The Last American Vagabond - Catherine Austin Fitts Interview - See Beyond The Duopoly & Take Responsibility For Your Future

Episode Date: September 8, 2024

Joining me today is Catherine Austin Fitts, here to discuss the the upcoming election, the problem of the two party illusion, and how we must remove the propaganda-laden political veil from our eyes and recognize that one president cannot change the broken-by-design system in which we find ourselves (even if they truly wanted to) and take back responsibility for our future from career politicians, oligarchs, and technocrats who care only about their own power and control. We also discuss the impending digital control structure being built around us -- by both the Left and the Right (otherwise simply known as Your Government) -- as we are inundated by never ending indoctrination in the form of corporate media (MSM) and mainstream alternative media (MAM) -- as well as the solutions to overcome this imminent risk. Source Links:(17) Dr. Jill Stein🌻 on X: "If it sounds like Democrats and Republicans are reading from the same script, it’s because they both work for the same donors. https://t.co/QZrKKODK94" / XSolari Report – Actionable Intelligence to Live a Free & Inspired LifeNew TabThe Man Behind Trump’s VP Pick: It’s Worse Than You Think(17) The Last American Vagabond on X: "Here's a Trump video suggesting we "close up the Internet" & that you're "foolish" for free speech concerns. And another suggesting the gov "take the guns first & go through due process second." You might not be surprised to learn Kamala shares these views. #TwoPartyIllusion https://t.co/k9eKPmwYXE" / XWeaponized Migration & Experimentation - Tools For Subversion, Division & Manufacturing ConsentThe SAVE Act, REAL ID & ID2020 - Using The #TwoPartyIllusion & The Election To Usher In Digital IDsTwitter Still Using AU10TIX & Israeli Soldiers Arrested For Gang Rape Protected By LeadershipNew TabThe Co-Opting of Bitcoin: BTC Nashville, Peter Thiel, Donald Trump, and Rumble(17) American Values 🗽 on X: "RFK Jr. at Bitcoin Conference 2024: “President Nixon took us off the gold standard in 1971 to finance the Vietnam War. Since then, the Dollar’s purchasing power has been in precipitous decline. The Fed has engineered an uber-efficient money-printing machine to perpetrate the https://t.co/7Jk3OGH7hw" / XQuestions for RFK Regarding Your Proposed Bitcoin Executive Orders – Solari Report(17) The Solari Report on X: "Never permit an all digital financial system. Protect cash and checks. Zero integrity + speed is not "safe and effective"" / XTrump says he mulls Jamie Dimon for US Treasury, won't try ousting Fed's Powell | Reuters(17) The Solari Report on X: "Two important questions: How was Netanyahu's syndicate involved in the $21 trillion missing from the US government? How much of that money went to building out Israel's cybersecurity infrastructure and Bitcoin/crypto markets?" / XNew TabThe Rise Of Technocratic Regime Change & DOJ Indictment Ensnares Right-Wing InfluencersU.S. Investors Could Bankrupt Honduras, With Biden Administration SupportCrisis of Honduras democracy has roots in US tacit support for 2009 coup | Honduras | The GuardianHonduras Próspera peter thiel - Brave SearchBillionaires Are Suing the Honduran Government for Blocking Their Profit-Making Scheme(17) sarah on X: "Honduras has withdrawn its ambassador from Israel in protest of Israel’s genocide in Gaza. https://t.co/hmSA0H5DAZ" / XUS/Israeli 5th Generation Warfare - Israeli Bots, Destabilizing Propaganda & Digital Regime ChangeThe Rise Of Partisan Psychological Warfare & Israel's Latest School Massacre Narrative Falls ApartNew TabThe Israeli Election Interference and Psychological Operation Industrial ComplexHow Israel Uses The US #TwoPartyIllusion To Divide, Destabilize & Control Policy(17) Derrick Broze on X: "Announcing the Independent Media Alliance: Myself, @_whitneywebb & @TLAVagabond are organizing an alliance of independent media specifically focused on individuals who have been consistently correct and principled in their reporting on 3 core issues: 1. COVID1984 2. Israeli's" / XNew Tab(17) The Last American Vagabond on X: "“Never Doubt That a Small Group of Thoughtful, Committed Citizens Can Change the World; Indeed, It’s the Only Thing That Ever Has”" / XSummary – Going Direct Reset – Going DirectBitcoin Donations Are Appreciated:www.thelastamericanvagabond.com/bitcoin-donation(3FSozj9gQ1UniHvEiRmkPnXzHSVMc68U9f) Get full access to The Last American Vagabond Substack at tlavagabond.substack.com/subscribe

This will be the most important election in the history of our country. This election is not only the most important of our lives, it is one of the most important in the life of our nation. Together we will restore vision, strength, competence, and we're going to have a thing called common sense. A president who leads and listens, who is realistic, practical, and has common sense. No nation will question our power, no enemy will doubt our might. That we strengthen, not abdicate our global leadership. An economy, the likes of which nobody, no nation, had ever seen China.

We were beating them. That America, not China, wins the competition for the 21st century. Our borders will be totally secure, our economy will soar. We will return law and order to our streets. After decades in law enforcement, I know the importance of safety and security, especially at our border. Last year, Joe and I brought together Democrats and conservative Republicans to write the strongest border bill in decades. We want people to come into our country, but they have to come into our country legally. With citizenship and secure our border.

I tell you this, we want our hostages back, and they better be back. before I assume office, where you will be paying a very big price. And now Iran is very close to having a nuclear weapon. To defend our forces and our interests against Iran and Iran-backed terrorists. We gave our military almost $800 billion. As commander-in-chief, I will ensure America always has the strongest, most lethal fighting force in the world. America is on the cusp of a new goal. old and age.

I will make. Just like our ancestors, we must now come together. It is now to do what generations before us have done. We will press forward and together we will win, win. Welcome to Last American Vagabond. Joining me today in studio is Catherine Austin Fitz. I'm honored to have her in studio today to discuss a lot of important things that we've been going back and forth on recently.

One of the things that I was really excited to talk to you about today in general is something that you recently discussed around the biometric control structure, or really just as you framed it, Republicans tricking conservatives into the control structure. And this is something my audience has been hearing about just incessantly over the last so many weeks about, and really from a two-party illusion perspective. Thank you for doing that. It's important. I mean, really. And from a two-party illusion perspective. And that's important because it can seem as if it's focusing on one side more than the other, but my opinion is more so about the idea that this is kind of a manipulation around the whole bigger picture, but really important to understand whether left or right that we're seeing,

in my opinion, and I want you to touch on your thoughts on this, they're using these different wedge issues to drive them into position. And I saw this during COVID, where, for example, Donald Trump being in position, in my opinion, was easily one of the, it was easy, it pacified what would have been the most resistant to everything, the constitutional gun owners. And I see it happening yet again. So go to any major consumer. brand and go sit with their marketing department. And what they will tell you is they have a marketing strategy for every niche, right? Thousands of, if you're a soda pop company, you're marketing around the world, you need a niche for, you know, 192 countries in different, you know, young and old and black and

white, women and men. And, you know, so, so this is no different. Right. Mr. Global wants total financial transaction control. And Mr. Global can't get that without a digital ID. The digital ID is the next step to the digital concentration camp snapping into place in your home, in your car, in your community. So we are watching multiple marketing campaigns for digital idea across the political spectrum. So, you know, on the conservative side, the Republicans are saying, oh, we can solve immigration, but we're going to need biometric surveillance and we're going to need a digital ID. And the states are saying, oh, we want you to have a new driver's license, but we need a real ID. And it's, it's, even in Tennessee, they're telling

you you you have to get a real ID when you don't to get a driver's license. Don't, don't let them lie to you in your state about that. And we're watching election fraud. We can solve election fraud, but we need a digital ID. Now, I want to point out that we had tight borders and we could run elections before we had digital systems. Right, right. So it's really, I'm always telling I have, I have some people on our team at Salary who are constantly saying, oh, well, let's get a new app to solve that problem. And I said, you know, I worked on Wall Street. We swung around hundreds of billions of dollars a year with syndicrites of hundreds of firms. And all we had were number two pencils and landlines.

We just kept our word. You know, there was no problem if you just keep your word. So anyway, so, so we're, you know, now we're. we're seeing from the EU vaccine passports. They didn't work the last time, but they're trying them again. So these are just all marketing schemes to get one thing and one thing only. It's good way to frame it. Right. And now you're watching a lot of people coming out and saying they're against CBDC. The problem is there are many ways to achieve financial transaction control of which CBDC is just one. You can do it with private cryptos. You can do it with MasterCard and visa. You just need to kill all the analog systems, which is why we keep saying, keep cash and check

going. But anytime in your life, you can reject, you know, if you go to get a renewal of your driver's license and they tell you you have to have a real ID, don't believe it, don't fall for it, insist on getting it without the real ID. And for those that aren't aware, this is something I recently was talking about in regard to the save act. I mean, this is really important to understand. is it. And this is, I mean, this is the first thing we're going to get into. And we have a lot of things we can discuss today around the idea of, as I called it, the Trojan horse for digital ID, right? So it's using the real ID aspect of it and overlapping with ID 2020, which you're well aware of, you know, are both digital ID kind of vehicles. Right.

And they're using it the trick conservatives in particular. Right. So different kinds of IDs that then snap together and you've got the digital ID. Right. And so you mentioned the mobile driver's license. I was just making this point. And for those that want to really see why the SAVE Act is not just. some unwitting mistake by the Republicans, it uses the real ID compliant identification and then lists off some other options. At the same time, you've got the Biden aspect or really just the government on the other side of it pushing forward the mobile driver's license and making it clear that that will eventually be your one-stop shot for all of your identification. So once that

shifts in a place, as you're saying, they snap together and there's no other option other than real identity, real ID compliant identification, otherwise digital identification. So do you think that that's something that Republican leadership is aware of? Yes, of course. Across the board? These guys are not stupid. Right. I agree. They're not stupid.

Although what I will say, I keep running into a remarkable number of people who are remarkably naive about this. So let me give you an example. I was meeting in another state with a wonderful activist, and he's got to build a protect against immigration within the state, and he had a provision in it that required e-verify. And I was talking about how much I love Congressman Massey, and he said, well, I do too. but he wouldn't support my bill unless I took out the E-Verify, and he's just being ridiculous.

And I looked at him and I said, no, he's smart. I would never support your bill if you got, unless you took E-Verify out. Apparently, you want to be a slave. And he said, what are you talking about? And I, you know, I tried to connect the dots for him. And I said, Massey, you know, went to MIT. He understands exactly what this is. Right.

He gave you a great tip. Get it out of your bill. Yeah. I mean, so you don't think he was aware of that, which is interesting. I think this gentleman was a very wonderful, hardworking activist who had no idea. I mean, I've gone to conferences of freedom groups, and they want us to sign up on QR codes that contract is worth. You know, and I have to say, no, you know, I just won't. I run screaming from those things.

So the interesting point that I want to make, though, is that I do agree, and let me know what you think about this, that there is some level, there's a necessity within this to actually, point being is that we should care if there are people, there are legal immigrants that are voting. I would argue that we should care about that. Yes. Because it is a law and that is there, and obviously we should want citizens to vote. We don't need digital identification

to do that. You don't need digital identification. If you look at what it takes at a county level to run the process clean, I assure you it won't be solved. If you have a governance system and a computer system, which are deeply compromised, you're not going to solve. it with a digital light. All you're going to do is give them a digital system. It'll make them more powerful and compromise. Exactly. Right, right. And so this is what's so frustrating about all this, is it's always, the best manipulations are always using something that we genuinely care about.

Right, but here's why. And here's the way you understand this. We have a governance problem. Okay. And it starts at the top and the people at the top want to centralize control into the top. And what is happening is our governance is being deeply compromised, you know, from from top to bottom. The way you solve a governance problem is by fixing the governance. You cannot solve a governance problem with technology. You cannot solve

a governance problem with a financial product. So all these notions, oh, if we just use gold, you know, that'll solve all the problems. Or if we just use, you know, digital ID systems, that will solve. You can't solve technological and financial solutions

for a governance problem always give the governance structure, more power, it makes the problem worse. Yeah, it sounds like naivity that the argument being that they're not doing it on purpose, which I think is obviously not the case. So it's, you're giving them more power. I've, I have worked at the top of the financial system and the political system in the United States. And I've worked with people who at that time were running the world. And I assure you they're stupid. Right. They are not stupid. Yeah, it's important. I mean, it's, it's, they always, I always say this all the time. They would always rather be seen as incompetent than criminal.

I mean, and it's everywhere you look right now. Well, they would always prefer not to be seen. The people really run things are not seen. Right. They make it their business not to be seen. Right, right. So in regard to the actual popular, the people within the paradigm, how much do you think, and this is just your opinion, I mean, I don't know how we can even tell what that much propaganda there is today. How much of the Republican conversation do you think is aware of this problem, whether or not they may still lean into the SAVE Act? Do you think that how much of do you think of is concerned that this might be a problem? I see the Trojan horse. Now, when you say Republican conversation, do you mean?

Conservatives at large. So I differentiate it by what I call the team sport politics. That's the Republicans and Democrats that I frankly don't think care about the facts. It's about winning. But then I see conservatives and liberals that still probably vote in those lines, but maybe are more aware of it. Well, but it breaks out into many different groups. So it's hard to generalize. If you look at anybody who's been experienced congressman, they totally understand.

You know, they understand this is just a theater. It's entertainment. We've moved political process out of the power zone into the entertainment zone. Right. Yeah, exactly. And if you want any solution or real change, you've got to move back into the power zone. What does that mean exactly? Well, in the power zone, if I decide I don't like something,

then I'm going to go down to the county commission or I'm going to go to the state legislature, or I'm going to go to Congress and I'm going to work to get it changed in the real actual mechanism that determines how the money gets whacked up and the resources get whacked up and what the laws are. As an individual or somebody internal in the system? So I'm either going to do it as an individual or I'm going to figure out the groups that are taking it the right way and I'm going to work with them and support them. There are many different ways to go about it.

It depends on the issue. But I'm going to, there is a mechanism by which power is, organized and allocated. And in the legislative process and the administrative process, there is a law and regulation mechanism, and then the real powerful mechanism is the budget. Okay. Yeah. So you whack up the credit and you whack up the appropriations, you whack up the taxes.

So when I was in Washington, I had one of the biggest budget jobs because I was overseeing the mortgage markets and the federal credit in the mortgage markets and all of those assets. And I had stopped watching TV from 1984, and I had a decorator insisted you can't work in the government without TV. So she bought me a TV. I had one for a brief period of time, and I would watch the Sunday shows. And I knew because I was working with the budget, everything that was happening pretty much in the budget, in my area, but in related areas in the general budget. And on the Sunday shows, here's what's going on in the budget, and here's what the shows are saying. and they're two parallel universes.

Right, right. This is the real deal. This is the official narrative. This is entertainment. This is power. You know, this is where you whack up the actual resources and who gets what. And so, you know, what has happened. I'll never forget realizing this when I watched in the 90s as people who used to have real political impact and choices literally migrated from a world where they had

political power and had influence and their vote had influence to a world where their entire desire for choice and impact was satisfied by consumer choices. They were overwhelmed with consumer choices and politics was slowly migrated to an entertainment space. Right. So, you know, when you, you have to decide, do I want to be entertained? And in that entertainment space, do I want to get online and fight and argue with people about, you know, who's going to win the election? or do I want to jump in and get involved in the nuts and bolts of implementing real change? We can talk about how the, but I'm interested in real power and real change,

and I find the entertainment space stupefying. Yeah. What's interesting about it is, like, just from my own personal thoughts on that, like I am, as my audience, well knows, I'm very jaded about the entire system. As we were kind of talking before, I'm still open to possible change. I want to believe, but I'm very jaded.

And so what I'm saying that for is that I feel like, as I'm hearing you say that, it's very easy for us to fall in that trap because you don't want. Don't fall, don't fall in that trap because it's amazing how much you can get done. I mean, interestingly enough, the bare bones of the mechanisms in the United States are brilliant and good. We have a great constitution. We have so many great laws. There are, you know, there are administrative things that make sense and more. There's a lot to the system, the bare bones, the backbone of the system.

agree, which can really be, you know, which are good and well designed and could be worked with. Now, the corruption is appalling. Now, one thing I want to say, because I always say this, the cellular report, we have a building wealth curriculum. I'm very big on building wealth. And our second, there's six pillars to the building wealth curriculum, but the second is navigation tools. And my key point under navigation tools is there's the official reality, and then there's reality. The official reality is for the cocktail party. And reality is for the management of your time, your money, and your real risk.

Right. Okay. Please do not take reality of the cocktail party. That's not a good idea. And please do not take the official narrative as a baseline for managing your money or your time or your resources. Right. Because you'll lose all your money and you'll get killed on your time. You'll also get poison.

So it's very, very important if you're going to navigate our world, you have to understand we are working. We're operating in a multiple personality disorder world. Right. Where I'll give you a, I have thousands of Washington stories, but this is a perfect one. Can I use an off-color word? Absolutely. Okay, I like to get permission. So I'm having dinner with a congressman and some other people, and he's a really good guy,

and we're talking about the real deal and what's really going on the housing corruption, mortgage fraud. So, and this is a really good guy, and he knows what's going on, and we're having a really meaningful conversation. Suddenly the buzzer rings, and he has to jump up and vote, and it's on tax appropriations. And he turns to me and he says, let's face it, honey, I'm only here to protect my shit. That's incredible. Well, that's what you get down to. Now, I'll tell you another story, and this was reflective of what happened when they moved things to the entertainment space. and the corruption really took over.

I was in Kit Bond's office. So I was litigating with the Department of Justice over corruption at HUD. And HUD owed my company a couple million dollars, and they had just tried to renege on a bill, and I was trying to collect my bill. Anyway, so I had a meeting with Kit Bond's chief of staff. He was chair of one of the appropriation committees

in the Senate for, a large number of agencies, including Treasury and HUD, which vast amounts of money was disappearing from at the time. So I walked in to talk to his chief of staff, and they said to me, what do you think is going on at HUD? And I was trying to be discreet. And I said, I don't know, what do you think is going on at HUD? And they said, HUD is being run as a criminal enterprise. Wow. And I said, I don't disagree. And the reason that's such an amazing comment or conversation is controlled by the Department of Justice, the Department of Defense,

the Department of Treasury, and the New York Fed member banks. So if they're running it as a criminal enterprise, it's their control and decision. Anyway, just as we're finishing that conversation, the senator, who I know, walks in, and at the time we had a very cordial relationship, and he's holding this huge plastic cup

designed to float in a swimming pool with that gigantic straw with a big plastic flower coming out of it. And he said, I need a kind of a gift for my fundraiser out in St. Louis next week. He said, what do you think of this? You know, we were coming in the summer. And I looked at him. I said, Senator, Americans want to believe that their Senate and their senator is much more distinguished than this. So I would not do this.

and he just looked at me and his eyes just said, they have no idea. Man, I mean, you know, it's so, it's just, it's terrifying to think about how it's just a open conversation behind the curtain, you know, like, and so what that ultimately drives is the reality that you either recognize that you play the game or you're not part of, like, I think people have, what, just on a quick side question. What's the likelihood that somebody can even make positive change from within the system? that is that, like, openly dishonest.

I'm with you on the sense that we should lean into that possibility. But it's remarkable. I see amazing people make extraordinary differences when you would think it's hopeless. So I just spent yesterday with Senator Nicely. And if you look at the difference that man has made. And it's funny because I've been in the legislature with him and it always looks impossible.

The friction is off the charts. It looks hopeless. you know, and then it works. And if you look at what he's accomplished over the last 10, 15 years, it's just, it's unbelievable. Just he and Janice Bowling, Senator Bowling, Representative Bud Halsey,

you've got a small cohort of people fighting for freedom. And it's a very, it's a very messy, high friction process. But it's amazing. If you see what Congressman Massey has accomplished, it's unbelievable. And if they hadn't gotten, you know, if they had kept McCarthy instead putting in that ding-dong Johnson, you know, he would have gotten a lot more done. Well, why do you, I mean, I guess the question that one probably comes to mind is, you know, why is it allowed? Like, how are they allowed to push back against a criminal enterprise from within?

Like, are they, are they threatened? Are there any kind of pressure there? Like, you'd think if it was a criminal enterprise, which I completely agree with, that there'd be more than just disagreement that they're trying to stop the criminal enterprise. Like, you know, what do you think on that? Like, is there more pushback than we see? So the pushback is extraordinary, you know, which is why they're not a lot more people in there. Right. So there is plenty of plenty of pushback. But here's the thing.

If you look at how freedom works, it really, you know, there is on this planet at the base, extraordinary spiritual warfare. And you got to win. Right. You got to win. And you can't say, oh, well, it's too difficult, I quit. Exactly. Because then you're overrun. Right.

And if you look at the people who have been in the mechanism fighting, what they have stopped, it's just miraculous what they have stopped. So they're the ones holding back the flood, essentially, is what you're saying. Yeah, they are the guardian at the gates. They are standing in the breach. It's unbelievable. Yeah. And all I can say is, you know, it would be a lot worse if they weren't there.

and it could get a lot worse. But I don't think, you know, I'm one of those people who believe, I'll never forget, I was sitting, it was when I was still dating a man who became my second husband. I was sitting in New York and he was a partner in a law firm. And I was talking to him about what it took to become a partner because I was at Dylan Reed and wanted to become a partner, which I did. And I said, how do you become a partner? He said, unrelenting, unceasing, unremitting, pressure.

And, you know, I think if the people's centralizing power have done any, anything, the thing they've done that has been the most right and the most successful from their point of view is neurological weaponry, propaganda, disinformation, all of, everything from propaganda to entrainment technology and subliminal programming. When it comes to the mind manipulation and control, you know, and it's one of the reasons they're so confident in their hybrid warfare because it's been so wildly successful. But they are getting people all over the world and certainly all across the United States to choose to act against their own self-interest. Yes, yes. So let's talk about that because this is something that I just, I mean, I've been, I think we've all been talking about this to agree for a while. Like people in, you know, our circles like gas are the ones that see through more so the two-party illusion, I would argue. but something has clearly shifted in the recent, you know, over the last year or so or more,

like we all seem, I mean, a lot of people are highlighting some different level of kind of political fervor. So talking about like, you mentioned that like the neuroscience kind of side of that, but also just the general propaganda, social engineering. So I keep seeing this happening. Like we can go into the, the RFK, Trump kind of, Musk, Bitcoin, kind of that whole overlap and talk about that. But point out for me where you think this gets into something deeper than just propaganda. as we go through this stuff because the neuroscience aspect of this is not a new conversation. And I really worry about whether there's more going on around the technological side of it, that it's just...

Absolutely. Well, give me your thoughts on that, more than just propaganda. Well, so if you go to Salarian, you put in the words mind control, you'll bring up... We have something called Mind Control Collections with the best information on literally electromagnetic manipulation of your mind, your thoughts. your body. I'm talking about using entrainment technology and subliminal programming to trick you and brainwash you. So you talk about like a screen or like direct energy? I'm talking about something that come through a microphone. Okay. It can come through the Wi-Fi in a auditorium. It can come

through your computer. And I've dealt with it. So I had professional training and understanding what it was and how it worked. I didn't I didn't understand it as a scientist, but just as a layperson. And I have had experiences dealing with it in a variety of formats. And I have the original Salary report I did on Entrainment Technology, Subliminal Programming, and Financial Fraud. I did that in 2000. It was 2010, I think, and I tell the story of having it used on me in a conference. Had it used on me on radio shows, too.

How did you know? I'll explain to just a second. But anyway, so the reason I did that, show, I called up the scientist who had originally briefed me in 2004 about the technology, how it worked, and then that helped me understand different experiences I had with it between 2004. And when we did the interview, what happened to me was I was an investment advisor. So I started an investment advisory firm in 2007.

I don't do that anymore. We converted to doing an investment screen, so that company just does an investment screen. But I was encountering situations where in terms. training technology and subliminal program was being used to market investments to my clients. Wow. And I would get a client who had been approached for, it was usually a precious metals deal or a private placement. And oftentimes it was coordinated with GPS data for marketing. So my guess is they were probably working with some of the intelligence agencies.

That's a guess. But what I found was I would have a very careful. conservative, intelligent client who was very knowledgeable and sophisticated, and they could go into the precious metals, go to any precious metals dealer and buy silver at 2 to 3% over a spot price. And yet they'd been marketed to on the phone, and they wanted to buy a different silver product for 24% of a spot. and normally my attitude is an investment advisor it's your money you should do whatever you want right but i would find myself literally screaming at people you can't spend 24% more than the market

price when you can buy it for 3% over the market price are you out of your mind i mean take that 21% and just give it to a you know to a worthy cause don't just give it to a fraudster for no reason you get nothing i mean i would just go crazy. And I realized, oh, they're marketing, you know, and they used to, there, there's a whole categories. It was both precious metals, it was one category, but there was another category of, I would, I call them goody two shoes, investments. It's solar, it's renewable energy, it's helping people. And then if you look at the, you know, I would tell clients, there's a 100% chance you're going to lose your money on that. You cannot do this. But I would find screaming, they were so

emotionally attached. Right. And that's when I realized, oh, they're using entrainment. And so this is from like a corporate level, right? So which is interesting to me. So that means I can almost guarantee it's being used in much more nefarious, high-level ways if you have companies using this. So let me be a bad guy. I think that the two ways they really hook men is they overlay pornography with that kind of entrainment. And you have no idea what they're brainwashing you do.

They use it with video games. That's how they get kids. Right. How do you get a kid to agree to be a patsy for a shooting? Right, right. That's how you do it. Man. I think they use it on sports.

So somebody used to say the ads at the Super Bowl with the number one programming event of men in America. Good thing I don't watch those anymore. Anyway, but you have all these. And this is how you sell big consumer products. This is cybersecurity. We just did a great interview with Bob Sullivan on the Mexican cartels are moving into very sophisticated. cyber crime, I think from Bob's description that they're using entrainment sublimo programming. And I've had it used on me, you know, as I said, on a radio show or in a conference, and it's

unbelievable. So I tell the story in the, you know, our, the Salary report on Entrainment Technology Sublimat Programming and financial fraud. I tell about it being used on me in an investment conference and on the whole audience. I mean, it was the whole audience. And it was funny. I walked into the room. I was late because I was talking to a client and I opened the ballroom doorrooms and I got hit by this wave and I thought, oh my God, they're using the treatment. Wow. An investment conference. And I've been convinced that that's how they were doing the Enron analyst meetings. From the descriptions, I was convinced they were using entrainment, but I hadn't

experienced it in an investment, you know, situation. Anyway, I describe it and if you're interested, I would, I would recommend you listen to that. Yeah. The whole mind, mind control collection is very, very good. And, you know, if you go through all the materials of at least legitimate sources that I think are useful, you know, this is a serious problem. There's a new book by David Hughes

that we just reviewed. We just did an interview with David Hughes, and you should have David Hughes on the Last American Vagabond. We're doing a seminar with him on September 21st online called Omni War. And he's going to be writing the third quarter wrap up for Salary called Omnoy War.

Good, good. And he integrates neurological weaponry and psychological operations. Man, this is the stuff of my nightmares. I've been talking about this for a lot. I mean, even getting into like the overlap with like that you've talked about, like smart dust, nanotechnology side of this. So what you're talking about here, let's overlap this with the conversation, is a level of not just programming propaganda, but like electronically, I guess, if that's the right

word manipulating people to acting as their own interests. So think of it this way. So we have a wonderful salarious report called Control and Freedom Happen one person at a time. Say it again? Control and freedom happen one person at a time. We also have a series called Deep State Tactics 101. And I go through all the tactics I've dealt with or studied because, you know, if you litigate with the Department of Justice for 11 years, you get an incredible training

program at Deep State Tactics. So I know a lot. Anyway, if you listen to control and freedom happen one person at time, what we describe, there are three primary lines of control. So they're clusters of techniques. The first is surveillance, and surveillance includes all the digital systems, including the entrainments of liminal programming, all the neurological weaponry.

So that's one whole line of me tracking you, watching you, and having an information advantage, because I've got you in front of a one mirror. I can see you, you can't see me. I've got all your data. You know, you don't have any of mine. So that's one set of guideposts. The second is financial.

The carrots and sticks, nuts and bolts. You behave, you know, you get a check. You don't behave. You know, so there's a whole world that is very, very powerful. Then the third is covert operations. And covert operations are, you know, if you can't, get, if you can't hurt somebody with the first two techniques, you know, that's how people get assassinated runoff.

You look at all the physical harassment I dealt with. That was the covert operations. Okay. So the three, you have to understand, are organized to work on a person one by one with AI and software. I can have databases and programs. So you have a unique program for you and I have a unique program for me. And you're trying to optimize and manipulate everybody. And you can do it all with AI and software.

So it's literally, every one of us has 24-7 Stasi teams on us. They're just, you know, they're just AI and software. Right, right. And luckily, they don't have the system perfected yet. Yeah. And we'll see, this is exactly what I think Twitter and a lot of these overlapping things are doing right now. It's like machine learning. They're honeypots and they're learning.

One of, if you look at those three lines of control, one of the most powerful lines of control is social approval. Okay. And I remember one of the hardest things for me when I decided to leave the establishment and fight was you are literally treated like an outcast and you have to be prepared to operate in the wilderness for years and years and years.

You know, just... And it's really funny because I remember I literally one day I have a Rolodex of the 5,000 most powerful people in the country and if I call one of them, they'll take my call, and everything will be very cordial. And the next day, not one would return my phone call. It's, you know.

That's interesting. Right. That's how it works. Yeah, just boxed out from the power structure. Right. So this, getting into the overlapping of the current problem with the two-party illusion discussion. So obviously, I think you would, would you say that that is something that's being used

right now? Because I see people that are acting again, and you've talked about this. You've made in podcasts, acting as their interest politically right now. there are real incremental differences between the two parties. And let me explain the biggest one. There is a huge, the entire global economy runs off and feeds off of the federal credit, both appropriations, taxes, appropriations, borrowings, and, and credit. So there's a massive money pot that runs the global economy in what, you know,

and it's allocated between New York, Washington and the Bohemian Grove in San Francisco. And so that is a huge honeypot. The group that controls that honey pot controls a whole pot of pork related to that honey pot. Okay? So if the party, you know,

so if the Democrats win, they control the pork. Okay, I see you're saying. If the Republicans win, they control the pork. Okay. Now, what I will tell you is talking to, You know, if I talk to legislators around the country who are sincere and real freedom fighters, they want the Republican Party to win because then the Republican Party will control the pork. And if they need a waiver, if they need a letter, if they, you know, whatever they need to get their issues taken care of, then they can.

If it's the Democrats, they're frozen. And that's because they're on the Republican side of the conversation? Right. Okay. And vice versa of the other. Most of the freedom fighters are on the Republican side of the conversation right now. Hopefully that will change, and I think it is changing. Although a lot of the Democrats are becoming independence.

Right, yeah. We can get into that, yeah. So who gets the pork is very real incrementally, not in terms of the big picture, but, you know, and so think of this as a process where whoever is in there is helping to centralize control by getting the digital ID. Right. Right.

But the guy who wins then controls the pork. Right. So the policy doesn't change, but who gets the port changes? Well, and so essentially the point is that, so you said, most freedom fighters on the Republican side, and I would argue from the beginning point, this is why this is being, I would argue, primarily aimed at the Republican side of the conversation to, they would be the most resistant to these next steps. Is that kind of what you're saying? Is it so they're kind of focusing on that side of it? Right. Now, there are incremental policy difference.

So in 2016, when Trump came in, he canceled the who. Now, he kept funding. you know, so it's not through Gavi and, yeah. And, but he canceled our participation in the Paris Agreement. You know, a very big thing to me was,

you know, he returned Christmas to a holiday. You know, there was a huge effort to story Christmas before that he, you know, so there were incremental differences. Can you something really quickly

on that point? Do you ever wonder whether that is sort of like a manufactured problem react, like where they, they do that to make it feel like Trump's the right guy in that situation?

Because you're all, well, here's the thing. you're always trying to get, you're always trying to get buy-in with things that don't cost you anything. Right. Yeah. Okay.

So, and that's why you get into all the social issues, because then you can, you know, if I can whack up the budget with my friends without the general population being involved, and I can satisfy them with social issues, there you go. Right. Right. Because it's not really, yeah, exactly. You made that. So I think that's the problem is that we tend to fall for that because it's something that we,

you know, I mean, people care, like you said, we care about those things, whether as from a religious perspective or just because of freedom perspective, but it doesn't actually change anything in regard to our day-to-day freedoms. So here's our problem, the general population. One is we are compromised by what I call the red button problem. In other words, for decades, we have been the beneficiary of a global system that delivers subsidy to the guy who controls the reserve currency.

And we have made it clear as a body politic. want the check. And we expect the leadership to go off and do the ugly, horrible things it takes to get cheap resources and cheap labor around the world and shelter us from it. Okay. So I want my check. I'm a good Christian. We're going to Iraq, not to get the oil and kill a million people and take their oil. We're going to rack to improve women's rights. Yeah. So I get a story of I am good. Right. Right. And what the politicians, will tell you is people want the check. They're not willing to, you know,

they don't want the bad guys to stop racketeering if it means their check diminishes. Yeah. And you would argue, do you think that's the majority of people in the conversation, or is that what they want us to think is the majority or that they're focusing on? I'm a little more hopeful these days. I think it's a combination of things,

but I think one is that a lot of folks have over the years been acclimated into that way of thinking. Yeah, yeah. But using a point you just made before, maybe not by their own decision-making process, like being manipulated into that using neural. Well, there are multiple strategies in place to get people to behave irresponsibly and to get people to behave in ways that make them powerless. For example, so I grew up in a world where from the youngest of ages,

we were all engaged in conspiracies. I mean, a conspiracy was the fundamental model of, how things got done. You know, you get together, you make a plan, keep it secret, and then you implement it. And most of the conspiracies were legal, not all of them, but, you know, it, but conspiracies were the fundamental building block of acquiring and affecting and implementing power. And that was good. You know, if you want to build a civilization, you build it one deal, one project, one transaction at a time. Yeah, you're really just talking about working alongside others to affect the plan.

Right. You're talking about cooperating. Right. Right. And, and, you know, it was funny. So I worked on Wall Street for years. I loved it. And we would put together huge syndicates. So one day I'm competing with Goldman Sachs and Solomon and we're almost ready to kill each other. The next day we're in the deal together. And our success depends on just extraordinarily intimate management of risk together at very high speed under great pressure.

you know, and we're like, you know, in the bunker together. So, you know, and we would compete and cooperate and compete and cooperate. And but we knew how to, you know, whether it was building a conspiracy or building a syndicate, we knew how to do it. And that we prided ourselves on being part of building the future. Yeah. That was a wonderful thing. What's interesting to me, though, is that it clearly from within the power structure that,

as opposed to working together, like it's always framed, it's like what you're really saying. It's a bunch of compartmentalized conspiracies to get what they want out of it. So when I get booted out of the establishment, I started listening to people talk about they were disparaging conspiracies. And I realized they were trained to be, they were being trained to be powerless.

Right, right. So when you say that, you mean, always see it as an insurmountable power structure that you can't have an effect on. And that's the, but being, explain that from me in the conspiracy side of it. Thinking that that, that, that people getting together, coming up with a plan to change things or build things or make things,

and keeping it secret was somehow dirty or bad. Right. It doesn't have to be, but you would understand obviously why Americans or anybody would be suspicious about that with the background of the government. No. Why? Because every, almost every great thing that's ever happened in this country came from a conspiracy. What I mean, though, is I can understand why the average person with how many examples we have of why the behind the doors colluding doesn't work out for Americans' interest. why you would at least worry that might be the case.

Well, but here's what I always say on Salaries. I always, you know, I used to always end the show with, don't ask if there is a conspiracy. If you're not in one, you need to start one. Well, this is the point about the word being misrepresented. Conspiracy is in the Christmas song for crying out loud. It's not an inherently bad conspired by the fire. You know, it's not inherently a bad word.

It is when it's done against your interest and it legally. Well, think of it this way. A hammer can be used to build a house. It can be used to hit somebody over the head. Right. You know, the hammer's not bad. Yeah. No, I agree. I agree.

And so this is the important part. This brings you to the point. But this is what I'm trying to do. If we're going to get out of entertainment space and we're going to get into the power space and really changing things, right. You've got to get into conspiracies. You got to start them. You've got to implement them. What's funny is I find it hard.

I think people will never get on board with that because that we've been trained to hear the word conspiracy as a bad thing no matter what. So we call that. People are going to immediately go like, whoa, I'm concerned about that. But I get what you're saying is we need to collect. We need to work together to effectively change. I can't lose my love of conspiracy. But I get what you're saying. And I think what's important is to see that not everything that's happening in regard to people

like right now we need to be able to work together to push back against the power structure from within like you're saying with people like Massey or others. But again, from my perspective, it's a very hard sell for me to believe in any context. Even though I know that like you're saying, it does happen, that I'm immediately on in any of the conversations. But let me tell you something that the future will be built by the people who build it. Right. Right.

So if you're sitting back and saying, oh, I want nothing to do with building the future, then the other guys will build it. Exactly. Exactly. So what I'm saying is not doing nothing, but rather just being, like that's kind of what we were saying before, is I am, I will always be open to the possibility that what we're looking at might be a good thing or might be in our interest, but I'm always kind of inherently. and maybe it's to my detriment, jaded about it and concerned that it will be against me.

But I'm, you see what I'm saying? Like, it's sort of like a learned skepticism towards anything that involves power structures. And again, maybe that's wrong to think that way. But I think a lot of people feel that way right now. You know, something I was trained, you know, I was trained from the youngest age to manage an exercise power. And to me, there's nothing more beautiful than excellence in governance. Right. When you see excellence in governance, it is a thing of beauty.

This is what I think we're all fighting for. And you're an example of exactly the point you're making. If you're going to have an excellent governance structure and excellent people in leadership positions, you know, you want people who are trained and you want a structure that is built to manage and exercise great power. Now, I believe in massive decentralization. Right. Well, see, that's the different part right there. But to decentralize, you need to decentralize into the hands of people who, who are qualified to manage power at a local or state level.

Right. And there's always going to be the possibility that anyone along that chain could do something wrong, but the point is the system is built in a way where it's good. Right. But this is why the First Amendment is so important. Because what keeps the thing healthy is transparency. Right, right, exactly. And so look at the last American vagabond.

That's what you're about. You're about making it difficult, you know, to do the dirty thing. Right, exactly. It's transparency. Exactly. And I'll tell you, it's funny. I have a long thing on Salary about the refiner's fire. I don't know if you ever listened to it.

I don't think so. Okay, so the refiners fire, when you go to Washington, you know, implementing the process of, because America's a republic, it's not a democracy, but there's a lot done by democratic process. So when you institute a new policy or regulation in Washington, what you're supposed to do is you design. your best shot. And then you put it, you circulate it for comment, you get comments from the various constituents, and then you put it into a draft reg, but then you put it out into a comment period.

And what happens is it's the most brutal thing you can imagine because you put it out and suddenly everybody tells you why you're completely ridiculous and stupid. How did you not know this? How did you not know that? I mean, it's just unbelievable. And you sit there, it's like sitting in the town square and taking the mud and tomatoes and everything. And, and, but what happens as it goes through is, is, is you learn a huge amount that you didn't realize or no. And when you integrate it all in, because they don't, they don't come in and say, oh, well, that's very good, but maybe you ought to do it this way.

They're like, how dare you, you know, so it, it doesn't come in in the most useful way. Right. You know, it can be quite cruel. But anyway, so, but then, fine. Finally, as all this pours in, you suddenly see a whole new way of taking it up and it goes to a much higher level of sophistication and complexity and becomes much better. And by the time the process is over, you go from something that could have been stupid and dangerous to something that is really effective and works. Because everybody had their say, and not only did they have their say, but they were free to say whatever they had to say without fear of being. attacked or punished right i mean and i agree with that in in theory in a situation where we do have

radical transparency and all but i just don't think that's where we are right now with apac and the influence of lobbying i think that that system has a but but that's why if you look at what what groups like apac are doing is is they are destroying the refiners fire right right and that is unbelievably dangerous and it has ramifications in many different areas far beyond you know and that's how you end up with plans dropping out of the sky you know everybody's keeping their mouth shut and the next thing you know the bridges fall down and the planes fall out of the sky and see and this is the problem that a lot of people are coming to terms with right now is that we're in a position where i mean and i'll be the first i've talked about this a lot over the years like

i believe in the constitution i believe in our foundational aspects of this country whether or not the founders entirely believed at all you know i it's taken root in what i believe But we're in a system now where the people in those positions by and large are actively selling that out to the highest bidder in a lot of different ways. I mean, whether it's Israel APEC and the overlap or some Bob Mendez just got arrested for, you know, taking money from Egypt. You know, there's a lot of these overlapping interests like that. And so how is it from an American, the average American supposed to lean into a system

where it's so transparently corrupt like you started with saying it's a criminal organization. So how do we get away from that and back to what you're talking about? Let's go back to the individual American. The most important thing that that individual America needs to do is to invest their time and their resources wisely. Yeah. Okay. So this goes back to having a good map and making sure.

And so what's interesting is many of the decisions we make as a consumer can have a dramatic impact on triggering a revolution. Right. Okay. So if every American says, you know something? You're putting fluoride in the water. I'm not drinking that water. Right.

You know, or I'm getting a filter that takes it out. Or I'm going down to the county commission and making sure we don't spend $400,000 a year on, you know, because we need that to feed kids. Right. So whichever way you go about it, one, I get, you know, I get the floor right out of my food. I start buying directly from farmers or from services that buy from farmers

so that I'm making sure the small farmers who make healthy food survive. And grow. Yeah. Right. So, you know, so I go through. through my consumer choices and by stopping myself from being poisoned. So when I started the litigation, I knew it wasn't safe for me to go to a doctor or hospital or go into the medical system at all.

And so I literally had to get an outward bound PhD in healthcare, you know, because I had to either do everything myself or find alternatives or, you know, learn all the old-timey recipes, whatever. Right. I ended up saving myself from being poisoned because I didn't trust any of the people who were trying to poison us, right? It's wild. Right. So if you look at what, if I as a consumer do everything I can to be really healthy and to protect myself, whether it's food, water, health care, you know, not doing businesses, have a great bank is a big one.

Very important. On and on and on, I can help trigger a revolution. And if you look at some of the most powerful pushback that's going on around the world, is consumers saying, you know, something, we're not falling for your lies. We're not falling for your phony bologna. We're walking away. Right. And it's happening all over the place.

It's happening. The pushback, our annual wrap up at the end of last year was, we called it Operation Pushback. Nice. Because here's what we discovered. And I didn't know this, Ryan. You know, we have this enormous open source intelligence process where we're, we save headlines and we rack them up in databases, which subscribers can use.

So it's every day. It's just ongoing. We're racking it up. And then when we get to the end of the quarter of the year, we do an analysis. And then suddenly we see things that we just, whoa, you know, look at what's really happening. And what we realized was the pandemic starts and everybody says,

you know, they kind of fall for it. Then within a reasonable period of time, they wake up and say, look, something stinks. then they realize, oh, this is a scam. Then they realize, okay, we got to do something. If you're an estate AG or a state treasurer, oh, we got to do something about it. What are we going to do?

And that, you know, that takes a certain amount of time. But then what happened in 2023 is they said, okay, we're taking action. Right. And you have state AGs acting. You have state treasurer's acting. You have, you know, children's health defense has 50 lawsuits. I mean, if you look at all the responsible parties who were taking action, it was massive.

And way do you see, we're just finishing up the document, I'll tell you more about it, of all the different things the state can do. And in each section, we go through lots of different clusters of what states can do. We have examples of proposed bills and pass bills. The states are rocking. Nice. I mean, we have like 26 states now that are, you know, passing things saying we will not comply with the WHO, with WF, with the U.N. Right.

And so, you know, I'm not saying it's enough. It's not enough. There's plenty more to be done. But, but it suddenly, you know, it took a long time for all that to work its way through until people could start taking action. And if you look at all the action they're taking, it's very significant. It's very, it's promising. And I think that this is, so that, look, this. This is why I think we can all agree that this whole thing seems to be almost aggressively being pushed forward.

I think the power structure recognizes the momentum, recognizes the kind of dwindling. I think people are just generally waking up from a lot of these manipulations, whether it's the COVID-19 medical freedom aspect, Israel and Gaza, whatever it is. And so this is about trying to rapidly push us into a position where these things maybe won't matter anymore. And I except for this. Go ahead. The effort, and I think this is your new alliance is so exciting. It's one of the reasons it's so exciting. The way of dealing with that huge pushback that's underway

is to route people into modified hangouts and dead ends. And I have never seen, so after we published Operation Pushback, suddenly we became engulfed with a tsunami of modified hangouts and dead ends, you know, hopium, fear porn. You know, unbelievable. And it's overwhelming. And there are days when I just, and it was very interesting.

So coming into your announcement about the alliance, because of Senator Nicely's campaign, I had decided I was going to be relatively quiet about the election coming into the Tennessee primary. And so I just kind of sat back and read and watched. But I found myself constantly, and Whitney Webb was the one, you know, Whitney would come out with something slamming,

whether it was the uniparty issue or, you know, Gaza or you and God, you know, and I would find myself jumping in and just, particularly in social media, going spot on, spot on, spot on. And because in the face of the tsunami, there is a group of people who've had it. They've had it with, you know, they've had it with fear porn. They've had it with hopium.

They've had it with... The two-party illusion. They've had it with politics in the entertainment space. Yes, right. Right. I don't want to be in the entertainment space. I want to be in the power space. I want to get something real done.

I agree. And you can't get something real done if you're chasing your tail in hopium or... Right. Right. And this is the problem with, you know, like I was saying earlier, is that, you know, we were clearly, this has been an opinion that we've had for a very long time about the two-party illusion, about, you know, the voting process, not necessarily translating to the outcome, but for whatever reason, before, this was, this was what triggered the talk of the alliance and putting that out there, that we got an amazing amount of pushback saying that we were somehow black-pilled or, you know, these are unpassable purity tests and all these different points. And it was so interesting because we're over here talking about other paths and solutions and even arguing, look, if you still think you want to. vote, I would support that. Especially, most importantly, if you're voting for what you actually want and not going, what else am I going to do?

I'll go with the lesser party. But so clearly, my point has been that you can sense a vulnerability within that power structure and the way that they're going after anybody that's putting out very logical points about what my other paths we might take. And I think that stands out in a really interesting way. And I think you're right. More people are seeing this than ever. So I told you the story.

I learned this last week and I was amazed. So I'm a huge fan of Dennis. Cassinich, who used to be the mayor of Cleveland. Then he was a congressman for many years. He was in Congress when I was in Washington, and he was one of, certainly on monetary policy, there's nobody more knowledgeable who's ever served in Congress. Anyway, he's running in Ohio's 7th District. I should also say his wife is an expert on regenerative farming, so he's really good on the food issue. Anyway, and I'm a great believer having Dennis back in Congress, because he's fearless. He beat off two assassination attempts when he stood out the banker.

when he stood back the bankers in Cleveland. And his record vis-a-vis, you know, standing up to the bankers, nobody's got a better record. Anyway, so I'm very enthusiastic about Dennis. I was talking to one of the people working with him on his campaign. And they had done a survey of registered voters 25 and under in Ohio's 7th District, which is Cleveland, and south of Cleveland.

And discovered that 92% of 25% of, and under had registered as independence. And the campaign worker said to me, it's very knowledgeable, he said, you know, the parties are toast. They are toast. They are toast. It's gone.

It's so powerful. And, I mean, my audience is out, they're going, this exactly what we've been talking about. You know, like, this is a very clear diminishing thing. And what's funny is that this, what you just said just simply proves, I mean, really the reality for a long time now, showing the kind of common point we put out there

is that every election historically, it's generally something like 40-something percent are people, or rather the largest voting block are people that don't even vote. And within the ones that do, it's usually 40-something percent that are independence. And so yet we, but yet we always get pushed into this one, you know, whatever. That shows you that the younger generation, which is continually becoming more more prominent, are clearly aware of that. And that's the desperation that they're sensing right now. It's Derek.

It's Whitney. It's you. It's a younger group. Right. And they're saying, you know, something. No. You know, we want to get something. something done. We want some, we want to get something done in the real world. And, you know,

each one of you is distinctly different. You know, but Derek is working on, okay, how do we build all these different things we need? How are we going to get health care? How are we going to get food? How are we going to get, you know, and Whitney, God love her, is looking at the real corruption. Right. You know, America was built on organized crime. Yes. You know, for hundreds of years, it's been built on organized crime. There's a wonderful book. I don't know if you have ever saw Dan Russell's drug wars book, but, you know, basically you institute the Federal Reserve and the IRS and then the drugs pour in. I mean, it's a very old model. Right. Anyway, so, so, so, you know, but, but Whitney stepped back and in her two volumes. And the first one, she just looks at all

the networks that bred up Epstein. And it's a very deep, long old story. Yeah. And, and you see how this thing is built. And it's deep. And, and it's how, America works. There's a wonderful book by Michael Woody was called American Power and Organized Crime. And he describes how the whole thing, you know, was built over generations. Right. I mean, and this is the point that I think most people are at least, you bring these things up. At some point in the past, there would have been like kind of a reflexive dismissal. That's not possible. That's conspiracy theory. But right now, I argue, like you just said with those percentages, more people are just going, let me hear about that. What else do you know? Let me find out more

about something I haven't been told about. And I think that in an obvious way, the power structure is very insecure about that changing. And that's what I think this is about, trying to drive us into a position where with digital IDs, CBDCs, like you're always talking about. Once we get put in that position, I don't know how we're, I mean,

well, I'm sure we'll find a way, but how we fight back from that is largely impossible. No, it's not impossible. It's growing, my point was that I'm sure we'll find a way that we will be able to, but what we see building is their mindset is putting us in position

where we won't be able to fight back anymore. So let me look at things. Let me look at the, world a little bit from their point of view. We do need a reset. They approved the going direct reset, and we are in the going direct reset, which is the sort of coup de grace of the financial coup that started in 1998 that I keep arguing about, you know, I keep writing about the 21 trillion missing from the federal government and the debt-based fiat system. And so, you know, if you look at the problems with the federal credit, they're very significant and very long-lived. And, and, and,

And so the leadership knows that we need a reset. So they have the going direct reset, which radically centralizes political and economic power. And we've talked about that in other interview. That was right before the COVID-19 illusion, right? Yeah. Right. So you have our going direct reset book. If you don't, I have one in the car, I can give you.

But the going direct reset is the reset. The World Economic Forum, great reset. That's just marketing. Okay. But going direct is the reset. And these resets tend to happen every hundred or so years. Right. So this is nothing new.

We do need a reset. Now, what I'm proposing is we need a building wealth reset. But that is a radical change. And my online book, Dylan Reed in the Air Stock Reef Stock Profits, goes into the fact in the 90s we knew we needed to reset. I was working on what I call the building wealth reset. I made those proposals to pension fund managers at the time. We were considering them.

That was rejected. and it was rejected because the leadership believed in a world where technology is moving fast, and much is secret, they can never trust the general population to behave responsibly. Now, they do everything they can to encourage them to behave irresponsibly and dumb them down. So there's two sides to that story, but I believe that it is possible to have a responsible system bottom up that decentralizes power. I agree. And to your point about what,

needing a reset. Like, for example, Derek has the greater reset kind of combat to put out another solution. And so what's interesting, just like we said in the beginning, it's used, there's obviously problems, even regarding environment. Like, I'll be the first to point out the many, many illusions around climate change and the carbon tax, but it's obvious that the primarily the people that are telling you we need a solution are the ones destroying the environment, you know, burning pits in the military, things like that. But so to argue, we don't need a solution is sort of like one side of that manipulation, where it's usually somewhere in the middle, but they're probably. reaction solution scenario here using the problem that exists to drive you into their solution

right so it's a fake it's a fake problem that drives you into control well it can be but my point is that in these cases like you're saying there is a problem we do need to reset but they're using that's interesting if you if you look at a building wealth reset versus direct going direct reset essentially here's the fundamental issue we can either if you look at how much charlie stevens who does energy on the Slayer report calls it the rackets. If you look at how much the rackets are skimming from the economy, it is mind-boggling. It's amazing that the wealth is as great as it is given the racket skim. So we have to dramatically reduce the racket skim or make it official and make it properly

managed because right now the racket skim is destroying productivity across the spectrum. So you have to reduce the racket skim or you have to somehow make it, you know, official and manage it properly. Or you have to depopulate in the G7 nations. You have to do one or the other. You can't keep the rackets going and have this many people. So the arguments then they're depopulating instead to maintain the problem. Absolutely. You know, it's interesting.

The financial coup started at the beginning of fiscal 1998. And, but in the spring of 1997, the largest pension fund owner, uh, president in the country, president of CalPERS, I was making a presentation on what I would now describe as the building wealth reset and how we could use new technology to make communities fantastically productive, get government money out, dramatically reduce the deficit. And he looked at me and he said, you don't understand it's too late. They've given up on the country.

I said, what do you mean it's too late? He said they're moving all the money out starting in the fall. And this was 1998? 1990, no, he said this to me in the spring of 1997. The fall of 97 is the beginning of the fiscal 1998 year, and that's when the money started to go missing. But it was clear to me that he was referring to they have given up. During 1995, there was a big effort to get the federal budget finally on a fiscally responsible basis. It ended up with a three-week budget war.

You know, the government shut down. and Rubin as Secretary of Treasury went in and raided the exchange stabilization fund, which I think scared the guys who run the financial system to death because that's their sort of stash. And I think that's when they gave up. And what was interesting is in the next month, November, 1995, is when the FDA approved OxyContin and when HUD, you know, radically up to,

the predatory lending and the mortgage guys. And that's when the beat down on the poor neighborhoods really accelerated because they got the pill mills, the predatory lending, and you had the private prison move with rounding up. And of course, the illegal drugs were pouring in. And if you look at life expectancy charts, that's exactly when life expectancy starts to turn down. First in the poor income groups, but then it accelerates dramatically during the... during the pandemic. And if you look at a chart of life expectancy in the 20 most industrialized countries,

literally 19 look like this and the United States looks like this. Wow. No, it's frightening. And if you look at our fertility, it also looks like this. The only one who drops more is China. And they had a one-child policy. Then, so I have a new article called Musings on Department of Defense, where I have those two charts,

but I have a third video, and that's Larry Fink, bragging about how we've now created an economic model where with AIN automation, we can grow the economy with the shrinking population. Wow. I mean, there's so many other aspects to that things we could point out, like the mass use of GMOs that ultimately failed or the use of, you know, the vaccine push in Africa and India. Like there's all these different aspects around these timeframes forward that, you know,

I think I've always pushed back on the concept of whether I think, depopulation is necessarily the agenda, but you're making a very clear case. It is the absolute agenda. We've been in a great poisoning in America since 1995 and before. I mean, and it's intentional. Here's how you understand it, you know, because to me as a portfolio manager, you know, so I'm trained as a portfolio strategist. When I look at the portfolio, it's obvious.

Here's why. In Washington, when a policy is chronically not working, It's the cover story that's not working. The policy's working. Because let me tell you, when they want something to work, it goes like a hot knife through butter. The minute they blow the whistle and say, ah, we're not going to the left, we're going the right,

boom. And I've seen it millions of times. If they want it to go to the right, it can go like this. And if it chronically will not, oh, is this, and it's complicated, it's hard, and blah, blah, blah. You know, no. And I can tell you hundreds of stories of watching that dynamic on different programs and issues.

So I give you a perfect example. When I first got to Washington, everybody said, oh, well, you know, the bureaucracy is so messed up. You can't get anything done at HUD. So, you know, I really studied mathematically the whole operation in terms of labor and money and everything else. And here's how it worked. we were putting out $25 billion a year of multifamily mortgage insurance. So this is just one program, one example. And the way we were putting it out was at a discounted price.

So we were charging below market government subsidized, which means there was significantly more demand than the $25 billion we had available. So the three ways you can allocate, when there's $100 billion of demand for $25 billion of stuff, there are different ways you can allocate it. You can raise the price so that there's only 25 billion of demand, but then it wouldn't be government subsidized. Or you can say, you know, something,

pink, projects with pink polka dots go first, projects with blue polka dots go second, and project with third, you know, purple polka dots go third, and, you know, you draw a line after 25 billion, and that's who gets the credit, right? But there's something else you can do. you can make a very complicated underwriting process. Everything can gridlock into that,

and then the right lawyers can go get the $25 billion and move it like this. And that way the right campaigns get the right treatment right. See what I mean? Right, yes. So gridlock was the allocation strategy because it allowed you to do secret political allocations

and have an excuse. Oh, the bureaucrats are so in effect. and difficult. It's so funny that the narrative, you know, so the fact that they want us to call them incompetence so they can use that to justify

the fact that they can't manage the... I mean, you... Well, but what the politician would say, if I use the Pocodot system, everybody will hate me and yell at me because their project won't get financed. Right. And the blue Pocod will say he's better

than the pink Pocodon and it will... Do you know? No, but I... I... When I was in Washington, I can't, I spent all day long listening to people tell me why I should do something with the rules and regulations that would make them money. Right. I rarely heard anybody, you know, I would occasionally talk about why the work they were doing would make the world better.

Right. Right. And so this is my worry about this dynamic. And like you make, you're talking about domestically, it can only imagine the kind of theft and criminality going on in foreign policy. and foreign endeavors around the world that we have no oversight over, we don't know what's going on. Here's what's interesting.

Robert Axelrod was a great, is a great economist from Michigan, and he did a book called The Evolutional Cooperation, which had a very dramatic impact on my thinking. And he did simulations, computer simulations in the 70s when he first had access, and showed his question was,

what conditions produce peace you know, on a system-wide basis. Yeah. And what he discovered was that the body politic would shun dirty players if they could see them. Okay. If they could know them. And the reason that the media loop,

especially with entrainment, is so dangerous, is because it can turn the dirty players into celebrities and honored people. Right. Right. And so I'll never forget. I was at a Christian revival, and the pastor was from Texas.

Texas. And I was there. It was primarily an African-American audience. And I was there with a pastor who had just taken spiritual warfare from. She used to work for the DEA. And she knows everything there is to know about Bush and Clinton family, narcotics trafficking, everything. Anyway, so I'm there. And the pastor brings George W. Bush in by, before the election when Bush won. He brings him in by monitor from Texas and the whole crowd, 100,000 Christian African-American women jump up screaming and cheering for George W. Bush, including my pastor. And so I said to her, Patricia, you know, I'm risking my life and my fortune to stop narcotics trafficking by the Bush family. And you just jumped up and cheered for him. And she said, well, he's going to be the winner. And I

said, so he's a winner and I'm a loser. And she said, yeah, that's right. It's incredible. I mean, so right there is an example of her acting against her own interest, simply because So I live through that story every day since because what I keep hearing from people is I don't want to help such and such win the election because, you know, I don't want to get in trouble with the governor and that might be bad for my business. And, you know, every everybody in America is trying to figure out who's going to win and how do I go with them. Right. Exactly.

And that's the team sport politics side of it all or really just self-interest at the end of the day. Well, but here's your thing. The way this system works, and I'm much more sensitive because of where I come from in my training, if you will agree to help Mr. Global genocide somebody else, then you're a fair game. in what way meaning the fair game to be attacked next or that they're okay in other words if i can get you off sides then then i'm free to go after you there's a there's sort of an unspoken aspect to the software of you know you can only protect yourself with the law if you will help protect others with the law but if you're willing to profit on the destruction of others than your fair game

too. Interesting. It makes sense. I mean, there's a lot of examples of that from the U.S. perspective alone. We're working with Osama bin Laden, then he becomes the bad guy. Saddam Hussein, then he becomes the bad guy, because ultimately, they're useful tool. I mean, really, I mean, wouldn't you argue that they just have no, there's nothing that's

sacred to these people in any sense? Or is there lines you're saying that they would avoid going after somebody if they played by their rules? So it's changing, but when I came up the system, there were rules. not the rules you know so the law and the constitution there was a parallel think of it as a parallel universe

and they did have rules and they really obeyed the rules because when you're running a system with that kind of system the rules have to be enforced or it falls apart interesting so so there were committees and there were rules and there were decisions

and they really respected them so well so let's bring this back to the conversation of RFK Jr and the conversation We'll talk about the Bitcoin aspect, but so how it's very different then with this. So how would you frame what we're seeing now with that mindset of before? How do you see the Trump, the division between the two sides? I mean, are they all playing us for some kind of a theatrical kind of like are they actually

divided or are they against each other? Like what you just outlined, the idea that there are some kind of semblance of rules behind scenes. I think, like the video you showed, I think it is a uniparty. I agree. And, you know, the uniparty has to. manage, to me, their profound differences. I mean, I think the Democrats are very eager to win because they have extraordinary criminal liability. And if you look at the fights, you know,

the fights have now gone into the criminal courts. And given the lawfare against Trump, you know, if that is applied against them by, I mean, if you put in a real attorney general at the Department of Justice and he decides to hold the Biden family accountable. Right. They're all going to prison. So the point you made is so effectively breaking the rules was going after Trump legally because there's always been like this classic unspoken idea that you don't investigate the president from before because it'll end up being like but that seems to have been changed now.

It's kind of what I'm getting at is like they don't seem to hold even those behind the scenes rules sacred where obviously they're going after Trump politically before and after and now it seems that Trump is saying he's going to do the same in reverse if they just scratched those kind of behind the scenes rules? is a guy who is very forthright in his opinions and can be very difficult to work with for some people. So there are many reasons the establishment can find themselves. So in 2016, a lot of people were uncomfortable with Trump because Trump really didn't know how to operate a large bureaucracy. He was from a small family business and he's an entrepreneur. and he just knows nothing about that.

Now, if you look at his current speeches, he clearly knows much more. I mean, he's, you know, and he's an exceptionally smart man, and he's, you know, a quick learner, and I think he's learned a lot. He's, you know, he's even becoming occasionally dangerously presidential. It's like, wow, okay.

So, so, so, but, but, and I think there are serious differences between the Republican Party and the Democratic Party. What is not different and what causes it to be a uniparty is you're running the dollar system and the federal credit. It is a global system. It is not just a domestic system. It is a global system. And the strictures that you have on it and on yourself are phenomenal.

So if you go to Salarian look up the red button story, you can watch the whole story. But basically, everybody in America wants their check. All the voters want their check. and the check is deeply dependent on organized crime and war. So you are running a system which is financially dependent on organized crime and war. Right. And you can stop it tomorrow, but you think the reset now has been.

Where do you see that reset? Well, so let's get into the Bitcoin aspect of it, right? Because so this is the obvious step into that one of those shifts you would argue, right? And that's explain what you see the Bitcoin aspect in what you just described. And then let's talk about your comments around RFK Jr. in a speech and how that, you know, why that goes. So my vision of Bitcoin is, I think, Bitcoin was, and crypto generally was an effort to prototype an all digital financial system. Okay. Interesting.

And I think it came top down. I think it's a top down phenomenon. Just real quick. So you think that Bitcoin, from its inception, was meant to drive us into that, or is that just how it's used? So Bitcoin was used for many things. But I think the fundamental goal, the long-term goal behind it was to prototype doing an all digital financial system. that could be used to control. Right. Okay.

So it was a Bitcoin crypto, it was a prototype, but it served many purposes. And one of the purposes, it's done a great job. If you, let me step back and look at the big picture, we have gone through a process for the last 50 years of creating more and more paper, securitizing mortgages, securitizing auto loans,

more and more paper, more and more paper, layering derivatives on top of that. And if you sit back and you look at the whole scheme, here are the real assets, here is all the paper, whether they're publicly traded stocks or mortgage-backed securities or municipal bonds, here's all the paper that reflects these assets. Now it so happens, there's a lot more paper than there are assets. Right.

Okay. So I used to find these properties at HUD where they had defaulted on the mortgage five times in one year and refinance. So they had defaulted and refinanced five times in one year. And I think I can explain in detail if you really want to know. But I think that's because they had 10 and 15 mortgages on one home. And that's how they kept the mortgage is floating, was constantly churning the default. So the mortgage fraud was unbelievable. I mean, $23 trillion plus dollars of bailouts when $8 trillion would have paid off 100% of the single-family mortgage in the country.

Wow. Okay. It's starting to see the collateral. It's called collateral fraud. When there's more paper outstanding against the collateral than there is collateral. Okay. So when that game of growing the paper slows, in 2018, the German finance minister said the debt growth model has. ended. There are no reforms that aren't real reforms. And what he meant by that is we can't

satisfy everybody by growing more paper. Right. Okay. Now, what happens when the game of musical chairs of growing the paper slows? Everybody grabs for the real, you know. Right. So Bill Gates and the Chinese are buying farmland. Right, right. There's a land grab. There's, you know, everybody wants the water. They want the oil and gas. You know, So part of what we're watching in Ukraine is a fight for farmland and oil and gas. Right. Okay. So everybody wants the real assets.

If I can satisfy real estate with digital assets made up from thin air, I can keep them from running up the price of gold. Instead of buying gold or silver, they're going to buy crypto. And I can balloon the crypto market. And I can use the crypto market to help win elections, to launder. I mean, it's secret money for secret armies, right? So I can do a huge number of things with Bitcoin or crypto that are very, very useful. And I can move money cross-border, a lot of stuff. But what I can really do, and this is what's so clever,

and I used to watch these guys do it on Wall Street all the time, if I went to all the smartest software developers and all the smartest database developers and all the smartest techies, And I said, I want to build a financial transaction control grid. And I will pay you any amount of money you want to help me. They would all say, go, own yourself, right? Right. Right.

Because they don't want to be part of that. Right. But if I say, oh, you can create your own currencies and you can be free and you can make a lot of money, they'll all get, they're like, wow, okay, this is real. This could, you know, and in theory, that's true. you know, private currencies could be great in a system with good governance. Anyway, so you get them all engaged, but then you inject money and constantly pump and dump it. You know, so there's lots of money to be made.

They make money. Meantime, they're helping you figure everything out. Well, so, I mean, and that makes perfect sense. It's just more fraud. It's another system. But what I'm curious about is, so what you painted there seems to be another bubble-type scenario, where clearly there's more paper than their assets and that. Well, but here's, no, all you're doing.

So, so, so I don't, the central banks are buying and accumulating all the gold. So the central banks have been buying and they've been reallocating gold to the Asian central banks and sort of the Silk Road. So you've been rebalancing the gold, but you're, you've been moving more gold into central bank's hands, right? Russia, for example. Okay. As this is happening, you want to keep the price of gold as low as possible because it's, the smoke alarm. If retail is buying gold as their central bank insurance is there, but if you can get them to all buy Bitcoin, which you can create out of thin air, or crypto, which you can create

out of thin air, you know, then that is hundreds of billions of dollars. You know, it's over at the peak price, you know, it's a trillion and a half dollars that doesn't go into gold. So if they can get you, the average individual at men, mass, to buy into this, they can effectively avoid what might be building. Well, but I'm, while I'm buying up, while Bill Gates is playing up all the farmland. Right.

And the central banker is buying all the gold. I've got you over here buying something I'm making up out of thin air. And as you do it, you're helping me prototype my control system. Right, exactly. And that makes perfect sense. I mean, there is a level of value in any sense,

even with Fiat because we believe it has value. But I get what you're saying. It's a complete obvious, but I guess what I was asking is. Bitcoin is Fiat. Exactly. No, exactly. That's my point.

The strength of Bitcoin. is it's not debt-based. Okay? The problem with the dollar is it's... The problem with the dollar is not that it's fiat. So I will tell you, the greatest currencies through history have been fiat that are well-governed. Okay. The problem with the dollar is it's debt-based.

Right. And that is the problem because it basically puts us in a debt trap for no reason. We're accepting being put in a debt trap for no reason. Well, there's two things. So I want to touch on the idea of the discussion of using Bitcoin as the reserve currency and how that fits into what you're talking about. But first, what I was saying is, so like 2008, for example, is an obvious, easy, the conversation of the, you know, subprime mortgages, you know, the bubble that was built and they kind of allowance of that to happen

and then they kind of swapping it out at the end where they all made the money and we took it on our shoulders, couldn't you argue it's a similar dynamic where they have more paper than assets? And so they're in a position where they are essentially now buying, basically with the switch into the CBDC digital structure, well, then they'll be able to wipe that state clean again. Is that not part of that as well? So they'll be able to wipe the slate clean by doing two things. One is radically reducing the population. Right.

And the second is radically reducing the economic footprint of the population. Right. Right. Yeah, but I guess what I'm at, that makes perfect sense. But what about the idea of like, so if this stayed the same, and they didn't have the CBDC digital step that was happening and we just continued for the next hundred years in the current system. Wouldn't it eventually implode or I'm misunderstanding that? The system doesn't have to implode.

Okay. Now, the issue of whether it uploads or not is a military question. Okay, interesting. It's not a financial question. So, for example, I would tell you, if you look, if we woke up tomorrow, so let me have I can tell a story. In the 90s, I had a very successful investment bank in Washington named Hamilton Securities. And one of the things we're doing was we're building databases that would allow us to map

all the federal appropriation taxes and credit by county or place. So you could go, the software tool is called Community Wizard. You could go to Community Wizard and say, my neighborhood is my municipality, or it's my county, or it's my zip code, or it's my congressional district, and I'm going to map out all the money using GIS software and graphical software, and I'm going to see all the money in my community.

That's cool. And when we first got everything loaded into community, Wizard. I took the smartest guy I had working in Hamilton. He was a PRC citizen. He'd been at T.M.N. Square and then he, he gotten sick. And the day he was sick was the day all his friends got killed. Wow. Yeah. And so he left and went to MIT and we hired him out of MIT. Anyway, so I said, Henry, take this and go look at how, you know, what could happen if we, if we just took the money and instead of spending it the way we're spending it, you know, to achieve central control,

we just spent it to make the economy as wonderful as possible. And he came back with the numbers, and I said, that's impossible. I mean, it was so big. I was like, that's impossible. Anyway, so Henry finally got mad at me. He said, look, you have to take the weekend off and go through my numbers. And, you know, you have to take responsibility to this stuff because I'm right and you're wrong.

You have to look at it. And he was, he was right. And when I looked at it, I could, believe it. I couldn't stop laughing. I mean, I'm still laughing about it because when I tell you that if you could stop the rackets and do something in a model where the incentives to act responsibly are enormous. Right. And the popular anger towards anybody who's unproductive, you know, they are free to exercise their displeasure. The wealth potential is so mind-boggling.

You just can't even, that we have no financial or economic problem that I know of. We have a governance problem. Right. And we cannot, you know, we have a tapeworm. We're like a body with the tapeworm, and the tapeworm is killing the host, and we either detox the tapeworm

or it's going to kill us. Right. And that's what's going on. But we, what is frightening in America is, if you look at how many people are voting every day with their pocketbook and their time and attention for the tapeworm. Right. Right.

Now, yes, some of it is neurological weaponry and mind control and propaganda, but we don't have to, you know, if 325 million people in America woke up tomorrow and said, we're not tolerating this, you know, exactly. A lot of the problem could be dealt with. So anyway, but what I learned then, and that was 1990. 95, 96. What I learned was there's plenty of money. And tyranny, words cannot express how expensive tyranny is.

Tyranny is the most, is the greatest financial burden right now in the United States. Yeah, makes sense. I mean, and this is why what we're calling out with this bigger, you know, the bigger problem here is, is so, such a threat to what this, like, I think right now, what you're highlighting is that this is, like, the tapeworm is such a great analogy. and you're voting for the thing that ultimately makes your life. The problems you highlight and think you're going to vote away are the things that that's causing. So I'll tell you why a tapeworm is such a great analogy. The way a tapeworm gets you, because you feed the tapeworm,

you eat what the tapeworm wants, what's good for the tapeworm and not for you. The tapeworm injects in you a chemical that makes you crave what's good for the tapeworm and bad for you. And that is the American media. Right. Right. And I mean, this is why everyone out. We're trying to convince people to recognize.

Like, for example, to highlight the fact that, in my opinion, at least, that Kamala and Trump are going to lead you in the same direction and that voting, you know, the lesser of evils is of designed to keep you trapped in exactly what you're discussing and people act like that is being childish or naive, we have to at least be willing to consider the reality that it is that bad. And I think it is. And by just pretending that that's... What I would say is Trump, if tomorrow I made you the president of the United States, here's what would happen.

Your Carl Rove guy would say, President Christian, the American people have spent billions of dollars to get you elected, and now they all want their community block development grant, their defense contract, their COLA increase on their Social Security, you know, the long, they all want payback.

And you would turn to your Secretary of Treasury, and he would say, well, the American economy, as of fiscal 1998, launders $500 billion to a trillion of all illegal money. And, you know, we're dependent on stealing oil from all these countries in the Middle East. And so if you're going to get that, you know, if you're going to give them their Social Security Cola, you've got to be nice to the people who control $500 billion to a trillion dollars of last year's dirty money and the accumulated capital there on.

Right. I see where you're going with this. So the people that want their check are going to want that and they would rather maintain the illegal system to get it. So they want, well, they want their check. Right. Okay. So how are you going to tell the people who control the accumulated capital,

go jump in a lake, unless they will back you? Right, right. And if there's one thing, the American people, I go back to my pastor, said, you're a loser. Okay. The one, if you look at the people who fought for the end of criminality, reducing the rackets or for financial responsibility, the American people have regularly rejected them politically.

So, you know, take responsibility. The fantasy that the President of the United States can fix what you will not support them in fixing is the absence of responsibility, and it puts you on the menu. Mr. Global's attitude is, You know, you want the fantasy, fine. Right. Well, so there's two thoughts is that, so obviously the hope for me would be that there are at least more people out there that are, if understanding the full picture in reality, not the narrative, would want to forego the check in the interest of bettering the country and their life in general, possibly in the future.

But if that's not the case, which I do think, I feel like the thing, how do you reach the people to make them understand that? Here's the, well, I think you tell them there is an economic opportunity. Okay. And we can, you know, we can turn the red button green. We can make money pushing the red button because clearly you can't get wealthy as an economy by poisoning all your children. Yeah, right. Okay. Which is what is happening.

So, but I think what you can do is you can tell the American people, if we get a digital ID, and if we get a financial transaction control grid and I don't care whether it's with MasterCard or Central Bank digital currency and in fact a private crypto would be worse than federal because then you're talking about entirely dark markets

and dark forces with no legal obligation whatsoever and that's why we have to talk about finance having control and that's even scarier than central bank control. So if we go there, we're talking about a slavery system. I mean, we're not talking, we're talking about the end of the republic, the end of any kind of democratic process, and the end of any human rights. And when the World Economic Forum says it's 2030 and you have no assets, they are serious.

Right. Because when you get that control, the first thing you do is you take all the assets. It's the second thing you do is you're going to take all the kids. In what way? Why would a government run by pedophiles leave the kids in the family? And when you say that, you're talking about the government at large, both sides of it or only one side of it? Any group of people who have sovereign immunity are the power to operate outside the law or above the law? I mean, that's been my, you know, because I've been squabledogging with RFK about Gaza from the beginning. Right.

And my attitude is if you will give them a get out of jail free card on the on the genocide of children, then you will give them a get out of jail free card on the U.S. Treasury, the $21 trillion, 9-11, you name it. And anything goes. If somebody has a get out of jail free card who feels free to genocide children in mass, what do you think they're going to do in the United States when they have? have, you know, when they have swarms of autonomous drones and autonomous weapons. I mean, what do you think is going to happen? Right. I mean, as I've said many times, I find his stance or anybody's in that position, be morally indefensible to argue that we should ignore what's going on

in that country and what they're doing to these people. But your point is well taken. Put that aside. Put it, you know, because I'm having operated at a high level of government, and I can think and speak in ways that are a lot more ruthless. Forgive me. Someone who will take, if you look at the syndicate that is controlling policy in Gaza, that syndicate has a very strong overlay with the syndicate that is pushing for financial transaction control. Right. So globalist kind of discussion, right?

So, yeah, I thought. And in fact, I think one of the reasons they need the land, they need the water, and they need the oil and gas is AI and financial transaction control is phenomenally energy demanding. It uses a lot. The data centers use a lot of water. It needs a lot of energy. You know, and you need space not only for the operations, but the people. And I think now that the sort of 15-minute city's prototype is over, they don't need the Palestinians for that. anymore. Now they need the land, they need the water, they need the oil and gas, and the Egyptians

won't take the people. So that's where we are. Yeah. And so the people who are doing this are the people who are implementing financial transaction control against you. And if you give them a get out of jail free card on this, what in the world do you think they're going to do to you? Exactly. And this is why, to your point, it's so important for the people out there who keep trying to act like, I keep seeing the conversation that, you know, why are you so focused? Like Kim Iverson put a great comment out the other day, or I think it was even today, about something overlapping with U.S. political situation, but also what Israel is doing in Gaza. And people responding, you know, why is this the only thing you think is important? That's not the only thing going on in the world. The point is clearly,

it is overlapping with a lot of these important conversations that we're dealing with. Gaza is a method. Mm-hmm. Right. It is a method being prototyped for rollout here. Yep. And not just the, the genocide aspect, you're talking about all of it. Yes. Right. Right. So we saw finance seize. There's some debate whether it was all or some accounts,

crypto accounts of Palestinians, at the request of the Israeli military. Wow. Now, I can't figure out for certain what jurisdiction, Binance is in. It was started in China and moved to Malta. I'm assuming it's under Malta jurisdiction, but I don't know that.

for a fact. Where is the legal jurisdiction? Where are the court filings? Where is the evidence? And where is the judicial process that affirms there is a broken law? Where does the Israeli military get to say that, you know, Joe Smith is a terrorist just out of the blue, take his stuff? I mean, I find it far, far worse that Binance would go along with it. I mean, Israel's going to be what they are. But the fact that Binance is a company would acquiesce to that is crazy. But apparently Binance and the U.S. Congress have the same problem. And the governor of New York with her Israeli flagging the governance, you know. The reality is we now have a rule by mob.

Mm-hmm. If a mob that's willing to exercise private force says, I'm the law, give me their, you know, freeze their crypto. Now, if you let that get going, you know, That is a virus that will. Right. You know, whether viruses exist or not, that is a virus. Right, right.

And see, that's the larger point that I was making a second ago is that obviously, I mean, just the fact that our tax dollars are being used to fund that, that should matter to people. And it shouldn't be the only issue that we talk about. But it's bigger than just what's going on there or issues of Israeli governance. It's a global discussion. That's why I made the point about globalism and the overlap. I, the leadership. So the neocon leadership has basically said we want a unipolar global model.

And many countries have said, no, we don't want that. So we're having this global debate. And the people who want the unipolar model are saying we can't get this done without depopulation force and genocide. Okay. So in Israel, we're going to inject them with poison and genocide them, you know, in the pharmaceutical way. in Palestine, we're just going to raise their housing and destroy their ability to, you know, to function. Right. You know, but both of those are genocides.

This faction is genociding the Israeli people and it's, you know, it's, and why the Palestinian and Israeli people don't get together and realize, you know, they share a similar tapeworm. I don't know. I think to a degree that's starting, but it's far more about the awareness that the Israeli government has neither of their interest in heart rather than them being together. Right. But I do think that's right. right now to a degree. Well, here's the thing. We are watching genocide.

I mean, if you just look at what happened during COVID, that was a genocide. Absolutely. That was a genocide. And so I call it the Great Poisoning. We are watching a great poisoning all around the world, and we need to stop looking at it in little different pockets and realize it's one thing. Yes.

Right. And I assure you, if you were ever to talk to the people who were on the planet and the financial system, you know, when I was in the room, everything was about life expectancy. Don't complain to me. Everybody's life expectancy is going up. I mean, this is a performance metric. A dark way.

They watched like a clock. Yeah. Okay. And the proof that they made life wonderful in America was how much life expectancy went up. That was, you know, I don't want to hear life is worse. It's not life expectancy is going up. If I took your point correctly, they see that as a bad thing. essentially, right, in the sense that that means more money, more cost more.

When they were bragging about it, it was still going up. Okay. It was when the financial coup started that they started to turn down. Well, so bringing this into the point, there's two things that I want. I don't know how much time you have today. So I'm really enjoying our conversation, by the way. I find so fast, so many things, directions we could take this in. But talking about the RFK Bitcoin aspect and you made a really, like 18 different points or questions you had for them about.

So I will say this. I have never been more shocked by a public policy proposal than I was by RFK's speech at Bitcoin 2024. I couldn't believe it. Now, I've got the two minute, 52 second clip. Is that the full speech? Do we want to play that or you just want to talk about it? No, that's not the full speech. Okay, because I didn't actually get to see the full speech. I was there, but I missed his speech in public. So I know RFK because of his work through children's health defense. And he's an attorney who the care and attention he gave to reading, um, the law and reading the science.

His knowledge, his command of the facts is just breathtaking. And he has been so careful and so meticulous. So I am used to RFK being absolutely brilliant and absolutely impeccable on his research and command of the topic. Yeah, during COVID-19, he was a light in the darkness for sure. Right. So for me, and he's an attorney, and he's a very third. attorney. So when I saw RFK make his first Bitcoin proposal, it was so flaky and completely without

grounding in the real world of the financial system. I was worried he'd look ridiculous on the trading floors of the globe. So I just wrote him a broad, you know, I was like, what are you? You know, it was an email scream. And I ended up writing some briefing documents for him and his team. He had some excellent people on his team. And, you know, on sort of what the federal credit problems were, what was involved in why the proposal he was making was not grounded in reality, in my opinion. Okay. Well, in case they don't familiar, what was the proposal just briefly so they know what you're, what you're referring to and why it's... It was that we should collateralize the dollar with Bitcoin, which is like a reserve, the reserve currency conversation

around using it that way. Similar, but... Okay. Because Trump put out the same point as well, like kind of talking about using it. No, because I watched Trump's Bitcoin 24 speech, and it was actually quite good. And I'll tell you why. Anyway, but so then Bobby comes out with his speech, and in it he makes a series of proposals that are flagrantly in violation of the law. He proposes to radically change American tax law through executive order. no public comment

no involvement of Congress just and the proposal is one that will take from the poor and give to the rich and you think he knows this for sure there's no way he couldn't know it well I mean I certainly

you know I've sent him my con you know I mean beforehand because if he being a lawyer it's impossible you know so Bobby is way too brilliant right why he did this you know the idea that you're going to require Americans to use their tax money

and their retirement funds to buy vast amounts of Bitcoin, which is a scarce resource from a small group of people, you're going to make a small group of people wildly wealthy and you're going to finance it by taking money from the... I mean, it's take from the poor

and give to the rich and do it in a way that that the profits of the rich are secret and not subject to taxes. Right. That's the whole public-private partnership overlap we've been talking about. It's reverse Robin Hood and it's taking the economy dark and even darker. And it's, you know, I mean, as a financial matter, as a public policy matter, as a fairness matter, it is the worst thing I've ever seen.

And I was stunned. Anyway, so I wrote up those comments and of Senate and I haven't heard back from him since. So, but why he did that, now let me take that back to Gaza. Because if you look at the crowd who would benefit from that, you know, it includes a certain portion of the,

you know, Israel has a pretty robust, pretty significant. And I don't begin to be an expert in this Bitcoin and crypto presence. I mean, in theory, you could finance the whole Gaza, West Bank, new, you know, Jared Kushner Vision redevelopment with your Bitcoin profits. Because one, Bobby made them nonreportable. He was proposing making them nonreportable and non-taxable.

So the profits of that group would be enormous. So to me, it just looked like another get out of jail free card. Right. So that's one side of it, right? But then the other side of it is using, so what, as I understand it correctly, they're talking about using the Bitcoin that was already seized from Americans, right? In one one aspect of it. No. Trump and Bobby both suggested that the Bitcoin, the Department of Justice, is seized, be moved to the Treasury.

Okay. So explain that for me. So the Department of Justice to seize Bitcoin, when you do a seizure, the person who lost the asset has a right. to dispute and get it back. Now, I don't know enough about the 210 to know if there are any disputes going on, but moving into Treasury means they lose their ability to get it back. Right. So I immediately felt that seemed like theft to me, like whether or not you're using it for a good purpose.

Yeah, that's what I thought. So I don't know enough about, I would need to know a lot more about the specific seizures. Now, I will tell you, I have spent a lot of time in my life studying and knowing a lot about asset forfeiture. And the asset forfeiture fund and operation at the federal government and how it interacts with state and local is terrifying. It's a taking machine. Right. You know, and we go back to the land grab. The Department of Justice asset forfeiture fund is using coin-based custody for its custodian for the 210,000 Bitcoin as seized or seizures in the future. So Coinbase custody is set up as the Department of Justice is custodian.

Let me keep going. BlackRock and all the ETFs who are exploding in size and sucking in more and more Bitcoin also use Coinbase custody. Okay. So now we have BlackRock and the Department of Justice together in Coinbase custody, right? Centralize. Right. Right.

Okay. One of my questions to RFK was, are you going to use going to pay his custody for treasury? You know, or is it going to be an exchange state? You know, where is this going to be? The New York Fed. Right. But if you look at needing Bitcoin for the ETFs, I mean, that asset forfeiture fund is a great way to get it and get it cheap. Right, right. Okay.

And go ahead. Anyway, so building up that power is very frightening to me. Yes, I agree. Now, what Trump is. said is, okay, let's move that 210 to Treasury and make it part of the reserve. You know, we own it now. We're just shifting it to another department. That's what I was referring to.

Yes. So Trump suggested that. What Bobby suggested was making significant purchases annually for a long time, you know, depending on the price runup that you would get. You know, you're talking about taking a trillion dollars even more of taxes and retirement savings because remember you sell treasuries to their retirement funds you get money so you're taking the retirement funds and the taxes of all americans every american rich and poor and spending it on buying a scarce asset that only a few americans own right right and they get wild profits because when you

turn the federal spigot on and focus it on a scarce resource it drives the price up and And as the price drops up, that group of people who hold it get enormous windfall profits. And so Bobby is suggesting that they don't have to pay capital gains tax and it's nonreportable. So the Bitcoin billionaires can make a fortune secretly without taxes and roll it into real estate, non-taxable. So that is a land grab. Right. Okay. So you're using everybody's money to finance a land grab.

That gets back to who the holders of, you know, the current holders of Bitcoin are and who's got the large positions. And, you know, we can speculate about that. But if you look at who's going to benefit, you're talking about a relatively tiny group of people. Right. And the notion that that has somehow going to benefit the average American is ridiculous. Typical. But so obviously, what you outlined there is very clear in regard to who will benefit. But why would Trump and RFK do that in your mind? Trump did not do that.

Or, excuse me, why would RFK proposes? Why would R.K.C. propose that? And what do you think is my sentence? Trump was very raw, raw. I believe in free markets. You know, let crypto thrive. Let the marketplace decide. And I'm going to let the regulation be light. Now, I don't believe in light regulation for any financial product. And so I don't necessarily love that. But the reality is, you know, I do think private currency should be allowed to thrive. don't think we need is a financial transaction control grid run secretly and privately, you know, by people who are even more frightening than the people of the central bank.

I think any American would agree with that if they knew that that's what this was. But I don't think Trump was saying that. I mean, Trump said, let's hold the 210 and use it as an asset. You know, I'm just sitting at one part of the balance sheet, just moving to another department and and he said i'm going to be friendly to crypto now if you look at the source of donations crypto is the biggest source of donations in this election by a lot interesting i think it's probably for obvious reasons well but but before that's the rump never proposed using the federal credit or the taxpayers money to run up the price let alone give give current holders a get out of jail free card in terms of reporting and taxation so same question though so why

Why do you think RFK is proposing that? Do you think he knows that? Okay, so he's a lawyer. He's talking about, I mean, for a seasoned attorney to suggest that you can make radical changes to American tax law without Congress and without giving the American people a chance to comment in a way that takes from the poor and gives to the rich, I mean, it's the most, it's so reverse of everything I've ever. seen or known about Bobby and why he did it, I can't explain.

I mean, I can come up with conjecture in theory on why somebody would do it. But basically what you're doing is you're pandering to a bunch of Bitcoin billionaires. And, you know, the question is, is this a campaign or is this an entertainment space? I don't... Yeah. I mean, nobody

would seriously entertain that proposal. Now, if I didn't know him, I would say it's a trial, balloon for the intelligence agencies who are looking to swap their Bitcoin. Okay. That's interesting. Yeah. But I don't, you know, I just don't know why he did it. Well, I think the point to make here is, and you're right, we can speculate all day,

but it is something he did propose. And in and of itself, that should be something that's concerning to people that are paying attention. Well, but anybody who would propose that is somebody I don't want in the White House. Right. Exactly the point. And so that's, that's the kind of thing I'm trying to show all these people that, like, the obvious response you're going to get, if someone's made aware of this that has

already chosen to support that cabinet, would be there, you know, like the reason, for example, why RFK decided to fall in with Trump's campaign. Like, well, he argued that will have the most effect. And I'm done making those compromises with this conversation. If you're RFK, you only have a couple choices. Right. I think that was the best choice he had. Well, so here's why I would disagree. And I do, I do, what he laid out was very well said. Like, it was a very logical statement on why he can make the most effect. But But it's like I see it the same frame, a same scenario as like Bernie Sanders or Gabbard, spending their entire campaign calling out Clinton as like the worst monster in the world and then endorsing her.

And he didn't do the same with Trump. And well, he kind of did. I was just playing all the overlaps of what he was saying before he decided to. And it was Trump's going to ruin the country. And, you know, it's interesting. But so let's just say he decided that that was the way he might be able to make the most effect. You're still compromising principles, I would argue, in a lot of different ways. But at the end of the day, I think this is.

what makes the most sense to me. The people that were supporting it by and large wanted something different. That's why they went with him. And I argue that they should go in the route of trying to reach that 5% trying to start the new party, even if you think that that gives who you might not want power for four years. I'm not in the mind that it's some more unique situation than it's been before other than the conversations we're having and I see both of them being the same problem. So we try to make something new. Spend the time in the effort to build something so the next time it comes around, maybe we will have another choice. You know, that's what I really think makes the sense. And I think that's why a lot of people left the campaign. I agree. As soon as he played,

you know, as soon what happened with Gaza when he first came out on Gaza, I just think you saw a whole wave of people leave. Yeah. Just for that one point alone, I think. But it wasn't, a lot of them anyway. It wasn't over Gaza. Yeah. It was a fundamental issue question, which is, you know, are we for the rule of law or not? Yes. We're not. We're not. We're not. We're not for the rule of law, I'm out of here. Right. And I have to say, to me, there's no more important discussion because there is only one thing that protects us all right now, and that's the law.

Right. As frayed and tattered and under attack as it is. And that is the rampart that we must buttress. Right. That is the place where we must stand. And we can't make an exception. It's like, oh, no, I'm counting on the law for me, but not for you. I'll just pretend, you know.

Well, this is what I was saying is that a lot of people might try to argue in that moment, that, well, he's doing this even though it's bad or even though it challenged law, because in the end, it'll be better for everyone. And that's a very lofty statement that people love to make. Let's face our problem because I, you know, I must say, I think, I don't know, I've only watched a couple of speeches for Trump. I mean, I've been very critical of Trump because Trump put $18 billion behind a mass atrocity program. Right. And facilitated a process that shut down 35% of American small businesses.

Right. And still endorses the thing that, you know, the shot. And he still invoices the poisoning. And he knows better. Right. So, so, you know, I've been very critical of Trump. But let's look at the problem. We have three candidates. And all three of them are, so now it's down to two. but there were well Jill Stein is still in the race but essentially what you're looking at is a group of people with Bobby Trump and and Harris who support genocide right I don't know how you get past that I mean that that's the hardest thing you can't get past that yeah because if we support them and supporting genocide they will genocide us in fact they have right okay so so or or certainly Trump and Harris have. I mean, Harris is still requiring the COVID shots to work on her gay

I saw that, yeah. Okay. So, so I can't get past that. Right. I don't, I don't know who could. I mean, I get it. Like, it shouldn't be a one topic issue when we're talking about any of these things. There's obviously a multifaceted conversation, but this is not some policy stance. I can make a compelling argument as to why you should vote for Trump. I really can. I mean, I probably could too. I mean, I think there's logical reasons, but there are very logical reasons to vote for Trump opposed to Harris. Oh, that 100%. I mean, yeah, great.

They both support genocide. Right. They both market genocide. They both support genocide. They both want digital IDs. They both want the biometric tracking system. Like, all these things are problematic. But let's look at Congress.

Congress is supporting genocide. Right. I'll never forget. I worked with a reporter from Washington. A what? A reporter from Washington. And I helped her for years put together the story on sex slave trafficking by one of big defense contractor.

Dyncore. Yeah. And Dyncore was being prosecuted. Their case officer criminally for sex life trafficking. And we got a cover story in Insight Magazine about sex life trafficking for Dyncore, put it out, goes to every desk, every senator's office, every congressman's office in Washington. And then I personally sent it. to the head of IT contracting for every federal agency.

Nice. The next week, the Navy, and I'm trying to remember what the other department was, might have been the SEC. The Navy and one other agency put out huge new contracts to DynC after receiving that, okay? It's disgusting. And they were running a big enforcement operations

at both the Department of Justice and the SEC. Didn't drop them. Okay? And in fact, they had just allocated a new big contract to the Memphis sorting office for the mail to DynCorp. It doesn't surprise me. It's depressing. But that's the point of why it's not one aspect or the other. It's this incestuous system that allows that kind of corruption.

But to get back to your point, it's just what we're trying to change with the power versus. Right. But to change it, you can't put that on one candidate. Exactly. You have to put that, right. 325 million Americans have to put it on themselves one at a time. Yeah. But so then how does that make sense?

So, like, to bring, and this is an impossible question, but this is what you get today. When you try to point that out, you get the response. Well, I don't want Kamala, she's worse. They're both bad. So I'm living in reality, so I'm going to vote for Trump. Right? And maybe that's the argument. I don't have any problem with that.

My question is, okay, what are you going to do to change the system? Right, right. Because changing the president can't change the system. Right. And you know something? Go ahead. You can't ask Trump. I mean, Trump is a human being.

He has a family. He has grandchildren. And he's one man and he can do what he can do. Okay? Right. And I've seen Trump do some pretty good things. So, you know, and I've seen Trump do more than most can. But you have to understand he's in a box.

He doesn't have the power to make the changes. You won. And you're not willing to make. the changes you won because you're not willing to live with the ramifications of the changes you say you want. Right. The population at large, right. Right. So we have to start making those changes. Right. And so for example, so over the last year, I was working with some of the people in the Tennessee legislature on changes that state legislatures were doing and art could do. And we've come out with huge packages on what the state legislators can do. Meantime, we're seeing,

dirty money moving in and trying to get rid of the good guys. Right. Where are the good guys supporting them? I mean, I've called regularly for support of all the great legislators in the Tennessee, you know, legislature, all the good guys who are sitting around complaining, they won't help. Why do you think that is? They're invested in something that's challenging for them, or they just don't think it's possible? I think there are different reasons.

I think one is there's enormous propaganda. There's nothing you can do. Exactly. You know, hopelessness is a black pilled in reality. Right. So part of it is that part of it is everybody's struggling with inflation and they're tired. And they just, you know, their bandwidth is limited. You know, the bad guys are better financed.

The third thing is they're afraid. Yeah. They believe as long as they stay in the entertainment space, they're safe. It makes sense. If they go into the power space, you know, they're going to run into opposition. They're going to run into trouble. Real, potentially lethal, life-threatening trouble. Right.

And what I will tell you is there is trouble in the power space, not as much trouble as what will happen to you when you go into a digital concentration can. Yes. So you need to stop being afraid. I'm not afraid of this. I'm afraid of what happens. Yeah. Because I know what, I know where these guys are going. But see, this is my issue with the, like, so go back to your point.

I want to agree with this. And this is my point about people are asking, like, so let's just say you look at this dynamic and you think that Trump is the lesser of evils and there's no other logical. And let's just say you don't think Jill, you don't like Jill. But let's just even say to make it more clear, you genuinely like Trump, even though you see the problems and so you want to vote for him anyway. I can go along with that if you genuinely. whoever is out there listening believe that Trump is a better choice than Jill or whoever else.

I can go along with that if you spend no more than five minutes on the whole issue. Exactly. It's only one thing. You get to know your state and local legislators and leaders and those issues. And you start fighting because I'll tell you how the federal government is controlled, one county at a time. And one of the reasons they want us up here dealing with the presidential election in the entertainment space is they're down here. is they're down here one county at a time

locking down control. Right. Okay, so I want you back in the game unlocking their control one county at a time. Don't think that the one vote for presidential candidate is the only thing you have to do, right? That's the least, in my point, one of the least important things

you should be doing in the larger picture, in my opinion. But what I was going to say, though, is that I don't share your feeling of Trump. I believe that he's either willfully ignorant to the fact that he's playing a role in the problem or part of it. Trump is not ignorant. I don't think he's ignorant.

I think he's actually pretty smart in a lot of ways. But I mean, he's being willfully ignorant to the fact that he's being used. That's my opinion. Or he's not aware of it. Or I mean, or he's willing in it. Trump's not ignorant.

Well, I know, but let me flesh out. What I'm saying is that I think that ultimately I do, that's my opinion. I feel like he's aware. I mean, I don't see how you can go along with this genocide or think those shots aren't

killing people. So let me, one second. All I'm saying is that I, so that being said, I agree with somebody, wanting to do that, but I still think the problem is by going into that system and voting in something where I don't think that translates anymore, and that's my opinion,

you're only giving, you're giving the allowance for the whole thing to continue. Now, I'm not saying you shouldn't vote if you think that that's something you want to do, but my point is that we need to also consider the other avenues around that, which is what you're saying too, right? But my problem is that the average American doesn't think like that right now, that they're, that they're being convinced that this is the thing they should do. And once they do, they feel like they're done with their job. And I'd say, how do you get past that problem?

And so I'm kind of in this mixed bag where I'm trying to convince them that, you know, I'm not necessarily saying don't vote, but if you're going to do that, just don't act like that's your only job. And I don't know how to maneuver that because people think you're trying to ask them to not even take part in the system. You vote every day and every moment. Exactly. In the marketplace.

In the, you know, your prayers and your intentions, you know, vote in the field. your actions day-to-day vote, all your consumer choices vote, your investment choices vote. You are voting 24-7 all day long every day, and it matters. And you have far more leverage than you can imagine. So this notion of, I'm not important, is ridiculous. I agree. And you are responsible for every one of those choices 24-7. do you think that in your opinion is voting for the presidential election more important than

all of those choices combined or how do you how do you frame that but where's the importance level to you i i think in the scheme of all the choices you will make this year the presidential election is one percent of one percent yeah so i agree with that i do just it's just not it it has an effect even if it doesn't translate in my opinion but i agree with you i think that then that's my biggest issue is that right now so many people in this country, many of which who might be willing to entertain this conversation have been convinced that there's no, that adults will choose the lesser of evils and that everything else is childish. Like I'm budding up against that everywhere. And that to me is very problematic because for my perspective, I think they're all part of that problem.

But if we were sitting here and all the people who run for president, we're sitting with us, what they would say is I'm trying to get something accomplished in the machinery. Right. And get in the machinery with me and good luck with feeling what it's, like to be in the arena and get enough money to run? I mean, how am I supposed to get votes when the American people want lots of expensive media and the only way I can get it is from Bitcoin billionaires? Right. Well, so we need a new machine.

No, because if people would make the decisions on the actual public policy performance and results. I would agree with that. So if they ended up doing all those other things every day in the right, we could see that. And I think we're beginning to see that to a degree. I mean, if you want those candidates to have options, you've got to create the options. 325 million Americans could absolutely create those options.

If you look at all the people who've been trying to buy direct from the farmer or direct from grocers who buy direct from the farmer, it's completely shifted the landscape. Yeah, yeah. If you look at the people who are making natural health choices, it's shifting the landscape. I mean, we have the power to shift landscape. And the more we shift landscape,

the more we open up options for real candidates. I like to see yeah this really just connected for me in the sense that I mean so I agree completely and it's kind of a similar thing that these other choices so really what you're saying is obviously if you said many times Americans need to start taking accountability for their everyday actions and how those are another form of vote in regard to how you need to take responsibility and not expect everything here's what I'm going to say you're in the entertainment space now so the entertainment space is going to be shrinking right you have two choices and you're talking about the population at large again right just I'm talking about everybody yeah Yeah, okay. 325 million Americans. You have two spaces. You have to decide which you want to move to. One is the power space where you take power and you do something. The other is the slavery space where they literally show up and take your kids.

Which do you want? Those are your choices. Right. And all of them seem to lead in that direction. So it's about our individual choices. Right. Right. So, and the candidates are now being paid and squeezed.

and pressured to move you into the slavery space. And so your point is even the ones that might actually want to change it for the better aren't capable of it because we are all demanding our check, the red button conversation, right? Yeah, so that makes perfect sense to me. So it's, I mean, it's the conversation is we can't pretend that this voting process is the only thing we need to do. And if as long as we're trapped in that cycle, the change will ever come to pass. We also can't blame the candidates.

Right. To a, yeah. Well, I mean, to a degree. I mean, we should be able to blame them and hold them accountable for their actions. I think it's fine to hold them accountable for their actions, but stop expecting them yeah, you know, to pull the rabbit out of the hat when we won't act to do, you know, yeah, we have to move over the power space. Do you know how you get power? No. You take responsibility. Right. You look at a problem, you say, it's my problem, I'm going to fix it. That's what

actual leaders do. Yeah. Right. Right. So, so part of moving over the power space is taking responsibility space. And what I want you to know is every person can do that. Yes. You don't have to be, never forget, I had a wonderful friend who was finally inducted into her Buddhist practice and she came back. I thought she'd be very happy and celebrating. And she was, she was sort of freaked. And I said, what's the matter? And she said, I just realized that I'm personally responsible for world peace. And I find that completely overwhelming.

That's interesting. She didn't realize, you know, you are not, you know, you are responsible within your time and resources to do what you can. Right. Okay. Right. And doing what you can is a good thing and you should feel good about it like you're serving your mission and not.

Yeah. Yeah. Well, you know, there was a few of the things I wanted to get into, but I think that's a great place to wrap. for today because I think that that is the core message right there is that we need to start taking responsibility for our actions and and we have it is possible and again even a more of a positive note as well on top of that positive note is that I think that I genuinely think to a degree we're seeing that begin to happen it's it's all over the place absolutely happening and it's

wonderful outstanding absolutely happening and it's wonderful um you know this morning I just did the introduction to this wonderful food symposium the daughter of freedom mural Dr. Merrill nas is doing And the creme de la creme of everybody who's been fighting on food, not everybody, but a lot of them coming together. It's a marvelous group of people. And it's so inspiring when you see all of them and what they've been doing and how they've been doing. It's just like, I want to be part of that.

Yeah. I don't want to, you know, let me tell you something. The reason you want to move to the power line, it's not because it's the right thing to do. It's because you want to hang with those people. You do not over here with the slavery people. Right, right. It's, well, you know, I've told people

the stories of, you know, when I had to make the decision of what I was going to move out of the establishment or not, there was one wonderful scene where it was a wonderful guy actually asked me, he said, he took out of glossy brochure, the council and farm relations, he said, it's time for you to join. And I looked at it and I said, you know, I just don't want to do this. And you want to me to ask Nick Brady to sponsor me and I wasn't going to ask Nick Brady for anything. Anyway, so he said, he looks, he looked shocked. And he said, you don't understand if you don't do this, you're out forever. Wow.

No, just at that moment, he was worried for, he was afraid for me. I had an image, Ryan, of them taking my name off of the locker and the underground parker. That's funny. And then I thought, and the first thing I thought was, do I want to be downstairs with them or upstairs free range? And I said, I said to him, you know, I'll take my chances, you know, if you, you know, my dream was to find the building well three set.

You can't do that in the underground bunker. Yeah. I mean, I just think your comments on this stuff from behind the scenes is the way that they talk of the, you know, the simple idea that you're sitting, like being brought into the circle of the CFR and like, you'll be, if you don't do this now, you're gone forever. Like, it's such an interesting. You're out forever. Yeah, it just seems like a, like you're watching some kind of a movie. But, you know, it's just interesting. I think people, you know, just need to know that this, there is that kind of behind the scenes power structure that is actively working to keep you in this position.

And I think. Well, but here, here's what I have to tell you. You know, I have operated at all levels of society from the top of the Wall Street and the top of White House all the way down to, you know, I can't tell you how poor I was during the litigation. I remember one day I got up and I had no idea how I was going to get. The utility was telling me they're going to turn my energy off and I didn't have enough money to buy food that week. Wow. And some guy in, it was called Apple Valley, California. I go to the post office and some guy had sent me a $100 donation.

and he felt sorry for me. And thank God I was able to pay the utility bill in email that week. And, you know, it was just like, wow, I'll never, I'll never forget that donation. That's fantastic. I've got my very first check that I've received, Ms. Powell, I believe, $25. I've got it framed over there. You know, it's one of those moments where you're just like, you know, it's powerful to see somebody cared enough to handwrite a letter and send this in and then believe in what

you're doing, you know, it's, you know, but that's kind of the points. I think that a lot of people are recognizing that this is, something that people care about enough and that a lot of people are acting out and these I mean I honestly do think that because of the foreign policy aspect it is shaking a lot of people free but I don't think it's just about that one topic and I think that people are

I you know right now we're doing what's called the freedom transaction tour so I'm going around the country meeting with Salary report subscribers and these meet and treats and so a subscriber will agree to host a party it's a lot of work to put these on and so we'll get together and what you see are

just thousands and thousands of the most wonderful people who do take responsibility. They're acting, they're doing, their county commissioners, their state legislators, their doctors, they're just everything you can imagine. They're plumbers, they're electricians. I mean, it's just a lot of small entrepreneurs, small business, small farmers. I mean, I was, believe it or not, I was coming from East Tennessee driving here to Shelbyville yesterday and there was no way I was going to get in in time to shop at the farm store. So I said to one of my colleagues, where can I go in Knoxville to buy good food, clean food?

So they sent me to this cooperative market. It's great. And they had a food bar, so I got my dinner and I just decided to sit and have dinner. So I'm sitting there and this guy walks up to me and he says, are you Captain Austin Fitz? And I said, yes. And he said, I'm a farmer. And he said, I supply the tomatoes here. He said, here's a bag of tomatoes for you.

I just want to thank you for your work. And he walked off. That's awesome. This is my first tomato donation. I love it. That's awesome. Well, during the Great Depression, my grandfather was a doctor in Jackson, Tennessee. And he supported the family.

His patients couldn't afford to give him money, but they paid him with food. Right. And, you know, my father said, we ate great. It's just so inspiring. I mean, there really are so many good people out there, you know, from every level and aspect of life who are willing to take that moment to make a difference. And I really, I think that this conversation in general we're getting at, I mean, I really believe that we have a moment for something really positive to happen.

And it's really just about like you're saying, for us to stand up and accept that responsibility and make that happen. Right. But here's the, have you ever watched the movie, the never-ending story? I love that movie. Yeah. Yeah. Okay, we are fighting the nothing.

Yeah, right. So from people, can you explain the nothing for people who've never seen it? Yeah, what, just like a vague darkness that's kind of coming in. It's a force in the wilderness that sucks the meaning out of everything. Right, yeah, and then they got the, yeah, go ahead, the wolf and everything. The protagonist has to stand up and fight for freedom and civilization in the face of the nothing. Right. And that's the fight we're in.

Yeah, right. Oh, that's right. The nothing was essentially absorbing everything as a past. through and yeah that's right and we are dealing with the nothing and it's tough yeah that's a great analogy right tapeworm and the nothing perfect well the nothing is it is the tape room is injecting the nothing into the body politic yes it's hopeless Ryan there's nothing you can do there you go well that's fantastic I really enjoy talking with you today I really have I think we've had a lot of important things yeah go ahead we're going to say something else so I just want to also point out

you have started this alliance and I think it's very important. I think it's a coming together, and I would say it's the coming together of a younger generation in what I call the new media who's standing for certain kind of values, which is, you know,

we can't compromise on basic maps. And I will tell you why that's so important to me. I was an investment advisor for 10 years, and I always felt strongly as a public official that you can't lie. You know, you can't lie to people because then they make mistakes. But working as an investment advisor,

I got hands-on experience in family after family after family, seeing families deeply harmed and bankrupted by one lie, one lie about vaccines, one lie about Madoff or financial fraud. And the devastation that one lie would wreck, it just really, and so one of the things we've tried to do at Salary is run a very high-quality,

control. And, and, you know, and it's why, even though, you know, I'm deeply grateful to RFK, and I really appreciate him, I've always really liked him, you know, on the Bitcoin 2024, I was like, okay, pal, you know, into the arena, we're going to have a big slug fest over this one. Right. And, and because you can't take from the poor and give to the rich and not have me call you out. Right. And, and, and transparency is a condition press, to a healthy economy, a healthy civilization, healthy politics, everything. I mean, you know that. You started the last American Magamon.

So without that kind of transparency, we're toast. And this idea of constantly promoting hopium or fear porn or things that get views, I'll never forget a lovely person in the new media. I did a show on the $21 trillion in the missing money. and then they had a fraudster on who basically runs a modified hangout about the missing money and I called them and I said

how can you do this? Right. How can you do this? And they said, it gets views. I said, you're, you're, you know, you're giving people a false map. Right. I can't tell you one of the problems

we have at Salary. So you have a lot of new media who have precious metals dealers marketing frauds. Right. On their website, you can't do that. that. You can't do that. And so anyway, so the bottom line is you're trying to up the standard of quality control. And you're doing it with a lot of people in the next generation. And I think

that is very, very powerful. And I want to do everything I can to support it. Well, thank you, Catherine. I mean, it's, and again, Derek Whitney and myself decided to start the Independent Media Alliance because, you know, like I said earlier before, like we're at a point now where these compromises they're putting forward, we just need to recognize them for what they are. Like, we need to stick with our principles. We need to stick with our objectivity. You know, and I think that those alone are the bridging. Real solutions come from an honest map. Yes.

They don't come from hope you. Right, right. Or fear porn. Like the idea that you're driving you in these positions of hopelessness either way. You know, and so thank you for that. And I'm feeling very positive about where this goes. And again, that's the same kind of feeling I'm having what we're just talking about. Like, I see this. The response. we've gotten from everybody, yourself included, in regard to reaching out to this, it's inspiring. And I really do see a positive step forward, despite all the negativity and the attacks and everything else coming. I mean, it's almost giving us more motivation to keep going.

Well, here's the thing, the beautiful thing, as I said, it's the Reminer's Fire. The beautiful thing about America, one of the things I love the most is we all feel free to express our opinion, you know, and it makes us smarter. Right. It makes us smarter, but you have to have, I wouldn't say you have. to have a thick skin, but you have to have, you have to maintain your state of amusement. Yeah, have a good sense of humor for sure. Well, I think it's a good place to leave it today, Catherine.

I really enjoy talking with you and hopefully we connect more than the future. Thank you. Anything else you want to leave us with upcoming events or anything you want to shout out before we go? Yeah, I really want everyone listening to this to sit down. You know, I used to tell my clients to do this. do a time budget. You know, where do you spend your time? And then what are the things in your life that are draining you that you can stop doing

or, you know, whether it's, you know, changing from a bad bang to a good bank? You know, what are the things you can do? What's draining you that you can delete? Right. Free up some time that way. Turn off the TV and then take that time and say, okay, maybe it's two or three hours. where can I contribute that will put me in touch with good people and make a contribution to world peace without it being overwhelming? Yeah, yeah.

And you'd be amazed if you just keep moving out that which gives you despair or disrespect and moving in, you know, maybe listen an hour less to presidential election entertainment. Right. And for that hour, do something that really, you know, get to know all your local farmers. Yeah. Whatever. Right. Everybody's different. Do something that gives you energy, but start improving your energy equation by taking

these kind of actions. That's great advice. Right. And very simplistic. You'd think more people could come to that conclusion on their own. Right. And move or move, you bad. You know, make sure you donate or support the last American bag of mine.

Absolutely. Well, thank you, Catherine. And, you know, I really, I think this is such a powerful conversation. and go out and have these conversations with your friends and your neighbors and your family and just and seek these solutions, right? And realize that sometimes we are in a pretty difficult situation. And pointing that out is like the old saying, like the first step to solving any problem is acknowledging you have one.

And you're getting stuck in this homie amorophy, fear porn aspect is only keeping you stuck in place. So thank you for tuning in today. And as always, question everything. Come to your own conclusions. Stay vigilant.