Welcome to the Last American Vagabond. Joining me
again for another, I guess, what the hell
is happening episode we've been doing lately between
Charlie Robinson and myself to discuss what the
hell is happening, all the madness that's going
on. Been kind of a a recurring discussion
of ours to just kind of go over
the kind of rapid news cycle and the
weird evolution of these stories lately, how things
seem seem to be evolving and our our
opinions around these, you know, sometimes differing, sometimes
the same opinions around these different stories. How
are you, Charlie? Always good to talk to
you, brother.
RIP Cracker Barrel.
Right into it. Oh my god. The important
story of Crackle you know, it's so it's
so funny though that the what was it?
Crackle Barrel and then the other one was,
the Land O'Lakes. There's plenty of examples, right,
of the the shift. It's interesting how that's
become this you know or even stories like
that become
you know, I honestly don't know what the
is there more around it? Were they pressured?
I don't know. Maybe you can tell me,
but it's just like the idea of these
evolving kind of shifts. It's a woke left
kind of a thing still is what it's
attached to. Right? Like, we're insulted by the
Indian lady or the, you know, whatever it
is. What what have you seen what's what's
your take on it? Like, is there more
of that?
Well, yeah. I I have
a a sort of a
a comical
skin in the game in the sense that
the running joke that we all had with
my mom was that she loved Cracker Barrel.
And and then whenever we saw one, we'd
be like, oh my god. There's there's a
should we pull over? Are we are we
good? You know? One of those situations.
And so when it's in the news,
of course, I have to kinda dig in
a little bit. And what you find is
the usual suspect, they hired some woke left
CEO who decided to
reimagine the brand without consulting with their demographics
and getting everything wrong from
botching the logo to the way they've redesigned
the interior.
It's
it's kind of it's part of a kind
of a much bigger.
It's the personification of a much bigger problem,
which is that the elitist left believe that
the the people in flyover states are just
a bunch of low IQ'd country bumpkins that
need to be told what they're supposed to
like. And so they come in and go,
yeah, yeah, you like this place with the
chachkies all over it and the the crap
on the walls. But we're gonna do away
with that because a decision's been made that
we're cleaning this up. We're gonna go to
a modern logo that some 14 year old
kid with a word
document could have created,
and we're gonna get rid of all the
stuff that you love
about this place that you've been coming to
on the side of freeways for the last,
I don't know, fifty years.
We're gonna get rid of all of that
and reimagine it, and then,
and you'll just love it.
So it's
it's being forced on people. You know, it's
is it a big deal? No. It's not.
In the grand scheme of things, it's not
a big deal. But it's it's just one
of those things that you see
that didn't need to be changed,
but is being changed
because it kind of reminds people of, like,
the old timey
Americana stuff, and we can't have that. And
it feels, like, it feels like if I
were to be, like, put on my tinfoil
hat a little bit, I mean, it feels
kind of like an agenda
to to get rid of a lot of
Americana type stuff and detach
us from any sort of
pride or any sort of remembrance
about the way it used to be. I
mean, it's one thing for to wait for
the boomers to die off, but in the
meantime, they're really trying to kill the culture
surrounding that,
as a as a way of
freeing you from the shackles of America
and and corporatism, of course. But so clearly,
there's an agenda here, and we both agree.
I mean, I agree with you entirely on
on the the you know, and largely, at
least these examples coming from the left very
clearly. Right? And I I wanna ask you
about the even the logo about Crackle Barracks.
I think there's a I'm just I'm not
sure what the image was. We'll come back
to that. But the, you know, the there's
clearly an agenda. That's undeniable. But do you
do you genuinely think that
not the average people,
you know, whether the people online or even
just people in congress who may think that
it's about some, you know, battle against right
versus left, but from the top, do you
really think that that's what it's about? About
just simply, you know, some, you know, surface
level kind of, like, like, ideological point, or
do you think there's more to that behind
it? Let's leave it there.
I think that the CEO
is is it's an I is an ideological
zealot. Mhmm. I think she's I think that
there's
you know, did they all have a big
meeting? Probably not. But does it come from
the top? Yeah. If they wanna get rid
of this stuff and and reimagine listen. The
Cracker Barrel logo is an old white guy
in, like,
overalls in a rocking chair leaning up against
a a barrel.
Right? Like, if you look at with a
one legged
transgendered Eskimo,
then I guess we tick the boxes, but
nobody's going to your restaurant after that season.
But see this is my point though. Like
like, I worked at an ad agency. I
understand I at a big one too. And
I understand, like, how much time and effort
goes into thinking about it. Like, they come
at this from every angle. The fact that
the Jaguar
ad came out
made me think this is an agenda.
Because Mhmm. No universe
would people look at that and go, oh,
this is exactly what we need to do
to sell cars. Right. Right. Be about more
than that. Exactly. Now there's clearly more to
it, which I think we all can see,
but it's like the, like so here's my
point. So if there's clearly something more to
it, saying that it's just about or or,
you know, seeing it as just about,
the
woke left point makes it feel like I
mean, how does that I mean, there there
we both agree. There are people that are
completely absorbed in this. They believe, you know,
that everything matters about it. You know, woke
pronouns or the world matters more than anything.
But I don't believe that's what the real
agenda is about. Like, to the point about,
like so it's not like they went to
some caricature of a, whatever you said, of
one legged trans, whatever you said. Something like
that, which is funny because it makes the
point. But instead, they went very blank. Right?
It's like a Yeah. Symbol. So it's like,
okay. So is it it's not the other
you know, it's not the extreme opposite. It's
sort of, like, somewhere in the middle, which
I still disagree with. But the other side
of it, you've got the Land O'Lakes, like,
the Indian, you know, Native American woman they've
removed. It's, like, same kind of thing. It's,
like, it's not going like, it's weird. So
one side of it's removing,
like, the black caricature, and this one, it's
removing the white caricature. So you see what
I'm saying? It's like it doesn't stick like
it fits in with the idea that it's
left versus right or their ideology versus the
other. It's like kinda what you were hitting
at, more about an all encompassing,
you know, I don't even know how you'd
frame it. Like like you said, like removing
American ideals or, like, classic I don't know.
It's but you get what I'm going at?
I think there's something bigger than that. Oh,
it could have been much worse. They could
have said, we're taking the cracker out of
Cracker Barrel Yeah. With all you honkies.
But that's what it's almost like that should
have been exactly the point. If it was
really about, it's like, no. We like the
we like the derogatory Yeah. Word. Yeah. It
could be look. It could just be a
a a branding
oversight. It could be a woke CEO who's
out of touch with their demographics. How that's
possible? I don't know. I mean, I'm not
I didn't go to Harvard Business School, and
I know you needed to figure out what
your demographics are before you start a radical
overhaul,
and and you and drop the ball. But
but
it when it happens over and over and
over again, Bud Light,
Jaguar,
Target Gillette.
Gillette.
Over you just keep going. Okay. So I
understand
that there's a BlackRock influence, an ESG component
to this, and maybe they're trying to tick
some diversity boxes, and and that's
a very devious way of
corporate manipulation,
changing culture through
corporate pressure
from your
board of directors who's run by BlackRock. Quickly.
So here's a point. Like, this is just
this is exactly what I'm getting at. So
as opposed to it being a diversity box,
that's the narrative.
BlackRock is doing this as a way to
control your speech or use these mechanisms as
a way to censor and and surveil and,
like, you know, that's kinda what I feel
like the real point is. But, yeah, from
left and right, yes, clearly, there are the
the surface level or even the congress level
people that, like, have absorbed and bought into
this. But the real agenda,
I don't think they really care about checking
diversity boxes or having to use woke pronouns
or stopping antisemitism, whatever we're talking about, whatever
side. I think it's really at its core
about much more than that. You know what
I mean? And so do you think at
the highest level, that's what it is, or
do you believe that it really is just
that they're obsessed with
ideological differ differences? You know?
Well, I think all of this at its
core is about control. Yeah. Right. Right. Controls
of speech, control thoughts, control of narratives, control
of ideas,
you know, allowing
this is this is the new version of
reality where everybody might be trans. You're like,
I don't wanna feel that way. But if
you go in and every store is reinforcing
this, it it it feels it it it's
artificial. It didn't exist before. It doesn't need
to exist now, and yet here it is.
And you go, why is this happening? This
is and and also, especially when you take
a look at it from, like, a a
business standpoint. Because so much of you know,
they make they spend tons of money making
calculations on how do we increase our stock
price by a little bit. And then you
and then you see
some curve ball
that in no possible way
could you ever think this is going to
do anything but have a detrimental
impact on your stock price. As an example,
Target
putting tuck pants,
you know, and and and embracing the whole
pride thing. How many tuck pants do you
think you're gonna sell? Mhmm. A 100
nationwide?
How many people do you think you're gonna
piss off?
A 100,000?
That's on the low end. You know what
I mean? It's a it's a poor calculation,
and you start looking at things and you
go, guy, you know, like,
you go and get your MBA, and they
teach you how to run a business. And
and I just I promise you, none of
this is happening. And and that's, you know,
that's the bigger point. Right? So that at
the end of the day, we have we
have people, like, we I think I don't
remember if it's you and I, but I
talked about this with somebody that you so
you could explain away
political leanings,
you know, ideological obsession. But when it comes
to, like, the the board, people that shareholders
that, you know, in many cases, don't even
care about the product. That's about, I want
my bottom line. I want my return. And
so how you can argue that they were
sold on that or that these people agreed
with something that is, like, objectively counter to
their business model, like, literally undermine you know,
like, Gillette is the point that I always
make more than the rest of them. Just
it's it because it's such a male, you
know, demographic, and they went with, like, the
the
like, it was, like, bad masculinity or something.
Toxic masculinity. Yeah. It was like it's just
there's no way that they were like, that's
a good business model. So what so what's
the answer? Well, we don't know for sure,
but we know things like DEI or the
background where it said, okay. Look. This is
not even about we're we're changing the entire
model. You don't even need to sell product
anymore. We just need you to sell ideas,
control, and we will then supplement you. We
or rather Yes. You know? What's the word
I'm looking for? Not Subsidize.
Subsidize you. You know? And so that's where
I think and that doesn't even have to
be about DEI or whatever it is. It's
just about that control mechanism. It's the same
way I saw with, like, USAID where, you
know, at the end of the day, clearly,
it's we've seen the narratives and the justification
shift under administration,
but, you know, I think it was it
they were they got their foot in the
door using certain woke ideas or funding, you
know, AIDS treatment. By the way, both of
which are still happening on Trump administration, people
just don't wanna point to it. You know?
So it's all about really the the agenda.
You know? And so it's like that that
bigger picture, like, what could that possibly be
leading towards? You know?
In your mind.
Continuity of ideas
is what I'm thinking of here. Yeah. You
know? Just to keep this ideology going. And
and and I think you're right on the
DEI front. It's like, how could you get
these corporations to act against their own self
interest when they're so driven
by dollars and cents and profit margins and
things like this? That's how they're trained. And
it has to be an external source. It
has to be, we'll make it up on
the back end, or Right. You'll be in
the club. You know, you'll be in the
World Economic Forum
club, circle of
of excellence or whatever it is. You know,
you you'll be in the group. You'll be
the company store. Right? So take a take
a short term hit
now
in order in order to get on our
good side, we, BlackRock slash World Economic Forum,
inseparable at this point now with Larry Fink's
promotion. Yep.
And you do
you slit your own you slit your wrists
a little bit here. Right? Maybe not your
throat, but your wrist. And you and and
we'll we'll patch you up on the other
end, but you'll be in the club,
and we'll lock everybody else out.
And you'll have no competition. Right. Right. So
but we need you we need you to
show us that you're on board with this.
And and this is as you said, it's
not it's not about selling razors. It's about
selling an ideology. It's about selling the concept
that, well, maybe men are yeah. They like
to shave, but maybe they're also toxic too.
And you go,
god, why would you ever do that to
your to your audience? This is your your
customer base
is just completely made up of men and
are insulted and it just
immediate there's you just shake your head and
you go, this will be taught in business
school for eons. Right? Do not do this,
this, or this. Right? And yet
and yet you think that people would learn
from the Bud Light treatment, and yet here
we are.
Yeah. But, again, which is even more so
speaks to the it's far more than about
the current ideological point they're using, you know,
which still is involved. But so, like, same
kind of point. Like, so we it's clear
that this is it's just absurd. You know,
the idea that these things are that
from a business or individual, whatever it is,
that this is even driving people's actions. And
I think we can all acknowledge that the
woke left side of it is just the
most transparent part. You know, it's just very,
very obvious.
But people are beginning to recognize,
I think, have for a long time, but
more so today than usual, the same problem
from the right side of it. So and
at least from your perspective, I could give
examples, but do you see that kind of
thing in the reverse way coming from the
right? Like, do you have any examples you
could think of?
Yeah. I mean, I think that the left
is more cartoonish
in their
in their,
belief system.
And the but the the right shows classic
signs of this as well. Like, they they
make excuses for their guy.
They they they look the other way.
They,
they they fall into traps all the time.
I mean, one of the one of the
prime examples, you don't see this on the
left at all, but you you certainly see
it on the right, is the concept of
Christian Zionism.
Mhmm. If ever there was just, like, a
group of people that you go, oh, oh,
oh, wait. Hang on a second. All of
you are under some form of mind control.
You need to snap out of it. Like,
you know that stuff you accuse the left
of being?
This is your this is a version of
it. Like, you're in some form of group
thinker. You need to break away, and you
can't you can't see that your leaders are
cartoon character preachers that are with megachurches, and
the whole thing feels very,
righteous gemstones to me. And, you know, and
and
and and yet you you can't get their
attention. You feel like they're under a spell.
The same way you wanna shake the left
and go, what are you doing? Why are
you
doing all these things that are incompatible with
reality? You know, like, are you
I do like are you subverted in some
way? Are you captured mentally? Or is this
the what Yuri Bezmenov talked about? I mean,
have you been broken to a point where
you can't be fixed? Like some of all
of it. Yeah. In the but the right
has their own flavor of it. And and
and it's and it it has its hero
worship, you know, of in in embarrassing fashion.
It's authoritarian
worship. Yeah. Get John Bolton.
Go kick his door in at six in
the morning. Listen. I I despise John Bolton.
But the idea of the state using this
here we go. It's like you've gotta be
ideologically
consistent here. If you're against it when it's
done to
Roger Stone, not because you love Roger Stone,
but you think he's gross too, but but
just because it's a it's it shouldn't be
happening. Yeah. You don't get to then enthusiastically
cheerlead when it happens to John Bolton just
because he's the war walrus and you and
you think that he deserves it. Yeah. I
think he deserves something like that too, but
I don't want the state to be the
ones doing it. I want him to be
his next door neighbors.
Yeah. Well and I I would argue more
so, like, maybe less ideological as as just
principle. You know what I mean? Like, logical
is, like, you know, the side versus side,
but but I agree. It's like, if you
if you care about the idea that it
shouldn't matter who it's being done to, it
should be wrong in principle. You know? And
it's like, that's what's so frustrating. But, you
know, even bigger than that too, though, you
know, the idea, it's it's the same kind
of,
model, you know, whether it's about antisemitism or
even just the overlap which we can get
into around, you know, like you said, the
good just broad church authoritarianism,
but, like, worship. It's weird. Like, there's overlap
whether it's DC, the constitutional
discussions. You know? And so it's like they
have these,
you know, mechanisms through which they can they
see that it's easier to make the things
they want to move. And I think it
happens on both sides of the paradigm for
an a a a joint goal, ultimately. You
know? And so let let's well, actually, one
more thing before we I wanted to talk
about some partisan stuff that I had just
I thought was interesting. You mentioned BlackRock. I
want your thoughts on this. It's really interesting.
So now that now that, you know, the
head now head of the WEF, right, which
is
not surprising,
but what's what is very weird to me
is how how completely immersed BlackRock is with
the Trump administration,
just like the last time, by the way,
with the COVID nineteen overlap, as well as,
you know, like, even like a Bill Gates
character who's also very much overlapped with Fink
in many ways and how Palantir is overlapped
with all. That's different point. The point is
just BlackRock and the obvious concern that mostly
conservatives have around that, but how it doesn't
seem to matter when it is
like, you know, the WEF Trump overlap. Like,
how does that not just spin this whole
thing out? You know? It's it's very weird
how clear that is. What do you think
about that? And and kind of choosing to
ignore it. Yeah. It's, well, I just recorded
an episode for macroaggressions that'll go out next
week about,
the dark heart of the financial
system, which is BlackRock. And and and when
you dig into what they really own I
mean, you know, people say, like, oh, they
own everything, and you go, yeah. Yeah. Yeah.
But to
be a to be point
01%
of their portfolio
means that they've got at least a billion
and a half dollars invested in your company.
That's insane. Staggering the amount of money that
they have. They have 12 and a half
trillion dollars of assets under management
as of this quarter.
So it and growing
at at rates that are staggering.
They were $9,000,000,000,000,
in 2023,
just to put it in perspective. So we're
talking about a 33%
growth in just two years
when you're already at $9,000,000,000,000
under management. And you're growing at startup rates.
That's so insane. It just becomes So insane.
The the idea of that money like, have
you ever seen one of those videos that
do, like, the visualization of money? Yes. Like,
once you get past, like, a like, so
many million, like, your brain can't even really
it just becomes like this they just blends
together. Oh, you built trillions. You know? It's
like it's just it's you can't even really
understand it. You know? That's why it's why
it's called a shadow bank. That's what's so
weird about it is that it's literally called
a shadow bank. It is it is it's
basically the US government finances at this point.
You know? It's just so wild. But so
it's it's very alarming to me. We can,
you know, be talking about the great reset.
We can watch how all of this is
just completely fully arched back to where they're
running out the great reset. And maybe it's
with, like, a barely different PR campaign. You
know? It's in a little bit different slant.
And now Fink is is head of the
WEF and and and now pushing out more
and more about the same future, and now
he's you know, it's just it's just I
think I'm shocked to see how few people
have made those dots connect. I'm actually really
really
feeling good about how many people are choosing
to call out, like, the Epstein cover up,
call out a lot of this stuff. But
that one to me is just like that
needs to happen. Like, we need to recognize
that this is in full blow. I mean,
what do you think about that? Do you
think the great reset is being completely executed
right now, or or is there something different
happening?
Well, when you've got build back better and
you rebrand it with with a big beautiful
bill Right. It feels like you're using the
same ad agency
to to deliver the message. Yeah. It's hard
not to see that.
So, I mean, when when you know
that
both of these red team, blue teams are
the same team, when you understand that, then
it all makes way more sense. Mhmm. So
the idea that, like, well, here comes the
here comes the red team. Well, what are
they gonna do? Well, they're gonna do something
kinda similar, but it's gonna be it's gonna
have red team terminology.
It's gonna have their ad. It's gonna have
all their stars in it. Like, it's gonna
be geared more towards them because they're the
winners. So so this time, we're gonna we're
still doing the same stuff. It's just a
different flavor. It's Coke or Pepsi. And and
and so the tyranny in fact, if you
wanna sell the tyranny
that the people on the red team would
rightly call out, then you're you're gonna need
your guy to do it. Because he's because
you can't have the opposite guy try to
sell the it just doesn't work that way.
You've gotta have your guys. So so what
the Trumpers didn't realize was that when he
won,
then what that meant was that they were
gonna get a whole bunch of things coming
their way that were going to be against
their own self interest, but they were gonna
be made to support it
because their guy was there. So if if
the Democrats, you know, all broke down and
cried, you know, when when Trump got in
again. But if they understood the plan, they
would what they would see is that for
the next four years, they're actually gonna get
probably a little bit of a break while
he targets
the the conservatives
and removes their rights
and does the things that that oh, had
Obama done it, he would have been caught
how Joe Biden or whoever that was done
it or Kamala.
There would have been, you know, there would
have been locked and loaded, ready to go.
But but because it's their guy Mhmm.
They they all put their guard down. They
allow that Trojan horse to be brought inside
the gates, and then they get the World
Economic Forum in the form of Larry Fink.
Well, you were gonna get the World Economic
Forum either way. Right. Didn't really matter. You
just got it this time, but but now
he's Trump's guy because of, I don't know,
Lutnick or something.
I don't I don't know. Yeah. He did
Many, many different overlapping points. But yeah. I
guess I guess more what I'm asking is,
do you think that the great reset as
it was laid out is actually still happening,
or do you think they've deviated from the
the, you know, bigger plan? Because that that
happens. You know, we've seen it. We've seen
them shift entirely to something new at least
momentarily. So do you think that's still what's
happening, or are they gonna shift? Well, define
the great reset then exactly because Yeah. I
mean, I mean, the like, the I guess,
the the the campaign that was laid out.
Right? Like, the like, the all the different
market the points that of the great reset
laid out by Klaus Schwab, you know, the
fourth industrial revolution, you know, all of that
kinda stuff. Like, do you think that's, like,
an earnest still marching forward, or are we
or or is it maybe that was the
head fake itself? You know? What do you
think?
Well, I think
in Europe, they're for sure got getting the
World Economic Forum treatment. I think that with
Trump, he's probably
less enthusiastic
about it, but I don't think that he
has
a a say ultimately in this. I think
that when when you're talking about
the the the the this globalist group,
it's it's
it's it's all it's settled in boardrooms
Mhmm. More so than than in Washington, DC.
You know, once they've incorporated
the the major,
corporations of the world with the interlocking
boards of directors, and then you bring the
granddaddy of them all, BlackRock, in and have
their head guy sit down and drive policy.
My my guess is that it it will
continue, but it just might look a little
bit differently. It might it might not be,
you know, the overt bad guy,
Klaus Schwab with the with the German accent
and the space suits that he wears, but
but it's it could be more like, you
know,
it it's definitely gonna be as bad, probably
even worse with Larry Fink, but it'll be
handled in, you know, through these interlocking boards
of directors where where all the major decisions
are made.
And,
and and whether Trump wants it or doesn't
want it, I think this is above his
pay grade.
Yeah. That's a good point too. Is it
kinda does now slant the flavor towards more
of the what we're seeing a lot of
actually. There's, like, the CEO run country, the
Yeah. CEO run Liberty Freedom City that's actually
a technocratic nightmare. You know? It's like it's
I so maybe that's the new push. We're
selling it to you as the a CEO
run version that'll be business wise. You know,
it's like it's just it's interesting even though
that's clearly not even what's happening. More spending,
bigger government. You know, it's frustrating. But, yeah,
I I I personally, I think it's very
much still happening. Like, the the very plan,
you know, but just slightly different framing. But
I guess we're gonna see how it plays
out. Yeah. But you you mentioned,
John Bolton. So I think this is interesting.
Just a couple overlaps on this. Rating the
whole of John Bolton, which is just on
its face interesting because I I think it's
funny to see how the, you know, the
what what the word they use? Just the
the the the friends of the past become
the enemies of today. You know, it's, like,
constantly off like that, you know, where he
was the team player. Him and Bill Barr
were gonna save the world, and then suddenly
now they're the monsters. But, like, you're you
already addressed this, and I agree. I think
it's wildly inconsistent. And just the idea of
the authoritarianism
itself, like, what's happening here. Do you I
haven't gone into this in-depth. What's the what's
the argument, do you know, of why they
I don't know.
I haven't looked at it. Right now, but
I haven't got a chance to look at
it.
You know what I mean? If you're if
we're talking about, like, what crimes could John
Bolton be arrested on, I Right. I would
imagine there's a variety of them. But in
terms of what they're looking at right now,
why today as opposed to last week or
three weeks from now? I don't know. That
I I did read this earlier. If they're
claiming or they're they're part of a larger
search for classified records, does that become, like,
the the the catch all these days? Classified
records, you know, and then no one ever
gets in trouble for anything. It's but then
now but see, here's where it gets interesting.
The narrative
becomes that it's more than that. Even though
there's nothing to go on, and that's what
I find interesting.
Excuse me.
Alice Jones says DOJ sources, which, you know,
his quote, unquote DOJ sources have been wrong
more often than not, say more raids are
coming ahead of dozens of indictments.
So, you know, I I I don't this
feels a lot more like we keep the
whole queue thing. But, I mean, I think
we both agree up to your point actually
before. There's so many crimes you can arrest
these people for, but you do, then you
open the the box for all of them.
You know, Trump was in there when he
was doing these things. I mean, they're all
war criminals. You know? So I doubt that's
what it's gonna be about. I don't even
think John I don't think John Bolton or
anybody is gonna be held accountable.
This is FBI raids, Maryland home of John
Bolton. Of course, Patel says no one is
above the law. You gotta love these fake
statements that like like you said here,
Barnum statement. Public corruption will not be tolerated.
In fact, public corruption will always be tolerated
inside the American empire. It's part of the
glue that keeps the whole thing together. That's
Dan Bongino for the podcast. Yeah. Funny. Go
and comment if you want to. I can't
see your face right now, so jump in
if you want to. I was gonna read
some of these. You have a comment? No.
I just I just think that it it's
it's such a it's such a laughable statement
when the FBI is out there talking about
how nobody's above the law. Like, what have
you been watching for the last, oh, I
don't know,
twenty five years? Yeah. There's clearly a segment
of society that is above the law. And
and even more so clearly right now in
this administration. I mean, they've shown us that
with with Epstein, with with Maxwell, or anybody
else or or Gates or you know, any
the people are supposed to be trotted in
front of us in handcuffs. You know? Yeah.
Uh-huh. And then there's a couple more of
these that just this one is so, you
know, saying that, you know, Patel is telling
us no one's above the law. Over here,
though, this was the day before,
Trump administration was preparing to fire Patel or
replace him with, Andrew Bailey. There's a whole
conversation there if you wanna get into it,
but it's interesting. Like, it's the way that
this reporting has been going from a lot
of them is very interesting. You know, kind
of like I don't know. Just it's weird
the way they recovered. This one says whistleblower
reveals how Patel and Boncino
are actually being thwarted by the deep state.
Right? So it's like, this is my point
of how he's covered. So you're covering all
your bases. You throw out every possible thing,
and then whichever way it goes, we knew
it. We were right. You know? I just
find it very interesting. But the idea that
somehow president Trump's kryptonite has always been a
corrupt DOJ,
what a stupid thing to say. Yeah. Because
I don't know. What do you think before
I jump in with my thought? It's
it's it's just theater. You know? It's like
and cue cue the, you know, the actors
to onto the stage, you know, and then
exit stage left. It just it just feels
like
trust the plan, arrests are coming, deep state
is in trouble,
it'll all be exposed,
you know, all all this stuff. I mean,
is John Bolton being led away in handcuffs?
Is it did they I mean,
raiding his house?
This
this could be theater for all we know.
I mean, it maybe just they're they're trying
to rattle his cage. But is is John
Bolton gonna go to prison? No.
If he was gonna go to prison, he
would have gone to prison for, I don't
know, being involved in war crimes, for facilitating
the sale of
of chemical weapons to Iran or Iraq or
some foreign
leader. Do you remember the video of him,
like, walking down the street in The United
Arab Emirates? Some people filmed him. They're like,
this is John Bolton walking down the street.
He's like walking down the street and or
he was in, like, Doha someplace, and you're
like, what's going on here? He's so he's
the he's a a scumbag
arms salesman
and has been for a long, long time.
Bloodthirsty Zionist who'd never saw a war he
didn't want your kids to go die in.
So there's plenty of reasons to wanna hate
John Bolton or to think that he should
be locked up. But what what this is
all about in the end is
it it's it's
like
Trump porn
for for the right where they go, he,
you know, he's rounding them up. He's just
going one by one. I mean, at this
rate,
he'll there'll be dozens of people in the
by the next in four years out of
the thousands or tens of thousands who should
be let away in handcuffs. I mean, it
it just feels
it it just feels like
more theater
to fill the news cycle. And then, you
know, football's coming up. It starts in two
weeks, so it'll be out of the we
won't be talking about it. Right. Well, I
mean, clearly, your point is this is the
same thing I've said in the past about
others. Right? Or Obama or anybody. The idea
is okay. So you're telling us you know
you're going out you you you've raided his
home, so you've got something. Right? So why
isn't he being arrested and led away? The
idea that so you're you're you're on a
fishing expedition then. You're going there to look
for something. So that clearly does not mean
what they're trying to lay it out as.
They're framing it as it's all coming down.
Well, then they would be arresting these people,
not diving into their home and making a
big show like you're talking about. You know?
It's it's it's insulting to our intelligence at
the end of the day. And and the
the idea of the, you know, the Trump
porn thing is it's it's clear that they
want that momentum. They want you to feel,
like, it to distract from many, many different
things. I mean, the isn't it weird how
the Epstein story it's every day we get
further from that story.
Every single day, there's no it's not I
don't even see momentum anymore. They keep acting
like, well, the courts, they said no. And
there there's so many other angles through which
they could put information out, and they are
just letting it drift away. It's very obvious.
Dave Smith even just called him out in
some recent thing. He was on stage saying,
you know, they covered this up. Or or
even the, what's the other ones that I
was just talking about? Like, or even whether
it's the MAHA
complete dismantling of this administration,
but all these different moves where they just
keeps getting further away. You know? It's do
you think there's gonna be any accountability for
any of that or any of the different,
you know, larger points?
No. I mean, I I I
and they you know, if there if there
was a a little bit of accountability,
it would go set it would go a
long way.
That's why when John does get repressed They
haven't made that that connection. Like,
you've got to show some of the people
going to jail
if you really wanna if you really wanna
get away. But they they they don't care.
Much in the same way, they don't care
about the Epstein stuff, you know. Yeah. He
just left them he he hung them out
to dry. You know, Cash and Bongino, he
just says, we're not releasing it. You guys
go out there and fall on your swords.
Look like idiots. I don't care. We're not
I just know that that, you know, I'm
gonna take it for a while, and then
we'll move off of the news cycle. And
I've been around
long enough to know that eventually,
you know, summer will be over. We'll be
talking about something else, and we'll we'll forget
about it. And you guys get to bear
the brunt of it. You guys the the
people anybody who's loyal to Donald Trump. What
this is like being loyal to the psychotic
king. You know at some point, he's gonna
turn on you. He he turns on everybody.
And and to think that this time, you're
gonna tame him or you're gonna be different
or you're gonna get you're gonna get to
the bottom of it or what like, it's
it it's not happening. He's there's no loyalty
with this guy at all. And so the
the the cash you know, the Bonginos and
and and the Bondies of the world, He
views them as disposable. The way he's seen
people, contractors,
you know, through his business world, I'm sure
executives with NBC probably saw them as disposable.
You know, he doesn't
value people. So if you wanna work with
this guy, just, you know, don't act surprised
when things go awry. I mean, I don't
know why these these guys are acting like
they didn't see it coming. Like,
we all saw it coming. Yeah. I agree.
I mean, I I'm of the mind that
more and more people who haven't in the
past are. But I I wonder here too,
like, you know, it's it's certainly like, because
of what you said and how long this
has been the can has been kicked down
the road, if you will,
you know, it wouldn't surprise me if somebody
like a John Bolton does. I mean, again,
I don't think it's gonna happen based on
past events, precedents, you know, and just the
lot the reality of the facts. I'm arguing
I think it's unlikely.
But if it did, it would make sense
because they know that people need that, some
kind of a bone. But, look, we are
doing it. Bolton was everybody hates John Bolton.
Everybody. Yeah. You
you you you could do that to universal
approval.
Seriously. But John Bolton does know where the
bodies are buried, you know? And so, like,
you wonder how this ultimately plays out. But
I simply said, you know, who's got the
odds on whether this is yet another hype
false story and a long line of hype
false stories that leads nowhere but but this
but the sale of penis bills on Infowars.
As we all should, I certainly hope these
criminals are arrested, but history suggests that we're
being played.
John Bolton will never go into a prison
cell. If John Bolton is ever going to
be taken off the chess board, it will
be that some two men enter his room,
hold him down, inject him with a substance,
slip out the back door, and John Bolton
has a heart attack in the middle of
the night. Right. Right. They're not gonna leave
a guy that who knows where the bodies
are buried, as you rightly pointed out, to
to sit around and get himself in a
in a in a in a in a
pickle and then have to start talking. That
just
he and
and John Bolton would know that.
Yeah. Exact that's a great point, which means
he's gonna act accordingly. Or logically speaking, that's
what you would assume. You know? But the
you know, an overlapping point is the Maxwell
point, which I didn't have necessarily set up
to talk about. But
the interesting discussion I recently saw, I don't
know if you saw this, where now the
statement's coming out, whether being released by people
supporting her or the prison or herself, I
didn't really see I'm I've got into it
in-depth, but that she's in danger now. Right?
Which
interestingly makes sense. Right? You're clearly with the
whole overlap to all of this. You've been
moved to a
lower security prison, and everyone just kinda stops
talking about it. It's like, was that set
up that way so she could be taken
out? You know, it's worth considering. Right? But
it's interesting to think about that now you
have this situation where she is, you know,
in limbo. It could work out in her
favor if ultimately this, you know I don't
know. I mean, how do you see this
playing out? With her in that position, it
seems they're drifting further and further away from
any accountability. The courts have stepped in and
said at least twice now that we're not
the records can't come out even though they
could do it if they wanted to. Where
do you see that going? I mean, I
think we talked about this a couple of
months ago. What if they made her into
a victim?
I that's already happening in some play some
places. Newsmax would be You could see her
well, I mean, I guess you could go
one of two ways with this. You could
either see this as they're moving her into
position for her to be easier to be
taken out,
which
a case could be made for that. But
I think people who
know the prison system will tell you, if
you wanna get somebody, you can get them.
And if you wanna get somebody as high
profile as her, you you're gonna have to
have connections
to to to do that. And, of course,
the people who would want Ghislaine Maxwell dead
would have those connections. So I think that
she's always been in danger,
but she's also hasn't been talking in the
past. And so the more that the FBI
visits her in jail, I mean, that obviously
puts a target on on your back because
it it implies that you're in some way
communicating with them, and nobody
can be sure what you're saying. So so
that would in that would automatically put a
target on her back as if she didn't
have one already. But maybe it kinda died
down and, you know, they made a calculation.
But
but if you wanna come at this from
the other direction is that
she could be one step closer to getting
out
for talking to these people about the about,
what she knows,
about who was involved. She could be in
being pressured in some way to come out
and say,
all these people over here were involved, but
Trump wasn't.
Right. Obviously, that's
that would
you know, if she did that, if that
was part of a of of some sort
of stipulation,
the left would never believe it anyway. So
I don't know who you'd be convincing. You
might be able to settle the minds of
some of the people on the right, but
they're already convinced that he's innocent of everything,
and he's fine. So I don't know, though.
I I see a split down the middle,
though. I mean, I see a lot of
really prominent people on the right who are,
you know, in many ways, even still supporting
him, which I continue to find I continue
to find confounding like with the COVID shot
thing. But they go, you know, yes. Bad.
But he did cover up the the FC
network. You know? It's nice.
It's a crack. Yeah.
I like that. Right? I do like that
that they're starting to break away and say,
well, I supported him, but I don't support
this. Okay. Good. That's a great first step.
It doesn't mean you don't have to sign
on to every you know, you can Mhmm.
Like one of these candidates, but it doesn't
have to you don't have to sign on
to everything that they do. You can say,
I like them, but I don't like what
he's doing right now. Right? That that's the
first step towards recognizing that they're all
they're all criminals. But but if you can
at least see the flaws in your guy
or you could you know, you can say,
I draw the line here. Like, this is
some this is wrong or we voted for
him or I was kind of on the
fence and I didn't really care one way
or the other, but I leaned towards him
because I it would be nice to have
some,
resolution to the Epstein stuff, and a lot
of these people need to be in prison.
So he said he would do that. So
if there's a chance that he'll do it,
I'll vote for him, and then he gets
in there and goes, yeah. We're not doing
it. You go, goddamn it. Yeah. You know,
I fell for it again. One of those
like, for those people, yeah, I think those
people are genuinely
starting to be, to feel like they've been
had. And and and, you know,
but but
if Ghislaine came out and just said, oh,
Trump wasn't involved at all.
I mean,
how much?
I I don't know. Would that would that
do would that do anything for the damage
control of those people who are frustrated with
him if he came out and or would
it be would that be good enough? Or
would they say, still doesn't change the fact
that this was done to somebody's kid. You
might not have been the person doing it,
but somebody was. And for you to not
investigate this or to to to tell call
us all stupid for still talking about it
is is not only insulting to my intelligence,
but it's it's immoral or it's, you know,
it goes against my my sense of
morality
or something. You know? So I I could
I'd I'd I'd I don't know what she's
going to be used for in this whole
play,
but,
you know, she's got cards to play, I
would imagine. She's in prison, which is not
a good spot, but, you know, she knows
a lot. And that information is valuable to
a lot of people.
And I think at this point with where
they've bungled this thing so far, I think
that they the best case scenario for the
Trump administration or just Trump's personal perspective
would be to go that route, to have
her come out,
you know, folded in over the next week
or two weeks since, you know, some kind
of over new new stories come out that
she's the victim. Right? That somehow that it
was all abuse and that she was played
and, you know, it finally comes out through
the court. And if you using that and
then her saying Trump was innocent, they were
trying it's a Democrat attack. Like, I could
see far too many
in even people, you know, people that are
maybe calling stuff out but wanna believe in
Trump falling for that. Because it's an easy
low hanging fruit to be like, I knew
it. He wasn't bad. It was always the
democrats. You know? And and it puts back
the that's what I think the best case
scenario is, but that would be difficult to
manage, I think. But we'll have to see
how it plays out. Yeah. It's interesting, though.
Yeah. So let let's talk about this last
point on the partisan thing I think is
interesting. The this this has been going around
in regard to the an interview that,
Tucker Carlson had. And what's the guy's name
again? It was is this from here?
Thank you. Yeah. And the this is everyone.
Laurel Laurel, dogpiling. Look. And you know my
I'm not I'm I'm very, very, very suspicious
of Tucker Carlson, but how and I think
there's a lot of very obvious reason to
be.
But he has been calling things out even
though there's things that have been public knowledge
for a long time that have been getting
a lot of attention to them, right, around
Israel and so on, which is positive, but
we should continue questioning, although I hope that's
importantly
heard. But it's funny to see the rumors
of the types kind of, like, dog piling
on to him about anything they can, which
says a lot to me. This one was
about him saying, I think the statement was
one can make the argument that we should
have sided with Hitler. Now you know I've
seen his work. The idea to claim that
he's advocating for Hitler support is absurd. If
you look at the rational arguments that are
being made, as I understand it, I
watched the the the general part of it,
is that ultimately the argument
is, you know, that based on this information,
should this be true, you could argue that
that was the side that, you know, was,
you know, fighting the evil you know, whatever.
Not to say that he goes, I think
we should support Hitler. It's a very nuanced
argument made. And I look. I'm not let's
just even say he was making that statement.
My point is of around all of it
is how insane it is for somebody to
say Tucker is now bad for letting this
person express their opinion. You know what I
mean? Like, it's isn't that the woke left?
Right? Isn't that what that was about the
same thing? And now here's the right doing
the same thing, which is always the point
to make around this, but just the way
that it's like this language control point. And,
I mean, in no way, to be clear,
am I arguing that there's somehow an argument
made that we support? I don't think that's
the reality. I think he was a monster
like a lot of people that worked in
many ways overlap with the very powers we're
fighting today, by the way. Both US and
others we could talk about. But what are
your thoughts about this and how it's being
applied? You know? And, like, especially with the
overlap of Zionism and where this all is,
it's a interesting thing. The split right here,
rumor, Tucker. You know? What do you think
about it all? Well, they did the same
thing with Daryl Cooper when he came on
and talked about Churchill. Right? He was like,
well, Churchill wasn't all that great. The monster
dude are you talking about? How dare you?
He had a cigar and he you know?
And and you go, oh, then well, there's
more.
It it goes to an underlying
point that there are more questions about World
War two now than there have ever been.
And people are trying starting to reexamine
history and look back on this and go,
alright. Well,
given what I know
now
about the way the media operates and how
dirty politicians are in our modern world,
isn't it reasonable for me to think that
maybe
what we in the West are told about
World War two
is
is is skewed to benefit us and make
us look better, make somebody you know, history
is written by the victors as they say.
I I had a conversation with a a
handyman
who is Russian,
and who who works with me on things.
And and he I asked him, oh, he
he couldn't come one day because it he
was at a celebration with his family. And
it was, it was a World War two
celebration.
He says it's a big deal to us,
to to the to Russians. And
in my community here in Denver is is
it's you know, the he says, you know,
do you know about World War two? I
said, well, I know
I mean, I had to unlearn
what I thought I knew and learn the
new version of it. And what I know
is that you guys lost a lot of
lot of young boys. You lost a lot
of people during that war, and that and
that the bulk of the heavy lifting was
done by the Soviet Union against the Germans
and that America's involvement was greatly exaggerated. He
just looked at me like, oh, okay. Yeah.
I mean
so you know a little bit more about
it. And so so there's a it depends
on on
it it depends on where you grew up
and what you're taught. Because here in The
United States, I mean, America saved the day
in World War two. You know, we dropped
the bombs on those dirty japs, you know,
and we and we we we came in
and we defeated the the the bad guys.
And you go, okay. Well,
what if they're all bad guys?
Right. Right. You know, like, if we consider
that like, there's this idea that it's like,
these are the good guys and those are
the bad guys. It's like, well, okay. But
the reason why it all started in the
first place was because of all these other
things that nobody talks about. Doesn't that make
the good guys kind of the bad guys
too? It's like, well, okay. So so when
Dave Colum or Daryl Cooper or somebody is
saying
talk you know, goes into and says something
like this that that creates a firestorm, what
they're really saying is
World War two is a lot more complex
than we had been told. Right. It's there's
the the stories of of what
led to it, what happened during it, and
then the things that were done in the
aftermath of it. There are a ton of
lies surrounding those stories, and it is worth
a reexamination.
Now, you know, in in it it talks
you know, it's just
kind of hearkens back to the
the general patent quote about, I think maybe
we've fought on the wrong side here. And
you go, why would he say that? You
know, what did he see? Did he see
something that we didn't see? Is it you
know, they're all banker wars. You know? Was
Hitler a a gay British spy as Sam
Tripoli says? You know what I mean? Like,
I mean, what what's really going on? Because
because to examine a comment like that,
just on its face, even if he said,
you know, even if he he went to
the most extreme,
requires you to unpack a whole new version
of history that you probably didn't know. And
you're not gonna ever get to a point
where you're saying hit Hitler was a good
guy. Right? You're not gonna get there.
But you're going to get to a point
where you're gonna go, well, now I understand.
You know, if I was in Germany in
1937,
I would've I would've given the middle finger
of the Nazis, and I would've never joined
up anything. And you go, yeah. You lived
through COVID, didn't you? You saw what happened
to people during COVID. Right? I don't know
if you you know, do you know the
conditions
inside Germany that led to a lot of
this frustration? What was happening? Who was doing
it? What was being done? Like, there's a
whole lot to unpack here. So I think
that when you're you're in a a headline
driven society,
social media fueled,
sound bites, clips, two minute thing. I got
two minutes of Tucker out of three hours
or whatever. And you use that, you can
paint whatever picture you want. You can make
Dave Collum look like a rabid Nazi if
you'd like to, or you can make him
look as like an intellectual, who he is.
He worked as a professor at Princeton. And
and you should say that what he's saying
is that we have to examine
all the information, not just some cherry picked
information that goes into your textbooks that's controlled
by some guys that you don't even know.
So so I I think that whenever you
get something like this, it's probably good for
ratings, good for clicks, you know, probably gets
a lot of people watching that that that
interview. But if you're looking to drag some
guy out in in his jack boots out
of an interview with Tucker, this isn't it.
Well, on top of that, it's it's not
even it's also it's largely directed towards Tucker.
How dare he sit there and let this
man express his grace? And after everything with
that Charlie just said and what we just
looked at, now listen to the statement again.
You the argument could be made that this
was the like, it's to to make the
I to put out the idea that you're
not the like, framing an alternative argument in
any context is is somehow wrong. It's weird
how that is only really ever happening in
conversations like this. In certain points and certain
historical you know, it's this is not allowed.
You are not allowed to look at Zionism.
You know, it's very weird how all that
happens. You know? But I think it just
speaks to the control
of a lot of important things, like your
point about World War two entirely. You know,
there's major aspects that people don't look into.
They don't they don't wanna understand.
And even the idea of, like, the the
the most contentious parts by design, the holocaust,
you know, the different aspects of the way
that went down. The idea that we're not
allowed to have a conversation about nuances or
how somebody like, even from the perspective of
maybe they just got the data wrong. You
know, it's like, how dare you? You know,
it's like whatever it is. And it's just
so insane. That speaks volumes. And I think
today people are finally, you know, more than
ever recognizing. That's not to say that we're
trying to make the argument that this is
good or that's bad. It's just an analytical
point. You know? It's just a like he
like you're saying, he's an he's an intellectual
making an argument about the historical misinformation, and
and that's what it all spins out into.
You know, it just shows you the control
that we are under in the world. And
it's not just Israel. There's a lot of
other parts around this. You know? But thank
you. That's an insightful breakdown on that. It's
very, very weird, though. It's coming from Ted
Cruz. You know? And, like, watching this kind
of split down the middle of these parties.
It's it's fascinating to watch. You're not allowed
to make the argument that there could be
questions about World War two, but you are
allowed to make the argument that men can
have babies.
Yeah. Right. Or or going the direction based
off your COVID point, right, that we don't
need a COVID nineteen. We're watching a genocide
play out, and people are siding, you know,
the same kind of idea. But to your
point that, you know, it's it's it's about
a a bastardization of the information. You know?
Using the misinformation to drive us into places
of control as always, every possible thing. But
then always within that,
there are multifaceted agendas. You know? Individual congressmen,
let's say, that have their own agenda about
the way the way they want something to
go down or people in the military or
different governments. You know? There's always that's why
it's so difficult to put a pin in
one thing. This is what it was about.
You know? There's always so many things happening.
Yeah. Let let let's take this into, you
know,
well, I was either gonna talk about
ICE DC overlap or
let's see how much time we have. Let's
let's talk about this first,
and then we'll go into some DC stuff
and ISEF with how much time we have
left. So I thought this was interesting. So
you might have seen this.
This just kinda speaks to the larger agenda.
Elon Musk on how to avoid being replaced
by by AI. I'll just play at the
beginning of it. Vision for a society where
human effort is no longer required
for survival or productivity.
How do we avoid irrelevance?
Right. I think that's a central question. Well,
if if you are
symbiotic
with AI
where we
that there's this
essentially, a merger of human and machine intelligence,
then
we may be able to address the relevance
question.
So So he goes on to clearly continue
to point out that we should merge with
machines.
Does sound familiar? I'm sure we've heard this
before. What's the first industrial revolution will lead
to is a fusion
of our physical,
our digital,
and
our biological
identities.
Now to us, this is not new. Right?
We've seen Elon Musk make very similar points
before. We've seen this building well before Klaus
Schwab. You know? But kind of the same
or earlier point. And and I I'd like
to even get into some Elon weirdness and
Doge and stuff like that, but he's clearly
pointing to the direction this is all going
in. And this is not, like, twenty years
from now. This has happened this is the
weird part for me as somebody covering this.
We're literally watching this happen. You know? Right?
We can see them building infrastructure, building out
I mean, we have bots running parts of
our government at this point, if not entirely,
for all we know. You know? And he's
outlining this merger
for the future. I just, you know, just
want your thoughts on that, where that goes,
the overlap with the China perspective, it's warming.
Well, I think it's important for people to
get clear on what the fourth industrial revolution
actually is.
He talks about the blending of man with
machine into something known as transhumanism.
Mhmm. And
and and that word matters.
The reason why they did not robot future
or whatever no. It's transhumanism.
And that word was coined in 1957
by sir Julian Huxley, the head of the
British Eugenics Society when he rebranded
eugenics
into something else, into a different word because
it had a lot of baggage. And the
word he chose was transhumanism,
and it sounds futuristic
and kinda cool.
And if you if you go with the
sales pitch from Schwab, which will now be
Larry Fink, you know, the this is this
is, an upgrade to your physical body. It's
it's it's
robot arms, it's,
implantable devices, it's pills that you swallow that
map and make sure that everything is working.
You know, it's it's benefit, benefit, benefit. That's
you sell the benefits. This is a time
share sales pitch,
and they're only gonna show you the glossy
images. Right? They're not gonna talk to you
about what it really is about. What it
really is about is depopulation
because that is transhumanism
is eugenics, and eugenics is depopulation.
So but you can't just come right out
and say that because people won't walk into
you know, they won't they won't walk into
the cage if you if you say it's
about that. So it's gotta be about something
more
and something
that they can sell. And and who better
to sell it than Elon Musk? You know,
he's got Neuralink. He's a trusted guy with
your car. You know, you get your sat
you get satellite
Internet from him sometimes if you're out and
about. You know, I mean, he's
he's
he's relevant.
And and so,
so he's the guy who's selling the future.
And the future, unfortunately,
that these guys wanna push
is is what he's not going to say
when in when asked the question about relevance
within in a world of AI is that
the truth is you're irrelevant
to them. And that actually,
as part of the fourth industrial revolution,
it's the blending of man with machine,
but it's then the subsequent removal of man.
Because they because they're no longer needed for
these tasks.
So
it's,
it it's just, that most people will never
dig beneath the surface. I mean, maybe
maybe what is necessary to wake people up
to this I mean, you would think a
cartoon character like Klaus Schwab and his whole
get up would be the thing that that
wakes people up. Maybe they just need to
see known bad guy Larry Fink
in charge there, and they go, wait a
second. Like, he's not uncle Klaus. He's he's
Larry the evil banker. Why is he in
charge of this? Like, wait. He wants me
to implant devices? The scary banker billionaire guy
who's owns all these like,
what if what if it has the exact
opposite effect?
Yeah. Yeah. I certainly hope so. You know,
you you just wonder if the kind of
the point before is that maybe they've created
a, you know, a a situation, a climate
where people are more amenable, open to driving
towards a CEO run anything. You know? Trump
the best man. This is the same model.
You know? I I just hope that we're
not that simple. You know? I'll I'll include
this too. We'd this is, to make that
point,
we've I've we've I've, covered this many times.
James Corbett did a great breakdown of this.
This is the the one
from that basically Klaus Schwab and the rest
in the US government overlap are pointing to,
converging technologies
for improving human performance,
02/2002.
This is the one that Corbett covered from
Canada exploring biodigital convergence that it literally says,
biological and digital systems are converging and could
change the way we work, live, and even
evolve as a species, which I think is
important seeing as how in this report from
02/2002,
it overlaps the this is how I covered
it on the show. The government docs from
2002 reveal a twenty year plan to alter
evolution with nanotechnology.
It puts us right at 2022, right in
the middle of the COVID nineteen overlap. You
know? So it's like I I think that
there's a very clear effort that overlaps with
this that's like a whole, you know, not
just like evolving
technology, digital IDs, and surveillance, but, like, something
internal. You know? And that's why I think
that there's a whole part of this that
is being done without our knowledge. You know?
And I think that the COVID nineteen overlap.
Different point entirely, but I think that these
obviously connect. You know? And I think a
lot of these stories are about trying to
get us to look anywhere other than what's
literally in front of us, sadly enough.
Yeah. Well, they're not gonna tell the sheep
they're headed to the, slaughterhouse.
You know? They just they just can't do
that. And so they're gonna it's it will
constantly be,
disguised and hidden or sold to us as
a benefit.
And,
but for those of us that that are
suspicious about these sorts of things, I mean
and I think we are we're right to
be.
The the sales pitch is gonna look a
bit cartoonish.
So I always kinda keep that in mind
when I see things like this, when I
see this Elon sale the sales guy.
And I I always wonder, like, well, maybe
this messaging isn't for me. When it's obvious
to me that it's crazy and, you know,
diabolical, and I look at it and I
I go, well, maybe everybody else isn't seeing
it the way I'm seeing it. Maybe maybe
the way they see it is is some
other way.
I need to read that 2002 document.
I can say that. I'm sure you've seen
it before too. You know, the it's the
it's the it's the premise for a lot
of this. The whole, because, you know, what
it's talking about is
the merging of the nanotech, biotech, information, and
cognitive. So it even talks about, like, the
neuroscience overlap. You know? And this it's like
this is what's crazy is how long ago
this has been mapped out. You know? And
this involves the The United States. You know?
It's it's a I'll I'll definitely send it
to you. And James James Corbett did a
really good breakdown of this one and and
the whole bigger picture, which I think I'll
send that to you. I think I have
it saved as well. It just kinda shows
you where this has been mapped out, you
know. And and what's weird is that half
the store half that conversation, even today, is
considered to be conspiracy theory. And here they
are in 2022,
like, mapping out how these things will converge.
And then, of course, when Klaus Schwab steps
out and goes, this is when it's happening,
you know, it just it kind of all
clicks together for people that have been watching
this build. You know, it's very, very strange.
Well, on on a on a final point
around this, you know, where what do you
think some of these next steps will be?
Right now, it feels like a lot of
the the coverage, the the media, it's we're
being pulled in I mean, in right obvious,
accurate ways. Like, the genocide is is very
important to highlight and see and cover, but
it's, you know, it's an ongoing kinetic war.
My point is that we seem to be
focusing on things that are in front of
us that we can cover as opposed to
some of these deeper points like the great
reset, like transhumanism,
technocracy,
political machinations. You know? So, like, what do
you think some of these next larger steps
will be that pull us into that direction?
You know? Boy. That great reset.
You know, I I I
I've been I've been writing recently a lot
about Eugenics,
on a new book. And and I
it's just a reminder
to me that these when you get these
very powerful people in large groups, they have
these
there's two overriding themes.
The the one is,
we need to we should all be in
charge. And if we were to work together
and inform some sort of world governance structure,
we could run the world. And secondly,
this whole thing would work a lot better
if it wasn't for all these people. Mhmm.
And as we start to as you you
mentioned earlier that the acceleration,
it
it it feels like we're at the point
now where
they're going to start
the the culling process. I mean, the the
the vaccines over the last couple of years,
whether they were meant to do it, you
know, on
within hours as as some people suffered or
whether it was more of, like, a a
ten year time bomb set on the immune
system.
It feels like if you're going to push
everybody into agenda 2030, and that's been on
their calendar, not our not my calendar, but
their calendar for for a long, long time.
Mhmm. If we're we're getting to the final
stretch here in the last five years of
this. And if you're going to make it
happen,
it's gonna it's gonna be done through these
digital means. It feels like that's the the
calculation that's been made. I so my eyes
are always on
the technocracy
side of things. I I I it's I
talk a lot about the CBDCs and the
money and all of that, but but watching
that, whether it's the
space fence being built or whether it's just
the the
the
the push of AI or the the dependency
already a lot of people have on AI,
which is crazy. But
I'm that's where I'm I'm keeping my eyes
on for for the for the for the,
you know, from here on out. I'm watching
the the techno because and the and the
reason why I feel that way is because
on day two of Trump's administration, he walked
out some of the most dangerous technocrats in
the planet.
And so I think it pays to watch
that. Now there's a lot of things going
on. It's not to say, don't worry about
what's going on overseas and because I because
I do. But but but if I have
to prioritize what's likely to impact my life,
truth is what's going on in Israel doesn't
really factor.
But the the technoctor
see that the digital side of things
impacts all of us. And so if they
can get that locked down,
then we're in real trouble. So I think
that that's where my my focus has been.
I think that it's it's a reasonable place
to put your focus when you see the
likes of Sam Altman and Larry Ellison and
Elon Musk and Peter Thiel and Alex Karp
and and, of course, the role of JD
Vance, and you wonder why is that guy
there. Yep. We know he he's one of
them. They created him, and he's been installed.
He's has got an unusual rise to power,
and it looks like he'll be the next
one. And so what do these guys have
going on with him?
You know? So if we're looking for something
like, what are we working on in the
future? What I'm working on in the future
is watching JD Vance
to see
what sort of Trojan horse,
he's going to become.
Yeah. Because it feels like it feels like
he he may be you know, Trump can
because he's polarizing, but maybe Vance
can sweet talk people.
Well, there we go. I lost you for
a second there. Yeah. But I I agree.
I I think that Vance is a very
alarming character. He very much, you know, he
has a very, you know, I I was
gonna say has a very kind of Obama
esque kind of presence, but then I almost
take that back because he's not as, you
know and it shouldn't be taken as, like,
a a praiseworthy thing. They're all monsters. But,
like, Obama was very good at presenting himself
as somebody who seemed like he cared or
you know what I mean? And Grant has
a little bit of that, but at the
same time, he's a little bit more, I
don't even know what the right word would
be for clumsy at it, I guess. But
he is better than Trump. Let's put it
that way. You know? So I definitely worry
where that goes. And I've already seen people
on the Republican side of this
are, like, almost already setting this up. Like,
the idea of, you know, he's gonna be
better with the plan for JD Vance. You're
right. It's already being laid out and very
well may have been the plan from the
get go. You know? It's hard to say.
But I definitely agree with you. I think
that that is a very obvious focal point.
Now, I mean, I I would argue though
that I think that the warfare specifically in
Gaza is much more interconnected with this agenda
than most, with the whole plan for, like,
maybe the first freedom city, Gaza, whatever they're
talking about. But I but I do agree.
I think that right now it's obvious. I
just did a big show about this called
the technocratic tiptoe where I kinda laid a
lot of this out in one long you
know, one quick little four hour video where
you can just, you know, put it all
together. But important, I think, that how all
of this kinda comes together and is building
out in front of us. But I always
a pleasure talking with you, brother. I look
forward to the next one and breaking down
you know, as always, I've got like 50
different things we could get into, but I
just I like walking through these with you
and and kind of sharing our thoughts on
it. I really do think it it opens
some, you know, sometimes my eyes to some
of these things that I wasn't thinking about.
So thanks for joining me again, brother. Look
forward to Thanks for having me. Anything else
you wanna drop before we leave? Any upcoming
events? I would like I would like for
people to go to activist post and and,
bookmark that and and find you know, I've
got a podcast section on there too, and
we rotate in,
great
interviews for,
from people all over the world, and we've
got great great writers. You know? It's just
one stop shop. Independent Media Alliance, you can
go in there and search through that link,
that tag. Anything that comes up,
will,
you know, will pull
anything,
that's been tagged with that. And so there's,
what, 18 of us in that group. So
any anything that that they've written, you can
find it all there. It's a it's just
a there's a little bit for everybody. And,
of course, if you're checking it out on
mobile, we did not build an app specifically
because we did not want to centralize control
into the hands of the App Store. So
you're gonna be on your own to go
to a browser and just pull it up,
bookmark it, and do it that way. But,
but
please and thank you as far as going
going to the site. You know, Activist Post
has been in business for fifteen years. I
take it seriously that they entrusted me to,
carry it the the the next step. And
I think that,
we do a pretty good job over there
of curating some information that, that this audience
of I mean, it's not for everybody. Let's
be let's be fair. But but this audience,
100%. You you you you like what we're
doing at activist post. I'm willing to bet
you it's more off the more people than
you think today. I really do. But, yeah,
please make sure you support an activist post.
It's been going on a long time, and
Charlie has taken the helmet. It's it's an
important aspect of the independent media. There there's
a lot of good content there, but the
the the attack on all of this field
is just constantly
it's just it's ever present. You know, everyone
is constantly being you know, it's all two
steps forward, one step back in this field
for people that are doing it the right
way in my opinion. So thanks for for
keeping that going, brother. And I'll leave it
there for today. Looking forward to the next
one. And as always, everybody out there question
everything. Come to your own conclusions.
Stay vigilant.
Thank you. From the president From the president's
office in the White House in Washington DC,
we present an address by the president of
The United States, Dwight d Eisenhower. In holding
scientific
research and discovery in respect,
as we should,
we must also be alert to the equal
and opposite danger
that public policy could itself
become the captive of a scientific
technological
elite.