“Has Anybody Here Ever Heard Me Threaten Somebody’s Life?” Zero Dark Tony Asks with a Straight Face to a Silent Audience

He als claimed to have passed relevant videos regarding Scott Hochstetter to a scientology attorney identified as Kendrick Moxon.

“We are going to identify you and we’re going to bring you to justice.”

Throughout the broadcast, D’Amato addressed targets directly, describing the legal consequences he said were coming and detailing the evidence he said he had assembled. He stated that a target was allegedly avoiding service and said papers would be delivered to the target’s workplace. He also told the target that reporting him to his own employer would be treated as an attempt at extortion. D’Amato closed that portion of the stream with the statement: “It’s not a threat. It’s a promise.” Later in the stream, D’Amato told the audience he was “very satisfied with the evidence” and said he had “no moral conflict with completely steamrolling you in that courtroom.” He said a prior court proceeding in Louisiana had established a multi-year course of conduct on paper, calling that outcome “the first domino in me getting justice.”

Exhibit A

D’Amato tells a target directly, “There’s nothing that’s going to save you from the legal consequences that you have coming. Nothing,” and then describes the target as allegedly avoiding service, saying, “now we know that you’re avoiding service, so we have to serve you at your job.” The clip ends with D’Amato stating, “And I’ve never threatened you ever.”

Timestamps: 00:06:17 – 00:10:54 | Watch with a free account

D’Amato describes the workplace service plan in the same breath as the denial of ever having threatened the target. The clip also contains his characterization of drone-related activity as stalking and his statement that he has “five screenshots that are going to put you in fucking prison.” He frames each of these as legal consequences the target has brought on himself, not as threats D’Amato is making.

Exhibit B

D’Amato states, “I’m not threatening you with legal process,” then describes a recently obtained restraining order and says the target appears on its declaration, before telling the audience, “God damn well with these subpoenas, we’re going to bring you to justice.”

Timestamps: 00:11:41 – 00:16:24 | Watch with a free account

D’Amato claims the five-year restraining order has already been granted and that the target is named on the declaration. He also states that if the target uses an employer’s equipment or network to continue the dispute, D’Amato intends to argue the employer has become a participant. The clip documents D’Amato’s account of existing court outcomes and his stated theory of expanded liability.

Exhibit C

D’Amato says, “Because go ahead and try and get in that courtroom and lie,” and then tells his audience he is “actually very satisfied with the evidence” and has “no moral conflict with completely steamrolling you in that courtroom.”

Timestamps: 00:23:45 – 00:25:48 | Watch with a free account

D’Amato also raises the possibility that the target is being paid to harass him, saying “if you’re getting paid for this, we’re going to find that out, too.” He characterizes the entire discussion as calm rather than angry, attributing the tone to his Italian background. The clip establishes his stated confidence in his evidentiary position and his intent to present it in court.

Exhibit D

Addressing the live audience directly, D’Amato asks, “Has anybody here ever heard me threaten somebody’s life?” then pivots to telling a target, “You’re going to have to get up in front of a judge,” and enumerates claims including libel, slander, defamation per se, and intentional infliction of emotional distress.

Timestamps: 00:36:12 – 00:38:05 | Watch with a free account

D’Amato’s appeal to his audience functions as a rhetorical denial of a prior-threats allegation while simultaneously listing the legal causes of action he says he intends to pursue. The clip records his own framing of the dispute: that the target is the aggressor and that D’Amato’s responses have been exclusively legal in nature.

Exhibit E

D’Amato states, “Everything that you tried to do to me. Will be reciprocated. Except I’m going to do in the courtroom,” and then lists potential civil claims including invasion of privacy and civil conspiracy, while also referencing the five-year restraining order and pending subpoenas.

Timestamps: 00:44:40 – 00:49:18 | Watch with a free account

D’Amato also addresses a second individual in this segment, a person he describes as having published that D’Amato is a “predator” in post descriptions, telling that person, “You have fucked yourselves.” He says subpoenas may already have been issued in another state, hedging with “maybe I already have them. Maybe I don’t.” The clip documents D’Amato expanding the scope of his stated legal action to at least two targets simultaneously.

Exhibit F

D’Amato tells the stream, “I’m hoping that after all this, you know, happens in court, that maybe I can get the judge to order a fucking mental evaluation on you,” then adds fraud to his list of claims, saying, “Try and get hired somewhere in your life with the fraud that you’ve committed upon me.”

Timestamps: 00:52:59 – 00:54:52 | Watch with a free account

D’Amato frames the mental evaluation request as something he intends to ask a judge to order, not a claim he states he can make unilaterally. The fraud allegation is similarly framed as a future legal claim rather than an adjudicated finding. The clip adds two additional categories to his stated list of intended legal actions.

Exhibit G

D’Amato challenges the target to post evidence of threats, saying, “Not these bullshit-like threats that they claim that I made. Where? Post them,” while also distinguishing between words that could be “manipulated to sound like a threat” and what he says would constitute a genuine threat in context.

Timestamps: 01:05:10 – 01:07:04 | Watch with a free account

D’Amato references the Louisiana proceeding again, stating that “the respondent in Louisiana learned” that only conduct directed at D’Amato specifically is legally relevant. The clip records his on-stream articulation of his own evidentiary theory and his public denial of the threat allegations made against him.

Exhibit H

D’Amato tells the stream, “I’ve already proven it in a court, and now I have that on paper,” describing how he established a multi-year course of conduct in the Louisiana proceeding and explaining that video authentication was the key evidentiary step the court accepted.

Timestamps: 01:15:32 – 01:20:10 | Watch with a free account

D’Amato then describes conduct he says will figure in future proceedings: contact with a person identified as “Mopey,” alleged channel-report filings, and outreach to other creators and followers. He states that a judge seeing that pattern of conduct “is really going to go against him.” The clip documents D’Amato’s on-stream inventory of the evidence he says he intends to present and his account of how a prior court treated similar material. Taken together, the eight clips from the July 11 broadcast create a contemporaneous record of D’Amato’s stated legal strategy, his claims about existing court outcomes, and his characterizations of the conduct he attributes to the targets he addressed by name or description throughout the stream.

Sources

• Original YouTube Video
• Full SRT Transcript: for HNZ Supporters
• Full Text Transcript: for HNZ Supporters
• Full Chat Transcript: for HNZ Supporters
• Date: 2026-07-11
• Stream ID: YOUTUBE · Dt6VFI1gokc