"Leave Now Or Be Assassinated" Cia Backed Coup In Venezuela Has Begun | Redacted News

Summary

---

Podcast Summary: "Leave Now Or Be Assassinated" CIA Backed Coup In Venezuela Has Begun | Redacted News

Date: October 27, 2025
Hosts: Clayton Morris & Natali Morris
Guests: John Kiriakou, Steve Baker, Dr. Pierre Kory

---

Episode Overview

This episode of Redacted News zeroes in on explosive claims of a CIA-backed coup attempt in Venezuela, the broader implications for US foreign entanglements, and overlapping pressures on transparency, accountability, and critical media scrutiny in several high-profile stories. The Morrises combine on-the-ground reporting with interviews from notable whistleblowers and independent journalists, pushing back against prevailing media narratives, exposing legal irregularities in the Charlie Kirk murder case, doubts about FBI transparency on the DNC/RNC pipe bomber, and growing skepticism about COVID vaccine headlines, especially as they intersect with the pharmaceutical industry.

---

Key Segments & Insights

1. Coup Attempt in Venezuela: The CIA, Oil, and Media Consent

[02:09–11:20]

Main Discussion Points

• Claims of CIA Mercenaries in Venezuela: Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro claims US/CIA mercenaries tried a false flag attack to trigger a regime change.
• Mainstream Media Support: US media, especially “60 Minutes,” is seen as echoing official narratives and manufacturing consent for US action.
• Oil at the Heart of US Motives: The US isn’t interested due to narco trafficking, but Venezuela’s immense oil reserves and the threat of Chinese (25% stake in Guyana offshore oil) and Russian influence.

John Kiriakou's Perspective (Ex-CIA Whistleblower)

• Pattern of US Interference: “It's like people got caught. What are you going to do? ...The Trump administration, the Biden administration, and the first Trump administration before that have used mercenaries repeatedly in Venezuela.” [04:18]
• Geopolitical Chess: “This regime change operation is not even really about Nicolas Maduro... It’s really about trying to keep the Chinese out of Central and South America and the Caribbean.” [04:59]
• Fumbling by US Planners: Attempts at coups in Venezuela have lacked preparation, failing to seize broadcast centers, the palace, or the power grid. “16 bozos who used to be, you know, in Marines or Delta Force or whatever and are working for Erik Prince now, they're not going to effect your coup...” [06:33]
• Open Covert Action: Trump’s public disclosure of CIA regime change authorization was “unprecedented since the CIA was created.” [09:00]

Notable Quotes

• Clayton Morris: “Let’s stop lying to people... we want to control Venezuela, let’s stop lying to people.” [06:10]
• John Kiriakou: “We trick ourselves into thinking that we are liberators who will be welcomed as heroes, and instead we're greeted as invaders and occupiers.” [07:47]

---

2. US-Israel Dynamics and the Ceasefire Question

[11:20–20:53]

Main Discussion Points

• Netanyahu’s Power Play: Discussion around Netanyahu’s statements that Israel isn’t controlled by the US, and vice versa.
• “Ceasefire Games”: Israel is accused of routinely violating ceasefires soon after they're agreed upon.
• US Political Posturing: MAGA-aligned Republicans are portrayed as rebranding to “America First,” attempting to distance themselves rhetorically from unwavering pro-Israel stances, potentially for electoral reasons.

John Kiriakou’s Commentary

• “It's an Israeli policy, frankly, to negotiate ceasefires and then immediately violate them.” [12:35]
• The personal relationship between Trump and Netanyahu is framed as manipulative, with Trump only recently realizing how he’s being used as political cover.
• Call for politicians to prioritize US interests: “...sometimes America’s best interests are not the same as Israel’s best interests. They're just not the same.” [17:36]

---

3. Charlie Kirk Assassination – Holes in the Prosecution

[22:19–35:44]

Main Discussion Points

• Opaque Court Procedures: Cameras are being banned from the Tyler Robinson trial, with delays and a new judge only recently appointed—raising concerns about transparency.
• Irregular Gag Orders: An exceptionally broad gag order affecting thousands, including future legal counsel and witnesses, is seen as suppressing independent scrutiny.
• Suspicious Behavior: The behavior of key figures (e.g., Michael McCoy, Charlie Kirk’s chief of staff, calmly walking away after the shooting) does not align with claimed narratives, raising further doubts.
• Video Suppression Allegations: Eyewitness Ryan Simmons discusses the FBI urging him to delete footage (“they had said...it’s best that you erase the video from your phone because it’s just going to give you PTSD” [36:05]). Others reported missing footage from their own devices after attending the incident.

Memorable Moment

• Natali Morris: “How do people lose their First Amendment rights just because they witnessed a crime? That’s highly irregular.” [27:21]

---

4. FBI Pipe Bomber Investigation – With Steve Baker

[43:18–54:10]

Main Discussion Points

• Withholding of Evidence: FBI refuses to release full, unedited DNC security footage, raising suspicions over manipulation (frame reduction) to sabotage “gait recognition” technology.
• Bomb Discovery Timeline: Numerous official sweeps (including Secret Service bomb-dogs, human patrols) failed to find the bomb, suggesting possible tampering or an inside job.
• Lack of Phone Tracking: Suspect’s movements remain untraceable, unusually so given widespread successful tracking in other Jan. 6 cases.
• Training Exercise Theory: Rumors swirl that officials might reframe the incident as a botched training exercise; yet this explanation is seen as highly suspect.

Notable Quotes

• Steve Baker: “We know that this was the one person using a cell phone that night that we've not been able to track... If this person is from the intelligence community... that device could be a burner phone...” [51:04]
• “It's absolutely impossible for those two counter surveillance officers to have the ability to go directly to the exact bush...without foreknowledge.” [54:24]
• Clayton Morris: “It's amazing that we can swoop in and within 33 hours we've got a lone gunman in Charlie Kirk's assassination... but here, suddenly we still can't [solve the pipe bombing].” [54:24]

---

5. COVID Vaccine, Cancer Headlines, and Pharma Spin – With Dr. Pierre Kory

[55:13–77:14]

Main Discussion Points

• Dubious "Breakthrough" Stories: The Washington Post and Nature claim COVID vaccines improved survival for cancer patients, but Dr. Kory slams the “retrospective observational study” for its weak methodology and premature conclusions.
• Weaponizing Weak Science: The study is non-randomized, limited to healthier immunotherapy patients, and doesn’t include standard chemotherapy patients—essentially self-selecting a group likely to do better anyway.
• Broader Trend of Narrative Control: Top journals (Nature, JAMA) are called out for publishing studies designed (via method or omission) to produce pro-pharma results—e.g., only counting live births in a pregnancy safety study to falsely show no fetal harm.
• Suppression of Alternatives: Vitamin D’s benefits are systematically downplayed through similar research manipulation. “You have any claim around it as being controversial because all of the data conflicts... it gets neutered.” [72:50]
• Calls for Skepticism and Health Autonomy: The show encourages listeners to recognize regulatory and media spin: “They do want us sick. ...If you had everybody with a healthy and robust vitamin D level, the amounts of illness and hospitalization would plummet.” [75:11]

Quotes

• Dr. Pierre Kory: “They’re sending messages that are timed around political endpoints. And it’s not subtle to me. ...You gotta try to find something positive to say about these vaccines, even on the weakest data. And they have absolutely no hesitation in doing that.” [62:07]
• “There’s a flip side to that. I also know what doesn’t show up in those journals. All these compelling studies showing the harms... never gets published in a high impact journal.” [70:05]

---

Notable Quotes & Timestamps

• “We trick ourselves into thinking that we are liberators who will be welcomed as heroes, and instead we're greeted as invaders and occupiers.”
  — John Kiriakou [07:47]

• “How do people lose their First Amendment rights just because they witnessed a crime? That’s highly irregular.”
  — Natali Morris [27:21]

• “It's absolutely impossible for those two counter surveillance officers to have the ability to go directly to the exact bush...without foreknowledge.”
  — Steve Baker [54:24]

• “They do want us sick. ...If you had everybody with a healthy and robust vitamin D level, the amounts of illness and hospitalization would plummet.”
  — Dr. Pierre Kory [75:11]

---

Summary Table of Important Segments

| Timestamp | Segment/Guest | Key Topics | |-------------------|----------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------| | 02:09–11:20 | John Kiriakou (CIA Coup) | Regime change, oil, US/China rivalry, US media complicity | | 11:20–20:53 | Israel/US Relations | Ceasefire violations, MAGA’s “America First” rebranding | | 22:19–35:44 | Charlie Kirk Murder | Gag orders, witness behavior, suppression of evidence | | 43:18–54:10 | Steve Baker (Pipe Bomber) | FBI cover-up, evidence concealment, surveillance technology | | 55:13–77:14 | Dr. Pierre Kory (COVID) | Vaccine/cancer headlines, pharma journal bias, vitamin D suppression |

---

Tone & Closing

Throughout, Clayton and Natali Morris maintain a fiery, unapologetically skeptical tone—confrontational about media spin and unapologetically anti-war and anti-corporate. They urge listeners not to place party loyalty above the facts, focusing on factual accuracy, deep analysis, and a commitment to open discourse no matter whose narrative it challenges.

---

For Further Listening

• Interviews with whistleblowers and independent journalists like John Kiriakou and Steve Baker provide unique insight into the mechanics and mindset of US covert operations and official obfuscation.
• In-depth critique of pharmaceutical industry influence on medical journals with Dr. Pierre Kory, illustrating the real-world effects of controlled narratives.

---

This summary is intended to provide a detailed guide for listeners seeking the facts beyond the headlines and corporate media filters, reflecting the passionate investigative spirit of Redacted News.

Transcript

[A]

Live from the rocky mountains. Welcome into redacted. I'm Clayton Morris.

[B]

I'm Natalie Morris.

[A]

So glad to have you all here on this Monday. We've got a busy show for you today. We're going to look at the latest in the war developments between the United States and Venezuela. Last night you might have been watching 60 Minutes where they were basically manufacturing consent for war. And Nicolas maduro has now said on his side of things that they have caught CIA mercenaries trying to enact a couple an overthrow of his government in that country. A lot of moving parts on that. We're gonna be joined by the former CIA whistleblower John kiriakou in just moments on that story.

[B]

Plus infuriating news in the Charlie Kirk murder trial for the alleged assassin Tyler Robinson. All kinds of holes in this story and we're gonna catch you up on what holes we still cannot fill and why this story stinks to high heaven. So that's on the agenda.

[A]

We're also gonna have Steve Baker from the blaze media. He's been one of the finest journalists in the United States. He, of course, has been cover pipe bomber story from the very beginning. And, well, he has a lot of questions and some new revelations as it relates to that new video that the FBI released last week. We'll talk about that.

[B]

Also, the last story is not correct. We're going to talk about the COVID vaccine and whether or not it improved cancer diagnosis because that's what the washington post is reporting. This is a very strange story. So we're going to talk to Pierre Cory who has been following the COVID vaccine all along, because are we going to let them sell this to us? You guys, this is a really weird.

[A]

Liberals. Liberals are excited about. I don't know if you saw, like, liberals over the weekend. They're like, see, we told you. Yeah, see, if you inject yourself with these MRNA vaccines, little stop cancer. We told you. Yeah, we have a lot of questions about that. We're going to talk about that on the show. All right, we got a lot of news. Thank you guys for joining us here. Thank you for subscribing to the channel. By the way, have you guys seen this new, like, a hype feature? There's like a new hype feature on YouTube and apparently it works. I don't know what, like, I don't know if you're watching us on mobile. There's like a thing where you can, like, swipe over and you can press the hype button.

[C]

I don't know.

[A]

Do you guys have you Guys used it.

[B]

I do.

[A]

It hypes us. Don't you feel. Don't you feel yourself being hyped?

[B]

Always.

[A]

So instead of liking and subscribing, you can now hype. I don't know. Rumble doesn't have that feature. But anyway, we've got tens of thousands.

[B]

Of you watching, giving us algorithm juice.

[A]

I guess. I know, like, hey, for independent media that gets suppressed and blocked on a regular basis, they actively try to hide our show. Maybe this will help a little bit. So hype. Hype the show if you can. All right. Well, it was only a matter of time before President Trump launched a military strike on Venezuela. Well, it appears to have happened this morning. Venezuelan leader Nicolas Maduro says they've captured CIA soldiers slash mercenaries trying to carry out a false flag attack designed to spark a coup in that country. Confirmed by a number of different news sources. But also you might remember that just a few weeks ago the New York Times even like broadcast this to everybody. The Trump administration authorizes covert CIA action in Venezuela because, you know, they love regime change operations. This is. This is exactly what we expected to happen. And it's here. Meanwhile, the American media is fully on board with this and with regime change operations. Last night, CBS News 60 Minutes, which is an extension of the CIA, of course, did a full report on Venezuela and they even had this guy. This of course is James Storey. He's an ex US ambassador, total regime change lover. So they got him on here to talk about how he. He really let the cat out of the bag. Now we can't show you any 60 minutes because they'll copyright strike us. They always do. But what. Basically he said he admitted the real reason that we're going to war with Venezuela. Guess what? News flash. It has nothing to do with those narco boats at all. It has everything to do with what I reported this weekend, which is about oil. And he admitted, quote, venezuela is sitting on top of the world's largest oil reserves, minerals that will fuel the 21st century economy. So of course we can't have Nicolas Maduro and Russia and China's influence in Venezuela at all. Needs to be the United States. CIA whistleblower John Kiriakou joins us now who knows all about these regime change operations and has been telling the world about the CIA's nefarious operations. John, great to see you. Does this surprise you at all? I mean, when you're hearing from Nicolas Maduro that they've captured CIA mercenaries off of Trinidad and Tobago trying to carry out regime change operations? I'm sure. This is like another day at the CIA, right? Yeah.

[D]

It's like people got caught. What are you going to do? People get caught all the time. No, it didn't surprise me. The Trump administration, the Biden administration and the first Trump administration before that have used mercenaries repeatedly in Venezuela. It's never well thought out, it's never well executed. And then we can't understand why the Venezuelans don't want to let go of all these regime change mercenaries that they catch coming up on shore. I will say though, that you raised a moment ago a very important issue, and that's the issue of oil. Venezuela is sitting on an ocean of oil. It's very dirty oil. It has an extremely high sulfur content. And until about 10 years ago, the only refineries that could process that oil were in Texas. And so we didn't like the Venezuelans, they didn't like us, but we were the only ones that could refine that oil. So we maintained a relationship. Well, about 10 years ago, the Chinese began building a refinery in the Caribbean and it can refine oil now. So I think that this regime change operation is not even really about Nicolas Maduro. We've worked with Maduro for a decade. It's really about trying to keep the Chinese out of Central and South America and the Caribbean.

[A]

Yeah. Not to pat myself on the back, but I did a deep dive video on it this weekend, specifically Talking about China's 25% interest in the oil that sits right off of Guyana. And of course, their lifeline right now is the amount of oil that they're getting from Venezuela. We don't like the Chinese and the Russians in our own backyard under The Monroe Doctrine, 1600 miles away from Miami. So we get to say that this is all about narco terrorist boats when it's really not. It's about, we want to control Venezuela, let's stop lying to people.

[D]

Yeah, yeah, I couldn't agree more. Just come out and say, Just say, look, we don't want the Chinese, so this is what we're going to do.

[B]

What do you mean not well thought out? Are we talking like Louvre heist type fly by the seat of our pants or what? Because John Bolton admitted in his book. Okay, so give me an example. Like, let's go in and try this.

[D]

Sure. If you're going to overthrow a government, you don't just send mercenaries in inflatable rafts to wash up on shore with their, with their guns and say, okay, we're here to overthrow the government. There's a way to Go about doing it. First of all, you have to attack the presidential palace. Right, Bomb the presidential palace. At the same time, you have to take control of the methods of communication, the TV stations, the radio stations. You have to attack the power grid. If you don't want the other side to communicate, you have to pacify the military, and then you have to physically take control of the major intersections in the capital city while your troops move on the presidential palace and the Ministry of defense. Well, 16 bozos who used to be, you know, in Marines or Delta Force or whatever and are working for Erik Prince now, they're not going to affect your coup. It's just not going to work out this notion. And I sat in meetings with White House officials who would say as soon as we cross that border, they're going to throw flowers at us. They're never going to throw flowers at us. They're going to shoot you for invading their country. It's just something that we don't understand. We, we, we fool ourselves. We trick ourselves into thinking that we are liberators who will be welcomed as heroes, and instead we're greeted as invaders and occupiers.

[B]

Right.

[A]

Can you talk about just some of the mechanics of a CIA operation here? The New York Times blew the whistle on this a few weeks ago, saying that Trump has authorized the CIA takeover and regime change operations. We reported here on this show through a whistleblower, Jordan Godreau, who was tasked by the Trump administration to go in and lead a coup attempt back under his first term in 2016. The CIA got in the way and his special Forces teams, he was a Green Beret, they were killed. Like the CIA got in the way of his regime change operation back Trump during Trump's first term. So what exactly are they going to try to install? I know there's rumors out there they're gonna try to install. The CIA wants basically a cartel light like a. Not as strong as Maduro, but they still get to funnel all of their phony and dark money through basically an alternative to Maduro, but he's not a saint at all.

[B]

Like a Zelensky government, right in Venezuela.

[D]

That's right.

[A]

Yeah.

[D]

That's great.

[A]

Point.

[D]

First, let me say that when this article appeared in the New York Times several weeks ago, quoting the president as saying that he had approved of a covert action program, it sent chills up my spine. There is literally nothing at the CIA that is more highly classified than a covert action program. Covert action is so highly classified that the COVID action staff at the CIA doesn't even have a sign on their office door to identify who they are. So for the President of the United States to announce that he is ordering a covert action program to overthrow a government unprecedented since the CIA was created. I don't know if he did it just to try to throw the Venezuelans off balance or because he was so proud of himself, he just couldn't keep it quiet. I don't understand the reason, but it was stunning to me. Incredible that he would do such a thing, number one. Number two, you know, in that show Narcos on. On Netflix, just as the DEA is going to go in for the big arrest or the big kill, the CIA station chief steps in and just screws up the entire operation. Well, the reason that was in Narcos so frequently and in other TV shows and movies is because it happens in real life. The CIA always screws things up. So on the one hand, you have. You have a group of mercenaries in 2017, probably working at the direction of the National Security Advisor, and then the CIA comes in and screws the whole thing up. The whole thing up. People get killed, others are arrested, and then have to be swapped for Venezuelan prisoners. It's just a big mess. But again, this is a lack of coordination. It's a lack of planning. And frankly, I'd like to know who in the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel and who at the General Counsel's office at the NSC approved of this operation. It's patently illegal to just go around overthrowing other governments because you don't like their politics. You can't do stuff like that. So I'm not surprised that what we've seen so far has just been one disaster after another.

[B]

I mean, at least they're doing it in full sight. It's not covert. Because when Trump left office the first time, we had John Bolton writing in his book like, yeah, we tried a coup in Venezuela. Didn't really work. At least now it's full out there and we can see it. They're not gaslighting us about it. Speaking of gaslighting governments, though, let's pivot to talking about Israel, because Israel addressed this idea of whether or not Israel runs the United States or vice versa. And this is sort of the most transparent way that we've ever seen the Israeli government address this. Prime Minister Netanyahu released this statement saying that that is basically not true. So if you say that Israel runs the US Government, that's the new antisemitism. Don't say it. I'm gonna keep Saying it. And he's also saying that the notion that he controls the US Government is a joke. The notion that the US Government controls Israel is ridiculous. He's saying they're basically gonna do what they wanna do. Now, why is he saying this now? He's signaling to us that he doesn't have to abide by the peace plan. He's gonna do whatever the f he wants. And he's making it clear is.

[D]

That.

[B]

He would do this. What do you make of this?

[D]

We shouldn't be surprised by this one iota. It's an Israeli policy, frankly, to negotiate ceasefires and then immediately violate them. It's just what they do. When they finally agreed to this most recent ceasefire, I said on my podcast, how many hours do you think it's going to be? Not days or weeks or months. How many hours is it going to be before the Israelis violate the ceasefire? And it was 48 hours. They did it after 48 hours. Just two days. It's just what they do. When Benjamin Netanyahu says that nobody is going to tell him what to do, he means it. He means literally nobody is going to tell him what to do. That's why the Israel Times last week published a front page article saying that the reason Vice President Vance and Secretary of State Rubio were in Jerusalem was to BBC. That was the word that they used to BBCit the Israeli government. Because Benjamin Netanyahu will do whatever he wants. He will not take orders. Today President Trump actually made a statement, made me laugh, in which he said that he runs the Israeli government and that Netanyahu will do as he's told. That tells me there's a split. That tells me that finally Donald Trump understands that Netanyahu uses him, manipulates him, and will do anything that Netanyahu wants to do, regardless of what is in the interests, the best interests of the United States.

[B]

Way to catch up.

[A]

Yeah. And I think. I don't know if I said, Trump, I don't know if I said this to you before, but I have it on good authority right from the White House that President Trump was shocked to learn that, like young Americans think that he is controlled by Benjamin Netanyahu. Like he had been so insulated from that awareness. How do you not know that that's what people say on X and social media and all these young people think that the White House is controlled by Benjamin Netanyahu. He was pissed to learn about that. I'm like, what kind of a bubble do you have to be in, Mr. Trump, to not realize that this is what people think, given the amount of money and the way that you sort of kowtow to any Benjamin Netanyahu. Netanyahu comes to town and two days later, we're helping them bomb Iran.

[D]

Exactly. And this is exactly the perfect example of how Netanyahu uses Donald Trump. Trump actually said a couple of days after the bombing that he did Iran a favor by bombing because Netanyahu told him, if you don't bomb Iran for us, we're gonna bomb them using a nuclear weapon. So thank God that Donald Trump stepped in to bomb Iran. He actually saved Iranian lives by bombing. It's like, do you listen to yourself when you say things like this? You've obviously been played. Even people 18 to 25 recognize that you've been played. And so it's time to finally establish an independent foreign policy. Tucker Carlson interviewed kind of famously now Senator Ted Cruz a month or two ago, and he really beat Cruz up over Cruz's oft stated self description as the most pro Israel senator on Capitol Hill. Cruz said, oh, AIPAC doesn't represent Israel. It represents American Jews. And Tucker said, well, what issue? Name one issue. Any issue that AIPAC disagrees with Benjamin Netanyahu over. And Cruz said, well, I'm not going to get into an argument with you. I'm not going to get into this kind of a pissing match. Well, yeah, because you're making this up as you go along. AIPAC is the personal representative of Benjamin Netanyahu and the Israeli government in Washington, which is exactly why they should be registering as a foreign agent.

[B]

Now.

[A]

Go ahead, sir.

[B]

May I ask this? So with the midterps coming up, we're gonna see Republicans rebranding themselves as a traditional form of maga, which means pro America first, and starting to pretend that they did not represent Israel during its assault in Gaza, that they did not want Israel to bomb Iran. I've seen this makeover start to happen through Republicans such as Democrats. At the very least, they never had to pretend. A lot of them did say, we promote Israel, but they didn't seem to want a war with Iran. At least now we're gonna see this makeover of Representative Anna Polina Luna. I've seen her start to sort of pretend that she cared more about America than Israel. Randy Fine is gonna do that. It's gonna be incumbent on us to remember that this is now a tactic to win reelection, and I'm not having it. What do you think?

[D]

I couldn't agree more. I couldn't agree more. Listen, if we're Going to be America first. Then, by God, let's be America first. And let's recognize and understand that sometimes America's best interests are not the same as Israel's best interests. They're just simply not the same. And so we should put America first. That's what it's all about. But people like Ted Cruz, and it's not just Ted Cruz, it's a lot of members of both parties on Capitol Hill shouting about who the most pro Israel is. Oh, I'm more pro Israel than you. That's not a good thing. We don't want you, we don't elect you to represent the best interests of Israel. We elect you to represent the best interests of the United States and the American people. And I agree with you, we need to call them on it in this, this next election. Enough is enough, John.

[A]

We'll get you out of here on this. Which is what happens now to the ceasefire. I mean, as you pointed out, and it's been hilarious to watch these like MAGA influencers on social media. They're seeing Trump deserves the Nobel Peace Prize ceasefire. I mean, we are, I'm a pretty, I'm usually a glass half full kind of person. And on this show we said, like you, I mean, how long until Israel violates the ceasefire? They will blame Hamas, of course. That's their, always their strategy. They'll do it very quickly. What is Trump's hand in this now? Like, where do things stand? Are we looking at a larger, broader war now with Lebanon? Like, where do we turn and will we see a sustained peace at all.

[D]

In the near term? I think we should not expect a broader war with Lebanon only because the Israelis have effectively wiped out Hezbollah. It's going to take Hezbollah at least another six months to begin reconstituting itself, probably closer to a year. The Israelis don't have to worry about Syria right now. They've taken a swath of the Syrian southwestern Syrian desert. But they don't have to worry about the Syrians posing a military threat to them. What the Israelis ought to be thinking about is if they're serious about expanding the Abraham Accords and establishing diplomatic relations with the government of Saudi Arabia, then by God, they have to give. On Gaza, you know, we hear all the time that the one state solution is dead, the two state solution is dead. What about a three state solution? First of all, there's going to have to be an independent Palestine, whether it has a military or not, sure, can be open for negotiations. But the west bank is going to have to Be the center of an independent Palestine. What does that do for the Gaza Palestinians? There's got to be some sort of an agreement out there where Gaza can be administered by the United nations or administered by the Saudi government or administered by the Egyptian government like it was before 1967. And to give the Gaza Palestinians some sort of a chance at economic development. Look at these photographs that you're showing right now. It's destroyed. For all intents and purposes, Gaza has ceased to exist as a functioning place.

[B]

And so there's going to have to.

[D]

Be some kind of bigger, bigger agreement here.

[E]

Yeah.

[B]

Thank you so much. John Kiriakou joining us from Europe today.

[A]

Thank you.

[B]

Pleasure to see you as always.

[A]

Check out his great show as well. John, always great to see you. Thank you for holding. Holding these empires accountable.

[E]

We appreciate it.

[D]

Thank you for the work that you do. These are important conversations.

[B]

Thank you, John. Someone in the chat says redacted's tds is showing. And to that I give you a middle finger. I don't care about any kind of allegiance to a politician. I personally don't mind Donald Trump, his personality. I don't care about the White House redecoration. That's Trump. Trump derangement syndrome. That's not what this is. What we are doing is holding the line of our freedom and anti war platform. So I'm sorry if that confuses you.

[A]

Yeah. We are vehemently anti war on this show. And also we vehemently support the idea of congress to declare war, go through congress. It's illegal to carry out these operations and to declare war in another country without congressional approval. It's a violation of the U.S. constitution. So we are very. We're strict constitutionalists when it comes to these things. I don't care if Obama or Trump is doing it. We're going to hold them both to account. By the way, both of these parties are corrupt. I mean, Republicans and Democrats don't get. You know, don't. Don't get us started on that. So we have no allegiance to a human being at all on this show.

[B]

Yeah. We oppose the uni party. Join us. It's very liberating. Then you don't have to be manipulated by partisan politics. Okay. We're going to talk about the Charlie Kirk murder trial because I'm mad as snakes about that. I invite you to join me in my outrage.

[A]

A new video evidence. Yeah, new video evidence is shocking on that. We're going to talk about that coming up.

[B]

But first we want to tell you about our friends over at American Financing because you know interest rates are dropping. What if you could delay your next two mortgage payments? Imagine taking those two mortgage payments, putting them in your pocket, and finally getting ahead, especially with the holidays coming. Well, it is possible if you call American Financing. If you're feeling stretched by everyday expenses, you're not alone. Today my son went to buy just super Glue, just a little tiny tube of super glue, and it was $8. Does that seem right to you guys? I'm like, Is everything expensive? $8 for a teeny tiny super glue? I don't mean to be scandalized, but every now and then I do. So now you can help yourself. Stop digging into the red for your expenses by calling American Financing. With their rates in the low fives, they have salary based mortgage consultants helping homeowners just like you restructure their loans and save every month without upfront fees. And their average customer is saving $800 a month. That's like to getting a $10,000 a year raise without getting a new job. So call and let them teach you this trick of learning leveraging your assets. It's something wealthy people do all the time, but most of us are not taught. So get a personal consultant. You can go to American Financing.net or call 866-890-8434. Today their NMLS number is 182334. You can find that information at nmlsconsumeraccess.org Again, APR for rates in the fives starting at 6.196 for well qualified buyers. But that's a moving target because rates are coming down quite. Call them. Get your terms americanfinancing.netacted.

[A]

Welsh Jackie says both Natalie and Clayton have the real tds, which is truth defined syndrome.

[B]

Oh, that's nice of you to say that. Yeah. We have no allegiance, really, except for what's good for all of us.

[E]

Yeah.

[A]

America first.

[B]

So no partisan politics to distract us from real study. Okay, well, we're gonna go over the anomalies in the Charlie Kirk murder case and point out the holes that we cannot fill and we are pissed about. So join us. Uh, now first we're gonna talk about the prosecution of Tyler Robinson because it's looking dirtier and dirtier every day. Now, today there was supposed to be a hearing, and in that hearing, the judge was going to rule on whether or not to allow cameras in the courtroom. Because both sides and the judge have all pretty much decided they don't really want this. Which is strange. Right? I mean, think about it. We were able to have Cameras to watch. Ted Kaczynski, O.J. simpson, Timothy McVeigh, Jeffrey Dahmer, the Night Stalker, Derek Chauvin, Harvey Weinstein, Ghislaine Maxwell. Oh, El Chapo. We have been able to watch courtroom procedures and trials for all of these people.

[A]

Correction.

[B]

But what?

[A]

No, Ghislaine Maxwell, we did not see.

[B]

Oh, okay.

[A]

Remember, we just had drawings. We just had drawings.

[B]

That's right.

[A]

But all the other ones.

[B]

Yes, yes. Who else did I miss? The Boston Marathon bombers. Can you think of anybody else? Like, why this guy more so than, say, Timothy McVeigh?

[A]

Yeah. I don't know.

[B]

So that's strange. But the hearing that was supposed to be today was procedural in preparation for a hearing that would be October 30th. And now that has been pushed just a few hours ago. They're saying, well, we're not ready for it. We still will do the pre trial hearing today, but you don't get to see him. No cameras on him. And then the actual hearing won't happen until January, which is straight. Okay. This is a high profile case. The government was so sure this was the guy within 48 hours of the assassination, but they've given us no evidence to stand on except saying they have evidence, but we haven't seen it. Now, not only can we not see him, because a lot of times people are saying that his face doesn't match the images that they gave us on the stairwell. We also can't see the procedures. We probably can't see all of it. And now they're not going to give us their full slew of evidence until January, which means they've given themselves the holiday season to craft their narrative, which is strange. Now the judge is going along with all of this. Let's think about who that judge is. Now, this is a high profile case. You would hope we'd get a really experienced judge. We don't have that. And in fact, Judge Graff has only been appointed as a judge since May of this year, so about six months he's been on the job. That doesn't mean he's not good. Just means he's not experienced. So let's keep that in mind. He's handsome, right? I'm just seeing if you're paying attention.

[A]

Okay.

[B]

Are you okay? Usually when I call someone handsome, Clayton goes like this. Okay, I'm reading the chat room.

[E]

Oh, what?

[B]

Do they think he's handsome?

[A]

I don't know. Okay, Denny says you both are losing credibility.

[B]

I don't care if you don't want to talk about this go somewhere else. These are things that are unusual in a murder case we're not getting a real answer on. So, I mean, actually, we haven't really been smeared for asking legitimate questions as much as others like Candace Owens and Jimmy Door. So, okay, we're in good company. Go ahead and say that if you want. Now, the judge also did approve an extraordinarily broad gag order which pertains to any future lawyers who join the case. How do you gag future lawyers? But they've done it. Roughly 3,000 potential witnesses, family members, and others connected to the investigation. How do people lose their First Amendment rights just because they witnessed a crime? That's highly irregular. And also, the extrajudicial commentary, not just public statements, but even informal communication like social media posts, could be subject to the gag order. Suspiciously, it does not apply to law enforcement. So that is also strange. Now, why do we need such an extraordinarily broad gag order when the media is not questioning the narrative of this case? The media is all in Tyler Robinson's the dude.

[E]

They.

[B]

They are pretty sure of it. They don't present any alternative. So who is this gagging, you have to ask yourselves? Probably us, right? The independent questioners. Now, here's another major hole that's been picked up by independent journalists, which again, is probably the target of the gag order. The narrative of turning points. Exactly. Executives is full of holes. Now, you may recall this guy who spoke at Charlie Kirk's memorial right after the assassination. Pastor Rob McCoy was saying, hey, you know, Candace Owens, questioning this is strange. Charlie would never have done that. He would have been a good friend to her. So what he thinks is a good friend is not caring how someone is assassinated. I don't need friends like that. Now, when the text came out that Charlie had, in fact broken his allegiance to the Israel lobby, that Pastor Rob McCoy was on the chain. So he knew this but denied that it was true. Now, strangely, his son, Michael McCoy, was Charlie's chief of staff, very high level at Turning Points usa, and was there, just a few feet away, when Charlie was assassinated. Now, let's listen to how his father, Pastor Rob, described. Described his son's experience of the assassination.

[A]

I'm looking at my son, who's 24 years old. Justin's the chief CFO, chief financial officer, and Mikey's the chief of staff. And I'm watching. The minute Charlie was shot, he called me, says, dad, Charlie's been shot in the neck. Please call every pastor and pray. Okay, son. He has wits about him. He was just directing he had blood.

[E]

All over him and.

[B]

Okay, blood all over him.

[A]

He was covered. Yeah, covered in blood.

[B]

Covered in blood. Had his wits about him. Well, the video evidence does show that he has his wits about him. He does not panic. He does not rush to Charlie to see if his bestie is okay. He calmly walks away. Now, this is publicly available footage that was put together by based Sam Parker. If you're not following him, we please do. So what you're looking at is Mikey in the back in the backpack, straps and the white sweatshirt and the white hat. And so he is with Charlie the whole day. And in fact, he has footage of himself that he published. When they drove up, he was in the car. He was one of the four seats taken by the car. Now, you see him back there, Charlie speaking. He's still wearing the backpack. The backpack never comes off, thankfully, so we can track him easily because there's a lot of people in white. Now, we are blurring the assassination here, so you don't have to worry about that. In a few seconds, Charlie will be assassinated. Now, what would you do if your bestie gets shot? Probably not this.

[A]

Walk right away.

[B]

So watch for a second. That's gonna happen. He walks away. He takes some phone calls, and then he comes back. You'll see it in just a second. Okay, so as soon as Charlie picks up the microphone, he says mostly, maximum two sentences before he's assassinated. So watch that man. He's about to be killed. Mikey is still there. He says one or two things. Now it's blurred. Now watch him back up. He does not run. He walks calmly behind, puts his hat down and walks. The footage does show him continuing to walk. He doesn't give Charlie any. You know, there's no blood on him. He doesn't resuscitate. Then when we see Charlie being rushed into the suv, we can see Mikey down the parking lot walking calmly, like, walking away. How does this happen? So very well could be that he's calling his father, which is what the pastor just said. He called me and asked for prayers, possibly. And we might be able to understand it if he was being a coward, running. Right? That's not what he was doing. This is inexplicable. It's absolute. So go ahead, try. Try to explain how someone that you're that close to on your team gets assassinated and you shrug your shoulders and walk away. Anybody?

[A]

No, I mean, someone could say, oh, he's in shock, which is ridiculous. Like, you process it that quickly to the point where you're going to walk away. Like, I'm done with all these assassinations. I've seen too many. I'm just going to walk down the street. I'm gonna go to Burger King or something. Like, I mean, I would be running around if he was like, my best, best friend and I was there with him all the time. I would be scrambling, working with people, trying to help get him out, trying to find a car. How do we get him out of here? Where's the ambulance? Doing whatever you can. I wouldn't be casually walking away.

[B]

And he doesn't know. So even if his father says, he called me and told me these things, there's nothing he could know at this point. The shot goes off or whatever it was, and he backs up.

[A]

So. And also, I know people are saying, hey, we don't wanna rush to judgment on Pastor Rob. We wanna give him the benefit of the doubt. But you're saying you're on a. He was on a FaceTime call with his son where he's covered in blood. I think it was a FaceTime call that he specifically said. Right. So my son is covered in blood, Charlie's blood. Well, where. When. When did that happen? Did you walk back and then help load him into the suv? Because that happened pretty darn quickly and you were already walking down the street. So where did the blood come from? Like, was it later at the hospital when you got there and you rubbed yourself all over him? Like, what doctor would allow you to be rubbing yourself a white shirt? I mean, it just makes zero sense. So was the pastor lying? I mean, that's the real question here. Why would he have said that? Where was this blood?

[B]

I will say that I watched his speech at the Charlie Kirk Memorial, and it was very heavy on I am America's pastor. Charlie had a lot of wisdom, but he insisted that I had more, that I was his teacher. Charlie really relied on me. It was very, I want to say, navel gazing. And so him establishing himself in the center of this story, in the center of this narrative, does make me very uncomfortable. That's where I'm going to leave it. Am I saying he's a liar? Well, I don't see any proof that his son had blood on him. Neither of the McCoys have responded to explain this. I have a feeling now that Candace Owens is coming back from vacation, that's only going to get worse for them. So, again, we're not presenting anything to fill these holes. We are showing you the holes right now because we can one other big.

[A]

Hole, and this is emerging. And Ryan's gonna be on the show this week, I believe. Simon, can you confirm that? I believe that's the case. But anyway, this emerged an eyewitness to this shooting Filming this in 4K high definition video using an iPhone. This is Ryan Simmons who said the FBI then contacted him and basically encouraged him to delete the videos off his phone because he might be suffering from ptsd. And then even had a higher ups at the FBI calling him to confirm that he had also deleted the videos from an angle that we haven't yet seen. He then released this video and that's why we can actually now see it. So take a look. And yes, I warning you, this is part of it. Take a look.

[C]

Originally when I sent this video into the fiv.

[A]

They are not counting gang violence.

[D]

Great.

[A]

So that is the video that he had on his phone for tips. I'm sorry, can you keep playing it?

[C]

There you go. And you know, to Charlie and helping out. So it started off where I got in contact was talking to someone at the local field office there in my local state. And then it jumped up a few levels. Then I was talking to someone on like the national level. That person had called me back and they had said, because this was your friend, I think it's best that you erase the video from your phone because it's just going to give you ptsd. And then call it another time to ask if I had erased it. That was the first time that I felt like it was even right to post these videos that was on my other account that was gone and just was removed after five years of building it. But so I got a call back and was asked to confirm it was gone. And again, that's when I started sharing, posting and saving on much, many different hard drives in many different places. It's been. It's been crazy. It's been rough.

[A]

Yeah. So the FBI, hey, just want to confirm that, you know that that really important video evidence that you have of Charlie Kirk shooting, you deleted that, right? I know it might cause you some ptsd. I know you were, you know, you were there that day. So you might want to delete that video. And by the way, did you delete it yet? Now he has heard now from other individuals who were there that they've also had videos removed from their phones without their consent. And you know, we haven't independently been able to verify this, but he's been hearing from others who were there that day who had videos erased. Gone. Watch.

[C]

Can someone explain to me how you can literally have stuff on your Phone have a couple posts that you post on TikTok still have, you know, 20 other videos that you've luckily saved on hard drives that aren't connected to the Internet. And then they're all just gone from your phone. They're erased from your phone. Guys, you guys keep asking. We haven't seen anyone. From this angle, people aren't talking from this angle, people aren't talking and posting their footage. People's footage is getting erased off their phones. People are being silenced. People are being targeted. And it's. It's getting crazy. Guys, I don't know where this comes from or what's going on, but yesterday I thought it was an overload because of the followers and comments and all this stuff like that. So I had to turn off my notifications. And then later on, when I assessed the situation, I figured out, no, my phone turning different colors and feeling like it's lagging when I'm typing and all this weird stuff and watching it type different things that I'm not typing. Just bunch of strange things. I know I sound like a cuckoo when I'm saying this, but woke up today and a bunch of my videos are gone. Not from TikTok, from my library. So luckily, I have one of my hard drives with them, and I'm gonna getting every video that I can out to you guys, Please. Save, save, save, save, save, save them, screen, record them, spread them, do everything.

[A]

Can you imagine? Literally, we're gonna have. By the way, Ryan's gonna be on the show on Wednesday here to talk about this and what he's been experiencing. Unbelievable.

[B]

Yesterday I had my kids. I was like, this is. I'm doing my backup that I do every quarter. This is where it's kept if something's happened to mommy, you know, like, this is important. You need to own your own data. The cloud, it's not your friend.

[A]

And I just want to point out.

[F]

Not once, not once has the FBI.

[A]

Ever called to make sure that I.

[F]

Was okay with what I.

[C]

What I was watching.

[A]

They've never called me to ask if.

[C]

I was doing okay.

[E]

You're just.

[A]

You're just not important enough, I guess. You haven't been. You haven't been to the scene of a mass murder scene that's been spread around the world. If you had, maybe they'd be wiping things off your phone.

[B]

You don't want the FBI being worried about your mental health. That's what I absolutely don't want in life.

[A]

Hey, Steve, Baker's gonna be here in a moment. We're Gonna talk about the FBI pipe bomber. Steve is one of the greatest journalists in the United States of America. He knows what it's like to deal with the FBI and the FBI lying about what happened with the FBI with the so called pipe bomber on January 6th. Why are they hiding information? Why does it look like the video footage that they have released has been manipulated? The FBI wouldn't do that. Right. The FBI is a solid, solid American organization. Steve is going to join us here in a moment to talk about the new revelations there. But first, is your money working for you? Well, investing in real estate has never been easier. Savings account CDs offer very low returns, barely keeping up with inflation. The stock market volatile, unpredictable. One day you're up, the next day you're down. If you're tired of watching your hard earned money sit idle or ride that market roller coaster, it's time for a better solution. Now you can invest in real estate Short notes with as little as $500. I've been doing it for years and we've been partners with Connect Invest for many, many years now. With annualized returns up to 9%. Yes, you heard me right, 9%. Real estate has long been a proven way to build wealth. But for most, the barriers are high. Costs are high, complex management, lack of time makes it seem out of reach for a lot of Americans. Maybe you've watched those flipping shows on television, you're like, maybe I should do that. And you realize, oh my gosh, I have to hire contractors, I have to do all of that. Well, now you can do it much, much easier by investing in with as little as $500. You can start with fixed monthly returns by investing in real estate Short notes. Yes, Connect Invest operates like a fund. So you're investing into this fund where they're building properties and you get the benefits of that with as little as 9. With, with as much up to 9% returns. So just go right now and create your free account. Go to redacted.inc invest and when you sign up today, you'll get a 50 bonus right in your account. And again, you can start with as little as $500 and you can select a short note for 6, 12 or 24 months. You sit back and you earn monthly income through your investment terms. Join thousands of investors who are growing their wealth right now. Go to redacted.inc./invest today. Redacted.inc invest. So thanks to all of you guys for joining us here in the chat room. The tens of thousands of you that are watching on Rumble on x on, on YouTube. Thank you guys so much for subscribing and being a part of our community here. We really appreciate we have no agenda on this show other than seeking the truth. And sometimes it gets uncomfortable and it might shatter your world view, especially if you've like voted for a certain person and it's really upset you with the way things have turned out. So don't hold, don't, don't shoot the messengers here. Well, last week the FBI suddenly released new, higher quality video of that 2021 DNC and RNC pipe bomb suspect as it renewed its efforts and also laid down that $500,000 reward for information leading to that arrest. A guest we had on the show last week says that $500 is never going to be spent. This is the same video, by the way, from earlier in the year. But then they slapped another two minutes at the end of that footage to show you. Our next guest is one of the best journalists in America and has been on this story from the very beginning. That's Steve Baker, who writes at Blaze Media and he's been covering this. He just posted this last week when they pushed this out, he said, let's pretend the cell phone data was corrupted and deleted and the identifying data from the many times they used their phone during that stroll was lost into the ether. For heaven's sake. FBI released the entire 17 to 18 hours from the Ethereum 2 cameras. What are you hiding? He's been covering this deeply. And Steve is back on the show with us. Steve, welcome back to Redacted. Great to see you.

[E]

Hey, Clayton, it's good to see you as well.

[A]

So since that video was published or republished with that additional two minutes added on to it, what stood out to you and in your reporting? I mean, it seems like you have a lot of questions for the FBI.

[E]

The most important thing that stood out was why won't they go ahead and release to us at the very least the unaltered video? Because we're talking about frame reduction on these videos. We proved that that has happened. This has been manipulated at the lab by somebody. We don't know who. We don't know why. I have a theory behind it. I think that the reason why that the frame reduction has happened is that defeats gate recognition software. And what do I mean by that? Well, we've heard of facial recognition, right? Well, gate recognition software is actually more accurate than facial recognition. Not only does it provide a much clearer, we'll say, fingerprint of what an individual walks like than does facial recognition but it's also more reliable at greater distances. Whereas, you know, somebody gets 50, 100 yards, 200 yards away from you and from the camera, then facial recognition is not likely to work at all. But gate recognition, in other words, how somebody moves, how they walk, how they carry themselves is reliable to much greater distances. And part of the reason why this blurry video, almost like stop action, you know, photography, it has been the only thing that's released is, I'm afraid that that's what they're trying to, to obscure. And, and the other thing, and this is the most, this is the most confounding part Clayton, is the fact that they refuse to for some reason release to us the entire 17 or 18 hours of that DNC those two cameras. So just like I posted in that 1x post right there, the side by side of the two cameras, those are not the Capitol Police or the United States Capitol Police CCTV video cameras. Those two cameras are on the Democratic National Committee headquarters building themselves. And for some reason they have never released to the public or to anyone else for that matter that we're aware of that entire period from the time that alleged pipe bomber placed the bomb there that night around 7 between, you know, he was walking around between 7 o', clock, 7:30 and 8 o' clock from whenever he or she allegedly placed that bomb is then there were other things that were happening. We believe that that bomb was picked up and retrieved at 4:40 in the morning. We also know that the Secret Service had their human sweep of the building that morning because then Vice President Elect Kamala Harris was scheduled to be there and arrive at 11:30, 30 that morning. And so they had human resources. We have from a long range traffic camera we can see between eight and nine blurry Secret Service members doing a sweep of that exact area that you're looking at right now, we can see that from a very, very long range, low resolution camera, we can see they're doing the sweeps at that time at 8:30 in the morning. We know that we're at least two bomb, bomb squad, bomb dog teams that sniffed out the area later that morning before Kamala Harris's arrival and they all missed it. And I'm going to tell you, when you see, even from this video that the FBI put out last week, when you see where they placed the bomb, it is absolutely 100% impossible that the human suite missed that target.

[A]

Right?

[E]

They could not have missed it. That means that that bomb was not there in the morning. And then again, we also believe that it was put back there. And it was put back just some time, either minutes before or at the moment that the plane closed. Capitol Police counter surveillance squad, it was, it was two individuals that they came by, they found the bomb. One of them did, and then walked over to the Secret Service SUV and alerted them that there was a bomb 15ft from where they were sitting. And then of course, you know, when you find out that a bomb is 15ft from you, the first and most likely thing that you're going to do is finish your sandwich for two minutes.

[A]

Always. Especially if it's like Jersey Mike's. You know, like, I paid $12 for this for a sub that's Mike's way with, with vinegar on it. I'm going to sit and finish this thing even if there is a bomb behind me. It's ridiculous, it's absurd. And what's more absurd is the idea from your reporting. It seems like, and maybe you can correct me on the record here, but it seems like the FBI's move here was to say that this was a training exercise. That was the excuse they were going to use.

[E]

And we have absolutely no proof of that. But what we have, if we have two different sources from the Washington field office who said that that was the prevailing rumor inside the wfo, is that they were going to claim that this was an ill timed or a very poorly timed training exercise that day from or between at least one, maybe two, maybe three different agencies. And that this was a really bad day to do that. And that's why everybody was casual. They knew it was a training device and that that was the problem with that. And so that was the way that they were going to explain it away. Now I'm going to. Once again, I try to do this as often as I talk about this. I'm going to give Dan and Cash, the Deputy Director and the Director of the FBI. I'm going to give them a little bit of grace because they are up against a lot of deep staters still involved at the FBI. In fact, they are running up against obstacles every single day. We know that from our own reporting, we know that from our own insider sources there that they are still under a tremendous amount of obstructionism and opposition for the things that they need, the things that they're looking for, the things that they're requesting inside that bureau. And as a result of that, it's very possible that they don't even know. They, they themselves don't have any idea right now what the circumstances are around this bomb. Because all of this was developed this investigation, or in fact this cover up conspiracy was developed long before they were there. This was almost five years ago now. And so it's very possible that everything that we're asking for, everything that we're saying we need, particularly that 17, 18 hours from those two DNC cameras which would answer every single question we have. If they would release that we would know the answers to these questions. But maybe they don't exist anymore. Maybe those that footage has been destroyed, deleted, and we will never know the answer to it. And that's why they're so reliant upon this $500,000 reward and tips to identify this alleged bomber.

[A]

I've spoken to people who said that there's no way that $500,000 is ever going to be spent. This is all obfuscation. If this have you, when you've asked for this video footage, who have you asked? Have you been able to get anywhere with any FOIA requests or otherwise that would have been able to make this video available to you? And then the other question I have is about the cell phone, the cell phone data from this individual. Where have we gotten with that?

[E]

Well, okay, a couple of things. We know that this was the one person using a cell phone that night that we've not been able to track. You know, we know, we, I've covered the January 6th trials. I've watched them track people through the building, up the stairs, down into the crypt, in and through the, the rotunda, into Nancy Pelosi's office. They were able to track people at that time of day when there were tens of thousands of people gathered in and around the Capitol. And with all of that bandwidth absorption and disruption, they were able to still track people's actual steps to the, you know, to the meter of where they were in the Capitol at a very specific time. Yet this particular individual was not tracked. Now, one thing that people don't talk about and one thing that they don't seem to realize is that if this person is from the intelligence community, whether it's FBI, CIA or somebody else, that this person would then have tradecraft and would not be using a device that could be trapped, tracked. It would be a burner phone or some, you know, some sort of device like that. But this person was clearly and obviously in communication with somebody because we also know that the, the targets, the, the DNC placement of the bomb, and then the placement of the bomb, they always say the rnc. But it was actually behind the Capitol Hill Club, which is a Republican gathering place, private club there next to the rnc, we know that those devices, that was not their originally intended places placements. And that again brings us to the other agency possibly involved in this conspiracy, and that's the Capitol Police. Because those two counter surveillance plainclothes officers of the Capitol Police, they are known, they are known to Congress. They are known to the congressional committee that's been investigating them for two years and the names are known. And those two particular officers, when they found the bomb at 105 at the DNC, only moments before that, I'm talking about less than five minutes before that, they were at the Congressional Black Caucus Institute where that same alleged bomber apparently attempted to place that bomb under a Bush there first. And then apparently something broke off of the bomb. The bomber picked it up and then talked on the phone and then moved it over to the dnc, placed it there. We believe that somebody retrieved it in the middle of the morning and when they brought it back, the bomb had been fixed. And what they were looking for at the time at the Congressional Black Caucus Institute was they were looking for the two pieces that had fallen off or broken off of the bomb when it was originally placed there. And it's absolutely, Clayton, this is, this is the bombshell. It's absolutely impossible for those two counter surveillance officers to have the ability to go directly to the exact Bush that this individual with the hoodie on and the rare Nike shoes sat down at and originally attempted to place the bomb and, and know where to go first without foreknowledge.

[A]

Yeah, it's amazing that we can swoop in and within 33 hours we've got a lone gunman in Charlie Kirk's assassination, the FBI all over it. We can solve all of this, but here, suddenly we still can. But hey, $500,000 is still out there and available for anyone who can put this together. Steve Baker, who's always been stirring up a hornet's nest. I hope we get answers on this. I hope. Well, I'd love to have you back. If we get these 17, 18 hours of footage, we can answer everything. But thanks to your incredible reporting on this and staying on this story, because they would love to sweep this under the rug. Thank you for not letting them do that. Thanks, Steve.

[E]

Thank you, Clayton. And by the way, more is coming.

[A]

Well, we'll have you back. We'd love to have you on. So as soon as it drops, let us know and we'll have you right back on Steve, as always, will do.

[E]

Thank you.

[A]

Thanks, Steve. Amazing.

[B]

All right, well, coming up, we're going to talk about how the media thinks the COVID vaccine has cured cancer. That's strange. Were you going to say something, Philip?

[A]

Oh, I was going to say Steve.

[F]

Should consider applying for that $500,000 reward on information leading to the arrest.

[A]

Yeah, wouldn't that be amazing?

[B]

Exactly right.

[E]

They'll.

[D]

Exactly.

[A]

They'll never let them have it.

[B]

All right, well, before we get to the next story though, we want to tell you about our friends over, over@Perplexity AI because you may know that the future of web browsing is AI integrated web browsing. Well, that's where Comet is, a new AI powered web browser from Perplexity. So what this allows you to do is basically complete all your tasks all over the web, but have an AI assistant that is integrated. So it's not just AI on any given. Like you might know, maybe you book a flight on Delta and Delta has an AI assistant. Uh, well, this is like that, but it's all over the web. Uh, you may know that ChatGPT most recently released their AI web browser, but ChatGPT tracks you. We've talked about this and why that might be pro problematic. So we want to introduce you to our friends over@Perplexity AI now here's something that you might think of. If you're booking a trip, maybe you're going to book the, the tickets to the, the airplane tickets separately and the hotel separately and the tickets to whatever it is you're going to go to a baseball game or a show se. And that is a pain in the butt. And then maybe you book one and the other one sold out and you can't do it. Well, if you had an AI personal assistant, it could help assist you and make sure that all of those things are doable. They can check your calendar, they can check whether or not you can make it to certain things. A lot of times, for instance, if you ever book something and the airline gives you like a 60 minute layover, your AI can say, that's not going to work. That's a big airline. You're not going to make it. What if there's a delay, that kind of thing. So it's great to have your AI assistant assistant assisting you all over the web, not just in any individual site. So we want to invite you to check them out. You can Download Perplexity's new AI web browser, comment at pplx AI/redacted and just see if this works for you, if it makes your life a lot easier. Just googling stuff, you guys, that's for boomers. As the kids would say, AI integrated web browsers is the future. So choose one that is that has your back. Has safety in mind. Download Perplexity's new AI web browser, Comet PPLX AI/ redacted. Okay. Well, a new study found that cancer patients who took the COVID vaccine lived longer than cancer patients who didn't. Here is the study. Sounds like a miracle, right? The media is pretty excited about it. Here's the Washington Post saying that this is a breakthrough. They're saying that the COVID vaccine could boost your own immunity, especially if you're a cancer patient. Well, that's kind of weird. So let's stop to think about what they actually studied. What they're telling us is that people with either lung or skin cancer who took the vaccine within 100 days of starting immunotherapy lived longer than people who were on immunotherapy didn't. That 100 day window is kind of strange. And note this is not patients on chemotherapy therapy. A cancer patient patient that's on immunotherapy is by definition in a stronger position with a healthier outlook than one that's on chemo. So what they're telling us is that pre selected healthier cancer patients lived longer. Okay. They specifically included these two groups. The vaccinated lung cancer patients they said lived 16 to 17 months longer. But they could not attribute this to the COVID vaccine because it wasn't a randomized trial. They were studying the data in arrears. The skin cancer patients, well, they don't know how much longer they lived. They're just saying that the vaccinated ones are still living, in fact have not yet died, but lived longer than the baseline. The media is dressing this up as a miraculous vaccine enhances cancer survival story when really it's sort of of self selecting immune healthy group outperforming the immunocompromised group. It's like saying people who were well enough to get the vaccine lived longer, which we would logically conclude. So joining us to discuss is Dr. Pierre Kory who has studied the COVID vaccine and Covid therapeutics since day one. So thank you so. Oh, he's also the author of the book From Volcanoes to Vitality, the Untold story of the Ezo Shamanic Shimonishi. Sorry, the man who cracked Earth's hidden code for life and health. So this is a story about health. What do you make of the spin on this and what we can take from it? This study?

[F]

It's shocking. I mean, here's how I looked at that study. So it's a study that's called a retrospective, single center, observational study. Now, anytime you have a study like that and you have any findings which result for that, in typical science fashion, they do not allow you to make conclusions from such a study. You can say that we found an association, a correlation, but they don't allow you to say that this does that. So they take this very limited retrospective, single center study. And how does the media portray that to the society? As if the vaccines are this amazing addition to cancer therapy, that if you're on a specific cancer therapy and you get the vaccine, it's like a two for one. You do even better. Here's the thing, Natalie, though, I actually think that there is some scientific plausibility to what they found, but it's very narrow. You'd have to get this vaccine very close and then you'd have to ignore all of the adverse effects of vaccines which they didn't measure. So it may be true, but you cannot present it as such. And when I look at the paper you said in your intro, like, let's talk about how the media presents this. When I look to this journal Nature, which is considered one of the best journals in the world, and I look at the actual paper and what they write, they do slip in that they found in an association. But right at the end, they make a very strong statement that this shows that adding vaccines to immune checkpoint inhibitors extend survival of cancer patients. It's a definitive statement that's unfounded with the data. But what makes me angry about that is they don't allow us to do that with other data, but they're doing it with this data in this situation. It shows that there's this complete incentive to try to whitewash these vaccines. You got to try to find something positive to say about these vaccines, even on the weakest data. And they have absolutely no hesitation in doing that.

[B]

But what we know is that HHS has banned future research in MRNA vaccines, but the existing MRNA research in cancer vaccines, would we call them vaccines, cancer therapies has been allowed to go forward. So it seems well timed to me for them to say, see, and this is what the paper specifically, specifically address is do our RNA vaccines stimulate innate immunity? So what they're trying to do is sell us this idea that the MRNA technology is beneficial in cancer therapy. What do we know about the validity of that?

[F]

Yeah, I mean, there may be a slight role in cancer in that narrow respect, but they're also saying in that paper they're using the amount immune activation that the vaccines cause, which in non cancer patients, not on those medicines, is generally very damaging. But they're showing in this very narrow situation of someone on an immune checkpoint that by activating the expression of the tumor, those drugs work better. It's a very weak argument, but again, it's like you said, it's the timing, right? Fortunately, the media is full of propaganda. So are the journals. They're sending messages that are timed around political endpoints. And it's not subtle to me. I think it's subtle to most of society. But I see it and I call it out every time. And now can I just bring up like a similar paper which tries to do the same thing. It tries to present the vaccines in a positive light. But this paper, which was just a week ago or 10 days ago, did it in the most brazenly fraudulent way and it screamed fraud. It was so clear that they did something fraudulent. They published a paper in jama, right? Where again, another topic, medical journals. By the way, I think those are the most corrupt. The highest impact journals are the most controlled by pharma. There's not even a question.

[B]

I mean, you just mentioned Nature. Nature is the paper that took directives from Dr. Fauci to obscure the lab leak. We cannot let them off the hook for that. So it's obvious that anything they publish from now on we're going to have to be skeptical of.

[F]

There's no question. The only real good science I find are actually in like what are called second and third tier journals that they don't monitor, that media doesn't cover, that media doesn't disseminate. But you can find really good stuff that you can use as a doctor, the stuff that comes out of the top is so curated and corrupt, it's ridiculous. But let's. Last week in jama, they published a paper which essentially concludes that vaccination in pregnancy does not increase rates of fetal malformation. Beautiful conclusion of the paper. But when you open the paper, you find out how they got to that result. And they did it in the most brazen way. When they did the study, they refused to look at women. They only looked at live births. Live births. That is like something you don't do. That's like research trial designed for Fetal Malformations 101. It's been well known that when you only look at live births, you will miss toxicity signals. In fact, the WHO and the EMA for years have said when you're doing teratogenicity studies, meaning looking at effects on fetuses, you have to include all pregnancies. So this is standard research trial design for anyone who studies fetal toxicity issues. Why would this August group of researchers in the top journal of the world conduct a study where they purposely looked only at live births? And then further, they only looked to malformations detected in the first year. That misses another 20 to 40% of malformations, which are typically diagnosed later. So can I ask again why these August researchers limited it to one year and then they only used billing codes to find those malformations that misses another 10 to 20%. So you have a study published in JAMA where they literally designed it to miss about my conservative estimation, 60% of malformations. That reduces the numbers so low it doesn't reach statistical significance. And voila, you say, oh, it's safe in pregnancy. It is. You have to understand they are hiding the data. We know that our lived experiences shows that. You know how many people I know just in my world who've lost pregnancies after vaccination? In the first trimester, in the second trimester, anyone who's alive with a brain and eyes can see it. And you have JAMA telling you, oh, no, we did this fancy little study and it shows that it's safe. I mean, it is beyond infuriating, Natalie. I mean, we've seen these brazen lies that are contradicting our lived experiences and we're seeing it over and over. And I hope people are able to recognize this more and more. It's part of what I do. I try to point this out to let people know they're lying. They're lying in journals, they're lying in newspapers, they're lying on tv.

[B]

I mean, it does seem like the narrative around cancer is very much changing. JAMA published a story, we covered this maybe two or three weeks ago saying that cancers are over diagnosed in young people, which seems to obscure the fact that cancer diagnoses are increase rising since the pandemic.

[F]

Unbelievable. Over diagnosed in young people. Yeah.

[B]

Are you what they were trying to say, what I surmise is that young people are being alerted to things that would not kill them, cancers that would not continue to progress. They could live with this. They never needed to have known about it. But they get chemo, they, you know, put themselves in a pathology, they're forever a cancer survivor. That they didn't need to have done that. I mean, I don't know which ones are like mild cancers. You don't need to know about what.

[F]

They'Re trying to Say, trying to unpack that logic. And this phenomenon that they described, this sudden over diagnosis, why did it appear societally in the last few years? Why, why wasn't that the case 5, 10, 15 years ago? I mean, cancer has been rising in young people for a while. We know that. But the rates and the amount and the cancer expenses in this country has exploded since the advent of the campaign. So they want to pretend that it's all part of a historical trend. But when you really look at the data and you look at these, you know, it's almost like it reminds me, Natalie, of the huge explosions in life insurance claims for young people who are dying in 2020, where they tried to blame it on like obesity, diabetes, getting fatter, and suddenly they're dying younger. Yeah, it's suddenly like a huge spike. Oh, drug addiction. That's what it was. It was all drugadosis. So I'm saying, wait, drug overdose has been pretty. They're rising slowly and they're there for 10 years. But why the sudden spike in 2021? None of their stuff holds up to really even simple logic or critical analysis.

[B]

And yet the COVID vaccine, Chemotherapy patients are still being told to get the COVID vaccine because even even though there are risks associated with it, you would take someone who has such severe immunocompromised status and still give them. What do you make of this? I mean, how do, how do you. I guess this. I never thought. What do. Advanced chemotherapy patients, how did they react to the COVID vaccine? We must have seen something.

[F]

You know, I don't have data from that specific cohort. Mine's much more sort of general and categorical, but I can imagine.

[B]

Yeah, I'm just wondering why they're excluded. If you're gonna make this broad claim about cancer patients, but only take the cancer light.

[F]

You'Re doing it. I think everything is done deliberately. I'm sorry, I just. My cynicism knows no bounds. Anything they do in order, how they look at data, how they shape the data. I always cite the article the disinformation Playbook. It was written by the Union for concerned scientists in 2017, and they outline how corporations and governments, how they counter science that's inconvenient to their interest. And there's five tactics developed by the tobacco industry in the 1950s and they're still doing them today. And the number one tactic is something called the fake. And that's where they design studies with predetermined results. So for instance, that fetal malformation study with the vaccines, those Scientists had marching orders, go do a study finding safety in the vaccines in pregnancy. You know, this one, this, this immune checkpoint one, I don't know that that's the same thing. And I think that result may be there, but I think they're overstating its importance. And I think the media is fanning the flames over this really association that really should not require front page news. So, I mean, there's also, I think, coordination between journals and media and what they kind of amplify. But I just have this cynicism, Natalie, that these studies coming out of these major journals have predetermined results, because there's a flip side to that. I also know what doesn't show up in those journals. All of these compelling studies showing the harms and the death rates and the increases in cancer, all of that never gets published in a high impact journal. So you're seeing a horrifically curated view of the actual totality of the evidence. We know, looking broadly at all the evidence, how toxic and lethal these vaccines were. But the average person, the average schmo walking around the street, listening to the news, listening to Foushee, is hearing safe and effective all the time. And anyone who claims otherwise is some fringe quack, radical, whatever, it's tiresome.

[B]

Now, can you tell me what you discovered about vitamin D disinformation?

[F]

Oh, yeah.

[E]

So.

[F]

So I gotta tell you, I don't know how much time we have a quick little anecdote, but my book, the War on Ivermectin, was inspired by an email I received one morning in March of 2021 from a guy I didn't know is from Professor William B. Grant. And he wrote me an email. This is during the height of the Ivermectin war, where the disinformation around Ivermectin was crazy. And he wrote me an email and he said, Dear Dr. Corey, what they're doing to Ivermectin, they've been doing to vitamin D for decades. And he included the link to the disinformation playbook. And that's the first time I read that article.

[E]

Article.

[F]

And when I read that article, I suddenly knew what was happening around the topic of Ivermectin. And I've since become collegial and friendly with Professor Grant. He's one of the most published researchers on vitamin D and he has written extensively about all the tricks that we've been talking about today. They've been pulling for decades with vitamin D, purposely giving low doses, purposely treating for short periods, purposely following up for Short periods, purposely studying things that vitamin D shouldn't affect, not in that timeframe. And then study after study gets published showing that vitamin D doesn't help any disease. But for everyone that they do, there's also plenty of studies showing the critical importance and benefits of vitamin D. And so after decades of study of vitamin D, you know what you have, you have any claim around it as being controversial because all of the data conflicts and it gets neutered. And so you don't know what truth is anymore. We know how important vitamin D is. The COVID data on vitamin D was crazy. If you had a good vitamin D level, if you had it over 50, there was almost no deaths found. And I've said from the beginning of COVID a reasonably functioning and moral and just public health agency would have immediately started a vitamin D assessment and replenishment campaign for the entire country. At the end onset of COVID you would have had every doctor checking vitamin D levels, you know, supplementing with the correct doses to get their dose, their levels higher. And nothing like that happened. In fact, you were told that vitamin D doesn't help. It's criminal.

[B]

Right. Well, beyond that, I mean. Well, number one, vitamin D is cheap. The supplement is really inexpensive. Right. And so they wouldn't, they wouldn't do that. Also, I find that it conflicts with the vegan agenda because vegetarians think, oh, I can get vitamin D from plants and vegetables, which they can't. They get vitamin D2, not D3. In fact, if you subscribe to Robert Malone's newsletter, he recently did research about how vitamin D2 is transient in the body. Vitamin D3 sticks around. And you get it from meat. You can't get it from anywhere else other than meat sources unless you take a supplement. And people don't want to talk about that. How they think that the vitamin D that they're getting from plants is sufficient and it's not. What do you think of that?

[F]

And, yeah, and that's, that's. So, that's. Yeah, that's actually what I would call misinformation or being misinformed. I think it's important where you get your vitamin D from and how much you take. But even outside of, like I think of, like when I think of vitamin D, I think of the fact that I think it's 90% of the country is deficient. Number one, when you think of the poor and low income, especially in the northern states, right. In the winter, they're literally immunosuppressed all winter. They have, they have sub, sub physiologic or protective vitamin D levels. There's no consistent supplementation programs or policies. And then the real, the biggest crime, now, you probably know this, is that the normal levels of vitamin D that are targeted in the US Population are artificially lowered based on studies. The idea that below 30 is what's called, like, deficient. I would call deficient if I was. If I was Dr. Fauci. Let's say you put Dr. Corey, the head of HHS, I would make the lower end of normal for vitamin D50, you know, and they do this, and this is the crime. And I'm like, hey, I'm sick of, like, ringing the same bell over and over again. They do want us sick. If you had everybody with a healthy and robust vitamin D level, the amounts of illness and hospitalization would plummet, particularly with COVID The billions that remdesivir made in hospitalized patients would have been millions. All of the money for everything. And also the amount of illness and the severity of it would have been much less. I think the appetite for vaccines would have been muted. I mean, it goes against their objectives. You don't want a healthy population. You want them reliant on pharmaceutical. On oversold pharmaceutical interventions that are supposedly gonna keep you healthy when there's lots simpler and cheaper and safer ways of keeping you safe and healthy and like, you've talked about. And I don't know how to change it except for doing things like this is having these discussions, and hopefully the public is listening.

[B]

Yeah. Well, I always love talking to you. You make a ton of sense. So thank you for offering your time on Redacted again. We really appreciate it.

[F]

Thanks, Natalie. Great talk, Nia.

[B]

All right, you guys. That's right, Vitamin D. So look into it. And in fact, when you look at Eskimos who have vitamin D levels, they have no sun, right. They're in the dead of winter, have sufficient vitamin D levels because they eat animal fat blubber, specifically from sea life. So look into it. As they say, don't use Google. Google was started by the CIA. You need to read ahead of your algorithm. You guys, we're working on a T shirt that says, be smarter than your algorithm, because that is increasingly the challenge. All right, well, we've got a busy show for the rest of the week that does it for us today. Before we go, we want to tell you about our friends over at Lear Capital, though, because you might have seen that gold and silver has had a banger year, even though the American dollar has not. We all know the cost of war is not just lives but also our financial future. War is a theft from the working class people. Right now the US Is on a dangerous path. That's what we've been talking about for the last hour. Clearly how the United States wants a war with Venezuela, is supporting the war in Gaza, has been supporting the war in Ukraine, amongst other places, not to mention Libya, Syria. You know this, all of this is done on our taxpayer dollars and it is it theft from the working people. That's why we're telling you to make sure that you have a way to hedge your bets and make sure that you're not saving the US dollar, which is constantly being deflated, but thinking about owning tangible assets like gold and silver. And in fact, Goldman Sachs is already predicting that gold could hit $4,500 an ounce by 2026. And it does seem to be on that trajectory because the smart money is moving. Central banks, billionaires, institutions, institutional investors, they're not waiting. They're protecting ourselves. And so are we. That's why we started investing in metals years ago. And it's been one of the smartest things that we've done. If you had done the same thing when we started talking about this, well, you're in a happy position too. But it's not too late because again, the American dollar, if you think it's going to get stronger, why are you here? You wouldn't be on a show like Redacted. You need to go watch the Disney Channel because you're a fan of fantasy, but the rest of us are grounded in reality. So now it's your turn to act. Call Lear Capital today. They will get on the phone with you. They will teach you how to do this with whatever you've got to start with. It's a really personal conversation. Like they answer the phone and you're like, oh, a real person. I don't have to go through, you know, impress numbers like, you actually get a person who's gonna help you and learn about your goals and help you implement. If you call them at 1-800-613-3557 or go to Lear redacted.com to get your free investor kit. There's no pressure, just the facts. And they will follow up with you at your learning speed whenever you're ready to do this. But don't wait too long, you guys, because you know what's happening to the US dollar. Go to Lear redacted.com. nobody's going to protect your money. But you do it now before the next crisis is hits. Okay, well, that's gonna do it for us today. Thank you so much for your patronage, for being here, for your comments. We really love having you. Do we have any super chats that we can look at before we go? Clayton had to run off to a car. Thank you, Brenda Cooper Richie, for joining the rebellion. When you join as a subscriber to our YouTube channel or a rumble channel, your name pops up there. We really appreciate that. And, yeah, again, we tell you, the algorithm is not your friend, so you got to help it along. No super chats, dudes. No.

[A]

Oh, I. I don't know anybody.

[B]

You can't.

[E]

You would have to read them.

[B]

And David. Oh, I would have to do it, and I can't. Never mind. Clayton ran off to carpool, so that's where we ended today. We will see you Tomorrow, same time, 4pm Eastern. Thanks so much for joining us, everybody.