Inside The Elite: Power, Epstein, And Us

Start with a laugh and a sip, then hold on: we trace a straight, unsettling line from budget blunders and media spin to the thousand-person stratum that quietly shapes policy, markets, and narratives. We unpack the Epstein fallout as more than scandal—global resignations, quiet raids, and a bipartisan admission that power clusters above the ballot box. The question isn’t just who did what; it’s who decides what counts, and why the backseat of politics feels like a bobsled ride you never agreed to take.

From there, we confront trust. When agencies rewrite definitions midstream, rules stop being guardrails and start being tools. That idea lands hard with a local case of “sober DUIs,” where dozens of arrests collapsed, leaving ordinary people with bills and scars while the system shrugged. It’s the same energy behind growing populist anger: the consequences are real, the accountability isn’t.

Then the horizon tilts. A patent to keep deceased users posting suggests social identity can be simulated indefinitely—credible enough to pass casual checks, ripe for abuse. Pair that with China’s rapidly improving humanoid robots and a demographic clock, and you get the real race: who controls labor, surveillance, and narrative when software can work the night shift and never ask for vacation. We weigh Elon’s blunt calculus on robotics, the geopolitical gap if the U.S. cedes ground, and the speed at which this wave is moving.

Finally, money and control. We cut through crypto noise: institutions say most of the upside sits in Bitcoin and Ethereum, yet quantum fears and policy fog slow adoption. More importantly, China’s ban on Bitcoin is a tell—centralized systems hate assets they can’t seize or script. That’s why a U.S. Bitcoin reserve isn’t a meme; it’s a strategic hedge in a world where AI eats privacy and data brokers outrun the courts.

Expect sharp clips, plain talk, and connections that stick. If you’ve felt that gut sense that the scoreboard isn’t the game, this one puts names, tools, and stakes to it. Subscribe, share with a friend who’s skeptical but curious, and leave a quick review—what lever should citizens pull first: transparency, decentralization, or local accountability?

Chapters

• 0:00 Peasants’ Roll Call & Coffee Cold Open
• 2:45 Thought For The Day: Life And Coffee
• 5:20 Are We Led By Our Betters
• 8:40 Australia’s Finance Math Fumble
• 12:40 Politics As A Terrifying Bobsled
• 16:00 The Thousand People Theory
• 19:35 Epstein As Shadow Governance
• 24:00 Left And Right Agree On Elites
• 28:10 Clinton Denials And Media Spin
• 33:20 Resignations, Raids, And Global Fallout
• 38:30 Changing Definitions And COVID Trust
• 43:10 Law, Enforcement, And Selective Power
• 47:00 Sober DUIs And Accountability
• 51:40 Prisons, Policy, And Populist Anger
• 54:30 Dead Profiles And Meta’s Patent
• 58:20 Robots, AI, And Who Needs Humans
• 1:02:30 Demographics, China, And Humanoids
• 1:06:30 Bitcoin, Control, And Strategy
• 1:11:00 Quantum Fears And Market Reality
• 1:14:10 Private Tease And Lawfare Claims
• 1:18:00 Data, Palantir, And AI Guardrails
• 1:22:20 Inequality You Can See

Transcript

SPEAKER_11: 0:00

Here we go.

SPEAKER_08: 0:31

It's a little gummy. Peasants, ma'am. We're just peasants. Every one of us. You watch those old movies. You see the peasants in the background with the kings and kings walking around. We're those people. We're those people. Good morning, peasants. Welcome to another episode of The Peasants Perspective. Shantini, good morning. You beat Pony Boy. Amazing. Doug Wyatt. Good morning. Welcome, welcome. Glad you guys made it today. It something happened last night.

SPEAKER_11: 1:12

Yeah.

SPEAKER_08: 1:12

My wife, some would, some friends we had got in an argument, and uh the the wife invited a woman over to fix something broken in the house. And the husband got upset because you know that's a man's job, and how dare you know, do a man's job. And in the ensuing argument, he was like, that would be like me inviting my mother over to organize the house. Anyways, the whole thing ended in tears. I were laughing because I'm like, and how are these bad things? Like, somebody's fixing the drawer and someone's organizing the house. I from a man's perspective, like, man, how is this a bad thing? Anyways, uh, peasants, uh, peasant pod, that's you, Ron. Good morning. Carlito, good morning from YouTube. Carlitz, good morning, y'all. Pony boy, good morning. I'm late. I was on a call with my IT guy. Well, that sucks. Fortunately, you won't, he's all your IT guy's only gonna have a job for a matter of weeks at this point. I'm sure AI agents are coming in to take over that. All right, I know why you guys are here. You're here for the simultaneous sip. All you need is a cup, a mug, or a glass, a tank or a chalice, a stein, a canteen, a jug, or a flask, a vessel of any kind. Fill it with your favorite liquid. I like coffee. And join me now for the unparalleled dopamine hit of the day. The thing that makes everything better, the simultaneous sip, and it begins now.

SPEAKER_20: 2:34

My coffee smells good. Kind of funny how coffee never tastes as good as it smells. As you grow older, you'll discover that life is very much like coffee. The aroma is always better than the actuality. May that be your thought for the day. That's pretty good.

SPEAKER_08: 2:50

May that be your thought for the day. One of the thoughts that I have so often, and I remember when I started having this thought back when I was interning in state capitol when I was in high school, and the representative from the Grangeville area would have me like write letters back to constituents, and sometimes these were like constituents that had serious farm issues, right? And I'm like, thank you for your correspondence. You know, I'm doing the generic intern reply. And I remember thinking, you know, this this representative I'm meeting with just reminds me of like my uncle, like, not that great of a guy to be the elected guy. You know what I mean? Like it just kind of seemed like we were playing at the bottom of the sandbox, so to speak. And as life went on, and I went and interned in a city and I saw how the cities are run. I'm like, man, you know, we're kind of led by people who don't necessarily always know what they're doing. And there's a combination of factors why people run ambition, money, a job, uh, prestige, you know, all the seven deadly deadly sense people will be gravitated into power, right? For most people don't do it just for the money, right? There's usually something else involved. And one of the things that's become more and more obvious for anybody as they grow up, it's not this generation, it's the whole when you're young, you're liberal and progressive, and then as you get older and you pay taxes, you become more conservative, right? Yeah. So the Republican Party, yesterday we played the clip where Tim Burkhardt was like, the Republicans are made up of like business owners and ranchers and people who have like lived some real life, and they're like, ah, the system's broken. I need to go fix it. The Democrat Party is not made up of that. The Democrat Party is not made up of a bunch of professionals that want to go make a difference. It's typically when you look into their backgrounds, you'll see one, they've been on government payroll most of their lives, one way or another. They've worked in government, executive branch, some way or another, they've never like made anything, they've just regulated things. So they kind of tend to go to this power base. And the other thing is you get a lot of these made people, these people that show up in these positions of power, and you're just like, you're not qualified to do this. Like you would assume somebody who deals with budgets and money in the federal government would know how to deal with budgets and money and could answer basic questions about, you know, budgets and money. But as I show you over and over and over again, we are not being led all the time by our betters. We are led sometimes by people that you could pull off of anywhere and they could give these answers. For example, this woman right here, she's one, she's Australia's finance minister. And this is someone that, as a husband, you could this could be your wife in a shopping mall telling you how she got such a great discount on something that was on sale and she just had to buy it. And you're like, but you didn't have to buy it.

SPEAKER_05: 5:34

Oh, I don't I just don't have that figure. Um in front of me.

SPEAKER_17: 5:41

You said there's been$114 billion of savings across your budgets. Is that net savings or gross savings?

SPEAKER_05: 5:49

Um well, it's savings and reprioritizing. So we're saving and then re-al essentially uh to offset new priorities.

SPEAKER_17: 5:59

So you're saying that's net of spending decisions? You reduced expenditure by 114 billion?

SPEAKER_05: 6:06

Yeah.

SPEAKER_17: 6:08

Yeah. That's gross, right. What is the net figure?

SPEAKER_05: 6:12

Uh I don't have that available.

SPEAKER_17: 6:15

Is it positive or negative?

SPEAKER_05: 6:18

Uh well, I d I just don't have that figure. Um Finance Minister.

SPEAKER_17: 6:23

Let's in front of me. Has the savings you've made been greater than or less than than you spend in the even shirt?

SPEAKER_05: 6:30

Um hundred and fourteen billion dollars in savings and reprioritizations.

SPEAKER_17: 6:37

But if you spend every dollar that you saved, it's not a save, it's just spending it on something else.

SPEAKER_05: 6:43

Well, you know, that can be the way you can.

SPEAKER_17: 6:46

When you say on radio, as you did last week, we found$114 billion in savings across the budget. I think the public will think that means you've saved$114 billion, but if you've gone and spent that and some more, you haven't saved us. Yes, we have$5 billion.

SPEAKER_05: 7:01

We have.

SPEAKER_17: 7:02

How have you saved it if you've gone and spent it?

SPEAKER_08: 7:09

How have you saved it if you've gone and spent it? Right? This is going into the store and you see a sweater you want for$100, but it's 50% off. So you buy the sweater and then you add in a couple other things and you spend$110, and you're like, I only spent$10. Whoa.

SPEAKER_10: 7:25

Whoa.

SPEAKER_08: 7:26

Nothing adds up.

SPEAKER_10: 7:27

How did you remember all that? I didn't have any of those numbers in front of me.

SPEAKER_08: 7:31

Yeah, well, I don't know. Is it a net negative or net positive?

SPEAKER_10: 7:34

Hold on, hold on. I don't know.

SPEAKER_08: 7:39

The finance minister, man. The finance minister. Now, I've been watching a lot of the Olympics, right? At night when I unwind, we get done with our 1776 meetings. I'll go down into my into my room and I'll turn on the Olympics on Peacock, right? And I'll just watch whatever's on. Last night I got stuck watching a bunch of curling. And as always happens, every two years, whether it's the winter or the summer Olympics, news reporters go out and they get to experience different sports and things like that. So this news reporter got to go experience bobsledding. And the reason I'm playing this is because we as we experience the political process, when we actually get in and see who it is that's running the place, who's steering the bobsled, so to speak, it is absolutely terrifying because there are real consequences to these decisions.

SPEAKER_11: 8:25

Okay.

SPEAKER_08: 8:25

And if the driver doesn't know what they're doing, there's no wonder why we're sitting in the backseat feeling just like this newscaster who went on his first bobsled ride.

SPEAKER_29: 8:35

Down the bobsled. I went from start point one at the top with a very gifted driver, thankfully, Brian Burkhorn. And I was not prepared for the level of terror of this bobsled. I swear to God, I thought I was going to die. I thought my back was gonna snap in half. I thought my bones were gonna fly off my body and be littered all up and down the bobsled track. It was by far the scariest experience I've ever had in my life.

SPEAKER_11: 9:09

Oh my god!

SPEAKER_29: 9:11

I went down the bobsled. I went from start by far the scariest experience I've ever had in my life.

SPEAKER_08: 9:18

And that's just politics, folks. We are careening down the mountain, and who's running the show? Good question. I've said for a long time, and you can go all the way back into the archive, and you can listen to me talking about who's runs the place. And it's been my belief all along that there's a thousand people around the world that sit in actual positions of power, seats of power and influence that can actually do things and make things happen. What's going on with this Epstein revelation, right? There's all the salacious stuff, but more than that, what we're seeing is that there's this ecosystem of world leaders and influencers, and they span from media to banking to government to nonprofit, non-governmental organizations like the WEF and all the other ones, even into the Illuminati, okay? All of these connections. And it creates this kind of super government where you've got these people that are influencing their individual governments, which really makes us wonder do we even have sovereignty or governments? Tucker Carlson explored this exact topic dealing with the Epstein, the idea that there's an ultra-government or something sitting on top of our governments that's actually calling the shots. These are the thousand people that I've referred to, the nameless faces that actually have levers of power.

SPEAKER_16: 10:37

But the big question is not was there blackmail? Yes. Was there it had sex with minors? Of course. Was there some kind of weird religious practice that we would describe as witchcraft? Oh yeah. But the bigger question is like, what was this? It's it's clearly an informal governance body over what the rest of us consider the authorities, which is to say governments, nation states. So that's kind of the point I'm making, and I do think we fall into a trap thinking it's about Israel, or I mean it is about Israel, but it's hardly only about Israel. I'm sure you know it's it's way bigger than any one country. It's the structure that sits atop countries. Yes. And I think it's entirely fair to the for the rest of us to be curious about that. Not to be distracted by all the sideshows going on, one of which is sex trafficking. Of course, that's terrible. Everyone should be prosecuted for. It's evil, it's the most evil thing, but it's not the whole story. It's not even close to the whole story.

SPEAKER_08: 11:34

The whole story that's terrifying that makes us think as we go down this sled of life that we're gonna leave our bones all over the track, is just this. Who is in charge? Who is the authority? Who has who actually wields power over life and death? Who actually controls the monopoly on force? Is it a government that's responsive to we the people and all of the nations that have constitutional governments? Right? Is it is it us or is it this unelected body? You just heard Tucker Carlson ask that question, right? There's this ultra body, this thing that sits atop of our governments that runs the show. Now we're gonna listen to Jen Saki, the secretary of communications for Joe Biden, right? She stood behind the podium and gave White House press briefings, circle back jen or you know, raggedy and gen or whoever you want to call it. So this is Jen Saki. She's saying the same things. So now it was coming from the far right, Tucker Carlson, and now we've got it coming from the far left, Jen Sauckey. Maybe we should pay attention.

SPEAKER_28: 12:36

It is Trump, yes. And we should everybody should continue to dig more about that. But it is the wealthy, the elites, and basically every factor faction of the world. It's global leaders, it's people in the business sector, it is people in Hollywood, probably. Who knows? It is a bunch of people who think that they can get away with anything. It is Trump, yes.

SPEAKER_08: 12:59

And we should so it's a bunch of people that think they can get away with anything, including Trump. That's the trope, right? It's always including Trump. Who is it really including? Like, who is a United States president that we have no doubt was overly involved with Jeffrey Epstein? Like, who's the most obvious person? Bill Clinton. Bill Clinton, Bill Clinton. So Hillary Clinton was asked while she was on this walkabout in Europe this last week about just that. Like, well, do you guys have any links to Jeffrey Epstein? So listen to this. Tucker Carlson on the right, Jen Socky on the left are both telling you there's a group of elites that span everywhere from Hollywood to government to banking that are unaccountable. Those were Jen Socky's words. They don't have to answer to anybody. So here's Hillary Clinton just simply getting asked the question Do you guys know Jeffrey Epstein?

SPEAKER_26: 13:46

Do you regret the links that there have been? You know, we have no links.

SPEAKER_08: 13:51

We have a very clear keep in mind Jeffrey Epstein was the co-founder of the Clinton Global Foundation. We have no links.

SPEAKER_26: 14:00

Record that we've been willing to talk about, which my husband has said he took some uh rides on the airplane for his charitable work. I don't recall ever meeting him.

SPEAKER_03: 14:12

Um did you ever meet Delay Maxwell?

SPEAKER_26: 14:14

I did on a few occasions, and thousands of people go to the Clinton Global Initiative. So it to me is not is not something that is really at the heart of what this matter is about. They are accused, and in both cases, were convicted of horrific crimes against girls and women. That should be the focus.

SPEAKER_08: 14:40

And we focus on the trafficking, not the associations. Why are you looking at our ultra-governmental organization? We have no links with this man who co-founded our foundation. Now, you know, the Clintons have really no track record of lying to the American people, right? Like they've never been caught in like outright blatant lies where say, I don't know, DNA evidence later proved that there was, in fact, you know.

SPEAKER_24: 15:06

Is is I want to say one thing to the American people. I want you to listen to me. I'm gonna say this again. I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewensky. I never told anybody to lie, not a single time. Never. These allegations are false. And I need to go back to work for the American people.

SPEAKER_08: 15:32

No family history of ever misleading the American people. Not even a little bit, Ron.

SPEAKER_10: 15:37

I'm super serial. I'm super serial. You gotta play the clip where he says it depends on the definition of what is.

SPEAKER_08: 15:45

That's in his deposition. Well, what's the definition of is is. I'm sorry. Did he did he graduate at the top of his legal class? Because that's like next level. I mean, that's better than if the glove don't fit, you must equip. It's like the definition of what is is. The greatest thing about this entire Epstein affair is we have absolutely proven that if the left and the right want to unify on a topic, they can, right? They can get together and they can get rid of Jeffrey Epstein, this whole problem. Okay, so John uh John Alsoff, who is the senator from Georgia, who won in that unique runoff election in 2021, just after the 2020 election. So John Alsoff and Warner, his co-senator in in the state of Georgia, both of them, even given the most critical view of the Georgia election in 2020 and 2021, these guys really shouldn't be in their seats, right? But he gets he's you know in his re-election time, and uh he's pretty certain he wants to make sure America knows that Epstein and Trump are the same thing.

SPEAKER_14: 16:50

You remember we were talking about the working class. But this is a government of I and for the ultra-rich.

SPEAKER_15: 17:06

It is the wealthiest cabinet ever. This is the Epstein class.

SPEAKER_08: 17:16

So notice the Democrats. Remember, facts don't matter. It doesn't matter that as you go through the Epstein files, you see one prominent Democrat after another. It doesn't matter that you see one donor after another, right? One Howard Lutnick, oh, Trump's Epstein, Trump's Epstein, Howard Lutnick's in the files. Oh, look, after Donald Trump had Jeffrey Epstein arrested, people started calling in with tips to the FBI. Oh my gosh, Trump's in the files. People are calling in tips and saying Jeffrey Epstein and Trump killed people. You know what? It's like, come on, people. But the truth of the matter is, read through the noise. They're consenting, they're conceding the premise of the fact that there's an elite crust, that there's an elite that run the place. The Democrats have long had their fingers in that elite. They're they're part of it. But now that it's not going to serve them, they're going to try to compartmentalize it, claim that it's not them, right? Meanwhile, the reality is on the right, it's been the exact opposite, right? Especially when it comes to the Trump family. What did I do here? I hate it when this happens. Somehow I can like merge Windows and I don't know how to do it. So when I want to do it, I can't do it. Okay, so so this is Don Jr., and one of the things that the Trump family has done for a long time is they've kind of placated to the whole Q narrative. Who's Q, right? This idea of who's who's Q. So this is from a couple years ago. This is when Don Jr. was taking questions. And again, elite crust of people, super elite, running the world. Democrats said that isn't happening. That's not a thing. Now the Democrats have completely conceded the premise. Yes, that is a thing. And then, you know, Donald Trump is hunting pedophiles and satanic people. That's not a thing. Trump's crazy. Okay, so there are some satanic pedophiles that happen to be in that upper crust of elite, but you know, nobody's got a plan on how to deal with it. Meanwhile, here comes these Q people who for years now have been like, I told you Rumler was dirty. You know what I mean? I told you that they were doing kids in cages. I told you they had underground facilities in New Mexico. I told right, all this stuff. So who's Q? Who was telling us all this?

SPEAKER_19: 19:19

Who is Q? Oh, and you'll never know, folks. I'm not sure. Well, maybe I don't. I just can't tell you. Uh who do you guys think it is? Uh out of curiosity. Uh multi-cracker all the rest of the story. Q is Trump? I don't know. Who is Q?

SPEAKER_08: 19:46

Who is Q? Carlitz, back me up if I'm off here. But I'm starting to feel more and more like Q was real. I mean, honestly, I I don't make a big deal on the show. I learned to not touch Q with a 10-foot pole because it pretty much guarantees you we're gonna get censored or deplatformed. Well, trolls are real. Yeah, trolls are real. I'm actually pretty certain the only reason I kept my X account was twofold. One, I think I didn't retweet a lot of Q stuff, and that kept me off their little heat map of every the two million accounts they deleted. And I think the FBI still wanted to have a look into what I was looking at. So they kind of probably a combination of both helped me keep my account. Although I'm fairly certain I'm still shadow banned. So who is Q, right? Is it Donald Trump? What is it? But we've conceded the premise. There's an elite crowd of people that are running the world that sit on top of the government. The left and right have conceded that. Even even uh candidates are now saying that the Epstein class, right? Of course they want to throw Trump in there with the Epstein class, but clearly this Epstein class are these billionaires that are totally and utterly unaccountable, of which Hillary Clinton has been hopnobbing for years. So continuing on with that interview she did, she has more denials for us. Do you regret the links that there have been?

SPEAKER_26: 21:03

You know, we have no links. We have a very clear record that we've been willing to talk about, which my husband has said he took some uh rides on the airplane for his charitable work. I don't recall ever meeting him. Um did you ever meet July Maxwell? I did on a few occasions, and thousands of people go to the Clinton Global Initiative. So it to me is not is not something that is really at the heart of what this matter is about. They are accused, and in both cases, were convicted of horrific crimes against girls and women. That should be the focus. And we are more than happy to say what we know, which is very limited and totally unrelated to their uh behavior or their crimes, and we want to do it in public. Because let's make this transparent. There are calls for another individual.

SPEAKER_08: 22:04

So the interesting thing is we want to do it in public, except you refuse to do it in public, and once you agree to do it in private, then you're like, oh, we want to do it in public. So that's a that's a charade. Complete charade. They don't want to do this in public.

SPEAKER_03: 22:15

He denies wrongdoing to go before uh Congress on this matter. Uh Andrew Mountbatten Windsor, formerly Prince Andrew. Do you think he should testify? I think everybody should testify, including the former prince.

SPEAKER_26: 22:28

I think everybody should testify who was asked to testify. I just want it to be fair. I want everybody treated the same way. That's not true for my husband and me because other witnesses were asked to testify. They gave written statements under oath. We offered that. They want to pull us. Why do they want to pull us into this? To divert attention from President Trump. This is not complicated.

SPEAKER_08: 22:56

To divert attention from President Trump. Carl Leeds says JFK Jr. is Q. Ha ha ha. Except Carlitz, if you listen to Q, Q said JFK Jr. is dead. That was one of the specific questions the Anans asked. So if you believe JFK Jr. is dead, you're not a real Q follower. You're not a real believer in your heart. You know, my son one time said, because we couldn't find his cowboy outfit, and he said, Dad, I don't need my cowboy hat to be a cowboy. Being a cowboy is in your heart. And you know, to be a real Q believer, you can't actually believe that JFK is alive because Q told us he wasn't. That's one of those side quests for Q believers. Okay, so uh Q Q22225 even talks about moon landings. I know, I know, we probably didn't go to the moon. And if we did, the videotape definitely didn't make it back. Okay, so Trump was asked on Air Force One, this is audio only, about uh the whole Clinton debacle with the Clinton or the uh Clinton debacle dealing with Epstein. And you hear Hillary Clinton said, We're getting sucked in. She said that phrase. Trump mirrors that phrase.

SPEAKER_02: 24:13

They went in hoping and then find it and found just the opposite. I've been totally exonerated. In fact, Jeffrey Empsey was deciding that I don't get elected with some author. I've been totally exonerated. No, no, they're getting pulled in. That's their problem. I don't know they're gonna have to see what happens. But I watched her in Munich, she seriously has Trump derangements and she shouldn't be able to do that.

SPEAKER_08: 24:37

Yeah, they're getting pulled in. When she was in Munich, she was asked about immigration. She's like, Well, immigration has gone too far, and we need to do it. It's the what's happening right now is that Democrats are going, okay, we agree with everything on Trump. We just don't like how he's doing it. That's all they got. We just, yes, we should have a closed border, but we want it to be humane without people dying. Well, come on. Then why didn't you do it?

SPEAKER_10: 24:57

We want to do it our way, totally opened.

SPEAKER_08: 25:00

Our way. All right. So what's the body count on the clin on the Epstein debacle? Goldman Sachs, chief legal officer, Rumler, resigned. Called Epstein. Uncle Jeffrey, she was Obama's White House counsel. Outta here. Paul Weiss, chairman Brad Carp, resigned. Most powerful law firm in New York. Thanked Epstein for a once-in-a-lifetime evening. You're out of here. DP World, CEO of Ben Solomin, resigned. Dubai's largest port, Epstein called him, quote, my most trusted friend, out of here. Yale University, Professor Galantier Bard, uh recommended a small, good-looking blonde student to Epstein. What's interesting about this gentleman is he is one of the ones that the Unibomber bombed. Apparently, the Uni Bomber bombed two people that were in Jeffrey Epstein's circles. So once again, Ted Kaczynski was right about everything. Yeah, exactly. Exactly, right? When Ted Kacinski's on your trail, you done screwed up, buddy. Uh UK government, Ambassador Mandelson, fired, called Epstein, my best pal, sent him classified government info. UK Prime Minister's office, chief of staff, McSweeney, resigned. Harvard, former president Larry Summers, exposed, named in Epstein's will, received$1 million from Epstein. Nobel Committee, Chairman Jagland, the one who gave Barack Obama his Nobel Peace Prize in coordination with Epstein. Named in Epstein's will, uh, excuse me, uh Chairman Jagland, he was not only fired, but he was raided by the police. He's the former PM of Norway, and he has now been criminally charged. L, the Los Angeles 28 Olympics, Chairman Wasserman, under investigation. Prince Andrew, stripped of all remaining royal duties. The Global Fire, UK, four resignations and criminal investigations. Norway, the former prime minister is criminally charged. France, special investigation team is formed. So apparently, France grabbed all of Epstein's information before the US did, and they were sitting on it. Well, now they've opened up all their little probes. They have a different judicial system. So basically they're gonna go like find you guilty and then arrest you. So that's that could be significant. I mean, you know, France has the capacity to really f up your life if they want. Slovakia, security advisor, gone. Sweden, UN official, resigned. Dubai, largest port CO resigned, USA, Goldman Sachs, Paul Weiss, Yale, Harvard have all been hit. Seven countries, 13 resignations, four criminal investigations in only 17 days. And now we've got the Clintons coming in to testify here very shortly this next week. I wonder if they'll commit perjury.

SPEAKER_10: 27:37

Or maybe there's just nothing there.

SPEAKER_08: 27:40

Hardly knew the guy. Hardly knew the guy. And this picture in the hot tub with this young woman, no idea, it was a super eight.

SPEAKER_10: 27:47

All these people are just resigning just for fun. Yeah, yeah, exactly.

SPEAKER_08: 27:53

Remember, Obama's DOJ had these files, they hit him. Biden's DOJ had these files, they buried him. Trump said release everything. The idea that Trump is somehow a child pedophile who might show up in these in these documents is absurd. And it actually goes more and more to reinforce the idea that when Elon Musk left Doge at the 120-day time frame, so it wasn't even like I quit, I can't do it. It was more like, hey, my contract has run up, right? And there was this big blow up. He punched Scott Besson in the face, and they had a and then he comes out and he's Trump's a pedo. Trump's not releasing the Epstein files because he's in them. And instantaneously, what happened? The left went wild. We've got to get out of those files. We've got to get at those files. So whatever they had lying in way, whatever they were gonna drip out, the moment Elon and Trump had that falling out, it was like the dogs got unleashed on the right. And that's when you saw Thomas Massey and Rokana all of a sudden get this brilliant idea to get all these files released as quickly as possible. Chum in the water. Jump in the water. And now they have a mess. You think Larry Summers wanted those files released? You think at the Nobel Peace Prize guy that just told Trump he couldn't have a Nobel Peace Prize wanted these files released? Nope. Nope. But idiots that are not read in by the elite, like Rokana and Thomas Massey fell right into the trap. And MTG and all these people. And you know, according to MTG, she's well, Trump said, I don't want to release the files because it'll hurt my friends. I don't really know what that means. I don't really know what that means, but I can tell you this if you're trying to maintain the world order, having the thousand people that run the country exposed through this email network, which by the way, cross-references really well with the WikiLeaks dumped from the DNC servers and the John Podesta Gmail hack, it cross-references pretty well. Like at this point, I would pretty much assume these guys eat nothing but pizza. You know what I'm saying? Okay. All of this is nefarious. The degree and the level to which these people will go to manipulate will go to to manipulate your world to compel whatever behavior they want, even to the point of self-destruction. It's amazing to me when I listen to Burlaw or Burlaw or whatever his name is, the president, yeah, the president of Pfizer saying, We saved the world from COVID and now we will save the world from cancer. And I'm looking at it going, you caused the cancer epidemic. Like if it wasn't red 47 and the canola oil, you definitely put the nail in the coffin with whatever that that the turbo cancer junk that you were putting in. Right, stop helping. Yeah, stop helping, please. You're killing us here, literally. So this is uh Cheryl Atkinson, one of the greatest reporters, right? She's the one who broke the Fast and Furious scandal under Barack Obama, and then Rod Rosenstein sent out Sean White and um John uh Mc McGreavy out to her house to plant bugs on her internet. They ended up planting child pornography on her husband's computer because she had a contract with CBS, they were willing to pay to have the forensics done. They proved in a court of law that the child pornography was planted from an IP address that was associated with the United States government. Okay, he never accessed it. They planted it. This all played out in a court of law. And we're just sitting back here going, Well, I wonder why Cheryl lost her CBS job. So she's been an independent reporter, different contracts here or there. But one of the things she's really chased down is this COVID narrative, really trying to understand what the vaccine industry has done. This is like the bobsled. It's terrifying when you realize who runs the place. Not only is it shades of incompetence, shades of nefarious, but you also have a situation where it's so utterly, acutely nefarious, they will change the definitions of things. And not for uh the betterment of society.

SPEAKER_04: 31:53

Sometimes getting and keeping a vaccine on the market requires a sleight of hand. The agency's best and brightest could even adjust the veritable meaning of the word vaccined vaccines quite simply as agents that prevent disease. In 2021, that had to be changed. It became undeniable that COVID vaccines didn't prevent the disease or transmission or even illness. After all, they didn't even meet the definition of a vaccine. Instead, the CDC quietly redefined the word vaccine to make the COVID shot seem successful after all. On the CDC's vaccine webpage, sometime between September 1st and September 2nd, 2021, somebody removed a key phrase from the definition. On September 1st, the CDC defined a vaccine as quote a product that stimulates a person's immune system to produce immunity to a specific disease by protecting the person from that disease. But on September 2nd, the phrase protecting the person from that disease was removed. Now the CDC says vaccines merely stimulate the body's immune response. Think of it, the CDC unilaterally redefined 200 years of the world's understanding of what constitutes By the way, when I think of stimulates the body's immune response, the word that I would say if it was Jeopardy would be Alex, what is an infection? Without so much as an exclamation, public discussion, hearing, or vote. Once you understand that our top trusted medical authorities are willing to sneakily move goalposts and change meanings of words to protect a market, a long way to begin to understand how deep the corruption goes.

SPEAKER_08: 34:15

It's so bad. I'm being dead serious when I say if you asked me what's the definition of something that stimulates an immune response, I would say an infection. Right. So they changed the definition of vaccine to what we used to have the definition of infection. And then they're like, oh, by the way, you need two infections and two no more booster infections, and then you'll be fully infected. Infected. You will have major immune responses to these vaccines. They're trying to infect us all. Do you not see the humor? Okay.

SPEAKER_11: 34:52

Yeah.

SPEAKER_08: 34:52

As as uh as was said earlier, we have to get to a dark humor. Oh no, I didn't play this clip. It's James Carville. We have to get to a dark humor place. That's where we're at. Okay. These people changed the meaning of vaccine to infection and then had you quadruple up on the infection doses. These people are horrible. Ayn Rand said this. She says in her book, Atlas Shrug, she says, Did you think that we want those laws to be observed? And the speaker here is a government employee who's coming to negotiate with Howard Rourke. Maximum sarcasm. Yep. Do you think that we really want those laws to be observed? We want them broken. There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced nor objectively interpreted, and you create a nation of lawbreakers, and then you can cash in on the guilt. In the COVID thing, right? When you have vaccines that become the vector of infection, and they tell you it's against the law not to get infected in order to prevent infections, you can neither win nor lose these arguments. Right. But they can be subjectively and selectively enforced however they want. There are people out there who lost their jobs and were punished for not getting the vaccine. Just to turn around and have the same government who enabled those corporations and told them to fire and ostracize people who wouldn't get the vaccine are now by the same government being told to pay settlements to the employees that they were told to fire and ostracize for not getting the vaccines. I met one of these people. She got$25,000 for having been fired. Right? Do you see how you cannot win? You can't be the corporation following the rules because then you're following the rules will be held against you later. You can't be the person who complies because then you end up being the fool who got infected and didn't get paid.

SPEAKER_10: 37:07

Well, also,$25,000 is not enough to compensate um civilization, our community, on the loss of worker diversity because now all of our workers are all tainted. They're all they're all Democrat or they're all willing to just go along with whatever comes down the pipe.

SPEAKER_08: 37:28

It was such a great proving ground for just that. The go-along to get along crowd, the back the blue crowd, the trust the expert crowd. You've now you've now concentrated them in these government positions.

SPEAKER_10: 37:40

Right. And you've weeded out anybody who would be a dissenter or uh, you know, some kind of a voice that wasn't a go-along guy.

SPEAKER_08: 37:48

Yep. Now, a lot of people will look at what you're discussing here and who's in charge, and they'd say it's good or bad, or one way or the other. CNN, right? What a breeding ground for diverse ideas. So they had a panel on there with Scott Jennings, of course, who always pulls strong for the conservatives. And you had a woman on there who was complaining about America and how bad it is. And Scott Jennings is like, it could get worse.

SPEAKER_25: 38:12

It's so interesting that you said that because right before we went to break, you asked me what country was I living in.

SPEAKER_08: 38:17

This one that we excuse me, I said Scott Jennings. It's Mr. Wonderful. Just went through. You should be able to do that.

SPEAKER_25: 38:22

The country that that just did what they did. So for you to sit here and act like you just didn't say, you know, what what country are you talking about? What country, you know, puts people in jail wrong? What country enslaves folks, which is pretty much the private uh uh prison system? What country does this? You can't possibly be a history buff. And also say that as well.

SPEAKER_12: 38:41

Let me give you how bad it could be. The Romans used to burn to the people.

SPEAKER_25: 38:47

You could never give me how bad it could be. I live it on a daily basis. Listen up, honey. I live it on a daily basis. You can never tell me how bad it could be. But I would encourage you to actually be the history buff that you claim that you are to really get some understanding. It's not about it. Because right before we went to break, you asked me what country was.

SPEAKER_08: 39:11

Okay. Did you split anything from that clip? We didn't. We didn't really, but I want to split the baby here. She's saying, Don't tell me how bad it can be. Okay, right? Don't tell me what suffering is. And he's like, come on, man, it could be Rome where we're burning people at the stake. Yes, there's nowhere better than the United States. As far as government is concerned, this is the best you got. And it's the most responsive to the people, it should be the most responsive to the people. Hopefully, we can get our elections. Yeah, in the current epoch, this is about as good as it gets. But it is inappropriate. It is inappropriate for anybody to think it is perfect, or anybody to trust the experts, or to trust law enforcement. Or thought it couldn't get a little better. Our whole system should be based on this idea of trust but verify. This next clip I'm going to show you, you have to recognize. You must recognize, because some people here, while you fall into the demographic that falls victim to what I'm about to show you here, you don't recognize it because it hasn't touched you yet. It's kind of the quartering soldiers in your homes. Unless they're in your house, it's kind of a nebulous concept, right? But this idea, this idea that there are no laws, there's only cops, there's only enforcement of the laws, right? I'm going to show you something here about a local police department that had a singular police officer that in his best effort was trying to keep the road safe for you and me. And look at what happened in this community. Look at all the destruction he caused, all the frustration, time wasted only to turn around and for this event to have never happened. This is what the minority communities have been complaining about. And if people that are elite, not the Epstein elite, but the people who actually run the place that don't know whether they can make money or lose money on their budgets, and the people, you know what I mean? If that class of people cannot recognize the harm that situations like this create, you're never going to understand why there's a populist us rising constantly nipping at your heels.

SPEAKER_09: 41:08

On this rural street in Bedford County, where Ron LaFlam became number 41. I was surprised when he started asking me if to do a sobriety test. Not the 41st person to be arrested by Trooper Asa Pearl for DUI, the 41st to have that DUI ultimately dismissed. It was wrongful arrest, and oh, don't get me going. In fact, word was getting around Bedford County about Trooper Pearl's DUI dismissal rate. But finding proof of all those dismissed DUIs wasn't easy. No mention of them in Pearl's personnel file. And so we filed an open records request with the Bedford County Clerk and found these. Dozens of DUIRS dismissed, all made by Trooper Pearl between 2021 and 2024. Then we obtained this: a spreadsheet put together at our request by the Bedford County DA's office, explaining why each DUI was possibly dismissed. Here's what it shows. In eight of the cases, including Ron's, the drivers had neither drugs nor alcohol in their system. In 14 other cases, the driver's blood alcohol level was within legal limits and no drugs were found. And that adds up to 22 cases where Pearl arrested someone for DUI and they were sober. I don't even take prescription drugs. I take one vitamin a day. The other 19 DUIs dismissed are just as confounding. Look, several cases had to be dismissed because Pearl was no longer available for court or couldn't recall the events of the arrest. And we wanted to talk to Pearl about all of this. Why so many sober DUIs on the streets of Bedford County? Why was he not available for court or couldn't remember details? But Pearl never responded to our emails or calls. All his personnel files shows is that in 2024 he resigned from the THP. No reason given. But Pearl is not forgotten in this county, especially by 41 people. And we reached out to the THP with our findings asking for an interview, but we received no response.

SPEAKER_08: 43:33

Could you imagine? Could you imagine piece? Huh? Wow. Could you imagine? Right? There are no laws that are only cops. What about the laws against unlawful imprisonment and false allegations? And nope, nope, nope. He just he just doesn't work here anymore. And this again, it's not this idea that it's not fixable. These are the spots where it has to be fixed. Right? This Is where literally the rubber meets the road. You know what I mean? It's like if you can't take out the trash, I don't care what your ideology is, you're not fit to rule the rule, right? If you can't administer justice equally and tell the difference between a drunk person and a sober person, don't write the ticket. Right? Because that that's how you end up with some crazy lady on CNN talking about slavery and the judicial system. You know, it does feel like slavery when you're incarcerated on a dubious allegation of DOI. You know, that carries six months to a year in prison. So if your case don't go so well, you could be sitting in prison. Like that's the kind of thing I want to draw people's attention to that. As peasants, that's what matters, right? This elite class that rule people, they create policies and that starts to trickle down where nobody really feels accountable. If you don't ever hold people accountable, nobody feels accountable. And it always comes down to the peasants, right? We always end up paying because we're the original creditor for the whole thing, anyways. So we end up paying and we end up suffering under our own hand by allowing that stuff to continue.

SPEAKER_10: 45:03

Do you have any kind of a handle on the volume that our prison systems can handle? Did you ever I mean when you went to prison, did you feel like it was, you know, over I mean, did did they have vacancy?

SPEAKER_08: 45:16

Very limited.

SPEAKER_10: 45:17

Okay.

SPEAKER_08: 45:18

Like like in the prison I was at, no.

SPEAKER_10: 45:21

Okay. I mean, is it like that in all the prisons, do you think?

SPEAKER_08: 45:24

Or I don't know. I I think there's always a little surge capacity, and you can always double up on cells, but where I was at, like there weren't empty beds. And if there were, it was one or two empty beds in like the dorms or whatever.

SPEAKER_10: 45:37

Okay, so never mind.

SPEAKER_08: 45:39

But you know, different facilities. I was in a hospital, and there's only two of them like it, so it's probably gonna be full anyways, and then it was just work cadre. So I don't know. I did hear during COVID numbers dropped a lot, they let a lot of people out during COVID.

SPEAKER_10: 45:52

Yeah, I heard that too, and I was just kind of curious about um, you know, just the volume capacity that's available, just for some other thoughts that I've been having about, you know, the near future.

SPEAKER_08: 46:02

Mass incarceration, fighting exclusion, those kind of thoughts. So I don't know. Just wonder what the possibilities are. What are we gonna do with all these illegal immigrants? Another in another notch of conspiracy theorists were right again. So 4chan, a lot of our listeners might or might not be familiar with 4chan, but what would you what would you describe 4chan as? Um just a source. An anonymous posting board. Yeah, right. It's like the it's like the uh the cork board at your local student union building. Yeah, it's like a super informal cork board. It's a super informal cork board. And the whole idea is that posting there is anonymous, it's not yeah, like a trace.

SPEAKER_10: 46:45

It's it's uh use at your own risk.

SPEAKER_08: 46:47

Yeah, use at your own risk. A lot of crazy stuff out there for sure. But this is where a lot of the best conspiracies come to light. And we find out more and more that there's a lot of like real people that post there. The the probably most recent one was the Jeffrey Epstein prison guard that posted, I think they swapped out the body. He was later arrested and charged for a leak, and it was all through Reddit, and it was confirmed. And then we find out later they did switch out the body. They pretending like, oh, but it was just boxes. We were trying to distract the media. I'm like, a body flip, a body switch is a body switch, right? So this was meta. This was posted in 2023, so three years ago. I'm a meta insider working on Project Lazarus. We're building an AI that can take over a deceased person's social media accounts and continues to make relevant posts as if that person is still alive. This includes age-progressed photos, interacting with other people's content, and everything else needed so that the person continues on in the digital realm after physical death. We were originally told this would be a service offered to people struggling with the loss of loved ones and people who had missing children. Seemed like a decent idea. Things are getting weird now, and I'm having second thoughts about what is actually going to be used for. The AI is extremely capable of impersonating people. It doesn't take as much initial input as one might think to train the AI, AI, how to uh certain person interacts with digit the digital world. It's very convincing. An entire island of people could go missing with little to no downtime. The AI could take over all of their social media media and the world wouldn't have a clue. Life wasn't just continuing as usual.

SPEAKER_10: 48:26

And they could vote.

SPEAKER_08: 48:27

And they can vote. A lot of the project is becoming more compartmentalized. Things have taken a dark turn, it feels like they've forbidden communication between the people working on different things. Something isn't right, and I don't know what I what I should do. I'm not going to post any personally identifiable information, but I will try to answer questions that won't expose my role in the project. So this was posted three years ago, right? This this oh, they're gonna take over all the dead people's social media and continue to live on. Well, it turns out yesterday, breaking Meta has patented an AI that can keep deceased persons' accounts active and running, posting, messaging, and video calling by replicating by using their behavior past data, and they patented it yesterday. Wow. So three years ago, there was a conspiracy theory that they were gonna take your dead relative's avatar and continue on with it, and it's real.

SPEAKER_10: 49:19

And go.

SPEAKER_08: 49:20

And go exactly. I wonder all the dead people voting, because how do you verify? Typically, it's things like a Facebook check to see if they're even alive, right?

SPEAKER_10: 49:30

Yikes, yikes. I did that for a couple of people that voted in 2020, and it was like, what no, no, it was yeah, it was was 2020. And um, did I tell you about that? No, Tom and Jerry. No, tell me about it. Tom and Jerry. Do you know Tom and Jerry? Yeah, the the the cartoon. Yeah, well, apparently Tom and Jerry are members of my family, and they voted. I didn't, you know, my family name, I know almost everybody in my family name, and I didn't know Tom and Jerry. I have no idea who they are, but they voted last year. A cat and mouse? Yeah, Tom and Jerry Cleaver? Yeah.

SPEAKER_08: 50:12

Yeah, I tell you, truth is stranger than fiction. Truth is stranger than fiction. Now, in a world where you have an avatar, you have a digital persona, you have now, you now have a personality that you can mimic. Okay. Imagine if you could take that personality and you could plug it into a robot. China yesterday had a dis had a feature display. They they aired this on TV to their billion people, allegedly, that live in China. A year ago, these robots could barely give a high five. Now? These are real robots out here doing this. You know what I'm saying?

SPEAKER_10: 51:18

How many units do they have?

SPEAKER_08: 51:20

Exactly. So imagine a world where they can take your personality through your social media profile, and not only could it interact with people on video calls and things like that, but heck, why couldn't it could just continue working at the job you once had?

SPEAKER_06: 51:37

People like, wow, this is this is a bit scary. It's completely new territory. I mean, will we still need humans? Uh, not for most things. Uh, you know, we'll defy. I mean, I mean, okay, all right.

SPEAKER_10: 51:52

So will we still need humans? Not for most things, and we'll decide.

SPEAKER_08: 51:55

I love how Jimmy Fallon's like SD. So I've been sitting with this future world with AI and robots and trying to just like what's it gonna be like? Like, this is a once-in-a-multi-thousand-year event. I mean, this is a massive change. Most people, like, if you were born when the printing press was invented, the impact of that is significant to be able to pass information on generationally and not through the handwritten scribes, but in mass, that changed the world. Yeah, right. The Galileo effect. Now, other people could verify scientific discovery and stuff like that, but it took a couple hundred years.

SPEAKER_10: 52:40

Yeah, then there's Marconi and Philo Teens Barnsworth, yeah, radio and the telephone.

SPEAKER_08: 52:46

Decades, right? I mean, from the moment that we had a live broadcast to short form TikTok brain rot, it took about 80 years. You know, it took a little while for it to sink in. But this AI revolution, all of the experts are say it's happening much, much faster than we think. Look at what you just saw with China with the dancing robots. Look at what we just read with Meta saying, hey, we have a personality that you could pretty much plug into those robots.

SPEAKER_18: 53:11

In the absence of breakthrough innovation in in the US, uh China will uh utterly dominate. Interesting. Yes. Robotics being the main breakthrough innovation. You need the humoroid robots, you need real world AI, you need um a million tons of year to orbit. Like let's just say, like, if we get the mass driver on the moon going, my favorite thing, that then I think uh would have solved all our problems. Yeah. I call that winning. I'd call that winning.

SPEAKER_08: 53:40

So basically what he's saying there is if we don't do something on this trajectory with AI and robotics, China will. Why will China do it? They face the same challenge as we do, but they have one additional burden that is amplified in China that is not as bad in the West. Population decline. Oh. They have the worst demographics. Certain people who analyze China believe that under any condition, any conditions, they have 10 years left. They believe that the population of China is closer to 300 to 50, 500 million, not 1.4 billion. They believe the male to female discrepancy is upwards. Uh the official number is like 1.24 per, you know, 1.24 males per one female, but that's based off all the fake, fake, fake, fake, fake numbers that they've been putting out for many, many, many generations. They believe it could be two or three to one, depending on how extreme you want to get. This is civilization ending for them, unless unless you can create an entire new working class and you just saw them dancing on the stage. It's a race. It's a race to that. Because those drones, those robots, will not need to take the night shift off. Those robots, you know what I mean? Those robots those robots can handle the abuse, can handle the abuse. They don't care about censorship, they have no free will. It changed, it's a complete game changer. It it is very much like the nuclear age. What if the Soviets had gotten nuclear weapons first? What if Hitler had gotten them first, right? Whoever controls the emerging technology sets the stage for those that come afterwards. So it is an absolute race to dominate that. Everything dealing with the digital world is a race, specifically things in the digital world that are democratizing. When we talk about cryptocurrencies and things like that, there's Bitcoin and there's everything else. Bitcoin is the only cryptocurrency that is totally decentralized. There's no president, there's no owner, there's no foundation, there's no nonprofit. It is just a public open source ledger.

SPEAKER_10: 55:52

Doesn't it also make it feel like it's uh built on sand? I mean, because it is propping itself up.

SPEAKER_08: 56:00

Yeah, kind of like everything that has ever worked successfully in the history of ever. And everything built by man, as Ecclesiastes says through the wisdom of Solomon, is vanity and will turn back into dust.

SPEAKER_10: 56:12

Okay, so but in the meantime, we'll use it until it turns back into dust.

SPEAKER_08: 56:16

What we're saying with Bitcoin, if Bitcoin is like gold. What makes gold valuable?

SPEAKER_10: 56:22

Um, that you have it in your possession.

SPEAKER_08: 56:25

It's because you think it's valuable and I think it's valuable, and should be a good thing. And there's a limited quantity valuable, and Pony Boy thinks it's valuable. The valuation of gold is decentralized. Okay. We don't require the Federal Reserve to tell us it's worth anything. In fact, the Federal Reserve is telling us it's worth$41 an ounce. But we all know it's worth$5,000 an ounce because we have a democratized belief in the value. Okay, Bitcoin allows that democratized belief. Okay. Ethereum, all the different coins, they don't. They have a central bank that says this is the value, this is the quantity. This is that makes sense.

SPEAKER_10: 57:00

Yeah, what are they? I wonder what they base that value on.

SPEAKER_08: 57:04

They base it on their own metrics, whatever they base the value of the dollar on.

SPEAKER_10: 57:07

Okay.

SPEAKER_08: 57:08

Right? It's the same concept, it's just another form of central banking.

SPEAKER_10: 57:11

Okay.

SPEAKER_08: 57:11

The lesson here, and this is what J.D. Bance, it's not lost on him. Collectivist comp you know, governments, they want control. They want central control, central banking. Okay. Bitcoin represents democratic banking banking. It represents something that no single bank or government can control. It's an open source legislature. So it can work with their system. We can work with it democratically. The people can work with their system. Whether the government is willing to work with it or not is up to them. There were fiat currencies when Thomas Jefferson and George Washington and Franklin all decided to make gold and silver the standard of currency in the United States. There were fiat currencies they could have used. There was a great debate between Hamilton and the other founding fathers about central banking and fractional reserve lending. These were things then, but they opted to go with a democratized form of wealth, which is coins and currency as a weight and measures.

SPEAKER_10: 58:05

And so some of my picking and poking at this whole topic is trying to figure out how is this going to go wrong for us in the end? Because it seems like all these things get used against us in the end.

SPEAKER_08: 58:16

Well, JD Vance has an interesting perspective on this. China does not want Bitcoin, they do not allow their citizens to use Bitcoin. Okay. Because, unlike they want their citizens to have gold, okay, which is different. United States doesn't want you to have gold, but they won't let the gold out of their borders. And because there's no private property, even if you privately possess gold, they still own it. Okay. So they have democratized the owning of gold, but they have absolutely limited anybody in China's ability to own Bitcoin. Now, some people could look at that and go, well, gold's real, Bitcoin's not. Maybe China's got it figured out. Or China knows that Bitcoin is antithetical to their communistic, collectivistic economic model because it's decentralized and because you can keep the passwords private in your brain, unlike gold, that you can literally just go take, right? And if you don't want to take it, arrested straight to jail. We'll take your gold. With Bitcoin, even if they throw you in jail, if you want to be a stick in the mud, you're not giving up that 12-code password. So JD Vance is like if China is running from Bitcoin, that's why America has to pay attention to it.

SPEAKER_15: 59:26

But I actually think that where Bitcoin is going is as a strategically important asset for the United States over the next decade. It's one of the reasons why President Trump, with the help of our great AI guy, David Sachs, it's one of the reasons why we started the Bitcoin reserve. Because we want to start to put in motion the strategic importance of Bitcoin for the United States government. We know that the PRC doesn't like Bitcoin. The People's Republic of China doesn't like Bitcoin. Well, we should be asking ourselves, why is that? Why is our biggest adversary such an opponent of Bitcoin? And if the Communist Republic of China is leaning away from Bitcoin, then maybe the United States ought to be leaning into Bitcoin, and that's one of the things that we're going to be doing.

SPEAKER_08: 1:00:18

So that is a strategic decision that the United States policymakers are making. Why? That's what I just presented. Bitcoin is actual democratized value, digital value. Whereas China's like, we don't want you to have that democratized value. We want it centralized. Central bank digital currency, we track it, we do it. You can track Bitcoin, but you can't figure out the owners unless you make the connections. Which that's something we're constantly talking with about over at 1776live.us, is how to maintain privacy. Because you might not be able to obscure or obfuscate the money, but you can obscure the equitable owners of that money. Anyways, Kevin O'Leary was on uh Fox Business just I don't think this was yesterday. It was in the last couple days because the Bitcoin valuation is correct. But he talks about structurally why Bitcoin and Ethereum over everything else. And the one caveat to why everyone's not going full hog into Bitcoin.

SPEAKER_01: 1:01:15

How do you think about Bitcoin uh fundamentally, technically, especially after a little bit of this washout we've seen?

SPEAKER_12: 1:01:22

Well, Bitcoin has had a major correction yet again, down 50%. This is not the first time this has occurred. Something else has occurred, though, underneath it that is uh quite a problem for the crypto market to resolve. Last October, uh October 20th was the day when this stuff really melted, but not just Bitcoin, everything. Some of them down 80, 90 percent. The reason that occurred, in my opinion, is everybody in the institutional and sovereign wealth at that time saw that the Clarity Act, the Stability Act that made the first act, which was the Genius Act, the second part was going to come and make Bitcoin legal for them to own in an index. It didn't happen. So they were doing a lot of analysis. This is quite shocking. It turns out, if you actually do the analysis, and they did, these institutions did, they they basically went in, eyes open, saying, Let's run the numbers. What do I need to own in crypto to capture 90% of the alpha, the volatility? Turns out all you need is Bitcoin and Ethereum, and the rest of the poo coins are worthless. So they dropped 80, 90 percent, they never came back. Bitcoin got slaughtered because of a lot of deleveraging. Remember, we had all these treasury products that came out that had leverage on them. I'm still long this, but there's a new concern that is kind of floating around for 10% of the people out there. Quantum. The idea that a quantum computer can break the chain.

SPEAKER_04: 1:02:41

Interesting.

SPEAKER_12: 1:02:42

And so until that gets resolved, there'll be some resistance at the institutional level to go past 3%.

SPEAKER_08: 1:02:49

You know, it's interesting. The quantum computer concern is not a new concern. It's been around forever. And from what I read, the experts are like, uh, you're never gonna get to quantum computing that is gonna be used for that. Like it's the way quantum computing works, it's not gonna be like these big AI servers. It's never gonna be like that. It's gonna be like transporting quirks. It's kind of limited into a theoretical realm for now. Anyways, very, very interesting. Structurally, everything's there for Bitcoin. That one caveat about uh quantum coming out, that's no different than being like, let's put all our money in Fort Knox and then they nuke it. You know what I mean? It's the same thing. It's like, well, there is a technology out there that can neutralize your wealth. You know what I mean? It's like, okay, that's always been the case. All right, it is about time for us to jump over to private. We are going to be making fun of we are going to be making fun of AOC relentlessly. We've got a couple AOC clips, and we're just gonna listen to these stupid things. They are they are ridiculous. Um, one of the other uh things that's going on is lawfair. The Democrat Party through their NGOs are actively out there training juries around the country to nullify verdicts. So we have a case down in Dallas where a jury fails to convict trendy agua members who kidnapped a man and his children and executed the the father in front of the kids. And we have Democrats coaching juries to nullify the prosecution. They had the jury had two bites at this apple and both times hung and acquitted. These guys are gonna walk. Yeah, really sad. Um, Palantir to follow up on that story about the big Palantir leak with all the the Vance and Elon and Trump phone calls. Totally true, totally happened. So Palantir is used to go get that data, and Palantir itself is susceptible. So now you just have all the data out everywhere. Nothing is secret, nothing is secure. Palantir can hack all the encryption, and Palantir itself can be hacked. So, welcome to all the new world. How that information gets weaponized, I don't know. But in a situation like this, there's one thing that works, Sunlight. Rip it off. There's no you can't the cover up is worse than the crime. You know what I mean? Give me the conch shell, Piggy. So the Palantir had 13 employees that quit, and when they quit, they sent off this letter because they're big mad here. I mean, they're big mad. And uh they're they're they wrote this letter in this the myth of the Palantir Stones. When JR Token passed, he left the story of the Palantir, and they like did their little resignation letter in like a JR Token style of storytelling. But their big thing here was this: they they wanted that the AI code would incorporate DEI. They didn't like that uh they weren't incorporating DI and diversity and include equity and inclusion, uh, preserve the spirit of free scientific inquiry and ensure responsible AI development. Guardrails were set to prevent discrimination, disinformation, and abuses of power. These principles have now been violated and are rapidly being dismantled at Palantir Technologies and across Silicon Valley. So the lefties have now bailed out of their. You know, monster creation. Dr. Frankenstein has left the building. Okay. And the monster's on the loose. Thank you very much, assholes. Oh, great. You create you built in you built in diversity, equity, and inclusion, which creates what? Discrimination, inequity, and disclusion. And now that people have come in to try to fix it, you're calling them Nazis. But now the whole grift has been, the whole scam has been exposed because you guys have access to everything. Like if I supported strategic use of nuclear weapons, it would be to hit these data centers. You know what I mean? I like the world where I could just take people at their surf, at their face, at face value. I can't now. So I don't know what side you can land on that issue, but I just know AI surveillance is not a good thing. And it's never going to be a good thing. Uh, last thing I wanted to point out, and this is just one of the things that people on the conservative side, and this is why in my early years I was a progressive leftist, or at least identified as such. There are certain things that once you see it, it's hard to unsee, right? When you actually see racism, or you actually see inequality, or you actually see color of law abuse of authority like the cop who arrests everybody for DOIs, even though they're sober, but it totally messes up their future plans because now they've got a record, they've got court dates, that you know what I mean? Totally inappropriate. This is another one of those things that once you see it, you can't unsee it. Once I saw the problem with the criminal justice system, now I'm much more sympathetic to some of this stuff, right? About how criminal justice is going to be weaponized. This is a concert down in Brazil. This is income inequality, how it shows up in the market. And once you see it, it's hard to unsee this. I don't know if this would happen in America, but look at this picture here. So this is a woman doing a concert. It's pretty common. She's just doing her little concert, Marvel concert.

unknown: 1:08:01

Okay.

SPEAKER_08: 1:08:01

Do you notice anything about that crowd, Ron? Anything about that crowd. Once you see it, you won't be able to unsee it.

SPEAKER_10: 1:08:07

Anything about the crowd.

SPEAKER_08: 1:08:09

Um so if I told you the people in the middle of the street paid for their tickets and the people on the edge of the street didn't pay for their ticket, do you now notice something about the crowd?

SPEAKER_10: 1:08:19

Uh I I really can't see that small. Um, I see a lot of hard hats, it looks like.

SPEAKER_08: 1:08:24

Oh, those are just yeah, that's that's guarding the if you're on this side, you paid. If you're on this side, you didn't pay. If you're on this side, you didn't pay.

SPEAKER_10: 1:08:33

Okay. So do you notice anything about maybe a color contrast? Well, yeah, I do see a different color. It's like darker on the edges and lighter in the middle. I don't know.

SPEAKER_08: 1:08:43

If you go to DC, you'll notice something. Everybody serving food, opening doors, parking stuff, doing construction are one color skin. Everybody working a salary job on the inside, whereas air conditioning is another color skin. Where's this at? This is in Brazil. But I'm saying in DC you see this. Okay. Once you see it, you can unsee it. The people in the middle paid for their tickets, and look at the skin color. Look at the color of the crowd. It's light. And look at the people who didn't pay for their tickets. I I don't know if that's I can't tell. It's darker.

SPEAKER_10: 1:09:13

It's clearly darker. But I can't do skin.

SPEAKER_08: 1:09:17

So she's taking crap because of the the inequality of her crowd. Really? Yes. And this again, this is Brazil. So when they come to our country and they're like, you guys have segregation, so do you. This is what happens when you can't buy your ticket or you can buy your ticket. There's something going on there. There's a class, something going on there that has a racial association. You see what I'm saying?

SPEAKER_10: 1:09:44

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

SPEAKER_08: 1:09:44

Anyways, it's just once you see it, this is the stuff. If I was standing in this crowd thinking, why can't I have a ticket? Why can't I afford a ticket? Why is everybody who does have a ticket a couple shades lighter in skin color than the people I'm standing around over here? These are the questions that we must resolve as a society. And don't be surprised when you're someone holding a ticket, when someone not holding the ticket starts claiming racism. You're like, what does race have to do with it? There's a correlation to some of this stuff. It's not causation, but we have to be aware of it because it comes up. So a little bit of a rant there. I just found that very interesting. Having lived in Brazil, I'm like, oh yeah, I could definitely see that. And having spent a little bit of time up on that eastern seaboard, I'm like, and it's not totally different here. There's a working class and there's a cubicle class, and they often don't share the same skin tone.

SPEAKER_11: 1:10:37

Okay.

SPEAKER_08: 1:10:38

And I got no explanations from that. I'm from the West. We don't do that stuff. You go onto a construction site here, it's five Mexicans, three white guys, and two blacks. That's okay. All right, guys. That's it for public. We are gonna jump over to private and make fun of Ocasio-Cortez. Okay, so Ocasio-Cortez. What a brilliant woman. She was asked at this Berlin thing. She had a couple different meetings, and she's being asked about Marco Rubio's speech, an amazing speech that frankly might change the course of world history. I mean, it was a good speech. But uh AOC, in commenting about it, said things like, Well, Venezuela is south of the equator. Venezuela's north of the equator. So a whole bunch of stuff like that. Here's one, Ron. Let's see if you catch the uh humor in her uh answer here.

SPEAKER_27: 1:11:28

Rubio's speech was a pure appeal to Western culture. Uh, my favorite part was when he said that uh American cowboys came from Spain. Uh I believe the Mexicans and descendants of uh of African slave enslaved peoples uh would like to have a word uh on that.

SPEAKER_11: 1:11:54

Uh uh.

SPEAKER_08: 1:11:57

So, first of all, I don't know where African slaves have anything to do with cowboys, so okay. But the Mexicans? So Marco Rubio said the cowboys come from Spain. And she's saying no, they come from the Mexicans. Where do the Mexicans come from? Um Hispania. Who brought the horses to Mexico? Espanna? Okay, like you're retarded, Ocasio-Cortez. The Mexicans, nor the horses, spontaneously showed up in Mexico. They came from Espane. Total, just retarded. You know what I mean? She got asked another one. This is good. That's a poor thing. She gets asked about the Fed interest rate, right? She's she's making a run for Congress.

SPEAKER_13: 1:12:46

I want to ask you about inflation and interest rates and uh Fed Chair Powell, who recently said that um the strong labor market made it appropriate for him to soon raise interest rates. I wonder what your take on that is.

SPEAKER_27: 1:13:01

Well, you know, I think particularly when we have this conversation in the context of inflation as well, it's really not just labor, it's not just rising wages, but there's a lot of different dynamics that I think are contributing to the increase in prices, whether it's supply chain complications, yes, labor issues, but sometimes lack of labor, um, a lack of the ability to be able to work consistently in their jobs, which is also tied to pandemic controls. And also there's a real distinction to be made between inflation and price gouging. And there's a lot of evidence that, particularly industries with high concentrations, corporate concentrations, um, whether it's almost oligopoly level industries, a lot of these price increases are potentially due to just straight price gouging by corporations.

SPEAKER_13: 1:13:56

Are you concerned about inflation and higher interest rates? What did you just say? Impact on working people.

SPEAKER_27: 1:14:04

I mean, wherever prices are increasing and it's making it difficult for someone to be able to feed their family, that is always going to be a major point of concern, primary point of concern. But the real key is making sure that we're diagnosing the causes correctly, because the danger here is that if we say we're helping working people too much and say that the cause of this is, oh, it's because we provided too much assistance during the American Rescue Plan, stimulus checks were too generous. That is why we are dealing with the problems that we're dealing with now. What that's going to result in is a pullback in the assistance that some families need the most right now. And when we already talk about the cessation of the child tax credit with the failure to pass the Build Back Better Act before the end of last year, we really need to be very careful about diagnosing these issues correctly. Because on the flip side of that coin, if we say there are real antitrust issues here, there's a lot of corporate abuse of power leading to price gouging, then that allows us to pursue lanes such as antitrust and also pursue labor protections, COVID protections that can help people get.

SPEAKER_08: 1:15:27

That's the point. It was literally just minutes of dead air. Like she said nothing. Here's one side of the issue, here's the other side of the issue. We have no agreement. We could use antitrust or not for what you're talking about. It has no connection. It's like, what? Here's the uh Venezuela.

SPEAKER_27: 1:15:44

What happened in Venezuela, for example? It is not a uh it it is it is not a a remark on who Maduro was as a leader. He canceled elections, he was an anti-democratic leader. That doesn't mean that we can kidnap a head of state and engage in acts of war just because the nation is below the equator.

SPEAKER_08: 1:16:09

And people clapped.

SPEAKER_10: 1:16:15

Maduro. Maduro.

SPEAKER_08: 1:16:17

Do you feel like you're heading down the hill with the bobsled captain and you're just you're like, ah here's another one. She made a huge fool of herself again in Munich. It's one after another. Like I could have taken a whole half hour just with her clips over the weekend.

SPEAKER_22: 1:16:32

So when you run for president, are you going to impose a wealth tax or a billionaire's tax?

SPEAKER_27: 1:16:39

I don't think that um I I don't think that anyone, and that we don't have to wait for any one president to impose a wealth tax. I think that it needs to be done expeditiously.

SPEAKER_00: 1:16:52

You have the the recipe that many Latin American countries uh applied many, many times that is some relief in the short term, but end up being, you know, a tragedy for the future. It's like public expenditure, huge public expenditure, price controls, sometimes wealth tax, and you end up uh the wealth goes away and you have just the tax and you don't and you don't have uh wealth anymore. That was something that peronism did many, many times. So all these recipes then create a cycle, no? Then you have uh this short-term relief, but then goes with inflation, shortage, then you have more poverty, and this uh and and the cycle goes and goes.

SPEAKER_08: 1:17:37

What's hilarious is she offers the anecdote to and the clear explanation to what AOC is talking about, but just allowing a wealth tax. And she's like, Well, then you have the wealth tax and the wealth flees, and you just get left with the tax. And they're like, Because of the accent, AOC comes off in the moment as sounding more coherent. Here's her answer when she's asked, would you defend Taiwan if China invaded?

SPEAKER_23: 1:18:04

Would and should the US actually commit US troops to defend Taiwan if China were to move?

SPEAKER_27: 1:18:12

Um, you know, I think that uh this is such a uh, you know, I I think that this is a um this is of course a uh a very long-standing um policy of the United States. Uh and I think what we are hoping for is that we want to make sure that we never get to that point, and we want to make sure that we are moving in all of our economic research and our global positions to avoid any such confrontation and for that question to even arise.

SPEAKER_08: 1:18:51

Would and should so is is the US gonna defend Taiwan? We're going to do things and not explain them, and ultimately what we want to happen is not to have to answer this question. That's what we would really like. We're not gonna do anything for or against, but we really want to be in a position where we take and determined action that leads to you not asking me this question because you're not gonna like the answer, because it's probably I'm not gonna defend Taiwan. All right, do we have a raid that we can send you guys off to?

SPEAKER_10: 1:19:27

Yeah, let's do it.

SPEAKER_08: 1:19:28

Did it go? Awesome! All right, you guys are heading on over to Wake and Bake. Go on over there and check out the raid. Hello Peasants. All right, those few of you that are there, head on over to Wake and Bake. They are they're they're talking about the clown world and it looks kind of funny. Security settlement.

SPEAKER_21: 1:19:52

And then all of a sudden they're free and they're like buy myself only.

SPEAKER_08: 1:19:55

Interesting. Okay, that's it for us to guys. We will it for us today. We will talk to you guys again tomorrow. Bye-bye.

SPEAKER_21: 1:20:26

What night lived in that castle over there? I'm 37. What? I'm 37, I'm not old. Well, I can't just call you man, you could say Dennis. I didn't know you were called Dennis. Well you're not to find out, did you? I did say sorry about the old woman, but from behind, you're not checking you automatically treat me like an imperialist. Well, I am king, old king. How'd you get that, eh? By exploiting the workers, by adding on to outdated imperialist dogma, which perpetuates the economic and social differences in our society. There's never going to be any problem. How'd you do? How do you do, good lady? I'm Arthur, King of the Britons. Whose castle is that? The Britons. We all are. We are all Britons. And I am your king. You're throwing yourself. We're living in a dictatorship. A self-perpetuating autocracy in which the working class is. That's what it's all about. These good people, I am in haste. Who lives in that castle? No one lives there. Then who is your Lord? We don't have a Lord. What? I told you. We're in a narco-syndicalist commune. We take it in turns to act as a sort of executive officer for the week. Yes. But all the decisions of that officer have to be ratified at a special byweek image. Yes, I think by a civil majority in the case of pure internal affairs. I order you to be quiet. Order you to be kings. I'm your king. You don't vote for kings? The lady of the lake. Her armed chance of the purest humoring samites held a lost excaliber from the bottom of the water. Signifying by divine providence that I asked was to carry excalibur. That is why I'm your king. Listen, strange women lying in ponds, distributing swords, is no basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some fartical aquatic ceremony. But you can't expect to wield supreme executive power just because some water is passed through a sword. I mean it's all way around. Saying I was an emperor. Just because some moistened bitch had loved a symmetry at me, they put me away. Shut up! Shut up! Now we see the violence inherited the system.