wavePod

SHOCKER! Trump's latest would-be ASSASSIN has Ukraine connections, Real ID backlash | Redacted - Redacted News | Wave AI Podcast Notes

Back to Redacted News

SHOCKER! Trump's latest would-be ASSASSIN has Ukraine connections, Real ID backlash | Redacted

Redacted News

Tue Apr 15 2025

Summary

Redacted News: SHOCKER! Trump's Latest Would-Be ASSASSIN Has Ukraine Connections, Real ID Backlash

Release Date: April 15, 2025
Hosts: Natali and Clayton Morris
Guests: Harrison Berger (Independent Journalist), Lionel (Lionel Nation), Tom Fitton (Judicial Watch)

Overview

In this riveting episode of Redacted News, hosts Natali and Clayton Morris delve into a series of explosive topics that challenge mainstream narratives. From a disturbing assassination plot against former President Donald Trump with alleged Ukraine connections to the contentious rollout of Real ID, the episode promises a thorough examination of issues often overlooked by mainstream media. Additionally, the hosts scrutinize the authenticity of a high-profile female space mission and explore the fairness of Harvey Weinstein's retrial, culminating in a discussion on the pursuit of transparency regarding Jeffrey Epstein's files.

The Would-Be Assassin Plot Against Trump

Timestamp: [00:00] – [13:56]

Clayton Morris leads the discussion on a chilling case involving Nikita Kassip, a 17-year-old who allegedly plotted to assassinate Donald Trump with foreign assistance. He criticizes the mainstream media's lack of coverage, emphasizing the purported Ukraine connections.

Clayton Morris states, “[...] Nikita Kassip was actively carrying this out. [...] to carry out the murder of Donald Trump” ([04:30]).
The hosts highlight that Kassip had foreign contacts in Ukraine who allegedly helped him “figure out how to build a bomb-dropping drone” ([05:10]).
Clayton questions the media's silence: “Why isn't this the biggest story in mainstream media?” ([05:25]).
They draw parallels to previous assassination attempts, such as Ryan Routh, suggesting a pattern of Ukrainian involvement ([09:11]).
Natalie Morris adds, “We keep hearing, just wait. The plan is coming together” ([10:08]).

The segment underscores concerns about foreign interference and the possible underreporting of serious threats against political figures.

Real ID Backlash

Timestamp: [24:23] – [33:05]

The discussion shifts to the implementation of Real ID, a government initiative perceived as an extension of the Patriot Act, raising alarms about increased surveillance and privacy violations.

Kristi Noem, Homeland Security Secretary, delivers a public service announcement promoting Real ID ([24:45]).
Tinida Gates (likely a fictional guest) argues, “It's essentially trying to do the same thing, more government surveillance and control over Americans” ([27:10]).
The hosts and guest debate the implications of Real ID on privacy, likening it to steps toward a controlled digital identity and potential central bank digital currency ([28:19]).
Melinda Gates contends, “This is a holdover from the Patriot Act” and criticizes the erosion of Fourth Amendment protections ([27:10]).
The conversation explores the conflict between state rights and federal mandates, questioning the necessity and consequences of such identification systems ([29:39]).

This segment reflects deep skepticism about government overreach and the potential loss of personal freedoms through mandated identification systems.

Female Space Crew Authenticity

Timestamp: [13:56] – [22:45]

Natali and Clayton scrutinize the recent Blue Origin mission featuring an all-female crew, raising doubts about its authenticity and underlying motives.

Natali Morris questions the mission's legitimacy, noting inconsistencies in footage and behavior of the crew ([14:24]).
They analyze the sequence where crew members open the capsule door, only to have Jeff Bezos intervene with a wrench, suggesting it may have been staged for PR purposes ([15:51]).
Natalie Morris criticizes the portrayal of female astronauts, expressing concerns about the messages being sent to young girls regarding feminism and motherhood ([18:23]).
The hosts mock the authenticity of interactions during the mission, highlighting moments that appear scripted or unnatural ([17:33]).
Lionel humorously remarks, “What happens when she goes on a roller coaster? She's like, I really want to become an engineer and a physicist” ([21:16]).

The discussion conveys a skeptical view of corporate-sponsored space missions, suggesting they may prioritize image over genuine scientific advancement.

Harvey Weinstein's Retrial

Timestamp: [33:08] – [43:48]

The episode delves into the controversial retrial of Harvey Weinstein, questioning the fairness of the legal proceedings and the influence of the MeToo movement.

Lionel, a constitutional expert from Lionel Nation, explains the basis for overturning Weinstein's conviction, focusing on the misuse of similar fact evidence ([35:44]).
Kristi Noem outlines legal standards, arguing that prior misconduct should not prejudice the current trial ([35:37]).
Lionel emphasizes the importance of a fair trial, stating, “You have to identify the body, you have to identify the deceased” and criticizes the potential bias jurors may hold ([39:23]).
Natali Morris raises concerns about the manipulation of public opinion through the MeToo movement, questioning who benefits from such high-profile cases ([39:44]).
Clayton Morris highlights the media's role in shaping perceptions, noting the lack of unbiased coverage ([43:07]).

This segment raises critical questions about judicial impartiality, the potential for media influence on legal outcomes, and the broader implications for social justice movements.

Jeffrey Epstein Files and Judicial Watch Lawsuit

Timestamp: [43:49] – [56:44]

Tom Fitton from Judicial Watch discusses the organization's lawsuit against the Department of Justice to obtain the elusive Jeffrey Epstein files, advocating for transparency and accountability.

Tom Fitton explains the motive behind the lawsuit, emphasizing the need for public reassurance through FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) requests ([44:50]).
He highlights potential government obstruction, stating, “The deep state is secrecy, so everyone doesn't want it to come out” ([48:01]).
Clayton Morris probes the possible contents of the files, referencing terabytes of video evidence from Epstein's properties ([52:38]).
Tom Fitton underscores the significance of Epstein's connections, questioning what the released documents might reveal about influential individuals’ involvement ([49:24]).
The hosts express concern over Epstein's mysterious death and the handling of his case, suggesting deeper governmental complicity ([53:34]).
Lionel adds intrigue by expressing interest in potential prosecutorial misconduct related to Epstein's case ([56:04]).

This portion of the episode underscores the ongoing quest for truth surrounding Jeffrey Epstein, the challenges of accessing pivotal information, and the broader implications for political and social elites.

Conclusion

The Redacted News episode effectively unpacks a series of high-stakes issues, blending investigative discussions with pointed critiques of mainstream media and governmental actions. By incorporating expert opinions and direct quotes, the hosts provide a comprehensive analysis aimed at uncovering hidden truths and prompting listeners to question widely accepted narratives.

Notable Quotes

Clayton Morris: “Why isn't this the biggest story in mainstream media?” ([05:25])
Kristi Noem: “Get a real ID. Starting May 7, you will need a real ID to travel by air or to visit federal buildings in the United States.” ([24:45])
Melinda Gates: “This is written by the same authors, which makes sense because it's essentially trying to do the same thing, more government surveillance and control over Americans.” ([27:10])
Tom Fitton: “The deep state is secrecy, so everyone doesn't want it to come out.” ([48:01])
Lionel: “What happens when she goes on a roller coaster? She's like, I really want to become an engineer and a physicist.” ([21:16])

This detailed summary encapsulates the essence of the episode, highlighting the critical discussions and providing context for each major topic covered by Redacted News. Whether scrutinizing political assassination plots, government surveillance measures, or high-profile legal cases, the hosts strive to present a narrative that challenges listeners to seek deeper understanding beyond mainstream portrayals.

Loading summary...

Transcript

Clayton Morris (0:00)

Mainstream media has already memory hold this entire story because they don't want to ask tough questions. But we're going to dive into that today.

Natalie Morris (0:06)

Plus is real ID yet another way to track us a violation from the Patriot act left over from oh you know how they used 911 to continue to track and violate our civil rights? Yeah, right. We're also going to talk about Harvey Weinstein because he's being retried. Now he was the poster child for the MeToo movement but maybe he didn't get a fair trial. What are they hiding from us? Why do they want us united against Harvey Weinstein? Now we are not here to advocate for anybody except equal justice under the law. So we're going to have Lionel Nation joining us about that Also.

Clayton Morris (0:40)

Where are the Epstein files? See there's even an E missing in front of eps in on the the in our rundown here where it's purposeful because they're hiding it. Are we ever going to see the Epstein files? Tom Fitton from Judicial Watch is going to be joining us because they just filed a massive lawsuit to get to the bottom of these Epstein files. And I' excited to talk to Tom about that because they've been leading the charge on this. So that's coming up here a little bit later in the show. So. All right, we've got a lot of news to get to. Let us know where you're joining us from around the world. Thank you guys for patience here as we're building our new studio out.

Natalie Morris (1:14)

And you see I started off camera I'm like hey everybody. Yeah, what's going on? We're still getting it worked out.

Clayton Morris (1:21)

Don't you move, don't you move.

Natalie Morris (1:23)

I won't move.

Clayton Morris (1:23)

The team move also.

Natalie Morris (1:24)

I'm getting used to that. I'm finding you guys. Yeah. So we're, we're still getting settled in here. So I apologize. Thanks for sticking with us through all the bugs before we get to. No, okay, no, we're not gonna do the sponsor first.

Clayton Morris (1:36)

No, we're not.

Natalie Morris (1:37)

We usually do.

Clayton Morris (1:38)

Sorry. We're gonna get to it. Okay. All right, well let's get to it then shall we? We. Let's get to the news. So we are learning some stunning new details about the latest would be Trump assassin that the mainstream media has totally ignored. First let's set the stage here. A 17 year old kid murders his parents, lives with their bodies for two weeks. Records a video of his stepdad's corpse, surround candles. And that's not even the most disturbing part of the story. If you can believe that. If you can believe that part of it, which is actually creepy enough as it is. No, this young assassin in training had foreign contacts, one of them based in Ukraine. At least one. There could be more, and there likely is more in Ukraine. The same place, of course, that the United States has been sending endless billions without a single receipt. The Democrats, of course, their favorite money laundering machine is, you know, is the war in Ukraine. And Ukraine was his exit plan, using Ukraine to carry out the assassination and then exit afterwards and get back safely to Ukraine, where he would then be, I guess, I don't know, taken care of. This teenager, Nikita Kassip, wasn't just fantasizing about violence. He was actively carrying this out. And he allegedly killed his own mother and stepfather to free himself financially and logistically to carry out an assassination plot on President Trump like these. In other words, his parents were holding him back from carrying out his plan. They were just getting in the way of all of this. And he was being, you know, he was being held back by this. Well, now we have the new FBI affidavit today from the FBI agent working this case. I want to kind of go through this here because the DOJ and the FBI say his motive was crystal clear, quote, to obtain the financial means and autonomy necessary to carry out the murder of Donald Trump. And you can read the affidavit for yourself. It's long, it's a stunning, stunning read. But it gets worse. Kassip wasn't just working alone. So you can throw out the, the lone gunman story if you want. And we now know that Thomas Crooks also wasn't working alone in Butler, Pennsylvania. None of these guys were working alone. Why isn't this the biggest story in mainstream media? Like, just take a, take a pause here. If this was Barack Obama or Joe Biden for that matter, and you found out that there was a criminal conspiracy that involved a foreign government and the intelligence community to kill a sitting president, it would be wall to wall coverage on cnn, on msnbc. Turning on MSNBC today, no mention of it. Zero. Cnn, the same thing. Zero. It's unbelievable. So according to the federal agents, Cassip was texting someone with a Ukrainian phone number and another person inside of Russia, Ukrainian sympathizer, both of whom were allegedly helping him figure out how to build a bomb dropping drone because they've been really good at this. Dropping, dropping bombs with drones on him, right? Hitting apartment complexes in the Belgorod region of Russia, flying them right into windows and killing civilians. So he literally asked them how to weaponize a drone, and his Ukrainian connections were helping him to commit presidential assassination on US soil. And maybe there's nothing here, I'm sure. Maybe there's just nothing to look at at all. I don't believe that for a second. Of course. So were these people on the other end of that encrypted chat, who were they and why was one of them in Ukraine? I hope we learn who these people are from the doj. According to the affidavit, Kassip had fully immersed himself in the darkest corners of the Internet. He was hanging out in a satanic cult forum. He loved neo Nazis and was a big fan of Ukraine's Azov Battalion, the Nazis that the Biden administration aligned themselves with. And he was a big fan of the group called nswp, National Socialism slash white Power. So think of this guy kind of like as a mix. I, I, I was thinking of this guy kind of like as a mix between, like, Charles Manson, the Azoff Battalion, and a discord server from hell. And that's literally your guy trying to kill President Trump. Also, it's kind of interesting that Democrats love to call Trump a Nazi, and a literal Nazi was crying, trying to kill him for not being Nazi enough. People conflate the two all the time, right? Nazis were socialists. Trump is the opposite of a socialist. So they hate him for that. They hate that he won't, you know, marginalize black people. They hate that he got a huge amount of vote in the Hispanic community during this election, last election.

Clayton Morris (6:46)

Yeah, exactly. They hate that he loves business. This is really, really, you know, detrimental to socialists and Nazis who really don't want that at all. So this assassin, this would be assassin. Cassip even wrote a manifesto calling for Trump's death, then talked about fleeing to Ukraine after the job was done. So let me ask this question. What kind of a teenager kills his parents, builds a bomb plot, and thinks that Ukraine is a safe zone for him after he carries out an assassination? Unless, of course, someone told him it would be a safe zone. So someone tells him Ukraine will take care of him. So then he allegedly kills his parents, then stays in the house with the parents corpses for two full weeks. And he didn't just ignore the corpses, he actually filmed them with candles and made a video of his stepfather's body with candles surrounding it like some sort of satanic cult ritual. And again, according to the FBI, this guy was in no rush at all. He had a plan. He was being methodical about it. He was Calculating according to the affidavit. And after the murders, the next move in his mind was, I'm going to Ukraine where I'll have a safe house. He even messaged one of his contacts, quote, I'm quoting him now. So while in Ukraine, I'll be able to live a normal life, even when it's found out what I did. Like, he's asking, like, yeah, you've already assured me, like, this would be the case. So, like, I'll be able to live a normal life there. Like, they'll be. I'll be sort of, like, praised over there. I mean, you don't ask a question like that unless you've been sort of led to believe the answer is yes. Am I wrong? I mean, that's the way that I read it. This isn't speculation. This is straight from the DOJ's affidavit. And why does the US media cover it from one day? And then they just suddenly. Memory hold the damn thing. Ukraine's numbers keep showing up on caller ID for these would be assassins, like he did with Ryan Routh, the guy who tried to kill Trump at Mar a Lago on the golf course. The CIA knew exactly who Ralph was, of course they did, and that he was in. He was in Ukraine, of course, playing mercenary with his mercenary friends. So today we can switch gears a little bit today, because now we've got. We've got this hearing today. So.

Clayton Morris (10:37)

Yeah. I mean, and now this one, of course, just happened. So now. But here's my question is like, how many more have we not even learned about? Right. How many more of these have been kept quiet from us right now? And how many more of this? Or do we have, like, Ukrainian connections with. So let's just talk about Ryan Roth, because today, big news in the Ryan Routh story. The man accused of trying to assassinate President Trump was back in court today. And we're getting more confirmation of everything we already warned you about here on this show. And you know, people, oh, you guys are conspiracy theorists. And then you go in court and they actually talk about it in front of a judge. So glad to be called a conspiracy theorist. Um, so let's be clear. This is the same guy we told you about weeks ago who allegedly tried to buy a rocket launcher from someone in Ukraine using encrypted telegram messages. That's not new. Of course, you heard it here. When we first reported that a few weeks ago here on the show, we reported on the encrypted messages. We reported the RPG request. We were, we reported the, quote about Trump being, quote, bad for Ukraine that they got from his telegram messages with Ukrainian weapons dealers, all of it. But today's hearing in Florida federal court just cemented what prosecutors are building here, that this, in fact, was a conspiracy. So prosecutors laying out before the judge that this is a conspiracy. This guy wasn't a lone wolf. He was not a lone gunman. He had help. Prosecutors say this wasn't some unstable guy with a grudge. This was a politically motivated assassination plot with Ukrainian entanglements. So once again, the word Ukraine is sitting front and center today in court in Florida. Prosecutors are going all in on the Ukrainian connection. They reiterated that Ralph went to encrypted apps, tried to procure military grade weapons, not from Craigslist, not from some gun, gun show, but from Ukraine. And as we played you soundbite from Tucker a few weeks ago here on the show, over 50% of all of these weapons have been sold on the black market. They're getting them, receiving them, and selling them off to terrorists, known terrorists and drug cartels. So that's two assaft, you know, two attempted assassins, two Ukrainian connections and we don't know to what lengths, you know, Thomas Crooks may have been connected using encrypted applications on forums and so forth with Ukraine. We don't know that. Of course his body was burned almost immediately and cremated so that no one could, could analyze that. Like, I really hope that we get some answers from Pam Bondi now and Cash Patel, because that was the FBI under Biden that just took his body and just cremated it like right away. His apartment was like totally wiped clean. No silverware, no nothing. Like who was this ghost in Butler, Pennsylvania? So what the hell is going on here? Of course the corporate media won't touch that question, ignoring their money laundering operation in Ukraine. Ralph's trial, by the way, is set to begin on September 8th. So let's see if he. Here's my. Let's see if he actually survives to see that trial. And we hear public evidence in trial because this guy, you know, he's on a path to like Epstein island, you know, Epsteining himself because maybe a lot of information might actually come out during this trial that the deep state doesn't absolutely want in front of the American people. So let us know your thoughts on that.

Kristi Noem (35:46)

Here's the bottom line. There is a. The reason why this was overturned, and I'm 100% for it, is that there is something in law called prior or similar fact evidence. And in New York, there was a case in 1901 called the Molineau case. And what it means is this. If you as a prosecutor have to prove something like intent or plan or lack of mistake, I can use your prior instances of wrongdoing that you have not been charged with to make a case. Let's say, for example, Natalie, you're charged with arson. And in prior arsons, you used a particular way of taking baby dolls and soaking them gasoline. This is actually kind of an example that's used. And you had this unique M.O. this thing that you did every time you left playing cards and you. And the note. And we don't know who it is this time, but this arsonist did exactly what you did in a prior case. Under the cases of similar fact evidence, I can bring that before a jury to say, see, this is Natalie, because this behavior is similar to other behavior that she might not have been charged with. That makes sense. If there's confusion, if there's a reason, in the case of Harvey Weinstein, why do we have evidence or cases of other women claiming he attempted to abuse them? What's the purpose of this? There was no question as to who it was. It was Harvey Weinstein. He didn't have a unique M.O. he didn't say anything. There was no evidence, There was no benefit other than to tell the jury, where there's smoke, there's fire. And if you don't find them guilty of this one, well, this no good SOB did this in the past, and that is precisely what the appellate court said. Now other people are saying, no, no, no, this is, this is attempt to address the MeToo movement. And I'm all for that. But the problem is when relevant evidence, so called relevant evidence, is so prejudicial that a jury says, well, you didn't tell me about these other cases. Well, he must be guilty then. And that's where we're headed. So I don't like him. And between you and me, he probably did everything they said he did. 80 women, we've heard about this creep, but this is the courtroom. Whether it's Donald Trump or Harvey Weinstein or anybody, you have to ask yourself, why aren't we talking about this case with these victims, this evidence? Now, who cares what he did before? If I could give one more example, that happens all the time in the case where there's a terrible case, let's say, of a child who's murdered. This happens more often than not. You have to identify the body, you have to identify the deceased. In the old days, prosecutor would show the worst picture, the most horrible picture of the child, let's say, in the morgue to, let's say, a mother. The mother would scream, that's my baby. And courts would say, wait a minute, that's relevant, of course, the identity of the deceased. But this outweighs any prejudice towards the defendant. We have to balance this. I don't care if you're a Son of Sam or Harvey Weinstein or Harvey Epstein or anybody for that matter. You don't need this. Why don't we just take the words of this, these woman alone, Tell me what happened. Where were you?

Kristi Noem (39:44)

They, they may not know that, I'm sure. Listen, this idea of everybody is, do you think Diddy can get a fair trial? Do you, do you think, you know the last time we ever had a change of venue? Remember that, that relic from Time Gone by. I think the best case ever was. This is before your time, Murph. The serf. This guy was so they. Son of Sam Shepard was another case where the. The. The, you know, the evidence. Do you think O.J. simpson. Do you think today, in this world of social media that we live in, anybody can go anywhere? Of course not. But it's one thing, Natalie, to say, oh, I remember the thing about the planter, or about this, or maybe I don't. But when I have women in a courtroom who said, well, let me tell you something. You're on trial for parking tickets, and somebody brings up the fact that you were charged with shoplifting at a Costco was like, wait a minute. What does that have to do with anything? It shows a criminal propensity. Well, that is verboten. Now, I know this guy is a creep, but here's the question. What defense does he have? You don't need to do this. Put a woman on the stand and say, here's what happened. This is what he did. This is where I was. This is what he told me, and that's it. Harvey's not gonna take the stand to refute it. You don't need this overkill. And plus, let me ask you this. What about having women outside the courtroom chanting his name, chanting, you know, basically hang him. It's like a lynch mob outside. Do you think anybody deserves that? Now, it's hard to tell people outside whether you could protest or not. But when it seeps through the windows, I mean, listen, you're going to find the guy guilty. Give him at least a chance. And I'm not suggesting he has any kind of a defense. There is. But this similar fact, evidence. Prosecutors are too lazy with it. There has to be a reason, especially if there's a case. It has come in handy before, where you have somebody who is, let's say, kidnapped. They can't ID the defense or the defendant. He wore a mask. Well, in this other case, he wore the identical mask, people, so that makes sense. But even he deserves this. And let me tell you something. He and Diddy and others, once you're charged, let's face it, you're through. You are done. You're finished. And I'm gonna say the worst thing, friends. That Harvey Weinstein has so little jury appeal. He's hideous. He's disgusting. There's nothing about him where you even. He's no Luigi Mangione. There's nobody out there collect, you know.

Natalie Morris (57:04)

All right, well, that's gonna do it for us today. But before we go, we want to remind you that Redacted is brought to you by Tax Network USA. Today is tax day, you guys. Today's the 15th, and if you've fallen behind on filing taxes or you owe back taxes, then delaying will only make things worse. But if you have a powerful advocate on your side, you could make a good deal with the IRS. And that's what Tax Network USA does, with over 5,000 new tax liens filed every day. And the IRS has powerful enforcement tools. Now, then, we just don't know what the IRS is going to do if you have back taxes. So don't make the mistake of facing them alone. Let Tax Network USA help you take control, whether your issue is 10,000 or $10 million. Their team of skilled attorneys and seasoned negotiators have solved over $1 billion in tax debt using proven strategies. So call them today at 800-958-1000. You get a free consultation, absolutely free. They can just tell you what services they offer. And. And if they can help you uh, or you can visit tnusa.com redacted. It's free and it's confidential. So again, don't wait until after April 15th today to make a move. Beat the IRS to it. Be proactive. Call them 800-958-1000 or get a free private consultation by going to tnusa.com redacted all right, well, that's going to do it for us today. Again, we will be back tomorrow. We're live 4pm Eastern, 1pm Pacific every day. Hey, don't forget we have a newsletter you can head on over to Redacted. Do put in your email address and you'll get the newsletter every single day. It is free. There's nothing behind a paywall. No upsell, no cross sell. It's just something that we like to provide you. Writing the newsletter not only helps you sort of study up for what the show is going to be and read original source material helps us prepare as well. Because we are a family business. It's Clayton and I, we're a married couple. So we compile the newsletter. We compile the show. We have a small team and we just really like interacting with you and having our free voices in an independent media. So thank you so much for being a subscriber to Redacted and to the redacted newsletter. And we'll see you tomorrow, everybody.