Investigate Earth Conspiracy Podcast - New World Order Conspiracy Podcast | Twitters New NWO Plant Ceo Linda Yaccarino

Episode Date: May 15, 2023

Welcome to this intriguing episode of the New World Order Conspiracy Podcast, where we delve into the fascinating topic of Linda Yaccarino, the newly appointed CEO of Twitter. Join us as we explore the connections between Yaccarino, the World Economic Forum, and the potential implications for the social media giant. Are there ulterior motives behind her appointment? Could she be a pawn in the New World Order's grand plan to disrupt Twitter? And why would Elon Musk, a prominent figure in the tech industry, make such a controversial hiring decision? Brace yourselves as we unravel the mysteries surrounding this enigmatic situation in today's episode: "New World Order Conspiracy Podcast | Twitter New CEO Linda Yaccarino Plant."

Out here on the street, I'm losing my... You've gotten to me, and that's my main... SummerTay. Hello, and welcome to Investigate Earth Podcast. I am your host alongside my beautiful wife, Sherry. Say hello, Sherry. Hey, guys, welcome to the podcast, and I love that song.

It's called I'm Going Underground, and it just makes me want to get up and dance. I love it. It does. It is a good song. Flux Vortex is that artist. In case she liked that song, you can go check them out. It is 5.36 p.m.

I'm here on the East Coast of the United States, May the 15th, 2023. And on tonight's episode, we are going to be discussing the new Twitter CEO, the big, big connection with the World Economic Forum, aka the New World Order. Why did Elon decide to make this higher? What is it going to do to freedom of speech? How is it going to affect Twitter? People on Twitter obviously are freaking out. Now, we do have a Twitter account.

We have Facebook. We have Instagram. But, you know, we communicate with a lot of you guys on Facebook or have. But, you know, anything we post on Facebook has never really got to anybody. You know, we'll post over there and it'll say it reaches 10 people or 15 people. Same thing. It's even worse on Instagram. So it's just really hard for us and our message to get out on the mainstream social media platforms.

They've done everything they could to censor and silence, the voice, the voice of the people, the voice that is true. That is what they've done for so long. We've talked about it on this podcast so much. So now that, you know, there's been a glimmer of hope for freedom of. speech with Twitter and Elon. Then we got this news of Linda Yard. I think it's Yaccarino.

However you say her name, it doesn't matter. I'm going to refer to her as Linda from here on out. But yeah, she's coming in. She's a big part of the New World Order. And when I say New World Order, I mean World Economic Forum. And I literally, anyone this connected to World Economic Forum, you got to just go ahead and put them in the New World Order category because they are. But we're going to evaluate some of the things she said in the past.

We're going to talk about kind of her stance and how. she's coming into this thing, what some of the people on Twitter are saying, how this really does affect the future of media and speech. And why would Elon do such a thing? Or is he maybe a part of this? We don't know. Interesting. It is very interesting. But, you know, that is the thing. We've been wondering for quite some time now, basically, how is Twitter going to get away with freedom of speech? I mean, that is a literal question you have to ask yourself. It seems as though in this world today that there's not many places you can go to where you can actually get

freedom of speech. There's not many places you can go to get real and true news outside of the propaganda that we are pushed every single day. You know, although a lot of people still have issues with Fox and definitely I have issues of Fox now after firing

Tucker Carlson, which we'll talk a little bit about that in a minute, but it's, at least Fox did have people like Tucker that went out and put his neck on the line and did whatever he could to actually get out news and the things that were really happening and the potential of how this whole ordeal that we've been living through over the past, especially through the pandemic, but even beyond that,

how it really affects our lives, how it's going to affect our lives. And anyone that comes out, especially on such a huge platform like Tucker had, you know, that's one of the reasons he got fired. We actually just found out today, everybody, that Tucker Carlson was what it, it appears to be part of the Dominion voting settlement with Fox News that, okay, number one, you're paying a $787 million. And number two, you have to fire Tucker Carlson. So those were the deals.

I just, that is just so crazy. Because I don't think Tucker was, I don't even know if he was really talking about it that much, but everyone on their newscasts was talking about it. Yeah, everybody was. Especially the Brett Breyer or whatever his name is. No, not Brett Bear. No, definitely not him. I thought he was.

No, but Hannity. talked about it. You know, there's been a lot of them. Laurie Ingram talked about the Dominion. I mean, most of them did, right? But the reality is, Dominion didn't care as much about, you know, the fact that Tucker talked about Dominion or not. I just think it was some kind of inside little deal that they knew, hey, here's the deal. This is what we are facing. Tucker Carlson is someone that has such a huge voice. Obviously, we are seeing how huge it is because Fox News has been down as much is 30, 40% in viewership since MSNBC, the, as people call it, MSDNC, has now, I guess, taken over ratings on the mainstream news outlets.

So MSNBC is over the ratings now, especially after Tucker Carlson's firing and exit at Fox News. Literally, both videos that Tucker's posted on Twitter, both of them have done better numbers than any show on primetime television, and that's just on Twitter. That's just crazy But I feel like Fox They were kind of put in a corner Where they had to make this settlement And this was the only way they could do it

I think they were pushed back where Because obviously they don't want to get rid of the guy That makes them the most money, right? They don't want to do that But they were pushed in a corner where they had to do that So I kind of understand You know Where Fox is

They didn't really have a choice Doesn't sound like Well they did they did have a choice But at the same time You know Here's the thing with the Foxx is thing and this is why it really matters. Everyone, when the Dominion thing came through and said, oh, look, see, no proof of cheating and no proof of this. And you see this people like Tucker and

Hannity and all these people were pushing, you know, fake news and about the 2020 election. The reality is that that settlement nor a lawsuit had anything to do with whether or not someone was guilty or not. The problem with that whole thing was, is that number one, it's pretty hard to get evidence on Dominion voting, especially when they control. the machines and they have all of this, you know, information. Now, you could say that all these voting machines that, you know, was, was used across, I mean, and there were multiple voting machine companies, but Dominion was one of them, one of the big ones. But, you know, the reality of it is, is that you have these voter machine companies that the big thing was they said,

look, number one, our machines don't go online. Well, we know they did because that was proved, but that still doesn't prove that they had any connection with voter fraud or a mass widespread, you know, election interference or stealing. And it would have been really hard for Fox to be able to prove that regardless. Regardless of how bad it looks of what happened, I mentioned on our substack, it's still not going to hold up in court for Fox to come in and say, well, look, this is what happened. They said they did. They said these machines didn't go online, but they did go online. That's a huge thing. but also it would be extremely hard for Fox to get evidence of that considering that this company controls their own machines.

And look, if there is some massive system or a fraud out there, which many people believe there is, it's going to be really hard to prove because they're going to have the experts, they're going to have the people that really know how to do what they're doing and get away with it. And do you remember back in 2020, and I don't know if you'll remember this or not, but I can't remember what city was in right now, but it was during all this stuff and people or like accusing Dominican of being dominion of being fraudulent. And you remember the guy in the white van that was right underneath their building and it blew up? No, I don't remember that.

I just wonder if that had anything to do with anything. I don't remember that specifically. But they said he was a Republican dude and he had a van and had Republican stuff all over his van. Do you remember that? Yeah, I mean, I was starting to remember a little bit about what you're talking about. And it was next to one of their buildings. It was like their major, like headquarters. building or something.

Yeah, or something. And he had like car bombs in his car. But I just wonder if that has anything to do with, you know, maybe they were trying to hide something or maybe this was really a Republican that was blowing up their place. I don't know. Yeah. And look, here's the problem. Like, you know, it's not to say that the one side of the other, it's not to say that

Republicans or the right doesn't have extremists because they do. You know, I think, though, the problem is just like the other day in Washington, D.C., there was this group. I don't even remember their name now, but it was supposedly some militia group that was all dressed in the exact same clothes, the exact same shirts. They all had, they all had masks. That's why you can hear me right now. But they had some kind of like, you know, gator on, you know, that went across their face. They had hats on.

They had everything very well coordinated. It was almost too well coordinated because everyone said that they were feds. And then they even came out with a video, I believe, on Twitter or somewhere that said that we're going to take our country back. they were trying to make it look like they were this terrorist group, militia group from the right. This group was followed and escorted by D.C. Capitol Police and everything else throughout the entire little march they did around Washington, D.C., which, by the way, is legal. But at the same time, when they left that day, they went into this parking garage and all the police stopped anyone from getting anywhere near them. They all went into a parking garage. No one ever seen or heard from them again. And most people are like, yeah, okay, that's feds.

That's pretty damn obvious because this is just a setup because it was the next day, Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, all of the other ones were posting videos of their march saying, look, it's white supremacist that is trying, these people are the people that we have the biggest threat in our country against is these people. I mean, although, keeping in mind, all these people were actually saying was whatever. I don't know exactly everything they said, but I don't think they said anything white supremacy or anything. They just said we want to take our country back. We want to do this. But Joe Biden and Kamala Harris and the administration went after them, posted videos and quoted some of their videos of the march and saying, see, this is white supremacy.

This is domestic terrorism we have to watch out for. And they use this opportunity because many people believe it was a setup. They highlighted this and pretty much marketed this event beforehand. They wanted to try to get as many people to show up as possible in support of this group so that they could then probably try to do something. But the thing is is that people on the right or people that are libertarians or people that do not like this government anymore, they're not that dumb. At this point, they know where a setup is or what it looks like, what it appears. You know, if it quacks like a duck, walks like a duck is probably a duck. And all this government's trying to do is set up more opportunities like January 6th for people on the right or people that oppose this government to then come in and just bring in stricter law, stricter gun laws, you know, stricter this.

We're seeing it with mass shootings. seeing it with everything. We're seeing this as far as them using these opportunities to just take away more of your rights. And they're using these events the same way. And looking back at our history of the government, I always grew up, you know, like a patriot and believing in our country and our country is here for us and they're here to protect us and serve us and all these things. Now that we've really dug into the past into the history and we've really dug deep into all these conspiracies that end up being true, I never in a million, trillion years,

would have thought our government would be as corrupt as it is. No. Never. I always trusted the government. Never thought, you know, and if anyone ever said something bad about the government, I'm like, you're crazy. This is not the way our government works.

Well, here's the thing, though, you were awakened. And, you know, although, you know, growing up and stuff like that, I never thought, like, you just don't think about that stuff, I guess, growing up. Some people do, but I never really. was one of those people. You know, I was, you know, kind of on the side of the government. I was a patriot. This is what they want you to be as a patriot of your country and you should be. You got to, you got to defend your military and support your military, which you do, because these are the people that actually, you know, they sign up to fight for you and your freedoms, right? And

these are people that you have to support. And then you look back at like anti-war protests as far as the Vietnam War, which was a shit show in itself and should not have ever even been a war. But it's just another example of the government has never really been true. It's ever really not been corrupt. It's always been corrupt. Look at JFK. Look at all of the shit that we have talked about in our history. Right. And really uncovered. Yeah, we were just blind to it. And now that this information, this, this battle of information is very crucial for the government right now because the amount of information that can be shared instantaneously on the internet and through social medias, except for Facebook and Instagram, but that was why Twitter's thing was a huge deal.

You know, you have this information war right now. And it is the information war, the government, versus the people. And the way that the government has always worked is that we have to control the information so that we can then control the people. So I think that's also why in a lot of ways you're starting to see that their grasp on information is starting to dwindle, even though you're seeing more control and they're doing as much control as they can. But the only way eventually that they're going to truly be able to control the information is if they control the entirety of the internet, which is what they have done with the, which is what they're trying to, to pass with this law with a TikTok law.

They're trying to make it about TikTok, but it's really not. They're trying to restrict Internet, just like China and just like North Korea and whoever does. That's what they want to do. And so now that they kind of realize, hey, we're losing this battle because people are actually finding out how corrupt and how shit that we are, we have to do something in responses. So they're starting to restrict or starting to put in bills that are trying to restrict things like that. But on the other side of this as well is, you know, Even back then, they were corrupt.

But they are even more corrupt now. But even back then, like the 1940s, for an example, all they had for media was newspapers, really, and maybe the radio. They didn't have as much media where people had it instantly, like you were saying. No. And so it was so much easier to control. All they had to do is control the newspapers and the radio stations. Yeah. Yeah.

And they did even still back then. But there was so much information, though, also that newspapers or journalists or whatever just couldn't get a hold of. I mean, you know, if journalists back then would have had the same technologies you have now without the people having the technology, you know, who knows? And if they were true and just journalists, that would be great. But the reality is that the government's never going to allow for the truth to be out there because it's just harder to control the people and they can't do that. You as a people now that you are listening to podcasts like us and the more we find out and understand about what the government has always been about, what this world government has kind of always been, or at least the people. the push to the world government that's always been, is imperative now than ever that we continue to fight on information.

They're going to continue their fight as well. That's why they are doing more and more because they realize that something is, now that they can't completely control information, and once all information is stricken down to where it's like we wake up one day, which many people are already waking up to realize that we are in a communist-type country, even in the United States. And by the way, you Australians and Canadians and you can't, hey, you're right there too.

You're probably a little further along than we are in some cases, but there's a lot of people from Canada and Australia or whatever that reach out to us and say, look, the way the U.S. looks right now looks worse than we are. In reality, we're all kind of the same, but at the same time, the real battle lines are in the United States right now because you have the hardest people to control it in the United States. You have more guns in the United States almost than anywhere as far as citizens go. and that's why now they're trying to also control the information

but they know once they completely control information and people have an uprising then they, that's why they're pushing for the gun control because they don't want to have to have a battle with their people because of the fact that they want to completely control and tyrannize their population and the only way you can do that is through gun control. You cannot have people with weapons.

You can not basically have an army of citizens that are going to say, uh, hell no, you're not doing shit to us, you know? Like Joe Biden said, we've said this many times. If you don't have F-15s or nuclear warheads, you ain't winning. But that's not necessarily true because, you know, that's just not how that works. So let's get into the story, guys. Here's what we know right now about Twitter's new CEO, Linda.

We're going to call her Linda. Linda. It's like Karen. Sorry. Yeah, so Elon Musk is welcoming a veteran ad executive. And I'm reading an AP article here, but I want you to introduce you to Linda according to the AP. And then we're going to get into the real who Linda is, the real Linda. She is a veteran ad executive to the helm of Twitter and the social media site,

the billionaire Tesla CEO, has been running since he bought it last fall. Now, Elon announced Friday that he's hiring Linda Yaccourino to be the new CEO of San Francisco-based Twitter, which is now called X-Corp. He said Yacharino's role will be focused mainly on running the company's business operations, leaving him to focus on product, design, and new technology. Now, AP is reporting that she is a veteran ad executive. It says that Yoccarino 60 has worked as an ad executive for decades. She came into the NBC Universal in 2011, just as Comcast was completing this merger with NBC

and oversaw integrating the company's ad sales platforms. Now, her most recent title was Chairman Advertising and Client Partnerships at NBC Universal. She oversaw all market strategy and advertising revenue, which totaled nearly $10 billion for NBC Universal's entire portfolio of broadcast cable and digital assets. Before that, she held a variety of roles at Turner Broadcasting Systems from 96 to 2011, including Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer. That was after she held management positions at several media sales outlets. Now, she's marketing leader, said Mark DeMasio, founder and Creators. creative chief at ad agency, Dijo. She speaks, CMO, and she understands what marketers need.

He added, referring to the role of chief marketing officer. Now, it goes on to say that she's pushing boundaries, says Yaccarino has pushed the ad industry for change on several fronts, including advocating for relying less heavily on Nilsen ratings for measurements and introducing a digital platform called one platform that makes it easier to buy ads across a variety of different media in effort to better compete for ads against social media companies and traditional media companies. It says, quote, it's worth noting that they build out a big team

that's made a lot of innovative products and supported the growth that they have experienced, said Brian Weiser, of strategic adversary advisory firm. Sorry, I cannot freaking read tonight. Madison and Wall. It says they've been pushing the industry on a lot of fronts, you know, trying to make it better. Now, so she serves as a chairman. or woman in this case, of the World Economic Forum's Task Force on the Future of Work. A 1985 graduate of Pennsylvania State University, she lives in Seacliff, New York, with her husband Claude Madraso.

They have two children, Christian and Matthew. So that is AP's thing. They barely mention anything about the New World Order. Sorry, the World Economic Forum. Let me. Yeah, it's like the last line of the article. Yes. So here's the deal.

I want to read to you guys first, I guess, and maybe this is how we should kind of bring this in as far as the World Economic Forum standpoint. Now, Elon has talked a lot about the World Economic Forum over the years, and especially over the past two or three years, and as far as his viewpoints on the World Economic Forum. Now, here's just a few tweets that Elon has tweeted. One of the tweets in January of 18 said, or January 18th,

Sorry. World Economic Forum is increasingly becoming an unelected world government that the people never asked for and don't want. That's one of Elon's tweets. December 24, 2022, Elon says, I was invited to the WEF, but declined. January 16th, this is a quote, master to future, quote, doesn't sound ominous at all. How is the World Economic Forum Davos even a thing? Are they trying to be the boss of Earth? Question mark. So these are just a few tweets from Elon Musk about the W.EF.

Now, what we have to understand about, oh, Linda, whatever her name is, the potential, which is apparently going to be the new CEO for Twitter. She has been an executive chair with the World Economic Forum, but working at the WEF doesn't immediately make you part of the establishment is what people are saying. Is every politician evil, every banker greedy? Well, the reality is, and this is a big reporter at Twitter that was kind of talking about this, some people in her defense are saying, well, just because she was an executive chair at the World Economic Forum doesn't mean anything. Okay, well, it does, though, because the World Economic Forum's main goal and mission and their vision

is to completely control information across the world. Period. End of story. Their idea is to establish a world government. They want to control as much information and as much government as possible throughout nations, regardless of their sovereignty or not. This is what the World Economic Forum's thing is.

They want to create a world system, a.k.a. a world government. We've talked about it many times. And so the other thing we know is that there are people that are known as, you know, world economic form speakers, which there's many of those. There's thousands of those that come to World Economic Forum. Some of these people are, you know, Fortune 500 company executives, Fortune 1,000 companies, whatever the case may be. And there's a lot of those. And many of those agree with a lot of the policies that the World Economic Forum presents

because they understand and evaluate these policies before they go speak. And then you have people that are chairman, right, or chairwomen of the board and executive chairs at that. And so as you get into these chairperson roles, right, these are people that lead massive roles in the World Economic Forum. These are people that are not necessarily there just to speak at the public events, right? Because we've talked about the World Economic Forum always has public events, which is always broadcast, put on videos, whatever. And many of those videos are very out there in the public to where people are like, are you freaking kidding me. And it's like, I can't believe they're actually saying this in public, including the World Economic Forum's. a commitment to you eating bugs and taking away meat and taking away cars and all of these

things. But then you have people that are part of the executive chairs, which these people are the ones that go into these private closed door meetings at the World Economic Forum, which, by the way, 70% of the meetings held during Davos, Switzerland, in the World Economic Forum are closed door meetings. That's 70% of those meetings. And all of the executive chairs actually go into these meetings, and this is when these people across all of these different, you know, compartmentalized things speak about how we're going to basically take over the world, right? This is whatever they're saying and talking about in these closed door meetings. Just imagine probably the event 201, which happened before the pandemic and how they were going to control the people and how they were going to stop misinformation as far as vaccines or how they were going to control the media and all of these things. This is what these closed door meetings at World Economic Forum probably are.

and Linda is out there going to these meetings because she has to. She's executive chair. That's how this works. Now, you may say, well, you're crazy. Linda would not go in the freaking meeting, a closed door meeting. This is a new executive, you know, Elon knows what he's talking about. He would never hire a World Economic Forum crazy psycho, which she probably is. But let's start here before we get in this video of Linda herself, you know, interview in Elon Musk, and it's only a three-minute video, but I want you to hear her thoughts, what she's trying to convince Elon of.

about Twitter, and this is before Elon hired her at Twitter. Now, we have to understand. We read off her accomplishments, quote-unquote, of all the companies she worked for prior to now, which is now she's the new Twitter executive or Twitter CEO. And all of the companies we named, basically, are companies that censor speech and promote propaganda. NBC Universal, guess who owns MSNBC? Well, that is NBC.

Okay. MSNBC is literally the worst news network on cable television as far as misinformation. They are the absolute worst. They hate libertarians. They hate Republicans. And they hate anyone that likes freedom of speech or likes freedom. That is just what they do. And now they hate that.

And now they, well, it's only because it's only because pretty much everyone besides this group, this subset of people, everyone else hates the media. They know they're full of shit. They know they're just propaganda. It is a new, it's not a new thing, but there are still people, especially the older crowd. Older crowd don't understand. They still watch the news like they always have. If you killed off every old person now in the world, their ratings would drop by like 75% probably. I mean, literally, because most of their ratings are coming from older people.

But the Linda thing, she was in executive, she was over, or not over, but she was a big time person. in some of these companies that they are the worst for freedom of speech. They are the worst for propaganda. This is what she is used to. This is what she always come from. And then so I started seeing some of the arguments on Twitter. Oh, well, she follows Donald Trump and follows this person. Who gives a shit?

That doesn't mean she likes Donald Trump. That doesn't mean anything. There is literally a misinformation war going on right now about old Miss Linda. But we got to look at it from the way it is. Now, I'm going to play you this video. from Linda and Elon's interaction recently in an interview. So this is the new CEO of Twitter, and this is her talking to Elon about some of her thoughts

and what she believes of how Twitter should be. And this is apparently before anyone knew she was going to be a CEO. And I don't even think Elon at this point knew she was going to be a CEO, which is very surprisingly who would even pick her for this. But let's listen. So you've got a massive platform. You have a vision that is a spectrum of just daily open-sourced conversation

and they can conduct their lives, their business, their commerce, whatever they can do on your platform. That's a pretty big vision. But in the middle should be advertising opportunity. That sounds like a great opportunity. I can talk about my brand. I can get my customers to communicate, and then they could also buy stuff.

It sounds pretty good, right? You'll be able to buy things just directly on Twitter. one click, boom, done. But they need to feel that there is an opportunity for them to influence what you're building, that vision, what we're doing here, whether it's me trying to push and prod you on your tweets. For example, you've said you probably shouldn't tweet after 3 a.m.

Well, I've got my... Probably good advice for all of us. I've got myself into trouble. few times. I'm very aware of those. So after 3 a.m., you travel all over the world. Lord knows how you handle time zones in space.

Will you commit to be a little more specific and not tweet after 3 a.m.? People in this room would like to see that. They'll make them feel more confident. I will aspire to tweet to less after 3 a.m. But, I mean, it is important

that, you know, I mean, if I would say, yes, you can influence me That would be wrong. That would be very wrong. That would be a diminishment of freedom of speech. But I want to be specific about influencing. It's more of an open feedback loop for the advertising experts in this room

to help develop Twitter into a place where they will be excited about investing more money. Product development. Ad safety. Content moderation. That's what the influence is. Yeah, I think it's totally cool to say that you want to have your advertising appear in certain places, in Twitter, and not in other places. But it is not cool to try to say what Twitter will do.

And if that means losing advertising dollars, we lose it. But freedom of speech is paramount. So Twitter 1.0 had a very well-populated, much-love. influenced council. I know I don't, I think we need to change the name. Elon does not want to be influenced. But it was really a recurring feedback loop from your key stakeholders, your advertisers,

where they had recurring access, or would have recurring access to you. Would you commit from this stage today to reinstate that council to be named later? Well, I don't think it should be, influence counsel, that, and I would be aware of that creating a backlash among the public

because the public thinks that, you know, their views are being determined by, you know, a small number of CMOs in America, they will be like, I think, upset about that. But feedback, I think, is appropriate. And,

you know, at the end of the day, if somebody's spending money for their ad campaign, it needs to yield results for their organization, or it doesn't make sense. So there you go. So yeah, so this is a marketing battle, right? I'm in marketing.

This, you know, it's what I do. But the reality is, is that all these advertising agencies, these companies or whatever you want to call them, these CMOs that are chief market officers, you know, these people are, they're mostly in charge of massive companies. You're talking about Coca-Cola. You're talking about already these woke companies, okay?

Coca-Cola was a company. said, had a training thing that says how to be less white. You've got Bud Light now that has a transvestite that was the head of their company, right? And you see how that's working out for them. And so you have all of these companies that are very, very woke. And I don't know if it's, you know, I guess part of the problem probably starts in college and even high school. You know, you've got these high school teachers that are very woke. They are teaching their kids to be woke and Republicans are bad or libertarians are bad and your country sucks. And, you know, you should go against your country and police and law enforcement and everything. And you should only believe

Democrats and what any Democrat says and communism is good and socialism's good. And this is where we're going to teach you, even though we're going to teach you nothing about what actually socialism and communism does and how it actually works around the world. And then you get into colleges, these liberal arts colleges, these liberal any colleges, almost all colleges now have a very liberal base of professors, right? And so you get all these college students in there that are going for marketing. They're going for all these positions. And they're also at the same time being influenced heavily by this liberal indoctrination, this leftist, crazy leftist indoctrination, this pro-communism, this pro-socialism and this pro-world government, this everything social justice,

everything is about, you don't know if you're a woman or a man anymore. Everyone's confused. But what you do have, you leave with a degree and all these woke companies are hiring you. And then therefore, this is your entire workforce. So now you have, it's not necessarily that the advertising or sorry the companies themselves are woke it is the people they are hiring are woke and if they go or if they go with certain things or they say they go advertise on Twitter they're not worried about whether their ad is going to upset someone on Twitter that sees it they're worried more about what their population of their staff are going to think and they don't want to lose their woke staff because that's all it is anymore coming out

of college is woke people that's where this is all coming from it is literally our indoctrination of our population through our kids, which is why everyone is like, oh, they think we're coming after their kids. You are, right? I mean, period is starting. And now they're just trying to go back as far as they can. Let's go the earliest age we can to indoctrinate them. So they're trying to sneak books in.

They're trying to put books in the elementary schools and middle schools. They're trying to get away with certain things. Well, they're even sneaking little bras that covers their boobs up or whatever. I mean, they're giving kids that even that. Yeah. It's nuts, right? And so they're trying to indoctrinate kids earlier and earlier. And they also used the pandemic for that.

They used when, you know, the masking and the total control they were trying to put over not just kids, but the teachers and then even the parents. And when the DOJ classified parents that would go to school board meetings and say, my kid is not going to do this. And you're not going to control my kid. I don't want my kid reading this. They classified these parents as terrorists because overall, Their overall goal is to take over pop culture. Their overall goal is to completely indoctrinate and take over your kids. And not just your kids, but not your kids in elementary, but your middle school, your high school.

And then in college. And then they have a workforce of woke psychos, basically, that then control everything, including freedom of speech, including the Second Amendment, they want to do all of this. So imagine, if you think it's bad now, right, and you think about all of the kids that are coming out of these woke colleges, think about 20 years from now who our leaders are going to be. Think about that. And the people that are going to be voting for them. Think about you're in America. You might as well say goodbye to your First Amendment, your Second Amendment, all the rest of the amendments, because they're all going to, you know, we're barely, like the people that are fighting for freedom in a lot.

In most cases, that's Republicans. Maybe a couple Democrats here and there, not very much. But those people are few and far in between. I mean, we are hanging on by a thread. Think about even 10, 20 years from now. All of those people and the people that maintain the majority House right now are going to be all Democrats. They're going to be all this woke, socialist, pushed, indoctrinated people that were in college, you know, 20 years before that are now in positions of power. And it is going to be a new China, a new North Korea.

It is going to be something that you have never seen before in your life as an American citizen. then this is where we're going. And I just want people to understand that. It's not a marketing thing. It's not that Coke itself says, oh, well, we don't want to have our ads in here. It's because of the people that are working for these companies. That's the problem.

What were you going to say? I forgot now. Oh, sorry. But him interviewing her, you know, it's, what was that one statement that she said, moderation? Content moderation. Content moderation.

Yeah. I thought that was very interesting because Elon is full, like, freedom of speech. Everyone has a voice on Twitter and that's what I want. But you can even see her trying to control him about content moderation. Don't, you know, don't tweet after 3 a.m. because you're probably drunk and you're going to be stupid or whatever, blah, blah, blah, blah. But even if you are 3 a.m. tweeting when you're drunk, it's still freedom of speech. And she's saying, don't do that. That's taking away your freedom. Well, but the big thing was she was specifically talking to Elon Musk about this. But the reality is she keeps putting.

pushing, and there are many times that I interview. I could play you guys, you know, 40 clips of this of her talking about content moderation, content moderation, content moderation. Now, the thing about it is that she doesn't understand what fake news is. Now, I'm about to play you something, but she believes that fake news does not come from trusted and traditional sources. And obviously she hasn't read about the Hunter Biden laptop incident, which was curated by the so-called trusted sources and repeated by traditional news sources, only to turn out

to be fake. Everything they were saying was fake. It was, oh, this is bullshit. This is, you know, whatever. But, you know, all of the trusted sources that she refers to, trusted sources, CNN and Mississippi, all these other ones is ridiculous. She also hasn't read about the Nord Stream 2 pipeline, which was bombed by the United States, basically. There's been many experts about that, which was reported by traditional and reliable sources only to be proven thoughts. Furthermore, she hasn't read about vaccine misinformation. spread by individuals who claim to have knowledge, which has been consistently proven faults.

And she fails to understand that the spreaders of disinformation are often individuals with intelligence community, government officials, public relations firms, lobbyists, special interest groups, and of course the media. But yet she refers to all of these people I just said as the trusted sources, right? That's the only people in her mind that she refers to as having trusted sources. I want you to hear her, I want you to hear what she has to say here. And you guys tell me, here you go.

I think the more complicated issue when it comes to fake news is that the younger generation really doesn't experience or consume news with the same filters that what I would call traditional news or older folks, maybe some of us up on this panel, were once raised whether you had a news reporter or a news presenter, that you trusted and that you received your news from, those largely don't exist anymore. So as a company like NBC Universal that has one of the largest news footprints in the world

and certainly the largest news footprint in the U.S. You have to constantly be looking at your news organization and your filters for disseminating and really taking that responsibility of leadership very seriously. but how do you educate a younger generation about news literacy? I do a lot of talks about to younger folks, be careful what you share. Where are you getting it from? So I think that, you know, there's a big spectrum to fake news. It's what are you disseminating?

What are you sending out? What's catching on with consumers? Because you'll receive a video and you're there today sitting, is this real or not? what organization did this get published from, but the younger generation does not differentiate. They're used to seeing, you know, someone's, you know, phone cam, on site somewhere, telling them what's going on, and they take that as real and news. So real news and education and discipline is very, very important. Not to mention in the spectrum is, you know, all the social and technology platforms experiencing a coming of age

and their responsibility about disseminating or being a platform for disseminating news. And that was her at the World Economic Forum. Now there's two things, obviously, to point out there. She's basically saying, look, I can't believe these people are believing videos. Like, I mean, like, these people are on the scene of something, and, like, they see that this is happening. Like, can you believe that people are believing videos of, like... That they're seeing with their own eyes? Of Black Lives Matter and Tifa burning down cities and believe in this shit.

Can you believe it? Because it's not coming from the right information. Yeah. Like obviously if they were to watch MSNBC, then this didn't even happen. That's basically what she's saying, right? I mean, I want you to understand this. She's like, you know, we need to get more people to watch NBC Universal. And what we say about the news, this is what she's saying.

Make no mistake. She's at the World Economic Forum saying that I can't believe that people actually believe people that go to the scenes of things, video what's happening, and then people believe it. No, but they're not listening to us, and that is a problem. That's what she's saying. Oh, absolutely. And the us is the government and the media that is on board with the government. Absolutely.

Yeah, I want to, I do want to play this clip. I want to give you a little more insight from the Milk Bar TV about Linda and her New World Order WF. highs, and then we'll pick back up on this in just one second. Here you go. Musk making it official. He's tweeting out, quote, I'm excited to welcome Lindyakarino. The new CEO of Twitter. Musk draws backlash for picking World Economic Forum leader, supporter of content moderation to run Twitter. The more complicated issue when it comes to fake news is that the younger generation really doesn't experience or consume news with the same filters.

During her interview with you, she was most excited about your initiative to limit reach of tweets, which are deemed hateful, freedom of speech, not freedom of reach. For the advertising experts in this room to help develop Twitter into a place where they will be excited about investing more money, product development, ad safety, content moderation. She went on to chat.

you twice for tweeting after 3 a.m. because people are concerned about that sort of behavior. So after 3 a.m. You travel all over the world. Lord knows how you handle time zones in space. Will you commit to be a little more specific and not tweet after 3 a.m.? People in this room would like to see that. She also wanted advertising execs to be part of an influence council within Twitter. Twitter 1.0 had a very well populated, much, loved influence counsel. Would you commit from this stage today to reinstate that counsel? She's not here to improve the user experience. She wants Twitter to be a safe space. They're used to seeing, you know, someone's, you know, phone cam on site somewhere telling

them what's going on and they take that as real and news. So real news and education and discipline is very, very important. Not to mention in the spectrum is, you know, all the social and technology platforms experiencing a coming of age and their responsibility about disseminating or being a platform for disseminating news. She represents advertisers and her natural inclination is to limit speech and pandit to those who push woke ideology on the world. My division, our news division, the biggest news division in the country is going to be 50% women and 50% people of color.

Diversity and inclusion is besides the right thing to do, that it's good for business. The CEO of Black Rock three years ago. So before the pandemic, before the awful social crisis, and he talked about calling CEOs to attention, right, all over the world that companies in the private sector had a bigger responsibility to both their employees and their customers to fulfill a gap in society

that it was once assumed that the government would provide for people. So it was a call you used the word to service. I would say it was also called to purpose, right? So we had a responsibility to impact culture for the good. He was also thrilled to spend $100 million on social justice initiatives at NBC. Comcast set up a fund to the value of $100 million to fight social justice. justice and equality, and obviously supporting many, many important groups. But it really made a very public statement that we're going to put our money where our mouth is. We're not going anywhere.

And it inspired action across every corner of our company. And forwarded government authoritarian propaganda that the way back to a normal life was to wear your mask. We are here to talk about masking up or packing up. Just keep your distance, get your hands washed. And this is a video of her washing her hands because she thinks people are stupid. That'll get us closer and closer to normal days. Elon responded and said, I hear your concerns, but don't judge too early. I am adamant about defending free speech, even if it means losing money.

Mask up or pack up. So there you go. Well, guess what, girlfriend. We're not going anywhere either. High five. Well, so, yeah, so this lady that Elon hired, I literally, I mean, you know, look, many of you have actually reached out to us in the past, and we have been pretty congratulatory as far as Elon taken over Twitter. And we still are because of the fact that really is one of the last hopes besides Substack, which, by the way, we are on. For those that you that don't know about our Substack, we are on Substack, and Substack is a Freedom of Speech platform. It is somewhere where you can go and talk and speak and say what you want to.

and there's not some girl like Linda that's over here doing social justice and telling you if you video something that it's not true, you should listen to NBC and whatever else she said. You know, also in the interview with Elon, which we did not actually play the clip on this. She said it's not about limit. It's not about censoring speech. It's about limiting speech. So you don't have to like delete their tweet. You could just limit that it ever gets out to anyone. Like that's literally what she said.

Like flag it. So no one sees it. Yes. Flag it. Make sure. And this is all the same stuff, all the same crap that she always did. This is all the same stuff she always said. And it's all the same stuff that Twitter used to say.

That's why she said this council that Twitter had was a very... Yeah, it was a very well-respected and loved council. By who? By the left. By the people that are communist. By the FBI and by the DOJ and by everyone else that was involved in the censoring of speech, in the disembate. in the disseminating of fake news and the propaganda that was basically a back and forth between Twitter and the government. This is what was happening.

And this is what she's going to bring back to Twitter. Now, Elon says he wants to focus more on the technology side of Twitter. And this is, he's going to put her over the business. Obviously, he's going to also put her over the marketing and advertising side, right? Which is everything when it comes to the censorship side. You know, so which means if she is the CEO, of Twitter. She's going to have all and most hiring decisions of who she

brings in, how they're going to react and do things to tweets and algorithms and you name it. This is not good for Twitter. It's not good for freedom of speech. Unfortunately, it's like Elon is a moron on a sudden. I know. It's crazy. And it's just like in the last elections,

you know, you had all these marketing ads for one side and not the other. Because, you know, they were making freedom of speech on one side only. This is what's going to happen with her in charge. And I feel like whatever he spent on Twitter, what do you remember?

40 something billion. 40 something billion dollars is going down the drain right now because he's hiring this girl with values that are not the same values of what he says he believes in. Because he says he wants freedom of speech. He wants all things, you know, to be at a platform where people can discuss and communicate equally. But she obviously just listening.

to these videos of her speaking herself, that is obviously not what she's looking for. No. No, she's looking for a way, look, and she could be a plant. However, you want to see this. Like, I mean, I don't know how exactly her and Elon came about their kind of interaction

as far as her becoming the new CEO. But you have to understand, she was interviewing Elon, I believe, in January or whatever of February this year. So for whatever reason, she was able to interview Elon. And telling him what he was doing wrong. Yeah, what he should be doing. and so somehow some way someone planted this probably probably even that meeting,

that public forum meeting, uh, in there to the point of they're probably thinking, look, we can't necessarily just cancel Twitter because, you know, Twitter's doing pretty good as far as how they're, how they're operating and, and kind of, you know, their, um, Twitter don't really have an advisory board, but like, you know, if there's a tweet that gets out there, Twitter has a system to where it's community notes. and so there's so many people that can vote on it and then most of votes as far as what the accurate and real thing is it'll be underneath so instead of a fact check

from a you know government funded website like Politifact or whatever like Facebook has right this is from users yes users and so there will be people that contribute to the real story and then how many ever votes that real story gets you know on both sides it doesn't matter what side it is and then and then it can be reviewed by people in Twitter and so on and so forth that's the best the way to do is a community guided fact check basically, right? And that's the way it should be. And people could argue about, oh, well, you know, since Elon came about, it's only right-sided now or

whatever. It was not true at all. We don't have a voice. But you have to remember before he took over, it was not real people that had a voice. It was robots that were tweeting the same thing all over Twitter. Yeah, absolutely. It wasn't real people. And there's still those bots there. I mean, if you look at Joe Biden's stuff, they're still bots. I mean, and I'm assuming these bots, but, you know, well, Elon thought that, hey, look, you know, people would pay for this blue checkmark. And a lot of people do. Most real people pay for the verified checkmark.

We did because it's just, you know, we want to make sure that people know we are. We're not a bot. But if you look at Joe Biden's or Kamala Harris or any of their posts, they'll get so many of the same messages still, the exact same messages. And when you see that, yeah, they're not even smart enough to see the bot to make bots say something different. Yeah. And when you see this same message over and not. over. You know it's not a real person. So the people that

are upset with Twitter the way is going is because it's not going on their side and people are not really agreeing with what they want them to agree with, but the only people that was agreeing with them were not people at all. Yeah. No, you're right. Yeah, I mean, actually, you know

what's funny is this is another example. YouTube, you know, we've always remembered YouTube having likes and dislikes. It's been on videos since YouTube started, basically. And So I found it kind of interesting. And this is something I don't know, I don't even know if I brought up on this podcast before, but, you know, YouTube, right after Joe Biden's, I guess, election or his inauguration and all that stuff. Well, he would post a video or the White House would post a video on YouTube, right?

And it would be, I'm talking about before Biden when you had Trump in office, right? And Trump would post a video from the White House or he would post a video from his own account on YouTube or whatever the case was. you know, the likes would be like 150,000, 200,000, 300,000, 400,000 versus, you know, 20,000, 30,000 dislikes or whatever. And then when Biden got into office, it was like 500,000 dislikes and like 20,000 likes, right? I mean, it was complete opposite. So ever since then, and probably that happened for about a couple months after Joe Biden's election, two or three months. And then it wasn't long after that. YouTube literally got rid of the dislike button.

It is still not even there to this day. Oh, so it's only like I didn't even realize that. It's only like there is no dislike button anymore. Wow. After the Joe Biden, every video White House and Joe Biden posted was mass dislikes. I'm talking about. And I bet you it had to do with that. On a mass scale.

But that's what I'm saying. Oh, 100% it did. There's no question how to do with that because everyone would even comment on their videos and say, oh, you won the election was the most popular president in history. But yet you literally have the most. dislikes I've ever seen on YouTube versus like ratio like and then people would post like screenshots of like look what Trump's videos used to do like 500,000 likes versus 30,000 and then you got Joe Biden's 500,000 dislikes versus 30,000. I mean, it was a night and day thing. I did not even realize that.

That's pretty crazy. So then YouTube removed the dislike and and I think that's because like people's minds, you know, you start doing some math here. It's like, okay, this guy was supposedly the most voted for president in the history of the United States. But yet when he posts a YouTube video, it has some of the most dislikes we've ever seen in history on YouTube. And the ratio is absurd. I mean, absurd. And even the comments, like everything was bad. And on Twitter, that's another great example.

You go on Twitter after you get through the bots. Once you get through the bots, read the real comments. There are so many people that are just like, holy shit, go to hell, you suck. Right, right. I mean, it's just nonstop. Because the people, and I believe the mass of the people did not vote for Joe Biden. And regardless of whatever you want to say, that's just my opinion. But you can do your own math.

I mean, go to you. Well, you could have back in a day. But, you know, that's going to be a problem for them. It's going to be a problem controlling the narrative and controlling the people to keep believing that he's the most voted for him president in history. When that's obviously not the case. And on their behalf, I have to say a lot of people didn't vote for Joe Biden, but they voted against Donald Trump. matter though I don't there's still

they're just that ratio and how all that worked out it's just not possible I don't think and I think YouTube and I think the White House and I think everyone realized that is like look this is kind of polls every time we post the video which is not good this is not look good for us you either remove the dislike or we're coming after your ass is probably what they said

and they did it there's no question that's why now their excuse to why it was was like you know some kind of social shit like oh well you know this is a place of acceptance and all this stuff and we don't want people to dislike videos. Give me a damn break. It was not nothing about that. It was literally

about Joe Biden. His administration was getting so hardcore reamed on the dislike button that they had to literally cancel the dislike button. That's terrible. And I know in the past you know, on YouTube, you can delete comments, but you can't delete the dislikes.

Yeah, well, you can ban comments up leave and stuff like that, but yeah, yeah, you definitely can't do anything with the dislike. So they had to do something about that. Now, if we're, you know, just to touch, real quick towards the end of this. And this is kind of an important story, which we may end up doing a follow-up story on or a podcast episode on this. But, you know, another thing that social media heavily censored and banned was the Epstein case and everything that was surrounding the Epstein deal. They said anyone spreading miss or disinformation about Epstein being murdered was getting banned and censored. I mean, you know, basically you can pretty much follow anything that the media says, hey, we're going to censor. or ban you, you might as well just say that's true.

Because whatever it is, they don't want that to get out, right? It's not like just complete bullshit conspiracy theories or whatever, like some crazy stuff out there, like this is complete lies. Most everybody can see through that, especially in 2023. That's why they don't have to ban that shit, right? They have to ban the stuff that's true and really gets traction because it does not look good for whoever it is, and especially the Epstein thing. Well, recently, Google co-founder, Larry Page, vanishes after authorities try to support

him in a Jeffrey Epstein investigation. Now, the intrigue behind the shadowy sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein somehow continues to climax despite the ultimately or untimely, quote-unquote, suicide in New York jail cell almost four years ago. Now, as of right now, the U.S. Virgin Islands is unable to subpoena Google co-founder Larry Page over potential ties to Jeffrey Epstein because he cannot be physically located. Federal court filings are revealing. Now, a motion followed by Attorney General for the U.S. Virgin Islands said investigations tried, investigator tried to identify a physical address at which Page, 50, he's 50 years old, could be personally summons to appear in court. After identifying four possible addresses,

none of which were valid. Prosecutors are requesting the federal government allow Page to be summoned via Alphabet, which is Google's parent company, as he is still a member of its board. Now, it seems there are two potential explanations for Mr. Page's Disappearing Act. Either he himself doesn't want to testify because of personal fears of what crimes it might implicate him in, or someone or something, else doesn't want Mr. Page discussing what he knows about Jeffrey Epstein's activities. I.E., they got rid of them. Or he could be dead. Who knows? Right? But there was a half serious petition, I guess, for Elon must to slap a Twitter red check

on all known Jeffrey Epstein associates. And this was what a lot of people were starting to say. Like, hey, Elon was saying, hey, this is government-funded media. He did its NPR, which NPR said they're leaving Twitter now. But, I mean, he was just doing this. 60% government propaganda media. He was doing this in a lot of this. And there was a lot of people calling for like a red check on all known Jeffrey Epstein Associates on Twitter. They would be in big trouble. So the subpoena efforts are part of the ongoing Virgin Islands prosecution of J.P. Morgan's CEO Jamie DeMond, implicating the highest level of multinational banking as potential accomplices in the years-long

trafficking ring. And so via CNBC, CEO Jamie DeMond, in an interview Thursday, said that he was so sad that bank had any business relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, but denied the firm is legally liable for the dead predator's sex trafficking. DeMond also said in the televised interview with Bloomberg that it was J.P. Morgan had known anything about or everything that had become public in the recent years of its former customer Epstein. We would have done things differently. So basically, if anyone believes that a multinational banker like Jamie DeMond is psychologically capable of regret over facilitating immoral illegal activities on behalf of his clientele,

Then we have oceanfront property in Montana to sell you. Because the reality is that this bank and this CEO and everything, they're highly implicated in this. They probably were also involved in this big sex trafficking ring. We don't know opinion. These are theories out there. Just going to say that. But then you have executives like Google CEO or I guess co-founder, Larry Page, banishing. Can't found him nowhere.

Now, U.S. Virgin Islands, although they are a part of the United States, they do have their own kind of justice system, right? And so the Virgin Islands sounds like they're trying to, like, get serious about this and try to bring some type of justice to this sex ring. And it's going to be very interesting to see what happens because they are now calling for the U.S. government to help them in finding these people. Wow. And the U.S. government is probably definitely not going to cooperate.

And so it'll be very interesting to see, like, how the U.S. Virgin Islands handles this. more than likely they're going to be shut up about this pretty soon because the United States will say, look, we're going to either do this to you or do this to you if you don't shut the hell up. I mean, it's very likely. They could end the U.S. Virgin Islands if they want to. If they have to over this, they will do it. But the reason I'm bringing this up into this whole freedom of speech thing and all of this is because these are the types of cases, which are the utmost importance to all of us that the information war is the most important about.

I mean, we've got people in our government. We got people in not just our government, but the elites in our country that are potentially part of this huge and massive sex ring, this sex trafficking ring, this pedophilia thing. We do have a note to the extent of how effed up this is. But we do know that, you know, there are kids. I just saw pictures the other day of these kids that they found in shipping containers that were coming over from, I don't know where, somewhere overseas. I mean, you know, they looked Chinese maybe or who knows. Asian maybe or something. But yeah, some of these shipping containers were, had just dead kids everywhere.

Some of them survived. Some of them didn't. Oh, my God. But they were being trafficked to the U.S. I think they were on their way to U.S. I don't know if we found them in the U.S., but they found them somewhere. But there were just tons of shipping containers full of kids. A lot of them dead because they didn't survive the trip.

And then some of them, some of them barely still alive. And so this is the world we're living in Like this is the world we're living in And this is also why they They the New World Order They the Global East and the globalists They don't want you to know They don't want you to know what's really going on

Because man I don't think a lot of people Would believe the shit That they are actually a part of And even going back to the Epstein thing Oh yeah it's always been kind of hush hush But then when he was going on trial And all that stuff happened And he was in prison

You know all the sudden the cameras weren't working and he supposedly hung himself. Yeah, which is all bullshit. I mean, there's no question that's bullshit at this point. Everything worked out very perfectly for that murder. Yeah, and even Jazeem Maxwell during her trial, nothing really was said about the people that, you know, victimized the victims. Yeah.

No, there was, yeah, she, see, she trafficked kids to nobody, basically. I mean, that's essentially what it was. And they wanted to shut, you know, open and shut that case. Epstein's gone. Maxwell's gone. Peace out. But now U.S. Virgin Islands are kind of starting to make some waves. Somebody needs to. And they are, but how far are they going to get? Well, there's a reason why they're called the U.S. Virgin Islands. They're not going to get very far. This government is a part of that. I mean, period. There's no question. It wasn't just random people that went in and killed Epstein. I mean, this is, Epstein had the biggest ties to all of the most important people inside the U.S.

government. In around the world. People even said he was tied to the CIA in many cases, which doesn't surprise me whatsoever. I think the CIA is one of the most corrupt agencies ever, like in history of any agency. I mean, you can talk about the FSB or you can talk about the KGB. You can talk about all of these other agencies. But, man, it's just, I don't know, like if we put all of them together side by side and he looked at the shit that CIA did versus all these other ones.

I think they're all very bad. But, man, CIA would be up there as far as probably if you knew everything they've been a part of and done. You would just, it would blow your mind. And who knows if they weren't a part of this as well. You know, CIA does a lot of crazy shit to get things and put things on people to where they can't, you know, can't tell on you. They can't do anything because they have shit on them. And if you say anything, then you're screwed. Your whole life's over.

I mean, this is all done. And there's a show, by the way, Shooter on Netflix. I advise all you guys to watch it. There is a movie called Shooter, which is Mark Wahlberg, great movie. But Shooter the show, if you, everything we talk about, just go watch that show. I mean, it's like how corrupt that that show makes the CIA and all that. So it's kind of like realistic fiction. Yeah, I mean, it's like showing what it really could be.

Yeah, I mean, what it really is. I mean, even though, you know, they don't. go into JFK murders and all this stuff, but, you know, we know, and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is doubling down on that, you know, CIA killed my uncle, which was JFK. He believes they killed his dad as well. You know, and all of this is just, all used to be a conspiracy theory. Now that we have information, it's not conspiracy theories. We are getting information out. We are learning stuff now that we've never learned before. But guys, anyways, that is going to do it for this episode. We've got a lot of great episodes coming for you guys. We've got a lot of great

stuff on Substack. Go find us on Substack. Investigate Earth with Chad and Sherry. And until next time, peace out. Peace out, guys.