120 Days - From White House to Tether CEO

to a special edition of The Aaron Day Before we get into tonight's main program Show. about the war on crypto, the Clarity Act, and our political prisoners, we're doing something special. OwnNothing.org is more than a website. It's a movement against the forces, stripping away your property rights, your financial freedom, and your autonomy. Every movement needs an anthem. We've narrowed it down to four incredible songs, and we're going to play all four of them right now. Then it's your turn to decide. Head to ownnothing.org to cast your vote. Plus, for every hundred people who vote, we're giving away twenty-five Freedom Dollars to a random voter. Let's listen to our four finalists.

First up, Tom and Mary Johnson. This song tells the story of everyday Americans fighting back against a system designed to dispossess them. Listen closely. Whoa, whoa, whoa Tom and Mary Johnson, Maple Street's a-ninety-nine He's at the kitchen table, six a.m., the screen's blue-light She's got the smart speaker listening every whisper, every prayer. The daughter's face lit up at midnight by the tablet's empty stare.

Signed a thousand agreements, never read a single line. Said you were long nothing, it was always the design. Tom checked his retirement, thought he had it saved away But he's just holding high, oh, used to banks get paid first when it breaks He bought the coin that promised him, set his family free But every transaction on the chain was there for all to see Got the diagnosis, found the records,

they've been sold They want us to own nothing Not our health, our wealth, our soul Then one night at the kitchen table Hands around the coffee cup Tom looked at Mary and Mary looked at Tom And both said, that's enough Well, they cannot see We'll own nothing but tomorrow Wallet to wallet, finally free They say we'll own nothing we'll own our destiny We've found another Well, way Now they're trading private coins No

ledger they can read Money that can't be frozen, transactions they can't see. Daughter's learning in her kitchen, not a screen that steals her soul. Son knows how to build things on nothing they control. Found a thousand other families, wallets laid but names unknown. If you already own nothing What you gotta lose

Sit and wait for permission You can finally move We'll own nothing Then build everything We got nothing left to lose We'll own nothing but our freedom Building where they cannot see We'll own nothing but tomorrow Our second anthem is called Sovereign

Ground. It's about standing firm on the land that's yours that no government or corporation can take from you. Remember, vote at own nothing dot org. Every click you make Every form you sign Every cent you take They're watching all

the time Every word you speak Every thought you share They're building up a cage And you don't even care But we see through the screen now We're breaking from the machine Building something they can't take Sovereign ground

Building something they can't take Sovereign ground for freedom's sake They own the debt, they own the fee They own the money, they own the need But they don't own the fire inside

We're breaking from the machine now Building something they can't take Sovereign ground Sovereign ground For freedom's sake For freedom's sake

Third, we have Taking Back Tomorrow. This one's about reclaiming the future they're trying to steal from your Your vote matters. children. Head to ownnothing.org.

Another day inside the machine again Inside the world, my future Click by click Never saw the walls until now

Can you feel it rising? Can you see the light? We've been sleeping too long Now we're all ready for the fight We're taking back tomorrow We're standing strong and growing We're the ones who dream From the frozen

bank accounts To the censored spoken word They thought they'd keep us silent Thought we'd stay inside the hood But parallel economies Can you feel it breaking? Can you see it fall? The system builds on paper and we're gonna burn it all We're taking back tomorrow

We're standing sovereign ground We're building in the ashes Of a world that let us down They said we know nothing We'd forget

One by one, we found each other Hand in hand, we built together They can freeze our money, they can shut the doors But they can't break the spirit of what we're fighting for We're standing sovereign ground We're building in the ashes Of a world that

let us down They said we know nothing We forget what freedom means But we're the ones still standing We're the ones still dreaming

And finally, Turning the Page, a song about closing the chapter on their agenda and writing our own story. After you hear this one, go to ownnothing.org, pick your favorite, and cast your vote. Remember, twenty-five freedom dollars for every hundred voters. Woke up this morning, phone already in my hand. Scrolling through the feed before my feet hit the land. Signed away my data, never read a single word.

Gave them all my all as every word. Something's stirring in the cities and the town. Sleepers are awakening. The program's breaking down. We're taking back our time. We're taking back our minds. We're building something new. While their system falls behind. They said we know nothing. And like a loving cage. We're writing different chapters.

Money isn't one of these It's a chain around our wrists Programmable permission slips They give us to exist But parallel economies Are rising from the ground When the old world starts to crumble That's when we'll be found The architects of capture Never saw us coming through A million little exits and we're building something new. We're taking back our time. We're taking back our life.

They own the screens but not our eyes They own the feed but not the skies They build a world of ones and zeros But we're flesh and blood and sovereign heroes We're taking back our time We're taking back our minds We're building something new While their system falls behind They said we'd own nothing And learn to love the cage But every line they wrote We're turning the page

Those are your four finalists. Now it's time for you to decide. Go to ownnothing.org right now and vote for the anthem that speaks to you. Share this with everyone you know who believes in property rights and financial freedom. No. Own nothing? Own everything. Vote now. Welcome back to the Air and Day Show. This is season three, episode five. So if you have been listening from the very beginning, you know that we're playing the four finalist songs for the anthem for ownnothing.org. So I encourage you to go to ownnothing.org and vote. We're going to pick the winner. Well, you're going to pick the winner before

next week's episode. So next week, i'm going to actually launch um oh nothing got over so the kind of version one point out it's the first one as you know i've been working on six different sites this is the first site that we're going to officially launch i'm i'm getting them all ready for launch with this above phone that we're going to be doing, but it doesn't make sense to launch and do kind of a rollout of all six sites at once. So we're going to roll them out once a week for six weeks. And, you know, as you go through the process, you'll see how they are. They're all interconnected. And actually, importantly, so given everything that's going on with

the Genius Act and the Clarity Act, it kind of occurred to me during the summer of last year that we have to hyper accelerate building the exits. I mean, we talk about exit and build, but to just say that is kind of a difficult thing for people to grasp. People need to actually have steps to know what to do and people need tools to There are a lot of people working on be able to connect. parallel solutions, but there are all over the place. A lot of these local solutions are local, which I'm trying to encourage people to open that up because frankly, it's very difficult to get enough people in a geographic location to be able to

sustain and build a parallel solution. And there's no reason to limit some of these things geographically. So own nothing is actually going to be the most important site because it is a site that allows you to assess how sovereign you currently are in terms of you know to what extent you even control your own attention to what extent you own your own money do you own your own health or information about your health you own your food so on and so forth and so basically what it allows you to do is go through and take a series of surveys it kind of gives you a score, and, you know, but more importantly, um, based on that score, it tells you, it gives you steps and links to resources

that you can do to improve your sovereignty. So this is why I think it's the most important thing. What I've found is that a lot of people aren't even aware of how little sovereignty they have. I've mentioned many times this idea that we already not only own nothing, but that in many respects, America, is over, which is definitely the case when you look at Real ID, which is digital ID, the Genius Act, which is backdoor CBDC, and now the Clarity Act that cleared another hurdle today in the Senate Agriculture Committee. We're basically looking at a situation where they're actively tokenizing literally everything we own, not just money, and they are putting it under the control of

basically central planners who can shut off our access to these things and then are building AI surveillance systems to make sure that we comply with the behavior that they're looking for, or we will lose access to those assets. And so this is what I have been fighting for or fighting against, I should say, for the last three or four years. And what I thought was something that was off on the horizon, something that would happen by twenty thirty is actually happening. right now we're almost out of time so so i'm launching these sites as the solution it just so happens the clarity act is going on right now so we're also actively trying to raise immediate

awareness around this because this almost no one knows about this bill and even people that follow what's going on haven't followed this in some respects it passed in the House a long time Yes, ago, but then there was, you know, people lost track of it and then it picked up discussions in the Senate. But there are a lot of other things I mean, we have, you know, going on. pick a new crisis each day. So all of a sudden we get a bill out of the Senate Finance Committee. two hundred seventy eight page bill. They drop it. Boom. Even the people voting on it, the legislative legislators only get twenty four hours to read it. Then a couple of days later, they announce a different bill out of the

Agriculture Committee. So this stuff is only like a week old or a week and a half old. So and then what I've found in studying this is almost no one. Discusses the negative aspects of this, the Crypto media is completely captured. Most of the major crypto publications are actually owned by crypto firms that benefit from the legislation. I talked about this last week. My Brownstone article that I am still revising, it's really long, but I wanted to get everything out to explain Not just what's in the legislation, but how the political process works, because a lot of people are being fooled thinking, oh, well,

they put this little carve out here. So this is protected. And when you know the history of what happens with financial surveillance bills from the time their first pass to then what happens when they get implemented and the amount of power that the agencies have. and the amount of leeway that they have. In this case, the SEC and the CFTC, it almost doesn't matter what's in the bill to a certain degree because the rulemaking agencies get all of the kind of the power and a lot of discretion in how to implement it. So having to explain all of this is really important, particularly when you're trying to counteract the propaganda that's being pushed out. And the top level propaganda that's being

pushed out by the administration is that we are going to be the Bitcoin capital of the world and the crypto center of the world. And that is completely false on its face. I'll get into some of this tonight. I wanted to talk about kind of a specific element of this. Last week I talked about this. I kind of gave a high level overview. I'm going to continue to talk about this on every episode. It's not going to be the sole focus of every episode, but it will be something that we talk about on every episode until either it passes or Somehow we kill it, excuse me, from being passed, which, by the way, is a long shot just simply based on who's funding it and how much money there is behind it.

I mean, essentially taking the position contrary to this bill, there's no money in it. You have one hundred million dollars being spent by the crypto lobby and the bank banking lobby to promote it. All the people that wrote it, you have something like two hundred former CFTC and SEC officials now working for lobbyists and for law firms. So there's there's literally no money in Right. being in opposition to this. So you have no. outlets for this you know there's there are no channels that will even take you on you look at coin telegraph you look at some of these other publications they are one hundred percent in support of these pieces of legislation it's they're

not journalists they are literally sponsored ads these publications have nothing to do with journalism crypto quote journalism is worse than mainstream media it's worse than our legacy media however you want to call it there have been in the last twenty four, forty eight hours, two major developments. One is USAT, which is Tether, has officially launched their USA regulated stable coin. And we've talked about Tether many times on this program. The new CEO of Tether USA is Bo Hines, a former member of the Trump administration working on crypto policy and prior to that failed

candidate for US Congress. And there's a lot of cronyism involved with that. That's happened with it. That happened yesterday. And then today, the Clarity Act passed. So we are now actively, at least I see on X, people are, it looks like people are actively supporting backdoor stablecoins, excuse me, backdoor CBDCs in the form of government regulated stablecoins. But that is actually not the case. Most of the traffic is fake. Most people have no idea what's going on. But nevertheless, we are at a point right now where I think it's probably the biggest populist rug pull in history. I think we might have Craig Wenkelwitz come on at some point here in the program to discuss some of this and to

walk through some of this, possibly even Patrick Wood or Courtney Turner as well. It depends on their schedules. But I've been chatting with them back and and they've independently come to the forth, conclusion that What's happened with Tether is absolutely worrisome and astounding. So in any event, just before I get into the heart of the program tonight, and the program tonight is I'm not going to go through all of the bills in detail as I've done in the past or will do in a more coherent fashion next week or the week after. Instead, I'm going to talk about who some of the key players are. Because it just strikes me that we have reached a level of absolute peak cronyism

in terms of the degree to which we're dealing with a revolving door and simultaneously people in the administration profiting off of policy kind of in real time. I mean, people complain about insider trading. and you can think whatever you want about insider trading, that's less than actually starting and actively investing in companies that are benefiting from your policies that you are the one passing, right? It's kind of like one is, well, I got wind of something and I invested The other is we literally created a in it. company and then wrote legislation to benefit from it. So it's worse. Nancy Pelosi is like a three on a ten scale of cronyism.

when you look at what's going on with this administration. So I'm going to talk about, you know, maybe, you know, ten of the people, ten of the big players that are involved in this. Before I do that, you know, these are, as I've been writing the article, I've been putting together a couple of images that I wanted to go through to give you a sense of how I'm trying to frame and help people even understand this, because I'm looking at the the legislation that's passing. And, you know, we're in a situation right now where the politicians are using the same buzzwords and then that's picked up by the media. I mean, I see these posts all the time breaking

big news, you know, landmark legislation just passed. And then they give you like the list of buzzwords that the politicians put in their press release, no analysis of what any of this means. So I put together this little quick decoder ring. So when they say bipartisan, it means the lobbyists on both sides got paid. When they say clarity, it means clear lines of fire for the regulators to attack industry. When they say consumer protection, they mean surveillance. When they say market structure, they mean rigged by the people who wrote the bill. When they say industry input, it's theater. That's not a process. That's by the time something gets to the point where it looks like

it's getting industry input. The bill has already been written. Responsible innovation means obedience and financial inclusion means conscription. You are required to play by these types of rules. A couple of other images that are in the article. One is speaking to how insane these regulations are. We don't even need the Clarity Act or the Genius Act. The problem that we have is the existing legislation. So we need to be repealing the existing legislation, not adding new legislation. We don't need market structure. They're putting in the market structure as a way to say, hey, listen, we have these rules that already are not

effective and don't solve the problem that they're stating to solve. Now we have this new technology called tokenization where you can digitize things and make it trackable and programmable. And so now we need rules to take the surveillance aspect of this new technology and apply it to the old rules that were broken to begin with. This is essentially even what's meant by that. But when I say the old rules don't work, I wanna talk about the Bank Secrecy Act. So with the Bank Secrecy Act, you have to fill out all of these forms. And I think that they only examine three or four percent of the suspicious activity reports that are sent to the Treasury. And out of those, like,

ninety percent of the people are innocent. So you're talking about like a fraction of a percent of bad activity might be caught through this entire thing. It's mostly victims. It's mostly cost. So as an example, a bank that was caught violating the Bank Secrecy Act after the fact, laundered eight hundred and eighty one million dollars. The bankers involved with that got promoted, whereas Ian Freeman sold Bitcoin without a license after being told by a lawyer he didn't need a license. And he's in federal prison for eight So now the legislation that we have is years. going to take this Bank Secrecy Act and add digital tokens to it. It's going to make it easier to to confiscate this stuff.

Some of these slides are out of order, but just as I was working on this on the article, I thought I'd throw these in here. So I wrote my book or published my book in June of, and just to remind everyone, the whole point of the book was to warn people that Fiat is collapsing. CBDCs are a threat and that CBDCs are an extension of Fiat currency. So what I have been saying the entire time is if you want to stop CBDC, level surveillance and tyranny, you need to exit the dollar. Well, so since that time, based on today's prices, if you followed my advice, what the title of the book was, The Final Countdown, Crypto, Gold, Silver, and People's Last Stand Against Tyranny by

Central Bank Digital Currencies. if you followed my advice from that time, Well, silver is up three hundred ninety seven percent. Zeno is up three hundred ninety four percent. Monero is up two hundred nineteen percent and gold is up one hundred eighty percent. my core thesis that all fiat currencies So again, collapse, but in this particular case, because then people get into this argument of which fiat currency we're going to pick next, even though when you look at it, they're all going to fail anyway. That what I've been warning people about is unlike other collapses, they are going out of their way to already build what's next when things And so people ask me all the time, collapse.

When is this going to collapse? And I say that it's not so much that it's going to kind of collapse on its own. It's more of a controlled demolition. So I will tell you when it will collapse. It will collapse when the Genius Act and the Clarity Act are fully implemented and when they are able to take digital control of everyone's assets. And in a controlled demolition, offer people, you know, hey, you need to take UBI, take this new system that we have, take this tokenization of all of your We're going to take all of your assets, assets. but we're going to give you universal basic income, universal high income or whatever it is. This is the infrastructure that's being built.

This Clarity Act will ultimately include not only tokenizing stocks, bonds, oil, oil and gas, gold, silver, the whole agricultural supply chain, real estate. But they're building into this the idea of even tokenizing and selling off the national assets of the United States. This is what the Sovereign Wealth Fund is all about. And Howard Lutnik's firm, Cantor Fitzgerald is involved in that. And so again, as I want to say, as I said before, issue we don't need market structure markets work fine markets have flourished for for thousands of years without a senate finance committee and the bank secrecy act really highlights this sixty one billion dollars a year in compliance

costs they catch about point four four percent of the people involved ninety five percent of the innocent are harassed and people that go through these suspicious activity reports and they get flagged they get basically put on a list and then they have a difficult time getting access to banking services. They did nothing wrong. It was flagged. And yet it goes to this kind of bureaucratic maze. I want to say something else related to the Genius Act. I've mentioned in the past that one of the reasons that the Genius Act was passed was to force stablecoin issuers to back their stablecoins with U.S. treasuries. And initially, Treasury Secretary DeSantis said that they

believe they'll be able to sell at least two trillion dollars worth of treasuries. He's now upped that to three trillion dollars worth of treasuries. So when you use USAT, when you use USDC, when you use these government regulated stable points, you are funding predator drones, you're funding NSA server farms, the militarization of the police, the surveillance of all of your financial transactions, CIA, black sites, tanks, social credit scores, and the surveillance state. This is what happens when you use stable By the way, coins. it's also what happens when you use the dollar itself, which is why I've been encouraging those who say, well, we should start using cash.

If you are using fiat currency in any form, you are funding the things that you are likely complaining about. You're funding both sides of whatever's going on in Minneapolis, whether you like it or not. And whichever side you're on, you're funding both sides of it by merely using the dollar. And now they're literally using misunderstood hype about crypto. They're using the fact that people don't know what crypto is supposed to be for about the fact that it's supposed to be about separation of money and state. They're using hype. to push a backdoor CBDC to fund more government and to fund more debt. It's actually pretty disgusting. And the fact that people are patriotic about it, I mean,

most of the time I encounter people, most of the time what I'm encountering, what I'm seeing is fake traffic from fake publications that are actually using bots. I've actually come to realize there's not a lot of organic actual average person on the street supporting this legislation. Most people don't know any of this is going on. But occasionally you will find people that are just literally trumpeting the bill. And if you are going around quoting the names of bills for your reason for supporting them without having read the bill, if you're at a level where you don't even realize that what is in a bill is usually the opposite of the name of the bill, it's very hard to interact with people.

There are so many layers of misunderstanding and propaganda that you have to work through that it's very daunting. So I will say, I mentioned last week, now is the time that we go for full court press on this. I was at an event this weekend and I was in front of a lot of influential people and I actually, usually I haven't asked for help. This time I asked for help. This time I said, listen, People don't know about this. And so I've actually gotten a lot of There are a lot of people that are help. actually, you know, I'm going on bigger and bigger shows, different shows. I was on this show last week with Paul Barron. Paul Barron has two point two million followers.

And I encourage you to check out the interview on YouTube. Forty three thousand views. But the comments were ninety nine percent for most of the people said this guy is the best interview you've ever had or whatever. And I'm not saying that to blow smoke. I'm saying that because this is a guy with two point two million followers and most of his commentary on the matter has are you for the Senate version of the been, oh, bill? Are you for the House version of the Which version of it? bill? And I went on there and I said, we don't need any of this and laid out exactly what you would expect them to And say. None of his audience had heard that perspective before, but it resonated.

I think inherently people, people's BS meter is going off on this. You know, the idea that we started out with crypto as the interview was with Paul Baron. Let me tell you what, let me pull up the, I'll put the YouTube link in the comments. And so I encourage you to not only watch the interview, but more importantly, look at the comments. The comments are, are extremely important because what this showed me is this was a show I had never been on before. So no one in the, I think almost no one in the audience, maybe they'd heard of me, but I, no one was kind of like, there was no kind of indication that these were like fans. I would be surprised. In fact, I haven't heard that of any of the

people that watch the show that have said that they've seen the episode. And so I've just pasted the link in the discussion, but when, when you actually look at the comments on When you, here, you know, keep fighting Aaron. We appreciate people like you. Damn, this guy didn't hold back much respect. Aaron's a hundred percent correct. I agree with this guest more than any other you've had on to discuss. This was your best interview. I'm done pretending all these laws are for Finally, a man speaking truth. our safety. So the point is that the message that I've been putting out on this show is resonating with people that don't listen to this show. People understand intuitively that these

bills are bullshit and no one is saying They've not heard anyone speak the truth it. about these bills. And I have think I got on there. I'm grateful for whoever, for the person that booked this show. And I think the host was probably a little bit surprised after the fact. But this shows me that if we get an audience, it's going to have big impact. Because no one can refute the argument. Excuse me, no one can refute the arguments. No one has actually heard, excuse me, a discussion of the history of financial

surveillance regulation. No one has talked about the Bank Secrecy Act. No one has talked about the process. No one has talked about who wrote these specific bills, who the lobbyists are. I mean, I've outlined all of it and I put it on day twenty twenty six dot com. Go to the bills section. And this is one of the things that I'm doing as part of the potential campaign is I'm analyzing these bills based on technocracy, based on what they do for the surveillance state and And no one's done that. You're not finding, you're finding just surface level stuff. when I see somebody like Cynthia Loomis You know, to me, push the Genius Act, my question is, and that she sponsored the bill,

my question is who wrote the Genius Act? Because she certainly didn't. I've spoken with her before. I doubt she's ever done a peer to peer transaction. There's no way she wrote the Genius Act. if you dig enough and you go through Well, the lobbyists and everything else, you find out, OK, Coin Center wrote that bill. You can find out from public information and piece this together. And by the time you diagram who the lobbyists are, who the trade groups are and everything else, you can figure out directly who the beneficiaries are of the bill. And I can assure you this. There is no one at the table that put any input into the bill that is concerned about privacy or about

the individual consumer. There isn't a constituent being represented at the table. Some of these lobbyists and lawyers get paid two thousand dollars an hour. So if you're working on a DeFi protocol or an open source privacy coin project, How are you even, you can't even afford to have a seat at the table. Literally hiring a lobbyist to work on the bill might be the equivalent of your, you know, half of your entire R&D budget for an entire year. So this is what we're up against. So when people try to act like there are people putting in safeguards here, it's impossible. There isn't anyone at the table even representing that interest. So again, when somebody says market structure,

market structure for who? It's for the people at the tables, the people that are actually drafting the bill, and it's none of us. Likewise, where are you going to hear about this? CNBC is not going to have me on to discuss this, not that I've reached out to them, but the reason they're not going to have me on is that their advertisers are Fidelity, BlackRock, all of the beneficiaries of this bill, Coinbase, I don't have anything to offer CNBC except the truth. They have no interest in the truth. Their business model isn't based on the truth. This is a network that has Jim Cramer on. On what planet should Jim Cramer be on television giving people advice about stocks?

I thought one good thing to do about Actually, it with AI would be to analyze all of the transcripts on CNBC and build a portfolio of all of the recommendations that have been made by all of the guests that have been on there. Literally, no one should listen to CNBC. The entire CNBC, usually CNBC, if you're listening to information on CNBC and you're actually genuinely looking at it for tips, you have to understand you're the exit liquidity for the people that are on there. The people that are on there are dumping and selling their equities or whatever the financial instrument is to you. So that's a good one. I was on with Merrill Nass with CHD,

which I thought was a great CHD TV. This just launched today. So Merrill has been a... a leader in exposing this technocracy and now spends a lot of time focusing on the food freedom side of things. This was a great interview. I did an interview with Clayton Baker, Dr. Clayton Baker, who has been influential. He wrote a very influential book on the whole COVID drama. And then now he's actually been focused on bringing people up to speed on the geoengineering crisis. So there are a lot of other interviews going on. And those are also a day, twenty twenty six dot com. But I encourage you to. I'm going to try to take this to Tucker Carlson and large formats at this

point is if you've listened to me over the last couple of years, I've said I don't I don't want to do that. I don't want to hit mainstream yet. We're not ready. We are now ready for two reasons. One. have to be ready because we have to expose genius and clarity because they're now one of them's already over the finish line and the other's close so there isn't any more time but on top of that with the roll out of these new sites owned nothing osr technocracy atlas now that we have xeno freedom dollar crypto wallets confidential layer we actually can explain to people what's going on and then give them a pathway out so i encourage you to if there are Podcasts and shows you like,

you don't have to even know the host. If you just authentically say, hey, you should have this guy on, you would be amazed at how well that works. That's actually what's worked mostly for me. I have not done any outbound outreach. All of the numerous hundreds of podcasts that I've been on are all because somebody introduced me to somebody. It was all organic. I haven't sent a single, hey, please have me on your show. I haven't done that. at all, I will start now as we continue to build and as momentum builds on this issue. Just to go through this quickly, I do have some events coming up. I'll be in Mexico City for Monerotopia,

February the twelfth through the fourteenth. Then I'll be in a different part of Mexico, Puerto Villarte for Anarchapoco. February the fifteenth through the twentieth, and then at the Crypto Vigilante on, I think, February the twenty second. So I'll be giving out of three or four talks and we'll be on a panel or two across all of those events. And hopefully, you know, this is a core audience of people that My pitch is, hey, listen, this technocracy is hyper accelerating. It's not twenty twenty. It's not twenty thirty. We're looking at it's twenty twenty seven. Now is the time to exit. This is you know, this is no longer. We have to particularly in the privacy

coin space, as much as people think that, you know, it's growing faster than it was, it's not growing faster than the surveillance side of things. And then in March, I will be in Lisbon, Portugal at the Parallel Society Conference. And then in May, we'll be speaking at the Libertarian National Convention and we'll be participating in this crypto corner that they have there as well. So this will be an opportunity to promote and educate all the libertarians from around the country on the importance of privacy coins. And this should be right in the middle while the debate is going on on the

Clarity Act. So the Clarity Act, just as a matter of process, it passed the Ag Committee, now it goes to the full body. And so what you're gonna have is you're gonna have this Senate finance version of the bill, and you're gonna have the Senate Ag version of the bill, and then they're gonna have to come together and work out their differences, which, by the way, when they do that, the bill always gets worse. You have the Democrats coming in there wanting more, quote, consumer protection, which means DeFi gets screwed, less privacy. And then you have the SEC wanting more control and bigger budgets for their organization, the CFTC wanting more for theirs. And in the end, again,

we don't have a seat at the table. So the bill as it stands only gets worse. And then when that's done, it has to go to the House and get reconciled with the House. Now, I'm even talking to some politicians about this. I may even reluctantly go to Washington DC I mean, and speak with some people about it directly. I am not optimistic that we're gonna be able to stop it. What can stop it is if the interest of the banking lobby and the interest of the crypto lobby can't come to if they can't come up with a come to some sort of agreement as to how to how to carve up the loop that's essentially we can't influence that that much but That is the possibility for how this whole thing falls apart.

depending upon how long this gets strung Now, and I don't know if the House has out, now flipped to Democrat control with Marjorie Taylor Greene and everything else, it could be razor thin. And if it's razor thin, then the midterm elections may make all And this is why I'm considering running the difference. for twenty twenty six for U.S. Senate. What's going to determine the variables that will increase the odds of me running, if the Clarity Act passes, then that dramatically increases the chance that I will run. And if the war on crypto continues with our political prisoners, I mean, if we're going through all of this with all these politicians saying we're going

to be the crypto capital of the world, and yet Ian Freeman and Roman Storm and Roman Sterlingoff and Keone Rodriguez and William Smith are still in prison or facing sentencing, then I mean, it's absurd. You know, I said to somebody, I think this is the biggest populist rug pull in history. There's a whole group of people that have been convinced that listen to the headlines. They actually think we're the crypto capital of the world and don't realize that what we're becoming is the surveillance capital of the world. That is what is being passed in these bills. Know your customer. Anti-money laundering. Everything needs to be registered through exchanges. More reporting requirements.

Every transaction is going to be monitored in real time. All of the transaction information in history has to be retained for five years. That on top of the existing CFTC and SEC rules. So it's taking a system that's bad and making it worse and adding surveillance. There is nothing pro-freedom about this. And by the way, again, I don't understand this idea that America is going to lead the world in crypto innovation by adding regulation. At what point in time that goes against every kind of tenant. It's known that capital flows to where it is the most free. This is a very basic, very well understood concept. We've somehow distorted all of this and come up with this narrative that says,

well, if we lead the world in surveillance and provide clarity for the rules, that somehow we're going to lead on the basis of that. Well, if your rules are clear, but what they clearly do is build a digital prison, you're not going to win. More money will flow outside of the United States. You will see the UAE. You will see Portugal. You will see other countries gaining. And people will just leave. And what you will be left here with are a bunch of deadbeats like Bo Hines and these cronies with companies like USDC and Tether pushing literally backdoor CBDCs. That's not innovation. None of those people should be celebrated. Those people are, in fact, part of Jekyll Island.

We are witnessing the creature from Jekyll Island happen in real time, right in front of our face. So now I'm going to walk through tonight, you know, what's kind of going on with this, you know, one hundred and twenty days to power. I'm going to talk about this in the perspective of this guy, Bo Hines. So one hundred and twenty days is how long it took for Bo Hines to go from writing the rules inside the White House to running the company. Those rules were designed to benefit. So one hundred and twenty days from government architect, corporate corporate CEO, from public servant to private profit. And this is what makes the story urgent. USAT, which is what the new version of Tether is,

the official regulated version of Tether, just launched yesterday. And so the surveillance infrastructure we've been warning about, it's no longer coming. We've actually gone from me warning, I've had articles, I've done several podcasts about the Genius Act. Well, the Genius Act passed, and now it's literally live, and it's live through probably the worst, least ethical company with the closest political ties that you could imagine. It truly is the worst case scenario. As I said, and I wanted to, so I always get this, somebody says, well, at least Kamala Harris didn't win. And you know, I was thinking about this today, and my answer to that is, if Kamala Harris won,

What she would do is say, no, you know, we're not going to have Tether do this. We're not going to have Palantir. We're not going to have Elon Musk. We're going to build it ourselves and we're going to bring in our own DEI team to build this. And so we're going to have our own from the ground up to first diversity led team. It will be like, it would have been like the Obamacare. portal for obamacare it would have been an absolute disaster it would have never gotten off of the ground people don't realize that how incompetent she is that would have actually been a benefit because um they never would have been able to get to the point that we're at now where we're at now is we've rammed through

palantir connected palantir to our government databases we've passed real id that that sat around for twenty years that states objected to push through in the first hundred and twenty days. And then we have this backdoor CBDC and I mentioned Bo Hines, but the orchestration here even happened long before that with Howard Lupin. So anyway, this isn't a policy debate. This is about a twenty nine year old who fell twice to what a congressional seat who then got appointed to design federal crypto policy and then walked in straight into the CEO chair of the biggest stable coin launch in history. So while he was getting promoted and

groomed for his golden parachute, real people were getting destroyed. People like Ian Freeman, who, again, I mentioned, sold Bitcoin without a license after being told he didn't need a license. He's in federal prison for eight years. And, you know, and we have people like Jamie Dimon and JPMorgan Chase. So JPMorgan Chase kept Jeffrey Epstein as a client for years after his first conviction. How much prison time did Jamie Dimon do? Nothing. They paid a two hundred ninety million dollar settlement and kept right on operating. So I'm going to walk through how all of this happened, and we're going to talk about who some of the key architects of all of this

are. We're going to talk about Jamie Dimon, going to talk about howard lutnik we're going to talk about brian armstrong which this is one of the biggest disasters i've seen brian armstrong is the ceo of coinbase and a lot of what i saw on internet now i realize it's fake but a lot of people were equating brian armstrong to being this hero who was trying to defend crypto for the little guy He's the largest lobbyist. I think his firm has paid twenty two million dollars. They are engaged in this process to lock out their competitors, to create regulatory barriers that make it nearly impossible for a new cryptocurrency exchange to exist.

So he's out there at Davos and people like, oh, yeah, he's given it to Davos. He's not giving it to Davos. He's there to get a seat at the table. And I'm not speculating on this. This is proof. You can see what's in the legislation. He's not fighting for yield for stable coins. He's not fighting for DeFi. He's fighting to add regulation so that he doesn't have any competition. He is not any different than a banker. He is a banker. So in the end, it's like two or three crypto companies working with the banking lobby. They're just trying to carve up who gets the biggest piece of the surveillance digital asset space. That is all... that this is about. So now that USAT is live, you know,

it's been designed from day one to comply with every surveillance requirement that the genius act created, which I will say that they were already complying. You can go to freedom dollar.com and actually check it out. They actually have a kind of a running tally of all of the seizures that are going on with stable coins. And so that's a good thing to stay This is only going to get worse. on top of. i'm going to go through each of these architects and and kind of describe their role this isn't all of the architects this is uh by no means is that the case but these are some of the big ones and um i've spoken about this

multiple times um i've talked about a lot of these people in the past i've talked about howard lutnik howard lutnik gets worse howard lutnik when it comes down to this you know he is going to be one of when you think about all of the bad folks at the creature from jekyll island like i think howard lutnik is going to history is going to look back at him as being one of the clear lead architects of this and he has his fingers in in all of this not only genius act and stable coins and managing all the treasuries for tether but his firm is also working on the Clarity Act side, the tokenization of real-world assets. And then it gets worse than that. We get into a sovereign wealth fund and

actually tokenizing the nation's assets and selling those off. And he's involved in that. But before that, we'll talk a bit about Beau Hines. So again, he lost his congressional race. And so then they gave him the key to the US financial surveillance infrastructure. And by the way, I've been in crypto for a long time. So I've been in crypto since, you know, twenty twelve. And so have a lot of people that I know. No one has ever heard of Bo Hines. Prior to him getting this appointment, he's never he was never out publicly talking about crypto. He's never been at a crypto conference. This guy is a He's an absolute nobody. I think he played college football or

something and he has a famous dad or There's literally nothing about this guy whatever. that would indicate that he understands or whatever. He just kind of, he's like Chauncey Gardner from being there. He just stumbled into this thing. And he's a great, a great person that Howard Lutnick could groom to do the handoff. So in January, he was named, January, He was named the White House Crypto Council despite zero industry expertise. I remember when this happened at the time and I was talking to people and again, I asked people, who is this guy? I mean, when it was announced and like, how remote is this guy? How unknown is this guy? And it's just this somebody that was

working on things behind the scenes and I didn't know about and nope, this guy literally has zero industry experience. hundred and twenty days later so january twenty twenty five he's named to the white house crypto council a hundred twenty days later um he's ceo of tether's new u.s stablecoin with one trillion dollar ambitions so he's twenty nine never run a company didn't have any crypto experience and he now controls the on-ramp to digital dollar surveillance usat was launched via Anchorage Digital Bank, which is a federally regulated, fully compliant, fully tracked bank. But again, where I would position Bo Hines in this

is he is literally just the front guy. So he's like all American, doesn't know a damn thing about crypto. played football, Let's bring him into this role and then we'll switch him out. He's part of the revolving But the person who really drove this entire process was Howard Lutnik. And as I've stated on many times, his company manages eighty billion dollars in Tether reserves. He personally owns five percent of Tether, his firm owns five percent of Tether, and he's setting crypto policy for the But if you go back and you look United States. at the timeline, we talk about this. before he made this investment in Tether.

And he cut this deal for Cantor Fitzgerald to manage the treasuries for Tether before he was actively involved in politics before the twenty twenty four election. If you follow politics closely and you follow Republican Party politics, you will not have heard of Howard Lutnik. Howard Lutnik He was an influential guy with Cantor Fitzgerald, but he was not actively involved in politics. And so then all of a sudden, the timeline is he cuts this deal for Tether. Then he gets a position as the White House chair of the White House Transition Committee. So his role was actually to help Trump pick his cabinet. Now, does this not strike you as bizarre?

Somebody with minimal political experience or almost no kind of known political experience, comes out of nowhere after cutting this deal with Tether and is now the one picking the cabinet? How bizarre. What he really wanted, by the way, was not to be commerce secretary. He really wanted to be the treasury which would have been an even bigger secretary, conflict. Think about how big the conflict actually And they probably looked at this and said, is. hey, you know, we're OK with cronyism. But I mean, this looks pretty blatantly bad. You just you literally just cut a deal to manage treasuries for a stable coin. And then you want to be in charge of the Treasury Department.

I think somebody finally realized that, you know, hey, there's corruption and then there's like, how blatant can you be? So what he does instead, he becomes Commerce Secretary, which, by the way, is the cabinet position that the Trilateral Commission typically owns, which we've talked about before from the standpoint of technocracy going back to the early seventies. The whole push for the technocracy movement has been to erode national sovereignty and push towards globalism through trade deals. And that's what the US Commerce Secretary does. So that's the position that he got into. But then he picks Bo Hines, and then he and Bo Hines push the Genius Act.

So again, quick summary, cuts a deal to manage the Treasuries for Tether at a time where Tether is not required to back their stablecoin by Treasuries. gets into politics, picks all of the people behind the scenes to push the Genius Act. The Genius Act gets passed, forcing Tether to back their stable coin by U.S. treasuries. His company is the biggest beneficiary of And now the guy that he brought in it. with no crypto experience to work on crypto policy is the CEO of that same company. So where is the outrage? Why am I one of the only people talking about this? Again, I still see memes of people complaining about Nancy Pelosi.

Congress shouldn't be able to insider Oh, trade. How about cabinet members shouldn't be able to have their own company manage all of the treasuries for a digital surveillance version of the digital dollar? Again, we're not even on, this is like a hundred times worse. nancy pelosi and and people are like now people are starting to say well that's just the way it goes this is just the kind of stuff you do like i'm seeing the amount of cope and lack of understanding of cronyism versus capitalism is breathtaking even in some cases amongst libertarians uh the other one of the other big players we have in here is epstein's banker so again this is jamie dimon so he originally called

bitcoin fraud and money loss And you've probably seen some of those video clips. His bank kept Jeffrey Epstein as a client for five years after his conviction, only had a two hundred ninety million dollar settlement, zero prison time. And again, he's only gotten more powerful to the point where there's a law that states that no one U.S. bank is allowed to hold more than ten percent of all. us customer deposits and they've waived that for jp morgan chase so literally there there's been nothing stopping him at no point has his position been in jeopardy if anything they've increased in power and so now all of a sudden called bitcoin

fraud but now they're selling bitcoin now he's out there saying well you know maybe bitcoin's the real deal after all and and we have The success of the propaganda that's going on here is breathtaking. You will see Bitcoin Maxis saying, yeah, we did it, we won. What you don't realize is when he was saying that Bitcoin was a criminal coin and so on and so forth, this was before it was hijacked. This was when Bitcoin was peer-to-peer digital cash. Once Jeffrey Epstein, interestingly enough, came in and In fact, let me take a step back, actually, when we talk about the people involved in this. So we have Tether.

One of the co-founders of Tether is Brock Pierce. Brock Pierce started advising Jeffrey Epstein on crypto as far back as twenty eleven, twenty twelve. Brock Pierce becomes then the co-founder of Tether, and he was also the chair of the Bitcoin Foundation. when it collapsed and the funding of Bitcoin core developers went from Bitcoin Foundation to MIT the group funded by Jeffrey Epstein and so we've now learned that through these house emails I wrote this article speculating that Epstein funded some of this we now know explicitly from the emails that Jeffrey Epstein funded Bitcoin core developers that's where some of his money went directly to

fund Bitcoin core developers So Jamie Dimon has changed his tune, but he wasn't changed because of Bitcoin. He was involved in changing Bitcoin. And right in the middle of all of this is Epstein. So one of the most hilarious things that I see is this guy, Jack Mollers, who you may see, he'll be on CNBC or Bloomberg or whatever, and he's always wearing a baseball cap in a huge closet with no clothes in it. And this is this whole thing. And he sits there, yeah, we're we're defeating the banks and Bitcoin is going to take over the world. And, you know, JP Morgan, I think he lost his bank account from JP Morgan Chase or some bank or whatever.

But he's like, you know, these guys were Epstein bankers. Funny you never see Jeff Mallers talk about the fact that Epstein funded the changes to Bitcoin. that allow him to do his second layer strike lightning network solution. Literally, Jack Mahler's wouldn't exist. His business wouldn't exist if it weren't for Jeffrey Epstein. Jack Mallers owes Jeffrey Epstein more and has benefited more from Jeffrey Epstein than Jamie Dimon. But you won't see anybody talk about this. You will actually see people following along thinking, oh, this guy with a baseball cap in his closets, you know, giving it to JP Morgan Chase. Boy, he's called out Jamie Dimon. he's a direct beneficiary of Jeffrey Meanwhile,

Epstein's funding of the hijacking of Bitcoin. You can't make this stuff up. Now you have... Larry Fink, and again, you probably see this. People are like, oh, BlackRock's interested. People will do these posts. I want to start doing posts that are So somebody will say, you know, kind of different. two trillion dollar asset manager so-and-so is buying Bitcoin, blah, blah, Rather than saying what their assets are, blah. we should report how much of a bailout they got under TARP. Or we should list, you know, company that paid four point five billion dollars for money laundering for drug cartels, ex-bank. just invested in Bitcoin. It's crazy how it's turned. So now people are saying Bitcoin won

because these big banks, which Bitcoin was launched to disintermediate, are now buying the hijacked Jeffrey Epstein version of it. I'm curious. So I don't know. We'd love your feedback as well. I keep on digging into this and I'm beginning to find that more and more of these accounts are bots within the Ingenious Act. was originally announced shortly thereafter there were a hundred thousand brand new twitter accounts that were created that were promoting this content i think almost all of the traffic in support of this is fake but i'll tell you it got me it got me pissed off it got me thinking boy the amount of propaganda so are these actual people sitting around saying america is going to

lead because of this legislation this regulation and it turns out i don't know maybe there are fifty people out there that have been duped enough that just, you know, that are the kind of person that hears a politician say the name of the bill and believes the name of the bill is related to the contents, never reads the bill, never gets close to the actual The closest they get to it is listening information. to other people's opinion about the bill that also not read the bill. I mean, admittedly, there are a certain number of people like this. But when you're talking about tokenizing assets and everything else, it's such a, I'm not saying it's niche, it actually affects everyone on the

planet, but it is a niche, it's niche in terms of it's sufficiently complicated and boring enough sounding that the general public doesn't kind of touch it on a regular basis. So Larry Fink, in twenty seventeen, calls it an index of money laundering. And by twenty twenty four, they're managing one hundred billion dollars in Bitcoin ETFs. So, I mean, when the new World Economic Forum co-chair suddenly loves Bitcoin, do you think it's because he's investing in freedom? Or do you think maybe it's because it's been captured? The other thing that I'd like to point out to people, when people say BlackRock bought something, you do understand they're actually selling

it, right? BlackRock is selling their ETF to investors and they're making a fee. It's not necessarily a statement. BlackRock's role based on the size of BlackRock and the number of trillions of dollars that they have under management, they don't deal with small stuff and startup stuff because they have to generate returns on massive amounts of money. So they wait until an asset class gets to a certain size because they really can't afford to to bother wasting their time until an asset reaches a certain market cap but their involvement is in packaging it selling it not buying it so at this point in time the kinds of people that are buying a blackrock etf are

frankly dumb money i mean these are the people and and i'm not saying that actually intending to be pejorative but these are the people that because of sec laws are not allowed to invest in things when they are at a startup stage. And probably wouldn't have heard of Bitcoin, certainly wouldn't have heard of Bitcoin. Some of the people like to say, well, Bitcoin is great because it was a fair Yes, launch. if you were on a cryptography discussion board in two thousand eight, two thousand nine, everyone got an opportunity to listen to that discussion board. Do you know how absurd that is to actually call that a fair launch and somehow indicate that that's money for the world,

because fifteen, sixteen years ago, people could have heard about it on a cryptography bulletin board. Anyway, the story gets The more distance you get from it and the more you look back, the more absurd it is. Do you know how many people two or three years from now, I actually put out a post, you know, Bitcoin Conference, twenty twenty seven. And it's actually a picture of Jamestown with all of the dead bodies laying around. Do you know how stupid people are going to feel in two or three years? Looking back and saying, yeah, I got excited because I heard Michael Saylor talking about cyber hornets and borrowing other people's money to buy Bitcoin and then creating a Bitcoin.

People will look back on that with incredible shame at this point. And then we have Brian Armstrong, who, you know, the funny thing is, I think if I'm not mistaken, hijacking Bitcoin, Brian Armstrong was originally a big blocker. I don't know if he was if he ended up caving or if he held that position for a while. But like a long time ago, you know, there were some indications that he was actually interested in peer to peer digital cash from the world. But now he's not. Now what he's pushing for, the Clarity Act establishes clear rights for custodians, coin based profits off of being a custodian.

So pushing things towards this custodial model benefits him. So he lobbied for regulations that require exchange intermediaries and that create a permanent vote. So he's doing the same thing that bankers He's doing the identical thing that do. bankers do. He is not representing your interests or my interests for privacy at all. It's not part of anything that he's lobbying for. So when you see him, I showed a picture I have a picture in this article is a picture of him standing next to Nancy He's been around all over the place. Pelosi. There is nothing ideological or even pro crypto. All he is is pro Coinbase. And I find people that are pro using the force of the state to protect their

own business to be disgusting, but certainly also not free markets or free crypto. It's the opposite of the ethos of crypto. so in any event this is what's happening so tether i you know and i i've done probably i did one full episode on tether and i'll do another one because it keeps on getting worse uh they now have i believe purchased twenty three well what is the amount the twenty three tons or something of gold they're now one of the largest or no one hundred and forty tons off to get the exact uh amount maybe it's twenty four billion dollars worth of physical gold uh off to

double check that because i think there was some news out on this today they're one of the largest holders now of gold and when you go back to the history of tether one of the problems that tethers had is that they've never been able to pass an audit so before this stablecoin legislation happened I was actually talking about Tether being a possible black swan that could take down the crypto market because they were growing in size and scale, but they'd never been able to pass an audit. And I have discussed and many others have discussed, I think Whitney Webb and others have analyzed and broken down what's happened here. They've never been able to get an auditor,

a big four auditor to even work with Now, frankly, based on their size, them. of course, every big four audit firm, it's not like they're not equipped to work with Tether. Tether has just not been able to pass an audit. And so twice, once by the state of New York and once by the CFTC, they were found to not have the reserves that they claim they had. And then it turns out there's this whole complicated structure where one of the owners of Tether also is the owner of this crypto exchange called Bitfinex. And so when they were going through this process, they were unable to complete an audit, but what they would try to do instead is do what's called an attestation,

which is where you do a snapshot of like, okay, at a particular moment in time, So I might not have a full audit for a quarter, but hey, I can show you, here's kind of like a snapshot of my bank account for today to show you that I have the assets to back up my stable coin. Well, it turns out people have done an analysis of this and found out, oh, a massive amount of money went in for Bitfinex into their account. They did the snapshot attestation. And then the next day, the money went right back out to Bitfinex. And it was demonstrated by a university in Texas that something like seventy percent of the price appreciation of Bitcoin in twenty seventeen. So again,

this twenty seventeen is an important year. Twenty seventeen marker is essentially when Bitcoin was hijacked. And also during this year, you had Tether responsible for up to seventy percent of the increase in price. Now, I want you to think about this. So we went from in twenty seventeen, the narrative shifted. It's no longer peer to peer cash. It's now a store of value. And people believe the store of value argument because the price went up in a big way. what happened was part of the reason the And interestingly, price went up is people were starting to use it and retailers were starting to accept it. But because they hobbled it and kept it slow and limited the block size,

the fees became really high. The processing time was really long and people stopped using it. as money and then right at that time all of a sudden tether is there pumping the price it is highly conceivable that the entire reason people think that it's a good store of value was based on tether printing tether out of thin air backed by nothing and artificially pumping the price And now Tether took that position, still hasn't passed an audit, cuts a deal with Howard Lutnik, who comes in and says, now Howard Lutnik has said, oh yeah, they have the assets to back it, right? Trust me, bro. Still haven't passed an audit. Then cuts a deal to manage their

treasuries exclusively. And then we now have what we have with the Genius Act. So this is potentially the biggest fraud in financial history. And it may and it may be this is just my opinion, but this may be the reason Bitcoin even popped and maybe the reason people thought Bitcoin was a store of value. And then that led to this cycle of back and forth with Bitcoin and Tether to give Tether kind of an artificial bump of and kind of artificially inflate even the usage statistics of Tether. Who knows how much of the buying activity back and forth between Tether and Bitcoin is fake? If the company that has invested in Tether also controls the exchange and they

control both sides of the equation, who knows how much of that volume is real? So this entire thing may have been constructed. This may be just a gigantic shell game. And now at the end of it, You have a person that was architecting the White House crypto strategy as the CEO of the company. And you have the commerce secretary as the biggest beneficiary through Cantor Fitzgerald. And now it's what I warned it might be. I can tell you there are people that before the election, I said, hey, maybe we should get to Trump and tell him that this Tether thing could be a scam. And I was told, oh, he's not going to be interested in this because he's promoting this pro crypto

strategy and this pro crypto agenda. now i would i would make the argument that tether is too big to fail it's too big to fail because what i just told you is so absurd and it's so blatantly fraudulent that no one will wants will want to take responsibility for it they will cover it up and bail it out before they let you know the truth and by the way it doesn't take a real sleuth to figure this out you can run checks you could do quick checks on the people that founded tether And I encourage you to do this on your own. You will find that there's a reason that this company couldn't get an audit done. Some of the people involved were involved in Ponzi schemes before this happened.

This is not the A-Team that you would back for a digital currency. So know their faces. Remember these people. We're going to be talking about them a lot in future episodes. Bo Hines, Jamie Dimon, Larry Fink, Howard Lutnik, Brian Armstrong. These five are big architects. They're not the only architects, but these are the people at the front of this now. And day twenty twenty six dot com forward slash bills. You can click on these individual bills and you can see the names of the lobbyists, the lobby firms and everything. And I encourage you guys to. Comment on social media, comment on these people's pages and try to let people know, because most of their traffic is fake.

I've noticed this because when I comment, even when you see the comments, you can tell that the comments are bots, right? I mean, at this point, a lot of the comments now, I mean, it's not like it's hard to figure out how to create a bot to be able to create comments, but the comments are like, somebody's like, hey, when this person responds, respond back and reiterate what they say in a positive way, but simplify what it is that they're trying to say and make it less than fifteen words or something. I mean, you can almost reverse engineer because no human being would make a statement like that. sycophantic, generic, vague comment. People don't talk like that.

So I found when you interact with those things, they don't interact back because they're bots. So let's get some authenticity and let's get people on there asking questions. I heard Aaron Day say this on the Say, hey, Is this true or not? show. Watch them not respond. So I see Craig is here. And this actually got done a little faster than I thought. I do want to say one thing before So this. I'm doing this big push as many podcasts as I can. I may even go to Washington, DC, talk to some of these, some of these politicians, but you know, the only value in it is that we I, I, can raise awareness so that people know how much they've been fleeced and start to realize they need to exit the bill.

Because here's the one thing I don't want to get caught up in at all. I don't want to get caught up in somebody saying, well, gee, Aaron, how would you make this bill better? This bill should not exist. None of these bills should exist. The crypto market does not need structure. We need to repeal the Bank Secrecy Act and we need to fundamentally change the SEC rules, which, by the way, make it so that average Americans and. Poor Americans can't invest in early stage You can buy as many Powerball tickets as companies. you want. You've got a negative fifty expected return. You can take your entire life savings and put it on the roulette wheel. They're not protecting you from that.

You can't buy Amazon stock or Nvidia when it's a startup company. It's a scam. The existing system protects the incumbents. It protects large investors, hedge funds, private equity firms, and Wall Street firms. And now they're adding digital tokens, programmability, and censorship on top of that. The bills should not exist. We need to be repealing these bills. So that's my position. I'm not going to entertain anybody that wants me to give them feedback on how to make the bill better. I object to the premise that a bill is necessary at all. hey craig how's it going good aaron how's the sound okay sounds good good good yeah don't forget the prediction markets too

aaron they're not protecting anybody over these prediction markets that are coming on like wildfire this is going to be a big deal in this prediction markets are going to be you can they're ramping up in every way possible on these prediction markets so yeah no i mean that's a good point and look at this point i could imagine The administration's probably on there, you know, front running their own policy. I bet the biggest beneficiary of the prediction market is going to be the Trump family. Not that we'll be able to figure that out. But it's like, you know, they'll go on there. are we going to have a war? Oh, you know, Are we going to bomb Iran? And if they see the odds, well,

this is paying out eighty one, you know, boom, they're going to go all in and then we're going to bomb Iran. And that's I joke about that. But I actually that would be on brand. I mean, it sounds crazy, but you know, I could see it happening. it's, it's revenge for, uh, um, what was it when the, uh, what was the casino on the East coast that failed for Trump? Um, Oh, Taj. Exactly. Yep. It's revenge. So yeah. Great job tonight on, on all that stuff. The, um, I've noticed one thing I wanted to mention. You were talking about the CFTC.

So we have these two agencies, the CFTC, which is the Commodity Future Trading Commission. And that's on the future side of things, futures and commodities. So we're talking about... Stock markets have, you know, we mostly, most people deal in the security side of it. Like an exchange traded fund would be a security, a stock market would be a security, a mutual fund would be a security. So all that stuff falls under the SEC and then, you know, FINRA and some things like that. The commodity side of things would be things like, you know, corn, wheat, soybeans, crude oil, natural gas, etc. even stock markets, but it's stock index, stock index futures and things like that.

Bond futures would fit under there. Cocoa, coffee, sugar, all those kinds of things you think of commodities. And so the commodity futures trading commission, like there's something going on here too, Aaron, like with this, with the, you know, that tether you were talking about and the gold and tethers now they have a hundred and forty tons of gold, twenty four billion dollar estimated market value, give or take. depending upon the price of gold. Gold just had an unbelievable move this year. And then we see Tether moving in and buying this hundred and forty tons of gold. They were like one of the largest holders of this gold market. Not only that, they want to trade it, Aaron.

So they want to trade this asset and make money off of it. And yet they're offering, Bo Heinz is also part of this USAT, and this offering of this exchange traded fund that Tether is offering. This is so ripe for so many nefarious things to go on here, and I can't even... I mean, I'm happy to go into it if you'd but what I will say is we have like, just opened up a can of worms here in terms of nefarious activity that you can't imagine, that people cannot imagine, especially when you look at the algorithms that are driving these markets. I wouldn't be surprised if... If Tether has an algorithm, some sort of an AI algorithm or something that they believe they can use to

arbitrage across all these different places where they have this digital currency, the gold market, these product offerings that Tether offers, all these different things. And if you're setting the legislation and you're writing the rules, you're going to have the Wild West for a window of time until people get just completely screwed. And then they're going to say, wait a minute. Everybody's gotten screwed in this market except the people issuing it. And then finally, there'll be pushback. But it's going to cost a lot of people a lot of problems. And they'll just run from the market. And they'll dictate the market. Does that make sense? No, it does. I mean, I don't know the CFTC as well as

the SEC, but I will learn about it. I'm sure in the end we're going to find out it's as bad as the SEC. By the way, I will say, and happy to have you go into more detail on this, but I will say that people are cheering the fact that today there was a press conference at ten thirty between the head of the SEC and the head of the CFTC talking about how, you know, they're burying the hatchet and they're going to figure out how to work together to harmonize to pass regulation. Now, let me ask you something. Do you think that regulators coming together is a good thing for you as the consumer? Do you think that that's good for your financial privacy? Do you think that's good for the

regulatory environment? Or do you think they're going to expand their powers? Just this, this is the amount of naivete. Again, I'm at this like balancing point of now I'm going to start calling people out. Now I'm going to start, I'm starting to do it today. Every time I see a crypto publication, put out a tweet and they always have like the here's the icon of an explosion and you know breaking news or whatever they almost they follow the same template or whatever and I'm like I'm gonna find out who their owners are and I'm gonna just start retweeting and commenting who owns them and what they're best interested is because not they make the Legacy media

look like like completely objective it's there's nothing legitimate about crypto And, you know, whatever. I think people should be able to say whatever they want. But the fact that there's no disclosure. And you know what? It's fine that there's no disclosure. But then now it's up to us to speak up against speak up about about digital currency group. Owns one of these publications or possibly more than one of these publications. And they have their fingers in everything. And Barry Silbert's involved in this. He's got SEC battles and everything else. And so he's their publications are all pro genius act. I mean, I did an analysis literally one hundred percent for these bills for the longest

time. Like, how could a crypto publication not even address the surveillance aspects of this? And now I've answered the question. So I'm going to start picking apart the crypto media one by one. And I'm going to encourage people to comment on this because we need to disrupt this flow of fake journalism and bots. And one way we might be able to defeat this, and here's how I don't want to defeat it. I don't want to defeat it by using bots. I'm not proposing nor would I participate in that. Let's fight back with authenticity. Let's ask questions. You may hear me say something, say, maybe I'm right, maybe I'm wrong, maybe you don't think I'm right. Let's try to get a response. Ask them.

Because I will tell you right now, I comment on... Brian Armstrong and Jeremy Allaire from USDC. I've commented frequently and I've never gotten a response. And by the way, I challenge any one of them to a debate. I challenge all of them to a debate. Bring Brian Armstrong and Jeremy Allaire and bring the Ag Committee Boozman, bring Cory Booker on, bring all of them on. Let's have a conversation about this because all I hear are these political propaganda statements about clear rules of the road and all this other stuff, I don't think any of these senators understand a thing about any of this.

it reminds me of the tobacco industry, Well, you know, You know, I mean, just think of it, right, Aaron? just to keep it simple, you know, you have tobacco, right? People were smoking tobacco for centuries. And then they start putting things in there that are addictive, and people don't know it, right? And all of a sudden, people are getting addicted to cigarettes and tobacco. And it wasn't the tobacco, it's all the stuff that got pushed into the cigarettes and tobacco. And I think that relates to this because there was no pushback until people got hurt and addicted. And people realize there's no pushback on this because there's no opposition right now. This whole industry is being paved and

controlled and reported on by the same people that are funding the magazines like you were saying at the beginning. I mean, there is no opposition. You're it. Yeah. Right? Is there anybody else out there that you know of, Aaron, that's talking about this and saying, like, this is not good? I don't know of anybody else out there I mean, who, one, has your knowledge and has been around this long enough, but who has the guts to come out and talk about this stuff and who has also the ability to research it and study it. and call it out. And that's what I think is going on. I just don't think there is any opposition right now. And so it's, and here's what's the other thing is that

it's so hard when you're as, as this legislation is being pushed out there right now, it's hard to figure out what's actually happening. So you have to have a predictive nature to your mindset. Where are they going with this? You have to see Howard Lutnick and Bohan. You and I talked about this. When Bohan's left the administration, we said, where is he going to pop up? Remember we laughed and we joked about it. And we laughed and we said, you know, he's going to pop up. So that's the predictive characteristic of Sure enough. You see these guys coming into the CFTC, this. out into the private industry, back and forth. Right. It's a revolving door. And we know this.

People who have followed politics have seen this revolving door between Washington, D.C. And the problem is that this is so formational right now and nobody understands it. There's no opposition. And so they're just, they are running full speed, Aaron, full speed ahead, you know, convoy coming down the highway at a hundred miles an hour. And there's nobody stepping in their way. You know, that's, that's how I see it. No one. And, and I will say I'm grateful. So, you know, I was at a Brownstone event and I, I actually in front of a whole bunch of people and I said, listen, I need your help. I mean, I don't usually, I've been talking about this stuff for a long time,

but I was aware enough to know that, that I was talking about at a point where it was too soon. People won't engage in it until it's in the zone. I mean, I have seven thousand word articles that are two years old about tokenization. No one knew what tokenization was. And I write these things and I try to explain what it is and everything else. And so people kind of glazed over. And now it's one of the two top points at Davos. And now we're like we're now at the end game. of this and so um so the brownstone institute has been supportive as are people affiliated with the brownstone institute i did a interview with meryl nass um at children's defense that went up

today i did an interview with dr clayton baker i have other i'm doing an interview with brownstone which now has a podcast i'm putting my article out of brownstone i've talked to some other pretty influential people. And I've got five or six different paths to try to get out of Tucker Carlson. People do get it. But the thing about the Clarity Act is it just popped up. Yes, it was in the House a long time but then there's been this delay period. ago, And then all of a sudden, there's nothing. And then they pop out a bill at two hundred seventy page bill and they give the members, you know, twenty four hours to read it. And then like two days later, something comes out of the AG thing,

similar deal, one hundred and seventy eight page paper, whatever it is, and people only get twenty four hours to read it. Well, the problem is so literally who could know about this? Somebody would actually have to read these bills. And tokenization has been a hot topic for me because in the same way that I was interested in Bitcoin early. And the reason that I was interested in Bitcoin early was because of the concept of separating money and state. I was interested in tokenization really early because of the potential, knowing how fraudulent the SEC is, knowing how fraudulent DTCC is. Our existing markets have zero ethics or People just don't know how they work. credibility. So to me,

the idea that you could tokenize and trade assets separate from these middlemen who are complete leeches and tied to the CIA and everything else. Literally, it's like the bad casting act. It's a bad cast of characters. I viewed tokenization in twenty eighteen as a bigger opportunity than Bitcoin because you're now dealing with the ninety five percent of other assets that are not So my intentions getting involved in both monetary. crypto and tokenization was as a solution. But what we are getting. So the reason I'm so passionate about it and know so much about it is that I've been actually actively using I've been tokenizing assets since twenty I tokenize silver. eighteen.

in twenty nineteen on the Raven coin mobile app. It was the first ever tokenized asset on the Raven coin mobile wallet. And it was silver. Right. This was this was seven years ago. I was trading and it was from a guy in Korea and he sent me the silver round. There was no intermediary. He could have ripped me off or whatever. But whatever the transaction happened and now I have tokenized silver and I have that transaction On the blockchain, I'm like, hey, this is cool. This could revolutionize things. But what I have been watching now since twenty seventeen is taking this idea that could increase human freedom around the world, get destroyed and get co-opted by all of

these people. It's like watching a slow motion train wreck for seven years. This is what it's been like. But then, you know, when you try to communicate to people, it's complex. Their eyes glaze over. I mean, so it's most people don't even know what crypto is like. I'm sitting here talking about how it's going to separate money and state. And most people only think of it as a speculative investment. Like it's almost impossible to. kind of cut through the noise and get people to understand the basics of this. And so I did realize, well, all right, the reason I'm the one that's talking about this the most is that I feel like I'm the most harmed by what's going

on because it's like taking something that you think is gonna improve freedom. it's now going to turn out to be And in fact, the control system for a global technocracy. And it's going to basically take all of our free will. And one of the things that I've stated to people, I mean, this article that I have is, I was going to pop this up. Extensive. You mentioned the revolving door. There are two hundred and forty former government officials involved in this lobbying effort. The Blockchain Association made a sitting CFTC commissioner, their CEO, like it's just mind boggling. And on the page that I've listed who some of the top people are, but it's like that's all any of them do.

So for the people that actually think government regulation is there to protect If you actually believe that, people. you don't understand how it works. You are literally you watch a Schoolhouse Rocks commercial like cartoon when you were a kid and you believed it and you never did a piece of research. This isn't a new phenomenon. This didn't become bad. The thing has always been a revolving door. So what I don't agree with is the premise that these regulatory bodies were good or that they've been effective. I don't believe, and history will bear this out, that there was ever good intent and there's never good execution. But now we're at a point where the

level of criminality that's going on here is unprecedented i mean again we've talked about this before like can you imagine the fact that it was a national tragedy and people like were in mourning about watergate i mean that wouldn't even make that wouldn't even make the news today not even a blip on the radar today nope Well, let me just give you one thing that I watched firsthand. So we did a technocracy roundtable, what, about a week or two ago, and we did it on food. And I had been involved in a farming cattle operation, and it got pretty big. I mean, I think we were up to ten thousand head of cattle. I don't know. thousands of acres of land and we

vertically integrated everything right so we were growing the corn we were processing it instead of taking it to the silos and getting ripped off we were packing it and then rolling over it so as long as you as long as you harvested the corn at a certain moisture content you could pack it pretty tight put a tarp over it and then you could use it to feed the cattle right so now you're essentially you know harvesting you don't you're there's no middleman in the middle ripping you off right so you have a pretty efficient process to feed the cattle what happened was one of the guys I Now, was working with was an old-school trader, and he understood spreads pretty well.

And so what he did was he figured out that he could actually report his cattle because you have two different styles of cattle. You have live cattle, feeder cattle, and some of it's babies to mid-teenagers, then teenagers to when you fatten them up and you actually sell them. And so when you're getting ready to report that cattle— It's an old boys network, okay? So, you know, you could be down in Texas and you're reporting this cattle and all of a sudden everybody knows what to expect, right? There's nothing out of the ordinary there. But if you're up in Nebraska and you report this big number coming out of some region they're not ready for, you can actually skew the futures market,

So you could spoof it or manipulate it right? And he figured this out and he did or market it. it and his clients benefited tremendously. I don't know, it was a four or five million dollar trade And so his, I don't know, a hundred clients benefited from it. He benefited because he was the broker, the futures, again, he was a futures clearing merchant. He was, you know, all these different authorization in the commodities market, right? Doesn't really matter, but he had a role in this as a broker, as a dealer and so forth. Not really a dealer, but anyway, he facilitated this trade. His clients made a lot of money. And the reporting agencies, the good old boy network, basically said,

this isn't going to fly. So he went into a lawsuit and it took like two or three years, a million dollars to fight it. He ended up winning and he only got like a I mean, he fought like crazy. I mean, he's like you. Right. I mean, he's a fighter. And he's a researcher and he he doesn't You know what I mean? take no for an answer. And so. I watched him fight this thing. And he ended up only having like, I don't know, a fifty thousand dollar spec violation limit or something like that. Like he found a way around it, but it almost cost him his license. It almost cost him. And so the reason I say this is that this is the commodity futures and trading. This is the futures market where a lot

of this stuff can end up. And it is not it. This is the Wild West in a lot of ways, you know. And so if that could happen in an established market like the cattle market, OK, and you could manipulate a market And it wasn't really wrong. What he did wasn't wrong. He just pissed off a lot of people who weren't used to that, and they got hosed for four or five million dollars. It was nothing illegal. He just caught them at their own game. And the Chicago boys went crazy. The lawyers were all over this. The, you know, the, you have a couple different futures exchanges, you know, in Chicago, you have the mercantile exchange and the board of trade. And at that point they were separate,

you know, or they were real. I think they were still pretty much separate. Anyway, the point of this whole thing is that. Hopefully that's a real life example of really not doing anything wrong, but having the ability to manipulate a You start rolling this into a market that market. only one group or one entity, this revolving door is all working in one direction here. They're not working against each other. They're all coming out to put this out on the market because why? This is all around this tokenization. This is all going to be about... a one directional flow of just continuing to tokenize assets, right? This isn't a two way flow in markets, if that makes sense, right?

There's this is everybody moving in the same direction and they're all it's almost like, you know, it's like the going, when the pioneers got their land, you know, their homesteading, you know, I mean, everybody just ran to the grab their eighty acres. You know what I mean? This is it feels a lot like that where everybody's is going to grab their to me, share of the tokenization market. Does that make sense? It does, except the one thing I want to say to people is that your assets are going to be tokenized and you won't even know it. Right. What you have to understand is this is the plumbing. So this isn't crypto. This is stuff that you already own that will be tokenized.

And there will be a couple of large platforms to do this. As I've been going through Part of the reason that this article that I'm writing is so long is that I'm not expecting everybody or many people to read it, but I want to put all the arguments down at once because when I see people pushing back, they'll say something like, well, yeah, but the Clarity Act isn't mandatory. So real world assets won't be forced to use tokenization. But if there are only a couple of platforms and there are only a couple of markets for these things anyway, if they use them, then your assets will be on them. And if they're used, then everybody has to use them because if you're going to be trading assets,

you have to have a common framework and a common platform. So everything is going to be tokenized. Larry Fink has said everything is going to The problem is this is not the kind be tokenized. of tokenization where you have self custody of your tokens. The beauty of tokenization, the way that I like to describe early tokenization when I was working with Raven Point is It's like going back to the old days where you had bearer assets, where you actually owned, if you had a certificate or if you owned something, you owned it outright. You didn't have your name in a register somewhere. No one knew you had it. You could trade it with whoever you want, wherever you want.

Tokenization could turn everything into a bearer asset. This is turning every asset into a complete surveillance ledger. Exactly. And then adding programmability on top of it. I'm thinking next week when I roll out Oh Nothing, I'm going to try to bring these guys on that have been on the battlefield fighting the great taking, because I think that would be great. There's a new book that's been written about it. Doug Grandy and some others who have been fighting this legislatively at the state level. I might bring them on because I think people need to understand the one-two punch here of all of the laws and the legal framework has already happened. So the contractual rights and everything

have already happened. the token will then represent those contractual rights. So now they'll be able to execute on these terms that no one's read. that basically we've already given up your ownership contractually. Now they're going to be able to make that a reality with a smart contract through these platforms. And so I'm trying to explain to people that this isn't a, you don't have to want, you might say, well, I don't have any interest in crypto. I don't care if you have interest in crypto, your four or one K is going to be tokenized, whether you like it or not. You better learn about tokenization because you will be affected by it. One of the things I'm trying to say

and try to explain at this Brownstone group is, you know, The COVID tyranny was horrendous, but part of where there were some breaks in the action were because it was difficult to carry things out. Well, if all of a sudden your money's tokenized and the supply chain is tokenized, they could determine what is a non-essential business and what's essential business and change the programming. And now all of a sudden you can't move your money or participate in supply chain. You know, shutting off the trucker's money wasn't a simple process. There were some hiccups even in doing that, despite the fact that it wasn't legal. Doing something like the trucker thing could happen in an instant.

It could be milliseconds. It could be less than the blink of an eye. That's what's being built. Even vaccine passports, vaccine passports will be tokenized. So you have to understand every asset like so this human movement will be tokenized. we just thomas massey tried to stop this kill switch bill for your car imagine now your car is tokenized now we have the kill switch bill it's going to be easy to shut off your car like if you leave it physically you will be able to control physical objects through digital tokenization because physical objects will be tied into kind of that will be connected to the internet track in real time. And then you will have the ability to

control access and use of those assets. This is a much, much, much bigger deal. The Clarity Act is the end game here. And when I first started talking about it, I was talking about it in terms of something called regulated liability network. And these three CBDC pilots that were coming out of MIT. And then Trump said, well, OK, we're not doing that. So those aren't the way that this is going to be implemented. It's going to be implemented through Tether, USDC, through ICE, the company that owns the New York Stock Exchange, putting out an exchange for tokens. It's going to be BlackRock putting out. But it's private solutions, quote, that are regulated by the government,

essentially controlled by Congress, and then controlled by these agencies like the CFTC and SEC. That is not better. than a CBDC. In fact, it's worse because it will happen competently at scale. I said in the intro, which I think this is true, because so many people have said, well, it would have been better if the election went the other way. If Kamala Harris had won, she would have said, you know what? My DEI friends can come in and build a CBDC and tokenization platform better than BlackRock and better than Palantir and everybody else, and they'd never build a thing. That is one hundred percent what would happen. This is why it would actually have been worse.

Their intent would have been worse, but their competence would have been their own destruction. In this particular instance, there's the same intent, but it's being competently executed by multinational corporations and people are cheering it on as some kind of patriotic pro crypto thing. It's brilliant. Again, it got me. It caught me off guard. And I thought when my book, when this book came out, when the final countdown came out and people reading it, people were like, well, this is dark. You know, this seems like a little bit of a conspiracy theory. I was wrong. I wasn't aggressive enough. I was not aggressive enough. And now I'm like, people are like, oh, we've got nothing to worry about.

And I'm like, you have one year. But I guess the forty five dollar penalty for airlines kicks in in two days, three days. If you don't have a real ID now, you're going to get charged forty five dollars each leg of a flight. And by the way, it's coming. I mean, that is that is a red flag that there it is. Right. That is the front end of the storm right there. That's the front end. Now it's forty five. Originally it was eighteen dollars or twenty eight dollars. Then it's forty five dollars. Then next year it's two hundred dollars. Well, we didn't mandate it, but it costs fifteen thousand dollars each leg of a flight if you don't have a real ID. Yeah, it's impossible.

Yeah, they make and it's all digital contract. You know, you wait and it just sends you something in two weeks. It'll be ten thousand in three weeks. It'll be and it just automated. It just rolls out and there's nothing you can do about it. There's no one to call. There's no one to talk to. There's no way to push back. It just is what it is. But people in America will make fun of and mock Keir Starmer and will mock the UK pursuing their thing and then have a real ID in their pocket or pay forty five. You know what I mean? Like over two thirds of Americans already have a real ID. Yeah. So so this is how bad this is. I wanted to bring something up that I thought you would be interested.

So Jack Mallers drives me nuts. Yeah, he's a clown. He's such a psyop. Well, here here's a little bit about Jay. about Jack Maulers. His grandfather, William Maulers, Sr., was the youngest ever chairman of the Chicago Board of Trade in nineteen sixty nine. Yep. Good work. You got his father, William Maulers, founded one of Chicago's more successful discount future brokerage brokerages, building on the family legacy and futures trading. Both grandfather and father were long CME members. But he's in there. What a coincidence, right? He happens to be in. There's no coincidence here, right, Aaron? It's not a coincidence that this kid came out of nowhere in his closet spouting off,

and now this is going to fall under the CFTC where he's got a heritage. It's not a coincidence. No, it's a disaster. This guy is absolutely not in any way, shape, or form anti-establishment. He is the establishment. Exactly. He is part of the hijacking of Bitcoin. He and Brock Pierce... And Jeffrey Epstein, again, his whole thing is he got all kinds of traffic because he got canceled by JP Morgan. He's like, we're going to destroy JP Morgan and everything else. JP Morgan was the banker for Jeffrey Epstein. His entire strike business wouldn't be possible without Jeffrey Epstein. Jeffrey Epstein funded the hijacking. which cemented Bitcoin as being slow and

expensive and therefore the second layer solutions that are built on top of Bitcoin. And people said, well, yeah, Bitcoin is slow, but you can use Lightning Network. Jack Mahler's entire business is built on Lightning Network. He like literally I now want to know if he knows Jeffrey Epstein. I want to know if he and like Brock Pierce. I'm not even kidding. Like this is a complete and total psyop at this point. And by the way, people are changing. I saw somebody, one of these large crypto accounts today said, yeah, when we bought Bitcoin, we thought we were defeating the system. And now we're kind of like supporting BlackRock and ETFs. People are actually starting to realize this.

Some people are actually starting to freak out about this. Yeah, well, and not to divert attention from that, but inside the same administration, we have the Small Business Administration, Kelly Loeffler. Her husband is Kelly Loeffler. She was the fill-in senator in Georgia. Remember when that whole thing went down, right? She ran, did not win against—what was his name? I forget his name— Oh, he's a clown. He was I think he was a preacher of some type. And then he became the senator. Remember, he beat her. We're not we're not. Yeah, that's it. Her husband is Jeffrey Sprecher. Jeffrey Sprecher is ice. Right. International continent. Again, here's the CFTC,

the Futures Commission. Right. It's all this is. I think with this, again, from a predictive standpoint, Aaron, what we can say is how much of this clarity act is going to go to the SEC and how much of it's going to go to the CFTC. And you can really look at the revolving door and you can see Jeffrey Sprecher, Jack Mallers, you know, all these entities. And I bet you that we'll be able to watch this thing again. Sadly, we'll be able to watch this thing fall in line on the CFTC side of things, Commodity Futures Trading Commission side of things. because that's where these again the central casting has been placed right the the jeffrey spreckers the jack mallers all

these guys that we think are these mavericks when they're really not you know and i think we're going to see the cftc is going to gain an immense amount of control in this clarity act it would be my guess yep yeah that's it i mean i think that's exactly what's happening and again in the end the sec and cftc will both expand their powers and it will benefit the existing players But also understand from a technocratic perspective, all it means is all of our assets are going to be on a trackable programmable ledger. All that's changing is that underneath, instead of using centralized databases for handling transactions, we're now going to be using smart contracts and centrally regulated things.

And it's going to be very expensive. The beauty of when I was using Ravencoin, and now I use Zeno, I still like Ravencoin. And actually, I think there's an opportunity for Ravencoin to work with Zeno and I could see that being a thing moving forward, but you could create your own asset for like. Seventy cents. You could tokenize, like when I say an asset, it's like, if I wanted to create a, uh, tokens for my company, let's say my company had a million shares. I could create that asset for seventy cents for all one million shares. I could create a unique NFT for like, you know, uh, two pennies. Right. So the whole point is I could tokenize and transfer any asset anywhere in the

world for like pennies. This regulatory regime now with what you're gonna have to do in order to get listed on an exchange and everything else, it's going to add more legal fees. It's actually going to be more expensive to tokenize an asset through these platforms than it is to use the old system. This is the bottom line with this. This doesn't help anybody. This doesn't help a single small business anywhere in the world. This only benefits large companies and technocratic firms period this and that's why i'm so against this because tokenization was supposed to be so that you know somebody that owns a restaurant could raise capital so you know in fact i mean the original idea

we would talk about it imagine being able to walk down the street with your mobile phone and you have a local restaurant that you like and now you can buy fifty dollars worth of tokens in your local restaurant Or you could even have a situation where you could invest in assets all over the world. You could have investors from foreign countries investing in mom and pop businesses here. You could have a portfolio of completely different assets. It would open up capital that doesn't exist currently, where there's literally no market because there's no way because of regulation and legal fees for money to flow. This is why the number of small businesses is getting wrecked and things are being

consolidated, which, by the way, COVID helped in a material way. But my whole premise on this is a small business should be able to form and to raise money without having to spend thirty thousand dollars and six months in legal fees complying with the SEC. It's a gigantic impediment to freedom. And already we are not competitive in this regard. And I wanna make sure that everybody knows this. We don't have the best financial regulation. I've said this several times on all of these other issues. We are not good at this already. We suck at this. And now we're adding the surveillance. We literally make China, look good on this because China has the digital yuan,

which has very little adoption, right? They're not tokenizing all their assets. We're literally tokenizing six hundred trillion dollars worth of assets and putting it under the surveillance of the United States government. This bill is about leading the world in surveillance. This we are the WEF now. So this bill sucks. This bill is anti-freedom. It's anti-American. And and the whole thing should be resisted and people should not buy into this propaganda this is why i'm gonna you know i i'm hounding these politicians i'm putting up these memes about that show what the political speech means and i should create a song for this which i'll play the maybe i'll play

the music video before the end as well it's a song that i played i put together months and months ago but i turned it into a music video and now i'm just posting it on politicians websites because it's hard to explain in fact if you don't mind i'll play it now Yeah, go for it. Because, look, this is a complicated concept, right? Tokenization of assets, digital representations, they're programmable, all these buzzwords, all of this other stuff. This music, so let's take the tech part out of it and let's just talk about what it actually means. So here's Trap in Disguise. Trap in Disguise

I woke up to silence But the war had begun They froze my account Said I'd done something wrong Wasn't no crime Just living free Now the system got a chain on me They took my savings, my future,

my land With a single cold line and a government hand Said it was safety, said it was green But all I see is tyranny behind a screen that's saying innovation. It's a trap in disguise. You're alone, nothing. Be watched all your life. Genius ain't freedom. Gravity, yeah.

It's a cage they built While we cheered I believed in the promise The man with the plan But the same old swamp Just changed its brand He banned the front door Opened the back Signed the bills that launched the final

attack This ain't innovation It's a trap in disguise We watched all your lies Genes ain't freedom Colony ain't clear It's a cage they built

Your gold, your guns, your voice, your name. They'll digitize it all and shift the blame. Palantirizing AI chains. Freedom dying slow in patriotic flames. This ain't about me. With your ID, your face, your tears, your time They wrapped it in stars, sold it with pride But freedom's bleeding

out from the inside DEF CON won, and they call it peace But I still got breath, I still believe We can break the code, escape the scheme Turn this nightmare back into a dream So that, that pretty much encapsulates it.

I mean, you don't need to know about tokenization, but to understand that, you know, that there are some phrases in there that, that really kind of mail it, mail it from me. Um, but it is the complete surveillance state between the genius act and the clarity act. It's digitally controlling, not only your money, but everything that you own and they have sold it as this patriotic thing. And in reality, it is absolutely the digital cage. So you don't have to understand a lot about tokenization to understand what's in that video. And I had that posted, it's up to. Eighty eight thousand views, I think right now, and so I'm pushing pushing that a lot, I'm actually going to include it in the

article. The name of the song is Trap in Disguise. Somebody asked, so I created this. It's. It will be on. It's on the Aaron Day Show music playlist, and I will launch the music video kind of officially for this and put it on YouTube and other places, probably on the Oh Nothing site as well. But I like sharing the whole tweet thread with the video on politicians' sites because I don't think the politicians understand what they're doing. And again, I'm not giving them a pass. I've talked to Ted Cruz. I've talked to Cynthia Loomis. I've talked to Warren Davidson. I've talked to these people. They don't understand. Some people in the comments are saying, I don't understand tokenization.

Well, guess what? The people that wrote, that actually they didn't write, the people that sponsor the bills don't understand tokenization. They don't understand the implications of what's happening here. They even buy into this. This guy, Tom Emmer, the chief whip when they were doing the Genius Act, you know, he had this profile picture of himself with a big flag. He's like, we're not, you know, we're going to make sure America doesn't have Chinese style financial surveillance. The bill you're passing is Chinese style financial surveillance. I'm not even sure he knows what it is. They cleverly made it out that the central bank was the bad player in all of this,

not understanding that the Bank Secrecy Act and the suspicious activity reports and all of the tracking that happens in the U.S. financial system emanated from Congress. His group is responsible for financial surveillance, not the Federal Reserve. And so when I watch this, I realize, you know, half the time, I've talked to enough politicians to know that a lot of them just don't understand it. The other, there's some that may understand it and don't care because they're cashing the check. But the point is, We don't have any representation. There is no one at the table advocating for our position because most people don't even know what this is. Most people have kind of shut off.

They're like, well, it's crypto. I don't care about crypto. What do I care? I'm not going to use crypto. Crypto is a Ponzi scheme or whatever. No, crypto is what's going to be used to buy and sell. This is the mark of the beast. The mark of the beast is the Clarity Act. You know, if you can't buy and sell anything, it's not even just money. It's even your ability to kind of barter your own, it's all of your assets. And so, you know, that song's a good one. I'll play around with some other songs as well. That one's trapped in disguise, but I'm trying to figure out ways to get the message out as to what the implications of this are. I'm sure I'll give a sixty page article

that explains how voting works and how, You know, the big issue with this is rules making, right? So they'll pass a bill and somebody will say like decentralized finance is one of the areas where it's under contention. Well, they've written this bill where they've defined what it means to be decentralized. And essentially none of the DeFi platforms meet that criteria, but they've also defined it in a way such that the CFTC or the SEC could just change a rule without having to get the law change to disqualify. And so the people in crypto are so naive about politics that they actually think that just because something is written a certain way, which could be cleverly interpreted,

they don't even understand what it means in terms of the authority that's given to the regulatory body. So people are sitting around celebrating. We have clear rules of the road. No, you have a vague set of parameters that have been given to agencies, agencies that have a revolving door with large banks and large crypto firms and You don't have to believe me to understand where this is going to go. All you have to do is look at the history. The most important thing here is to look at the history of financial surveillance legislation and what happens and you will find financial Regulation never gets reversed. It only gets worse. The requirements only and it happens through rules and not laws,

so that oftentimes there are legislators who don't even realize the extent to which the rulemaking agencies have the power to do whatever it is that they're doing. And then there's no process that the amount of effort it takes to unwind the rulemaking I mean, we have the Chevron case and everything, but nothing's happened with that yet, as far as I know, right? That still has become, that's kind of a Pyrrhic victory as well. So anyway. That'll be my, my pin tweet. I'll put it back up there, trap in disguise, but I encourage you if you, if you do wanna help actually sharing some of these threads, I, I have one thread on, on the genius act that has seven hundred thousand views, excuse me,

on the clarity act has seven hundred thousand views, sharing those posts on politicians sites on, on their pages and their theme. It, it, it'll tell you it, it, it helps that Paul Baron interview that I did. I don't know if you were here, um, Craig for that. But I did this interview. Yeah. I heard you say that. I can't wait to watch it. Comments were like, but what was important about that for me is that an audience that has, that has only heard the other side and didn't have any idea who I was. Ninety-nine percent of the comments were positive. And they were all like, this is the only guy speaking the truth. One guy said, this is the only guest you should ever have. And these are,

I don't know any of these people. My point is I think people have an intuitive sense that they're being lied to, but no one has actually done the work to kind of demystify it. Well, and they can't deconstruct it, right? A lot of times – I always say this with trading, and everyone's heard the thing. Past performance is not indicative of future results, right? But it's a lot like driving a car but looking out the rearview mirror or looking out the side. You can't see what's in front of you unless you have the background and the knowledge to anticipate – You know, like, okay, I see this and this and this happening. That leads me to believe that this is where we're going.

So a lot of people don't have that background. It's not their fault. They just don't have the background that they can look forward and say, okay, I see where this is going. I see what this lawmaker is doing. I see... know jeffrey sprecker you know ice bought the new york stock exchange in twenty thirteen heavily and you know we talk about all the time they're going to do this through energy right a lot of this is going to be driven around energy what does he run i mean he runs you know the whole i mean his his exchange is heavily energy-based ice right it's and it's they got all these contracts right crude oil natural gas energy this energy that energy Very easy for someone like that to roll

in and play a role in the tokenization of the energy space. And I have Courtney checking into Chris Wright, doing some digging on him because he's got a background in energy. He gets a clean bill of health, you know, but the problem is people, you know, they're busy and we're all busy, you know, and it's very difficult to have the background and the foresight to look and see like where this is going until it's too late. You know what I mean? Until you've gone down the road and you look in the rear of your mirror and you're like, man, there's explosions everywhere. I just went through all that. You know, I mean, that's kind of the way this rolls out, Aaron.

It's a lot like trading or investing. You have to anticipate what's about to happen. And that's what we're trying to do here is anticipate what's where this is going and it's not good, right? It's not good. The biggest thing to have to cut through is that people buy the white knight propaganda. Right. So when Trump says, David Sachs, the talking points that have been issued throughout the administration are that we're going to be the crypto capital of the world and we're going to be the Bitcoin capital of the world. That's what Sachs says. That's what everybody says. So people that don't spend any time to research this, and still believe in this white knight

stuff are actually believing that this is without doing a bit of reading or a bit of research actually believe this this is why we need songs like you know trap in disguise or whatever we have to have you know kind of the sound bites on the other side like no this is a digital prison right like this is this is the opposite of what they say it is and i don't even think trump knows i you know i've talked to people at trump You can go back and find old tweets. Trump was anti-crypto his first term. He's like, oh, yeah, this, you know, he didn't like it. He actually, I go find the tweets. He said he didn't like it. And he actually, it's only used by criminals and blah, blah, blah, blah.

He was pitching the ADIQ line at the time from twenty fourteen, twenty fifteen. Right. It's what they say about privacy coins. So privacy coins are only for money launderers and terrorists. That's what he was saying at the time. But when I saw him come out against CBDCs, it was clear he didn't understand what CBDCs were. He was given talking points for that. So he's once again relying on his advisors and his advisors are technocrats. His advisors are part of the PayPal mafia. His advisors are people like David Sachs. He's listening to Again, he has a bad track record at picking people. Even if you're a Trump fan at this point in time, how many times do we have to say,

well, Bill Barr, Jeff Sessions, Pam Bondi, on and on and on, the entire list of literally everybody in his first cabinet. At some point, you have to say, look, if you bought into this because you saw him on The Boss, you have to realize that was reality TV. He's actually not good at picking people. And so then and then people like, well, well, people are trying to sabotage him. Look, I don't care if the buck stops with him. He's picked the worst possible people. Howard Lutnik. again i mean there's no conspiracy theory about this he picked a guy that cut a deal invested six hundred million dollars in a company to manage the treasuries then got involved in politics

and brought on people to put push legislation for which howard lutnik is the single biggest beneficiary of the genius act howard lutnik should be removed from office just because of this This is not something that he should be celebrated. These are the people that he's listening to. He's listening to self-interested, self-dealing people. So I'll make the comparison again with Nancy Pelosi. It's one thing to do insider trading because you learn about a bill and you profit from it. It's another thing to start the company and then pass the legislation that benefits your own company. It's much worse than insider trading. It's much worse than Burisma and it's rampant.

It's throughout the entire administration. And it includes Trump himself. And if people don't want to wake up to that, I think we said in the comments, this has to be the biggest weaponization of populism ever. You sent that thing about who's backing Trump now. Who are these big financial firms that are now putting their money behind Trump? Didn't you send something like that today? Probably. Which one? Can you have a look? It was a screenshot, yeah. Yeah, hold on to that thought for a second. Before we get away from the cabinet, I also want to throw Scott Bessette in there, right? Scott Bessette, you know, worked for Soros, left Soros, went back and worked for Soros again.

Left Soros, took two billion dollars of seed money for his own private private hedge fund. You know, so there's not a there's not a oh, I made a mistake kind of a situation there with Scott Besson. Right. He took down the British. This guy is like the Trojan horse. You know, I mean, you have to watch this guy like a hawk. And then we have I was going to say someone else to who was it? Someone else was on my mind, too, in terms of the cabinet position. we were talking about there i just wanted to throw that one in there there'll be another one here i know there was something else on my mind too um i'm trying to think what it was that if i sent something to you today on that

it wasn't to me i thought it was to the group chat and then maybe it was yesterday i but the day everything is kind of blurry um let me see if i can find it maybe i misread something i thought it was let me see if this is it All right, I guess I don't know what it is. Maybe I'm hallucinating here, but I thought there was a list of financial firms. Oh, yeah. Well, a lot of them are the ones you were talking about. Fidelity, BlackRock. Oh, that's what I was going to say. One more thing. Let me add one more thing to this. You know, I used to think, Aaron, that maybe he was just a bad chooser. You know, I kind of bought into that, that, you know, he's a good guy and he chooses poorly.

You know, the people around him, Bill Barr, Jeff Sessions, you know, what's the guy with ExxonMobil that was his original secretary of state, Tillerson, Rex Tillerson. I used to buy into all that, too. But then here's the thing. He's been dragging this whole thing out with the Fed chair position, right? It's been going on for a long time. I mean, this could have been very quick, easy. This could have been a quiet decision. But they've made big fanfare on this every single day. There's discussion. Who's going to be the next Fed chair? Who cares who the next Fed chair is, right? Right now we have... Jerome Powell came from Carlyle Group. Carlyle Group has a storied history.

These guys are the ones that are forming a lot of the lobby groups that are dictating. These private equity groups get in on the ground floor for a reason, because they dictate policy with the government. Not only that, Carlyle has offices in D.C. and so forth. But here's the real kicker, Aaron, is this. Rick Reeder, who's the fixed income guy at BlackRock, he's up for the Fed chair. And he's climbing in the poly market. He's number one, isn't he? Well, he's climbed. I don't know if he's number one, but he's up there underneath Kevin Warsh. So here's another guy, right, that, again, he's a smart guy. I listen to him all the time, right, with BlackRock. Ran their fixed income department.

He understands this stuff incredibly well. If they're going to tokenize something right out of the gate, they're already tokenizing this to your note product. They've already done it this last week. I don't know if you saw that. Did you see that come through? No. Anyway, they just tokenized something, and I need to do a little more research on it, but they tokenized a product on the short end of the interest rate yield curve. I think it was some sort of a two-year note product. Anyway, Rick Reeder is a fixed income guy at BlackRock. Underneath Larry Fink, he's the grandfather of tokenization. I mean, he's the head of the World Economic Forum. You know, Trump went to Davos and he was buddies

with Larry Fink. You know, I mean, this this network, Aaron, is getting out of control. I mean, if Rick Reeder gets in there as the Fed, the chair fed, this is the guy who can implement the transfer from digital digital assets to CBDC. This is the guy. I mean, these are the guys that ran the Federal Reserve after two thousand and eight real estate crisis. These are the guys that ran QE and QT. They ran the whole thing, Aaron. These aren't accidents. I bought into that for a long time, but I'm just not buying it anymore. These are not accidents. Well, now that you brought that up, now I want to check the connections between Howard Lutnick and Rick Reeder. I want to see to what extent Lutnick

is involved in this, right? Because, you know, again, Tether could end up being the new reserve currency. Privatized, tokenized. Technocracy. Technocracy. currency. Absolutely. And this is why what I've been saying is we have to, you know, I ran for president on the platform of ditch the dollar. My whole book was about ditching the dollar. Well, if you're not seeing this yet, if you're now not getting what I'm saying, the only way out of this, you're not going to vote in different people to negotiate this. You have there's no power or ability to do this. The system is completely rigged. The voting is rigged. The way bills are created is rigged. The amount of of time and money it would take to

be able to influence the process is beyond the resources of what we have. The people that are controlling the ship already have all the resources. You're not going to change it legislatively. change it by exiting the system their system requires a hundred percent participation it demands a hundred percent participation you've got to exit the system i have people all the time i have people that are now starting to question bitcoin but they're like where am i going to go stocks i'm like you've got to exit this if you don't own the asset and the asset is tracked and controlled by these third parties you've already lost the reason i'm watching oh nothing Dot org next week is that there are

a series of eight quizzes that you can take and you will find at the end of it. You don't own the money in your bank account. You don't own your stocks. You don't own your land. You don't own you don't own your most of the services that you have. You really most of your attention has been hijacked by algorithms in the media. So if people are sitting here thinking that they have something to lose, you actually just don't realize you don't have anything to lose. And now this is checkmate with this. So I'm hoping that once people understand how dire the situation is, they'll leave their fear behind and realize, all right, hey, I have nothing left to lose. Now let's go create the parallel

alternatives. Because so many people are holding on to something that it's kind of like insurance that we talk about. People have jobs they don't want for insurance. And then they'll find out later that it doesn't actually provide catastrophic coverage, which is why one person every minute files for medical bankruptcy in this country. Your insurance isn't protection against medical bills. It doesn't work. It's fake. I've gotten a lot of heat lately for suggesting that people are all caught up in this Minneapolis thing. well yeah and now they're trying to make it all about communism and i'm like you know what do you think medicare medicaid social security is we have two hundred

trillion dollars worth of unfunded liabilities but you know there's no bigger from each according to its ability to each according to its need for those programs those are the programs that are bankrupting us we have domestic communism but we can't possibly talk about that we have to go and blame other people and other other things because we're not dealing with a single root issue in any of our political discourse. It's Trap in Disguise, not Trap in the Sky. It's not on YouTube yet. I haven't put it up there yet. I created the song probably six months ago. I just created the music video over the weekend and I haven't published it on YouTube. yet well actually i was starting to

process let me see if it uploaded i don't think it's there i'll check okay here you go aaron here's a few things for you this ties back to rick reader right blackrock tokenized real world assets reached around twenty one point three five billion in total locked TVL total value lock TVL as of January twenty first twenty twenty six with U.S. Treasury debt representing the largest share of on chain tokenized assets, according to crypto crypto ranked data. U.S., here we go, here we go. Tokenized fixed income products have displayed scale with offerings such as BlackRock's BUIDL fund accumulating two

billion in U.S. Treasury exposure. Additional initiatives from firms such as VanEck and Apollo Global Management highlight institutional capital deployment into on-chain markets. And then there's a ton on this thing. It just goes through a bunch of stuff. But it says here, long-term projections from McKinsey, which is a big consulting firm, estimate that tokenized asset market is likely to reach four trillion by twenty thirty. With Boston Consulting Group forecast potential market size of sixteen trillion. We'd say it's a lot bigger than that. But the point is, there you see that BUIDL. That is Rick Reeder. If this guy becomes a Fed chair, Aaron, The Fed has completely changed its

composition. Rick Reeder's now ahead of that. He's tight with Larry Fink. He's now controlled because you're not going to take that role underneath President Trump unless he's got his hands on you. He's said that, right? I mean, Scott Bassett and Donald Trump are picking. the head of the Fed chair, right? As we speak, they've already picked them. So they say, and we're going to get it announced next week. If it's Rick Reeder, this thing, we just basically hit the turbo button on tokenization on the fixed income asset side of things. I mean, this is really, really concerning. This will go fast. It will go fast. And by the way, just as a sanity check here, I thought before the

MAGA was against BlackRock. MAGA was against Larry Fink. This was one of the known enemies. Fink was in the camp with Klaus Schwab and Bill Gates. How have we gone from that to, oh, well, I guess Trump must be smart. He brought in George Soros, this guy who did the currency collapse, and then he brought in Howard Lutnick. Well, he must be smart. If Joe Biden picked these people, people would be Up in arms. Up in arms. The very same people. These are not – do you think you're going to have economic freedom because of Larry Fink? You have the most skilled currency destroyer of all time, Scott Bessant,

who did the quantitative analysis, right? Stan Drunkenmiller did the trading. George Soros oversaw it. Scott Bessant was the quantitative analyst that calculated how to take down the British pound, okay? I mean, you've got the world's worst enemy in there. Again, for a dollar, if you care about your domestic fiat currency, if you care about it, you have the worst guy in there. So the question is, if fiat currency falls, what's going to be there to pick it up? And it looks to me like it is something like Tether, some privatized technology. technic technic how do you say tech technocracy yeah whatever the word is and you now have rick reader in there from the fixed income side of this who can

tokenize things immediately i mean you you can't you couldn't pick two people that would be worse for tokenization and destruction of a fiat currency than these two guys you just can't pick them Well, something happened in the prediction markets because Rick Reeder, the last time I checked, was ahead. Now this Kevin Warsh is way ahead. He's got an eighty five percent chance. So I don't know what happened. I have no idea what that's all about. Maybe there's some news on that. But, you know. watch a lot of being Jamie Dimon or something like that. But yet so people say to me, you know, all the time people are asking me, when are things going to collapse? And, you know, I'm like,

I don't know when they're going to collapse, but I know the circumstances under which they're going to collapse. It's going to be a controlled demolition and it won't happen until they have the infrastructure in place to be able to push out technocracy. This what has just happened in the last forty eight hours with Tether officially launching a stable coin under the Genius Act and now a next step in clarity that gets us there. And it's like you said, yeah. And then if Rick Reeder is in this position, then if there's a collapse, then in an emergency, because this legislation is in there and because it's already under the control of Congress, we've seen what happens in an emergency.

This is something that to me also is surprising and hit me. What I was saying before the election and before we knew the outcome of the election, you know, and people were saying, well, how are we going to CBDC? I'm like, we're going to get a CBDC in an emergency, just like we got the CARES Act, the Patriot Act, so on and so forth. We are getting emergency like surveillance legislation passed without an emergency. This is the part about this that is unique. and different than any other time when we've gotten this kind of legislation. Usually you would expect to get the Clarity Act in an emergency when the market collapsed or something like that, but we're getting it before the emergency

and we're getting it, and even when those bills happen in an emergency, usually there are at least some people opposed to it, even during the emergency. They tend to be in the minority, but TARP, by the way, TARP failed in the Senate the first time around. Right. TARP failed. And then the market tanked like seven hundred points. And then, you know, my weasel New Hampshire U.S. senators, Judd Gregg and Johnny Sununu flipped their vote along with some others. And that pushed it over. But but at least it failed the first time. At least people were like, hey, you know, maybe we shouldn't give seven hundred billion dollars to the people that created the problem without any strings attached. Right.

That seemed reasonable, seemed reasonable to be able to state that. But no, the market dropped seven hundred points and we might as well just go into complete moral dukes of moral hazard. I remember I put together a meme, something along those lines. But now what we're witnessing with Genius and TARP. excuse me, genius and clarity is worse than the TARP bailout. It's worse than, I'm actually calling the Clarity Act worse than the Patriot Act from a surveillance perspective. Because again, what it's giving is real time, surveillance of all of your transactions, of all of your crypto transactions, of all of your, that will be used for commodities. And by the way,

the clarity act isn't initially for real world assets. This is something that people are saying, well, it doesn't apply to that. This is where it's going to be very simple to add on real world assets. It's not, this is why it's actually being passed. So people are like, doing all kinds of mental gymnastics to convince themselves that this is somehow just providing clarity to crypto transactions when it couldn't be further from the truth is providing the entire regulatory framework for the digitization of every asset that there is. Anyway, it's, you know. Well, you know, and back to the anticipating and the predictive side of this stuff. I remember before the two thousand and

eight real estate crisis when they paraded in Hank Paulson from Goldman Sachs. Remember, he was the CEO of Goldman Sachs. And I can remember when Baby Bush brought him in and I can remember I can still see him walking in. Getting interviewed, getting the job, you know, and they sweeten the deal for him, right? You know, he had, what, four hundred million dollars in assets and they allow him to do a transfer out of where he's at without any tax implications. And but nonetheless, you know, they had him in there and then they had, you know, he picked another Goldman Sachs guy who's now on the Federal Reserve Board. Oh, what's his name? He was the guy that ran for governor out in California.

The bald guy, Neil Kashkari. Neil Kashkari, yeah. So Neil Kashkari was Hank Paulson's right-hand man in that whole deal. And I knew when they brought Hank Paulson and I knew something was about to happen because you just don't make a shift like that at Treasury Secretary like they did. without something coming down the pipe. And you knew that real estate was overdone. We sensed that. You could sense there was something wrong in the real estate market, the CDOs, the CDLs. And the way you could tell this was the profits on Wall Street. You would see JP Morgan and Goldman Sachs come out with four-dollar estimated earnings, and they'd hit it at seven, seven-dollar earnings, right?

You're like, what? Something's wrong. I mean, these guys are just hitting it out of the park. Goldman just did this the other day, Aaron. They had earnings. They doubled earnings. They just blew their earnings out. So something's cooking behind the scenes. These are the kind of guys that get on these tokenization deals. They front run them. They make huge profits. They leave us holding the bag. So when I see if Rick Reader gets in there and Scott Besant's in it, Treasury Secretary, to me, it's the same sinking feeling or worse than what we had when Hank Paulson got traded in as Secretary of Treasury under Baby Bush. Yep. Well, I think you're right. I mean,

this is an even worse team because these are people who have been involved in collapses before, right? It's like bringing in your known team. I mean, those guys were heavy hitters, but they hadn't been through this kind of collapse before. We're actually bringing in people that are kind of engineered for that. Kind of like Ben Bernanke, though, his whole thing with studying the Great Depression. So you bring him in. Helicopter. Helicopter Ben. Helicopter Ben. And I'm looking up this other guy, Kevin Warsh. I mean, I've followed him for a lot of years. I don't think he's – he's not as dangerous as Rick Reeder. I mean, Rick Reeder is a smooth guy, seems like the kind of guy you'd want

to have a beer with, seems like a really nice guy. But, I mean, that's all great, but his background is just not what we – his background is very concerning. Kevin Warsh just seems a little bit more like a safer bet for mankind. I put it down. Yeah, I mean, although special assistant to President George W. Bush for economic policy. Wow. Yeah. None of them are clean, but yeah. Let's see. Member of the panel of economic advisors of the Congressional Budget Office. Former steering committee member of the Bilderberg Group. I know. I know. I mean, look, he's being brought in to cut interest rates. And again,

we should not be cutting interest rates. Whatever. The whole... I mean, the question is, does Trump realize that we're on the brink and he realizes that, hey, unless AI gives us these advantages and unless we buy a time by lowering interest rates and printing money and everything, it's already over. Does he know that or does he actually think this is good policy? Like, this is my question. Do they know it's a Hail Mary policy? Well, you know, it's funny you say that because Ken Griffin of Citadel, right, who claims he was the guy that named Warp Speed, Warp Speed, right? He's a consultant to President Trump. You know, big donor, obviously, you know, how, you know,

eighty million dollar houses in London, Chicago, New York and Miami. Right. One of those kind of guys, you know, sixty billion dollar net worth kind of a guy. One of those guys. Anyway, he. He was out saying yesterday that AI, at the World Economic Forum, AI is the savior, right? That's what they're trying to hang their hat on here. And, boy, I mean, you know, we could go on for an hour on that one. You know what I mean? You could run that clip and we could come at that thing from twenty different angles. But yes, when you said that, that's what made me think of it, was Ken Griffin, consultant to President Trump, named Warp Speed, Warp Speed, or so he says,

and now he's saying AI is the savior. AI is going to have to be the savior for our system and our economy. And we've talked a little bit about that as well, the productivity side of AI and everything else. It's a double-edged sword. Well, I talked to somebody this weekend, I'm not supposed to say their name, but he basically made the argument, he said, look, the money supply has grown at twice the rate of productivity. At some point that stops. You can't, you cannot, like literally that doesn't work mathematically. So, which he's right. And other interesting topic of conversation is about why, i hadn't been paying attention to this but but we started out making venezuela about

drug trafficking and then we but here and this was an interesting conversation that came up but now we don't even contend that that's the case now we blatantly say it was for the oil we are blatantly stating that we are causing regime change to take people's natural assets and and i will say this is an empire in decline. We are at the point where we actually have to steal people's stuff in order to keep our stuff going. Somebody says, have you tried opening an X space? I've tried X spaces. I mean, we have fourteen hundred people on here now. Whenever I do X spaces, even with as many followers as I have, I haven't found that to be particularly effective. But I do X spaces.

I usually don't host them. I guess there's a way to do this while doing X space and this at the same time? I'd consider it. I'll look into that. But this is on X, by the way. This is also streaming on X. Of course, you have the problem of not having it be particularly interactive. So I'll take a look at that. This is going out. We only have fourteen hundred people now. Sometimes we usually have around three thousand, sometimes as high as ten thousand. Admittedly, I didn't have a lot of lead time to promote this today. I've been working on this article, which is still not done, which I will have working on all day tomorrow.

But in any event, obviously the other thing is this is long, so I haven't for a long time created clips and I need to do that. I need to create a whole bunch of short clips out of that of the podcast, particularly covering a whole variety of these areas. But I'm waiting until I get the article done and I'm going to kind of more professionally package it into into shorter segments because yeah, if you're says thirteen or watching that's on whatever channel you're on, if you're on YouTube or whatever it happens to be right now, I'm seeing the overall across all the channels. Admittedly, most of them are are coming in from from X. But in any event, the,

but the whole idea that we're now just saying, well, we need these resources. Like it's, it's, it's kind of, it's looting, right? So we're basically, now we're calling it the Don Monroe Doctrine, but let's be very clear about this. We have two hundred trillion dollars of unfunded liabilities. The dollar is collapsing and, and we are at this point doing a Hail Mary saying AI is going to fix it. And by the way, But part of the thing that we're doing with Venezuela and other places, we're running out of oil. I guess there was something that came out. I guess we don't have the amount of shale we thought we were gonna have. So we may, there are some other things going on where

we may have a bigger crisis going on behind the scenes than we're even privy to. And this speaks to why like this, does the Greenland think all of this speaks of weeks of desperation. what we're doing from a foreign policy side. This isn't making the world safe. There's no aspect of this that is about national defense. This is all about staving off economic collapse. Well, I don't know. Does that map come in reversed for you, Aaron, or does that come in normal? It comes in normal. Okay, good. I couldn't tell if the audience is seeing that as normal or not. But this is the TechNate of America map. And supposedly this was put together by Elon Musk's grandfather.

I don't know if you've ever seen this before. Yep. Yep. So, you know, so again, back to that Venezuela thing, you know, it was about drugs and it was about oil. Then it's about what is it really about? You know, again, this is TechNate, technocracy, same kind of a thing. So the, you know... Lots of different threads here, but I just wanted to show that because I think there's more to Venezuela than just the drug trade, than just the drug issue. Well, no, they even stopped saying that. Then he said, oh, it's about the oil. And the point that was made in this discussion this week is that one of the things that has kind of kept this whole thing together, even though it was maybe fake,

is this idea that we are the moral police of the world. We've actually dropped morality. We're straight up just taking people's resources. And now it's no longer even under the heading of, well, we're doing it to kill the narco-terrorists or we're doing it to kill the bad guys who probably are not the bad guys that we say, but we've been lying about it for a long time. But we've reached, there's a new level here when you're no longer instituting the moral, you're no longer leading with moral authority. You're just dropping moral authority. We're just flat out using might makes right that is a change for the united states of america that is a change for our positioning and policy and

i think that has some ramifications and i suspect people are not going to put up with it Well, I agree, but that's the key. That's why it's so important for you to get on with Tucker and expose this to a large number of people because if people know what's going on, they're not going to take it. The problem is this is no different than the NACs, the natural asset corporations, and they try to slide this through between Christmas and New Year's and one of those Christmas tree bills. where they hang everything on it. And again, that involved New York stock exchange, Jeffrey Sprecher, that whole crowd, you know, trying to steal that stuff, you know, trying to essentially a pre-run at

tokenization, right? Can they get access to the land, the water, the ground, the soil, the air above it, you know, everything else, the aquifers underneath the ground, anything like that. Can they get access to it? And can they capitalize on that? Um, and, um, And so, again, I, you know, I think that that's where, you know, the, you know, we can't leave that part of it out. We just can't leave that part of it out. So this just popped up. Tether back stable coin yields banned. Tether is reportedly siding with banks on banning stable coin yields in the U.S. market structure. So. I mean. even the idea, this is Coin Bureau,

so this is one of these captured publications. And again, I'm going to expose every single one of these. So follow me at Aaron Arday. You'll enjoy seeing this because there's no, I'm not holding back on any of this because there isn't anybody else. And I actually need your help to share the information because this is all we have. We don't have, we don't have an ad budget. We don't have, we don't have, you know, financial in there's not a financial interest in this, but the interest is. Everyone's free will. So I usually in the intro, I state the whole existence of. This show and everything that I'm doing is that we're dealing with technocracy versus

freedom. And and free will is at stake, technocracy, if technocracy is implemented, digital currencies, surveillance, social credit scores, all determined by from the top down Originally, this was an ideology that had scientists and engineers doing this. This will now be replaced by AI. Once your actions and what decisions you can even make are determined by an algorithm and your resources can be shut off automatically, you've lost free will. You've lost the ability to make decisions. Those are the stakes. What we're fighting for on our side is for everyone. We're fighting for everyone's free will. While there isn't necessarily money in this, if we lose this, everyone loses.

This is the part that a lot of people don't understand. A lot of people are supporting this legislation because they think it means crypto will go up. You're not thinking through one or two or three steps in advance. I'm not even sure you're going to get a short-term plan, right? Bitcoin is done horribly. Wouldn't you think... With this massive legislation, with governments talking about a Bitcoin strategic reserve and buying Bitcoin, and with all this legislation around crypto, wouldn't you think that Bitcoin would go up? Bitcoin has not gone up. This is now creating a crisis for Bitcoin believers who have bought into the fake digital gold narrative because it turns out

every time there's real stress whenever there's a geopolitical thing or something going on bitcoin does not bitcoin is not the flight to quality as they call it and now i mean we're at the point right now what more headwinds or excuse me what more tailwinds do you need than all of this supposed government stuff. What do they say today? They're gonna think about opening up the four or one Ks, the twelve and a half trillion dollar four or one K market to crypto. I think it's time to do that, Paul Atkins said. Okay, crypto's not moving on that news. People don't want crypto. I'm gonna say this. I mean, I like privacy. I think privacy coins are the way out for being able to do transactions,

but people do not, by the store of value, the digital gold narrative at all. I have talked to, and I'm talking about some smart people and not people that are averse to technology. There's just something about the tangibility of gold that just resonates with human beings as whether it should or not, whether Bitcoin in theory is better or not, it's not based on other reasons that I've described, but it's not holding. so this is a real conundrum but i see an opening here again i'm i'm finding bitcoin maxis that have only heard the propaganda they're now reading some of my

stuff and they're saying okay well maybe you're right about bitcoin but what am i supposed to do buy stocks and then now we get now we can actually start to have a conversation about what's actually going on here what the threat of technocracy is does a rancher see themselves as an authoritarian tyrant over their cattle Was that a question from the audience? Yeah, it's a question from the audience. You're the end guy. Well, that's a good question. You know, I mean, I think you have to talk about free will first, right? I mean, this gets back into, you know, what do you call them, the principles, the founding? What do you call those, Aaron? The first principles.

First principles. I think this gets in a first principle situation where, you know, you have to think about, I think we have to consider human beings different than cattle, right? I mean, is that fair enough? If we do that, then I think you have to say, you know, the... I mean, cattle is... you know the you know it's a food source right you know cows are very efficient at eating grass you know doing things and making you know and and providing a food source for human beings. And we've, I wouldn't know if domesticating them, but we've obviously turned it into a product, you know, through time. And it's been going on for, you know, I don't know how many years have cows been around.

I mean, I would imagine, I would imagine people have been eating and slaughtering cows for what, three to five thousand years minimum. So I don't you know, I mean, look, there's always been the issue of human beings and, you know, wars. I mean, wars are the same thing. I mean, you're essentially and I think that's the big thing here is, you know, let's think about this in terms of debt, because you were just talking about, you know, what would change things? What would people don't like Bitcoin? They don't like, you know, the crypto. But they might be forced because of the amount of debt that the world has. I mean, we have massive amounts of debt. And what's going to be the solution?

Klaus Schwab said it, right? You're going to own nothing. You're going to like it. The Great Reset. I mean, I think it's inevitable, right, Aaron, that we're going to get a Great Reset. and you know and you know we've been talking about this cattle industry as well for a while in terms of why it needs a reset you know same kind of a thing it's it's it's a non-functional market because the cattle rancher should be making a fortune right now with cattle prices at all-time highs and feed stock at all-time lows corn soybeans wheat anything that they use to feed the cattle to fatten them up to sell them at record high prices Everything's there for the cattle rancher

to be making a fortune right now, and they're going out of business left and right. Why is that? Because structurally, if things have been broken, there's middlemen in the middle, and they're ripping the whole system off. They're ripping off the end user, us trying to buy this. They're ripping off the rancher who's made this decision to be a cattle rancher, whether people like that or not. exerting tyranny over his cattle. I don't know. I mean, I don't know how to answer that question really. The point is it's a structurally broken system, right? Same thing we're dealing here with the debt. We have a structurally broken system and we may not have a choice, you know,

unless we stand up for ourselves and understand what's going on. We have to be part of the decision. The problem is when hell breaks loose, Aaron, I'm not sure people are going to be thinking rationally, right? They're going to take what comes easy to them. What's that going to be? Universal basic income. Who has the ability to offer that? Governments. you know, you know, individuals can't say, Hey, you know, this isn't like, it's a wonderful life where what's his name can say, Hey, you know, let's keep the savings and thrift open. You know what I mean? This is going to come down to someone who's going to have to offer universal basic income. We saw this with COVID, you know,

we saw the handouts, nobody turned down the handouts, right? Nobody, not very many people turned down the checks that went out to everybody, you know? And so I think universal basic income, Well, I did. I didn't have it either. But yeah, not very many people turned it down, right? I mean, what percent? Less than a percent? Yeah. And some then took more than they should. Right. So, I mean, we have a structurally broken system. The cattle market's a structurally broken system in the United States. You know, so is our financial system. It's a structurally broken system. And that's why we're getting this great reset, which I think is the reason for these guys going to this digital currency and,

you know, some way to control everything. And, you know, again, we talked about this. AI, is it the savior? You know, I mean, they're... I think they're as concerned as we are in a lot of ways. They're concerned about losing control. You know, we're concerned about losing our way of life you know if we watch what's going on back to your video you know i mean that poor guy sitting on his bed and realizing that you know he's lost his autonomy over himself and um and so we're that's what we're worried about right is having our way of life our our free will our freedoms i think these you know these global leaders that that that have the ability to pull these switches and

drive you know that you know the howard lutnick's who are driving you know this um uh you know, um, tether, right? I mean, they're looking for solutions too. It's just, they don't want to give up power. I don't know. That's how I see it. I see they're just as concerned as we are. Um, and the question is, can they control the crash when it happens? You know, how's it going to happen when it happens? Are they going to be able to bring it down easy or is it just going to fall off a cliff? And it is what it is. And here's the replacement for it. I don't know. These are the questions I think about all the time. Well, I don't think what they're doing is going to work,

but I think it's pretty transparent what they're doing. Elon Musk is projecting straight technocracy. He is telling you that you're not going to need money. If anything, you're going to the currency will be measured in energy. You're going to have universal big income, awesome income and work will be optional. And, you know, Robots will follow you. Instead of going to prison, you'll have a robot following you around. Robots will outnumber people. They'll be doing all of the work. You'll essentially be living a hedonistic lifestyle, kind of similar to that movie WALL-E, the folks that are kind of out in space. There's actually a nine or ten book science fiction series that I'm going to read.

I keep on, I actually remember to do that, that apparently has informed uh musk's kind of view of how he thinks things are going to be moving forward and it sounds like a to me it sounds like a dystopian technocracy but depending on your world view if you're kind of strictly a materialist um perhaps it's it's appealing but but everything that that he talks about is being done so doge got connected doge connected palantir to the federal government databases we have operation stargate they're building these systems The article, even though it's supposed to be about just the Clarity Act, at the beginning, I reiterate to people that we have real ID, but what's going on from a data collection

perspective, even with HHS, even with the implementation of AI for essentially denying claims for Medicare and Medicaid. By the way, I've said this before. People like to talk about the debt. The biggest thing that is the threat to our solvency is Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security. It's two hundred trillion dollars of unfunded liabilities. Their solution to that is going to be rationing through AI and they're rolling it out this year. They're starting to roll it out this year. This is actually happening. So because that's a we're trying to taper a Ponzi scheme. These things are these programs are Ponzi schemes and the bill is due. We're at that point in the cycle where

there have been enough generations in the Ponzi scheme. It is no longer sustainable. Gen Z and Gen Alpha paid fifteen percent FICA taxes into these programs. This is it was only going to be one percent. It was never going to be more than one percent. It's now fifteen percent. You have two workers for every one recipient. It doesn't work. It's a Ponzi scheme. And no one wants to admit it. People want to say, well, I put in enough money. You didn't put in enough money. Your generation did not put in enough money. It's a Ponzi scheme. You can lie to yourself all you want, but it's false. It's numerically false. And these programs cannot be sustainable. So what they're putting in place

While we sit here and we call it Maha and everything else is they're putting AI surveillance, they're putting in predictive health models, predictive health scores, Palantir's connecting hospitals, wearables with government data and information. And then they're throwing in all of the Medicare and Medicaid information. They're even throwing in information from ICE into the system. So this infrastructure is being built actively now And they managed to co-opt conservatives and even some libertarians by saying, well, of course you would do this in the name of efficiency. But people aren't understanding what the end game is on this. And apparently people have been willing to

shed privacy and freedom for efficiency, which is very odd. And the fact that it happens within libertarian circles with Curtis Yarvin and everything else is also kind of a mystery. But the point is, I've been even trying to figure out what the word is to describe how I've felt since the election, which is going from everybody being concerned that Biden wins and us potentially having CBDCs to us actually having all of those things and nobody resisting it. And I threw this out to a group of people, and it's like there's kind of an insouciance was a word that somebody brought up, which is kind of more indifference. There's cognitive dissonance. willful ignorance there's trojan horse but

i'm trying but i've been trying to figure out a way to to describe how i feel about what's going on because i feel a lot worse than i did before the election and look before the election i was concerned that biden was going to win based on what was going on with executive order one four zero six seven so if you're listening to this thinking that i was i was supporting biden in any way i was not i've never supported i've never voted for A Democrat, but the rug pull that's happened here, maybe rug pull is the answer. The way that this has gone from we thought we were stopping something and now we're actually supporting it. But then also some people don't even know they're supporting it.

They're implicitly supporting it, but they're ignorant about the fact that they're actually supporting the opposite of what they said they were going to support. So they think that they won and in reality, they're supporting the opposite position. That is how bad this is. And it's very difficult to communicate this because no one wants to believe it. And then actually it gets worse than that. You don't wanna believe that the guy that... This was a little analysis I did here. Did you know that a quarter of all of the national debt that we have accrued has happened under Trump? Yep. And a big chunk of it under Biden, too, right? I mean, between those two, it's been a lot of debt.

It's been added. Between those two, but five years, one guy, twenty five percent of the debt. And people don't people want to believe. But then but then this is like what I was saying before. There are a lot of people they're going to look back at. Believing in Bitcoin and in like two years from now, they're going to be like, oh, my God, I believe that. Michael Saylor talking about cyber hornets. And I believe that this guy who was borrowing other people's money to buy Bitcoin and hold it in a company, I believe that this guy that we were going to save the world doing, they're going to look really stupid. But it's almost the same as saying, well, the guy that pushed Operation Warp Speed

added eight point something trillion dollars to thinking that guy was going to be the Avenger to come back and fix things. We're going to look back at this and say, oh, my God, how did we get I think you made a comment about this. Maybe this whole thing was like, hey, you know, we'll put Biden in there to make it so bad by comparison that we're even willing to pick Trump back. well i do think there's an ebb and flow here and if you think about let's back up just a little bit to old man bush and cheney right a lot of things happen during that period of time right you get nine eleven you get the nasdaq bubble crash you get the patriot act right a lot of things and then

you get a lot of wars right weapons of mass destruction definitely a neocon influence right a white male neocon influence you know and you and and there was a big push during that window of time and remember Little Bush didn't get in there very cleanly either. Remember that whole deal, right? You know, that wasn't a clean election. Then we come out of there. What do you get? Well, you get McCain and you get Palin, right? Not what the people want. They're sick and tired of this white neocon, you know, kind of a mentality. So they're like, OK, easy slam dunk to get Obama in there, right? You get Obama in there for eight years. Then what do you want? You want to change. You get in Trump, right?

A lot of people don't like him, whatever else. Too much of Trump at one time was too much for a lot of people, right? So what do you do? You bring in Biden, Sleepy Joe, who, you know, that's how he's been nicknamed by Trump. And you get this ebb and this flow, right? This back and forth. It's no different than sports or anything. You know, you fake left to go right, you know, or, you know, you get these ebbs and flows and things. And this is how you get people off sides. So you put Sleepy Joe in there where he goes in, signs a bunch of executive orders, and then you don't see the guy. He's on vacation like two out of the four years he's there, right? And nothing's happening.

Nothing's happening. And so what do people want, right? No different than they didn't want another Bush and Cheney, right? They wanted something different. They got it with Obama, but did they? Now what you're getting, you didn't want Bush. You were sick and tired of Trump. A lot of people were sick and tired of him. You bring in Sleepy Joe. You know, you create this vacuum for Trump to come back in, come in and slam the executive orders and just start slamming this stuff down our throat. Right. You know, and look at what happened at the World Economic Forum. Aaron, Aaron, he had the world up in arms over Greenland. I mean, he had Europe like doing somersaults. I mean,

these people were literally losing their underwear. Right. They had no idea what was going on. You know, Starmer and Macron and Mayers. Right. And then all of a sudden. It's solved. He sits down in a meeting room with Mark Rutten, an hour and a half, and it's just poof, it's gone, right? I mean, it's just evaporated. I mean, you know, you can't, and then I listened to this guy in Finland, right? A very interesting perspective, this Alex Stubb, very smart guy, buddies with Trump, buddies with Carney too, right? You know, so, but very interesting perspective on West, East, South, you know, and if anybody gets a chance, it's worth watching. But yeah, I think this is an ebb and flow, Aaron.

I think this, if you believe in the technocracies, Right. If you believe that these things are connected, when is the stock market ever gone down? It went down in the Nasdaq bubble, nine eleven. And, you know, and the real estate crisis, COVID, if you really look at the stock market and you look at a weekly or monthly chart, the only time this thing has really gone down. Right. Is when they've wanted it to when these false flags have occurred. Otherwise, it's like you said, right? It's this massive amount of money being pumped into a system that's going faster than the productivity gains are coming. Even though our productivity in this country is higher than almost anywhere

else in the world, or so we're told, the amount of money we're spending to get there is just outpacing the productivity gains. So if we don't get something like AI, we're running off a cliff. You know what I mean? And I think it's an ebb and flow back and forth. And I'm starting to believe more and more, Aaron, all the time that this stuff is just – the whole thing is orchestrated. I really – I mean it's hard. And I know a lot of people say this guy has lost his mind. But I really am starting to believe, especially when I watch the markets and I watch how the structure of markets – because I trade thirty different markets and I trade, I don't know, five hundred to a thousand different

trades a day. I mean, so I see a lot of different things and I've watched the evolution of this and I've watched how things have changed And this is a progression. It's a very clear progression. And then when we see these betting markets, right, these prediction markets coming in, we see the tokenization coming in, we see it falling into the hands of the CFTC. I know the CFTC, in my opinion, they have done a terrible job. Like, you might as well just get rid of them because it's the Wild West. I mean, they do nothing. They do not get the bad guys. They only get the good guys. That's the bottom line. I've never seen a bad guy get arrested. Take example, New Jersey Senator John Corzine, right?

He comes in, essentially, basically blows the futures market up. Never had a problem in two hundred years of operation. John Corzine comes in, basically blows the system up and he just walks free. No, no punishment, no penalties. They never get the bad guys ever, ever, ever, never. I mean, one MBD. I think we were talking about that right the other day. One MBD, one of the biggest scandals of all time. And the guy's going to get a pardon. They never get the bad guys ever. And so I think it's all orchestrated. I really believe it's all orchestrated, Aaron. I think it's orchestrated. I put out a meme that problem, reaction, solution. And I think Democrats create the problems.

Republicans give a fear-based reaction. And the solution is Palantir. Right. So it's like, you know, here's a bad idea. It's just watching what's going on in Minnesota right now. Whatever side that you're on, what we're going to end up getting out of this is probably gun control and Morph's Palantir. It doesn't even matter which side you're on on this issue. In fact, I believe Republicans are going to be the ones actually successful in pushing gun control. Again, they put, we've got real ID. We've got a backdoor CBDC. It's mind boggling to me that this happens. But it's easy to get people rallied up around fear. It's like, hey, yeah, we've got to defeat the bad guys.

Now here's some more surveillance on you, the not bad guy. But it works. It works everywhere. It works every single time. But yeah, I think a lot of this is we have to stop believing in politicians. The problem is believing that any of these politicians are going to solve it because they haven't yet. And it's now structurally such that somebody asked, what can we do about it? I said, I don't know. I feel like. Maybe we end up breaking up into states. I don't think you can fix the federal government. I've researched nations and empires. I've never found a situation where there was a turnaround. I've done a podcast or two on this. And if you just look at what would

need to happen to change things, how do you change the fact, like you look at Congress, And you look at like this crypto, a hundred million dollars went into this crypto bill. And then you look at how these politicians are funded and you look at who writes the bills. What, you know, we tried this. So this was tried after the Ron Paul revolution. And the idea is, oh, we're going to have these Liberty Republicans come in and we're going to restore the constitution. We're going to audit the Fed. We're going to end the Fed. It's gone nowhere. The Federal Reserve has has has ballooned since Ron Paul wrote and the Fed. We've made zero progress. We have Rand Paul and Thomas Massey.

And at one point we had Justin Amash. And you know what's actually happened? As much as I like the stand that those guys take, they haven't made any impact. Everything's gotten much worse and there's no momentum. It's not like we've gone from two to three to now, thirty people in the House. right, where you can see a trajectory at the rate that we're going now, there's an infinite amount of time before anything could possibly happen. You can't have two out of five hundred and thirty five people and make a change. And look at what happens, by the way, if you're Thomas Madison, you end up being targeted. Trump is targeted. AIPAC is targeted. They're spending millions and millions of

dollars to remove the only principled people that we have. So there is not a political solution. And yeah, I used to think that. I spent a lot of time on this. This is why when I say a lot of this stuff, it's from direct experience at a lot of different levels, which I've described. But some of these are things that we haven't worked out as humanity. For instance, fiat currency doesn't work. If Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, then I've got news for you. Debt-based currency issued by the state has a zero percent success rate. So if you're going to come up with if you're going to come back and say, well, you know, I mean, the founders at least looked at things

here from first principles. And, you know, we were kind of the first. This is a great system where we actually codified, you know, what government could do. And, you know, the fact that our rights don't come from government, so on and so forth, and spelled out a lot of other things. But we did a lot of other things that haven't worked. And so if you are going to reevaluate having a state based debt issued currency doesn't work. You would have to remove that to the side, but there are a lot of other things that don't work and there needs to be a lot of experimentation. I've been thinking a lot as I've been writing this article about so much of it is about saying, okay,

not only should we not pass these bills, but let's look at the underlying problem, which is the SEC laws. And we have these securities laws that date back to FDR, which is just absolutely insane, which by the way, those those laws were passed at the same time technocracy was emerging and that is not that there is over there's you know you can go back and look at uh his cabinet and the brain trust and everything else and overlap fdr's cabinet was a mess he was a mess it was a mess he was an absolute mess and so but we're living with these things ninety years later and so so i'm like well you know some of the things with ai somebody actually wrote this like what is a you know

AI will replace lawyers. Lawyers are, it's a ridiculous industry of people that take templates of documents and substitute names and then charge you as if they'd written the document from scratch. Like the whole thing is a scam. It's a fraud. It's a total fraud. It's all fraud. So when you're going to start a company, You have to create all these documents and investor questionnaires and everything else. It costs like thirty thousand dollars. That all should be replaced, even if you were going to keep the laws, which are ridiculous and out of date and not relevant. In fact, I was trying to find there was some congressman who once he gave a rant. I couldn't find it on YouTube.

I'm trying to figure out how to search for it. But he's like, nobody reads this. Nobody reads boilerplate. He threw the document. He's like, nobody, nobody reads any of these documents. So you have to go and spend thirty thousand dollars on legal documents that no one reads, just like the click wrap agreements that we talk about. The whole thing is fraud. it's fraud and so so i was thinking about what you know so many people say well what are you going to do without the state to enforce these things so then i'm like okay well let's look at how state enforcement works because the premise here is that what we have works what we have does not work so now i'm doing charts of how much does does

it cost how much have legal fees gone up versus inflation what is the impact of that like these systems do not work you can't even afford to sue somebody The financial value of a lawsuit has to be really high in order to justify even playing. Your odds are, what's the probability of me winning? Then you look at what the legal fees are going to be and it's like, unless it's a six-figure or more settlement, you can't even afford to play. It provides no justice for anyone. It provides zero justice for the little guy. The system is just broken. So this is the answer to somebody, well, how do you fix this? You do not fix this. You start from scratch and how that gets

worked out, that's a whole other different But there are some profound implications of AI that people don't want to look at. Some people want to just say, oh, AI is bad. AI is not bad. I mean, this whole thing about the weight, there's so much human fraud. It doesn't mean that the AI is going to be perfect, but you could make some AI that's open source where you could actually at least see what it's doing. Right now, we have corrupt people working in the shadows. Even the fact that you can't get, you have to pay money to Pacer to get legal documents, right? like the whole system is just you know aaron schwartz ended up killing himself because he was trying to make these legal

documents available for free and the fbi went after him and he actually killed himself rather than go through the that whole situation i mean this this this system is not is not working. I don't know what the answer is going to be, but other than to say that we need to have conversations from first principles and there needs to be some experimentation and we have to actually have the humility to admit as much as we may have liked the foundational principles, something got profoundly broken here. Well, I think you're right. And I think, you know, remember, what is a revolution, number one, right? Because people think of it as, you know, just, you know, military and blood and guts everywhere.

But a revolution doesn't have to be that. And I think, keep in mind competition. And, you know, if you have competing AIs, right, the good AIs will win, right? And so you take out of the equation propaganda. You take out of the equation false flags. You take out of the equation, ripping off the people with a COVID scam, a not two thousand and eight scam. Right. Again, twenty five, twenty five percent of the debt under Trump. You know, the other chunks been wars. Right. Wars. We didn't need WMD, all these things. Right. You take that stuff out of the equation. Right. and you let people use this AI. Remember, a computer has multiple different types of memory because one memory isn't enough.

So you have RAM, you have long-term memory. Human beings can't do everything. We're very good at certain things, but we don't have great memories. The AI is essentially your memory, right? You have all this stuff. Who was it? What was the scientist that said, you don't need to remember everything. You just need to know where to find it. That's AI. Was it Albert Einstein, I think? I think it was one of those guys. One of the geniuses said that. The point is, I think AI is a potential solution here, as long as it's not corrupted by a bunch of bad people. The concept of large language model and being able to locate and organize thoughts quickly, that you know where the information's

coming from, you trust it, just like you do your food. You want to know where your food's coming from, right? Because you can't trust. It's the same concept. This isn't rocket science. And I think really and realistically, And you have the great idea of escrow, right? If you let people interact with each other and you have an escrow component and you say, look, this person just isn't trustworthy, we all live and abide by the four-star, five-star thing. We don't have a problem with the four and five-star. I mean, okay, this guy's got a four or five-star. I'm not going to require as much escrow. I've got videos of him interacting with people. He's got a lot of good recommendations.

I'm not going to require as much escrow to do this transaction with him, you know? However, this guy's shady, brand new, never transacted. I'm going to require more escrow. And then you earn your, you know, you earn your pedigree over time because you're a good dealer. You know what I mean? This really isn't rocket science. I mean, it's really not that hard. The problem is revolution, right? What does that mean? The people have always held the power. They just never have the balls to storm the castle. We never have the balls to storm the castle. And that doesn't mean blood and guts. That means storming the castle and taking control of the A.I., Because people are way smarter than these

globalists and these technocrats and these other people. They use us. They put us on the mouse wheel, use us over and over and over again to solve their damn problems. You know what I mean? They steal everything. You know what I mean? They leave us with the shit, the debt and everything else. So I don't think it's that hard of a solution here. We're just – we don't have the balls to storm the castle, and we never do. Right? Right. And we've always had the people have always had the control. And I don't really think we hate each other as much as we think we do. Right. I don't really think party and black and white and male, female. I think it's all bullshit or mostly bullshit.

I think realistically, if you just create honest dealers, you're going to have a pretty good society. That's my belief. Yeah, I mean, I put a post out where it's actually eight billion people versus about five hundred. what they do is a great job of manufacturing these near fifty fifty divisions over almost anything but you know the thing and so i mean again i use ai differently than you know i don't just use chat gpt or the big tech version of it in the way people use the big tech side of it what i'm worried about though is it's kind of like all right bitcoin had the potential to separate money in state. Tokenization has the potential to allow people to engage in voluntary trade of all

kinds all over the world. And AI could empower you as an individual to be able to basically have access to and to choose which data you're actually accessing. Just kind of like you curate what you learn. You choose what you want to learn. And you choose where you want to go. You can use AI in that way, where you're just using the language model to interact with the data that you select. And it can become an extension of yourself. The main way that I use AI is on my own content and on my own data sources, because I spend a lot of time repackaging information and trying to say things in different ways and then try to pull in new information. as it relates to a theme or whatever,

well, that's time consuming. That's a lot less time consuming with AI. You can get a hundred times more work done with AI in that regard. My fear, of course, is though, just as Bitcoin got hijacked, just as tokenization got hijacked, it's all the same problem. And the same problem is around free will and the intended use of these technologies. And even if you start off with good intention for these technologies, they tend to get hijacked. And I think they get hijacked in a very kind of algorithmic way. Like, I don't think that the globalists create these technologies. They just are able to sit there and wait. And I actually think in some ways they use securities laws for this.

There's a whole system and so forth in place that. that makes it so the only way that you can grow is to access capital. And that capital has an ideological slant to it. And it basically absorbs good ideas and turns them into these dystopian versions of these ideas. And that's a whole other separate thing. But yeah, I think you're absolutely right. We can win. And the revolution doesn't require fighting. The revolution actually requires exiting and building parallel systems. No fighting needs to happen. And you don't even need to challenge the system. You need to exit the system because the system is structured in such a way that when you fight it, you're going to lose. I mean,

it's kind of like the only thing, and part of this, when I say this stuff, I say it because I've been through, I don't know, thirty years as a political activist and then being part of the Free State Project in New Hampshire that has also taken on going to court a lot. I've been in my own legal situations, but also other freestaters. We go to court and we film each other's court hearings. So there's a whole body of experience here. And so there are a lot of people that think, well, we've got the Constitution. This will get decided in the courts. You've never dealt with the court if you hold that case. If you're still holding that the courts are actually based on the rule of law

and objective, you're clueless. You watched that how a bill was made thing that I mentioned earlier, and you've applied that same naive thinking to the court system. That is not how it works. The courts are unfixable. And so... Can you play a link, Aaron? I just sent you a link to your – can you play that? There's an X link on there. I don't know if you can play that. It's pretty interesting. Where did you send it? I sent it to your Signal account. Here we go. Yeah, give me a second here. Here we go. Or will you be able to play it, you think? Because I can give a little background on it. Oh, yeah, I'll be able to play it.

Okay, so let me give a little background on this. So Chamath Palihapitiya, he grew up in a poor surrounding, supposedly. That's the story. Indian descent. And he climbed the ranks, pretty smart guy. I think he's a part owner in a basketball team, I believe, you know, some sports teams. buddies with David Sachs, right? Chamath Palihapiti and David Sachs were the guys in San Francisco, right, that were the ones that raised the money that helped get J.D. Vance in as vice president, right? So this guy is definitely a technocrat. When President Trump had the technocracy, the tech dinner at the White House, On his right was Mark Zuckerberg. Next to him was Chamath Palihapitiya's

wife, who's got, again, very wealthy, powerful background, and then Chamath Palihapitiya. So this guy's a player, but listen to this. I think this is a pretty fascinating look on, you know, from a guy who's right there in that precipice of the people who are controlling capital flows, kind of like you're talking about. All right, let's hear it. There's about a hundred and fifty people that run the world. Anybody who wants to go into politics, they're all fucking puppets. Okay? There are a hundred and fifty and they're all men that run the world. Period. Full stop. They control most of the important assets. They control the money flows. And these are not the tech entrepreneurs. Now,

they are going to get rolled over over the next five to ten years by the people that are really underneath pulling the strings. And when you get behind the curtain and see how that world works, what you realize is it is unfairly set up for them and their project. First order of business is I want to break through and be at that table. That's the first order of business. And the way that I do that is by proving that I can do what they do as well as they do it. And then do it better than how they do it. Because at the end of the day, they are commercial fucking animals. And they'll open the door out of curiosity, and they'll let me stay because I add them. And then once I'm there,

I can open the door for other people who can try to do the same thing. So my entire goal now is that, is to be in a position to aggregate enough of the capital of the world to then reallocate it against my worldview. And I'm not saying my worldview is the best or right, but it is mine. And at the end of the day, there are a hundred and fifty other fucking guys with their worldview, and they don't give a shit what you think about their fucking worldview. That's the truth. And so why not me? Why not? Why not one of you? Why not? And so in my life now, I'm just kind of like, why not? Why the fuck not? What a disaster.

I mean, the thing is, by the way, so this is what I've said about Bitcoin maxis that that early on they looked at at central bankers with disgust and it turned out it was envy. And what they wanted was actually to see the table. They acted like they wanted decent decentralized money separated from states so that people could have voluntary transactions around the world without the grip of the state. And then the ones that maintain their view that for a Bitcoin maximalism, despite it being hijacked, it turns out those are people like Brian Armstrong. They're not going to Davos to displace it. Now they're taking his view, which is, well, you know, I want to be one of them.

And if I'm one of them, then I can I can make an imprint. There's no like that's that's horrible. And by the way, it's exactly what I expect out of these people. This is exactly what's going on. There is the. And the viewpoint, and I don't know what his particular viewpoint is, but the viewpoint of his circle is technocracy. He is probably in the Curtis Yarvin circle. And so what's important for everybody to know is that these people are trying to say, yeah, well, this is the old power structure. Here's the new power structure. And by the way, the new power structure is the same as you all know of Ferrari. The new power structure is technocracy. So... I'm glad you played that clip.

I already didn't like that guy. Well, well, and his one claim to fame, if there was one, was a special purpose acquisition company, the SPACs. Remember, he was going wildfire on the SPACs and it backfired. It didn't really work out very well. Right. And for lots and lots of different reasons. But that was his one thing. And that and it fits right. If you listen, what he said there, he followed that up because that was an older clip. He followed that up with these SPACs, the special purpose acquisition companies. to aggregate the capital that's what he was trying to do is aggregate the capital to get control it backfired what is he doing now he's teamed up with david sachs

he's putting jd vance in office right like he's part of this whole thing and who knows what he's up to next but he's not guys like that don't go away right they do not go away they just keep coming back for more no they don't go away this is and this is and by the way what their strategy was was that we're going to control trump And they're controlling Trump. He's in the circle with Andreessen, and they're coming in. These are people that didn't like, these were not Republicans. These were people that were on the opposite side. And then he's on there with a sweater and, you know, doing his whole thing. And now all of a sudden, oh, my God, I can't believe all these woke policies

that we implemented in San Francisco were coming back to bite us in the ass. Now we're against that. Or Musk, who is, you know, pictures of him with getting, you know, handouts from Obama. And, you know, now he's trying to play this moderate position of, You know, he's just in the middle where, you know, the whole it's all fake. And these guys want power and they don't want power for the humanitarian purposes. They have power for most of these people don't like humanity. Most of these people think that humanity is something to be solved. And often there's some deep psychological wound in their background. And this is kind of like a hyper accelerated Revenge of the Nerds meets Terminator.

That's actually kind of what's going on. And people need to understand that the amount of bullshit people have swallowed with Musk is almost unbearable. Now, I'm beginning to wonder how much of his support is actually fake or not, because I am finding that people that used to say that he was saving free speech and everything else, I think that that is kind of wearing off. I'm seeing that that is starting to wear off. I'm seeing people are starting to maybe question, hey, maybe he had an alternative solution i mean if you want to read the summary that i gave of the terms of service of x which states that he can give us give your information including dms to government authorities he

owns all your content you can use it for training data and if you try to reverse engineer and figure out how he's doing censorship he violated the terms of service it's there in black and white or if you want to see him in his own words, talk about everything that's technocracy. I mean, it takes a lot of work to actually delude yourself that he is the thing that they're putting him on the pedestal as being things like, you know, saving free speech and so forth. You actually have to go out of your way to believe that story. But people nevertheless do. And I guess we suffer from white knight syndrome, right? It's still people want to believe Trump despite the evidence. And the problem isn't

believing in Trump. The problem is believing in any politician. This is the issue that I have with RFK and Maha, which is that it started out being about medical freedom and now it's not about medical freedom. These people believe that government should be involved in solving people's health problems if only their people were put in there. That is the fatal flaw. That is a no-go. And so what is going to happen out of this is you're going to have a lot of delusional people that believe in twenty twenty six with all of the technology that we have post Internet, post complete failure of public health and everything else that believe that the best way to solve health problems is to have

a bunch of uninformed voters in a rigged system, pick politicians who pick bureaucrats that are part of a death call to come up with technology. There isn't a worse model that you could actually deploy. And even when they say something like we're going to come up with gold standard this or that, the big problem is in believing that there should be a single standard. Standards themselves need to be subject to market forces and competition. And that's where we run into a lot of problems. That's why the statement that how does science progress one funeral at a time comes up. It's because we end up having a scientific... I've talked to a lot of academics recently

who've said that all of academia is broken. It's because there's no actual debate anymore in any discipline, whether you're talking about the hard sciences or even social sciences, there's no debate anymore. It's all the same ideologically. And even the way peer review works and everything else, peer review is if you have a contrary idea, you're not going to get your paper published. And if you have an idea that doesn't fit into the funding mechanism, you're not going to get your paper published. Academia used to be about pursuit of truth. That's gone. And I've heard that from prominent people across all kinds of universities. So we need competition even around standards.

Government has a monopoly of violence and people have resigned themselves to that's the only way to do things. I think we've got to break apart all of our thinking. and have a lot of experiments and a lot of discussion. And so, I mean, you know, it's hard to get people to break out of it. I think the biggest thing out of is the, I say it again and again, and I will continue to, is people's false belief that is still that we are the best and freest country in the world, which is not objectively true on any measure. And back to AI, you know, I was saying, and Mike Adams was saying a couple of episodes ago, We agreed that China was going to overtake the US in AI.

They're ahead of us in fifty seven of sixty four categories already. We're already seeing it might happen by the end of this quarter. In the last week, there have been three models released by China that are actually arguably cutting edge, state of the art models, and they're all open source. Meanwhile, ChatGPT is dying. ChatGPT is sitting there trying to figure out how to interject ads. Their model is not even state of the art compared to other models. I don't think Grok has achieved... There's more propaganda around Grok than actual results. The AI is not that great. Claude is genuinely... the best right now for coding, but there's this new the new Chinese model,

Kimmy two point five that I'm hearing actually gives it a run for its money right now. Open source model. So the US lost because of closed source and they lost in part, by the way, because of Trump's tariffs, because Trump's tariffs on GPUs put China in a position where they decided to think intelligently instead of about using brute force. So they've actually changed the fundamental nature and the way that their models so that it's not about just adding more compute power. So I mean, it was a little bit of a derail, but other than to say, we are getting our asses handed to us and we still think that we're the best country in the world. That's how big this gap is.

Like we are definitively a declining empire. This is why we are using military force. This is why our dollar's collapsing and everything else. We are absolutely declining. We're not going to decline, we are actively declining. And we have a zero percent chance of being successful to the extent that people continue to believe you unless you admit you have a problem, you can't fix it. And we don't admit we have a problem and we will use any excuse. The big the big one now is to is to blame communism. Well, they've been using that one since World War II, right? Blaming communism, and we're blaming the infiltration of communism.

Again, look at Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security. and tell me we need to be worried about external communism. No one wants to admit what's going on with these entitlements. No one wants to admit it. And so I put this out there and people disagree with me on this because it hits a nerve and it's always the same response. I don't care if you don't like the information. The information is actually factually true. This is why people say, oh, it's the third rail of politics. If you're not going to touch the third rail, everything else that you're doing is useless. You are literally... rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic. None of it matters. If you don't deal with the root cause issues,

then everything is theater and fake. And the thing is, that is what all of these conservative talk show things, none of what they say matters. None of their debate matters. Whether they're right or wrong doesn't matter. And then they'll move on to another useless issue that doesn't matter. When has any of the Candace Owen, Nick Foote, when has anything that they've ever done resolved anything or mattered? One thing. I can't think of anything. Yeah, if anything, it just causes more useless bubblegum debate, right? It's the same thing. But I think the key is, you know, like,

if you're able to shine a light through Tucker, through these other outlets, and maybe the timing's right for this because it feels right, right? The interview you just did, the one that I can't wait to go watch on YouTube, who was that with? I wrote it down. Paul Barron. Paul Barron. You know, if it was that well-received, people are hungry for this, you know? I mean, if you can get the spotlight. get this out there and then they have an outlet to go to where when they they're hungry to search for something and there's an outlet ah they're satisfied you know i mean they're hungry now it's time to eat then go and look at the technocracy atlas right they can go and

look at these things and look at how screwed they are on all the click graph agreements they've signed you know then all of a sudden it's like you can't change you can't unsee what you've seen you know what i mean and that's the key right is you go shine a light then you go looking you come back you're hungry you you you know take a bite and you can't unsee it you can't un eat it you know what i mean and um and then i think it can pass even word of mouth right i think but and it doesn't take a lot it take number one we have to stop this this clarity act right we have to stop this thing because there's no debate right there if you if you want to say there's ever been a

thing where there's no debate there's no debate there's there's zero debate aaron and it's coming at us like a like a freight train and if we let this get through we are in deep trouble well those are saying so there is debate but the debate is about what percentage of pie the cftc is going to get versus the sec and then the democrats want are are in there trying to get regulation for the lawyers Those are the people that are at the debate. And this is why in the article I'm trying to lay out to people how politics works, because so many people have this idea of like this isn't Mr. Smith. There's no Mr. Smith goes to Washington. That is not available to you.

This is not how any of this actually works. So the only people at the table are there. They're dividing our assets at the table, period. There isn't a single person. And by the way, I'm not going to go up there and represent us because it doesn't even matter unless unless somebody wants to bankroll me with ten billion dollars because these people The politicians are bought off for these positions. Look at the FEC filings. This isn't even me being cynical either. This is a stark, realistic examination of how this works. And I spent time doing this. I've supported federal politics. I've run for office. I may run for office. again for you know again for the reason

of not I'm going to go and solve it the only thing anybody can do is expose what's going on long enough to buy people enough time to take back their own individual sovereignty there is no way you're going to fix Washington DC um it is it is and I used to think that you could and would even put together packs like if you won this many votes and did all this other stuff and tried it at the state level you know what I found is We won, between my wife and I, we won, won, two hundred and fifty races or something like this at the state level. And then the people that we support get co-opted by the leadership of the party in the state Senate or whatever it happens to be. And then they flip votes.

You can't keep your own people. Even if I had people that signed pledges that got elected because they signed a pledge on an issue opposing an issue. And then and then six years later, they end up the prime sponsor making the thing that they oppose permanent. So you can't keep together a group of these because the kinds of people that gravitate towards politics, you don't have, you know, Ron Paul, Tom Massey types of people come around like literally one generation. There's not enough of those people to aggregate to sustain making change. And then look at what happens to them when they're when they're even in there. So anyway, there's there's a but, you know, if

That doesn't mean that the Clarity Act, the Clarity Act can fail for a whole number of reasons. One thing that can cause the Clarity Act to fail is other things, like the government shut down some other kind of crisis, something that actually preempts it and that pushes out this particular legislation out past the midterms. That is actually one of the ways that we can stop the Clarity Act. But we're not gonna stop the Clarity Act by testifying in front of Congress, and we're not gonna stop the Clarity Act by talking to senators. Now, I will tell you, let me give you two examples of things The kinds of things that I would do one running for Senate saying, look, if, if the clarity act passes,

the probability of me running increases probably by. Because I will go after Sununu and I will make sure that there are consequences for this. And the, and the one thing that, that we would be better off having a more divided Congress, because we are screwed. The worst thing happens. We get the worst outcomes when it's the majority of one party. And it actually turns out when you look at the math, it's worse when it's Republicans. All Republicans, when it's an all Republican majority, you get bigger spending and bigger like defense and everything else than you even get under Democrats. It's actually it's quite a quite a thing to see when you line up the numbers

because it goes against what the rhetoric is. The other thing you could do is you could run a super PAC that targets any Republican that is in a race for U.S. Congress where their margin of victory was less than two percent. And you could start a super PAC and you could just go after those races. And again, I think the Republicans already lost control of the House. I know when Marjorie Taylor Greene there, I haven't looked at what the numbers are, but they may have already lost the House. It was sixty something percent likely that the Republicans were going to keep control of the Senate. But that goes down every I mean, that's starting to near fifty fifty. And so it's like, OK, well,

they lose control of if it's just Trump and then Democrats with minor majorities. That is a better outcome in terms of slowing up, slowing technocracy. Well, and how important is it to them? I mean, you know, we've got this whole gun thing coming up. How much would the Democrats come over and vote for the Clarity Act if they got some sort of a gun legislation? I mean, you can't rule that out. You know what I mean? It's like it's that important for the for, you know. to get this thing through, you know, from a digital currency. Because, again, Lutnik, Bo Hines, right? You know, all these guys. When I watch Bloomberg during the daytime, there's very little in the U.S., Bloomberg,

on digital tokenization or digital currency or anything. When you go to Asia at night and you watch the Asian version of Bloomberg, it's freaking everything. They talk about tokenization nonstop. You go to these conferences over in Singapore or Malaysia or, you know, Kuala Lumpur, you know, And it's all about tokenization. I mean, it's just nonstop talk about it. So like we're getting, I mean, we're getting, we're not getting the story here. Like it's just not getting out to people at all. But in Asia, it's getting out. It's very clear, right? And they're behind it. And that's probably why they're winning this AI race because they see what's really going on and they're not being

propagandized, right? They're allowed to, they're basically the, you know, the mind is being freed to develop. And that's what they're doing with this open source code. You can see how this stuff connects, right? It's not that hard to see how the puzzle fits. No, it's not. But we have no idea. We do not perceive how much propaganda we have here. We really don't. We see almost nothing. That's why I did that episode to show people. And now it's getting out. I did an episode on this probably four or five months ago. But they're now, who was it that went over to Ford or somebody went over there and saw a factory where there aren't even lights. The entire, the two plants or whatever are run using

just robotics and they actually output a finished product and the factories don't even have lights on because they're run by robots. They are so ahead of us in robotics, in manufacturing. And we're sitting here, going back to this whole weaponization of, of populism, Trump literally has people thinking that he's going to revive blue collar jobs that are going to be done by by human beings. Right. Like like he's playing off of nineteen eighties Reagan rhetoric. It's not even possible. That's not what's going to happen. At best, if you were trying to make this patriotic, you'd be saying, well, our robots are going to be better than China's robots. But even that's not going to happen.

That's actually not happening either. But what do we see? We see Musk with Optimus. We see Android. We see all of these other things as if those are the only things that exist. People in the US think that that's all that exists. We're losing in robotics. You can already buy robots in China. that are better than the things that they're claiming are going to come out soon here. This is how big the gulf is between perception and reality. And so anyway, it's a, I don't know, we'll see what happens, but the Clarity Act could be halted. So you always, there's always some way that it could happen. But I know that the way that it's not gonna happen is,

How do I overcome Trump and David Sachs parroted by all of the media from Bloomberg to CNBC to every crypto journal saying that this is going to make America the crypto hub of the world? even though it's completely false, how do you get the message out? I mean, this may be something like trap in disguise or whatever. It's going to have to be short video clips. It's going to have to be songs. It's going to have to be something where it's like, yeah, this is, you know, without going into the details of tokenization, this is the digital prison. This is not, you know, again, on what planet would a Republican be claiming that excessive regulation is what is going to

make America great and competitive. That's not how it works. Money flows to where it's freest. This is a known concept. We are not competitive with the UAE. We are not competitive with Singapore. We are not competitive with probably even now at this point, South Korea. We are not leading on this. This is not a this regulation doesn't make us freer. And therefore, that's not where capital is going to flow. It's actually an absurd proposition. The only way it's going to happen is if they use force, which, of course, is what they will. Yeah, no, I think that's right. I mean, that's where they're headed. That's where they're headed with it. It can go a long way with Tucker.

Tucker gets a pretty good audience. You'll see the reception. You'll see how active your website gets. At that point, it's worth going into and saying, okay, let's get some backing on this and let's do these short videos and make a real marketing push on this. I mean, look, you can make a dent in today's world. You know, I mean, you can make a dent. But again, X is throttled. Rumble's throttled. YouTube's throttled. A lot of these things are throttled. So, you know, it does make it challenging, right? It's not a fair playing field. I guess that's the point. You're going against the people who own the networks of where you're trying to get this stuff out. That makes it hard.

interview showed me that there's an appetite and that people sense that it's BS, but they don't know how it's BS or who's pulling the strings. And so if we can get bigger scale, and again, but It's you know, the problem is this is why I end up with these long articles. It's not, hey, this is really bad. Go call your congressman. It's like this is really, really bad. The dollar is going to fail. And this is the part of the control system you have to stop. You have to exit, you know, the dollar and exit these financial instruments and start building parallel systems. That's the that's the tough. I worry that, you know, you get the message out, but then people get then people get stuck

with the rope a dope thing and then they're back to voting again. And so there's so much information to convey, but hopefully these sites are enough developed or will be by the time an interview like that happens where it's like, oh, okay. Because when I was telling somebody, again, the Epstein thing, by the way, that's Trump's Achilles heel is the Epstein thing, even still when you look at the polling data. we need to crank that up, right? We need people crowdsourcing what's going on with Epstein. And I think it all ties together. I think that by the time this is done, we're going to see Brock Pierce, Jeffrey Epstein, Howard Lutnick, all of it. It's all going to line up.

Bill Barr, Ace Greenberg, Bear Stearns, JP Morgan, BCCI, Safari Club. You just keep going. You can go down. We could go on for an hour just listing off the chain gang, you know? And what's his face was right. There's one hundred and fifty people pulling the machine and they're mostly guys. And it's you know, and we're going to be able to figure out who those guys are. But whether you figure out who those guys are or not, what you realize is you need to build parallel systems. I disagree with him. He will not beat them at their game. He will become that. And you know what? He already demonstrates that that's all he wants to be. He doesn't have a principled stand.

He just wants to be a Rockefeller. He just wants to be a Rothschild. He's not there fighting for anybody other than his friends that want to control and become the next... By the way, worse. They will be worse. Bitcoin maxis are worse than central bankers, as it turns out. That wasn't the case, but again... Think about where they've come on this, where it's like, well, just buy Bitcoin, hold it, cut your own hair. And if you wait long enough, you will be in the citadel. And they have these means where it's like, if you have ten Bitcoin, you're at the top of the heap. They built it like a feudal system where they're at the top. They're not even they're not even talking about.

freedom for other people or maximizing free will at all it's not even part of the ethos they're worse than they're saying out loud what the bankers may be doing but at least the bankers are somewhat softer in their language they're they're overtly the bad guys these bitcoin maxis in their presentation of this and so that's what i'm impressed that you can say the guy's name chap chairman i you figured i don't know how long it took to figure out how to say that guy's name But, you know, I look at that. I'm like, yeah, we need to stop that. We need to stop the process of that. The idea isn't to be one of the one fifty. It's to get rid of the structure where there are one.

That should be the goal. Right. I would think. But I don't know. Maybe not. Increasingly, people are in, you know, aligning with this. I'm getting sick of people. You see people lining up, well, yeah, we need monarchy. We need a dictator. That whole thing has taken on more popularity than it should. But this, to me, is just the last gasp of a declining empire. That's why we're actually getting to this point. People do know this. Another thing that came out of this conversation this weekend was somebody saying, yeah, people are starting to get nuts. Maybe it's because intuitively people do know that – that the dollar's collapsing. People do know that we're at this great

reset point. They don't necessarily know who's behind it or whatever, but they feel, they just sense that we're kind of at the edge here and there's uncertainty and nobody knows What's going on? Somebody says, I just got kicked off stream for the third time on Rumble. But by the way, backed by Tether. Rumble is not going to like this content, by the way, because Tether is one of the big investors in Rumble. I'm not long for Rumble. And as Craig taught me and as we did on that episode, Rumble is like fake traffic and pay to play. So we're not going to be a hit on Rumble. Um, this is why, you know, you can watch this through the air and day show.com, but, but yeah, I don't,

I don't hold out any hopes for any, uh, any, any big burst on rumble anytime soon. Nobody's getting behind this on rumble. No, the title of this is like Bo Hines and the, you know, one hundred and twenty day. What is it? One hundred and twenty days from White House to tether CEO. This thing, I'm sure didn't do well in the keyword search. uh so uh all right well we've been out of here for about four hours i uh i'm i'm i'm getting a little near near the end here i've got to uh i still have to work i gotta get a clear head to finish this article it's been so writing is initially fast um but you know ai does not work for writing

this kind of stuff i can't use ai for this i i i can use ai for research but you can't use ai for writing i end up having to um Edit and rewrite from scratch. I've had to rewrite this article, not even saying it was, it wasn't AI. I've had to rewrite this article three times because I've tried to lay out what the argument is and I'm, I'm still not sure it's good. I've got to get something out, but it's like, uh, it's painful editing. Editing. Editing takes about ten times longer than writing in my experience. Yup. So anyway, stay tuned. It's tentatively called The War on Crypto, How the Clarity Act Betrays Financial Freedom. That's the working title.

And it will be a beast. But hopefully people will read it and works will derive from it. Again, the whole point on this is I wanted this to be the article that everybody refers to when they talk about the topic. whether or not anybody even reads it or not. It's like, this is, if you actually want to see what the full argument is. So at least when I'm talking to people online, it's like, all right, here's how the whole process works. This is how the voting works. This is how all of this works so that you're not buying the propaganda. So many people buy the propaganda. It's frightening to see. Although I also heard recently that even in academia, in academia,

people don't read the academic papers. They don't read the whole literature review. They don't read the analysis. Sometimes they don't even now read the abstract. They just read the title. And so, you know, if that's what's going on in academia, we know politics is worse, right? People don't read the bills, people don't read the summary of the bills, and the titles are the opposite of what the bill means. So if there's somebody that's going around parodying just the title of the bill, you already know right out of the gates. How do you have an argument with that? You already know they didn't read they're saying well it provides clarity i mean it was just like you know the

genius people always ask me how did we get the jeep why is it called the genius act like well it's the stable act in the house and the genius act of the senate and then people roll their eyes it's like this they're mocking us they're actually laughing at us with these bill names all right any closing thoughts before we wrap this up i think it's great i'm gonna go check that paul baron thing out the um i'm excited to see that it sounds like it was good um anything in there that you covered that you haven't covered before i mean or was it pretty i mean was it pretty basic i mean did you go deep or did you pretty much just keep it conversational or well he let me talk

that was one of the things that okay i have no idea what i've never watched any of this other guy's show so i don't know how unique this was but from the comments i guess it was different than how it normally goes so he gave me latitude and What was different about it is most of these podcasts are, you know, are you for the Senate bill or the House bill? You usually pick a side. What I did was I framed it as why do we even need financial regulation? And if we were going to have financial regulation, why would it be through Congress, which has this background? But I framed it all in Bank Secrecy Act SEC laws. And in the end, he had a lightning round thing. He's like,

are you for the agriculture bill or the finance bill? And I'm like, none. we should repeal the Bank Secrecy Act. So what I did about this, it wasn't long, it wasn't even an hour interview, it was maybe thirty-five minutes, but what I did was I reframed all of his questions. And what I did, which I think the audience had never heard before, was I refused to answer his questions in the way that he asked, because I framed it back as, why do we need market structure? I mean, Adam Smith talked about the invisible hand. We've had markets that structure themselves organically throughout time. Why do we markets have functioned without a Senate finance committee? Right. And so so what I think that I

threw out there were I could change the way that they thought. Now, is it going to be new information? No, it's the information that I've said on this podcast and the previous podcast. The difference is it was in the Q&A environment where People are not used to getting that answer. People are used to you're answering the question in the way you're picking, right? It's the, are you red versus blue? And I'm like, I refuse to answer that question. And so that's why the comments and what I clearly saw in the response is that, yeah, okay, this guy gets it. No one's heard that. People think it. And again, people intuitively, I think, understand this, but no one's ever said it or been

allowed to say it. any of these platforms this is why i say i'm saying an open debate tim scott guzman any of these people brian armstrong any of the lobbyists the blockchain association any of you dead beats from the cftc and sec that are part of the revolving door i will debate any of you on any platform and it will never happen in fact i encourage you to do this go on these things and encourage people to have me on to debate someone Watch how that doesn't happen. See how many times I've been invited to debate people on Bitcoin. How many Bitcoin maxis? There's only one Bitcoin maxi who's had me on. Cedric Yunkleman, I believe is his name. He has Bitcoin Matrix podcast,

and I'm grateful that he did it. And he was not. And you know what? Actually, it was a great show. It was a great interview. It wasn't combative. I assumed that I was walking into a, you know. whatever, I was walking into a bad situation. It was a great interview. We talked mostly about technocracy. And then at the end, we touched on some of these things. And so that was great. But the other people, they've all blocked me and push on that. Push on that. Ask these people to debate me directly because I wanted that. That's what we need to see. The American people have not seen any opposition to any of these positions. And what gets me riled up about this is people say, well,

why don't we heard about that? Well, because people like Roger Ver were threatened with life in prison and now he can't talk or he violates his prosecution agreement. Ian Freeman's in prison. These. Privacy developers who are developing the technology the way it was supposed to be to protect our financial privacy, they're all in prison. So the people that should be talking about this can't. They've literally been pressured and imprisoned by the federal government. So this is why nobody's heard of any arrest events. You have no idea how much further along this would be if Roger Ver had been talking about this. I even get the years now mixed up. I forget that this whole thing happened in

twenty twenty four, not twenty twenty five. We are approaching like two years almost. So April in three, you know, we're like one year and nine months into when Roger was initially arrested. He's been silenced this entire time on the hijacking of Bitcoin. Think about how impactful that is based on what's happening today. What if his voice was there? Why do you think his voice was suppressed? Yeah. Gee, I wonder. So people can't know. People have not been exposed to this information. It's literally been suppressed by the force of the state, in many instances now spanning different political administrations.

And so Trump did not stop the war on crypto. Trump has extended the war on crypto and people still believe. He said, you know, it's kind of like George Bush when he was on the aircraft carrier and it said mission accomplished. That's what I feel when I when I when I hear people say, well, Trump ended the war on crypto. Trump did absolutely no such thing. He's made it worse. The Clarity Act, the Clarity and Genius Acts are the war on crypto. These people being in prison is the war on crypto. And so. We've got to elevate this. So if you want to help out again, you know, if you have podcasts that you like, if you ask them to have me on actual authentic stuff works.

This is how I got on Mike Adams, all of this other stuff. Again, I've never actively promoted. People have reached out to me and now now is the time. But if you see politicians promoting these bills, if you see these lobbyists, these ask them to debate. Share the content. Ask for their opinion. Don't even say, well, hey, maybe this guy said this. Is he right or not? And then watch. Watch the silence. Watch the lack of response. And in some cases, the podcast might actually have me on. But generally speaking, push them on it, and the silence will be deafening. And if enough of us do it, then in the comments, rather than seeing bots that are these little sycophants that repost and

repackage in ten words what the post said that are clearly bots, Maybe we start a discussion on these threads and people start seeing the alternative position. Because based on that Paul Barron thing, I'm of the opinion. And now just today, even I put out a post, I said, when did you first realize that Bitcoin was hijacked? And there are a lot of people that follow me. They're like, yeah, twenty seventeen. This guy's like twenty fifteen. And then somebody just posted, you know, ten hours ago. or yesterday, right? People are actually waiting. Now, you have to take some, be realistic about the fact that a lot of people's worldview is just being shattered. So they're kind of in a position where

it's like, I had this happen like two and a half years ago where a guy's like, wow, thank you for opening my eyes to this, but it's completely changed my social circle. Now that I know that Bitcoin was hijacked, I kind of, I feel alone. because I've lost my social group. He's like he's glad to know that there are other other people out there. But it's kind of like this is how impactful this is. This is Bitcoin has become like a religion and with its own sex and sex. And, you know, people are a lot of stuff going on. But Bitcoin people are starting to change. So I'm grateful for that. I'm trying to not be as it's tough because we're running out of time. So you've got to be as direct as

possible. At the same time, you want to be welcoming of people that have had their worldview shattered. my worldview was shattered all of our world you don't get to this position without your worldview having been shattered multiple times and i'm sure it'll be shattered again i've even you know when i got into tokenization i thought that uh patrick byrne was was working on all this stuff to you know to decentralize all these things and create a hot swappable blockchain tech stack human civilization and it turns out he's a cia asset so it never just this hasn't this hasn't gone well so far so I'm still waiting for, I'm waiting to not get rugged on something. So fingers crossed. Oh, good.

Well, it's a good one to share. Sounds like it's a good one. I I'm looking forward to watching it. So. Awesome. All right. Well, have a good night and, um, we'll be back next Thursday. Next Thursday will be, um, uh, so hold on. So Aaron, you and your wife should, Asked Courtney about a guest slot on Dr. Merritt's weekly private call. Thank you. That's a that's a great idea. I will. Yeah, we're going to launch do another launch of that probably in two weeks or three weeks after making some revisions. But that is a that's a great idea. So next week will be oh nothing. And hopefully we'll have these guests on to talk about the great taking. So this this will be a good combination. one, two,

plus an update on whatever's going on with this legislation. I guess we'll see where Bitcoin is. Bitcoin is now below eighty two thousand dollars. So just barely. So it's down. Bitcoin is this is really creating a crisis for people. Gold going up and Bitcoin going down is is a big deal. And that might open up a lot. A lot of people might start to think about reading, hijacking Bitcoin and considering some of these other alternative ideas. Yep. Well, and Michael Saylor is going to get blown out around seventy seven thousand. So that should get interesting. Oh, is that his number? Well, I think that's his average price and it might be a little higher than that because

he was buying up higher than that. So he probably pulled his average price up. But yeah, I mean, I think he starts to get put under pressure at seventy seven thousand and the system would love nothing more than to splatter his Bitcoin all over the place. Right. Yeah, absolutely. I mean, I have to think that maybe when he had his tax problems, he kind of deal with the CIA. His whole thing might be fake. I mean, it could be. It could be. All right. Well, well, thank you again for coming on. And I'm going to play a trap in disguise on the way out. And I will try to get that up on YouTube soon as well. Sounds great. Thanks, Aaron. Have a great night. Great show. Thanks.

I woke up to silence But the war had begun They froze my account Said I'd done something wrong Wasn't no crime Just living free Now the system got a chain on me They took my savings, my future,

my land With a single cold line and a government hand Said it was safety, said it was green But all I see is tyranny behind a screen that's saying innovation. It's a trap in disguise. You're alone, nothing. Be watched all your life. Genius ain't freedom. Gravity, yeah.

It's a cage they built while we cheered I believed in the promise, the man with the plan But the same old swamp just changed its brand Keep in the front door. Open the back. Sign the bills that launch the final

attack. This ain't innovation. It's a trap in disguise. We watched all your lies Genes ain't freedom Colony ain't clear It's a case they build

Your gold, your guns, your voice, your name. They'll digitize it all, then shift the blame. Palantirizing AI chains. Freedom dying slow in patriotic flames. With your ID, your face, your tears, your time They wrapped it in stars, sold it with pride But freedom's bleeding

out from the inside DEF CON won, and they call it peace But I still got breath, I still believe We can break the code, escape the scheme Turn this nightmare back into a dream