Tom Luongo - Trump is DEFEATING the Globalists and DISMANTLING the British Empire
|
Time
Text
Getting rid of Maduro, putting Russia on notice, putting China on notice, kicking the British out, making the deals with the oil companies.
What you're doing is you're creating the foundation.
Trump's not going to go in there and establish the same old system of IMF loans and extraction.
No, no, no, that's all the British stuff.
He's not going to do any of that.
Okay.
What he's going to do is set up partnerships with these people to say, we are going to get, we're going to help rebuild them.
They're going to get the lion's share and we're going to take our cut.
And that's a different model than what we've had in the past.
Welcome to today's discussion here on Brighteon.com.
I'm Mike Adams, the founder of Brighteon.
And you know, one of the people that I love to listen to is our guest today, none other than Tom Longo.
And his blog, his website, well, it's gold, goats, and guns.
And I have all three of those at my ranch.
Also, I had my got my goats today.
They were destroying one of my trees with their horn rubbing, got gold and got plenty of guns.
So I can't have a better guest than Tom Longo.
Welcome to the show, Mr. Longo.
It's great to have you on today.
Thank you, Mike.
It's been, it's great.
I have, you know, I do also at many times in my life, I've owned all three of them.
Those things, at this point, I don't have the goats anymore.
I did, I did my penance, 12 years of raising goats in a drought in North Florida.
I'm done.
But hopefully, you know, I'll be able to pass on that knowledge to somebody else in my new neighborhood up here in my up here in Tennessee.
And we'll see.
But yes, I've been like, I don't know about you, but I've been on a gun buying spree watching what's going on in Minnesota.
Like, I'm, I can't buy guns fast enough.
It's, it's kind of scary.
No, thanks for the reminder.
I need to get back to doing that.
I've, I've been so busy doing like AI projects lately, I haven't had time to buy guns or ammo.
So I'm just relying on what I already had.
But yeah, I need to get that going.
So I take it from what you just said there.
You think things are getting pretty topsy-turvy here in 2026.
Do you want to give us your big overview?
Sure.
I mean, somebody asked me at the beginning of the, you know, at the end of last year, they're like, so what's your big, you know, what's the big story for you in 2026?
And I was going to go Kinetic.
I'm like, rolling those dice.
And I'm, you know, I'm, I'm hoping I don't roll a seven.
Like, I, I mean, honestly, I think their only move left on the board, Mike, is to do the, you know, do the quote unquote Civil War color revolution script that they've, you know, have been prepping for a long, long time.
What's been fascinating has been watching Trump and his team push the pace and force them into moves they don't want to make at the wrong time.
And I think that's part that everybody's kind of missing.
And a lot of people on in the in the conservative space are just missing that.
Actually, Trump is pushing on every vector.
And but the thing is, and the reason is because they refuse to admit that the real enemy is Britain and the European Union.
And they keep seeing it's just something else.
It's American imperialism.
It's dollar hegemony.
It's this.
It's that.
It's Trump's ego.
None of that is true.
That's all.
I mean, I hate to say it, but that's just a gross and pathetic British psyop that we've been living with for most of our lives.
And that's where I am on this.
And the more I, and the more I like poke that, you know, the more I, I mean, you know how I am.
I'm, I'm, you know, I'm a chemist and a scientist of heart.
So I come up with a hypothesis.
I test that hypothesis.
I run the data.
I look at the data through all the data through a particular filter and then go, what hypothesis does this fit?
What, what conclusions can you draw from this data?
And I can only come up with one because it's the only one that has any predictive value, right?
Because the only point about putting a hypothesis out there is that one, you can try and falsify it.
And then, two, have it give you some kind of predictive power.
So, in my mind, like the most predictive thing has been this whole argument about call it Davos, call it the city of London, call it all of the above, right?
They're the enemy, and we've known this since, I mean, they came out of the closet in COVID, and it's just been the same thing for the last six years.
And it gets worse and worse every day.
And when you study the intersection of geopolitics and the financial markets, like I do, it is impossible to argue that this is not, that all of Trump's actions are not aimed at, you know, our closest allies and our special relationship we have with our oldest enemies who are who else?
The people that we declared independence from 250 years ago.
And they're still butthurt about that, by the way.
And they still act like, and they are still very butthurt about that.
Your analysis is very compelling.
And the city of London is the source of so much global evil that has taken place over centuries and continuing to this day.
Not only did they run in large part the Russia collusion hoax against Trump, they also ran a lot of the censorship laundering through the NGOs over to big tech in the U.S. that censored people like myself.
And I've actually sued the DOD.
And yesterday, the DOJ responded to my lawsuit, not in a great way either.
By the way, that's a whole different podcast.
But the British leadership have destroyed or attempted to destroy the lives of many good Americans.
And they are running a massive censorship campaign across Europe right now while pushing escalation of war with Russia.
But Trump is clobbering them financially, culturally.
You want to give us your assessment of what are the odds that the British leadership survives all this?
I don't think they do unless they decide they want to sue for peace.
See, here's the thing, Mike.
This is the hardest part for a lot of people, like myself.
And I used to be one of these people.
I'm not going to like not cop to this, right?
When you wake up one day and you have your political awakening and you realize that the country that you were sold as being your, as being your home, right, wasn't the country that you actually have been living under and living in.
And that all those lofty ideals have just been, you know, words, right?
At least as far as your life of them is concerned, it's easy to get very disillusioned.
And then the problem is, like everything else, you go through the five stages of grief and you get to the acceptance part and then you start looking at it going, hold it.
Is that really what's going on here?
Or have I been gaslit into believing this?
Has my country been betrayed by a structural enemy from within or from without, however you want to put it?
Did we go along with it after part of our part of us go along with it after World War II?
Of course we did.
But when you really go back and you look at the post-World War II Bretton Woods institutions and you look at all of it, it's all very British in its, you know, in its conceit.
And then you start looking at the Euro dollar markets and everything else.
So what happened was over the course of time, we had leadership in the U.S. who, you know, post-JFK getting shot basically rolled over and said, okay, we're all Keynesians now.
We're all globalists now.
We're all going to go, we're all going to do this.
And we're going to suppress the price of gold and suppress the price of silver and all these stories.
They're all part of the same thing.
While we run, while the Federal Reserve takes over the entirety of our economy, while the Euro dollar, offshore dollar system, the Euro dollar system really controls our monetary policy and the Fed is just a convenient scapegoat and in many ways a victim of this entire system.
And then once you kind of accept that, you say, well, has anything changed?
You know, is there something happening that would counter, that would run counter to that?
And if not, well, then, okay, we're, you know, on the road to, you know, serfdom and, you know, 1984 becomes an operating manual and not a warning and all, and all of those things that fuel all of our disillusionment with the, with our home, right?
Great.
But that's not what's happening.
That's not what's happened since 2016, right?
It really, we saw it when they circled the wagons around Ron Paul in 2008 and 2012.
We saw the exact same thing.
Now, Ron was in no position to change anything.
The machine was too, you know, the train was, you know, wasn't going to slow down, quote, Jethro, right?
But where we are today is we have a United States as opposed to just rolling over and playing dead and allowing the globalists to run the table on us and use us as the dumb muscle to enforce their terrible plans around the world.
And their high priest, their real Manchurian candidate was Barack Obama.
And he didn't work for China.
He worked for the city of London.
Or did you miss the fact that he's visited 10 Downing Street about half a dozen times in the last six, the last 12 months?
Now, once you make the assumption that, or once you accept the idea that Trump is different, and then you run that script in your head, you go, okay, well, where's the evidence?
Right.
And what is he actually trying to do?
And that's where I say, okay, we have all of these institutions in the United States that are fundamentally shifting.
My friends over at Promethean Action have now done yeoman's work to popularize a lot of these ideas and make them digestible and make the history digestible in what are phenomenal 15-minute shorts that they do all the time.
I like to say that she's my auntie, Susan, Susan Kokinda.
She's brilliant.
But when you get to that point, you say, okay, maybe there's something different happening and you should embrace that and you should let go of your disillusionment because what's the worst that could happen?
You could be wrong.
And then if you start doing that and you start, well, how can we get out of this?
Well, it's not hard.
All we have to do is stop rolling over and playing dead and saying, we're the United States.
We still have the reserve currency of the world.
We still have the best military in the world.
We still have one of the most dynamic economies in the world, blah, And if we decide to use those things in such a way as to our advantage and to nothing but our advantage, all of a sudden you really expose just how thin and just how fragile this whole global order that we've been asked to accept or been demanded to accept,
the censorship industrial complex, the COVID restrictions, the EU bugs and the climate change, the carbon credits and all this nonsense.
It's all nonsense.
I mean, literally, I can't remember if I'm allowed to curse on the show, so I'll keep it as clean as possible.
It's okay.
People understand.
It really is just all bullshit, right?
So, I mean, give it to you loud and dirty so that it sticks, the whole patent thing.
So that's where I think we are.
And I think it's very clear that that's what's happening because then you watch what Trump does when he engages in such a way, all these old conflicts.
I don't care if it's Israel or Iran, right?
He allows Israel and Iran to have the war that they both said they really wanted.
They beat the crap out of each other, and then he cleaned up the mess and then he walked away.
And everybody's like, it's going to be a hard, it's going to be Afghanistan 2.0.
He's like, no, it's not.
I'm going to, I'm going to fly a B2 wing halfway around the world in the ultimate military logistics flex and bomb Fordow, and no one knew about it.
Oh, and by the way, we're going to nab Nicholas Maduro in a Delta force raid that they didn't have any idea was happening until three minutes and 45 seconds before it actually started happening.
Like, so it was, I, and you're watching this, and then you watch the financial markets.
And Scott Besson has been running a brilliant gold and silver operation, draining operation on the LBMA through the Treasury Department.
You're watching, I mean, in every everywhere, now they're pushing, and they've been pushing since literally the beginning of last year, but forcing all the NGOs to put their dudes on the ground by, hey, let's, hey, let's send ICE in to a money laundering, cartel money laundering operation at a literal laundromat in LA, right?
And then it was a dry climbing business.
And then we watched them spin up, you know, their rent-a-beener mob and, you know, turn it into some like, it was dumb.
It was silly.
But what happened?
We found out where all the dark money was.
We found out who, you know, we started, you know, at that point, they can start tracing all the money flows and whose phones light up and all the rest of it.
And all of a sudden, they've been doing this like all year long, like every little confrontation domestically between Trump, his team, ICE, and/or the FBI, and what I would call the seditious governors, the Gavin Gruesoms and the Tina Kotex and the JB Pritzkers and all those guys.
When you want Tim Waltz, when you watch them operate and they think they're operating with impunity because they're being told by George Soros and all the other horrible people that no, you can't do this is what we're going to do next.
Okay.
And then you're just watching the move counter move and you're like, yeah, but like Trump's got far more resources than you do.
So he's unloaded on them.
So.
Yeah, clearly, clearly, Trump has changed the rules here.
And I love your interpretation and I'm very open to your reinterpretation of some of my concerns.
So let me lay out a couple of concerns about Trump and see what you have to say about them.
And, you know, you're the star of this show, not me.
So we're going to listen to you on this.
So feel free to disagree.
I'm very infuriated about Trump saying we're just going to take Greenland with under no rule of law, no justification, et cetera.
I understand it's an important, you know, control the routes, have the over-the-horizon radar for Russian missiles.
I get it.
It's important.
That doesn't mean you can just take it.
And then secondly, the tariffs are driving me bonkers.
I'm an importer.
I run a business in America.
I import herbs from India, for example.
And Trump just slapped another 25% on India by himself with no congressional approval, no oversight, saying, well, India buys things from Iran.
So therefore, another 25%.
And I'm thinking, wait a minute, did the American people vote for one guy to control all international trade rules?
So am I wrong about either of those two things?
And if so, how would you correct my thinking on that?
Okay, well, the first thing is first is that we have to use what leverage we have and access to our markets is what we have to do.
I'm not, I'm still a free market kind of guy.
I am watching, though, the idea that unfettered free trade in a world with central banks and a world with hyper-financialization of assets and hyper-financialization of all the commodity collateral of the world.
And that's the real estate and the gold, the silver, the oil, the copper, the natural gas, all of it, which is which is the whole British system.
Like, this is why I'm willing to, you know, give the Federal Reserve a pass for certain activities at this point in time.
Do I like the Fed?
No.
Do I want it reformed?
Yes.
Do I want it back to a minimum to its pre-banking act of 1935 version?
Absolutely.
When you live in a world like this, it's like, do you believe in open borders, Tom?
Well, no.
Well, yes, in theory, but not with a welfare warfare state and other central banks and hostile actors and other psychopaths running around and trying to, you know, trying to invite the world, invade the world.
I'm not going to play that game.
If Global Homo was out there doing their thing, no, I'm not for open borders.
Like this is very self-consistent with, you know, with Rothbard at the end of his life, to be honest with you.
So the tariffs and the whole concept of tariffs are meant as a leverage point, right?
They are meant to, they are a negotiation tool, right?
Do I think that he's going to keep these new punitive tariffs on for very long?
No.
He's pushing to get a, to get a favorable outcome in Iran so that the people of Iran can choose their government.
The situation on the ground in Iran is very complicated.
We could probably spend a half an hour on it to try and explain what's going on, right?
So let's just make it simple.
There are at least three factions on the ground.
One is British-backed.
One is a kind of Trumpian, let's get rid of all the devil's legions.
If you're a fan of my friend Ian Berling game, understand, get rid of the IRGC and the access resistance, who probably at minimum have the theocracy, which is the overstructure of the entire of the entire Iranian society.
I have a podcast coming out with Joaquin Forays on my channel and a couple of, I'll have it out by the end of the week where Joaquin goes through this, where the theocracy itself is not really the important part.
It's actually the technocracy that Iran has underneath it that's actually more important.
So really in many ways, what Trump is doing is trying to disempower and destroy certain verticals within Iran's technocracy, the IRGC being a major one, and then allow the Iranian military and the IRGC to fight it out.
But at the end, the organic faction of Iranian people wanting to live under a new system has to emerge.
But I don't see Trump necessarily looking to put boots on the ground, and though he bloviates about that, he bloviated about this vis-à-vis Venezuela.
Did he do it?
No.
Same thing with Ukraine.
Did he bloviate a little bit about it?
Yes, he did.
Was he ever going to do it?
No, he was not.
Because that's not his style.
And that's not, he understands that he can use leverage, right?
Financial and military leverage and the threat of American intervention to get the outcome that he wants.
When at the end of the day, he and the Ayatollah are, I mean, I think Hakan and Khamenei are not very far apart on this.
Like at the end of the day, I don't see Khamenei as the bad guy.
Per se, I see him as the figure that we're all supposed to hate, right?
Just like Maduro, just like Qaddafi, just like Saddam Hussein, just like Putin, just like this one, just like that one.
They always create, they always spin up a new one.
Basha al-Assad, yada, yada, yada.
I mean, it's as old as the hills.
So tariffs are a mechanism by which to do that.
Okay.
And the American president has a lot more power than we're all used to him actually exercising because he's been bound down by the technocratic state that was put in place by the British and their and their treasonous elements within our government for decades.
Okay.
The balance of power in the United, the separation of powers in the U.S. as they're Operated today, right, are completely out of balance, right?
We have direct elections of senators.
Like the Republic ended in 1913, folks, right?
Because the states are not represented in the legislature, only the people are.
That's a fundamental mismanagement.
That's a fundamental imbalancing of our separation of powers.
The president has been bound down by every third-rate judge in a traffic court in Maryland, along with every, you know, like Humphrey's executive makes him, you know, subservient to his department heads of his executive departments.
Excuse me, he's the executive.
He can fire anybody in the executive branch tomorrow.
He does not need cause.
And yet, somehow, the Supreme Court and the judiciary has told him that he's not allowed to do that.
Excuse me.
Have you read Article 2?
Because I have.
And most of our Supreme Court has read Article 2.
And when they finally rule on Humphrey's executive, it's going to go away.
And you're going to watch him actually use executive power in a way that we squishy libertarian types may not be comfortable with.
But that was what was set up.
That's what the president was empowered to do.
Okay.
And that is to run national defense and run national security.
So now let's move it over to Greenland.
What's going to happen with Greenland?
He's going to buy it.
He's not going to move troops in.
That's all British freaking slop.
That's all you slop.
You know that something is important to these freaking people when it's a non-issue for years, for decades.
And then all of a sudden somebody says, oh, that's a problem.
I want that.
You can't have it.
And then they can like light their hair on fire and they go through the histrionics and everything else.
I'm like, watching the histrionics is your tell that there's something really important that they need there.
And it's not the terry basis and it's not the rare earths.
It's controlling the sea routes in and out of Europe.
But to be clear, because Europe needs that energy, they need Canadia, flappy headland, to continue to be the antipode to American dominance over North America in order to allow the British and the French to continue to control our foreign policy.
Well, the domestic policy.
If America acquired Greenland, and I want to be clear, so do you believe that Trump will succeed in a deal which would consist of what?
Paying every Greenlander an enormous amount of money and then having them vote to leave stopping the territory of Denmark or what?
How would that work?
How about doing, again, what Walking and I talked about yesterday when we recorded that podcast?
Flip the question around.
Why can't?
Why, if we're all NATO members, we're all supposed to be allies.
Why is it that the United States can't have a say in the disposition of Greenland to, you know, why is it solely just Denmark's property and it's inviolate?
Like, why aren't we working together on this?
Why don't we ask that question as opposed to immediately turning and saying, oh my God, the United States is acting in a horrible way?
Like, how about Europe is acting in a horrible way by holding on to an asset and denying the Americans the use of that asset when we're supposed to be in a defensive alliance together?
Makes no sense.
Like, why do the French have territory on the St. Lawrence River?
Right, right.
But well, I am not opposed to Greenland.
And you're asking, and none of it, like, no, at the end of the day, Mike, I'm sorry.
We have always been in a might makes right world.
Yeah.
And the rules-based order has was nothing more than a velvet glove over the iron fist.
And when we were the dumb muscle that they were happy to send out and beat other people over the head with, then it was fine for us to do Mike Makes Right.
True.
For their purposes.
The minute we start doing it for our own purposes and our own defense, all of a sudden we're the bad guys.
We're the ones who are untrustworthy.
Excuse me?
Well, if Greenland, though, if they, and by the way, no one will shed a tear if the British Empire collapses, by the way.
In fact, most of the world will celebrate, but Greenland is...
But how do you get there?
How do you get there without taking Greenland?
I just want to be clear that if the people of Greenland vote to join the United States, then sure, they have the right to do that.
Why not?
And maybe they're going to be incentivized.
I honestly think that Trump can negotiate with Denmark, cleave Denmark away from the rest of NATO and make them a deal they can't refuse.
Okay.
Okay.
but isn't part of that deal the threat of potential military action though also it's like i mean i'm not saying i'm not i'm not saying that geopolitics doesn't you know that i'm not saying this isn't a contract of dehesion situation where it's not it's a lot it's not a lopsided situation Of course, it is.
The United States has the United States doesn't, I wouldn't say it has the right because, look, there is no such thing as international law.
International law is a dock.
Well, Trump agrees with that point.
That's for sure.
I agree with that point.
We're either sovereign nations or we're not sovereign nations.
Yes.
You know, exactly.
Like, he just took us out of 66 friggin, you know, like fake organizations.
I mostly agree with that, too.
Why should we be involved in all these fake fronts?
Yeah.
Well, then, then, then again, those organizations are the way in which quote unquote international law is enforced because they are all, look, no one actually abides by international law when their national interests are at risk.
Everybody wants to play at being subservient or observant of international law.
But at the end of the day, has it restrained anybody's behavior?
Not really.
No.
No.
So let's dispense with the bullshit and let's redraw the maps of the world such that we can get to more people expressing their sovereignty.
And if that means having to do some things that are unsavory to get there, because honestly, what's been done, the original crime was what was set up previously.
It's the aftermath of World War II.
It's the aftermath of World War I.
Okay.
None of these things.
I mean, did we vote for the Federal Reserve?
No.
Did we vote for a direct election of senators?
No.
Did they actually ratify the 16th Amendment?
You and I know for damn well that they did.
Right.
Right.
So at the end of the day, I'm sorry I'm not playing that game anymore.
I live in the world of realpolitic.
This is real politic.
And we're taking the British and the French and everybody else and we're cutting them off from North America.
And the only people upset about this are the globalists.
So then everybody else, you talk to Canadians, you talk to Mexicans.
They're all like, oh my God, please talk to Greenlanders.
Like, please.
Like, Denmark puts no money into Greenland.
Nothing.
They don't do anything for those people.
57,000 people.
We get twice that for a football game between Tennessee and Florida, for Christ's sake.
Well, I mean, you bring up a good point.
Then it wouldn't take that much to incentivize, even if you offered every Greenlander something like $10 million US dollars, which would make them all insane.
The whole thing is $6 billion.
That's $7,000 people, $100,000 a piece, $6 billion.
We fart that.
Yeah, exactly.
That's like a rounding error.
Use the tariff money that that we would collect from India this month for buying Iranian oil.
And, by the way, reason he's going after India is because India refuses to get off the fence about being Brit Britain satrap in the global precious metals market.
Yeah, like they're playing this game where they want to remonetize silver.
And you know they want to re-collateralize silver.
Why?
Because they need to re-collateralize and mobilize all that silver.
Because the remnant of the British empire is uh, desperately short needs to deliver.
How do you think they've been?
These people have been living in their castles.
How do you think they've been living?
And how do you think these banks have been uh, have been functioning, all that?
They all have physical delivery of silver to deliver.
They've been suppressing the price in order to demoralize everyone by keeping the, the price differential between gold and silver weird right on on purpose.
And then you know, the old, the old British system runs, still runs on the pound sterling.
So these people have pledged forward all of their wealth in the form of silver to fund their lifestyle, to fund their this this their, their governments and their NGOS and this and all that stuff.
They're looking to fund all of it.
So if and you've got so like and we want to.
We want to standardize on gold, right?
Clearly, the Chinese want to standardize on gold.
It's so, we're right.
We're right back to the British again trying to play the, the game of play the arbitrage between gold and silver as a means by which to control the uh, to control the world.
If silver keeps, control the value of the dollar sorry right right right okay, and and that's failing.
That effort is clearly failing and and Trump's people did some rather brilliant maneuvers roughly about a year ago.
That really hurt London.
But how close are we?
If silver keeps rising?
What is it 88 plus today?
If silver keeps rising, how close are we to breaking some European banks and financial institutions?
I'm amazed that they're still not, that they haven't broken yet, but what i'm seeing right is a lot of their money coming onto the table.
I think a lot of.
I think there's a lot of old intelligence, asset money and NGO money that was sitting in dark wall, dark bitcoin wallets for a long time.
That that's part of the reason why bitcoin has been getting crushed right, I think there's, that's part of it.
Um, I think that money has been being used to uh, demoralize people in the Fanning and Freddie Trade I think it's silver, I think um, and of course they failed.
And I saw something the other day, Non-us banks on the Comax are short 205 million ounces of silver.
Whoa whoa wait, 205 million.
Yeah, Non-us banks, whose banks are those?
Oh well, I don't know.
Go look at the, not go look at the banks that are, that are on the Comax and that are Non-us.
The Us, because the U.s banks are all now net long, because that's yeah, I think JP Morgan's even got a big physical stash right now, right.
But well yeah, because they're the custodian for us, because they're the, they're the custodian for SLV and Geode, right.
So what's happening?
What's happening here, Mike I?
So I know i've explained.
You've probably watched an interview where i've talked about this, but to the audience, you've got to understand the gold and silver at the, at the, at the core here.
I know I'm kind of just galloping around and doing the Weave.
I understand that.
And it's hard to, there's so much going on.
All these things are connected that it's very difficult.
And I'm not trying to ignore stuff.
I just want to hit a point.
This is a very important point about the gold and silver market.
What we've lived under for the last 50 years has been use of the use of futures where people had or effectively writing paper future contracts for silver and gold that they never intended to take delivery of against people who were writing shorts who never intended to deliver or longs who never intended to deliver.
And it was all just this big paper game, right?
Using LBMA, the COMAX, and SLD and just kind of running a rehypothecating triangle trade.
Now, that trade is breaking down.
But what it did was it conflated the use, the two main sources of demand for gold and silver in the marketplace.
The one is this traditional commodities future of coordinating delivery through time by a price, by price discounting and selling forward, right?
That's what commodity futures are supposed to do.
They're not evil.
That's exactly what they're supposed to do.
You know, producers and consumers can tell each other what they're willing to pay and what they're willing to sell for through time, right?
That's what they're supposed to be for: the physical delivery of metal or natural gas or whatever it is, right?
And then there's the currency speculation aspect to gold and silver trading in particular, because both of them trade as forex payers.
One trades XAG versus USD, and the other one trades in the spot market as XAU versus USD.
They are both currency as well, right?
So those two use cases in the paper-silver circle jerk, for lack of a better term, conflated.
You got to disaggregate them so that you can have commodities futures coordinating physical delivery through price and time and currency speculation.
Those need to be separate markets.
So what's happening is that SLB and GLD, the two gold and silver ETFs, which are basically non-deliverable contracts for difference for the way people would use them in the options market, and they'll use the options market on SLB and GLD as a proxy for currency speculation using gold and silver as the proxy, right?
And they'll use SLD and DLD as the mechanism, which is great because that separates out the currency speculation portion of the demand.
On the other side, you have the commodity futures markets where we can actually just move actual metal around.
And by splitting those two things, you break the LBMA's hold over the value of both not just gold and silver, but the dollar itself, the Chinese yuan itself, the Russian ruble itself.
You change the nature of the collateral within the entire Forex market.
Done it with gold and we're doing it with gold and silver.
Copper is clearly next.
And the final boss for all of this is oil.
We have to do the same thing with oil.
So that's part of what Venezuela is about, partly.
Venezuela is an entire podcast in and of itself, maybe three podcasts, right?
So that's why you have to cut off Europe, and I mean specifically Northern Europe, non-Mediterranean coast Europe.
That would be Germany and the Netherlands and England and France and those guys, not Italy, not Greece, not the Balkans, From access to their traditional colonial colonialist extraction mechanisms of natural resources and controlling them through financialization,
i.e., in the case of gold and silver and other metals, the Canadian banking industry keeping, destroying the profitability of the Canadian mining industry and the Canadian oil industry.
They have to be able to deliver those commodities into the European market.
The Ukraine war was started clearly to go get the Russian assets in the ground, and that's failed.
So now they move their high priest of happy, flappy headland, Mark Carney, back into the role of running Canada or ruining Canada in order to secure that future.
Greenland stops that.
And so while, you know, at the end of the day, this is where we are.
I don't see Trump putting troops on the ground in Greenland.
I don't think he needs to.
I think what he's going to do is prove that NATO is a freaking lie.
And he's going to use it as a means, but he's going to use it by which, as a means by which to dictate terms to NATO as to what the new rules are.
NATO, of course, is now the members like the UK and France and Germany are all screaming about kicking the United States out of NATO.
Now, that's a tail risk.
And the reason that's a tail risk is because the United States, unlike the way most people in the space would argue, the United States is the only thing actually restraining NATO from going to war with Russia.
Yeah, you're right.
You're right.
But these actions would probably end NATO, I would think.
I mean, in the long run, yes.
France doesn't want to be a member of NATO.
They never wanted to be.
Macron is already talking about it.
He wants to be the arms dealer of Europe.
He wants to build the European army.
Fine.
That's fine.
I don't care.
So let Greenland be the thing that breaks NATO.
Phenomenal.
Yeah, yeah.
Okay.
Let's watch what Trump does next when he goes to Davos.
Because when he goes to Davos next week, I am 100% with my auntie Susan on this.
He's going to offer them terms of surrender the same way he went to the King of England and offered them terms of surrender last year.
All right.
Well, let's take this to the next step, though.
If Trump, if Greenland wants to join the United States, okay, they take a vote.
They want to become the 51st state.
That'll be fun.
No, no, no, no.
Greenland does not get to be a state.
Oh, okay.
Oh, it's a protection.
Okay.
Sorry.
I don't even want Alberta to be a 51st state.
And Alberta actually could, I think Alberta needs to be a territory for about 10 or 12 years.
I was going there next, actually.
But wouldn't Trump need Quebec and Nova Scotia?
Alberta is a separate category for energy and so on.
But what about the eastern side of Canada?
I mean, if you're going to control from Greenland all the way down.
I mean, honestly, Mike, I don't think anybody other than the Laurentian elites actually are going to have any control in Canada.
I mean, dude, we might be at war with Canada in a year.
I'm not kidding.
Because Canada represents an actual, honest to God, threat to American national security.
They always have, by the way.
And this is the problem.
We tend to look at them.
That's why I'm getting really angry.
Look, it's funny.
I make fun of the Canadians, even though I love them.
And I do.
I love my hockey and I love all of my Canadian patrons.
And I've got hundreds of them.
And they all agree with me on this.
These people need to be removed from power.
We would like the United States to come in and liberate us.
Stop that.
Looking at this as invasions and start looking at these things as liberations.
Same thing as what's going on in Iran.
Iran is a liberation from all of this British-French Perfidy.
Well, it's because I'm trying to, you know, at least not drop an F-bomb.
Okay.
That's what's going on here.
It's the same thing with Greenland.
Greenland needs to be liberated.
Well, but Canada.
Liberated.
Like these are, and then we're not, I don't need them to all be members of the United States.
I don't need to, you know, I don't, I mean, I don't even think Trump cares.
Like, they can be their own country, but they can't be crown territory anymore.
Okay.
This narrative, though, that we're conquering you to liberate you.
I mean, this is the narrative of every conqueror through history.
You know, if you're if you're occupied, our military has new bases there.
Have we occupied that?
Has we occupied Venezuela?
No, but we did liberate it.
Well, not until we liberate the oil rigs and the mines with our soldiers on.
It's going to be a process, but getting rid of Maduro, putting Russia on notice, putting China on notice, kicking the British out, making the deals with the oil companies.
What you're doing is you're creating the foundation for the first thing you're doing is you're still basically kind of legitimizing to the Venezuelan people that their governmental, however they want to live is going to be fine with us.
Okay.
Ultimately, we got rid of Maduro.
We have him in custody, protective custody, as far as I'm concerned.
And then you leave the existing structure in place.
Let them, you know, at some point, Del Codriguez is going to stand for elections and the Venezuelan people are going to have the big boot that was on their neck lifted.
It's going to be perfect.
No.
Is it going to be easy for them to reestablish order?
No.
It's not going to be easy.
Like, look at what Malay has been doing, has had to do down in Argentina.
He's a perfect example.
And a guy that I was very, very skeptical of.
Okay.
Very skeptical of Malay.
Look at what's happening across the Sahel region of Africa.
Look at what's going on at like places like Burkina Faso and others.
Trump's not going to go in there and establish the same old system of IMF loans and extraction.
No, no, that's all the British stuff.
He's not going to do any of that.
Okay.
What he's going to do is set up partnerships with these people.
We're going to help rebuild them.
They're going to get the lion's share and we're going to take our cut.
And that's a different model than what we've had in the past.
Isn't that the Chinese model, actually?
That's what China does.
The Chinese have a similar model.
I think it's a little bit more extractive than that, but I'm not, I don't think it's very different.
I don't think it's very different.
Yeah.
I mean, that's not that hard.
Like, look, I think if you look at what Trump is trying to do for the United States, it's very similar to what Putin did when he took over Russia, right?
He had no Putin's, it's not wholly analogous, but it's similar.
We have oligarchs.
We've got all these factions.
We've got all these people.
They're all going to make money.
There's a lot of people in America who are really butt hurt and want them all to like, you know, for all the terrible things that our corporate overlords have done to us and that we want to like, you know, drag through the streets and tarden feathers.
They got news for you.
That's not going to happen.
These people are going to be able to keep their billions, most of it.
They're going to have to give some of it back, but some of it on the table.
No different than what Putin did.
It's like, look, you're going to get to keep everything, but, you know, you pay your taxes, you stay out of politics, you do your thing.
Well, same system is literally being going to start happening here in the United States.
It's somewhat what Xi has done in China.
China's far more complicated than that.
I don't want to like, I don't want to further complicate the conversation, but you're not wrong to say that that's kind of what the Chinese are trying to do.
Now, you want to make partners out of these people.
You do not want to saddle them with excessive debt and Leverage because they'll never make any money.
That's although that has been the British model forever.
That has been the British, the British model, the French model, the Portuguese, the Dutch, the Anglo-Dutch model.
You're right.
Absolutely.
And for all the gold and silver, long-suffering gold and silver mining share holders in the audience.
Oh my God, did you ever think that you were going to make any money?
Did you look at the balance sheets of these companies?
Did you look at their debt?
Did you look at their debt to equity ratios?
Did you look at the round of fundings?
And how many times did you have to get crammed down and do another capital raise and blah, And the bank is short against you.
And then they're sitting on the price of silver and they're running a paper circle jerk game against you and running out the clock on you so that this poor company that finally does, when they finally do get a mine into production, the first, you know, the first 75% of the life of mine is already pledged to pay back the freaking loans.
Yeah.
You as a shareholder didn't make any money unless you timed the thing properly because you're because your name is Rick Ruhl, who's by I and I take nothing away from Rick.
He's brilliant at using at the using the timing to get in properly.
But you know, but Rick is able to do that because he always goes for a warrant.
Like he's not dumb.
He knows what the score is.
He knows how this works.
And so I mean, like, what I'm getting at is that the entire way we finance commodity and capital investigator in the future is going to start changing.
It is already changing.
Trump is making partners out of our trade partners who he forced trade deals on to and put tariffs on in order to have them come in and invest in the United States.
Okay.
Okay.
And that's, and then eventually the tariffs will go away because they won't be necessary, or there'll be a minimal cost, seven, you know, five to seven percent.
And that's what's going to fund our government.
And then we're not going to have to pay income taxes anymore.
I don't think those tariff numbers replace the 3 trillion of federal income taxes.
No, it does when you it does when you get rid of the 1.6 to 2 trillion dollars worth of fraud.
Yeah, well, there you go.
Yeah, that we got to slash government by some significant amount.
But I'm glad you mentioned 10% and 10% work head workforce reduction, headcount reduction in the federal government in 2025 alone.
10%.
That's what he did.
They did it.
10%.
I mean, I'm sorry.
It's true.
Okay.
It's not going to stop tomorrow.
It's like, you know, I got to go to 90% tomorrow.
What do you want?
Look at Mad National, but if we could do 10% of guns, right?
If we could do 10% a year.
Well, let's see what 2026 is.
Yeah.
Yeah.
Exactly.
But domestically, okay, answer this question for me.
And this is all really fascinating.
But I believe the reindustrialization of America is going to be way more challenging than what Trump imagines because we don't have the work ethic.
We don't have the skill set that we had post-World War II.
You know, China is a nation of engineers, as Catherine Austin Fitz says, and the U.S. is a nation of lawyers.
Like we don't, we don't have the people to run the factories.
Now, Trump can bring factories, build the factories, you know, Samsung, Taiwan Semiconductor, build the factories.
Great.
Who's going to run it?
I think becoming an electrician is not that hard.
I think becoming a steam fitter.
If you can't agree, like not being a steam fitter is not that hard.
I'm dead serious.
Like Mike Rowe is out there getting these kids trained every day.
Yeah, we haven't a need for them.
Sure.
Like they already have in place.
If FYI, anybody listening to this wants to become an electrician or a tile guy or whatever, you can go to Home Depot tomorrow and they'll get you the basic certificate to get you started.
So you think we can retrain, by the way, is a Trump program.
What's that?
You think we can retrain the workforce?
Why can't we?
Well, it's because we have generations.
Do we just believe that we can't?
Like, seriously, have you?
I'm telling you, I'm talking to people every day who are in their mid-40s looking for an opportunity to go and actually do some meaningful work.
But are they willing to work in factories?
Absolutely.
Really?
They're willing to work for anything where they make money.
My daughter would rather, my daughter's got a, has got a paper, a paper pushing job, a good entry-level job at, for example, at UF, labeling samples and doing, you know, and doing that and doing very important work for the people whose, you know, whose medical care it matters, right?
It matters that she does good work.
Yeah.
She's going to become an electrician tomorrow.
It's not hard.
Like, I just, I think we, again, Mike, this is again, this idea, this, this learned helplessness or this learned obsolescence.
I think there's a way too much bearishness here.
Like, if you want to go out, if people see the point of going out and getting the job, they will go out and get the job.
But if the job doesn't pay enough to cover their basic costs, then they're not going to go.
Sure.
Right.
Right.
So, what we have to, so what he's doing is: look, here's one for you.
I saw this the other day.
Household wealth in the United States in 2025 rose by 7.1% in 2025, in one year, 7.1%.
But not evenly distributed, that's for sure.
Oh, of course not.
It's never going to be even, right?
It's never evenly distributed.
But if you look at what he's trying to do in terms of rejiggering the tax policy, rejiggering the depreciation rules for small businesses and the full expensing for capital plant equipment and all this stuff.
If it starts there, and then the jobs start to come, and then the workforce will get retrained.
And look, at the end of the day, either you'll take the nose ring out and wash out the purple hair dye and go get a job, or you can sit around all day and be resentful and wait for the next call from George Soros for $20 an hour to go protest the demon Trump, or you can get a job.
There are jobs out there.
And they all know.
I want to ask you about.
Okay, point taken.
I want to ask you about the protest because you mentioned earlier that Trump is forcing leftists and Democrats into moves at a more accelerated schedule than what they probably planned on.
Doesn't it play right into Trump's hands if the left really starts an armed insurrection at this point, you know, to try to attack ICE agents more violently than Trump just says, you know, insurrection act time.
And they're trying to force him into that move so that then the governor, then the seditious governors can all call him a tyrant and lark that they care and all the rest of it.
Trump has already showed you what it looks like.
He's already, he's already, what's the word I'm looking for?
He's already trial ballooned and already tested, beta tested what it looks like when they do the rent the beaner mob out in LA last summer.
Or now they're doing, and then he turned right, he turned right around.
What's the first thing he did?
He nationalized the state guard.
He sent in the Marines.
And guess what?
He took zero political pushback for it.
None, zero.
The only people who complained about it were the traders in Congress.
Right.
The American people were like, more of that.
Now, he since then hasn't done that, but he knows that he can get away with it, right?
Because he did it.
He put the governors on notice.
Hey, dudes, you think you're going to be able to like nationalize or you're going to be able to move against national assets like this?
No, I can call these people in whenever I want.
The Supreme Court, the only kind of loss he took from the Supreme Court was that the Supreme Court said, Look, dude, you can't do it that way.
You got to go.
You got to, you know, you got to just declare the Insurrection Act and invoke it and this move the military in.
Okay.
Again, we are.
Mike, here's the thing, Mike.
I think the better way, in order for everybody to understand my perspective on this a little bit more, is the following.
We're at war.
We've already lost the country.
Country's gone.
You want to get it back?
You got to go to war.
You're in a war.
And so you're not on the verge of, oh my God, it could be a civil war.
Oh, we could lose the country if we lose the midterms.
No, We've already lost the country.
We lost it during the Biden hunt.
And now we're fighting to get it back.
Now, when you're fighting for your home, do you have a martial mindset or do you have a lawyer's mindset?
And I think that if you reframe it that way and you stop, and we all, this is the royal you.
This is not you personally.
This is the royal you for the audience.
If you reframe the concept of war, which it is at this point in time, war is not being fought by state actors.
It's not America versus the British.
Line up the armies and fight it out.
That's not what's going on here.
We're not doing that.
We have non-state actors who do not respect political borders, do not respect sovereignty, running massive financial and logistical armed, organized crime networks around the world, killing and kidnapping people, subjugating them, enslaving them, and everything else in multiple different ways.
And at that moment in time, when that's the state of war, we are in a state of war all the time.
In order to finish this job or stop the war, you're going to have to fight it like it's a war.
Now, you can do so right up into and including the legal limit to do so, that the president is allowed to do so.
What 2025 was all about was Trump establishing, re-establishing the limits of Article II executive power.
And he's walked right up to the line multiple times, and sometimes he's walked over it a little bit.
Yeah, okay, let's then he gets slapped back in.
Fine, you need to know where the line is.
So you don't know where this line is.
Yeah, I trump around.
I think everybody's a little bit uncomfortable with the fact that, oh, by the way, the American president has a ridiculous amount of power.
Well, he's exercising that power very aggressively internationally, but in my opinion, love your response on this.
He's failing to exercise that power domestically.
So why do we still not have the arrests of Clapper and Comey and Fauci for that matter?
Right.
What's going on?
And the traitors, the obvious traitors who stole the 2020 election.
And it's, and it's, and I agree that at certain point, he's going to have to start making those moves, but it's going to have to be, you know, it's like everything else.
I, I, I, I share the frustration.
I really, really do.
I do.
I want to see these people like, you know, um, indicted and tarred and feathered and, you know, hung over the Washington reflecting pool and then fed to dogs?
Like, of course.
Like, who doesn't?
Right.
And I'm like, I mean, and I'm not kidding.
Like, that's what I want to say.
I don't know about you, but that's what I want to say.
But that is the end of the process, frankly.
Okay.
If you fix all the other things where you're fixing the society first and you're fixing the fraud and you're stopping the outflow of the money, if you stop the theft, because if you stop the flow of money, then you can it's triage.
You're trying to stop the bleeding so that you can actually have a society so that you can start winning.
We're not going to win at the legal level.
They've got the legal stuff down.
If you want to get Comey, Brennan, Obama, the goal is Obama.
Yeah, right.
The goal is, the goal is to get the king to abdicate and tear down, it's not just to abdicate, for the king to dissolve parliament in the UK, okay, and restore the proper order of things.
There's many, there are a lot of big things that have to happen.
And then all these other people will eventually either go to jail or they won't or you know, whatever.
Like Obama, he's going to get Obama.
And if you're going to go after Obama, it's got to be airtight and it's got to be at a point when you've solidified the and stabilized the society and the country to the point where, yeah, icing on the cake, and we got Obama and Hillary.
And they all know they're caught.
Now you use the fact that they are caught as the means by which to get the legislative agenda passed that will actually fix the country.
The thing that has really, really impressed me in terms of how they've operated, and I, you know, look, three weeks ago, I was like, things look pretty, pretty grim, right?
And I'm not kidding.
I was very, I mean, not, I mean, I usually come out and try and do my best to say, okay, here's the good stuff and here's the problems and everything else.
And but privately, you know, you game plan out all the way these things can go wrong.
And I'm not trying to say I don't look at those things.
I do.
I look at them very seriously.
So, you know, this time last month, right before Christmas, yeah, things look pretty crappy.
Not going to argue, not going to lie.
I said, well, let's give it 30 to 60 days.
Let's see what he does when he comes out in 2026.
All of the, so as they're uncovering, or now, or not as they're uncovering, as they're informing everybody, the extent to which the Somali fraud in Minnesota was, right?
They knew about this back in July, by the way.
Of course.
Haspatell the other day and said, you know, we were in Minnesota, you know, July.
We knew exactly what was going on, but Trump held it all back until a particular moment.
Because at the same time, now he's got all the smurping numbers on all the senators.
The $63 million for this guy and the $20 million, Lindsey Graham, and Amy Flobuchar and this one and that one and everybody else.
At some point, that's real money.
That's real leverage.
And that's when everybody's manila envelope quotient, as I like to put it at their MEQ, enters the conversation.
What matters now is you won't go to jail, but you're going to vote for this.
This just this morning, they put out their latest budget reconciliation bill, the things they want in the new budget reconciliation bill in the House.
It's fascinating.
It's more, it's even more of what we were hoping for.
It's getting rid of capital gains tax on your house sale if you're a boomer and you're selling it to a first-time homebuyer, for example.
That's a bigger one.
Okay?
Like, that's huge.
Like, there's a whole laundry list in there of great things.
And how are they going to get that one through?
The same way they got the one big beautiful bill through.
Okay.
And there's probably is the one big bill.
Great, in many ways it is.
In other ways it's, yeah, it's not enough.
Okay fine, it also doesn't fully fully um fund the entire government.
There's still plenty of the government, of our government, running under Biden rules because our congress has not passed any of that.
So we've got another issue here, the all the health care stuff, all the, you know, all the the help, the Obamacare subsidies.
He wants to distribute that to the people and let them argue for their, you know, negotiate for their own health insurance.
Reforming Obamacare without actually having to do any of the hard you know what I mean.
Like, all of this is getting done and I think that he so he's using all of these things in order to um get the leverage he needs to get Congress to pass the legislative agenda that's necessary remember they only passed five freaking pieces of legislation in 2025 right right, but this, okay.
So this leverage uh, which apparently he's getting more and more leverage over the current members of Congress.
But, of course, the clock is ticking because the midterms are coming up and then the swear-ins are roughly a little under a year from now.
So Trump's got basically 12 months to make or break his future and his plan for America.
Yeah, the country, so not just Trump, it's actually the country.
What do you, what do you think is likely to happen right now?
Let's be honest, the, the Trump, doesn't have the same support base that he had, you know, a year ago.
He doesn't.
There's a lot more people now independent.
Yeah yeah okay yeah, okay.
What do you think is likely to happen?
I just don't buy it.
I just don't buy it.
I really I don't, I really don't.
I think that there are lies, damn lies statistics, polling and British polling.
Yeah, I don't believe polling in that order and that order of crappy data.
Well, and the Democrats haven't given America any better option, that's for sure.
Democrats still suck, like always and, and all Trump has to do is turn up the heat on these people yeah, and he'll hand everybody back.
And let's clean up the voting rolls and let's, and let's get true, and let's get Congress to actually pass voter integrity.
What do you think Maduro is all about?
Is that going to happen?
Are we going to get rid of the black box voting machines?
I think it's already done.
Well, but you don't think the Dems can rig the elections in their own districts?
No, I don't, not to the same rate, not to the same level, but before.
Because this because Venezuela was the was ground zero for a lot of what was going on.
Yes i've, that's all i'm told about.
Yeah that's, that's a lot.
No argument we've got.
We've got that one um.
You clean up the voter rolls and get rid of the um.
You know the dead people voting and all the illegals voting and all this, and you deport all these people and you get rid of them.
And you, you know you.
This is part of the problem.
I'm not saying it's easy.
I know Tom, Tom Fitney's cleaning up voter rolls too, his organization, Tom Fishing.
Yes, Tom Fitten's a great guy.
So yeah, cleaning that stuff up.
We have the problem I.
I ran over this from my patrons the other day in my, in my market report that I do for them every wednesday.
Oh, you want to plug that too.
By the way, how do people become one of your patrons?
It's Patreon Slash GOLD, Goats AND GUNS.
Just look me up, you'll find me.
It's not that gold you can find.
You can find it.
There's a link right on the website.
There's a.
You know.
You can find it on my, on my twitter profile, you can.
You know, I also post all the market reports as twitter posts when they come out.
So you know, if you're interested boom, you know you can.
You can watch, you can sign up, watch one.
It's only four dollars a month, is it's like it's not even all that that much money?
Um, you waste more on a candy bar at this point than or or a bad cup of, or a burned cup of coffee from Starbucks than you know.
But when I was saying in the market reports the other day, I was going over um some statistics and remember you know, you and I both we have that background um Polls in and of themselves have very, very, I would say, generous error bars on them.
This poll is a blunt.
It's got a, you know, and then they wave their hands and they make some, they make some arguments and they, and they slap a plus or minus 4% on it or 3% or whatever the hell it is.
That's already your noise level, right?
For whatever the number is.
Everybody loves the number, but they forget that the poll, that, you know, that every number from, so they say 51% of the people are unhappy with the way Trump is doing blah.
Okay, fine.
That's great.
Well, first, you've got the bias of the question itself and what it implies.
And people like to answer questions honestly.
So then you can bias the result that way.
Then there's going to be, you know, 3% to 4% worth of plus or minus on that.
So they say 51%, that means anything from 47% to 55% is noise.
It's got to be higher than that or lower than that.
Then there's the other problem.
And then, will that affect how you vote?
Polls do not matter if they do not correlate to a predict a mechanism by which you can predict how people are going to vote, right?
Yes.
A poll in and of itself means nothing.
It's just data.
But if that data cannot be used to then create a predictive model about how people are going to vote in the future and what that's going to look like, it doesn't mean anything.
Now, here's the thing: if you have all this data in the voting data in the past that we've had, and the pollsters are all out there, even if they're like doing God's work in the process, they're all on the up and up and they're all squeaky clean and their methodology and everything else.
They still have the fundamental problem.
And the fundamental problem is that all of this is built on the assumption that our elections are approximately at best on the best of days, 0.5% accurate, right?
Meaning, there's about a half percent worth of error, be it, you know, this, be it mishandling or localized corruption or whatever the sources of error are.
And there's a bunch of them, and they're all kind of small and they propagate out to about half percent.
Here's the problem.
And we know this.
For important elections, the error is more like 5% to 10%.
Right?
There's stuff in ballots with 250,000 ballots in a House race.
That's a 30% error right there.
Yeah, I mean, in swing states, the Democrats made sure.
Well, again, both the Republicans are just as freaking 30.
So don't kid yourself.
They all freaking cheat.
My point is the pollsters' methods are predicated on the lie of what their theory of action is, what their theory of outcome is.
The poll means nothing if it's based on the, if they structure their poll based on trying to figure out how people are going to vote in an election where they can just cheat and cheat a lot more than that source of error, so that their 4% error in their poll plus their 0.5% error in the election itself, that gives you an error bar.
Some of the squares, take the square root of the sum of the squares, that's your error bar, right?
Basic everyday an error analysis.
Well, what if the election is actually 5% or 7% and the pollsters are all using that as a means by which to connect and create a model for themselves of how to poll.
Then the whole thing is nothing but a complete and utter disinformation campaign.
It's a feedback loop of bad data.
Yeah.
It's a feedback loop of bad data.
Exactly.
And it starts to look like medical data.
Yeah, exactly.
So it's looking like vaccine data or whatever.
So at the end of the day, I would tell everybody, it's being used to gaslight you into believing something that isn't necessarily true.
Okay.
Most of the people in this country, if we were to clean up the voting rolls, we would actually get to see what the people, how they actually want to, if they would actually be able to express themselves honestly, everybody's elections now would look like Florida's.
Have you noticed that once they cleaned up the voter rolls in Florida and once they cleaned up the voting process and standardized it across all 67 counties in Florida, that Florida can count 30 million votes in like an hour?
Yeah.
And oh, by the way, and then we found out that Florida is like 60, 40 red and not purple.
Yeah, that's probably true for much of California as well.
Right.
And Texas and Massachusetts and Connecticut and New York and this is the this is the point.
They have to keep pounding you over the head with splitting and it's not working.
And every day I listen to these people.
Like, who are you working for?
Are you?
I mean, I look at some people and I'm like, do you just have stock in polymarket?
Yeah.
But I'm not convinced yet.
I mean, we still don't have nationwide voter ID, not even close.
The states won't allow it.
We still have black box voting machines.
Ballot stuffing, ballot mueling, all of those things are still going to go on.
And we still have mail-in ballot printing like crazy in the blue areas.
That's been solved.
I think what's really going to be interesting is whether or not Trump then turns around and declares a national emergency around the elections themselves and stashes military at every freaking polling place in America.
I've talked about the same scenario, and I think the military has to count the votes.
It's the only way we're going to have an honest election.
I think that that is very, very possible.
If Congress doesn't do its job, the executive will.
And the way to justify the troops counting the votes is to have a big national emergency leading up to the election day.
Or just the fact that Congress refuses to do its job, right?
Yeah.
Trump can declare a national emergency around this already because he has all the data.
He has all proof that they stole the 2020 election.
I firmly believe that that is continuing, is going to continue to dribble out, if not hit us over the head like a bombshell.
If I have to make a prediction here, Mike, they're going to time.
I don't really like to make predictions anymore.
I'll make a prediction for you.
We're going to find out just what they did in the 2020 election in the next 90 days.
I think you're right.
I think you're right.
Or some are by later.
I think every bit of it is all going to come out.
I think you're right.
And he's going to do fireside chats and cabinet meetings and the whole nine yards.
And he's going to lay it all out for the people.
And he's going to say, and that's why we will have the military at every polling station in America on the night of the midterms to ensure that we have an honest vote.
No mystery water leaks at three in the morning and all of it.
And there's not going to be any more bringing boxes of mail and ballots in, and there's not going to be any of this nonsense.
And it's all going away.
We have an election on election night.
I mean, this is why what I just said about Florida is the key.
This is.
And we can get the thing done in a day.
Okay.
And then that would give Trump at least two more years to pursue the international agenda.
He would wind up with a, he would wind up with a majority in the House that would be so big and probably pick up seats in the Senate that would be so massive that it would be like FDR rolling the Republicans for 40 years.
Right, right.
All right.
Well, we did not survive this.
And the Democrats aren't doing themselves any favors either right now.
I mean, they have nothing to offer America.
They're in burn it to the, they know they can't win.
So now they're in burn it to the ground mode.
That's right.
That's why you're seeing Mark Carney crash out the way he's crashing out.
That's why you're seeing Kier Starmer in England.
They're all all the globalists are in Joker mode.
Let's just burn it all to the ground and try and prove to people that people suck.
Yeah.
Go back to what go back.
All right.
Do me a favor, folks.
Rewatch the Dark Knight and make the Joker into Davos.
Yeah.
Okay.
And you'll see the story right in front of your eyes.
And that's what you're fighting.
Now, how do you deal with that guy?
I don't know.
Well, me personally?
Me personally, I'm not allowed to say because we're on YouTube.
So there you go.
No, we are.
I am permanently banned from YouTube.
Okay, cool.
Then we're not on YouTube.
Then we pop two in the back of his head and we'd be done with it.
Whose head?
But the Joker.
The Joker.
Okay.
You deal with that.
You deal with that guy by dealing with that guy.
Well, maybe that's about what happened.
He wouldn't give a second thought to murdering you.
That's true.
So I want to be a lifeguard for the gene pool.
Okay.
Well, Tom, I greatly appreciate your analysis.
You've given me a little bit more hope, perhaps.
I was feeling pretty frustrated about some of the recent things that were going on.
Thank you for some additional explanation.
Tell people how they can follow you and reach you and also your Twitter handle or X.
Sure.
My Twitter handle, because I like to dead name things when I can and be as unpolitically correct as possible is TFL1728.
And you can follow, you know, you can hit the blog at tomalwongo.me.
You can sign up with the Patreon at Patreon slash gold, goats, and guns.
We have podcasts I do infrequently whenever the spirit moves me and I need and I feel like I've got somebody on the hook that who has something I really need to find out about.
And I really do recommend the podcast in that respect because I think it really is an all signal, no noise kind of thing.
I'd rather do one podcast a month than do 50 that aren't any good.
So that's the way I do it.
Well, all your podcasts like it.
So what's special about 1728 that is part of your username?
Oh, God.
You know, THX 1138 is the first George Lucas film.
So TFL are my initials.
So 1728.
Well, you have 17 is my favorite number.
And you do the thing where you're like, he does, he is a trans all the characters in that movie have a, if you go through the castle, I'm very geeky about this.
They all have like a weird pattern within their number.
It's not, it's not a big deal.
17 is my favorite number.
So 1728.
It's not a year that something special.
Yeah, yeah, no.
I think Greenland founded right around 1728.
No, no, no.
I'm not that.
I wasn't that geopolitically hip when I put that one together.
Okay.
Like 1728, it also happens to be the distance of the power generators in the Battle of Hoff in the Empire Strikes Factory.
That's how much of a geek I am.
And the handle stuck.
I should have actually just gotten one and got my name ages ago, but I'm stubborn.
So there it is.
So honestly, Joel Malazzi from the showrunner from Stargate will really appreciate finding out where my handle came from.
I think we're such bike.
It's just not funny.
Well, and we're also, you and I are both kind of lab geeks too.
And I got to tell you, I'm about to go take a look.
We're finally nailing down our dioxide testing sample prep procedure to get the lipids out of the freaking samples so that we can get the sensitivity on the dioxins.
And it's the lipid removal step that is the hardest thing in the world.
I don't doubt it.
And I am not an organic chemistry, not organic chemist in any way other than I understand the basis.
I understand the basic chemistry of straight chain hydrocarbons, i.e. oil.
Because I was a UP-vis spectroscopist for 20 years and then I got into electrolysis, you know, electrolysis plating and metallurgy and all that.
Yeah, that's what I did for a while.
I mean, I have a, you know, I did, I did a, I did a big, I did a five-year project in a nickel boron company, nickel boron startup.
Oh, that's right.
I have you to thank for the reason my AR-15 doesn't jam.
If you have a fail-zero-I do.
I have many.
Are you kidding me?
You have a fail-zero?
Yeah.
That's my, that's my coding.
That's your, that's your coding.
It's like Teflon.
Yes, it is.
I mean, and it's like really, really hard Teflon.
Yeah.
And all you have to do to clean your gun is go, all right, it's clean.
I know.
Even a direct impingement AR with your metals, it never jams, never jams.
It's amazing.
And you get and you get better pressure because it's and you get better cycling because the natural lubricance of the coding and everything else.
Absolutely.
No, I run the 300 blackout with the bolt carrier group of fails here.
I have my CZ85 combat up in the up off camera.
And I had it played before I left, before I got, you know, before I got laid off, basically, you know, just at the end of the day, we ran out of money and I was the future products guy and there was no future products.
So that was the end of it.
Well, no, no, yeah, but yeah, and sadly, we also didn't, you know, like a lot of, like a lot of companies, like a lot of startups, we wound up, you know, it was a, it was a tough time.
I can talk about it now, but yeah, it was, it was tough.
Of course, yeah.
You know, all my stock options were worth nothing by the time it was all done.
So I got to do a really cool job.
I got the, I have a great story to tell.
And I know, and I learned an off, a ton about hydrogen generation catalysts and plating and this and maybe a better chemist and maybe a better analyst in every way.
So it was a great amazing.
Well, well, thank you, Tom, for your contributions to the world.
And thank you for what you have offered us here today.
Really appreciate your analysis.
And we'll talk again soon.
Just have a great rest of your day.
Thank you, Mike.
And thanks for the invite.
It was good catching up with you.
You too.
Best to everyone.
Okay.
Thank you, Tom.
And thank you, all of you for watching.
There you go.
Tom Luongo, everybody.
Gold, goats, and guns.
And yes, he really is a high-level chemist as well.
We have him to thank for why our rifles don't jam.
So all-around good guy.
That's awesome.
Be sure to check out more interviews at brightion.com and you are free to share this interview.
You can repost it if you want.
Put your comments below the video.
And hey, you know, pray for a positive outcome for America and for humanity at the same time.
And just add all this to your stack of things you're going to consider.
And, you know, pray for the best outcome possible.
Help make it possible.
Thank you for watching today.
I'm Mike Adams.
Take care.
Most commercial laundry and dishwasher detergents contain toxic chemicals.
Try our chemical-free laundry and dishwasher detergent powders for a clean, safe, and healthy home.