The Last American Vagabond - Derrick Broze Debates Ian Carroll - Is Donald Trump The “Lesser Of Two Evils”?

Episode Date: October 29, 2024

On October 28th, 2024, TLAV lead writer Derrick Broze and researcher Ian Carroll discussed the 2024 election and the often repeated claim that Donald Trump is the "lesser of two evils". Ian shared how he went from quietly supporting Robert F. Kennedy's Independent Presidential run to openly supporting his effort. In the end, Carroll embraced Trump's campaign because he believes that Trump will potentially be slightly better than a Harris administration. Derrick presented numerous points countering this notion, including debunking claims that Trump is anti-war, the Zionist influence on Trump's campaign, Trump's relationship with Peter Thiel and Elon Musk, his actions during COVID1984, and Trump's calls for limiting freedom of speech.Journalist Derrick Broze (The Conscious Resistance Network) and researcher Ian Carroll (Cancel This Clothing) come together for a dialogue on the 2024 U.S. Presidential Election.Follow Ian: https://www.youtube.com/@cancelthisconspiracyFollow Derrick: https://www.theconsciousresistance.com/Bitcoin Donations Are Appreciated:www.thelastamericanvagabond.com/bitcoin-donation(3FSozj9gQ1UniHvEiRmkPnXzHSVMc68U9f) Get full access to The Last American Vagabond Substack at tlavagabond.substack.com/subscribe

All right. Hey, everyone. This is Derek Brose with the Conscious Resistance Network. I'm Ian Carroll. I'm just kind of doing my thing. I'm of cancel this clothing company and we're doing away with that. We're just moving towards Ian Carroll on all the apps. Awesome, man. Well, thanks for agreeing to do this discussion. I know we're live on both of our Twitter X accounts. We're live a few other places on my channels. And I'll just kind of set the stage for those who aren't caught up on everything that happens on Twitter because obviously there's a lot of people who have lives and don't pay attention to all those sort of things. But for those who don't know Ian's work, I'm sure you guys have come across his work. If you don't know my work, you can check out my website, theconscious resistance.com. But both us are out here doing, I think, what we think is in the best interest of humanity trying to promote truth, doing investigations. I can't claim that I've seen everything you've done, man, but over the last year,

of course, I've seen people share some of your stuff with me and reference it. And from what I gather and correct me if I'm wrong, you know, you're somebody who does the deep dives and follows the money and tries to look for connections there. And I think that's something I've done as well over the last 15 years. And I mainly focus on doing documentary work and books these days in public speaking, but I do as well a weekly podcast and focus on somewhat similar topics. I know there's some overlap there. So the reason we're speaking today, though, is because of some areas of disagreement, which is, is fine. And I know that there are people online who love to see when different content creators go at each other or whatever, but this is not some internet

celebrity death match here. This is a discussion that we wanted to have in the hopes that I think both of our mutual audiences might gain something out of it, right? I mean, there's no point in talking if we can't really bring something to the table. So, yeah, that's kind of the goal here. You may notice the title isn't Derek Brose versus Ian Carroll or anything like that. And that's on purpose. This isn't intended to be us attacking each other. So wherever we may disagree, that's fine. I hope by the end of this, everybody who's tuned in will gain something, though. And so let's just start with what the interaction that led to this. So Ian, I'll let you describe the video in just a moment, but you had posted a video sharing about, you know, your embrace of the Trump

campaign and sort of it was something to the effect of, you know, Obama's been responsible for this and Biden's been responsible to this and Bush did this. But Trump is different. And I came out very politely to you and said, are you fucking delusional? Which, you know, I know you said you have a thick skin. But that was my, I guess, knee-jerk initial reaction because, and that is honestly, as odd as it may sound, coming as a place of someone, I guess you could say, of respect of seeing other content creators and journalists and people who I think do good work in different areas.

And then maybe in my case, a bit of disappointment for that and sort of questioning and I'm not here to accuse you of being controlled opposition or any of these sort of things. things. I'll let the internet do that. But it was sort of like, to me, like, oh, another person who's saying some positive things in different areas going this route. So that was like my first gut reaction. You responded to me. We had another interaction we'll talk about in a little bit related to, yeah, we'll start there in just a moment. But that's kind of what led to this whole thing. And so would you like to share first about like what your post was about and everything? Totally. Yeah. And also just to frame it as like, I'm stoked for this conversation.

because I'm not here to prove that I'm right. I think that I'll probably learn a good bit from you because I often get sort of like mischaracterized as being an expert or claiming that I'm like the deep dive guy that knows everything and that is super not the case. I am new on the scene. I'm new to this whole researching thing. And I've just been trying to figure out what's going on from the start.

And my opinion, my opinion and perspective has changed a lot over the last year and a half of doing research as it should because, you know, if you're actually here for the truth, you should be updating your perspective every day as you learn more things. And the moment you think you know everything, that's when you stop learning. So I know that you've been in the game for a long time, and I'm excited to kind of get your perspective to give myself a lot of new avenues to kind of dig into in my research and to help clarify what I do and don't believe.

The specific post that kind of spawned this interaction, I think what I did is I was reposting a video that someone affiliated with RFK Jr. had created that was about the Kamala campaign. and I made a post saying essentially that the current modern Democrat party is the party of the CIA and that Kamala is controlled in this way, the Biden family is controlled in this way, Obama was controlled in this way, sort of running through the list of the party that I used to be a part of, that I was raised as a Democrat, raises a liberal, and did not think anything of it for most of my adult life until the last five years or so.

And I don't remember if I specifically mentioned, I think in that post I mentioned, I mentioned, that Trump is not controlled in the same way and that's what gave you the that's what kind of gave you the knee-jerk reaction of like are you kidding me Trump is super controlled and I think I respond to that like actually that's a very fair point Derek like I was careless with my words is like Trump obviously is beholden I think was the word I used to many people to his donors to his friends to the people that have lifted him up along the way I just see it currently in my best understanding as Trump is not beholden in the same manner in the same intelligence agency based manner as the modern Party is. And so I'm stoked to sort of unpack the various evidence for both sides and the various perspectives for both sides. I'm sure that we'll both be called controlled opposition and operatives at many times throughout this discussion and in the future. So I'm just stoked to kind of like unpack all that and have a chance to get into the nuance and have a real discussion as opposed to like Twitter shouting matches, which are fun too. I love Twitter shouting matches. Yeah. So I definitely get sucked into that more than more than I've

prefer. And as you said, this is to me more of a preferred avenue of having these discussions because you know, the character limit, the back and forth, the heated nature of like, I got to respond right away. It's not really, I think, conducive to what we're trying to do here. So let's go ahead. Then I've just made a few notes based on again what we, where we started at. So that initial post that we just mentioned. And then I did share one of your posts that was related to, I think, a deep dive you were doing in Ohio about a political campaign. And I, Because after I saw that comment, I hadn't checked on your page in a little while. So I decided, let me just see.

When you're referring to. I don't. Okay. Yeah. You dive into someone in Idaho. Yeah. So I went to your page and I saw that and I just, you know, checked it out for a second. And I noticed that you said something to the effect of like, well, Miriam Adelson's funding this campaign are involved in.

And you said something like, if you know, you know. Now, to me, that immediately brought me to like, well, does he know that Miriam Adelson is also pledged $100 million to Trump? And that her husband, her now deceased husband, Sheldon Adelson before him. was pledging millions of dollars as well. And they sat in the front row when Trump moved the embassy to Jerusalem, all these big Zionist moves, which is what I think those are big players that are backing Trump. So that kind of set me off again. I was like, let me tweet about this.

And that led us to further discussion. So let's just start with that. I mean, what are your thoughts? I know that you're aware of the work of my colleague Whitney Webb and the work we do with The Last American Vagabond. We've spent years kind of pointing out the different falls, associations of Trump. Whitney's book obviously gets deep into the Epstein and the mafia network. And that clearly is connected to the Israeli lobby.

Shout out Whitney Webb. She's a legend. And everyone is contributed along the way. Yeah, Whitney is very aware of this conversation is hopeful for some sort of good outcome here. So I say all that to say, you're clearly aware of those things. And that to me was just, I guess, perhaps a blind spot or I don't know, disconnect, but maybe we could start there. Do you see or do you acknowledge the massive Zionist lobby behind Donald Trump?

Absolutely. It's my biggest concern about Donald Trump. And I am aware of the Aedelson's as sort of the tip of that spear as the most prominent and largest pool of money, I believe, from the Zionist camp that is reaching into Trump's, you know, back pockets in his campaign. And they have for a very long time. And Trump has been deeply allied with heavy Zionists throughout his entire. rise all the way back into what you might call Trump prehistory.

And so I held those concerns deeply leading into this election for many, many months. And for me, it was the endorsement of RFK, which also has a lot of complicated ties that we can dig into a little bit if we want. And that gave me some level of confidence to the sincerity of certain claims in the Trump campaign and the tactics being used by the Trump campaign. and it gave me a position by which I could get access to at least some people relatively high up in the RFK camp to sort of vet in a in-person basis of do I assess this person as being somewhat genuine or like can I get some sort of inside inside baseball on what the people associated with RFK are thinking and thereby assess the RFK camps claims about the Trump camp and stuff like that. So the Zionist angle is my greatest concern and I am not optimistic about a Trump presidency's relationship to Israel. But I do think that I have a different take on what might

happen and what they might be doing and on why there might be more optimism for the sort of, I'll call them Z-pilled people, like the Zionist-pilled people that understand the Zionist relationship. I think there might be a slightly better outcome coming if Trump gets the presidency than a lot of people want to acknowledge. And that's a really fun one to unpack that's kind of related to our can stuff. So, well, let's let's talk about before we go any further. So I just want to ask just in the interest of transparency, because from what I saw, so you were supporting RFK and then, like you said, just a moment ago, as they kind of became one force, are you, are you directly, like, working for the RFK campaign anywhere, or were you or the Trump campaign? Or is there any sort of direct connection with you outside of just you being, you know, a curious guy doing this? Is there anything more direct?

Great question. And I kind of appreciate you framing it here. No, I'm not associated. I'm not affiliated. There's no, I've never signed any contracts. I've never been sent or asked to sign any contracts. I have no NDAs of any form related to the RFK campaign or the Trump campaign for that matter. I was flown to San Francisco by Nicole Shanahan's team to do an interview with her during which they paid for the flight and the hotel.

And the rest of that was more or less on my dime and we were kind of like sharing meals and stuff like that. But I wasn't paid monetarily for that appearance outside of kind of covering expenses, which is the industry standard for the most part for being flown to a podcast. And so I've had two different, I think it's two, that one was in San Francisco, and then I went on my own dime to DC, 100% on my own dime to DC for the more recent Rescue the Republic rally that was sort of organized in affiliation with the RFK campaign. And that was another opportunity for me to kind of like meet a lot of people, not just associated with RFK, but people from all walks of this kind of truther, you know, perspective inside campaign. outside campaign, everyone in between controlled opposition and not, whatever it is. And that was also a very interesting one, but I don't have any personal affiliation and I have no obligation to say anything. So everything that I say is my own personal belief based upon what I've figured out. And I make lots of mistakes. I'm not, you know, I don't know everything,

but. Cool. See, I just wanted to get that out of the way just in case anybody's curious. And then also, I guess we'll just address this at the very beginning because I was just posting about this this morning on social media that inevitably when somebody like myself, calls out different things Trump's doing because there are still so many people stuck in the left-right paradigm. And what I consider to be a very low level of thinking, they instantly say, so you must like Harris. So you're a supporter of Biden or this and that. So I just want to make it clear, in case anybody actually knows my work or doesn't know my work, I'm not a Harris supporter.

I'm not a Biden supporter. I have no background in there. I have a 15-year history of work that you can look at to see that I've been calling out Bush, Obama, Trump, Biden, and whoever's next will continue to do so. So I just want to address that before we start seeing comments in here that I'm shilling for Harris or something like that. But yeah, so let's get into some of what you mentioned there as far as the RFK aspect and that sort of bringing you towards the Trump campaign. You said that from your view, you think that maybe people like myself who are critical of what might come next with the Trump campaign with the Trump presidency, we might maybe not be seeing the full picture. Could you elaborate on what you mean by that? Totally. And I think it's easiest to elaborate on it looking at RFK and his campaign prior to his endorsement of Trump. And that'll sort of lead us to what I'm hoping for from Trump. But we'll see what happens. But I think that people that understand Zionist influence in America and around the world understand the totality of that power base. And it's not that it's just like the country of Israel, you know, affecting politics around the world through their government influence. It's affecting politics.

politics around the world through their friends in the banking industry, their friends in the pharmaceutical industry, their friends in the pharmaceutical industry, their friends in all of these various industries that becomes the spider web of pro-Zionist narratives, not the least of which being in the sexual blackmail industry, which I'm sure we'll get into. And so RFK is a great example of this where early on when I started being pro RFK in a first somewhat guarded sense and then a slightly more open sense, there was always calls, people call me out for like, yeah, but RFK is a horrible Zionist shill, which is really weird because he's so based on so many topics and he's so knowledgeable about so many things. And he's deeply

researched. He's kind of encyclopedic that it's this weird, glaring hypocrisy that he would have all these great takes on like, you know, pharma and on the COVID vaccine and on all these other things and then be like, call Palestinians the most pampered people in the world, which was like atrocious to hear. And I still hate to even think about hearing that. And I believe currently that there's likely or possibly some amount of blackmail involved in there. And I think that a lot of people try to pretend like we have the ability to know more than we do. I think that a lot of especially keyboard warriors online like to think that like we can imagine like even begin to imagine the insane complexity of the political mechanics of these like massive money campaigns, all this complex politics of essentially royalty of America. So I see it as maybe RFK is blackmailed, and there's a strong argument for that through stuff about the diaries, about his ex-wife and his infidelities over the years as sexual deviancy is a favorite for blackmail networks.

But there's also, you know, everyone can come up to their own level of like percentage of chances of how much, you know, how likely this is. But there's a certain percentage that I've always felt that maybe he's smart enough to play the long con. because I think that anyone that understands the power of the Zionist network understands that you can't just attack them head on. You get the JFK treatment if you attack them head on as a metaphor, so to speak. And so if I were in RFK's shoes and I knew what I know today, plus probably all this other crazy stuff that RFK knows, I would imagine that I would not attack the Zionist Bobby and the Zionist network head on either.

I would probably come to some conclusion of we need to knock out the legs of this machine one by one by one and decrease their power base in a more strategic fashion before we actually openly address the Zionist issue. And so when I look at the RFK campaign, I see a man who is openly, actively destroying the pharmaceutical complex and ready to do it because he's a litigator and he is litigated against these companies and these big corporations over and over and over successfully. So he's ready to take on big pharma, which is a big part of the Zionist campaign like network. He's ready to take on the bankers, although I haven't personally seen anything about. about him openly litigating against bankers.

He understands that world, and he certainly is no friend to the bankers in a, you know, not an Obama way. And he's ready to take on the media complex. He's been going to war with them and they've been going to war with him. And that's just a few examples of these sort of networks of power that benefit the Zionists, you know, not to mention the military industrial complex that he's quite critical of. So he is this guy that's coming out and he's talking about taking an axe to all the legs of this, structure that they've built that they used to control most of the world in many ways.

And I see a man who's talking about all the legs, but not the head. And so when I look at that, and if I imagine, suppose RFK got elected and he was successful in doing all the things he claims, which obviously politicians don't mean everything they say, and they rarely accomplish everything they say, even if they try. But still, even if he just accomplishes some of that, if he accomplishes taking out two of those legs, that is 200% more. That's infinite percent more than any other president in my lifetime has ever done to reduce the power of the Zionist network. And if we were then to move into the next four-year presidency with the Zionist network having a destroyed media complex and a destroyed

pharmaceutical complex, suddenly the power has shifted in the global space. And so when I looked at the RFK campaign early, I saw a man that there was an argument to be made, you know, and there's arguments on both sides, that he is at least attacking elements of their power in a way that no one else is doing. And so, and not to mention make America healthy again, which I think that that is a whole other topic for a whole other interview, like a whole other conversation. But I think that if we made Americans healthy again in the ways he's talking about, that would heal so much of our imbalances emotionally that would heal so many of our political imbalances in our country and make us so much less manipulable as a populace that I think that those benefits would

be huge steps forward against creating a real change in this Zionist world order that is currently ruling all of our lives to a large degree. So that's what was my take on RFK and some of that has transitioned now to look at Trump. Okay. So before we get it, because we're going to focus mainly on Trump, but I do think it's good that we're starting with RFK. So you mentioned the whole about pampering Palestinian being the most pampered people in the world. I actually confronted RFK about that. People can find that at the Conscious Resistance.com. Went to, I can't remember which conference it was, but it was in Texas,

and caught him on the way to the bathroom and asked him about it. And he stood by his position and, you know, continues to stand by it. And I know that without even getting into some of the speculation, which I do think is worth exploring about his ex-wife and, you know, his loose connections to Epstein and what may have happened there, which I do think aren't things that should be totally ignored, even though we don't have concrete evidence of that. It's still something, as you said, we should sort of keep in the back of our minds. To me, even just with the Zionist influence and that statement, I mean, I know I don't have to tell you and I don't know I don't need to inform the audience.

But I mean, guys, we are literally watching a genocide happen. And there is nearly every single politician in the U.S., I would say except for Thomas Massey and a couple others who are brave enough to speak out about this. And so they're not getting the JFK treatment. Now, maybe if they were running for office like president, we might see something different. But I just think that, you know, before we move forward on all the things that you hope would happen under RFK and then now with Trump, that to me is like a huge thing. That's not just something that. And it saddens me, honestly, as a human being that we're one year into this thing and that when I bring that up, people just kind of breeze past it as if it's just, oh, yeah, he's got a bad haircut or he, you know, has some bad opinions about things. I mean, these are people who are literally making excuses for a genocide that is going on.

And not only making excuses, but Trump, RFK and their whole camp running around with Rabbi Shmuli. And like even today, he tweeted a picture of him and Trump. And other Zionist people coming from the Chabad movement, obviously Netanyahu and others. And to me like that, I know some people say, like the criticism, I'll get back because you're just a single issue voter. What about all these other great things that may happen if they keep their promises, which is a big if. in my mind at least, especially after we saw how many campaign promises Trump broke the first time, that is just, like, we, I just think we need to, not to, you know, belabor the point over and over, but just to really emphasize that how big of a thing that is.

Like, to me, that's not just some small thing to step past and then ignore. And so I'm just going to say that. And then that'll come back up throughout the conversation because we're going to continue to see this influence of Israel and Zionists and that whole movement. And, you know, that it's a whole other conversation for another. day about the fact that there literally are people in the Republican Party, but even beyond that, the true power who do, whether they really believe in the Bible or not, but they seem to be determined to bring biblical prophecy to real life. So there's some really worrisome things about

that. And we can talk about that and just a bit when we talk about Iran and Trump's threats to bomb Iran for Israel and things of that sort. But in terms of what you mentioned with RFK and some of the potential positives, like of course I'll acknowledge, like if somebody was to get in there and actually try to fix up the American food supply and get rid of all the big farm influence. Like that's something that I would celebrate, whether or not I would vote for them or not. I mean, folks who followed my work for the last year, I've been one of the few journalists reporting on the fluoride lawsuit, the fluoride trial. Every now and then I see that RFK will tweet about that. You know, if he made a move on that, that would be something that would stop the poisoning of hundreds of millions of Americans.

Like, that would be a great thing, obviously. It's not that I don't see the potential for whatever. positives could come. It's simply that these people, RFK and Trump, are all being funded by billionaires. And one of the big, I just finished an article actually for the Last American Vagabond that should be out while we're recording this called Election 2024, Zionist technocrats versus Zionist technocrats. And I go through and list all the billionaires who are funding Harris and all the billionaires who are funding Trump and how the fact that all of them are supporting Israel. I mean, it's a much bigger piece of the puzzle than we might imagine. And I don't think

that we can ignore that that billionaire money. Now, some people, and I think maybe you made this argument, might say, well, Trump being funded by people or given money doesn't necessarily mean that he's beholden to them. And that could be true. I think we saw with his first term that he did make moves that were favorable to the people who put money into his campaigns. People want to argue well, he learned. He figured things out the first time.

And now he's got RFK on his side. So he's going to do some things different. What I think we should pay attention to is that Trump hasn't actually said he's going to appoint RFK anywhere. You know, he says things like, I'm going to let him, like I think just last night at a rally, he said, we're going to let him go wild on health and let him go wild on the FDA and things like that. That could be true. But if he actually, you know, just to kind of bring it back to just day-to-day politics, if he actually was to attempt to nominate him, he still would need to be approved through the Senate, through the House, you know, by the Congress, which there's already an

effort to label him an anti-vaxxer and try to prevent him. So there's no guarantee that he would even get in that position. Now, Trump could still appoint him as an advisor or something like that. But also we need to look at the fact that Trump had that opportunity. Allegedly, from what we've heard, Bill Gates is the one who told Trump not to do the vaccine commission with RFK in the first campaign, first presidential administration. We could again argue, well, he learned his lesson, et cetera, et cetera. Trump went from talking about autism. I think it was back in 2014. People have seen the famous tweet to now still promoting the vaccines. And when it comes to RFK, that to me was, I was never going to vote for the guy, but I was at least thankful there was somebody, okay, he's being independent.

That's cool to see somebody doing. In my view, he should have ran all the way to the end, regardless of whether he would have lost or people say he would have taken votes away from Trump. It doesn't matter. If you actually stand on principles and values, take that shit all the way to the end and run it as far as you can and not give in to the two-party system that you spent the last year telling people that you were trying to fight. Like that to me has been the biggest thing for me. And then not only that, but literally giving into the two-party system with the person that brought us Operation Warp Speed, which appointed Big Pharma execs, as you know, and is a military operation and brought us the COVID shots and all those things. And even Nicole Shanahan said right before they did endorse Trump that they weren't going to do that unless Trump, you know, said something or, you know, rescinded his statements on supporting the shots and Operation Warpspeed. that never happened, but they still went forward with supporting him.

And literally in the last week, Trump's doing some campaign thing at McDonald's. Like, I don't know. That doesn't scream maha to me. Like this. And even I saw, yeah, and I saw RFK like having, like, he made a tweet after that saying, like, well, you know, we can fix McDonald this way by getting rid of the seed oils. Sort of it felt like he was having to kind of play a little bit because he, yeah, exactly, give cover to what Trump was doing.

And so I just look at those things. And ultimately to me, it doesn't matter anymore. RFK is not running right. He's he's embraced Trump. But I hear what you're saying, like with the hope and the optimism and that, to me, that was all shattered. And I think a lot of RFK supporters, not just me. I mean, I was never going to support the guy, but people who were going to support him, who gave money to him more importantly and who campaigned for him and then saw him go towards Trump, somebody who he had been rightfully calling out, I think we're very disappointed. And then we could also point to the fact that both RFK and Trump are funded by a billionaire Timothy Mellon, who comes from the Mellon family, Andrew Mellon, you know, back in the Robert Barron days, the Carnegie's, the Rockefellers. I mean, these are sort of some of that old, they're less known than a lot of families that people pay attention to, but they have been part of that same ruling class behind the scenes. And Mellon was giving money to RFK and then also giving money to Trump at the same time. Some people think, as I'm sure you know, that this was a ploy the whole time to just kind of build up the movement and then send it over to Trump.

I think that's a reasonable question to ask. I don't know the answers, obviously. But yeah, and so, I mean, unless you want to say anything else on RFK, maybe we'll move forward. Yeah, go ahead. You've briefly touched on sort of, I think, what is the crux tipping point of our disagreement about methodology here for us as voters, which is, I believe I'm going to recharacterize what you said, and I want you to tell me whether or not you agree with my characterization, is that I'm trying to say that politics is messy and this is complicated.

And in power games, you often have to make compromise. You have to sacrifice this piece to get your queen in position for that kill shot. You have to do things that, like, inevitably, my belief is that if we want to make real change, we have to play the game to a certain degree on the playing field that's in front of us. Otherwise, we stand to just be pushed around like pawns the rest of our lives. And I believe that your perspective, which is obviously hardened by a lot more time, you know, on the pavement here, is that that doesn't work and that trying to play within the system is a broken methodology and there's a better way that is outside of the system and does not include

endorsing the two-party political system. And so what you were saying about RFK here about how like he really gave up on his, you know, he should have pushed his campaign as far as he could have all the way. And I would, my argument to that is that I think he is pushing his campaign as far as he can all the way by sacrificing a great deal of ego and respect in order to get himself as close to a position of power to make as many differences as he can. Is that a fair characterization of what your sort of stances here and the difference between our stances? Yeah. And I think, I mean, We're going to continue the discussion, but if we were to end right now, that would be the crux, I think, of what we're, that we're ultimately disagreeing on strategy and approach.

And, and yeah, so I'll let you continue, but that is, that is accurate. Cool. I mean, that sort of is where I wanted to just highlight right now while we're on the RFK thing, because I purposefully, after RFK endorsed Trump, that's when I purposely tried to get close to as many people high up in the RFK camp as I could to assess in private conversations, whether or not they felt as though the assessment of Trump being genuine about his desire to appoint RFK and what Trump is saying behind closed doors about what he's apparently going to do, I was trying to get their assessment of whether they believe that or not. And whether that's just a talking point on the TV that is whispered differently about at private

dinners. And I mean, obviously, I can be fooled. And obviously people aren't telling me all their secrets. But I did receive a fair bit of data that kind of helped me to feel more confident that at least the RFK camp is comfortable that they're getting, you know, a real deal, not necessarily a raw deal. It's more complicated. You know, politics is super messy. But that helped me to sort of feel comfortable in saying like, at least we're all trying to do what we do because inevitably we're playing on the stage of billionaires.

We're playing on the stage of the largest and most powerful empires the world has ever known. And so a good example is all this funding that's happening is like, we can't control the fact that billionaires fund these people. We can't control the fact that they fund both sides. And inevitably in the current political system, if you're not going to be taking money and getting billions of dollars for your campaign, you're not going to make it to the presidency. And we're not going to see you on the ticket. We're not going to ever see you in the office. And so we don't really have the power to stop the big money from flowing into their pockets. The only power we have in a presidential race, we have other powers outside of it for sure. But the only power that I personally see inside of the presidential race is finding the candidate that is sort of, their least favorite, finding the candidate that is the most independent or the most prepared to do something for us. And we can put that piece in play while also activating all of the other power pieces that us as regular citizens can activate, which I think are far more important and we should not lose sight of them. So, okay, a couple of things. Thanks for saying that, man. But just,

let's just, again, take a moment. Think about how sad of a state of affairs that is. Vote for the person that is the least worst. I mean, that's basically where we're at. And I know that that's not your fault. That's not my fault. That's what we're born into. It's where things have been long before either of us came around. People have just finally realized it. But just really, I think that's, you're correct that my view is that we shouldn't use the electoral system, the political system. I say this is somebody who ran for mayor of Houston two times, 2023 and 2019 on the local level trying to spread a message. I mean, but that was my goal. I got on TV, got on radio, got on newspapers to talk about the ideas we care about. But I think it's absolutely clear. And the evidence shows that the presidential elections are controlled to this. degree, whether we're talking about a real basic level of billionaire funding, oligarchy, et cetera, then getting into deeper levels of, okay, well, they're all Zionists, and then getting to the fact that, wait, steering committee members of the Bilderberg group are funding both sides of this thing and are choosing their favorite candidate.

I mean, to me, yeah, I don't, I wouldn't be the person to say that's where we should put all our energy. And I'm glad you acknowledge that there are other tools we have and that those are more important. We'll get to this later in the conversation, everyone out there who's, I see the comments, okay, well, if not Trump, then who, or what should we do? I have some ideas on that. We can get into that later.

But I do think that that's where more of our energy could go into. Ultimately, it just feels like the more energy we drive into trying to find the least worst candidate. We're feeding our time, money, energy into that system. And I also think because I do believe this is a spiritual battle we're facing as well, that energetically, spiritually, we're consenting to their system. Now, just one other point on that, before we get a little more into the specifics on Trump, I started to wake up in 2009, and at that time, some people may have heard of a man named Ron Paul, was just ran for his first presidential run.

He was considering another one. I never became part of Ron Paul's campaign, and he didn't make it all the way to actually being on the ballot. But I was keeping an eye on it and kind of watching with curiosity. And anytime people who were voters asked, I said, hey, well, there's a guy here who's anti-war, talking about the Federal Reserve, talking about 9-11, eventually, all these sort of things that were really crucial. to my awakening. And he chose not to, when it came down to it, even though it was clear Ron Paul wasn't going to win the nomination, which, by the way, because the Republican Party screwed him the same way the DNC screwed Bernie Sanders, they changed the rules at the last minute to keep Ron Paul's delegates from being able to come in and try some real grassroots ground game. Once they did that

and they handed over to Romney, they offered Ron Paul a speech at the RNC if he would endorse Romney. And he chose not to. In fact, I was there in Florida, in Tampa Bay, and right next to, to the RNC was an entire different festival called Paul Fest. That was just dedicated to Ron Paul. And he chose to say, you know what? I'm not speaking at the RNC. I'm not going to acquiesce and endorse something that doesn't, you know, line with my values. I'm going to go to my people. And that from his 2008 and 2008 and 2012 campaign sparked a major movement. I mean, some people call it the liberty movement, the freedom movement, the volunteerist movement. And I don't mean liberty in terms of the libertarian party. That's a totally separate thing.

But I've been in and around this movement since that time and seen him. people who actually do care about principles, care about values. And we can look at Ron Paul from 30 years ago, same message. His message hasn't changed. He stayed consistent. And so I'm just to want to say that there are examples of people, and I would say Thomas Massey now, who have been around and who chose not to play that game. Sure, he didn't get become president, but he sparked a massive movement of millions of people around the world, not just in America, but people in other countries who have taken the principles of volunteerism and non-aggression principle and non-aggression in terms of anti-war and all these different things. And then Donald Trump came along and sort of tried to

siphon, and I think to some degree did successfully siphon that energy away from that. I've seen a lot of former libertarians who I knew, who I kind of grew up activist with, who were against Bush, against Obama. And because Donald Trump said something about the Federal Reserve here, or he said, oh, we need to find out more about the 28 pages in 9-11. And just in my mind, through a bone to each of these different areas. Now it's going to the Bitcoin conference. It's, we're going to free Ross. It's different things like that that when he got in office, of course, he did none of those

things. And we could go on and on about that. But my point is not everybody who does play that game gives into it. In fact, I think Ron Paul, who thankfully is still around, still preaching the same message, still reaching people. He's not president. But perhaps that's better because as you acknowledge, there are other ways for us to influence culture and influence the world around us.

So I just wanted to make that point that not every politician who goes in there is going to play that game. And for me, that's a big part of it is that politics are chosen over principles every time, pragmatism, politics. Instead of standing by your principles, even if that means you, quote, unquote, lose like RFK could have done if he would have continued on and said, you know what? Trump called me, but I'm not going to go ahead and endorse him because of these different reasons that I've been calling out. And I have no interest in Harris. We're probably going to lose guys, but I'm going to take it as far as I can. he was on the way to being on nearly every single ballot, and they totally destroyed that effort to go, you know, hand it over to Trump. So to me, there's always an opportunity if you are going to

play that game to stick by your principles and to, even if that means you, quote, unquote, lose in the election, you will win in other ways and you can spark a movement that can continue to awaken people. That's what I would have preferred to see from RFK if he was to continue as opposed to what we're seeing now. I agree. The last thing I would say before we move on, I think it'll be fun. We'll unpack kind of the history of Trump and what Trump really is here in a second. But the way that I see it is I agree with you, there's all kinds of other ways that a campaign can go and there's all kinds of other power bases that we can activate as citizens. But I also think that voting takes like literally five minutes. Like voting is so simple. And people do get consumed by following the presidential campaign

and following and arguing and dividing over it. But in a way, what I kind of look at that as is also we're using that as an opportunity now in our free speech platforms and our information space to use what the various candidates are talking about to steer the national conversation in different directions. And so RFK coming onto the scene and bringing the Maha conversation in, had he not done that, chronic disease would not be a discussion point at all whatsoever in America in this presidential race or ever so far. And so in a certain way, we have this opportunity to use the presidential race as a way to steer the talking points towards what we care about. And along the way, we have this five-minute opportunity to exercise our basic right to vote. and it takes no time at all.

And it's just like, vote in for whatever power we want. And we're going to wind up with one of them one way or the other. And so I do understand and I admire people that take the stance of abstaining is a spiritual and sort of a cognitive decision. But I think that in a certain way, it's, I don't, I don't see in my perspective that it cheapens anything else that I'm doing. And I'm using the information space all along the way. And I'm still going to exercise my right to vote as a power tool that is basically, you know,

It takes more than five minutes to even open a live stream these days. So it's like that's so fast to just vote and, and, you know, move the direction one way or the other. And in this election specifically, my personal view of the Kamala space versus the Trump space is that it's so vastly different, the outcomes that we get into that for me, it's a no brainer to choose the Trump. Even if Kennedy had run all the way, I was still on the fence or whether I would just go Trump just because it makes like because of how much better the, world is going to be for truth seekers, we believe, it's hard to say, in a Trump presidency versus a CIA Kamala presidency. So I think it's a good segue now to move into the Trump history and who he really is. Let's get into that. And just one other thing just to mention on that, because I know we're going to come back to it. Yeah, I definitely don't advocate that.

Well, to what you said, yes, I've heard the same thing. Derek, can I do all the solutions you recommend and go vote? If you feel inclined, then go vote. Like you said, it can take you less than five minutes. In my view, though, to be an actually informed voter and not to just assume you actually know Trump or no Kamala Harris, that does take some research. For example, how many Trump supporters have actually read the Republican Party platform under Trump, which calls for censorship against pro-Hamas radicals and things of that sort? I mean, I wrote an article about that recently. I don't think people are actually taking the time. And of course, you could argue, we all know who Trump is at this point. We know who Harris is. But still, generally speaking, I think it does take more than just that five minutes

of going and pressing a button. And also, the problem with voting is people will just go, okay, straight blue, straight red. I'm just vote for my team, right? Regardless of who those people are, you know, that's a whole other discussion. But yes, you can go and vote. And I would encourage those who are going to vote to stay tuned. And I'll share some of my ideas on what you can do outside of voting if you feel the need to do so. Personally, though, I do think it's consenting to a immoral system. I also think the elections have been rigged long before people claiming that the 2020 election was rigged. Like, it's been controlled for quite some time. It's hard for you to fathom that somebody gets up to that level without having, you know, gotten the tap on the shoulder.

But let's go ahead and get it a little bit more into Trump. Thanks, everybody who's tuned in here across both of our channels. Really appreciate it. It looks like we've got 25,000 people listening across the platform. So that's pretty cool. So to me, some of the more obvious things that I point to, well, let's start with this one. The claim that you sort of touched on this, that things will be better under Trump. people say things like, well, we've got a free speech platform under Twitter and X and Elon Musk now.

First of all, people are still being censored on Twitter. That's something people need to acknowledge. People are still being censored. Shadow banning still exists. It's freedom of reach, not freedom of speech necessarily. You know, we've seen that. Also, I mean, I know that I'm grateful for Twitter for whatever it is and has become in some ways. I think it's become an echo chamber really in the last couple years, mostly.

But also, just as a point of fact, I put. post everything I post on Twitter on every other platform. And rarely does it get taken down every now. And then of course, YouTube, they like to do what they do. But just to say that it's not the only place on the internet that we can put this content up. I think there's places like Odyssey, which are much better. Just to make that point, because I hear this often, well, we have this free speech haven now. And that's because of Elon and Trump. Like, it's, I'm still pretty free to post whatever the heck I want on other places on the internet. So I don't think that's, you know, a huge thing to sort of like. I would push back on that a little bit. And we post in different

formats and in different places. But the reason why I started as a short form video creator, especially on TikTok, is because of the massive number of users on TikTok and the massive amount of reach you can have on TikTok, especially with young voters, with young people, with the people that are going to be influencing our country for generations. And short form video is by far the most consumed type of media in our world today. And it is the most censored type of media in our world today. And it was very apparent to me very early on that TikTok is extremely controlled on topics like the CIA, Jeffrey Epstein, Kamala Harris, and anything to do with sort of the mainstream Democrat platform. And moving to X,

that difference is striking. As in I have over, I have like over a million and a half followers on TikTok and I don't even post there anymore because I'm one strike away from being banned. And videos can get banned for any reason. It is completely just AI censorship with no oversight. and I do post on Instagram, but it's not monetized. They don't take down videos on Instagram, which is kind of weird as far as I'm aware. I think they do do some weird algorithm stuff, but, but X versus TikTok is a very obvious discrepancy. And then the other platform, there's a lot of like nuance about which platforms are controlled

in what ways. And X is certainly not perfect. There are people especially, I mean, in my perspective, it's the Zionist posts that are most often, it's posts that are critical of Elon and posts that are critical of Zionism and Israel that seemed to be getting the most heat on X. And I haven't quite gotten to the bottom of what triggers that and how it works, because I have not personally experienced it yet. Well, it could have something to do with Elon going to do an apology tour in Israel.

I don't know. But I hear you, though. I'm not claiming there's no censorship at all. I got a video from like four years ago, just taken down off YouTube a week ago. But my point is that generally speaking, it's not like Twitter is literally the only place on the internet that exists where we can still post content. And that's what I hear from people often saying is like it's this, we've got a free speech platform and we never had that before.

And again, there are more decentralized platforms that exist out there. But so let's talk about the first point that I have in my mind here is this idea that Donald Trump is a peace president. And I think this is one that you brought up maybe in our conversation on Twitter or elsewhere that Donald Trump is a peace president or at least he's an anti-war president or maybe even, you know, because again, the title's lesser of two evils. So people are, some people are willing to hear the criticisms I give, but they'll still say, yes, but Kamala will be worse, which how do we know that? We don't know. I mean, we can sort of guess, right? But there's no way to actually measure that. So I think that's sort of, you know, pointless to say. But we can look at what Trump has done. We can look at what he did in his first term. We can look at who he's supporting. I would point to a few things to push back on this idea that he's a peace president. He dropped more drone

bombs than Obama. A lot of people don't actually realize that. And one of the reason most people don't know that is because Trump also issued an executive order, which ended the counting of drone bombs and ended the requirement where presidents have to actually release numbers of those statistics. So it's pretty much become impossible post-Trump for us to know how much Biden's dropping, for example, how much his administration is doing. And it would be impossible going forward if it was a Harris administration or a Trump administration again. One of those drone bombs that Trump dropped that he ordered killed an American girl, which was the daughter of Anwar Auala who was an American citizen who was suspected of being al-Qaeda terrorist.

Some people believe he was a CIA double operative. He was killed along with his son during the Obama administration. Then in 2017, Trump orders another drone bomb, drone assassination, and that killed his daughter. And again, these are not things I think we should just brush past and say, okay, well, she was a daughter of a terrorist. It's no big deal. We could also look at the assassination of Soleimani, which, again, some people might take the excuse. He's a bad guy.

Trump took out a bad guy from Iran. But if anybody out there who claims to care about the Constitution is conservative, Republican, whatever, if you want to set in a precedent that the American government, the military should just have the ability to assassinate people anywhere in the world, which is what they already believe, I think that's a pretty dangerous precedence, very much not aligned with the Constitution. We also saw how that goes with Julian Assange, their pursuit of him, who he wasn't even American citizen, and going after him.

We saw that Pompeo and others in the CIA discussed trying to assassinate Assange. That's under Trump's administration. And literally just in the last couple days, Trump's on Rogan saying that Pompeo is a good guy. We already mentioned the Zionist support of behind Trump. Trump is running campaign ads right now saying that they're going to bomb Iran for Israel. J.D. Vance is saying we're going to hit him hard. I just don't really see where this idea that he's a peace president is going to come from. And of course, people say, well, he's going to end the war in Ukraine. He's going to bring that to a halt. Maybe. I mean, again, it remains to be seen. But even if that is the case, let's imagine best case scenario, he does do that. But if he goes forward with the

promises of bombing Iran, which, by the way, these have been plans that have been discussed by the Brookings Institution and the Atlantic Council for almost a decade now. And it pretty much seems like these plans are now being moved into action. If Trump were to bomb Iran for Israel, Iran is not just some solo country with no allies that are nobody's going to come to their side. You might get pretty close to a World War III situation that people are constantly afraid of, even if it didn't come from Ukraine and Russia. I think we could expect to see some of those allies that were constantly told are part of this axis of evil come to Iran's support if the U.S. were to intervene or if Israel continues their bombing campaign that they've pretty much already started here. So there's those, I mean,

I could go on to a few more, but I think that kind of outlines my major criticisms in terms of this talk of him being a peace president or that with him, we will avert war. And if we will, we get Harris, it's automatically guaranteed that we're going to war, which maybe, probably, I mean, I'm not, again, I'm not here to defend Harris in any means at all, but we can also look to Trump's record and see and look at his, not just his previous record, but what he's actually currently saying, even with Israel, he said, you got to get it done fast. Finish the job. Finish the job.

And what, you know, let's take that apart. What does finish the job mean? It means continue to kill and bomb people, innocent civilians or otherwise, because Israel makes no distinction. Trump just says, just finish the job, right? And I don't know. I just don't think these. Yeah, exactly, finish the genocide.

I don't think these are things that we should just breeze past. So, you know, what are your thoughts on that? Like, does he actually qualify as an anti-war candidate in your mind? I mean, no, I agree on a lot of these points. And you brought up some really good examples. And I want to not brush over the drone warfare point. I went and grabbed this book that I highly recommend if anyone doesn't know a lot about drone warfare, how everything became war and the military became everything by Rosa Brooks.

It's a story from a woman who, I forget her exact background, but she has a pretty strong legal background. And she was in a couple of the different White House kind of coalitions during the Obama years. And she was heavily involved in how drone warfare became more and more ubiquitous until it kind of became this ongoing secret war that no one was really aware of. And she does a really great analysis of the distinction between like when are you letting everything become warfare and assassination become the name of the game. and it's dark. And it's, and because like what you bring up, Derek, about how now under this new executive order, we don't even have reporting on the number of drone strikes that are happening, that is an egregious offense towards the Constitution and what the Constitution says about how America declares war. And I don't think it's an accident that they are slowly erasing

the lines between warfare and peace times, because that is how you erode the Constitution's protection against keeping America out of pointless wars. So I agree completely about everything you're saying there about drone strikes and about Trump's. I don't know as much as about as you about Trump's history of drone strikes because I was not yet reporting on things during his last presidency. And so I have a ton of catching up to do on Trump's record on that. This is one of my biggest concerns about Trump. And I didn't have this concern nearly as strongly, you know, five months ago. Five months ago, I was just concerned about Trump's support of Zionism and Israel, which is a huge concern on its own. And his rhetoric about Israel has always been atrocious.

and I am not a fan. But now, leading in closer and closer to today, he's been more and more vocal about wanting war with Iran and basically repeating like the clean breaks talking points all the way back from the days of Richard Pearl and pre-9-11, all the way through up till now of like bomb Iran, war with Iran, we need to finish the job and protect Israel. And that leads directly to World War III.

So that's actually in the last month or so has been this huge red flag for me that I'm really concerned about. And there's a lot of people online, especially like the Q side of people that will, you know, throw out this sort of like he's playing a game, he's playing chess, he's sort of like he's projecting strength kind of a perspective. And that's cool. And I hear that. And I do pay attention to those people just to keep a pulse on what every different person's

sort of theories are. But I mean, I don't, you have to have evidence for theories like that or else you're going on a lot of blind faith, right? And I do see some evidence that he has snubed Beebe in the past in ways that are kind of weird relative to his stance on Israel. I've seen video evidence of him playing some games, but I'm deeply concerned about his stance around the entire issue. And I don't feel like I have any strong evidence that I can trust any plan, although I love to make trust the plan jokes because I think they're hilarious. But I don't see any strong evidence that I can trust the plan because his words overtly are very concerning. So I'm I'm with you on 90% of what you just said.

And I do, you know, I try to take a strong dose of, um, of what word am I looking for? Humility, I guess in realizing that I am nowhere near smart enough to unpack, you know, the overt messaging versus the behind the scenes messaging versus the negotiations. There is an argument to be made for you have to project strength in order to prevent war. But the difference between projecting strength to prevent war and projecting strength and getting pulled into war is a very fine line that you don't necessarily even have control. rollover, even if you are Trump and you really do want to overt war, you might not be able to

avert it because you put yourself out there in a way that you can get played and then get called out on your quote-unquote bluff. So I'm quite with you on the war. The war point. Yeah. I appreciate all those points, man. It's definitely to me one of the more worrying elements of what's going on. And I know this is not what you're doing, which is why I'm glad we're having this conversation. But you mentioned the Q&A and the trust the plan. Those people are still out there. I've gone to those rabbit holes. I don't come up with anything that's worth following. But there's also people who sort of do what you said there that he's playing games. He's playing chess. You're just stuck in checkers, all the sort of memes and comments who've heard. Sure, in the realm of all possibilities,

could that be true? Yes, anything's possible. But we only have the evidence that we have in front of us. We have the relationship someone has. We have the people that are being funded by. We have, in the case of Trump decisions he made in the first administration. And that's really what I'm basing it on. You mentioned a book there, which I think is, I look forward to checking out. I want to mention another one for anybody who hasn't kind of gone down this road in the drone world pre-Trump, which led to what Trump continued, because this is, in my view, how these things happen. They pass the baton from one side to the other, right? So, for example, just as one more immediate example, people are familiar with this new DOD directive that's been going around that just came out during the Biden administration that it does make some changes and says that there could be lethal force used against American citizens. So people are pointing that and saying, look, oh my God, this is Biden. See, this is an example of how Biden's an authoritarian and Trump isn't. But what we actually see in the past is that one administration, one party will implement a policy and perhaps do nothing with it. But it's there. It's on the books. And then the next administration, maybe from a different party, comes in and then they use that or they advance it. We could look to the 2011 National Defense Authorization Act where Obama allowed, codified, indefinite detention of American citizens. These things have all been put into place over the last,

decades going back to the 90s and sort of demonizing Americans who care about freedom. So the reality is that all the pieces have been put into place. So if Trump did want to go authoritaine or Harris or anybody else or even somebody we haven't met yet, who hasn't even come into the picture yet, all the pieces are there and they could be used. And so I say that to say there's a great book called The Assassination Complex by journalist Jeremy Scajo, who's done some of the best work on the whole drone assassination complex, the drone war. And of course, we should shout out, what is his name? I'm missing his name right now. Daniel, he's a whistleblower who did the drone papers. He's the one who first really revealed to us. He's

the reason we even know so much about the drone program right now. Sorry, I'm forgetting his name, but he's now out of prison, but he went to prison for a couple of years during the Obab administration for releasing the drone papers. And that is one of the first ways we learned. Daniel Hill, exactly. How that whole program works. And then that led to Trump coming in. Trump going from, like people used to say Obama was the drone king when he was in office. I think Trump was the drone emperor. He took it to a whole new level. I can send you some links where I'm pulling those stats from when we're done. And then as I mentioned, issued the executive order, which ensured that we never really would know what's going on after that point. So that is a big

part that people often forget. And some of the kind of pushback all here where people say, well, at least it's drones and it's not American soldiers, you know, with feet on the ground. So that means it's quote unquote no war. He didn't start any new wars. But he did bomb Syria, based on a false flag gas attack. He did assassinate Soleimani on some other country's, you know, sovereign territory. And he dropped more drone bombs than Obama, as far as we even know from the records that do exist, that is still war. I mean, that's a huge part of the way that the future of warfare now.

It's not all about putting men on the ground anymore. I mean, that's one piece of it, but it's more about AI, drones, facial recognition, these, you know, technocratic tools. And in the process of that, as I've already outlined, innocent people do get killed. So I just, you know, I hope anybody hearing that will maybe think more about that next time you say that Donald Trump is a peace president. We should briefly pause to and point out the fact around this drone warfare topic that when you put that concept together with what you're seeing come out of Elon's companies and robots walking out, you know, onto the stage, cars driving themselves, you're starting to get into a world where warfare is automated by AI. It is targeting anyone who is labeled a terrorist, which is very quickly becoming people like. us that are speaking out. And it is being done without oversight. And that is far more scary to me

than open warfare with boots on the ground. In the old days, they had to do a false flag attack. They had to trick the entire American public into endorsing a war and getting Congress to vote for it. And today, that is no longer the case. They can just send an automated, like undefeatable robot to just go and and, you know, kill anyone they want anywhere around the world, except obviously they would never do that within the United States ever under any like they would never even think to do I'm sure it'll never come home I'm sure it will never be used here it'll never have blowback so yeah yeah and you made some great points that kind of lead us to the next topic I want to get into first just to mention I mean the AI this is exactly how

Israel is running their their program they're using the lavender program which you know you can go look into Peter Palantir and that kind of leads me to the next part like Trump being supported and funded by Peter Thiel who of course co-founder of Palantir connection to PayPal, steering committee member of the Bilderberg group, and then also Donald, excuse me, also Elon Musk, who's now openly campaigning for him. And you just sort of touched on this. I mean, Elon is with, people don't really understand that they just think of Starlink and they think of SpaceX as just, he's doing fun things out there. He's trying to get us to Mars. Elon's Musk's entire wealth is built off of government subsidies and contracts with the military

industrial complex. And I just put in my new article that's over at the Last American Vagabond, a reminder to people who weren't paying attention post-9. I didn't wake up till 2009, so I learned later. But there was a program called Total Information Awareness that was initiated after 9-11. It was an office of information awareness. And at that time, back in 2003, there was enough, you know, wherewithal within Americans to realize this sounds pretty crazy. In fact, the logo for the office was literally the pyramid with the all-see and I looking over the earth. And they talked about putting satellites around the planet in order to be able to monitor things in real time and be able to track and trace people.

and now Elon Musk is doing very similar things with the Starlink satellites, which I know Starlink provides internet for people in places where they wouldn't have, you know, there's the obvious potential positives, which is how these things usually happen. You can point to some good things, but then maybe you see, you don't see the bigger picture of how it's actually funding warfare. I mean, Starlink is helping the Ukraine war. So he's contributing to war, no matter which side of that you fall on. And I'm very worried about his sort of stepping into this role as some like new hero for the so-called freedom movement when he's promoting chips and brains or he's promoting transhumanism merging with AI.

I mean, he's literally saying almost everything that Klaus Schwab is saying, but promising that it'll be for the good of us. And then is literally funded through the military industrial complex and his tools are helping advance the war machine that we're talking about. And just before I kind of back off Musk and get your opinions, I want to also say that this is one of the reasons why myself and Whitney Redd, Webb and Ryan Christian and a number of other journalists have formed the independent media alliance for those who've seen that because we believe that there is whether through, you know,

controlled opposition, paid operatives, and I'm not saying that's what you are, or people who just have different opinions, but from our perspective are falling, you know, astray and kind of falling to dead ends, that there should be some sort of coordinated, organized pushback from journalists specifically against these narratives that we see is false, that Elon Musk now is the hero. to save us, ignore all the things I just mentioned. He's promoting Trump. He's trolling the libs. You know, he posts funny things on Twitter.

I feel like the bar has been set so low now that people are just like, yeah, but Trump is mean to the media. So I want to vote for him. Or he's mean to the people that I know are bad. So I'll ignore the rest of the things. Or Elon says he posts funny memes and that's enough. And that allows some people to just ignore the red flags, as you mentioned, like that do pop up. When we get into Donald Trump, we get into Elon Musk. and of course Peter Thiel. Now, Musk is in a steering committee member of the Bilderberg group,

but obviously he is a very influential and powerful person. And Peter Thiel, though, is a steering committee member of the Bilderberg group. And that's another fact that I don't think we can just breeze past just like with the genocide going on in Gaza. The Bilderberg group has been immensely influential behind the scenes. And I know you know this, but for anybody else who's kind of woken up the last couple years, just a decade ago, the Bilderberg group was still a secret. They didn't have a public website. They didn't put out a list of topics. and a list of people. It was journalists like Jim Tucker back in the day, Alex Jones, a little bit in the early days as well, and then others who were literally showing up and finding the locations

and going and confronting politicians and documenting. Look here, this prime minister was here. This reporter was here. This person from, you know, this organization or whatever, that exposed it to the point that they had to talk about it. And then you had Charlie Skelton, the only mainstream journalist at The Guardian who was reporting on it. He's still the only person who consistently does talk about it. But now the Bilderberg group has a public face. They've got a website. They'll put their attendees out there and they put a very generalized list of topics, Russia, AI, Iran, whatever. But that would have never happened if it weren't for the work of activists and journalists exposing them.

They are, I don't think they're the top of the pyramid, but they absolutely are representatives of whoever's behind them. And we know Kissinger was deeply involved until his death. And so the fact that you have the steering committee members of the Bilderberg group like Peter Thiel, funding Donald Trump, and yes, to be fair, Eric Schmidt, former CEO of Google funding Harris. And so Alex Karp, also steering committee member of the Bilderberg group, co-founder of Palantir with Peter Thiel, also funding Harris. It's on both sides. It's, you know, the Zionists and the Bilderberg technocrats are on both sides.

So those, that's another to me, a big piece of the picture is looking at Peter Thiel's influence. You could also look at how Peter Thiel essentially funded the rise of J.D. Vance. So if they do win and Trump retires, you know, then Vance is next in line, right? And so Peter Thiel's steering committee, the Bilderberg group, they continue to have that influence, even post-Trump. So those are some of my major concerns as far as those two gentlemen and the sort of technocrat aspect of this. It's a great point. And I think it's worth highlighting that, and I don't know if I've ever even gotten to say this on camera, too, is that one of the biggest reasons why I have such respect for your work and for Whitney Webb's work and for several of these other journalists that are aligned with you guys is because you guys represent what real. journalism is and always was and is desperately still needs to be, which is holding the powerful

to account all, like all the powerful to account, not picking aside and saying, I'm on Trump's side and I'm going to hold the other people to account. I'm on this side. I'm going to hold the other people to account is reporting on all the powerful people and holding them all to account. And it's a very black-pilling kind of a space to be in because the world is so effed right now. And it's, A, it's not popular. B, you piss off everyone on every side. So it's like you don't, in this new world of likes and clicks and subscribers and, you know, social media, it's a deeply unpopular place to be. And inevitably, you have to stick to your guns in a way that makes you lose followers. It makes you lose revenue. It makes you lose opportunities. And I think that your guys's stance is not sung.

You guys don't get enough praise for sticking to your guns as you should because Witteweb is a good example where she became like the darling of this whole truth or movement when she published this. But then her new work since that has come out is holding everyone else, like holding Trump to account, holding Musk to account, calling out all these other things along with yourself and the other people on your guys' teams. And that suddenly then all the people that were on Whitney's side then turn their back on her and call her a shill or call her control opposition or all this other bullshit. And that is inherently like partisan bullshit. And we need journalists that are going to do that job even when it's unpopular because that's always

been what journalism is about. So I just want to give a quick shout out to that job because it's unsummed. And it's amazing. I appreciate that. Just real quick, I just want to mention that, and I know we'll get into this, that we're not blackpilled in case anybody that is what anybody. I know that's not what you're saying, but that's what we do get. So we're not black pilled, but we'll get into that more later.

And thanks for those kind of words. Zooming your content because. you know, on surface level, it's easy to get this like, oh, there's no hope vibe. But the more you dig into it, the more you find hope, the more you build hope, the more you find and build solutions, right? Absolutely. I think I'm alluding to, right? And so I would, I think the only piece I would add on to there is sort of where I see my role in the media space right now is, A, I see myself as being nowhere near as intelligent as most of you guys that are doing the real work and have been doing it for decades. And so I know that, like, I know my depth and I know when I'm out of my depth. And I know

that I have a lot to learn before I can truly understand the mechanations of a lot of these more complex, deep discussions. But also, I think that my talent base does not lie in the true skills of a journalist. And like, people call me the deep dive guy, but that's not actually what I'm good at. What I'm good at is making videos that are accessible to huge numbers of people. What I'm good at is communicating somewhat complex ideas in a way that they become fun, digestible microbyte stories that everyone can watch. And we can suddenly have a million in views on a video about P. Diddy in a way that is getting the word out. And so I see myself more as a bridge than an actual journalist. I'm not really an investigative journalist. I'm a journalism

communicator. And so I see my role as being different. And so I kind of intentionally take a different place in the media landscape. And that's why I try to follow people like your work. And I try to follow people on both sides of the political island, kind of in every space so that as best as I can, as I learn what's going on, I can be a bridge that can help to convey the important work that all the journalists are doing to the wider audiences. And I think that, you know, there's downsides to that, there's upsides to that. It comes to compromises. But no, I appreciate the distinction there. And it's not something that I try to harp on too much because I don't think it's totally necessary, but I do think, and this is maybe something the audience out there isn't that good at discerning,

because you clearly have an understanding of the role you play and how you see yourself in your mind. And I think that people make the mistake of assuming anybody with the YouTube channel is a quote unquote journalist where there's a very different distinction between that. And I've even had some of my colleagues who are amazing on what they do say that what you do speaking to me is different from what I do. Because I do, I did go to Epstein's house. I do go on the ground and interview the lawyers investigating Epstein. I do try to put time on the ground. I think that's what real old school journalism comes from picking up a phone, calling people, checking the sources, emailing, doing that. That's not something that everybody does or needs to do.

Like you said, you're reaching way more people than I do with your different approach, which is something that, you know, I appreciate when the truth is getting out there. And then there's people like Ryan Christian. He'll do like these deep dive three, four hour podcasts and just tear apart the truth from every angle. And people love that as well, right? And then there's Whitney writing 10,000 word articles and huge tombs. And so everybody's playing a different role. I do think it is important, though, for those out there, of course, to always critically think.

Don't just blindly trust me. don't blinding trust Ian or anybody else, but just to understand that there are differences in the approaches and the things that we're trying to do and the way that we communicate these ideas and these truths. That's why this talk is so cool is because it's a good example of how we need these different people in the different spheres working together and communicating and discussing what we disagree on,

explaining to each other was like, this is why I said that and this is the evidence for it. And here, now you can communicate that. It's like we need more cooperation amongst each other and far less of like calling each other CIA assets because you know the CIA assets expose themselves over time and even if you are a CIA asset that's okay come and help you know help me spread the truth and the day that you try to expose the day you try to mislead us we'll all look at that and be like huh that's not a good take bro why are you saying that right because I think that inevitably you know

we are the primary target for subversion this media space this decentralized journalism space so there is There are subversive actors in the space. But I don't worry so much about who they are because I just worry about trying to get everyone thinking for themselves and working together to create consensus about what we think the truth is. And when we're doing that and we're critical of everyone in the space, we wind up sort of like self-selecting for the greatest truth as long as we stay collectively all working

instead of just getting complacent and playing all these name-calling games and whatever. Yeah, I'll just add to that before we move on to another section. We'll be wrapping up soon here, everybody. But I mean, obviously we could keep going. There's so much to get into. But I definitely want to get into COVID-1984 and Trump's, you know, positions in there. But just to add to what you're saying, I also don't spend my time going into who's controlled opposition. You've been called controlled opposition.

I've been called controlled opposition. And I do think, and not even that I think, we know for a fact going back to Cointel Pro that governments do infiltrate activist movements. We know because of the Snowden files that they. They create fake online personas on Twitter, on Facebook, on YouTube, on probably every platform you can think of. And this is their own words to dissuade, to disrupt, to delay, and to divide. Like that is absolutely a fact out there. So none of us have the documents that show this influencer, this influencer, this influencer.

I think many of us have suspicions and feelings. I tend to sort of, I trust people as far as I can see them. I can work with you and collaborate with you. And that's fine to have different opinions. But I do get more suspicious of people when I see them going. in different directions. And I would not, I would be lying if in the back of my mind, I don't, you know, I didn't say that I believe there has been a huge operation going on the last eight years, a co-opting of the freedom movement involving Trump to bring people towards him and take

that sort of energy of that I was describing from Ron Paul and even the Bernie Sanders movement. People disenfranchised with the system. Even go further back, you know, that was happening around Occupy Wall Street. That was people who were pissed off about the banking crisis, right? So there's all this momentum that's been building. And then Trump comes in and plays pop says enough things, throws a bone to this crowd, this crowd. And, you know, all the people hate him, right? And it's, again, this low level thinking, people are like, oh, the people I don't like, don't like this guy. So he must be my friend. And I don't think that's very logical, necessarily. And I saw, to my view, there is a co-opting of the freedom movement going on.

I don't claim to know who, which influencers. I know, I mean, let's just be real. There are people who are suspicious of your rise of how quick you've gained views. I don't think, I don't think that's necessarily, it automatically indicates anything, right? Because I'll also see sort of low level thinking where people will say, if something's been censored, then it must be true. And if something's still on YouTube, then clearly it's control and it's fake. And neither one of those are inherently true. Yes, it could be the case that censored information has been censored because it's factual and they don't want you to know. But also, sometimes the social media companies overstep their bounds and they censor things that don't need to be censored. And I know this is difficult for some people to imagine.

People do lie. They make shit up. They do. They do. They do. do promote fake news. They actually do put out fake garbage. They monetize your clicks. They keep you in this state of fear. And so, you know, that's a whole other discussion. But my point is, knowingly and unknowingly too. Oh, absolutely. Sometimes there are people who are being paid. I do think there are influencers and people who saw, like you were pointing out a moment ago, it's not a very financially lucrative position to be in the place where we're calling out all different sides, because then we get attacked from all different sides. But I do think there are certain influencers and content creators who recognize,

hmm, when I say positive things about Trump, I sure do get a lot of views and clicks from that particular crowd. And if you were somebody who is strictly financially incentivized, monetarily incentivized, and if your content is monetized, mine never has been, then you might say, perhaps I'll lay off some of the Trump criticisms and start focusing on the things that I think make him look better and your following could grow and things like that.

I think there has absolutely been coordinated efforts using concepts like fifth generation warfare, the idea that social media is the battlefield now, our mind is the battlefield, and other people who may genuinely just believe those things and who are kind of following whatever they hear, or following their own gut or whatever. But I do think we can't deny that there is some element of infiltration. And that's not to say that there isn't maybe CIA programs trying to send people towards Kamala because they absolutely want to navigate the different pathways that they send us on.

And they've studied human psychology to the point that they understand that if I put this thing out there, that's going to trigger this crowd and make them react in these ways. And if I put this thing out there, this crowd will embrace it and they'll think X, Y, and Z, right? We should not underestimate the power that the intelligence networks, particularly the Israeli intelligence networks, the UK and the U.S. have studied our minds and our reactions and our behaviors. Yeah, I agree 100%.

Yeah. And I think the best immunization against that is that everyone now in the centralized media landscape that we used to inhabit, you were able to. give over your trust to the media agencies and the journalists working at them for them to tell you the truth. And we all found out how well that worked. And you know, back in the day, there were more real journalists. People like Gary Webb, rest his soul. But like these days more, once, you know, as the empires grew in power and money and wealth, they realized that they could buy all of that. And they could subvert all of that and they did very well. But today in the decentralized media

space, there is a new paradigm and it requires us to all take on new responsibility because no longer Can you trust a different, you know, someone else centralized to give you the truth? You have to, we all have to do it for ourselves now. And so now in this new world, the best immunization against the co-intel pro and against the sciops and against all the deception is to just understand that you have to think very critically for yourself. You have to not assume you know everything. You have to not put anyone on a pedestal and not trust any influencer to be good or bad.

You just have to look at everything and understand that you could be wrong. People could be lying to you. People could be deceived themselves. you know, it is what it is. We try our best and we'll all get better together. I mean, that's, unless anyone else has better solutions. That's what I, that's where I see. Critical thinking is the key. You said it there. So, all right, well, let's talk about one more area of Trump before we focus on the sort of wrap up question, which is where our second interaction went to, which is this idea of abstaining from elections. And, you know, I think you said,

abstaining from choosing is not bravery. And we'll get into that as we wrap up here. And again, thanks to everybody who's tuned in and who is enjoying this. conversation. Hopefully you're learning because this is why we both agreed to come together and share these ideas. The other big area that I think Trump still takes a lot of heat from, and I think rightfully so, is the COVID-1984 operation. Now, we know that Donald Trump, this is something I pointed on the past, that his administration's first administration, even prior to COVID, was very friendly to big pharma. He appointed Alex Azar for Secretary of Department of Health and Human Services. Of course, he comes from Big Pharma background. And I will preface this,

saying, I know now Trump has said, well, I got fooled even in the Rogan interview. He's like, well, I put some bad people in there, but now that RFK, this goes back to the RFK conversation, now that RFK is there, he's going to help make sure that doesn't happen. Again, to me, just promises from a known liar, somebody who broke promises, forgot all about who WikiLeaks was once he got into office, things like that. But Alex Azar is just one example. Comes from Eli Lilly, you know, big corporate background. But then going into COVID, he appoints Moncef Slawe as the head of Operation Warp Speed. This guy comes from Pfizer, comes from Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation,

GlaxoSmithKline, you know, coming from all the things that many people in this general freedom movement have been concerned about and have pushed back against. And up until this point, and even more specifically, let me say, Monsef Slawe was involved with companies like Galvani Bioelectronics, which I did some research on. And this is a company promoting implantable devices, implantable chips, injectable devices, things like that. These are the kind of people that he brought into office, not to mention Trump did also issue an executive order in 2019, which streamlined GMO regulations. It's called the modernizing the regulatory framework for agricultural biotechnology products. We could go on there, but obviously COVID is kind of the big thing. The promoting and the endorsing of the shots still to this day has not acknowledged that people have been injured by the shots, still has not said he made a mistake by, you know, helping them rapidly. come out. And of course, the Q&Hors will say, no, he, he was preventing the, the, the,

um, COVID camps by getting the shot out as quick as possible, right? This is, you've heard the same things I have. So outside of those excuses, which we have no evidence for, this guy is still up into this point, a week before the next election, not changing his mind about it, not, you know, kind of, I don't know if his ego will allow him to say, I made a mistake and do, did something wrong. We're going to do better next time. Your thoughts on that. Like, how do you, you know, you know, you know, get around that whole issue? I don't really get around it. And I do, I will say that I have heard the same sort of like, like, it's not just

Q conspiracies. It's like this whole other like branch of theories about Trump. And I've seen people with the evidence for it. And I've intentionally never taken the time to dig into it. Because I just know from the outside how much hours of research it'll take to really get to the bottom of a whole that, you know, dark and conspiratorial if it is true or not. So I don't know if there's any evidence there or not. But, you know, I listen and I just see what people are saying.

and I don't act or think like I don't base my opinion on it because I only base my opinion on what I have evidence of. And what I have evidence of is what you're saying is that Trump is atrocious about his stance on COVID. And I think you're you hit the nail on the head when you talked about his ego. And I think that, you know, by now most of us have a pretty strong grasp on Trump's character and his personality. And, you know, it's funny. And there's there's some, there's a lot that is smeared about him that I don't have a problem. You know, I admire parts of Trump for sure. But, um, I think that he's, his ego is a great detriment to him in this regard in the sense that COVID. He talked about in the Joe Rogan interview, how COVID apparently he says derailed his economic turnaround, like his best

economy of all time, and then COVID ruined those numbers for him. So I think that if what he's saying is, you know, true in any regard, he has this huge chip on his shoulder of like that COVID thing ruined my reputation. So I can't also admit that that was a mistake because then I would have not, like everything would then be a mistake. But you're right that everything he did during COVID, everything he did during his administration was basically straight businessman and for pro the corporate overlord community. I am more, I think I'm maybe more sympathetic than you are at this point to the fact that I don't think Trump really realize. So actually, let's rewind one step. The whole theory that Trump is a big controlled operation op, like that Trump is a part of something bigger to co-op the right

and to co-op the populist movement, that is something that I entertain. Um, and, and And my perspective on that on Trump being like an even worse bad actor, I just look at that as like, if that's true, we are so fucked and up against such a big and powerful and complex foe that I'm just going to have to take that data point when we see evidence for it in his next campaign, in his next presidency and just basically like take a huge deep breath and get ready for even worse. Because the level of complexity, like of having like a bullet whizz past his ear that's fake. of having like just all the various things that have sort of like added up to they don't want Trump for all of that to be fake is mind boggling and I am open to it but I don't really act off of it. So when I look at Trump and his stance on vaccines and his stance on how he entered like what he says about how he entered office and didn't have he was unprepared and didn't know anyone in DC and basically just started appointing his friends from the business community because that's

what he knows. I am inclined to take that at you know relatively phased. value because it aligns with what we do know about him and it is certainly what we saw him do and it's not a good thing it's not an excuse for what he did but it does sort of switch it in my mind from he is like some pro big pharma shill to he made some huge mistakes that and he was deeply manipulated and unprepared for office and is too egotistical to admit that to the extent that we would hope for as American citizens. That's my current most likely scenario that there. And having RFK come in helps me in that regard a lot, but you're right that he's not made any public commitments about RFK being involved. He's not made any like open, you know, there's a lot of gray area

about what exactly is RFK going to be able to do on this and where are we going to see this reconciliation? And I'm not decided. I don't like it. But I do feel as though I like it a lot more than Kamala on the COVID stance specifically because the Democrat campaign is just I mean I don't want to turn it into he said like into now you know it's like the reverse TDS syndrome on that because Trump deserves plenty of criticism for his handling of COVID but I do give him a you know a little chip for RFK being so ready to burn his platform to the ground burn his whole life to the ground over speaking up about COVID publishing books about Anthony Fauci etc naming Nicole Shanahan who has a vaccine injured child herself.

I think that all of that has pushed the conversation so far that I'm willing to give a little bit of that credit to Trump now that he is letting that conversation infiltrate or like, you know, be adopted by his platform and his campaign. So I'm, you know, it is what it is. Yeah. Yeah. Don't forget everybody who gave Anthony Faucian award on his last day in office. Donald Trump did for his great service.

So yeah, like just a couple of points there. I personally am more of the mind that the shooting was staged to some degree. And obviously with the full caveat that I don't claim to know how, I know there's a lot of people who've spent more time looking at camera angles and this and that. I wrote an article in like the first 24 hours and just had a lot of questions and looked at it for a few days, but have since moved on. But to me, this is one way I tend to judge things. And it's not always, it's led me to positive places.

It's led me towards facts, let's say. when COVID came around, if COVID was just what they told us, it just, oops, virus popping up out of nowhere, random thing, you know, pay no attention to labs or pre-planning with, you know, all the event 201 and stuff like that, if that was the case, and that's what we're being told, you know, that the accidental view of history, well, it sure seemed like that accidental event definitely favored all the agendas of the predator class with digital IDs and advancing this and control. And so that's one of the ways I tend to approach thing is like, if an incident seems to just check off all the boxes for agendas that we know exist, that makes me very suspicious of it, even if I can't necessarily prove what did or didn't happen, right? And that's one of the things I see with the Trump, the first shooting thing and then the alleged second assassination, that it literally deified Trump in the eyes of many people, some who were already looking at Trump as God emperor or whatever, but you know, the picture of him down and looks like praying position and all this stuff like, and even people, that's when

Elon and others came out fully in support of Trump. Like to me, if you were writing the script, you couldn't have written it any better. Now, again, I don't claim to know how that happened, whatnot. But this is something I've been calling out since Trump was first elected that I, again, I think this was been a long play to build him up. First, what you do is you attack him for Russia, Russia, Russia, he's racist, all these kind of things. I do think Trump is a crude guy and he's ignorant in a lot of areas.

But we all know that they, the left-leaning media, many elements of the government, for whatever reason, we're definitely attacking him for false things initially. So then what happens is the people who support him or even, let's just say, centrist people and even former progressives start to look and they're like, huh, I don't know. The things they're telling me don't actually line up with reality. Maybe I shouldn't trust this corporate media anymore, which is generally speaking a good thing. But what if the intelligence operations wanted that? You go back to the Bilderberg meeting of 2017 and they said we were entering into the post-truth world. And that could be video, audio, fakery, deep fakes, things like that. But I also think they are purposely spreading disinformation campaigns. not even the ones that we sort of think of, but things that favor our views and confirm our biases so that people see, like, we're, oh, we're winning, we're pushing back against this. All the bad people hate this guy, so he must be a good person. Now they're literally trying to kill him.

They're trying everything they can to get rid of him. You build him up as this populist hero, despite everything that we've already gone over today that he's involved in and the people who are funding him, which at best, in my view, is like the right-leaning technocrats versus the left-leaning technocrats. Like, maybe that's the best we can hope for in the current system, billionaire technocrats versus billionaire technocrats pick your side.

But in my view, that has been a long play that has been building up to get us to this point now where people say, like, well, what else do we have? And just to reiterate to anybody in the comments, I'm not saying, and nobody who has my view or that I'm aligned with is saying Kamala Harris is a better option or anything like that. We're going to wrap up today with talking about, well, what else do we do? But I just think that's an important point to mention. And there was one other thing you said as far as, oh, yeah, us being that we're so fucked if these things are true about Trump.

I totally disagree with that, man. I think that this is a sad state of affairs that many people do fall into. I see this comment often where people will say, I'm here you, Derek. I'm with you. I'm with you. Like, I see those things. But if that's true, then we are screwed. Then everything's hopeless.

And I think that is that that's the real learned helplessness that has been taught into our minds, is that only through the political system and only by following these people who are placed in front of us, can we ever hope to achieve real liberty? real freedom for humanity because for me I'm thinking like internationally worldwide freedom not just what's going on the U.S. obviously the U.S. is where I'm born, where I'm from and what happens in the U.S. will affect the rest of the world. But I just think we can do we can do better than that. We don't have to bring ourselves down to the level of saying like, whoa, I'm going to support him even though I see all these other bad things. I get it. There's never going to be a perfect candidate that

totally aligns with everything you believe and people think they need to make compromises. That's where I sort of diverge. And I don't, I think that, you know, takes away from us. being rooted in our principles and our foundation. And for me, I believe in individual liberty. I believe in bodily autonomy. I believe you own yourself and that nobody else does own yourself. And everything that springs from all those different values. And so when I see people come along, that's the measure that I judge them by is like, are they respecting that individual liberty?

We haven't even talked about how Trump is also talking about jailing people who are burning the American flag, talking about deporting pro-Hamas radicals, including people who are foreign exchange students who are here, who may potentially become naturalized Americans who could do good for this country, who see what's going on in Israel, and maybe even come from countries who were harmed by Israel's actions, and he's talking about deporting them. There's already reports of students, PhD students, Stanford and elsewhere,

who are potentially facing deportation, and Trump's not even in office yet, right? So I just, I see all these things, and I think that taking that idea that, well, we're screwed, or fucked without him or some other hero to come along, it's just setting us up for failure because they will, they, the big they, the predator class, will always prop up some new hero. I guarantee you there's going to be another populist movement after this, unless Trump really is the last president, as some people believe, that will come up and that will, you know, promise the whole world to everybody and then we'll eventually do what Bernie Sanders did, do what RFK did, and sell out and endorse the candidate, Clinton, Biden, Trump, whatever. That's why I point to Ron Paul is kind of a unique thing because he didn't go that route.

That doesn't mean, you know, maybe that was a controlled movement too. But that led to millions of people actually recognizing that there isn't freedom in government and that perhaps there are alternative ways for us to organize our life. Perhaps there is liberty outside of just following politicians who are not really anti-war, who are not really freedom of speech. They're freedom of speech. He's freedom of speech for his people unless you say something bad about Israel, unless you, you know, burn the American flag.

And things like that that we know are the bedrock, the foundation of American freedoms and values in the Constitution for anybody who still cares about that. So much of what he says and represents, even outside of the Russia, Russia, Russia, all the other things that the left likes to scream about, just looking at the facts, looking at what he's done. It's hard for me to then still say, all right, but he's our best bet we got.

And that's all we got left. So that's kind of my final thought on Trump. I'll let you close out before we talk about the final thing about abstaining from voting and it will be done here today. There is one more huge piece that we don't have time to give nearly the time deserves, but we really can't have this discussion about Trump and about what he really is without talking about sex trafficking and sexual blackmail. And we can go into this as deeply or as shallowly as you want, but the current border situation and what is being exposed by people like Ryan Mata

and J.J. Carroll and other documentaries and journalists about the absolute, shall we say, operation that our government is currently involved in at, you know, the direct order of the Democrat Party currently in office is the largest sex trafficking operation the world has ever known. And that sex trafficking operation is clearly tied to the criminal underworld, the black market, and the sexual blackmail, the purveyors of sexual blackmail, which we know our intelligence agencies like the Mossad and the CIA. And so A, what Trump is, Trump's stance on the border has always been strong. And what Trump will do for the border is a very important piece of conversation for the immediate future of America and American citizens like in the next three years talking about

potential kinetic violence on the ground in our country. Closing the border is an essential piece of the conversation here. But beyond that, I think there's a really important conversation that we won't have time to do any real depth on, but the nature of the sexual blackmail industry and blackmailing politicians and blackmailing our entire power elite and how that is currently being exposed. And I think people immediately go to Epstein in their minds, but I'm actually referring to Diddy and what is happening in high. Hollywood and the music industry around the Diddy case. And I'm not claiming like, I think there are a lot of people on the internet that go to like the full queue on like like it's all controlled and Trump is a part of this exposing network.

And it's like I don't, I don't know. I'm not. That's not what I'm trying to say. What I'm trying to say is that the exposure of Diddy that is currently unraveling like right now as we speak new evidence is being leaked every day. And I think that the Diddy thing is messy in a way that cannot be put there. A lid cannot be put on the. ditty thing in the same way that the Epstein files were kind of covered up and contained. And I think that we are in the process of watching a huge portion of the illegal

Zog and military industrial complex control network through sexual blackmail being exposed. And I think that as that Hollywood celebrity, like, you know, music culture crumbles around, that ties to the Democrat Party. It ties to a lot of Republicans too. it ties to many of these controlled political actors. And I think that we are in the process of watching a huge shift of power happen in American politics. And I think that Trump plays a really unique role, whether or not he has anything to do

with the current exposure happening, his history in the black male world, his history related to Epstein is this vast, like, richness of complex questions that people will misinterpret in both directions. They'll have great arguments in both sides. And I'm not saying that we need to discuss it all right now. I'm just saying that the border and sex trafficking and sexual blackmail is another big part of people's decision making process around this election. And everyone should get as educated as they can about Trump's actual history, like his history with Roy Kohn, his history of, you know, people like with Anan Khashoggi, for example, in his ancient history with Epstein, as well as his more present day history and sort of really

try to assess for yourself what you think Trump's involvement is, what he does and does not know, and why or why are, like, why is he being treated the way he's being treated in the modern media landscape? You bring up a lot of good points there, man. And like you said, we don't have the full capacity here in this. Maybe we'll do another talk specifically about that. But a couple of points that come up, this is one of the areas where I do see Trump supporters, you know, because I've seen all the different talking points come up, that Trump did more than any

other president to go after human trafficking. People will point to the executive order that he issued, for example, that I'm sure you're familiar with. I actually did a fact check of this back in 2019 called Have Human Trafficking Prosecutions Increased under Trump and looked into the data. And actually prosecution of child sex traffickers plummeted under Trump, went way down. And I also see people trying to make this false equivalency that because Epstein was arrested during Trump's administration, he had something to do with it. We just discussed how big Trump's ego is. If Trump had anything to do with it, he would be shouting that. that from the rooftops. Now, often, in fact, my interview is used to make that point. I did an

interview with the lead attorney, Bradley Edwards, back in 2018, was before Epstein got arrested when he was prosecuting one of his civil cases. And I went to Florida and I interviewed him directly. And he did tell me that when he was investigating Trump back in the early two, excuse me, Epstein back in the 2000s, Donald Trump was the only person who picked up the phone and he said, and he provided evidence that checked out or provided information that checked out and I was able to corroborate. So yes, that's a fact. That's what he told me. Now, you listen to the full interview. He also said things like he could never confirm the story that Trump kicked Epstein out of Maralago, which is a big thing people claim. I've followed that story down to the two sources that claim it and there's really no

hard evidence that backs that up. It seems more likely their relationship severed over a real estate deal gone bad. But the point is even whenever Edwards was calling Trump in terms of Epstein, this was after everybody knew that Epstein was hardly under investigation. So I wouldn't be surprised if many of Epstein's old friends, whether or not Trump was involved with anything untoward or not, would then be like, hey, yeah, I don't know that guy. Here's everything I got on him. But as you said, you go back, you can find articles from the 90s of Trump talking about his relationship with Epstein and early 2000s and relationship to Bill Gates and all these things that I still think a huge part of the Trump movement, especially the Q movement, completely ignore

the depth of that relationship. And you mentioned Roy Cohn. Obviously, we talked about Whitney Webb in her book. I still think that there's so many people who have their blinders on when it comes to that. And there was Katie Johnson, a woman who did accuse Trump of rape. Now that she had some connections, there was like Hillary Clinton was trying to promote it. There's some things there to explore and to dissect. I covered this in a 2018 documentary called Bringing Down Jeffrey Epstein that people can find at my website. My point is, I think you're correct that there is much more to talk about that, probably from both sides of the equation. But I do think from my perspective,

so many of the Trump supporters turn a blind eye and immediately dismiss things when people bring up the numerous videos showing them spending time together, showing them pictures together and talking about him as a great guy. And the fact that Trump started giving information to this attorney, we don't know what he provided

because, again, it was all off the record. It wasn't under oath. So that's another big thing to think about. But he gave him information. He said that checked out. That was after Epstein, was already being busted in 2005. That was after people who were associated with him,

more than likely got the word that this guy's house was being raided, that he was being held in this county jail. And then, of course, we know that Trump appointed Alexander Acosta to, I think it was Commerce Secretary or Treasury Secretary, somewhere in his administration. And he was the one who helped cut the sweetheart deal for Epstein. So you start to see these different connections that I still think have been not fully explored or maybe fully accepted by some of the pro-Trump camp,

the MAGA movement. But overall, I do agree with you that we still haven't seen where the Diddy thing's going. You know, I'm based here in Houston right now. And the lead attorney who's fighting that, we were actually, I think, on a Twitter space recently about this. Tony Busby, he actually ran for mayor when I ran for mayor back in 2019. So I know him. He is the lead attorney who's filing like these dozens and dozens of lawsuits about Diddy. And he has certain unnamed celebrities that are listed in there. So I do think we're going to see more and more that come out. But just because Epstein was arrested during Trump's administration or the Keith Reneer and some of the other things that happened, people need to understand, and this is where I think a little bit of

dose of reality can come in, that investigations don't just pop up overnight. These things were being worked on for years before Trump was in office, for years before Trump was even considering running for office. They've been investigating Epstein. They've been investigating the nexium cult and others. So it didn't just happen that Trump came in and all of a sudden you said, hey, let's go after all the bad guys. And that doesn't mean he played no role, but I surely do think that if Trump had a direct hand in the Epstein operation or the nexium sex cult, he would be like, you know, talking about this every single day. And instead now, when people ask him, including in friendly interviews with Fox News, if he's going to release the Epstein files, he's like, oh, I don't know. It might,

you know, cause some trouble for some people. I don't want to create it. It's like he's hesitant to even do that. Now, does that mean he's implicated? I don't know. But it definitely to me says, this guy's not trying to shout that from the rooftop. That's he's the one who brought down Epstein, and he surely isn't in a rush to release the rest of the files and the videos that we know that the FBI collected from his house and things of that sort. So all those things still have me, you know, asking questions about his allegiances. Yeah, to me, we should go into it in another space. I take a somewhat opposite approach to you in the sense that I do think that Trump was involved in the sex trafficking industry as a younger man, whether directly or indirectly through just

his business associations. Well, the modeling agency has been accused of things. His modeling agency. His modeling agency was accused of all kinds of different things. Absolutely. And his, I mean, his mentorship with Roy Cohn is this huge,

like, glaring, like not to be understated. And Whitney Webb is, I believe, where I learned first, that Trump bought the Plaza Hotel, where,

you know, the original Blue Suite was. He bought an non-Kashoggi's boat, which a non-Kashoggi was famous for sexual blackmail. But when I look at all of that, I see a man that if he was sexually blackmailed, we probably would have heard about it during this whole Russia investigation, unless he is truly controlled opposition. And it tells me that he understands the sexual blackmail industry in an intimate way that 99.9% of people would never even begin to understand it. And so actually, I see that as it's a huge if, but if Trump is in any way, like I'm starting to suspect that there's a possibility, I'm hoping, I suppose, that there's a possibility that Melania is.

in his ear a little bit and his ego is in his ear a little bit and saying, what can I really leave a legacy about? It is bringing down this evil corruption and draining the swamp. And the swamp literally is this criminal blackmail network and all of their associated criminal friends. And I think that I'm hoping, and there's some evidence, but is not certain by any means, that you were seeing a man that knows the industry intimately, who is maybe blackmailed, but it It doesn't seem that way as certainly not as much as many of the other people, like not as much as a Bill Clinton or Hillary Clinton, for example. And he seems like if you're going to have a big, powerful person that can take them down,

he's a primary candidate. So there's a whole other, you know, conversation to have about that. And I'm not saying I believe that for sure. I'm just saying I see the inklings of the possibility. And gosh, I would love if that were true. Yeah, I've heard that as well. I'll just mention one other thing on that. just because I don't know if you've gone down this rabbit hole and I don't claim that I've fully explored it, but it's something that I've seen.

There's also some circumstantial, some interesting pieces of evidence I'll say about Melania originally that she might have been trafficked when she was younger from Eastern Europe. And so, I mean, that leads a whole other thing of like Trump's involvement or knowledge or whatever. And I also mentioned just in case anybody didn't hear it, Trump's modeling agency, go back and investigate those and see how many claims of weird things of Trump coming in the women's dressing room, which maybe. it was just him being a creepy boss, but also accusations of trafficking and some of those women coming from Eastern Europe. We know that there is a huge, you know, I've done documentaries on the finders cult and child trafficking. Much of this does come from Eastern Europe. I think that's a big part of the Ukraine war as well as trafficking children through there. So there's much more to be explored there that I don't think we fully have these questions answered about Donald Trump.

And I hear what you're saying more from the optimistic perspective. We're an hour and 40 minutes in. So let's go ahead and start wrapping up. So the last thing I'll touch on is when I shared your tweet about the Idaho thing we were talking about earlier, I mentioned pretty much everything we've covered here. And that's where you said something to the effect. You said politics are not simple. The truth is not simple. I would much rather live my next four years under Trump than Kamala, even though Trump has many flaws.

Abstaining from choosing is not bravery. And so that's where I want to wrap things up here because I know that there are people, who are listening to this on both sides and who are maybe hearing some of the Trump things and they're still going to vote for him, that's fine. I am encouraging people not to vote. I am absolutely encouraging people not to vote in the U.S. presidential election. If they feel inclined, I think it's much more moral, principled, et cetera, to vote for third party, even knowing that they are not going to win. But if you do feel inclined, at least you can know that, hey, I participated, I played the role I feel is my freedom or my privilege or whatever you want to say. But you didn't necessarily

go with somebody who is going to, you know, continue the Zionist genocide or whatever other issues might matter to you. And just to reiterate for, I think, the third time in the last hour and a half, I don't support Kamala Harris or the Democratic Party at all. The reason I've put so much energy and the reason this conversation is focused on Trump is because there is nobody in the freedom movement who is thinking Kamala Harris is the, you know, the savior here to, to rescue us. It is Trump that people are looking towards. If it was the opposite, I would be spending the same amount of time saying, hey, guys, Kamala is not who you believe she is. But I think out of all of my audience across all the platforms, I've heard two people mention they're going to vote for Kamala.

The vast majority are, if they are voters, are going to vote for Trump or at least leading that direction, maybe a few going third party and then some who kind of hold my views. But that's why there's so much energy and attention and this conversation is focused on Trump because it's nobody, I don't think anybody generally speaking in the freedom, truth, conspiracy, health freedom is thinking, oh, Kamala Harris is here to save the day. Like, that's just, you know, that's not really even what we're focused on. So that's why the energy is going to Trump. Now, when we talk about abstaining, I think most people associate what we've discussed here today and the viewpoint that myself and the Independent Media Alliance, Whitney Webb and others, we talked about

this, they see it as being blackpilled. And for those who don't know, that just generally means you're negative. You've given up on the world. Everything's hopeless. You're a nihilist, et cetera. And that is the farthest from what I personally, I can only speak for myself that I'm that I'm promoting. I do and have been recommending and promoting noncompliance and non-participation and voting since 2015 at least, written essays and done articles and things of that sort about that and why I think that's valuable. But that doesn't mean that I'm promoting apathy. I encourage non-voting and non-participation, particularly in the presidential election. You know, I voted last year on the local level to try to take away the power of the mayor of Houston, for example. So I do think there are

some areas where we can vote for certain things that might reduce government or, you know, take away bad laws, but I have more of an issue with people who are voting and putting their faith in candidates and in politicians. So instead, I encourage people to take away their time, energy and support from that and put their energy into something that I call exit and build strategy. And this essentially, if anybody wants to know more, go to my website, theconscious resistance.com. I won't do the whole spiel now. But essentially, it is taking this idea of voting with your dollar and applying that to every area of your life, right? So if you see that keeping your money in the banks is going to eventually turn your money into CBDCs

and you're going to be bound by that system, then take your money out of the bank and put it into a credit union or learn about, you know, alternative currencies or barter or whatever other thing that you're into, precious metals, et cetera, if you see that the health care system is all, the so-called healthcare system is all about GMOs and vaccines and fluoride and stuff like that, then make yourself less dependent on system to the degree that is possible. Start eating better. Take your take your, take responsibility for your own health and things of that sort. If you see that big tech, Google, uh, Amazon, Apple, Microsoft, et cetera are spying on everything you do, that they're working with the government agencies, that they're also willing to, we talked about the AI.

Google is willing to do through their, um, Dragonify program, create drones and they've created desensored version, desensored versions of their internet for China and other countries. These people don't have the same values and principles of us. Then stop using. them. You can go to no more Google.com. You can go to privacytools.io. You can go to take back our tech.org. All of these websites are resources that show you how to get off Google for search engines, mail, calendar, drive, et cetera. These are privacy-based companies open source. And so you take that idea and you start applying it to every area of your life and removing and lessening your dependence on those systems. Now, that doesn't mean that it's going to stop the war in Gaza,

per se, right? But you are, in my view, in giving yourself a little bit more security. because we can see, we saw during COVID-1984, and I think we'll see the same, whether it's about climate change or some new alleged pandemic or alien invasion or whatever, that they're going to use lockdowns. They're going to use social and public pressure. They're pushing towards digital ID programs. I mean, I just got harassed and detained at the airport in London for four and half hours for opting out of facial recognition. Those things are not even going to be possible soon. You won't be able to opt out. So my view is really instead of just putting our faith in politicians and hoping that this election, it might work, then starting to take your life back in your own hands, applying this exit and

build strategy to different areas of your life and making sure that you are less dependent on them. This also could include, like, for me, it's getting land. I bought land recently. I'm building an eco village with like-minded people where we're going to grow our own food. We're, you know, going to have free-range kids and clean water and believe in self-defense and all these important things. That might not necessarily be the path for everybody. But overall, it is about taking your time, money, energy, moral, spiritual support away

from these systems that we know are going to become slavery systems and focusing on building alternative institutions. Like I think if we put more and more of energy into building parallel structures outside of their systems, and thankfully there are many people much more intelligent than me who are working on some of these things, especially in the tech sector, we will be able to lay the foundation for a free humanity. Now, that doesn't mean you can't still go vote Trump if you feel inclined. But if that's all you're doing is just going and pressing a button, spending five minutes

of your day, like you said earlier, it's really quick. pressing the button, getting your I voted sticker, and then going about your life and assuming Trump's going to take care of everything, that is absolutely a recipe for disaster. Because even if Trump is the best case scenario that Ian, you want to see and others, maybe even more optimistic than you want to believe, then he's not going to be able to do this all on his own. There will still be resistance, even if he was this great hero, which I don't believe. But if that was the case, there still would be resistance. You can't put your faith in just running, you know, and a politician. I know that this is not necessarily what you're advocating.

but I think this is what most people do is they just go vote and they think that's it. Things are done. I don't have to. I can sit back and just continue on my life. Trump's going to take care of everything or Biden or whoever's going to take care of everything rather than taking their own life into their own hands. And just one more thing on this, exit and build can also be about physical location. Now, I believe you recently moved to maybe a different part of the country.

That's the thing I did during COVID. That is basically exit and build. I'm going to guess that some of that probably had to do with wherever you live previously, watching it go insane or maybe being anti-exam. liberty, that's exit and build right there. You recognize that, hey, this local area is not conducive to liberty, not conducive to my values. I'm going to move somewhere where I feel like there might be a little more security, might be more like-minded people. For some people, that's the next town over, the next state over. For me, I moved to Mexico. I live between Texas and Mexico. I have land in

Mexico. And that is also part of this idea. So strategically exiting from systems that don't align with our values, building or supporting those who build new ones. And if need be, changing your physical location because that can be really valuable because I don't think we're done with whatever they have planned. The Great Reset is still on the table. Agenda 2030. It's 2024, about to be 2025. We've got technocrats funding both sides of the election, people who are promoting digital IDs, transhumanism. This is what Klaus Schwab. This is what we know the agenda is. And I just don't think it's a smart strategy to, for those who are doing this, put all your eggs in the basket of I'm going to vote. And then that's it. Wipe my hands of it. Everything's done. Now with that.

said, sure, if you feel inclined to vote, go ahead and do that. But I highly, highly encourage you to learn more about this strategy or something else that you think will work for you. I'm not claiming to have all the answers. I do have, I wrote a book about this. It's called How to Opt Out the technocratic state. You can download it for free, 100% for free at theconsciousresistance.com slash how to. If you want to learn more about it, I'm doing a 45-day exit and build challenge right now leading up to the election to try to show people their alternative solutions. This is, I guess, my main gripe or effort that I'm really making and why I want to do this with you is because I do think that there are good people being set up for another disappointment, for another failure. And my hope is just that at least of a small percentage, if even 10% of the people who consider themselves awake and aware shifted their energy towards building parallel systems and not being dependent on these slavery systems, we would see the creation of something outside of their hands.

And the final thing I'll mention is even in the World Economic Forum's infamous, welcome to 2030, I own nothing. and I have no privacy in life has never been better. Even in that, about a third way through it, they say something to the effect of, sometimes I feel bad for the people we left behind, the people who technology move too fast for them or they didn't like the political changes. They now live outside of the cities

in 19th century shanty buildings. Well, I believe that's going to be us, but we're not going to be living in some kind of like Mad Max dystopia. We're going to be living in permaculture, communities, regenerative agriculture, with organic food, clean water, like-minded people. I've put all of my energy and time into this.

I actually rewrote that and wrote an essay called Welcome to 2030. I own land, live amongst life-minded people, and life has never been better. So I just want to encourage all the people who are watching and tuning in or who will listen to this later to try to put at least some of your energy into that, into thinking about what you actually want in the world, not just focusing on what the bad people are doing or outsourcing your power to people like Donald Trump and others. Derek, I admire everything you just said so much. that was such a great way to put it. And I think that we represent such a fine difference of opinion here with so much in common because I am voting for Donald Trump and I do encourage people to do that.

But I completely agree with you that that is not even beginning to be the whole solution. Anyone that is going to vote for Donald Trump or vote for Kamala Harris and then expect that to solve our problems, you are deeply deceiving yourself. And I want to get a huge shout out to the resources you just talked about, both the ones that you're offering on your website for free, mind you, which is like needs to be reiterated that you were talking about, homie wrote a book and then decided not to charge you for it. And anyone that is going to do that who is,

you know, sharing information on the internet, that is one of the best green flags you could ever look for in a researcher because the world is full of monetization and full of people that they're selling you things. And anyone that's going to create information and give it out for free, that is 100% a sign that you're talking to a person of high integrity. So I want to just reiterate how many cool resources you just shouted out

and I couldn't agree more with all of the philosophies you're talking about, about exiting and building and about preparing yourself to not be reliant on the state and not be reliant on the government, whether or not you think Trump is going to save the government. That's not part of the point. The point is that we are the government. And if we're not building our own systems and our own lives and our own communities, then we are relying on the billionaires to build whatever they want for us.

And you will live with whatever they give you. So I agree completely in that same vein on my website. have free resources where a lot of my early content was about going into the grocery store and looking up who owns all the products on your grocery store aisles and the fact that they are all just the same giant mega corporations. And so I have free spreadsheets that anyone can use. They're not complete, but they're a good starting point to just look at your shopping list and look at who is really selling you all those products you're buying and to start to make better choices about your laundry detergent or your salad dressing or your chips or your shampoo or

whatever it is to start abstaining from this corporate oligarchy that owns our whole lives, because all that money goes to the same place. It goes to the same technocrats, the same oligarchs, the same ruling class. So I couldn't agree more with your resources and your perspective on that. And I think it's so cool that we've just like, what a great discussion to sort of highlight both sides of debate, highlight what it's like to have real genuine debate in pursuit of truth and sort of like move each of our needles a little closer to clarifying our perspectives and our opinions. So that hopefully, both of our audiences are better informed now, I would hope that I would expect that everyone in my audience

that has just watched this interview is like, damn, this Derek dude is pretty fucking based. And I should be following his research because you should. In the same way that you should be following Whitney Webb's research, you should be following everyone's research who is genuinely pursuing truth. Because, you know, some of us are more right than others. Some of us are more intelligent than others. I am certainly on the tail end of that spectrum.

But the point is that when you find people that you can tell are pursuing the truth, you follow them, you support them, and you learn from them because we, you know, it all comes back to the individual, whether it's individual forms of government, your family, protecting your community, whether it's individual forms of information and deciding for yourself what's true. It all comes back to the individual because the state is not headed anywhere good. And it's happening faster and faster and faster every year. So huge shout out for hosting this. I really appreciate it, Derek.

This has been a ton of fun. Yeah, this has been great, man. And like I said earlier before we started, my goal was not to, necessarily try to convince you to, you know, do what I'm doing necessarily, but I'm glad, as you said, to learn more about your specific perspective. I hope this has been fruitful for everybody who's listened. We passed, I think, 45,000 at some point here. And that's great. That means even more we'll hear this after the fact. I know there's a lot of different pieces to explore. Once this goes live on my website, I'll be putting some show notes. And if you want them, Ian, I'll send you some links as well if you

want to share those with your audience. But overall, guys, whatever you do, we're a week from the U.S. election, whatever you put your time energy into, I just hope that you believe in the power of yourself, believe in the power of all of us coming together, those who are genuinely after truth and trying to understand what's going on the world, and more importantly, who value individual liberty, that if we can come together, even despite our differences and put our energy into solutions, the election will pass in a week and we're still going to be dealing with much of the same problems. And even if Donald Trump comes into office in January, those same problems will exist. He alone won't fix them. I argue he probably will make them worse,

but that remains to be seen. Nevertheless, though, we should be working together. We should be focused on how we can create more liberty in our lifetimes and not just waiting around for government to do it. So thank you guys so much for tuning in. Ian, let everybody know just one more time where they can find your work. What's the best place to check you out? Absolutely. Thank you. My website is canceled this clothing company.com. And that has a link to all of my socials in the tab that is called Connect. The best place to follow me and follow everything I'm doing is on X, where my handle is at Cancel C-Clo-Clo-Co, which is cancel C-L-O-C-O. Go by the name Ian Carroll on X, and I'm Cancel this Clothing Company or Cancel this Clothing Co on the other short-form video apps. So I really appreciate all the support, and the best way to support is just to watch and share and get in the conversation.

Absolutely perfect. And if anybody's new to my work, you can find me at theconsciousresistance.com. Or if you just search my name, Derek Brose, on most platforms, you'll find. me. And thank you guys so much for being here. Until next time, remember, you are powerful, you are beautiful, and you are free. Peace.