He does quote from some excellent sources, Dr. Walvoord, Dr Gaebelien, and Dr Fruchtebaum especially.
I think his theology is very sound, but where I have difficulties with this kind of teaching is when current events and personalities are used to uncover previously "secret" conspiracies and so on.
His conclusion is interesting; the last 3 or 4 minutes sum up the whole teaching and he uses a familiar technique of challenging his audience to "prove his conclusions" wrong. Of course, nobody can do that because they are his conclusions based on his interpretation of facts. The facts, both historic and Biblical, are sound, it is his interpretation of those facts that I question.
He could be right, although the Bible suggests that the Antichrist will not be known until he is revealed, a fact that the teacher mentions then dismisses. As a staunch pre-trib and pre-mil believer, I can't help but ask this teacher: Why should I care who the Antichrist is?
The only real problem I have with this kind of teaching is that it is fodder for the "kook" wing of the church. I know and you know this man is speculating, but I'll guarantee there are people who will latch onto this teaching, run with it, and re-teach it as the Gospel truth, something I am sure even the man in the video would discourage.