The Pete Quiñones Show - Episode 1305: 'The City of London' - A Non-PC History - w/ Philos Miscellany and Stormy Waters

Episode Date: December 14, 2025

2 Hours and 12 MinutesPG-13Stormy Waters is a managing partner of a venture capital firm.Philo's Miscellany has a YouTube channel in which he reviews rare books.Philos and Stormy join Pete to talk about the history and rise of the "City of London" ™ Philo's YouTube ChannelStormy's SubstackStormy's Twitter AccountPete and Thomas777 'At the Movies'Support Pete on His WebsitePete's PatreonPete's SubstackPete's SubscribestarPete's GUMROADPete's VenmoPete's Buy Me a CoffeePete on FacebookPete on TwitterBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-pete-quinones-show--6071361/support.

You know, If you want to get the show early and ad-free, head on over to the Piquinez Show.com. There you can choose from where you wish to support me. Now listen very carefully. I've had some people ask me about this, even though I think on the last ad I stated it pretty clearly. If you want an RSS feed, you're going to have to subscribe your substantive. or through Patreon.

You can also subscribe on my website, which is right there, Gumroad, and what's the other one? Subscribe Star. And if you do that, you will get access to the audio file. So head on over to the Pekignonez Show.com. You'll see all the ways that you can support me there.

And I just want to thank everyone. It's because of you that I can put out the amount of material that I do. I can do what I'm doing with Dr. Johnson on 200 years together and everything else. The things that Thomas and I are doing together on Continental Philosophy, it's all because of you. And, yeah, I mean, I'll never be able to thank you enough. So thank you. The Pekignana Show.com.

Everything's there. All right. As per is per usual, when I get together with these guys, we're in the middle of a conversation. And, yeah, we're here to talk about. about the Bank of England city of London. And I got Philos here. Phyllis, how you doing? I'm doing very well.

Cool. Stormy, how you doing? I'm on team, no sleep, but I'm feeling ready. I'm good. Cool. You'll get a solid amount of autism. Well, before we started, we were doing market autism. but let's jump over here and maybe you can even do some more market market autism once we start

getting into this here. But historic market autism. But anyway, Phylos, why don't you jump in? Yeah, so the theme of tonight's stream is broadly the history of the city of London and kind of the question that we're going to ask is do Jews have a disparate amount of control over said city of London and current financial markets relative to, say, the British elite when, you know, the city of London, it's just a bunch of evil European globalists and Judaism doesn't really play a role in it. The time period that we're going to cover is about the year

1,000 to 1700. And I hope to conclusively demonstrate that, yes, Jews pretty substantially and definitively controlled finance, financial innovations, markets, documented all the way through all of these times. And I think I'll sort of skip the more modern questions here and just get right into the question of how Jews control English banking. Don't let me stop you. I guess I'll go ahead. Wait, wait, I thought the globalists.

And the British did. Well, so this is where you run into the question of them. It's thrown around so many times in our circles. And it seems to be that it does split into a camp of it's the Jews versus it is globalists and Jews are incidental or irrelevant in this question. There's been a history throughout conspiracy theories, the American right, referring to them, referring to bankers, elites, shadow government, smoke-filled rooms, neoliberal, and broadly speaking, by like a measurable demographic quantity, they're not a majority of them being Jews, but the Jews that are in those positions exercise, undue, and outsized influence upon those institutions.

And I think you're describing Bolshevism. Unbelievable. This is crazy. it's almost like every single time which is the real it's honestly the real nuance of the jq it's it's not present in this simplified version of just jews run everything it's quid pro quo that's it the end of the statement it's you have to have that nuance of power relative to size i went to the dmv and the jews were not running the dmv exactly i guess they run everything this is already disproven everybody can go home now sheniquel runs the digital

IDs, I guess, at the DMV. So looking at this, I mean, I think it's important right off the bat, because when we refer to people in power structures, these are not people working a job. Is what they do? Is it a profession? Is banking a profession, a job like any other? I assert that it's not. Things like law and medicine, they are professions.

In a profession, you reach a standard of education and training that enables your special in a subject and your credentials to continue work in that field. A vast majority, I think, of people that you'll meet in your life or either professionals or wages, wage earners. But I think in order to understand Jewish influence in the city of London, you need to change your thinking about what these people do for a living. And you need to understand them in the concept of a guild. And what a guild functionally is, is it is a organization that provides exclusive privileges

to members within a territory. There is no such thing as free competition in a guild system, and its members can only join at the recommendation of multiple members. If that's a confusing structure, just think about something like the Freemasons, which perhaps not so coincidentally are founded with their Grand Lodge in the city of London. And when you begin to think of the structure of the city of London,

you need to think of the company, not as a modern quarter-to-quarter innovation that's run by Indians that's over leveraged in the AI bubble that is heavily invested in a services and finance-based economy, but a company in a really traditional, classical sense of the word. That's the sense that you need to understand how I refer to bankers in this stream. So we're going to start in the year 1066 with William the Conqueror. And I'm going to pull from two different sources here.

Source number one is Banks of the World, a History to Analysis by Roger Orsinger from the mid-60s, and also the classic, A History of Central Banking, by Stephen Midford Goodson. And that has actually a section in it that's by Matthew Johnson, who I presume is Dr. Matthew Raphael Johnson, who's been featured on your streams very regularly. So these are the two sources that I draw this following information from. This is not your Wikipedia stuff. As a matter of fact, you can't really find this on Wikipedia. So 1066, William the Conqueror takes England in the Norman invasion.

And prior to this, England was in a financial golden age. Small holders on land are the norm in this situation. Urban trade in cities has very low, consistent prices. And there's an overall lack of liquid capital that is for stalling any kind of centralization of nobles or powers. You have power centers, but not this centralized government within England. Usory was formally banned in Mercia under Alpha the Great, and King Alfred the Great, although he's in the process of centralizing Wessex power to resist the Danes, he refused the services of the banking cabal.

And obviously, William the Conqueror going into England, he needs funding to fund his invasion of Anglo-Saxon England. And he was assisted by bankers from Venice and Rome. And if you will recall, some of the earliest Jews that left Palestine, Roman Palestine, they went to Rome. And Italy was the first place that Jews were able to go to in the West to establish their systems. Under William the Conqueror, usury was permitted. The old Anglo-Saxon aristocrats were killed. and William bought in a new nobility, which established the first iteration of feudalism in England.

This led to a system that charged 33% of collateral lands and 300% on capital as a tool within the cities for trade. In two generations after William the Conqueror, 66% of England's land was in the hand of money lenders. And I make that distinction very clear. Money lenders are not the same thing as bankers. These are different, and I'll get into it later. By both sources between the time of Rome being in Britain and their eventual evacuation out of the area that was to be the city of London, all the way through for the next 900 years to Norman the Conqueror, there were basically zero Jews in England. And what both of these separate banking books have asserted is that Jews were the first people in England to deal in money, as we understand in our modern conception. For a long time, the Jews alone gave the Norman kings the support they needed in terms of war and rebellion.

A charter of Henry III was necessary to limit the permissible interest on loans to two pence on the pound per week. that is to say, a limited interest of 43% per year. So, to put that in context, Jews come in with William the Conqueror, and by the early 1,200s, they are starting to have to issue royal charters to limit the amount of interest to not be super exorbitant. During the 1270s and 1280s, the Crown officially attempted to crack down on coin clipping. I'm sure all of your audience members know what coin clipping is. even by Jewish sources, specifically some 1990s books that I've read looking at the Jewish

histories, the English Jews of the time were extremely wealthy relative to the Anglo-Saxon and Norman populations that were there. Edward I expelled the Jews formally in 1290. What happens after this point? Jews are no longer in England, for the most part, at least the wealthier ones, that were allowed to retain most of their possessions and were physically required by law not to be harmed as they were put on boats and sent to the continent. The Jews, however, succeeded in the money lending trade by the Lombards. These are Italian merchant bankers from Milan, Florence, Venice, Genoa, and Luca. Banking houses of Italy had branches in London starting from the 13th and 14th centuries. The Italians, as they're coming into London, are bringing the earliest direct predecessor of liberalism

in the form of Renaissance humanism. And so these men are essentially equipped to handle the property and financial circumstances of the elites within English society at this time. Money and valuables began to be trusted to these Lombards. There is, within the city of London, a Lombard street that they would gather in on the open street to conduct their business. And from this time, the corporation of goldsmiths was formed. Goldsmith obviously refers to anybody who works with gold jewelry, who is tasked by the king to have a standard of weights and measures. This is extremely important in inventorying the wealth of nobility in the country. There were in 1556, approximately 100 goldsmiths in London. By the Elizabethan period in 1600, personal

fortunes were mostly jewels, plate, and gold and silver coins. This wealth was either situated with these 107 goldsmiths or the royal mint directly. The system honestly is pretty stable and not too complicated as far as financial systems go. By the time of Charles I and Charles the second, the looting of the royal mint starts to begin. Charles the first appropriates 130,000 pounds sterling, and Charles the second appropriates 100, excuse me, 1.3 million pound sterling out of the royal mint. So that is money that is being taken directly from the goldsmiths and the royal mint. In 1672, the reason that decision for 1.3 million pound sterling was made, is to finance the Dutch war that England was currently fighting in.

The king, several years afterwards, acknowledges his debt to these goldsmiths and paid interest on it for a few years. It is this interest which created the concept of a national debt in England. Prior to this point, there are only two major types of people handling massive amounts of wealth. These are the goldsmiths and the money lenders. But after this point, there is banking. This massive national debt, this creates a funneling effect. In an economic crisis when most are driven to bankruptcy, the individuals who survive largely tend to amass further power and wealth after the fact. And this is where we get into the Dutch. when looking at a financial system, you, especially in the early modern, the mercantilist period and the Middle Ages, you are almost never looking at a market totally in isolation, especially as it's beginning to modernize. How does this come about? Well, financially speaking, let me start out earlier. The Dutch Sephardic Jews. So in order to understand what

the Dutch are doing in London and creating the concept of banking, you have to understand what the Jews are doing at this time. So upon their expulsion from Spain in 1492, major Dutch Sephardic Jewish families move to Amsterdam, and they're rebuilding their banking base with a square of influence. They're controlling this power through grain trade in the Baltic, their management of Amsterdam banks, trade routes in Constantinople, the Turkish market, as well as Poland, forming a square. These are the overland roots of modern grain trade that enable them to skyrocket grain prices in the West, forcing the East to export more and more. They're playing both sides here. The earliest new examples of these modern

bankic technologies I'm about to present are in the grain market, and they are ongoing and developing in Dutch, Svardic Jewish families in Amsterdam between 1550 and 1620. Well, what's a banking technology and innovation? Well, the Dutch Svardic Jews invent the following in Amsterdam. Exactly. But to understand their brief connection to Lundgen, the Dutch essentially conquer England in 1688. William III, who is known as William of Orrnd Stottholder of Holland, he has offered the English throne by the Dutch in 1689. Many Svartik Spanish Jewish families that had come originally to Amsterdam and were responsible

for the grain trade followed this specific king to London and they institute all of these banking innovations that they had previously created in Amsterdam. What did they invent? Well, here it is. Loan collaterals, repo transactions, short and long-term annuities, annuity associations, tauntines, lotteries, public securities, futures and options trading, derivatives, and the perpetual bond. So that's a lot of different innovations. Not all of them, honestly, I understand, but I can tell you that some of these perpetual bonds and institutions, they're still honored today. Let's put this way, both of us, every single one on this call is a perpetual bond.

Every treasury bill is basically a perpetual bond that we pay forever. Go on. Nick Dick Bovindams, which is a Dutch water authority bill, there's one in existence from 1624 that's still currently paying 5% interest a year. And so why did the Dutch invent all of these innovations? in banking? Well, trade and risk are inseparable. In order to make an investment, you have to alleviate or eliminate, if possible, most of your risk to ensure your stability of your supply and your price. It's complicated, and I don't understand it, but essentially

this relationship between trade and risk incentivizes you as a banker to make a contract for future delivery. This is the foundation within Amsterdam of futures and options trading. And eventually from this, the evolution of the derivative. Why are these created? They appear in a modern form in the market of shares for the Dutch East and West India companies in 1602 and 1621. Why them? Well, you have a major risky investment. You need to create, outfit rig and gather men for a ship and then multiple ships to mount an expedition, send them to the other side of the planet to gather extremely valuable resources, which you can then sell at high prices nearer to your home country. And what that means in

practice, if you're a banker, is that a very large, a vast majority of your investment is going to cease to exist. It's extremely risky. The ship is going to sink. The crew mutiny, there can be pirates, there's a very high likelihood that your expedition is never going to have a return on it. And what that means is that bankers that are involved are trying to diffuse risk amongst each other. So one man who theoretically could pay for an entire expedition if they were extremely wealthy would not, you know, be forced to eat their shoe leather. So the British form of this comes about in the East India Company in 1600. This is something called a joint stock company.

But the East India Company in 1600 in its charter had less financial fuckery going on. What made the Dutch East India and West India companies much more profitable for speculation is that they were distributing annual dividends of between 10 to 20 percent on average and sometimes as high as 65%. So what this allows for with these dividends are speculation in forward markets. And so essentially, very wealthy people with a lot of money and a lot of time on their hands

to research the likelihood of success of an expedition will begin to conduct futures and options trading, begin to think of derivatives. And all of these inventions are created by the Jewish banking families in Amsterdam. If you want a more real-world example that you've probably heard of in economics class, look up the tulip mania, the Dutch tulip mania, between 1634 and 1637. So, okay, we now have all these crazy innovation.

What's how Isaac Newton went bust, by the way? Correct. Is the blowing up, when the blowing up of the collapse of the Dutch stock exchange was a controlled demolition, it was going to go bust anyways, right? So if the house is going to fall down someday, it's better to just demo it to make sure you're not inside it that day, right? Absolutely. Nobody told Isaac Newton, apparently, and he was almost bankrupt. He basically was bankrupt. He was a large shareholder. He was a successful guy. I was a large shareholder of the Dutch East any company. But one quick thing about futures and options. These are not predatory instruments

on their face. They fulfill a very important function in any type of commodities trading. And simply like anything above subsistence farming is going to be some form of commodities trading. right like just simply a farmer taking his goods to market or whether it be grain corn or whatever is commodities trading but he can't control what price he gets at the market right somebody could you know be getting out of the business or switching to you know tomatoes or whatever and is basically just selling all of his corn, including the seed corn, which you generally wouldn't sell. That's for planting. He doesn't care. He's getting out of the business. So you get to the market and the corn prices are, you know, 40% less than what you needed them to be, as in like

just to recoup your cost. Farmers operate on a very thin margin, right? They're basically betting the farm. This is what the term, like they're betting the farm each time because of the amount of money it would take to plant. And once that money is in the ground, it's frozen until harvest. So basically all of their expenses that they would have throughout the whole year, they would have to use their say, this is why farmers are such good savers. Every, I would bet every single farmer in the country. That isn't some major. agricultural combine or some shit like that has literally like mason jars full of gold or hundred dollar bills buried around his property that's just how they do it because they basically

have to they have to put in so much capital into their crop each year it leaves very little left over for them to live on so anything goes awry any machine breaks anything it could be disastrous. And they're basically living off savings. So this guy just found out that like all of his money that he invested into his crop, because that's what it is. Every planting season, he is making an investment. And that investment was locked up for a whole year. And now he gets to find out that when he goes to sell it, he's lost half his money. And he's already eaten through all his savings. how much grain do you think is going to be planted next year significantly less right that farmer is not making the same investment again either because he physically can't

or he's too afraid to now and every other farmer that brought their goods to market along with that farmer they got 40% less too they will be planting 40% less next year minimum. And this is how you have basically rapid boom and bust cycles that are inherent to commodity markets. Without before, like this was a very common thing. Just was, you know, the invention of futures and options were almost necessary to grow any type, let's put this way. Like, let's say you boot all the Jews out, kill all the derivative contracts and say, we're not doing that, we're not doing financialization at all. If you're going to have a national economy, you would have to put back futures and options because it's the only way to do agriculture

outside of just your immediate locality. Because basically, what an option is or what a future is is when that farmer is making an investment, like let's say, all right, I am going to sink all, literally all of my money into the ground. I need this percent return. Like, I need to make this amount of money or else I'm going to go bankrupt. I need grain to be, you know, let's say 10 or 15 or 20 cents more a bushel than it is now for me to even break even. So as insurance, I'm going to buy, and grain brokers are happy to do this, because it's also insurance for them. The grain broker would be like, all right, I will agree to buy your crop once you're done harvesting at this price. And the farmer goes, all right, that's a good price.

Okay, I can live with that. Everyone's happy. Let me shake their hands. That's just a six month. That was a six-month option contract. Both the farmer and the grain wholesaler came to terms that were acceptable regardless of where the price is at the moment that that crop is brought to market. If the crop is going to market and grain prices have tripled, then that farmer made a really

shitty deal. He just gave his crops away for pennies on the dollar when he could have been getting, you know five dollars on every dollar you know he made 20% or 10% when he could have made 200 and that grain merchant that grain wholesaler is very happy but let's say he goes to market and the scenario happens that I just laid out where grain is down 50% 40% yeah that grain wholesaler is gonna take a hit on just that guy's order all right That'll get evened out with all the other people he has to go buy a grain from.

But that farmer stays in business instead of getting wiped out. Because he made a deal six months beforehand for his bare minimum, like his total investment plus a bare minimum to keep going. Like total investment, all my money, plus 10%. So, yeah, that time, the grand. broker got screwed, but he's buying the entire crop of 100 farmers. So him getting screwed on that one little thing gets kind of washed out, but it saves that farmer, and he's going to plant the same amount or more next year because he at least earned a little bit more money and can buy more seed. This is like, it's like dampener systems on your car, right? It's a

suspension system. It stops, and instead of like price action that it's, you know, dampening up and down, it's supply that it's dampening up and down. And it stops there from being basically feast or famine cycles. Because the opposite of green shortage is a whole bunch of grain going to waste, right? It goes, what do they call it, uh, fallow in the fields where the farmers literally just let it rot in the field to fur, so they don't have to buy, fertilizer next year. Anyways, so they're not, when people hear like derivatives, futures and options, they immediately think of like, you know, the big short and just financial fuckery and casinos, whatever. That is largely true. But when it comes to agriculture,

specifically, or mining, right, things that make, things that either grow or pull out real things, These are necessary mechanisms for any advanced economy. So I will say there's a very, very large amount of fuckery and a very small amount of innovation. So we do have to kind of, and trust me, if anyone wants to slam the fuckery of these people, it's me. But as we go and we tear down what exists and rebuild something new, we need to know what's worth keeping. Futures and option contract in relation only to agriculture, mining, and basically resource businesses are imperative. Go ahead, Phyllos.

Well, let me jump in there because I do have definitive proof that Jews didn't invent the future, the concept of the future. Oh, that's amazing. Sombart in the Jews of Modern. capitalism. He goes through an exhaustive. He talks about Cromwell. He talks about the Dutch East and West India Company. And then he comes and says, most important of all, however, the book which for the first time exhaustively treated of stock exchange business and all its branches was written by a Portuguese Jew in Amsterdam toward the end of the 17th century. I refer to

Don Joseph de la Vegas Confucian de Confucius, et cetera, which appeared in 1688, and which a stock exchange specialist had described as being still the best description both in form and substance of stock and share dealing even today. The book bears witness to the fact that a Jew was the first theorist in the sphere of speculation and futures. De La Vega was himself engaged in commerce and his treaties clearly reflects the atmosphere in which he lived. De La Vega's book in conjunction with the other evidence quoted cannot but lead to the conclusion that if Jews were not actually fathers of the stock exchange business, they were certainly primarily concerned in his genesis. Should this nevertheless be skeptically received by some, I have a trump card in a way of direct

proof in support of it. We possess a report probably of the French ambassador in the Hague written for his government in the year at 1698, wherein he distinctly states that the Jews held the stock exchange business in their hands and shaped this development as they willed. the most salient passages here follow here follow in the state holland the jews have a good deal of power and according to the prognostications of these pretended political speculators themselves often unreliable the prices of these stocks vary so considerably that they cause transactions to take place several times a day transactions which merit the term wager or bet rather than business the more so as the Jews who dominate this kind of activity are all, are up to all matter of tricks which

take in people, even if they be ever so skilled, their Jewish brokers and agents, the cleverest of their kind in all the world, bonds and shares of all of which they hold large amounts. The author, acquainted as he is with all the secrets of stock exchange activity, describes at length how the Jews succeeded in obtaining the influential position they held on the Amsterdam Stock Exchange. I will refer much to this later in the book. Well, there you go. Basically, where derivatives and stuff comes from, where this is the financial fuckery that blew up the Dutch Stock Exchange.

So futures and options, you get a good idea of that, right? Yeah. I'm basically buying something, right, to kind of, I'm hedging. I'm hedging my risk, right? Farmers, commodity producers, these people have risks. I don't know, pick any piece of equipment on a mine, whether it's one of those bulldozers or dump trucks the size of like, you know, 30 semi-trailers tacked on top of each other. One of those things is about $30, $40 million. Just one. truck, you're investing serious amounts of money. And with other businesses, there's ways to hedge risk.

But when it comes to real materials, either you're, you know, digging real things out the ground or growing real things, that relationship is with you and nature. That's it, right? There's not like a counterparty that's, you know, that you can negotiate downwards. You say, hey, man, I'm taking a huge risk on this. You need to come off on price. Or you need to come up in price, whichever. Mother Nature makes no deals.

Has no terms to offer you. So these things are necessities. But what happened is people got the bright idea. People got the idea to use futures and options contracts on stocks. Well, I've added another layer of variability here. So instead of like whether the fucking crops grow, which they do every time, well, now it's a company, it's whether a company can make money or not. Well, what if somebody's stealing or what if they run a bad business? Like, what if a bunch of Jewish guys are speculating?

on the stock, like Sombart just talked about, driving the price up and down, buying and selling it several times a day. Well, now, if you're the guy that happens to have a contract to buy that stock at a predetermined price, some Jews speculating the price up and down wildly is going to destroy you. Because on the day, and basically what they would do, do is they'd buy all these options really, really cheap. And then they would drive the stock up through speculation, getting many, many multiples on their money. That's all well and good.

If the stock keeps on being a functional company, when that doesn't happen, now you're on the hook for hundreds of times your money. Leverage gives you on the way up, it takes away 10 times faster on the way down. Go ahead. So I think it's also interesting to just kind of clarify what a company is at this time, where this came from, because this is not your modern conception of a company. 16th century England, this in this world in which this is taking place, it was a franchise government. So offices and positions within it tied to the nobility, these are both a public service and private property at the same time.

And that is sort of enabling people to have social and financial advancement. So these people that are forming a joint stock company, initially these are just merchant adventure. within the city of London, but very rapidly, nobles start to get more involved because there's certain privileges that have to come down from the king. Royal charters have to be approved for certain elements. And so... You'd be protected from piracy. Exactly.

Exactly. And this also, within the country, like a company in early modern and medieval England, this merchant adventurers group, it's not only a commercial association, but it's also also a religious enterprise. It's a mutual assistance society. It's a quasi-government council and it's a guild. And this idea mostly originates in these Dutch and Italian conceptions of a company. This is why like a lot of Christian conceptions of a company you mean. Exactly. Yes, exactly. Christian consumption of a company. This is a lot of the carryover.

In the Transylvanians, right? The Transylvanian Germans. Basically. operated like this up until the time of the communist revolution, sorry, like the Georgian revolution that happened like, or sorry, Romanian revolution, like right before the communist revolution. So maybe like, what, 30 or 40 years when they, anyways, the Transylvanian Germans operated on exactly a system of guilds, right, and father and son businesses, as Phyllis is describing right now. and a tiny, we'll call it like an area the size of, you know, Connecticut, maybe Massachusetts

dominated all of Romania, all of Eastern Europe, really, right? The best armaments, the best watch, the best of everything in Europe at that time wasn't made in Paris, right, or Milan or Rome. It was made in fucking Transylvania by a series of guilds that created a governance. So basically, he's talking about public and private benefit. And so who sets water policy? Well, the guys that are in charge of the water treatment plant, right? The Plummers Guild.

Okay, well, the Plummers Guild is responsible for all of the public waterworks. It pays its taxes. So it puts in its contribution to the larger society by building all of the water infrastructure in the city. And what about the Builders Guild? How are they paying their taxes? Oh, well, they're paying for out of their pocket the building of the public buildings and maintaining them. The Blacksmith Guild is doing the same thing. And the maintenance of this infrastructure becomes flawless because the actual guild people are on the hook when it breaks.

I'm going to build the best quality thing ever, and I'm going to maintain it amazing. because if it breaks, A, I'm going to be blamed for it, and B, it's my pocket that's going to be repairing it. So the guild system for public and private benefit, this is what he's talking about. So companies at this time were also a public good. It's a lot easier for the nobleman to say, well, how about you just build all this shit for me? And rather than you trying to, you know, hide the amount of money you make and basically me, you know, tossing your office to find out how much money you actually made and then extract taxes out of you. I have things that are expensive that need to be done. So how about you just do those things?

And there's two interesting ideas also to add into this. The first one is that I think this is the actual definition of sovereignty and i think there's huge lessons for the right uh mike maxwell's book travel future of the west it goes into all these examples of sovereignty um shout out to him he had a great interview on your show but this is the origin point of future sovereignty i'm reminded stormy of when on your latest substack posting you were talking about the trade unions in nazi Germany. And in this country, we used to have the longshoremen, stevedores, we used to have auto workers unions, these systems, the mentality of a corporation that without prompting, without regulation, that of its own sense of obligation would give more than just a watch and a handshake

to someone when they left, they would pay out that person's pension for the rest of their life. That sense of obligation comes from this original organization of a corporation. And when conservatives get all warm and fuzzy about what a business is and what business make America great, it all has to derive from this original conception of a corporation's obligations to its members, to its employees. It is much easier, as Hitler says, for me to turn a trade unionist into a national socialist, to give him back to his nation, as it is for me to make a bourgeois conservative, a revolutionary.

So Hitler says, like, your people that you pull from are going to be lower to middle working class. The people, the more on the margins, the better. The more on the margins, the more they're in need of you to help them. And the more willing they are to make revolution. change. Also, they're inherently patriotic, fiercely patriotic, a guy that works at GM his entire life. He knows a Mercedes is a better car. He knows it. But if you ask him what the best car in the world is, he's going to tell you a Cadillac. Why is it the best car in the world? Because he

fucking built it. That's why. They're patriotic because their patriotism is as some total of their labor. They are interlinked and inseparable. I mean, you can literally just have this in like a gun debate with a Swiss guy and a German guy. Anyways. Yeah. I mean, I think when I consider politically how this came to be, I mean, how we went from a guild system or at least something that mimics it within a company to this just utterly atomized extractive world of an AI bubble of infinite JETs H-1B types. I was really thinking about the political theory behind it. It has to do with the divine right of kings. Divine right of kings was that was the prominent political theory in this time period

where these mechanisms are being set up. And on the one hand, you of Filmer or Hicks, they're asserting the state is the natural outgrowth of a theory of compact under the king, the nobles oblige that's present, the state has an obligation to provide for its citizenry. Then on the other hand, obviously, who went out in the Enlightenment, it's Locke and Hobbs. And to them, the state is largely a mechanical instrument, and this eventually leads to the rise of the concept of utility. And I would also point out that people think this is ideas that came about in the Enlightenment and then American Revolution happened and then liberalism happened after that. If you look at the origin points of the English Civil

War, it is far more modern of a war in how it debates the guild nobility against the atomized mercantilist individuals that are beginning to rise. Even Wikipedia will tell you that that's the source of the Enlightenment. We don't even have to try and sell you on it. exactly cromwell's revolution is where we get the enlightenment from more important uh interestingly enough william of orange right who was he overthrowing uh wasn't charles yeah charles a second the catholics it was overthrowing catholicism who was cromwell overthrowing overthrowing yeah it was the catholics and the uh there's all the uh exactly all the i mean it was the whole like bonnie blue prince was a disaster for the for the christian faith

in europe in the world because we spread it to the world And it was, and before Protestants get nuts, real quick, let me just throw out a caveat. It was 50% Rome's fault. Actually, you probably say larger. Papal pig-headedness, Italian pig-headedness, and their inability to let Germans worship like Germans, Germanics, let Swedes worship like Swedes and Englishmen worship like Englishmen. You know, because these are very, I mean, all of those three different cultures have very distinct concepts of display of wealth, right?

Like the English, you have like the concept of stealth wealth and anything in Sweden, any type of gaudiness or showiness, right? or ostentatiousness in any way is, you know, it's, it's basically socially insulting, right, because of the rest of their culture. So you basically had, you had to worship and you had to do things Rome's way. And he, the Pope refused to, you know, convene a vet, a council of bishops, which he should have, considering the amount of dissent, whatever. So that, it was equally Rome's fault. But everyone needs to put this bullshit aside because what the Catholic Church was the vehicle. It's the only thing that can, that combats a decentralized money network of people like this.

It's the only place where you, it's the only thing that has the tools that you need. Right. The head count in the places and the bank account in the right places. Right. So when you fractured the Christian church, where did all that Catholic wealth that was in all those places, all of these countries that went Protestant go? It got stolen. to pay the national debts he's talking about that got raided so you basically cut out the

legs from the only institution that was capable of stopping people like this they have more money than kings the protestant church is basically a nationalist church right that you can call lutheranism German church. Anglicanism, it's a little bit more obvious. But when the people that are destroying your civilization are the ones lending money to the king of England or lending money to any of the other nation states, they're lending money because they have more money than that person. Right? Catholicism was a way to centralize Christian financial and political power. And Europe has never been the same since. And every time it attempts to re-assert itself, these magic revolutions kick off

magically and funded by coincidence people. Exactly. I don't have much to add on that other than some smaller points that I've found were that I'm going to script the history. Well, let's name names. Not the people that propagated. this, not people that propagate this bullshit, but the individual bankers that financed William of Orange, because we can pull quotes about, you know, from the, from the, from the Jew himself that lent William of Orange all of his money, telling you exactly how many times he, how much he was going to make in returns, right? He's like, yeah, I'm going to invest all this money. All of

that I can't remember how many guilders. I think he was three million guilders in William of Orange. Because I'm going to make seven times my money back in his victory. Like, they will tell you what they're doing. The idea that these things occurred organically or that anybody, other than these people, are in financial control of these places post-revolution, is dishonesty. Because all you have to type in is Oliver Cromwell and the blank.

And your search bar will fill in the Jews. They're proud of it. We can go to Jewish, you know, Jewish, my Jewish daily learning or whatever. They'll tell you, William of Orange and the blank. Your search engine will snitch you all. We'll tell you more than people are telling each other now in our spheres. They're not shy about it. I mean, would you be if you made seven times your money?

Let's talk about the city of London. Sure. I'll just briefly talk about London Exchange and bank. Sure. And then mercantile banks and then city of London. Yeah, this is equally as well documented. This is a silly that we have to do this, but it needs to be done. It also lines up perfectly chronologically with a,

Anglo-Dutch invasion. Like they, they install a king on the English throne. The newly formed lending exchange was created by Sir Thomas Gresham. It was simply that gold exchange and money lending practice, but then after the Anglo-Dutch thing in 1688, boom, it just becomes filled with all of these different elements of financial tools that were discussed earlier. Notably, Gresham writes that it's filled with Dutchmen, Frenchmen, Venetian, Spaniards, Italians, and Turks. He, the founder of it, directed the English exchange rate within Antwerp, and also the English information services that are present. And then, 1688, a Scottish man named William Patterson, began finalizing his work on a bank. A bank functionally provides a higher degree of security,

reduced interest rate, and a paper currency. It takes about six years to clear parliament, but in July of 1694, the Bank of England begins. This enables, in the positive sense, to Stormy's earlier point, industrialization and the great titans of English industry, English metallurgy, textiles, pottery, and engineering. They all begin to spring up factories all over the country that are employing workers, and this is forming a positive feedback loop for a vast colonial empire in the 18th century, which is subsequent. If you look at a map, London, London is geographically situated on waterways, which is extremely convenient for international trade and internally within England, the water system that's there.

London also surpasses Amsterdam at this point as the hub of commerce and finance. And so what happens to these joint stock banks, they are beginning to be reduced over time. And when I say reduced, I'm just going to like fast forward ahead to the modern example. In 1899, there are 106 joint stock banks. By 1918, after World War I, there are 34. And by the mid-1960s, there are just five. Five great banking houses. These are Barclays, Midland, Lloyds, Westminster, and National Provincial.

How big are they? In the 1960s, they are 75% of the liquid reserves and means of payment of the economy in Great Britain. How do they operate? This will transition us into City of London. The five banks have multiple global affiliates. They were in the British Overseas Bankers Association. They are all headquartered in London.

This is what makes the City of London an extremely powerful tool of the globalists. Prior to the 1960s, as a counter-example, United States banking was mostly investing again in itself. Well, the British banking system throughout the 18th, 19th, and 20th centuries, it's better adapted to international trade and foreign operations so we can then pivot into the history of the city of London itself well so the it's funny enough Francisco Lopez Soelze right the funder of the glorious revolution who gave William here's a direct here's an interesting quote the Sephardy population of London was little over a

500 families at the time because they sought that under William, London would be transformed into a city where Sephardi Jews would feel as secure and as home as they had long felt in Amsterdam. It would even seem that William's expedition to England at the head of his Dutch army and the ouster of the stewards was largely financed by Lopez and other Sephardi Jews, one of whom mentioned Francisco Lopez-Souazza of the Hague, is believed to have advanced the Prince of Orange an enormous loan to this end, two million crowns at no interest with no guarantees. And then it goes on to cite Roth, Cats, and Edelman,

there's three separate authors, and the Jews of England, which is another book, page 28 and 29, if anyone's interested. Nevertheless, proposals were still being brought forward and acted on that placed burdens and restrictions on the Jews alone. And at the end of 1689, for instance, the House of Commons passed a resolution tax. Basically, it goes on to talk about how they continued to tax them until 1691, which was until, you know, William of Orange got around to pulling every last bit of, I guess you can call it hindrance. that was placed on Jews to keep them out of England. So by the end of 1691, it goes on for the end of this, there's like two more sentences that I think are really interesting.

With the passage of time, more and more Jews, especially the wealthier, native-born Sephardom, were participating in English social life with no obstacle, as Cecil Roth puts in a 1952 book, acquiring property, sometimes intermarrying with Gentile women, attending theater, And as early as 1723, for instance, Jews had come to hold the highest offices in Masonic lodges. That's weird. And so these families of these 500 families of the Hague, a couple of families, some names you might know, right? We're really pivotal in setting up the city of London. But before I get distracted, about the 13 dragons.

Pete, remember a while back when you sent me the stock, the original stockholders of the Bank of England, the stock purchasers list? It was a while ago. Yeah. Yep. A Solomon Lopez Suza was one of them. He was the largest holder, I believe. At the time, he probably, I mean, those shares have probably moved about.

But it was like 200 people participated of varying degrees in the Bank of England's initial stock offering. I did the math. Over 80% were Safarum Jews. That's who owns the Bank of England. This is who set up the city of London. To try and pretend it's anything besides this is retarded. And the 13 families, the 13 biggest families, the city of London.

We can just look up the 13 dragons of the city of London. They all have interesting little statues. Literally, they have demon statues on every corner of every street in the city of London. Dragon statues. Oh, yeah, I've looked those up before. It's wild. Yeah, that mark the boundaries of the city of London. right so at the corner of every street where the street intersects with actual london

right because city of london has its own loss issues its own passports and i mean the fucking king of england has to get written invitation from the city of london to come to the city of london he's not invited sorry 14 not 16 my bad but story it's just all worky english tradition it's just all so silly it's those damn brits it's those damn brits man oh man i want to like uh it's that old it's that old european nobility stem brits yeah Francisco lopez suaza and for all the um for all the complexity of this system it's okay like me back up. There are finance centers all over the world. New York is one, Amsterdam is one, Tokyo is one. These are not legally the same status as London. Everyone knows that London is the

global financial capital on the planet, period. But what enables it to be the case is the legal designation of the city of London. And it is far more than the marketing terms of, oh, it's just some quirky thing. It is physically a square mile of London that has not materially changed since the Norman conquest. It is a, it's also not a city. It's a corporation, like a capital C corporation, and that is understood in law as a legal entity which is separate from the individuals which comprise it. It has a corporate spirit and a corporate reputation that is distinct from its individual members. So in layman's terms, any person who is a member of this is legally protected through its complexities.

The mayor of London, it's not a municipal position. It's the mayor and the commonality and the citizens of the city of London. They are members of said corporation. And like a brief aside, the prime minister of Canada is one of these sorts of people. And the, I think, what was it, the current mayor of the city of London is an American. There's this very incestuous, I mean, Carol Quigley writes about this, and I believe up until the 1960s, Carol Quigley is completely accurate. It's a little strange to have a direct analog to today, but when he's talking about the

Anglo-American establishment, these are the Anglos in the Anglo side of that. It is not the WASP American Anglo population. That should put the American Revolution into context. exactly which was ultimately the more I read in this banking books about it because I've actually been fortunate enough to get the original primary source books from the city of London I actually was able to find one that was signed by a U.S. ambassador that was attending one of these guild dinners there wild story but the um where was I within this American revolution everyone knows about the stamp act And people look at it and say, oh, it's just a couple interest increases over a small period of time. What's the big deal with stamps and tea? Well, what is not like publicly known is that in the decade or two prior to the 1765 Stamp Act, the Bank of England is basically just punishing and punishing and punishing the American markets. Kind of like the Friedrich List sense of political economy where it's you you just taxes and extract as much.

wealth from the colonies is possible to benefit the uh the home system as it were and then let's see yeah there's an interesting quote you can find right on wikipedia there's some english history of english revolutions right um it's like a third paragraph down in 1290 king edward the first of england he's that meany that they depicted in uh in what's called braveheart that mean mean man was mean to Mel Gibson, also the guy that threw out all of the Jews, funny enough, had issued an edict expelling all the Jews from England. However, the English Reformation, which started in the 1530s. They seemed to leave out poor Mr. Cromwell like 40 years later. But anyways, that brought a number of changes. The English Reformation, which,

started a number of changes that benefited the Jews long-term. Doctrines and rituals of the Roman Catholic Church that insulted Jews were eliminated, especially those that emphasized their role as the killers of Christ, deacide. Further, anti-Catholicism and with the Pope as Antichrist came to replace anti-Semitism during the period. of the Revolution, and in the period of the English Civil Wars in Dregnum was marked by both widespread millennial beliefs and the beginning of religious tolerance throughout England. Significantly, millennial-millianism in England often had a strong Hebraist character that emphasized the study of Hebrew and Judaism. This was sometimes extended by certain individuals to claim that the English are the descendants of the Ten Lost Tribes of Israel, with Cromwell himself numbering amongst the supporters of this idea. Oh, wow.

What a crazy, crazy thing to say. Wait, so, we're going to replace those doctrines that insulted the Jews. Those were eliminated, and especially those that emphasize their role as the killers of God, Jesus Christ, and further replacing the anti-Semitism with anti-Catholicism. And instead of the Jews as Antichrist, that naughty Pope is Antichrist. Now, that's interesting. So the next two sources I got for you, these are the originals from the city of London. The first is a 1960s book, The Guilds of the City of London.

Second is the Guild of Freemen of the City of London. That's the one signed by the Ambassador. So this is all straight from the horse's mouth. Tying that into sort of the Semitic question, if you will. The Freemen of the City of London. They have the right to trade. they're admitted to the franchise. They have a freedom from tolls all throughout England

and a freedom from custom in London. That privilege is 1,200 years old. So taking it back to the very beginning, Alfred the Great, the one who was against usury in Mercia, he reestablishes this entity in his reign, the city of London, but then separately, William the Conqueror, who's backed by the Italians,

if you will, the Jews, they explicitly confirm legal distinct rights to the city. That is when the policy is established that the king must recognize the city's special status in order to enter it. So are you really a king if you have to ask permission to enter your own capital? At the same time, with this city of London having special status, because at this time, very early on, it's more like a walled fortress than a distinct city in the classic sense. Westminster and other fortresses are built around it physically to try and compete with it, but they are unable to. In the 1190s, a distinction is already apparent between the citizens

of London and people that just live in London. Within the city, there are something called liverly guilds of london these are usually known as the city companies um essentially like throughout the history so okay early middle ages there's the black death part of that is what led and transitioned us from feudalism to like the joint stock company because there are fewer skilled tracts like tradesmen and craftsmen so they begin to conglomerate and centralizing the cities and form guilds to protect themselves because they have a very specialized amount of knowledge. That's essentially like the cultural origin point of these corporations a couple hundred years before they were to become the capital C corporation.

But that has a social effect within the city of London. So they start creating rules in order to systematize their society and to distinguish their guildsmen from commoners. In the middle ages, this was men wearing their guild colors with emblems denoting rank. what that is functionally it's a straightforward way of saying if you fuck with me in business or in life a whole bunch of people are going to have my back and ruin your life that's what the function of a guild is I mean the mafia structure is very similar um in general any of these guild systems are like this but continuing on by the way they have diplomatic community oh yeah I don't know if they have their own passport they probably have their own

The Bank of International Settlements has their own passport, bro. I'm sure there you go. There is also a direct lineage between these early guilds. This is all city of London primary source stuff. There is a delineage between the early guilds and what was to become the Grand Lodge of Freemasons. That was formally established in 1717. But the Hall of Merchant Tailors, which is physically the oldest building in existence at the time, was there hosting spot between 1331 and 1940. This building, prior to World War II and its destruction,

hosted the Grand Lodge of Freemasons. And there's also crossover where when the Knights Templar was kind of destroyed, they sort of generally went to Amsterdam and London, as I understand it. These guilds and these systems within the city of London, they began to gain power and wealth throughout the Middle Ages. They're forming complete monopolies, and they're preventing all competition from outsiders. Early on, so prior to the adoption of the Anglo-Dutch standard, where they would bring in people from Amsterdam, Holland, Italy, whenever these guys would try to show up and do business in the City of London, the English City of London Guilds would physically remove these foreigners. Initially, as they're starting out in gaining power and

privileges, they're appealing to the mayor's court who is in charge of their capital C corporation, which is the original source of their authority. But why would you appeal to the mayor of London, the city of London, when you can appeal just to the crown itself? So having the advantage of having the backing of the crown for your royal charter, it gives you significantly more powerful legal jurisdiction and authority over your trades, and it also gives you complete eternal autonomy. Like I said earlier, you're a city of London. You are legally protected from a lot of different tax laws, business practices. And now with the royal charter, you are a, there's no way in which another guild system from another city can possibly compete with you. And so you might think that

having a royal charter as a private citizen and a private corporation that makes you as powerful as a nobleman, well, you're completely correct. And the distinction between nobleman and City of London citizen is very, very blurry. We start getting into the royal involvement here. The earliest royal charter for the Weavers Guild predates the Magna Carta. It was in 1130, and it constituted a lordship endorsement of their trade as Weavers. So each guild is sort of tied to a specific industry and the money trading on that industry. By 1500 AD, 25 guilds had corporate rights and powers of jurisdiction. The Crown in Tudor Times and after began to regard the city companies which could reliably produce funds for every emergency that might befall them.

So when Charles I and Charles II are pulling massive amounts of money out of the goldsmiths and the royal mint, this is their predecessor to it. This is their predecessor to it. This is their fund in which they basically become debtors to the city of London. So there's an interesting little cultural phenomenon. There's the Lord Merd's show. This is the only public appearance of the city of London. They actually still do this each year. They have a little parade where they all put on their guild colors,

and they formally welcome in the mayor, usually that has its traditions after the king would win a foreign war or coronation, which would be completely sponsored. by the City of London all the way back through English history. Edward I was welcomed to the City of London after the Scottish campaign, as well as Richard II, and Henry V. So, okay, how can I prove that the City of London owned him? Well, when Henry the Fifth's French Queen in 1420 commented during this parade about the extravagant cost of it, the head of the Guild of Mercer's, which is the most powerful Guild in the City of London,

said, quote, I have something still costlier, and he threw from his hand 60,000 pounds of royal bonds into the fire in front of her and King Henry V. That is the equivalent of 61 million pounds sterling or 83 million U.S. dollars today. That's how much money and power the city of London had, even at that time. Funding. What does the city of London do in the mercantilist age, in the early modern age? Well, the plantation of Ulster and Ireland and the plantation of Virginia was founded through the Virginia Company of London. So these are massive investments that joint stock, that guild system, is paying for the colonialism of the crown. Ostensibly, the city of London also has had its own military and its naval forces. At the time of the Spanish

Armada in 1588, the city of London itself furnished 30 ships with 10 belonging to the merchant adventurers of London. So the defeat of the Spanish Armada at that time was primarily due also to the city of London directly. So fast forwarding a little bit. In 1947, so that's when I have the source book from, there were between 70 to 80 companies or livery guilds, and at one time in English history, the livery men were entitled to parliamentary votes. Since Edward III, many of the monarchs in England have been members of these guilds, specifically the Mercer's Guild. The Magna Carta itself, the negotiation with the king, was negotiated by the Mercer's. And as a small side fact, the first recorded death by a handgun was Robert Packington in 1536, a Mercer Guild.

member, to very briefly touch on it, this is where I'll cut off here. How can one join the city of London? There are three ways. You can't really buy your way in, per se, traditionally, but it's patrimony, it's father to son, it is service to an apprentice within the guild, or it is, quote, redemption. That is buying away your sin and buying yourself into this system. That's all the information I was able to glean from the city of London sources here um let me uh let's talk about what the city is up to now sure because when people uh we talk about oh who's doing this is it the cartels oh what's going on over here is it the sex traffickers is it the this or is it the that all these varying criminal networks all over the world what's this is from a this is a

an excerpt from an article cited in um uh actually funny enough uh the guardian right it's uh you can find this in just type in the city of london space UNZ. The very first thing a little pop-up is a very lengthy, very informative article that I urge everyone that is listening to this episode to do as the very next thing that you do. It's long, so if it's late, save it for tomorrow, but read it. Probably the best thing on Unz report, and that's saying a lot. At the same time as the government's anti-fraud minister resigned because the Jews in the city of London had once again killed legislation to combat economic crime by the city, saying that nobody in the UK government cared about stopping, kleptocrats,

oligarchs, and organized crime lords stashing their money in the UK. Another article goes on to tell us how the city remains a safe haven for the world's dirty cash. Here's another interesting article from The Guardian with a five-step guide telling you how the Jews in the city can help you get away with stealing millions. no KYC or AML, right? So know your customer anti-money laundering stuff that happens inside the city of London. Yes, UK has got very rigorous KYC AML laws and KYC AML checks and all these things, none of that shit exists in that one square mile and any of the banks that

do business in that one square mile. And so one indication is of the UK's official UK company registered list that is littered with fake names because no identity checks are required in the city of London at all. One corporation is registered, for example, in the name of Holy Jesus Christ, with his stated occupation as creator, his nationality as angelic, and his country of residence as heaven. Another is in the name of Adolf Tooth Fairy Hitler, with the city sales firm. in the name of Donald Duck, right? So there is a firm that operates out of the city of London in the name of Donald Duck and so on and so forth.

The UK government claims it hasn't the resources to police the corporate registry, but the truth is that they permitted to continue because it serves its purpose, because it serves the gangsters controlling the legislation, An article in the Eurasia Review called the City of London a paradise for parasites, or the best, this is the title is A Parasites Paradise, or the best criminal sanctuary money can buy. London has become the center of global finance capital by engaging in long-term, large-scale,

active collaborations with multi-billion-pound drug arms and sex slave and people-smuggling cartels. The Jews in the cities specialize in laundering funds for the Mexican, Colombian, Peruvian, Russian, Polish, Czech, and even Nigerian narco cartels. White slavers is in their article, right? You raise a review. Thank you for calling out the white slave trade. White slavers have their private bankers at prestigious city banks. Lifelong multi-trillion dollar tax. excavators fleeing from the nations they pillage.

It continues on that the city boys welcome every gangster and oligarch. The London Sanctuary for the world's richest plunderers offers unprecedented services, especially protection from extradition and protection from criminal prosecution in the nations that they commit the crimes in. So City of London will also hide you. It's expensive place to live. It's one square mile. But you can also live inside any bank-owned properties outside.

Because, again, this is the beauty of a corporation. This gets into the concept of something that Pete and I talked about a while back. I believe the episode is when there is no justice. about a concept called corporate citizenship and the lovely loopholes to evade all types of prosecution and how anybody inside these corporations can commit crime

and aid and abet others penalty-free if they're acting on behalf of the corporation how do you slap the handcuffs on a corporation Well, you don't because it doesn't have hands. Well, how do you throw a corporation in prison? Oh, well, you can't. You can't.

Well, let's throw all the officers in prison. All the officers, the CEO. Well, the CEO is just an employee. He's doing what he's told by the board of directors. Well, let's throw the board of directors in prison. Oh, they're just appointed delegates. kind of like a lawyer, is your appointed representative of the shareholders? Well, who are the shareholders?

I don't know. There's one share over here owned by some Taiwanese hedge fund. There's a couple million shares in this Hong Kong entity. There's this. There's this over here. There's some over. You get the point. What happens in a bond issuance? I want to talk briefly about bonds. Because everybody thinks that, oh, no, New York City, Wall Street, is the financial capital of the world. No, it is not. It is the equities capital of the world.

It is this stock trading capital of the world. What is the bond market? Well, the bond market is the debt market. It's the IOU market. Well, how big is the stock market? Well, let's just say, I don't know, 30 trillion or 5 trillion or 50 trillion. It doesn't matter. Because the bond market, on any given day, is about 10 times the size of the stock market.

Well, where are all the bonds? Well, the bond capital of the world is London. So, yeah, stocks are worth money and loans are also worth money, right? If Pete gives a loan to Philo for $100 at 10%, I am, you know, if I buy that loan, I pay Pete is $100 and another 10% for the Vig, Astral and Thomas are going nuts in the group chat and I forgot to silence my phone because I'm an asshole. There we go. That loan is worth money. So having a bunch of loans is like having a bunch of money. You can sell those loans to people that want to buy them. Hey, I'll, I'll buy that for $100. And then Philos can pay me the

Vig. Instead of you, Pete, well, you're getting 10% from Philos. How about I give you $100 plus three years of interest? So $130. And you could have $130 now rather than wait in three years for Philo to give you that 10% each year. Say, okay, this is, it has a value. It's tradable. But unlike stocks where I can go to a company and I can get a list of every single person that owns a share in that company, because they have to have a list, because each one of those shareholders gets a vote, right? Corporations are incredibly democratic institutions, probably the only place democracy works because everyone has the same vest. at interests. I'm not going to vote for some fucking Indian asshole to be the CEO, because if I

vote an Indian asshole to be in the CEO, the company's going to tank, and then my stock that I own is going to be worthless. So everybody has each other's best interest at heart, because everyone has the same interest. So there's lists of all the people that get to vote. There is no list of who has lent money to the company. There is no bond regulator. Funny enough, bonds are largely out of the purview of the SEC. So not only is there really no list of who owns what bonds, there's really no regulators to enforce any rules that for, for, for every hundreds of pages of security law, for every hundred pages of security law, which there are thousands, there's maybe about five pages of laws about bonds. It's almost like bonds are,

you know, an afterthought in people's heads, right? To legislators, they practically don't exist. They are 10 times the stock market. Companies can issue bonds at any moment in time. That's the benefit of being a publicly traded company. You don't need to go to the bank and say, I want to borrow some money. You could literally go to the entire market and say, who wants to lend me money? You're not under any obligation to tell the world who decided to take you up on your offer of lending you money. You just have to tell your shareholders how much interest you have to pay, and if you're going to be able to make those payments, that's it. So there's really no way of finding out who owns what.

And a bondholder is basically a shareholder in certain cases of bonds. So like a convertible note. A convertible note is largely used in venture capital for early stage companies because they haven't really set a share price yet. Nope. They could, an Indian founder can tell me that one share of his, you know, shitty tech company that's not going to work is worth a million dollars. But has anybody paid him a million dollars for a share yet? No. So it has, it hasn't been priced. So since the shares have no price, I'm just going to give him a loan at a set interest rate. Let's say 13%, which is about

average. And at any given time, I can say, hey, asshole, give me my 13% back, plus my principal, and he has to do it. Let's say after a period of two years, I can call that note whenever I want to. Or whenever I want to, I can have, let's say, a million dollars plus $230,000 roughly. So 13% interest at two years. I could say, all right, asshole. Well, I actually don't want my money this time. I want $1,230,000 worth of shares. And you have to give me. I have converted my convertible note. So that means that that founder, that CEO, whether it's an Indian startup that's worthless or a big company, you have to treat me like a shareholder because at any given time I could be one. I could just decide, well, I'm going to convert

and I own shares now, not debt. So you have to treat me like a shareholder because I could be on whenever I want to be. So that means if I say, hey, company, maybe you should think about doing X, Y, and Z. You have to treat that like it's a shareholder. Because if you don't do that and you keep fucking up, that guy will convert his share, his debt into shares. And the very first thing he's going to do is he's going to vote you out of a job. And the guy that he votes in the job, We'll do X, Y, and Z because you didn't. So you have a large in these convertible notes aren't a big thing in public market companies, but they very much are in private companies.

And they used to be a big thing in all companies back in the 17s and 1800s. And I'm working my way right now to the thing I wanted to talk about when I started on this bonds thing. And that is the British East India Company. Well, guys like Isaac Newton lost his ass when, oh, by the way, this Sowahsabella that I mentioned that financed the Orange Revolution and overthrew Catholicism in England. Not only was he the founder, right, this guy. that started the Dutch East India Company. He was also the creator of the Dutch stock exchange, the very first stock exchange that Philo mentioned. So remember when I said, like, you don't blow up, you don't like demo your house when you're inside of it, but you know what's going to fall

down. So you get all the shit, all your valuables out of the house, and then you demo it. You're not going to demo it with all your shit still in there. That would be retarded. So, once he got all his shit out, and William of Orange got him a new place to put it in England, he demoed the stock exchange. Stock exchange collapsed. Everybody lost everything. The Dutch East India Company collapsed. Everybody lost everything if they owned shares. But the interesting thing in bonds, right, just like a mortgage. Pete, what happens if you, you, default on a mortgage who gets the house physical asset the bank does well but um the county if it defaults it usually goes to the county court uh the county courthouse and goes to

the as auctioned off on the steps of it but normally it's because the bank isn't going to come down and put a for sale sign and show the listings itself is it no it's going to give it to the accounting, like, you take care of this. Okay. So when a company goes out of business, just like with the mortgage, if you, the person go out of business and you lose your house and you can't pay your bills anymore, right, your house is going to be sold to pay off your debts. Let's say you're a shareholder of Microsoft and Microsoft goes bankrupt.

and they auction off all of its assets, you're not getting a red scent of that. None. The bondholders, they get paid out from the assets. So when a company goes bust, the bondholders get the assets, not you, the shareholder.

Right? So bondholders always get taken care of. Now, whether the company is a success, right, or the company is a disaster. The bondholders are always taken care of, and they are sacrificing, you know, big 20, 80, 50, 100% returns like a stockholder would, like the speculative value. you for a steady rate of return. Like, I don't care if your stock goes up. I don't care if your stock goes down. You're going to give me 6% every single year. Or I'm going to call my bonds and make you basically give me all of the money at once, which you're not going to do, and then you're going to basically go out of business. And I'm going to basically get my money

out of you by auctioning off all your shit while you look for another job, right? He gets that security because he's making a calculated decision. Like I would rather know that I'm making 9% and who cares how much I could have made doesn't matter. I would rather make 9% guaranteed than 100% maybe. And that's a type of risk profile that bankers need. Bankers need to know that you are going to give them a certain amount of money.

They don't care if they could get more, even if they could get hundreds of times more. That's a risk. Bankers don't like risk. So this guy, Mr. Sowza, was also the guy that started the British East India Company. when the British East India Company went bankrupt, what happened to its assets? Well, what assets did it have? Boats, you know, cannons, islands. The British East India

Company had islands. Why is the, why is the UK, why is the, why is the, why is New Zealand or Australia, a commonwealth country that has roughly the same laws and tax system as the UK. But then there are these other things called protectorates like the British Virgin Islands or like Hong Kong was until like 10 years ago. Right, where there was no tax,

no banking law whatsoever, no regulation. whatsoever. Literally a fucking black box. The Cayman Islands. All these interesting little islands. What's that other one? Next to Madagascar. The Maldives? One by Africa. Anyways. The islands. The islands are called the British Virgin Islands or the British X, Y, Z, island. They get British protection. The Brits have to protect them, but they get to basically do whatever the fuck they want.

And it's funny that the thing that every single one of these islands got into, these protectorates, got into the banking business, every single one of them. More U.S. treasuries are funneled through the British Virgin Islands, then the European Central Bank. Just go to any treasury auction and I'll tell you what nations are buying. The BVI will be in the top five, top ten, every time. Hundreds of billions of dollars. So hundreds of billions of dollars, every treasury auction is just moving into this black

box country, or sorry, this black box island with 100,000 people on it? What, did every single one of them decide to buy a billion dollars with the treasury bonds that day? There's not a, who on that island needs hundreds of billions of treasuries every other month? I don't know. They're not running through England, like as in like London. Yeah, the Bank of England's treasury purchases go to the Bank of England in London.

The European Central Bank, well, those get sent to Brussels. So it's not Britain buying hundreds of billions of dollars in treasuries, is it? No, it's not. And Pete, like, you know when I talk about like the offshore dollar market? That is like exists outside of any regulation. Yes. This is what I'm talking about. It exists here.

It exists in these islands, in these tax havens. Hundreds of billions of dollars and tens of trillions of assets. Like, it's not like bribe a couple politicians. It's by a country. Buy a couple. right conservatively i don't know 40 trillion in assets maybe more 60 trillion in insane amounts of money but also insane amount of debt because they borrow on all of it they're basically buying it with leverage money we lose stormy no i should be here

I'm here. I'm here and I'm fine. Okay, cool. Oh. Yeah. Anyways, this is where the offshore dollar market exists. Everyone's like, oh, well, how does this exist outside of regulators? And what do you mean?

We don't know how much it is. This is the shadow banking network. This is it. Right? It's the city of London, the Bank of International Settlements. If you notice sovereignty, in these little banking clusters that exist in a country. So, like, England, a Britain is a sovereign country.

But the city of London, this little tiny island, is also sovereign. The Bank of International Settlements exists in Switzerland, which, I mean, don't get me wrong. It's got fucking really liberal banking laws. Up until the U.S. put the screws to them, you could get away with bloody fucking murder in Switzerland. You could set up, you could open up a bank account and instead of using a name, you could just have a number. Like, that bank had no records of you except for a number. You'd be fucked if you lost your password, but anyways. So why would I need to set up a tinier little island that is sovereign, issues its own passports, diplomatic immunity, all that fun shit,

inside a nation like Switzerland, I can already get away. with whatever I want here. So you see these little tiny tax haven islands that are self-sovereign all over the place and the only thing that they have in common is hundreds of billions of dollars moves through them every day. Who is that money going to? Nobody knows. What is it being used for? Fucking nobody knows. This exists as a sovereign nation it's a decentralized superpower i should add that uh the city of london no longer i mean at one point it had a monopoly on this sort of tactics generally hundreds of years ago but they've kind of let everyone into the club or at least into their tactics as i

understand it because they're kind of this conduit that can sit on top and skim money off as a sidebar the The Trump administration changed a lot of its foreign terrorist organizations to be transnational criminal organizations. So just to like very briefly tied into current events, Hezbollah, for example, and also stuff with Venezuela, a lot of the sanctions and stuff that were being put on were going through the Treasury Department because essentially they found out that Hezbollah, for example, was laundering hundreds of millions. of dollars through this global illicit economy. And when they say illicit economy, when I was looking at the stats, back in 2019, it was something like $2 trillion of wealth was circulating in this sort of city of London sort of pipeline. I mean, and that's just a rough estimate. No one has really any idea how much money is circulating. Because when these things will tie in, for example, like when, and I only really know

Hezbo has a specific example of this tag. Because the Israelis are willing to like blow the whistle on it. You also get the cartels. So basically this is how intelligence agencies also move their money around. But they would do stuff like the UNESCO building in Beirut. The fifth floor of it

had something like 10,000 shell companies registered to that floor in a building. Oh, bro. I can show, I can, I can point you towards literally strip malls in Delaware. that have hundreds of thousands of large corporations in a single office building.

I should remind everyone. I have two Delaware registered C corporations. I've never been to Delaware ever. I drove through Delaware once, right? But there is a business, right? So there is a, it's called trustees. So I call a trustee and say, set me up a Delaware company.

I don't have an office in Delaware except for a post box that this guy gets the mail from and sends to me. I don't ever have to go check this post box. He does the filing and he is my registered agent. Registered agent businesses

are, you know, an actual, it's like a profession, like a barber. I have those are registered agents in the Cayman Islands. they will help you set up a company, they will register it, and they, because you have to have one officer, right, that is from the place or exists in the place. All right, so he takes all of your mail that comes to your Cayman Island post office box, or this, you know, mailbox room the size of, you know, a big restaurant full of thousands of little mailboxes. And whatever mail in official communications, like taxes or whatever you're trying to dodge, go there.

He forwards that mail to you. You can register a company. You can create a corporation in dozens of, dozens of countries or any state in the entire 50 states. Wyoming is really good. I'll probably, you know, if Delaware gets sketchy, I'll, you know, re-register my entities in either Wyoming or South Dakota. South Dakota has the best trust laws in the world. They have a trust team.

The U.S. rivals these entities that I'm talking about for money laundering abilities. We're talking about like British Virgin Islands, places like that. Well, Dublin, Ireland as well. There's a lot of these sorts of places around. There you go.

Well, South Dakota beats everybody. The governor of South Dakota sends out a trust team every year, and they go to all of these countries and find out what new rules and laws that they are putting into place to protect these anonymous buckets of money. And whatever the best one is, he then goes and enacts those rules through the financial regulator of South Dakota that year. So no matter what year it is, you can guarantee that South Dakota has the most robust trust protection. I mean, the federal government could come after me and basically nail me to a wall. And if all my assets are in a South Dakota trust, you're not getting them. Not only you're not getting them, but you're not even allowed to know that they exist. You have to invade South Dakota and put it under martial law to find out.

So how bad do you want to know, you know, what's in stormy water or South Dakota trust? The U.S. is the king of the money laundering business. There's a lot of stuff like here, I'll give you an example. And this is, this is all you need to know about it. the fucking roach motel of money. So let's say, Philo, you're a Hong Kong citizen. You're not Philo, you're Chilo, right? Or Ching Lo. And you and I are good friends and you find out I'm getting married. And you want to give me a wedding gift of $100 million. Chilo is a good friend. It's my favorite Hong Kong Chinese person. So this is not a surprise.

to me, I'm going to fill out a one-time foreign gift report for the IRS. I'm going to tell them I just got $100 million for free. How much tax am I paying on that? The answer is $0.00. I can get as much money from any individual in the world as a gift. As long as I report it, if it's over $100,000, if it was less, if he was going to give me $99,000 wedding gift, he is less of a good friend, obviously, but I don't have to report it. And if it's over $100,000 and I failed to report it. The penalty for failing to report is the full tax, the maximum tax bracket.

So it would be like 40% of whatever the amount is is the penalty. So the U.S. will let you bring money from anywhere in the world and as much of it as you want into the country. But if you try and take even a red cent out of the country, without giving Uncle Sam his slice, he will chase you to the ends of the earth, Ask Roger Ver. So that gives the US tremendous power. We are a safe haven for capital

as these other nations break down. Just being the place where rich people keep their money is power. So now how much power does these little network of Tax Haven Islands that were once the British East India Company have a lot. Again, like you have to look at these little chains of tax havens as a decentralized superpower because they are. They don't need armies. They can finance somebody else's armies to go do war for them. Ask Russia. They're not enjoying this aspect right this minute.

Well, now they're enjoying it a lot more because they're plowing through Ukraine. This is how it's done. And this is why you'll find Hezbollah moving money through tax havens. This is why you'll find Mossad and Eamon moving money through these tax havens. Now, if moving money for rich people gives you power, what does moving money for intelligence agencies give you? a lot of power. They're like, I mean, Spangler is right. Like, in our age, unfortunately, it's quickly coming to an end.

Thank God. But money power rules. And these people, these lovely Sephardum and not, you know, Englishmen, have been ruling at it for a very long time. I mean, this bears like a final question, which is, uh, if it is so powerful, if it circulates so much money, I mean, how is it? Total business, buddy. It's go. Well, it's my, my question is really, how is it all going in the toilet so quickly?

Leverage. What leverage giveth on the way up takes away twice as fast. Right. So imagine if you had all these loans out, right? Remember bonds? it's like a game of poker right if the three of us are relatively the same skill level right and new players come into the pot in a short amount of time their capital will be evenly distributed amongst us three and if pete's better he will have a disproportionate amount I can say he's 20% better. He'll have 20% more than you and I.

But on a long enough timeline, that money that that new guy put trickles into us and out of his pocket. By osmosis. Each hand a little more, a little more. I'm giving some to Pete and taking some back. I'm giving some to you and taking some

back. This guy is losing and losing and losing. Sometimes he wins. doesn't matter, right? It's the timeline. That money trickles down into our pockets. All right, so this is what this is what the Federal Reserve and the you, basically the U.S. government, fucking libertarians, Federal Reserve doesn't fucking print money, right? Ending the Fed will do nothing, you stupid fucks. Just read the Fed's charter. They will tell you. They can only monetized the debt that Congress tells them to do. So whenever Congress passes a budget,

they go to the Fed and say, here is our budget, make this amount of money happen. And the Fed is legally obligated. Again, so much of our politics is just misdirection. It's like teaching people to protest, like that gets change. You're sending people in directions where you know that they can make no change because they're in the wrong direction. You can't stop money, printing by ending the Fed. You have to stop money printing in Congress. The Fed is fucking forced to by law to print every dollar that Congress tells it to. They don't just get to decide. Anyways, Fed prints tons and tons of money. Europe prints tons and tons of money. England prints tons and tons of money. That money will flow down

and into these, look at them like estuaries, right? It's the flow of money that matters. Sitting on a bunch of money in a bank account doesn't actually do anything, right? It's the movement of money where you make money, either flowing in or flowing out, flowing into new investments, flowing back in returns. So these banks, these institutions, these entities,

are constantly, as soon as money comes in the door, they are lending it out the door. Money, the farmers chose growing crops. The miners chose, you know, generating coal or copper. The Jews were in the money-growing business. Like, that was the commodity in which they traded. So it's not like the money hoarding business, it's the money trading business. So money comes in, you lend it to somebody else, because now that guy's paying you interest. So what happens if, let's say, the Federal Reserve starts shrinking the amount of money at the table?

Well, this is very bad because you have been lending it out the door as fast as it's been coming in. So if the money coming in is drying up, but the amount of loans that you have out is staying the same, then you're about to have a really bad day. Because the money that's flowing to you is also flowing to all of the people that you lent that fucking money to, right? Whether you're a business or a bank, if I nuke 10% of the dollar

supply, guess how much revenue that that business that you lent a bunch of money to is earning? Well, it's earning about 10% less money, 10% less revenue because there's 10% less money in the system. This is why you need mass immigration. This is why you need 2% inflation right why does every central bank say oh we have a target to inflation wait so your goal is 2% inflation a year compounding that's the goal so your goal is to just print 2% more money than you did last year and then that amount 2% more than that the following here. Right. We need, it's not that like, oh, line must line go up. This is good. It's line must go up or everything blows up. Once consumption starts to backwardate, once any of this starts to

backwardate at all, all of the leverage in the system implodes because it needs growth. It needs growth to live, it's like a cancer, in the most literal sense. If it's not growing, it's catabolicly collapsing. Peruvian bull is a great guy to check out on this. Roberto, he'll tell you all about it. The system cannot afford even the slightest backwardation. This is why they're in such a panic, because as the boomers die off, there's no one to backfill the consumption. This is why they're giving every fucking illegal immigrant or legal immigroid doesn't matter. He gets a government stimmy debit card because you need the spending to continue.

It doesn't matter that you're giving it to a fucking 60 IQ Somalian to waste on fucking Netflix and Doritos. That doesn't matter. The only thing that matters is that he's buying something. that the consumption continues, the growth continues. So this is what's killing the system, thylop. The Fed is shrinking its balance sheet. The Fed is shrinking the amount of money in the system. The amount of consumers in the system are shrinking.

And this is the real problem. They've been inflating and then deflating a little, inflating and deflating a little. That's not directly killing the system. This last bout through, this is what COVID really was. COVID was a grand $10 trillion heist. Right. The Fed was shrinking its balance sheet.

Right. When the Fed raises, when central banks raise the interest rates, the amount of money in the system goes down. So after COVID, okay, so COVID was basically a political weapon. You put a gun to the Federal Reserve chair's head and you say, print me $7 trillion or you're basically politically murdered. $7 trillion goes into the system. That gets used to create more and more loans. It's levered up. Except for this time, it just went in every big corporation's pockets.

It didn't trickle down. because the lockdowns and all the other bullshit they needed to sell the con on, right? The scenery, the set pieces. Well, that caused a whole bunch of people to go out of business. And a whole bunch of other people just straight up left the economy. So in this last chance to prop it up, they ended up doing damage that they can't undo. right? These people, they, it's a very simple system run by people that don't understand complexity and third and fourth order consequences. So even though the action that they're doing

should have reciprocal effect and, you know, I'm putting a dollar out and a dollar come back in, everything checks out. Well, no, because like when you gave that guy a dollar, he gave somebody else and that guy got hit by a bus so the dollar you're getting back in looks like a dollar but you're actually richer a dollar but you're short a consumer and that consumers you need him to spend x amount of dollars for the next 30 fucking years or whatever it's complexity that's killing it the system got so complex that the usual machinations that they were able to use to keep this thing in check right the boom and bus cycle the consolidation cycle the accumulation cycle and then the

distribution cycle right like imagine it like breathing in and out yes we all get poorer each time but the amount of consumption stays the same and grows but each but these as the system got more and more complex you can't pull away and then affect and and think that you can't can re-inflate it right back up again. When it's so desperate for money coming in from consumers, like you've after pay of Klarna, you have these unsecured installment loans, you have these instances where you're trying to get, it seems, to this shortest possible time cycle of getting money out of the consumer.

And the problem when you shorten and shorten and shorten is eventually like one, people just run out of money to put into the system period, but two, they become so, thoroughly an indebted class of people that there is just a this is where like the left wing sort of things is actually correct this total disparity between rich and poor yeah it just gets insane and this actually which which rich people actually spend very differently than poor people right so this is why they're pumping fucking all of these bodies in these countries thinking that it's a one-to-one replacement but but the spending is entirely different, right?

So rather than spending in the economy, the immigrants are just sending it all the way in remittances or other things, right? They're not spending the same. So the businesses that depended on these, they're not able to survive anymore, right? It's complexity. Sorry, go ahead.

Well, I just think it's to sort of draw a through line through it, it seems as though these financial tools and instruments are perfect for us. society that is in the process of industrializing and tying it to physical goods, returns, hard reality. When you just put this financial tools and system back in on itself over and over and over, you just have a natural. Yeah, and you get entropy.

And it's just this, uh, it's sort of this impossible cycle to escape out of, I wonder. Well, they were trying to. This is why do you, does everybody remember central bank digital currencies? Yeah. Like, they tried that shit. The Bank of International Settlements is still rolling ahead with it. Luckily, it's illegal in the U.S. now. But that can change.

Like, this is their last-ditch attempt, right? Their goal is to put it entirely in the computer. And then you can just move it up and move it down. They think that, all right, well, we've tried letting the consumption. thing happen organically. So now when we need to, we'll just burn money right in your bank account. They're trying to now control consumption. They tried to control the financial end of it, the fiscal end of it. But it always blows up because they don't have control of the other thing, the other side of it. Central Bank Digital currencies is for them to try and control

consumption and production in both consumption of money and production of money. it's not going to work because these these nations these institutions are not going to survive long enough for these systems to be rolled out and trouble shot and all that other stuff every country that tried to roll out a central bank digital currency ended up having to call it back because everyone was already hit everyone's hip to it now like this the central bank of europe is like yeah we're moving ahead with our central bank digital currency plan and every citizen of europe's like i'm not taking that Absolutely not. Right? Like, this shit used to work because they controlled all the media. And you weren't finding out about a central bank digital currency until one day. You were just told all of your dollars are gone and now you have, you know, these e-coupons. Like, you didn't have a fucking choice.

They got to have the drop on you. They had the element of surprise every time. And without the element of surprise, none of this shit works. I mean, how it's like the other. trillion gay ops they've tried to do that by the time they try and roll out the gay op the internet has already figured out what the gay op is and told everybody about it so then they're like oh yeah just kidding we were just like that was that was that was just a you know that was a gag our bad like oh that was a joke we didn't really plan on doing that it's comical now

because the system is more complex than these people's brains have the ability to understand hand. Literally nobody has the brains. The machine's too big. I think the last thing they're able to successfully, in quotes, pull off was the implementation of the Eurozone. Everybody, if you want to hear how that works and how it's going to come apart, check out my episode with Myth of the 20th century. It's all on shadow banking in the offshore dollar market. Yeah, I think that sort of reminds me of 9-11 where it's just there was not the media and internet environment present to pick apart and criticize this and there were still centralized control of media institutions but at this point now I mean basically they are making moves that are being refuted in real time

and also that all of their stupidly still putting out all of their decision making processes and policy papers out in the open two like they haven't learned this lesson from what I can tell. As I got a wrap. Likewise. I have given all I have to give. Yeah, well, I'll leave you with your white pill. Trump approves another 650 million to Israel.

Congress approved it too. It makes 20 billion to Israel in under a year. And that doesn't include the $4 billion they already get. So what is that already total? this year the total comes out to 20 billion on top of but that's that's in uh in addition to the 3.8 billion they get for not going to what we need to call it 20 25 billion so and he's got three more years he's time four man that's a 10x Mary Madelson spent 100 million for four years She's getting $100 billion.

That's a good trade. That's some good interest right there. We live in a time where a strong, competent person who has worked all that, I don't know, I don't want to go a Cesarist, but it's just like the critical nature of this time as far as changing course and seizing upon the city of London's Zionists, all of their disadvantages, moving on it, sort of charting this national socialist, frankly. reindustrialization style in this country it's just such a perfect angle that so many people left and right are ready for i just find it you got to break it first oh man you don't have the power

to break it they have the power to break it let them break it and it'll be spectacular spectacular to see it they're they're trying to break the republican party to kick out the the guys like us okay well Pete and I we couldn't we could never be able to break the Republican Party please don't throw me in the briar patch please all right guys I appreciate this one and let's do it again real soon all right man everybody have a good night take care man thank you bye thank you It would. And...

...withal... ...and... ...the... ...their...