That's the point. The ultimate final agreement can be reached that they are continuing to this day to say that we need to agree on the deal around the straight.

Starting point is 02:25:07 Then within possibly month to two months, we'll talk about the nuclear conversation. that hasn't seemed to change. The Hormuz letter says Iran, excuse me, directly rejects Trump's new claim that he reached an agreement to cancel tonight strikes on Iran as baseless, saying no agreement has been approved at all. And all of Trump's words should be disregarded like all of his previous 38 times that he claimed a deal was eminent. God, that's embarrassing. A senior Israeli official, like we said earlier, also told Channel 12 that they were not even aware of the deal with being. reached. That is Israel and Iran publicly going, we have no idea what Trump is talking about. So to me, that really starts to feel like a coordinated collapsing of the U.S.

Starting point is 02:25:53 government, at least from the Israeli side of this, because why would they not back them up? Here's a clip from Trump. Oh, no, this is just what it says. President Trump says the war with Iran is officially over and that a peace deal will be signed in Europe. That was today, guys, in the midst of all these statements of Iran going, that's not true. Israel's like, I have no idea. President Trump spoke to the leaders of Qatar or the UAE, Saudi Arabia,

Starting point is 02:26:16 Benjamin DeNehauhu was kept out of the discussions. It's not what he said earlier in the same conversation. Here he says Trump says the Iran deal signing ceremony will happen this weekend in Europe. He's actually saying this right now. Well, they're all denying it, but I won't be able to be there, he says. You know, why? The UFC fight. I can't even think about how stupid.

Starting point is 02:26:37 Think about it done this is. You're talking about a, first of all, a backyard fight. in his way. Everyone seems to be embarrassed by this. And it's not even about whether you support UFC or enjoy the fights. It's about the decorum. You're taking, so it's like, it's like taking, you know, the, like a, the Vatican and holding some bar fight in there. It's like it does, it's not, it is insulting to, to the idea of what these things are supposed to represent, not what they really are, by the way. But the point here is that that's embarrassing for a lot of reasons. But the point of this being the reason, like the idea that you're going, well, we're about to sign a

Starting point is 02:27:11 monumental deal with Iran that will change the Middle East and I'm responsible and we fought it, we beat them and we won and it's so great, but I can't even show up because of this fight. Really? You don't think that that would be important from him to show up to? So that shows me one of two things, that either he knows this isn't happening, which is probably most likely, or that he's worried that something might go awry and doesn't want to be the one blamed. Seems pretty stupid, if you ask me. Now, this is Al Jazeera from two hours ago. Donald Trump says Vice President Vance, of course, be the one to attend the signing, like last time when Netanyahu called him and then it all blew up.

Starting point is 02:27:46 Maybe that's the plan, even though it doesn't seem to be happening in the first place. Netanyahu was surprised by news of eminent U.S. Iran deals. Israel was not looped into the deal, it says, according to the sources from Israel. Let's check these four updates here. Of course, Trump says agreement in Iran can be signed as early as this weekend. I can't believe he's still so embarrassing. Yeah, it's close this time because they've taken a pounding. Not really, guys.

Starting point is 02:28:14 I mean, I see no discernible difference in what they've. did this time versus last time. Iran has been preparing for this kind of stance for a decade plus, or probably longer than that, quite honestly. Now, Ryan Rosbioni points out that satellite imagery for many of these locations, in this point, he's discussing the one over Jordan, can prove with satellite imagery that they attacked and succeeded in hitting the U.S. base. Like every other time, by the way, and they claim nothing happened. Here, White House says, the state is, the White House controls the straight. Not Iran. But yet Iran's the one dictating what's happening. They're secreting things through the straight. Said Mohammed Miranda says the straight is closed.

Starting point is 02:28:54 It will remain closed. Now, as I've been saying from the beginning, they've never thus far at the very least. And even right now, if you want to look, it still says two are going through, unless that's wrong. From the beginning, the point was they didn't close the straight. They've restricted it to them. That's what they said as well. The minds, even according to the admiral, we just discussed from the UK, I think, and plenty of other obvious examples don't seem to exist with China ships going through and other, you know, civilian ships. I mean, there's no, and they're not unique to certain ships that anybody would get hit. It's not happening. That was used to scare people. The insurance was hiked, according to this as well,

Starting point is 02:29:29 the extreme risk. Now you even have examples of Trump bombing ships in the same discussion as wrong. So you've got both sides, like that one of the reasons why maybe stand back and ask if there's more coordination, just one thought. But either way, the point being that that, now it does appear to be more close than ever. So back to this point, it seems to suggest that they just called your bluff and said, guess what we do control it. How embarrassing for yesterday for them to go, we're in control. It's like Trump saying, I'm the one calling the shots, me about Netanyahu and then

Starting point is 02:29:57 Netanyahu clearly calling the shots. How demoralizing and embarrassing. So they do this and then they prove it. And as of right now, it seems that they have. Now, again, back to the larger point, I would agree. shutting down this straight based on the circumstances affects a lot more than just the U.S. and Israel. I disagree with that.

Starting point is 02:30:17 You can call it a crime. But you have to understand where we are in this situation where it's as if you're, they're breaking the law with everything they're doing. They're bombing illegally. They're bombing civilians. I mean, it's what they do. And for them to just sit back and let them keep doing it, I don't, I doubt anybody would do that.

Starting point is 02:30:35 I doubt the U.S. and Israel definitely wouldn't do that. Still doesn't mean I support it. But you can understand. the logic of why they might start to do something like that. But either way, it's important to understand. If they bomb civilian locations, I still call it a crime no matter what we're talking about. But in this case, them shutting it down has been driven into reality. I argue because that's what Trump and Netanyahu actually wanted.

Starting point is 02:30:55 They wanted the world to gripe about how Iran was affecting everybody and then turn on Iran. They didn't do that, though, because they didn't actually close it down. I think that's what spun this into the position it's in now. Now, here, going down some of these breakdowns, it says straight of Pramos is closed for all ships, and any ships trying to transit will be targeted, says the Iranian military. Now, it appears that there were a couple of tankers that they basically deterred. As far as they could tell, they weren't sunk, but they did the same thing. They, you know, bomb them back.

Starting point is 02:31:23 Now, what's interesting is at the same time, you have examples of Indian tankers that are trying to go into Oman or Iranian ports, who are civilian, who are not military, and Trump's military is bombing them. So ask yourself how this makes sense. if you have Trump bombing some that are going in, then you got Iran bombing some trying to go through. That just seems like it doesn't make sense for a lot of reasons. Either way, it's pretty clear that that means the U.S. government does not control the strait because it's not.

Starting point is 02:31:52 They're not able to get it through. They're not able to force what they want. And at the end of the day, what you have now is them trying to like secondary block aid, but Iran is stopping from the first place. It just, it seems almost petty. Oh, wait, hold on. There's more than that.

Starting point is 02:32:08 Then two oil tankers attack by Iran, says the guard, according to this platform. I mean, we'll probably find more tomorrow. Straight to Formos is open, says Centcom. That's all. No, it's not. It's open.

Starting point is 02:32:20 Well, guys, we can tell. Evidence, GPS, right? I mean, here, let's look at this one too. Even this, the, this one, tracker is a little bit better. You can still see on here if you just go to, you know, let's just say tankers. It's not hard to see that this is clearly shut. I mean, there's, it's all backed up in these two locations for the most part. Right? That means they're not just freeing. It's not open, like the U.S. said. So, why would they lie about that?

Starting point is 02:32:51 The Strader removes remains open for transit. I mean, I think almost they, they almost want there to be more conflict so they can use it to justify their action. That means they're risking people's lives. U.S. Central Command announced on Thursday that it bombed an oil tanker for the third time this week. And they killed people. Iran doesn't seem to be doing that. They've killed innocent people because they just want to stop what Iran wants. and that's in this case stuff that helps civilians, whether it's oil and others as well, by the way. They're blockading anything going to Iranian ports. Enforcement of the blockade Iranian ports, which comes after India confirmed the previous U.S. attack on one of their tankers, killing three of their crew members.

Starting point is 02:33:27 Now, on top of this, realize the blockage of the Babelmandibstrait, which I'm not sure as effective right now from the Houthis, that is going to dramatically increase the pressure on the U.S. and Israel. So I think that might be why they're trying to maneuver right now. Now, lastly, in the last two things, Ryan Rosbiani points out that Trump just posted, no other president has ever been more committed to both rebuilding our great military and saving our country. And now is the time to make that happen.

Starting point is 02:33:56 Oh, apparently in the midst of a war where you've never been failing more. Well, let's spend $350 billion more to build our military. Is that what Americans want right now? I mean, even if you want to pretend that Republicans want bigger, he promised all of them less spending, smaller government. None of that happened. Trump wants $350 billion on top of all the what, $700 billion

Starting point is 02:34:20 they're going to send in top of everything else to Israel? No, excuse me, that was million. But either way, the point is the billions they spend on top of all that with the extra $700 million in that little small bill on top of the idea that they've got the National Defense Authorization Act,

Starting point is 02:34:31 the Senate bill, and all the ones before it, to rebuild our military after the war you said wouldn't happen? Americans always get screwed paying the bills for the net Njahou's wars. Now, in regard to Lebanon, because over here, you got them saying that we're, you know, abiding by the agreements with Iran, right?

Starting point is 02:34:51 That Trump said, stop bombing in the U.S., Israel, and Iran stopped, right? Except that's not what happened, seeing as how Israel never stopped bombing Lebanon. Now, what I mean when I say that is from Iran's perspective, which clearly matters, as Trump says, they're making a deal. Iran has said bombing Lebanon is an ongoing violation, and they wouldn't make a deal unless Lebanon was included. best I can tell up yesterday, they still think that. So Israel has carried on bombing Lebanon right up until today.

Starting point is 02:35:19 Has to matter. Zach Foster says, Israel, we're at war with Hezbollah. And he says, Israel trying to take over Lebanon for the last century. Before Hezbo existed, by the way, here's their old map of what they wanted greater Israel to be, which included Jordan, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Gaza, you know, Egypt, all of it. Like we've been telling you for a long time. Shield of Truth points out, Israeli airstrikes reported near Hazin in eastern Lebanon as artillery fire targets villages. That's today, the 11th.

Starting point is 02:35:50 Daniel Modas reports that Israeli aircraft carry out air strikes in the town of Suklan in southern Lebanon. Sukken or Shukin. White Reid, Israel kidnapped a local council member and municipal employee from South Lebanon today while they did maintenance on a water pump this morning. Like all Israeli aggression, it's been ignored by the Lebanese government, which spent the week accusing Iran of interfering in the country. Yeah, no, they didn't say Hezbollah member. They said a municipal council member from Lebanon, meaning part of the Lebanese government. But keep telling us why they're at war with just Hezbollah and not the entirety of Lebanon.

Starting point is 02:36:30 Here's a report from Israeli media. June 11th, Trump strikes back. Israel warns Tehran and Hezbollah under fire. They're attacking right now. Footage shows the Israeli army blowing up an entire residential complex in a village in southern Lebanon. This from the 9th, which is showing you again the mass, blind destruction of an entire area full of people. Daniel Lambert, Israel's murdered three times more Lebanese civilians in the past few weeks than Israelis killed in October 7. Not even getting into the fact that the majority of them were killed by Israeli bombings and the rest of the shootings from Israel IDF and all the rest that has been admitted by their own military, by the way, as everyone still pushes back on that.

Starting point is 02:37:09 and a hundred times more kids in Lebanon than what happened on October 7, just in Lebanon, a deranged state armed and funded by the West, terrifying evil. Now, to finish, I've shown you this before, but I thought it was kind of worth reminding you what we're actually dealing with here. This is a Heretz article from 2020, 42 knees in one day. Israeli snipers open up about shooting Gaza protesters. protesters, not Hamas members, children, women, protesters who simply stood on the other side of a fence and a high wood dirt wall berm while they're protected with sniper rifles and body armor

Starting point is 02:37:53 and shooting innocent children in the legs in the arms, in the head, as even major reports that come out recently from any number of platforms. Over 200 Palestinians were killed and nearly 8,000 were injured. Oh, yeah. Start on October 7th, did it, guys. I know exactly how many knees I've hit, says Eden, who completed his service in the Israeli defense forces as a sniper in the Golan Infantry Brigade six months ago. That was in 2020. For much of the time, he was stationed along the border in Gaza Strip.

Starting point is 02:38:24 His assignment to repel Palestinian demonstrators who approached the fence, not hit the fence, but simply protested at the fence. I kept the casing of every round I fired, he says. I have them in my room, so I don't have to make an estimate. I know. 52 definite hits. My God. This is what we talked about, guys. They stand there and they wait and they're just protesting with their flags.

Starting point is 02:38:48 And, you know, and maybe throwing rocks, God forbid, while you're there on a berm choosing to be there, right? Like, so they're throwing rocks and you're killing people. Even Trump tried to push that himself. The bottom line, guys, 2020, long before. Gaza fights for freedom. A documentary made by Abby Martin is undeniably obvious. It goes way before October 7th.

Starting point is 02:39:07 they have been assassinating these people our entire lives. And this is just one example, one of them, endless amount of them from this platform, by the way, that highlights what we're dealing with, a choice, a deliberate action to hurt innocent people because they're the other. It's as simple as that. They've been trained to hate.

Starting point is 02:39:28 So we'll show you a couple clips. A famous video that you've seen before. Because it is exactly this example, guys. It is exactly this moment. but people always, even the Guardian one I'll show you that says we were unable to confirm this video. Clowns. Not only is it obviously Israel, obviously shooting at Palestine, speaking in Hebrew, but yeah, Guardian couldn't figure it out. The point is that this is somebody from in that exact time frame reporting to Horatts that they shot 42 knees in one day.

Starting point is 02:39:56 So gone telling me this is a bad apple or one example or you don't understand what you're looking at or is from somewhere else. Behind the seas, I will tell. That's the wrong one. Here, this is the one from Guardian first. Now it's in their subtitles right there. The Gory was unable to verify this video's authenticity. Very publicly discussed, very easy to verify. You're looking through a sniper scope for the podcast and it says, do you have a bullet in the barrel?

Starting point is 02:40:26 Because is that him? He says, wait, I can't shoot because of the concertino wire. All the protection they have. Behind the fence and the wires and the dirt and the snipers and the protection and the body armor and the helmets. There's a small child. There, he says, publicly out loud. How does he always bend over right when I follow? He goes on to say,

Starting point is 02:40:59 Not to pink, I'm on the blue. Wow, it's a sirton! Yes! Wow, what a video. Ben of a zonah. Oh, mama, did you phone... Hey, it's a series of him. You know, I've got to film it.

Starting point is 02:41:16 Wow, you get someone in the head. Other snipers. There was a child, by the way. What's a child, by the way. What's a film? What? I didn't see it. This is every day. Son of horrors, he says.

Starting point is 02:41:44 Yeah, Guardian had a real tough time figuring out who that was from. Well, here's the Al Jazeera report that breaks down some other commentary as well. This Israeli soldier has in his sights a Palestinian apparently unarmed standing a few meters beyond the separation fence that divides Israel from Gaza. Just by being there, this man is, according to Israel's military regulation. a legitimate target for a sniper. The army imposes a minimum 100-meter buffer zone into Gaza's territory. And they aim at the knees. That's a common thing they've discussed.

Starting point is 02:42:15 That's what that article is about. It's a regulation with no backing in international law. The video seems to have been shared on social media by one of the soldiers. We don't know who the victim is or what he was doing in the time before he was shot. Israel's military says it happened in December. The delight the sniper's colleagues take in hitting their target doesn't change the fact that the Israeli military won't consider the sniper's actions unlawful. That's according to one human rights group here.

Starting point is 02:42:49 I see it, what I've been with a reggae and that. Keep hearing that anybody who is coming close to the fence will be shoot. And anybody who is participating in those demonstrations is part of the Hamas and they want to destroy Israel, everybody is a terrorist, all their demonstrations are totally illegitimate. So if the public debate here that is being conducted by the, and being led by the political level is on that level that showing the Palestinians is not deserving the same rights as any other person, it's not surprising that this is the result. In a statement, Israel's military says,

Starting point is 02:43:37 The video depicts a short part of the response to a violent riot, which included rock-hurling and attempts to sabotage the security fence and lasted about two hours. During the riot, means were taken in order to disperse it, including verbal warnings and calls to halt using riot dispersal means and firing warning shots into the air. After none of these were successful, a single bullet was fired towards one of the Palestinians

Starting point is 02:43:59 who was suspected of organizing and leading this incident while he was a few meters from the fence. He was hit in the lag and injured. Just so you understand, they've denied that video a thousand times over. Here they are admitting it, though. video, yeah, that's what happened. But over here, fake news, you're racist in the media, right? Or the reality that you can watch the video and watch them shoot the child who was simply standing there or watch them discuss how the other guy just hit someone in the head. But yeah,

Starting point is 02:44:25 keep lying to us, guys. Keep, you know, what it shows you is they know that at the very least, you think it's wrong. Whether they do or not, they know that it's not supposed to be okay, and they know you don't agree with it, so they lie to you about it. Or we can go back to the video, let me finish this, or the article of the people who were there that day telling you, I shot 42 knees. It was not a one-off to get them to move. They know what they're doing, guys, and then they lie to you about it. And on target shot that might earn a sniper high-fies from his buddies has, of course, devastating real-life consequences. In the last two weeks in Gaza, more than 1,400 people have been injured by live fire from Israeli snipers. Many will be crippled

Starting point is 02:45:04 for life. 31 people have died. Bernard Smith, Al Jazeera, West Jerusalem. massive series of protest and whether it's the same thing with what trump is doing and or the rest of them you know let's say you have people out there that are throwing rocks god forbid a defense and occupied territory with sniper it's just so stupid but then argue that you can then just open fire and literally everybody out there protesting which is what they do nothing new guys this is who they are now the point again this is the this is the group from the point of which we're talking about you can read it all for yourself it's horrifying look there's any endless examples of people and they're praising the fact that they chose to hurt people.

Starting point is 02:45:43 You read Horretz every day, it'll shock you how common this is. This is why there's a disconnect between these two medias. Lastly, here is J.D. Vance. This is him saying about Netanyahu. He's a good partner. You know, he's gotten some things wrong, but he's a good partner. The guy that's supposed to be the next president, right? And I said other than the ongoing genocide, you know, the undermining of American interest

Starting point is 02:46:10 and the subversion of American will. Sure, Vance, Netanyahu is a good partner. Please wake up, America. The prime minister has made any mistakes in how he's worked with the United States on Iran? Look, he's certainly gotten some things wrong, but fundamentally... Like what?

Starting point is 02:46:28 Well, I think that those conversations sometimes are better left than private. What does that mean? So you're not willing to comment on what you disagree with at all about anything? Israel did, I'm best in private. You're the vice president of United States. We're talking about a foreign power and you want to only privately discuss concerns or criticisms of Israel.

Starting point is 02:46:50 Wow. But what I would say is that he's been a good partner. We're going to keep on working together. But where interest diverge, the United States is going to pursue the best interests of our nation. And that's how it's going to be. Sure. Our nation being Israel, apparently. Or if you however you want to read that, or he's lying to you. The end of the day, guys, They've outrageously shown you every day that that's not true, that they will do what they're told. As last time when Vance got a call from Netanyahu that said, no, no, not Lebanon, broke the deal, even though Trump agreed to it, then Trump lied to. I mean, these are verifiable steps that you can prove for yourself.

Starting point is 02:47:27 And they just keep going forward. I mean, think about him, not, well, that better left for private. I just think that's insane. That means he's so afraid of criticizing even quietly what they do. because you know why he just got a crazy amount of pushback for simply suggesting that they all spy on each other i mean he's getting crazy pushback from zionist who screaming at him for that because he said that they do things they know they do he's they're so careful about this guys and that's what i think that is i mean we need to see where we are right now guys i know you do that's why you're here

Starting point is 02:47:59 but i'll leave it there for today please share the information get it out there right get this in front of people make the clips you're reaching people you know you are i mean if you're you're watching this show if you're here you know this we can see it help other people see that right help other people recognize the reality of this the change is happening in front of us the two-party illusion breaking down the incredible amount of people on the republican side right now just like there was on the democratic side during covid who are suddenly seeing through it all that i've never seen before the teams don't want you to see that the corporate media and the mainstream alternative do not want you to recognize that because that breaks their mold it shatters the status quo that's what we do

Starting point is 02:48:37 we shattered the status quo, guys. That's what we're aiming for. Call it out. Help people see it. Thank you for tuning in. I love you all. As always, question everything. Come to your own conclusions. Stay vigilant. When were you in Gaza? End of April for the first couple weeks. And then there's sniper bullets. I have children that were shot twice. Wait, you're saying that children in Gaza are being shot by snipers. Definitively. I have two children that I have photographs of that were shot so perfect. in the chest, I couldn't put my stethoscope over their heart more accurately and directly on the side of the head in the same child. No toddler get shot twice by mistake by the world's

Starting point is 02:49:19 best sniper. And they're dead center shots. In fact, more than 20 doctors recently in Gaza also told Sunday morning about gunshot wounds to children. One American doctor told us he even reviewed CT scans to confirm what he saw because he, quote, didn't believe that this many children could be admitted to a single hospital with gunshot wounds to the head. Some shootings have been captured on video. So of all the disaster zones you've seen, how does Gaza compare? All of the disasters I've seen combined, combined. Forty mission trips, 30 years, ground zero, earthquakes, all of that combined doesn't equal the level of carnage that I saw against civilians in just my first week in Gaza.

Starting point is 02:50:17 And when you say civilians, is it mostly children? Almost exclusively children. I've never seen that before. Never seen that. I've seen more incinerated children than I've ever seen in my entire life combined. I've seen more shredded children in just the first week. Shredded? Shredded. What do you mean?

Starting point is 02:50:39 Missing body parts, being crushed by buildings, the greatest majority. Or bomb explosions, the next greatest majority. We've taken shrapnel as big as my thumb out of eight-year-olds. The UN reports that to date more than 80% of Gaza's population has been displaced and the majority of its buildings destroyed. A reality which has taken its own toll. toll on the well-being of children. What about the emotional wounds?

Starting point is 02:51:08 How can you measure that? I can't measure my own. How do you be an orphan watching your family, you know, melted in front of you, and shredded in front of you? How do you fix that, ever fix that? In fact, so many Palestinian children have had family members killed that doctors created a shorthand term, WCNSXN. Wounded child, no surviving family.

The Last American Vagabond - US Illegally Targets Water Infrastructure In Iran & Trump Lies About An Iran Deal (Again)

There aren't comments yet for this episode. Click on any sentence in the transcript to leave a comment.