Whitney Webb On Jeffrey Epstein's Connection With Elon Musk & Bill Clinton | PBD Podcast | Ep. 270
PBD Podcast Episode 270. In this episode, Patrick Bet-David is joined by Whitney Webb, Adam Sosnick and Vincent Oshana.
0:00 - Start
1:59 - Whitney Webb on Investigating Jeffrey Epstein
6:58 - Shocking Revelation About JP Morgan and Epstein Revealed
14:48 - Google Founder Sergey Brin Linked To Epstein
20:08 - What's Elon Musk's Connection To Jeffrey Epstein?
41:50 - Shocking Revelation About Bill Clinton and China's Past Revealed
57:15 - Whitney Webb Reveals Shocking Story About The Death of Martin Luther King
1:05:34 - Why The Deep State Hates Trump And Kennedy Family
1:27:24 - Will Politicians And Fake Media Ever Be Held Accountable?
1:51:21 - Horrifying Details About Woody Allen Abusing His Kids
Purchase Whitney Webb's book "One Nation Under Blackmail - Volume 1": https://bit.ly/42L3dHQ
Purchase Whitney Webb's book "One Nation Under Blackmail - Volume 2": https://bit.ly/3MbTjrU
Check out Whitney's work at UnlimitedHangout.com: https://bit.ly/3MdCpch
------
Get You Tickets for The Vault 2023 NOW ⬇️⬇️ The BIGGEST EVENT in VT History!
**TOM BRADY, MIKE TYSON & PATRICK BET-DAVID on one stage!**
https://thevaultconference.com/
------
Want to get clear on your next 5 business moves? https://valuetainment.com/academy/
Join the channel to get exclusive access to perks: https://bit.ly/3Q9rSQL
Download the podcasts on all your favorite platforms https://bit.ly/3sFAW4N
Text: PODCAST to 310.340.1132 to get added to the distribution list
Patrick Bet-David is the founder and CEO of Valuetainment Media. He is the author of the #1 Wall Street Journal bestseller Your Next Five Moves (Simon & Schuster) and a father of 2 boys and 2 girls. He currently resides in Ft. Lauderdale, Florida.
She talks about stuff that people in power don't want her to talk about.
You know, she's hidden in a place in the world that nobody can find.
She doesn't live in the States here.
She comes here every once in a while, does her thing, pisses the powerful people off, and then she leaves the country again.
She's written a couple books, one called One Nation Under Blackmail, Volume 1, and then there's One Nation Under Blackmail, Volume 2.
A professional writer, researcher, and journalist since 2016, she's written for several websites and from 2017 to 2020 was a staff writer and senior investigative reporter for Mint Press News.
She currently writes for The Last American Vagabond and hosts an independent podcast called Unlimited Hangout.
Her works aim to highlight underreported issues and find common ground between people of different political persuasions regarding corruption, government overreach, the lack of accountability for militaries and intelligence agencies, and the military-industrial industrial complex.
And she also talks a lot about Epstein and a bunch of other stories.
It's great to have you on.
It's great to be back.
How you been having me?
I'm doing well.
Good.
Yeah.
Fantastic.
So from the last time till today, we got a lot of different things we want to cover with you.
We got some ESG questions for you.
We got some DEI stories.
We got the whole Soros and Musk going back and forth a little bit with Musk tweeting at him.
We got a Woody Allen story.
We got a bunch of different things.
But from your standpoint, what's been new, new stories you've seen recently on Epstein that's been creating momentum since the last time we were together?
Well, I guess the most recent one, of course, is going to be these revelations that have come from the Wall Street Journal most recently about his private calendar, emails, a bunch of different things.
Per the Wall Street Journal, they claim to have thousands of pages of documents.
But I'm a little curious, you know, where maybe they got these documents from, why now, and if they plan on publicly releasing any of that, because, of course, the reporting comes from the Wall Street Journal and they refer to these documents, but none of those have been released to the public.
And I'm personally a big fan of public transparency, but we're kind of in a post-WikiLeaks world, so tend not to get much of that source reporting anymore.
But I would definitely like to see it considering a lot of the names that have come out in connection with that.
How would you do that?
It's great seeing Wall Street Journal doing this, though, right?
Because they can't say it's a website or it's a blogger or it's somebody with this.
When Wall Street Journal does it, you have to give it to you have to pay attention to it.
Yeah, but at the same time, you know, a lot of the reporting, the way it is, is, you know, this is what's in the documents.
And then we talk to the person referenced.
And of course, the person distances themselves from Epstein and says, oh, well, I only went to them because he was wealthy or I didn't know anything about this or that.
And it's hard to know if that's really true, to be honest, because some people have claimed that and then evidence has come out showing it was a bit different.
And then they're like, oh, well, and nothing really happens, you know.
You referenced a post-WikiLeaks world right now.
Obviously, a reference to Julian Assange.
Break that down.
What does that mean since that transpired, what, over a decade ago, I want to say?
Where do you see the current state of affairs today?
So I sort of, you know, looking at like Assange and WikiLeaks, you know, what they were doing, obviously, before Assange was incarcerated, was taking source documents that they received and putting them out for the public to look at and view and draw their own conclusions.
And, you know, how investigative reporting has changed since then is, I think, pretty clear.
I mean, you compare a lot of how WikiLeaks handle, you know, their access to source documents versus something like the Twitter files, for example.
I mean, there's a pretty big shift between then and now.
And personally, I prefer the former model because more information, more transparency, I think that ultimately serves the public interest more.
How does that affect reporters like you today, whistleblowers, stuff like that?
What the mindset of you guys doing this intense investigative journalism?
How have things changed since WikiLeaks?
You know, I intentionally, like what I do, I don't try and work with people that are in a position to like face jail time for giving me information because given what like I know and what's pretty obvious about the surveillance state today, I don't feel like I can guarantee anyone's security.
Let me ask, how many people have actually reached out to you who are insiders saying, hey, can we talk offline?
Because I have some information that I want to share with you.
I mean, a couple, but again, you know, I don't live in the U.S., so it's hard for me just online to know that they're for real.
And I don't want to, again, put anyone in a position of danger.
So I tend to go with things that are public record, open source.
But people that do want to work with those types of sources, everything that's happened with Julian Assange and WikiLeaks, and even, you know, with what happened with Snowden and then a lot of the people that, for example, leaked documents or shared documents with the intercept, for example, three of those guys went to prison.
And that was after Snowden and Assange.
So I think there's definitely been an intentional chilling effect on that sharing of transparency.
And I think obviously that's in great detriment.
And what about your personal, like, do you ever worry about them?
I mean, because it's completely possible.
They could get to somebody in jail and say that he committed suicide.
Do you fear for your own safety at all?
Well, I mean, people ask me that a lot.
But frankly, you know, the state of the world today, I feel like it's incumbent on all of us to stand up and say something.
And again, I'm not trying to work with like classified information and stuff.
I think if I was, it would be a different situation for sure.
But I think also at the same time, like if you live your life in fear, that's going to impede you from doing stuff that's important.
And I'm really grateful for the platform I have today.
And I have, I guess, an ability to put information together that helps people see some of these power structures that aren't necessarily visible to everyone.
And I feel like it's my duty and responsibility to do that because frankly, the more people, we really need to raise awareness, I think, about these power structures, these situations, and how we got here.
Because especially if you're a parent of kids like I am, I mean, you just let things keep going this way.
It's not going to be good for anybody.
So, you know.
I like it.
I like what you're doing.
It's dangerous.
Someone's got to do it.
I got a question to start off with here.
So individuals subpoenaed in the USVI's Epstein-Linked case against J.P. Morgan.
Okay.
You got Sergei Brin and Larry Page.
You got Musk.
You got Michael Orvitz.
He's the former president of Disney and co-founder of Creative Arts.
You got Mortimer Zuckerman.
You got Thomas Pritzker.
You got Glenn Durbin.
You got Leslie Wexner, which we talked about last time.
You got John Luke Brunel and a few other.
Isn't Brunel dead?
Well, it's in your French modeling scout who was a close associate.
He was arrested in Paris, I believe, and died in his jail cell suicide.
It's great that you can subpoena a dead person.
That's when AI is really advanced.
You can do that.
So this comes out.
But the problem with this story is the fact that Newsweek does a story a week ago saying Larry Page has been missing as Google founder faces Jeffrey Epstein lawsuit.
The U.S. Virgin Islands attempting to locate Google co-founder Larry Page to subpoena him as part of a lawsuit against J.P. Morgan Chase.
But so far, four possible addresses have been found invalid.
The government brought the civil action against defendant J.P. Morgan Chase Bank as part of its ongoing effort to protect public safety and to hold accountable those who facilitated or participated in it directly or indirectly, the trafficking enterprise on Jeffrey Epstein.
Anyways, he keeps going talking about this.
So what is, if they're going after these guys, there's a story about Paige missing.
There's another story about Sergey Brin going through what he's going through.
How much are they really going to get to the bottom of this?
And is this just a nothing burger?
You know, I don't know.
Some of the other cases, I think, to an extent were sort of like nothing burgers.
And some of these stories about past cases being unredacted, you know, a lot of those redactions, it was actually kind of known, what was there.
This seems a little bit different because this is the first case I'm aware of where they're subpoenaing so many billionaires.
You know, so that should be kind of an indication that they, at least more than other cases, sort of seem to be interested in getting more to the bottom of the money aspect.
And again, this is the J.P. Morgan case.
And as I'm sure you all are aware, the attorney general of the USVI, after filing this case, gets fired just a few days after.
So of course, there's a lot of speculation that her firing was related to her filing of this particular case.
And, you know, when it comes to some of these tech billionaires, I think that's interesting too, because, you know, in my work on Epstein, you know, there's a lot to be said about the Edge Foundation.
Epstein was funding them very extensively, including being like their only financing source for several years.
It was run by publisher John Brockman, who was a science publisher.
And they had this annual, I think, billionaires dinner, they called it, which brought Epstein into contact with a lot of these big tech names.
And a lot of, you know, the biggest names in tech, including Jeff Bezos, Musk, Zuckerberg, Brin, and Paige, you know, have all come up in the Epstein case even before these subpoenas.
So, you know, I think that's pretty interesting.
And another thing, too, that I came across recently is that a lot of these big tech companies have data centers in New Albany, Ohio.
And the land on which those data centers sit is owned by the New Albany Company, which Epstein actually set up for Leslie Wexner and invested in and was a general partner in that company at the time that it was planned to court big tech to that particular area.
You know, it's interesting you're saying this.
We had Mike Tyson on yesterday and he said something.
So some of these, like when you start doing business, you get invited to parties.
Okay.
Oh, sure.
And when you go to these parties, you're like, hey, meet this guy.
Hey, meet that guy.
Hey, meet this guy.
Hey, meet that guy.
You're like, oh, okay, Greg.
Hey, meet this guy, Jeffrey Epstein.
Oh, shit, you're that guy.
Yeah.
Oh, damn.
Somebody just took a picture.
Here we go.
This is what's going to start.
So Mike Tyson's at an event in Phoenix.
And he says, this one guy comes.
If he can pull up this picture, Rob.
He says, this one guy comes.
He starts shaking my hands.
And, you know, he looks very fragile.
He's like, man, I felt so sorry for this guy.
And he shook my hands.
He said, his hands were really small and he was timid.
I said, listen, if anybody does anything to you, I got your back.
Nobody can say anything to you.
And he says, great.
The next day, the feds come to him and they're like, hey, we see this picture with you and him.
How do you know this guy?
He says, well, did somebody do something to this guy?
Poor guy was, you know, I saw him being bullied.
I want to make sure he's been.
He says, no, we want to make sure you're okay because he killed eight people and shot 29 people.
What?
Yeah.
This is Dale Hausner.
So there's a picture with Dale.
If he can pull up the picture with him and Mike Tyson, Mike Tyson said, I was at another fight.
A Taliban was sitting next to me and a white supremacist was sitting next to me.
And they asked, why would you go to a game with a white supremacist?
And the Taliban, he says, I didn't go to a game with those guys.
They just bought tickets right next to me.
So how much of this, this whole thing with these names being dropped, it's kind of like guilty by association, man.
I was just there.
I didn't do anything with these guys.
I just met them at a party.
Well, it's hard to know, again, because a lot of people involved in this case have not been very forthcoming.
And some of the names on this subpoena list, there's a lot to say about their ties to Epstein that has not really found its way into mainstream reporting.
But again, with some of the cases, it could be just what they say, and oh, I met them through this guy and that guy.
So, again, without greater transparency, it's hard to know.
But allegedly, the U.S. Virgin Islands has access to a very significant amount of documents from J.P. Morgan.
And their interest in subpoenaing a lot of these tech billionaires specifically is that Epstein was referring them to the bank.
And again, Epstein's activities with J.P. Morgan, from what the USBI has said, it was very clear from J.P. Morgan documents that his activity at the bank was not consistent with any client-based business.
And that was supposedly what he had at the time, Epstein.
And so the money flow was weird.
His relationship with executives at JPMorgan was weird.
So why was he referring people to the bank?
They're speculating that it's related to some whatever funny stuff Epstein was doing.
He was trying to bring in other people.
With younger girls.
Well, in the case of Jeff Stadley, that's true.
But again, and I think we talked about this last time, as I see it, Jeffrey Epstein wasn't just a sexual blackmail mastermind.
He was also very talented in the world of shadow and offshore banking.
So anyone that wanted to get involved in that, whether it's for things like tax evasion or all sorts of stuff, I mean, that doesn't necessarily involve sexual blackmail or interest in a sexual interest in minors, right?
But here's the thing, though.
This is the problem, though, with the Epstein story, because the only thing people think about when they see a picture with you and Epstein, if they see that online, the first reaction everybody gets, they don't think about tax evasion.
They don't think about blackmail.
They don't think about the- Oh, exactly.
The only thing they think about, oh, this guy probably hooked up with a 14-year-old girl.
So I understand what you're saying.
In that sense, okay, he got close to J.P. Morgan Chase, and hey, they have this thing where he's brokering deals and he's bringing money over to them.
I can see that.
I can see how myself, you know, I refer God knows how much business to my advisor that I'm working with at certain bank, and he does my stuff.
So when I bank with someone or I use a technology or I use someone, I'm like, go to this guy.
And they've probably made a lot of money through those referrals.
Obviously, this is at a larger scale because he's bringing a billion dollars, half a billion dollars, $300 million.
And Jamie Dimon's going to take those accounts.
He's not going to say no to it.
But the difference between receiving that referral and the other aspect of Epstein, that's not only career ending, that's reputation, that's legacy.
That could destroy your reputation in every way.
So if we can isolate the two, let's do that.
So from your research, this is your world where you study this.
You've created so much momentum right now with what you're talking about and the sources you're referring to.
Let's go one by one by one.
Larry Page and Sergey Grin, Sergey Brin, based on the research you've done, what have you learned about those guys from Google?
Okay, so as far as Google as a company goes, from the very beginning of that company, they took national security, state money, specifically CIA money and throughout their existence as a company, like we know from the Edward Snowden documents, collaborated very openly with the NSA and other national security agencies to the, you know, in sharing data in ways that they were not you know public about with their, their customers and users.
And, of course, Google dominates search, so they have a huge role in the type of information people access when they look for something.
Those first results, what results are?
First, you know, Google has a lot of power.
And to take it back to WikiLeaks for a second, if you remember back, I believe Julian Assange wrote a book called When Google Met Wikileaks, basically talking about how his experience with that led him to believe that Google was essentially operating as an intelligence agency in connection with the Hillary Clinton-run State Department.
So, and I think Jigsaw at the time, which was part of Alphabet, had these weird connections with things going on in the Arab Spring and other geopolitical developments where Google was alleged to have played an outside role.
So it's important to keep in mind those aspects of Google.
But as far as the connection, specific connection to Epstein goes, Larry Page, I'm not necessarily familiar with anything, but before the subpoena, it was known that Sergey Brin was going to the townhouse with Epstein in the early 2000s.
He was.
Yeah, and I think at least one of those meetings, Mort Zuckerman, who's listed on that subpoena list as well, was present.
These were some regular visitors to his townhouse in the early 2000s.
And it's possible as well that this Edge Foundation thing, and again, I'm not trying to say Edge is a pretty big thing.
Not everyone that was part of Edge was tied up with Epstein, but I think it's pretty clear from the finances alone that Epstein used that billionaire dinner and his big role as the main funder for a long time of Edge and being very close to Brockman to get access to these big tech people.
You have to keep in mind too that after Epstein was busted for sex trafficking the first time, he tried to rebrand as a big-time tech investor specifically.
And his big company that he was trying to make out of the Virgin Islands, which I think he made in like 2012, was called Southern Trust.
And he framed it as being a biomedical and financial Google.
It was described by the New York Times as a DNA data mining firm.
So he's trying to get in all these spaces that also Google and a lot of these other big tech companies are also trying to get to in relatively the same period of time.
Because 2012 is like 10 years ago.
A lot of people are talking about AI now and all of this stuff, but Epstein was trying to sort of corner this market for the AI market for big pharma and for major investment banks back during that time.
And actually in these Wall Street Journal reports that have come out recently, it mentioned that the Edmund DeRoss Child Group, Arian DeRoss Child named in those documents, had entered into an agreement with Southern Trust, I think around $7 million, that they had contracted this AI financial algorithm company that Epstein was making in the USVI.
So, you know, again, the financial services thing with Epstein is very underexplored by mainstream media.
And what you referred to there about the public perception of, oh, you have your picture with Epstein, Europedo.
I would blame all of that on mainstream media because mainstream media is only interested in talking about Jeffrey Epstein's sex trafficking activities from 2000 to 2006, nothing before and essentially nothing after.
I think it's to protect a lot of powerful people that engaged in financial criminality with them and also people like Bill Gates and Bill Clinton as well.
Because a lot of that, you know, their ties, for example, with Gates, that goes back to the 1990s.
Mainstream media says it was 2011.
And the reason I think they say that is to, Gates didn't have any role in Microsoft at that time.
If you look back before then, there's a lot of Gates and Maxwell family ties to Microsoft.
And other Microsoft executives, Linda Stone, Nathan Merville, documented Epstein ties with them back in the late 90s.
And I think, you know, if you take, you make the Gates Epstein story just about the Gates Foundation and not about Epstein and Microsoft, I think that's a, you know.
I want to stay on this because we're going to go to Gates and Clinton as well.
So Elon Musk, Elon Musk being linked to a name like this.
The thing that concerns me is the following.
Here's what concerns me.
I have four kids.
As a parent or a guy that's running an insurance company or any business, I always watch your trends to see if it's all of a sudden out of whack, someone's influencing you negatively or you're about to go to a bad place in your life.
So for example, if you're generally a person that doesn't drink, doesn't smoke weed, doesn't do drugs, and you're pretty stable, all of a sudden you're doing stuff that you've never done for 20 years.
I'm like, something's going on with this.
Your decision making is going this way.
Or you used to be good with this guy and this guy was an enemy and this guy's a true bad enemy.
All of a sudden, you start defending this guy out of nowhere in front of people like, hey, that is not you.
You've never really defended this guy.
What does he now have on you?
So when I see, you know, the questions with Elon Musk is, hey, you know, he announces CEO, the new CEO that's coming, the ex-NBC Universal Lady who comes in and, you know, World Economic Forum, everybody's losing their minds.
I asked a question.
I did a poll the other day on Twitter.
Rob, if you pull it up, I said the good hire, bad hire, let's wait and see.
Good hire was 6%.
Bad hire was like 20-something percent.
Let's wait and see was like 60-something percent, right, on what people want to see.
But when that was made, the same day or the next day after he made the hire, you saw the article comes out about Musk.
You saw what Soros article comes out, and you see what Musk out of nowhere, if you want to pull up what Musk tweets at Soros the next day calling him, you know, Soros is Magneto.
I didn't see that.
Well, you didn't see this.
He says Soros is Magneto.
I may have been traveling on this.
Yeah, I'm sure.
So he says, yeah, Soros is Magneto if you want to show this tweet.
Soros reminds me of Magneto, right?
And this thing just takes off 42 million views on this tweet.
So everybody's responding.
I can't believe you said this.
He's trying to do this.
The reality is Magneto was also a guy that dealt with the Holocaust and the story is a survivor of it.
And that's kind of what he's going through.
So it's really a cause behind it.
Anyways, so my concern becomes when somebody that's been, here's what I'm for.
I'm for this, I'm for that, I'm for this, I'm for, we got to get off of advertisers, we got to be doing all subscription, all of a sudden you bring in an advertising agency, a veteran in the marketplace to go and get advertisers, and you know she's a black rock edifying Larry Fink, edifying fake news is not real.
Did something happen?
Did they find, are they, like, that's the part that kind of throws me off sometimes.
Well, I think some of these, there's, you know, I see Elon Musk as a person who has like a very specific persona he wants to project to the public.
And then there's Business Musk, right?
And I don't think they're necessarily always the same person.
So, you know, for example, Elon Musk, a lot of people maybe forget, you know, he's a big military contractor.
And also, you know, the Space Force, it's also an intelligence agency.
So he's technically a military and intelligence contractor.
In order to keep your contracting business with those things, there's certain rules you have to play by and certain things.
I would assume you can and can't say or you'll lose those lucrative contracts.
And if you look at someone like Elon Musk and his business history, a lot of his companies would not have been successful, sorry, would not have been successful without significant subsidies from the government.
So, you know, I feel like in order to get those deals, there's certain rules you have to abide by to an extent, at least when it comes to your business decisions and certain things, right?
So maybe he wants to project, you know, this persona of like, I'm one of the bros.
I'm one of the guys.
You know, I believe in free speech and all of this.
And certainly when he bought Twitter, that's what he said.
But then it became, you know, oh yeah, free speech, but not freedom of reach.
And now it's sort of changing again with the appointment of this new CEO.
And again, you know, I don't really have any high hopes, and I didn't necessarily when Musk bought Twitter, just because I tend to be kind of skeptical and I guess you could probably say cynical about these types of types of people.
And, you know, I personally, just from my own, you know, experience with Epstein research, I have found Musk not to be very upfront about some of those connections there.
So for example, you know, he'll be like, a lot of people like to bring up the picture of him and Gheline Maxwell from 2014.
He'll say he was photo bombed and all of this.
But he won't bring up the fact, well, at least reporters seem to have forgotten that Kimball Musk, his brother, who's on the board of Tesla and SpaceX, was introduced to a member of Epstein's entourage who had dated Epstein and lived at the apartments on 3016th Street East, where all these traffic girls lived.
A girl from there starts dating Kimball Musk, and somehow Epstein is allegedly granted access to SpaceX facilities and tours and then is allegedly advising Tesla, according to the New York Times reporter James Stewart, who was told by someone else that Epstein was advising Tesla and then goes before Epstein's 2019 arrest and most of his public infamy, goes and asks him about if the rumors were true.
And Epstein says yes.
And this is during a time when Musk is saying he's trying to secure capital to take Tesla private, I believe.
And this was allegedly involving one of the Saudi wealth funds of the Saudi government.
And at that time, Epstein was very, a very, very close advisor to Mohammed bin Salman, who had recently come to power.
And if you remember back to when the Epstein story really, the scandal sort of broke in 2019, it wasn't just talking about his townhouse having all these pictures of him and Clinton.
There were a lot, probably as much as Clinton, of Epstein with MBS, Mohamed bin Salman.
That's pretty random for a Jewish businessman with maybe ties to the Mossad to be doing business with the Saudi kingdom, MBS.
Yes, but Mohammed bin Salman was brought to power in a way that was very uncharacteristic for Saudi Arabia.
You know, there it's not father-to-son hierarchy, right?
It's like seniority within the royal family.
Usually it's like elderly uncles that become the next crown prince and whatnot.
And he was very young in his 30s when he came to power.
And he hammered out things like the Abraham Accords with people like Jared Kushner.
He was texting Jared Kushner all the time, who, of course, has a very close relationship with the Netanyahu family, for example.
So again, that seems rather uncharacteristic as well.
And it's very possible that, you know, given the geopolitical plays in the Middle East and North Africa, a lot of that often has to do with people that are either for or against Israel.
You know, what government's going to shifting the balance of power there, normalizing relationships with Israel.
And so the Abraham Accords obviously were a huge step towards normalizing the relationship with Israel in the region.
And they may have seen, you know, oh, there's this upstart prince that's really ambitious.
And if we can get him in, then maybe he'll help us push that normalization just a bit further.
So, you know, there's a lot of question marks there, but it seems to me that that may have been something to do with it.
And I also think this might be the thread to pull on to find out the real reason Epstein was arrested in 2019.
Because if you think about who MBS took out, Mohammed bin Nayev, that guy was very, very close to John Brennan, who was the CIA director.
And John Brennan was very unhappy with MBS's rise to power.
And if you have Epstein close to MBS, John Brennan, who's also a big guy behind RussiaGate and all of this stuff, and around MBS, you have Kushner, right?
You have Epstein.
It seems like there's two intelligence-linked factions sort of duking it out.
And if Epstein was on one side and the other side sort of wanted to send a message to that side, you know.
This is the article I think you're talking about.
Jeffrey Epstein claimed he was helping Elon Musk find a new chairman for Tesla.
This is part of it.
Yeah, that's one of the stories.
But again, to me, there's two different stories.
The one is, I did business with this guy.
And Kimball, right now, I think he's got a vertical farming company.
No, yeah.
He's doing a whole different thing.
This is before.
This is before that.
Yeah.
So two different things.
So one, for example, I'll give you a crazy story.
So I first come to Florida.
Okay.
I'm doing a project and it's called Mafia States of America.
We're having it with all these ex-mob gangsters and people that are in that world.
I go to this restaurant, Casa D'Angelo.
First day I go there, the person I'm having dinner with is Michael Francis.
Michael Francis was one of the top earners in the Capo.
He was a Capo in the Colombo family.
And he comes in and this Casa D'Angelo place is ran by Italian.
So they know who he is.
Bonacera, you know, they're talking to him and we grab a seat.
The next day, next I go there, I go there with Chas Palminteri, the actor from Bronx Tale, and he's done a bunch of mob movies and he looks like, so he's got an incredible one-man show.
So he comes with me next time.
Oh, Bonacera, okay, great.
The third time I go eat at this Italian restaurant, I bring Sammy de Bolgravano, okay?
And they see Sammy, they lose their minds.
Like, holy shit, Sammy de Bulgravano, the former under boss of the Gambino family, is here.
He's sitting there, we're sitting in the same table.
By the fourth time, they thought I was an Italian gangster.
Okay.
And I said, no, I'm from the Middle East.
I am not.
I'm just interviewing these guys because I have a relationship and I'm interested in that world.
So we're doing a documentary, a show on this.
So the challenge becomes sometimes when you're seen, people love to jump to conclusion and say, well, this is what's going on.
The part I want to isolate is the following with Musk.
I think what Musk is doing, you know, 100% there's the argument of what he's taking from public, you know, government money, government funding, SpaceX, all this other stuff.
Even Tesla, he has to answer to that.
And that's part of, you know, capitalism, where you're getting money, all this stuff.
That's a different story.
The part that I want to isolate is him being linked to what Epstein did with the girls.
There is nothing there with Musk.
No, not that I've seen with the girls, but there are significant business ties.
And what I just mentioned is part of that.
Another part I cover in my book, it's related to these brothers that worked for Epstein and his brother, Mark Epstein, at OSA Properties, which has been tied to the sex trafficking operation, those apartments I mentioned earlier, owned by Osa Properties.
So one of these two brothers, Jonathan Barrett, that worked directly for Epstein and then worked for Mark Epstein at OSA Properties, works for this company called Luminous.
And Luminous is an affiliate related to LS Power.
LS Power is a major supplier to Epstein.
And a lot of these directors for Luminous, for example, are the same people that were directors for the special investment vehicle that Epstein had with Bear Stearns called Liquid Funding, and also investment vehicles and companies tied to Glencore, which is Mark Rich, who's a well-known affiliate of, well, pretty much openly referred to as a Mossad asset and stuff like that.
He was a commodities trainer, a trader, a fugitive from the U.S. for a long time because of helping Israel avoid the oil embargo of Arab nations.
But, for example, he was pardoned by Clinton really controversially.
Allegedly, this was due to a lot of pressure put on Clinton by Ehud Barak at the time and things like that.
So anyway, you have sort of those shared connections and the Kimball Musk thing.
And then you have a woman named Nicole Yunkerman that I wrote a lot about in the book, who has invested in recent years very extensively in SpaceX.
And Nicole Yunkerman, maybe I should backtrack a little bit before getting to Nicole.
So basically, what I note in my book is that there's the sex trafficking operation of Epstein everyone knows about, but there seems to have been another parallel operation that he used for influence ops, I guess you could say, involving women.
But they were of age.
They were women that were well educated in some cases, in probably most of the cases, but at least a few cases we know about, Epstein financed their graduate education.
and helped connect them.
They ended up marrying or dating powerful people sort of in his circle.
So allegedly, Trump is one of these guys, right?
So his girlfriend before Melania, Selena Middelfart, Epstein was taking her with him.
Yeah.
Horrible.
I know.
Horrible name.
Well, she's Norwegian.
She's Norwegian, so maybe in Norway.
No, no, it's fart.
It's Feldfart.
It's Mittelfart.
Yeah.
She's a Norwegian heiress.
Very attractive, despite the last name, I guess.
Yeah, so that probably helped her out.
Before her.
Yeah.
But, you know, she and a couple of these other women that Epstein was taking to the Clinton White House in the 90s ended up marrying very powerful people.
And she dated Trump, and then allegedly, Melania was introduced to Trump by Ghelane and Jeffrey Epstein.
They claimed that.
Who claims that?
I think it was either Ghelane or Jeffrey Epstein at some point before their infamous people.
That's how Trump met Melania.
There's that allegation that they were introduced to each other.
But the modeling industry thing with Epstein and Ghelane, remember, this is before they were infamous, necessarily, at least publicly.
And Trump likes models.
I think we all know that.
That's not breaking news.
But I mean, it's not like it was, oh, look, meet Melania who's underage at the time, right?
It wasn't like that.
So again, if you're trying to secure influence with powerful people and you don't think they're susceptible to your sex blackmail op involving minors, you can be the matchmaker that sets them on the path to marital bliss, right?
Because, you know, whoever sets you up with your husband or wife, you might keep contact with for a long time, or if they come to ask for a favor, you might be willing to do so, right?
So there's a few other cases where this happened.
And one of these women is Melanie Walker that we can talk about later because she's part of the Bill Gates-Epstein connection.
This Yunkerman lady, I'm curious.
Yeah, so Nicole Yunkerman appears to be another one of these women.
She's not an Instagram model.
No, but she was a model.
She's a former model, and now she is married to some Italian oil billionaire.
Very, very wealthy.
He's much older than her, I think, by late.
I saw that.
Yeah.
He's 63 or something like that, 66.
And she's very attractive, right?
Ferdinando Bracetti Peretti.
Yeah, something like that.
Yeah.
And so allegedly, you know, there was this meeting in September 2002 in the United Kingdom at a home that is owned by Wexner, and Nicole Yunkerman was on Epstein's arm with an unknown brunette woman and was passed off to these two U.S. senators that were there.
And the allegation, the implication there, which this is right before the Iraq war vote, right?
The allegation is that there may have been some sort of like sexual blackmail occurring there.
But why is Nicole Junkerman hanging out with Epstein and these senators at this place?
It's a bit weird.
And then there's some other business connections over the years.
So for example, Carbine 911, which is this sort of emergency 911 call center app or something like that that's being sold all over the United States.
It was created mainly by veterans of Unit 8200, which is an Israel signal intelligence agency.
It was chaired and one of their main investors was Ehud Barak, who of course we know by now is very close to Epstein.
And Barak urged Epstein to invest, at least of what we know, at least a million dollars into that company.
And apparently Leslie Wexner also invested a lot of money.
And at that same time, of course, Ehud Barak was getting a bunch of money from the Wexner Foundation.
There's some weird stuff going on there.
But one of the directors at the time when Ehud Barak was on the board and Pinchis Buchras, who's former commander of Unit 8200, and some of these other guys in this network, Nicole Junkerman's on the board of directors as well.
And now she's invested in SpaceX.
So she's one of these sort of Bond girls, I guess you could say, that was sort of around Epstein in this category with Melanie Walker.
And now, you know.
You know what it is for me?
You can't control who invests into your company.
Okay.
You can and you can't.
I mean, let me rephrase that.
Yeah, but to an extent.
So take Elon Musk and Twitter, for example.
What does Elon Musk want to do with Twitter?
He wants to make it X the everything app.
And he specifically, as a model for that, refers to WeChat, right?
And a lot of people don't really like WeChat, at least in the U.S., because it has so much data about everything you do.
And if data is the new oil, as is often being said, whoever owns the everything app is going to own most of the data.
They're going to be the new oil barons, the data barons of this era, the new Rockefellers.
There's no question about it.
Yeah.
So WeChat, the same parent company of WeChat, is a major investor in Tesla and their most active shareholders.
So it's kind of weird, a little bit.
Chinese company.
Yeah.
So I think it would be, you know, why does he want to replicate the same thing?
WeChat is a big investor in who?
No, the parent company of WeChat.
I think it's Tencent, if I'm not mistaken.
Big investor in what?
In Tesla.
In Tesla.
And he wants to bring WeChat here, right?
You know, I personally, you know, if you're against the WEF, sort of like, you know, Musk postures about being against the WEF, and they're all about this type of, you know, digital ID.
Well, sorry, yeah, World Economic Forum.
But it's not just exclusive to them, right?
There's a lot of other interested parties, including Bill Gates, for example, a big force behind ID 2020 and all of that.
A lot of this particular network is very interested in creating sort of this everything app because everything you do, finances, social media, all of it, is in one centralized place and you get all that data.
The super app.
What is this ID 2020?
What is that, Josh?
It's a public-private partnership that was overseen.
It was created under the aegis of the, or the auspices of the United Nations.
And I think it's the Rockefeller Foundation and it's some other nonprofits that were created by the Gates Foundation, like Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance.
But Bill Gates is a big proponent of this whole digital ID paradigm for sure.
Yeah.
But I mean, the benefit of it, if you're one of these guys, you know, you get all the data and you can sell it to security agencies.
You can sell it to whoever, right?
Because if data is the new oil, that's the way to make money.
So you get everyone's data on that app.
That's one thing.
But at the same time, keep in mind, too, Musk is a military and intelligence contractor.
And historically, if you look at the ambitions of the national security agencies as it relates to mass surveillance, they have wanted a thing like that for a very long time.
Have everyone's data in one place.
We can know exactly what they're doing at all times.
And then also there's this interest on their part as well of using AI to predict what will happen, sort of this pre-crime paradigm in a sense.
Like a minority report.
It's happening before it even happens.
Well, it's been being piloted or has been piloted in the past by companies like Palantir, Peter Thiel, who did PayPal with Musk, right?
Predictive policing.
And actually, William Barr under Trump created a pre-crime program in the United States called DEEP under the Department of Justice that has arrested some people for their social media posts and stuff like that.
Arrested for their social media posts?
Under the guise that they're preventing mass shootings before they happen.
Well, that was at the time.
That was the big concern at the time, right?
There's a part of that.
There's a part of that that's, but predictive analytics, take data out.
Like predictive analytics, if you want to go have a job that's going to be protected for you for decades, if you want to major in something that's going to be safe, go major in predictive analytics.
Everybody's hiring predictive analytics.
There's a form of predictive analytics that's without data.
Teacher watches a kid in school and says, That's the behavior you're showing.
This guy's capable of doing something.
He's been caught with this, he's been caught with that.
And they go and they talk to other teachers and say, Let's keep an eye on little Joey.
That's a form of predictive analytics to say that this guy's going to do something stupid or that kid's going to do something stupid.
I get what you're saying.
I've seen minority report and it's a slippery slope.
I totally get its slippery slope.
The problem is, when you give those rights away to the government, you're not going to get them back.
There's no question about it.
They keep going.
You know what I saw today, which was great?
I saw a video, Rob, I'll send this to you, of what's his name, that validates kind of your point: of who's this fantastic president of Canada that everybody is the sweetheart of a guy who was a Castro, I think, cousin or something like that.
But I want to send this to you.
So, this kind of validates what you're saying.
Rob, if you can just play this real quick.
So, here's a clip of what he said about guns 12 years ago or 10 years ago.
And he says, The one thing about Canada, and he's talking in a very nice, gentle way.
He does that, doesn't he?
You know, this is Canada.
We are gun-loving.
They can never take our guns.
You know, we're never going to do this.
They're like, What a sweetheart of a guy, right?
And then, you know, 12 years later, effective today in Canada.
We will, you know, no more.
So, you have to hear this because it validates what you're saying.
If you can play this clip, that predictive that's not letting you?
It's not loading.
It's not loading.
Let me just play it from here.
Well, while you guys are waiting, the other thing I want to add about this predictive analytics stuff go for it.
No, go ahead.
Is that the problem is a lot of these AI algorithms, they're not 100% accurate, right?
So, if you're making a decision of whether or not we imprison this person based on the AI and you're working with something that, according to the company, is like 76% accurate, which is not unheard of in that particular industry.
And, you know, a lot of times these are what the business, the figures, the business puts out.
They're not independently audited.
So, it could be 50%, which is like flipping a coin.
And you're deciding whether or not to take someone's liberties away.
Oh, my God.
You know, based on that, that's another reason why I think it's particularly problematic.
So, that's one topic we just went through.
The Elon Musk, and it's more who's investing.
Your question is, is he more of a freedom guy?
Or does he have to at times, you know, agree for certain things?
Because, hey, if you do this, we'll give money to this and we'll fund this.
Okay.
I can see where somebody could be tempted to make a decision politically for other benefits that could come.
They're fine.
But there's no such thing with the younger girls with him.
Not that I've seen.
Fantastic.
So that's why I want to kind of isolate these things.
Let's go to the next one.
The next one that we can talk about is Clinton and Gates.
If you want to kind of get into that part.
I'll read one story to you and then you take it from there.
Bill Clinton's aide, linked to Jeffrey Epstein, killed himself with a shotgun despite no gun.
I mean, I got to tell you, I've spent a lot of time, you know, I've seen the Copperfeller, you know, what's his name?
Rich David Copperfield.
David Copperfield and some magicians, these guys, they're great.
But the ability for the Clintons to do magic like this, I don't think they give him enough credit for how great they are in doing magic, right?
Mark Middleton, a former advisor to President Clinton, was found dead in May 2022 in Haifa Ranch in Perryville, Arkansas.
He was discovered hanging from a tree with a gunshot wound in his chest, despite no evidence of the weapon that killed him.
Middleton had ties to convicted child trafficker Jeffrey Epstein, repeatedly signing him into the White House during his tenure as Clinton's special advisor.
The investigation into Middleton's death by Perry County Sheriff's Office raises more questions than answers.
Middleton's body and car were found at Highford's Ranch, which is owned by non-government organization allegedly connected to the Gates Foundation and Clinton Foundation.
The release of the investigation report was delayed due to Middleton's family's concerns about the publication of harmful, substantiated and hateful articles on the internet.
The judge allowed the dissemination of certain details, but prohibited the release of images.
Middleton had a controversial history, including being implicated in exploiting his access to impress business clients while working at the White House in the 90s.
So how do you do that?
I mean, how do you kill yourself with a shotgun and hang yourself at the same time?
Mark Middleton, again, this is another reason why no one, I don't think mainstream media lets anyone talk about the Clinton-Epstein relationship before the year 2000 or until Clinton left office.
Mark Middleton was a central figure in some very significant Clinton-era scandals.
It was not just him abusing his access to the White House after he left.
I'll give you an example.
Congress was investigating Mark Middleton at the time 9-11 happened.
And of course, 9-11 happens, they move on to other stuff, obviously.
But before then, the Bush administration, George W. Bush's first time invoking executive privilege was to block the release of documents to Congress about a couple of about three different things.
One of those was Mark Middleton.
Why is Bush stepping in to protect a Clinton aid?
That should tell you that there's something bigger there with Mark Middleton.
And then if you look at when Mark Middleton was called to testify as part of these investigations, he pleaded the fifth 28 times, including to the question, are you a foreign agent?
Wow.
So there's obviously a deeper story here.
The question is, why wasn't Mark Middleton, you know, suicided, whatever you want to call it, back then?
You know, why did it happen so recently?
I would argue it's because in 2019, when the Epstein case broke, it was alleged by the Daily Beast that Epstein had only had five meetings with Mark Middleton.
And then you find out from Daily Mail gets White House visitor logs a couple of months, maybe like four months before Mark Middleton's found dead, it was around 15.
It was much higher.
Something was going on.
And then if, of course, you go and look at what was Mark Middleton involved in at the time he was meeting with Epstein and what was Epstein doing, it starts to get really weird.
Epstein, at the time he was meeting with Mark Middleton, on behalf of Leslie Wexner, was involved in negotiating the relocation of Southern Air Transport from Miami, Florida to Columbus, Ohio, where it would ostensibly be mainly running cargo for Wexner's company, The Limited.
Have you ever heard of Southern Air Transport?
Southern Air Transport used to be Air America.
It was the CIA's proprietary airline.
And Wexner bought it.
He bought the bunch of the planes.
Well, he didn't buy it, but he basically, pulling levers, got a very attractive incentive package developed by the government of Ohio taxpayers on the hook to relocate Southern Air Transport.
Right.
Promises of bringing all these jobs, which never materialize.
And basically, Southern Air Transport gets pumped and dumped and goes bankrupt a few years after this move by the end of the 90s.
But anyway, it was being in the 1980s, it was the main airline for Iran-Contra, arms and weapons dealing, and then gets involved with some weird stuff going on with the first Gulf War.
And with that history, that is the specific airline sought out by Epstein and Wexner.
They could have gone for any other airline in the U.S. There's a lot.
They first tried one called Aero Air, also tied to Iran-Contra, and also the BCCI scandal.
Then they go to this Polar Air cargo, which is a joint partnership of three companies, one of which is Southern Air Transport.
The other two guys kick out Southern Air Transport.
The Limited dumps polar air cargo and goes straight to Southern Air Transport.
They seem to be very desperate for one of these shady airlines.
And Southern Air Transport previously, like I said, was in Miami, Florida.
And during Iran-Contra, of course, it was going to Latin America, MENA, Arkansas, or Clinton's governor.
All this weird stuff's going on.
Yeah.
And it goes to Columbus.
It starts going from Columbus to Hong Kong.
That's the circuit it's going.
What is Mark Middleton doing during this period?
Mark Middleton is a central figure in a largely forgotten Clinton era scandal called Chinagate that intimately involves a bunch of very weird business ties between Southeast Asian conglomerates, mainly the Lippo group, which had gone into business with the Chinese government by this time.
And a bunch of very, very weird stuff happens.
I don't know how deep you guys want to go into that scandal because it's very convoluted, very extreme.
But basically, you know, I would say sort of Chinagate in a sense is a misnomer because what is really going on here is that this is the Rioti family and Jackson Stevens.
I do want you to talk on the Riotti family.
Okay.
If you can touch on that.
Yeah, sure.
So the Riottis are, I guess, ethnically Chinese, but they've been in Indonesia for a very long time.
They're one of the main oligarchs in that country.
Their main business interest for a long time has been based around the Lippo group, which has a bazillion subsidiaries all over the world, mainly concentrated in Southeast Asia, but also, of course, a U.S. subsidiary as well, which was run by this guy named Johnny Huang, who at the time of ChinaGate, who was a major guy in the Chinagate scandal.
And sometime in the early 80s, the Riottis got involved in Little Rock, Arkansas, and forged an early partnership with Jackson Stevens, who's one of these Arkansas businessmen, political kingmakers.
He's largely seen as being responsible for Clinton's political career from Arkansas onward.
But he also, for example, financed the campaign of George Bush Sr., sort of playing both sides.
And a lot of his companies that he ran, Stevens Inc., Beverly Enterprises, Systematics, have either been tied to major Clinton corruption scandals of the past or to Iran-Contra specifically in the case of Systematics.
So the Riotti family and Jackson Stevens had these intertwined business dealings and basically become sort of this hub of political cronyism in Arkansas.
And then, of course, Clinton gets into the presidential office and it is much more expansive than that at that point, meaning beyond Arkansas, obviously.
So basically what was going on with ChinaGate, I guess you could say, is that a bunch of money from foreign nationals, mainly Chinese nationals, a lot of them with ties to the Chinese government or the Chinese military, are being funneled through a series of individuals who can donate to the DNC, or the DNC is directly taking money from people that are foreign nationals who, of course, can't legally contribute to campaigns.
And so, you know, that was the focus of the congressional investigation, that it was like illegal fundraising.
But what was that money buying these people?
It was almost all focused on the commerce department.
The head of the commerce department at this time is Ron Brown, who, of course, dies under very suspicious circumstances near the end of this, when it starts to come out in the 90s, I think, 96 or so.
Dies in a plane crash, but he has a bullet wound in his head.
And all of a sudden, somebody was shooting in like a forest and bullet window.
Well, here's the thing.
The part of the commerce department that was most targeted by ChinaGate, the ITA, all the other people on the plane with him pretty much were ITA, except for Johnny Huang, wasn't on the plane, because he had been let go by that point.
But right before Ron Brown gets on that plane to Croatia, He agreed to investigate or cooperate with independent council probes into this stuff.
And he is unexpectedly asked to go on a trade mission to Croatia, and then the plane crashes, allegedly blamed on a 1930s era navigation system at the airport in Croatia.
But a few days after the crash, the head of the navigation at that Croatian airport is found dead with a shotgun wound to the chest and it's ruled a suicide.
So there's some weird stuff going on with China Gate, to say the very least.
But again, I think it's really more than this misnomer.
There's a lot deeper corruption here.
And I talk about it pretty extensively in my book going through the congressional, the Senate reports and all of that.
And some of the main things that seemed to be going on there, it was about getting the Commerce Department and the Clinton administration to push for most favored nation trading status with China.
And to after there was a certain point where in exchange for that, Clinton had banned the import of Chinese weapons to the United States as sort of the caveat for giving China MFN status.
And before then, the biggest market for Chinese weapons was the United States.
So they're smuggling weapons into the U.S.
And they get caught doing that on some Chinese state-owned barges coming to the West Coast.
But then you have to wonder what was going on with Southern Air Transport going from Hong Kong to Columbus.
And if you think about, I think we talked about this last time, Epstein had these weird associations with arms deals in Iran-Contra, was mentored by an arms dealer named Douglas Leese, who had all sorts of connections to the defense industry, both in Britain and the U.S. He's a British guy, though.
And that's the guy that connected him with Stephen Hoffenberg of Towers Financial and the Ponzi scheme that was ran there.
And Epstein's name was dropped from the case.
Hoffenberg took the hit.
And instead of Epstein going to prison, he starts hanging out with Robert Rubin at the White House, who's a former head of Goldman Sachs.
There's a crazy, I don't know.
I mean, there's so much we could get into with the whole like Clinton-Epstein thing in the 90s.
Again, this is why I say they only talk about Clinton and Epstein after Clinton left office because they don't want you looking at all this crazy stuff.
What frustrates me and like almost infuriates me is when you're selling out America, okay?
And when you make it to the top, the question for me would be the other way.
Who, which one of our presidents have we had that hasn't sold America to somebody for their own personal benefit?
I'm being very serious.
No, I know.
Well, let me tell you.
He hasn't sold America.
Let me go back to China Gate for a second because there's a Biden connection.
So basically, one of the other guys that was targeting the Clinton Commerce Department was this guy named Bernard Schwartz, who was a major military contractor.
Laurel was his company.
He later sold a bunch of it off to Lockheed Martin because the head of Lockheed Martin at that time was his really good friend Norm Augustine.
And Norm Augustine goes on a few years later to make NQTEL for the CIA.
But Bernard Schwartz basically was trying to use, he was the biggest donor to Clinton, legal donor to the Clinton campaign in 96, where all this ChinaGate stuff was happening.
And he was specifically trying to get satellite export controls moved from the State Department to the Commerce Department so Ron Brown would handle it.
And Ron Brown, he'd basically given a bunch of, Ron Brown had been DNC chairman before this and had been involved in a lot of this funny, funny stuff going on.
The guy who got shot in the head was a former DNC chair.
Yeah, yeah.
And then he was commerce secretary.
So Bernard Schwartz was basically trying to do technology transfers to the Chinese military.
I don't really know why, but he was very, I mean, if you look at the documentation of what Laurel was doing, who it was selling it to, and the broader ChinaGate stuff.
And again, this is coming from the congressional report.
Like, I'm not even relying on mainstream media here.
This is the U.S. government investigation.
Bernard Schwartz has a lot to answer for.
But again, because 9-11 happens, everyone forgets about this stuff, right?
Because it's like, oh, that was the last administration.
We have a lot of bigger stuff to deal with now, right?
So Bernard Schwartz, it turns out, was one of the top, if not the main donor to Biden's primary campaign in 2020.
Bernard Schwartzworth.
Bernard Schwartz.
And he was the single largest contributor to the Democratic Party 92 through 96.
In 1998 for his 71st birthday party, he celebrated his birthday, I think, at the White House with the Clinton.
Probably.
That would sound about right.
Yeah, very close.
But this is the guy that was selling our most sensitive military satellite technology to the PLA.
So again, to me, who hasn't sold America and what happens to those guys?
Okay.
If you were to go back and you were to say, you know, these are the people at the top that didn't sell out.
Have you investigated that?
Because to me, that's just as important as who has sold out.
Yeah, so I mean, you come across, I mean, frankly, you know, looking at someone like Ron Brown, he was corrupt, but he was going to, you know, work with the investigators and he gets killed off.
What kind of message does that send to other people at the ITA and the Commerce Department that were going to testify to Congress?
You want to end up like Ron Brown.
So you're saying that behind closed doors, those types of talks are happening where?
I think it's very possible.
Most definitely.
Yeah.
I mean, to think it won it, I don't know.
Again, it's hard to say because I don't know.
I'm not there.
I don't have access to those documents.
But I think it's pretty clear.
You look at something like the FBI, for example, more recently.
There is apparently an FBI document that has been requested by Congress that shows Biden engaging in play-to-play politics with a foreign national.
The FBI won't release it.
Isn't the FBI, no one's above the law, all this stuff.
Everyone's supposed to be on the same playing field.
Oh, you know, if that type of corruption really was happening in the U.S., the FBI would investigate it for sure.
Why don't they?
Well, I think you just kind of have to go back and look at the history of the FBI.
A lot of these people, like J. Edgar Hoover and people like that, have sort of been given this mythical legendary status.
They're paragons of morality, you know, all this stuff.
But if you look back at like Hoover, for example, an insane amount of mob associations or mob-linked businessmen.
He was obsessed with blackmail, acquiring it on friend and foe.
He was involved in power struggles with the early intelligence services about who was going to have more control over America.
According to a case that was won by Martin Luther King Jr.'s family in the late 90s, Hoover's FBI was responsible for killing Martin Luther King Jr.
Killing FBI linked to killing Martin Luther King Jr.
Yeah, there was a civil trial that was brought by King's own family and they said and the result of that was yeah it was the FBI Winnie Winnie, I have a question for you.
And that was the 60s.
So if nothing happened to them then, what do you think's going on now?
My problem is that I feel like, you know, thinking about like my own family, for example, and how they view my work or my grandparents, people like that, you know, the way they were told things worked is not the way things were really working then.
And a lot of the American public, in my opinion, has sort of been fed this fairy tale that the government is your friend, the government's here to help.
But essentially, if you look at the history, the government's the mob.
Or they act like the mob.
It's funny, everything that they arrested the mobsters for, they've been doing that.
But it's consolidation.
You know what I mean?
Yeah.
Like, I don't think the mob went away.
I mean, if you look at a lot of these people, including the ones I talk about in my book.
So let's take Chicago, for example.
Some of the most powerful families in Chicago to this day are the Pritzker family.
Thomas Pritzker, subpoena, right?
He's in Epstein's black book.
Number Pritzker is the governor of Illinois right now.
Yeah.
Thomas Pritzker in Epstein's black book, Epstein referred to him as Numero Uno.
Wow.
Number one.
What does that mean?
And they're the legendary Hyatt family.
Yeah, they took over the Hyatt hotels in the late 50s, but they were also involved through their lawyer in something called Castlebank, one of the most notorious intelligence and organized crime-linked offshore banks in the world.
It was set up by their lawyer, Burton Cantor, and Paul Helliwell, who was a big American intelligence guy, Republican insider.
So there you have, you know, Democratic family, Republican insider, both parties coming together, teaming up with organized crime and intelligence, running offshore stuff.
Meaning neither party has a monopoly on the city as being a bad thing.
No, not at all.
Like I said, Jackson Stevens, funding both sides.
Exactly.
I mean, there's a ton of this going on.
So, I mean, both parties, I think, are rotten to the core, unfortunately.
Who has anybody that's been the least to manipulate, that's been the least to take advantage of?
Anybody.
Since JFK, Obama, Reagan, Trump, anybody else?
Well, Obama's whole political career he owes to the Pritzkers and the Crowns, who are both tied up to the same organized crime intelligence power nexus out of Chicago.
That Gus Russo, who used to work for PBS, very acclaimed journalist, wrote a book about it called Supermob, about Sidney Korshak, this labor negotiator in Chicago, and how he basically exported that power nexus of organized crime and intelligence from Chicago to L.A., creating, you know, MCA, Universal Studios, all of that stuff.
You know, it's the same blob, basically.
But the Pritzkers have been in that world for a long time.
And Obama was their guy, 100%.
And one thing I do want to bring up, the CIA director under Biden, William Burton, is meeting with Epstein, right?
So allegedly, he was me.
He was going from working under Hillary Clinton for a long time in the State Department to the private sector, and that's what he wanted to meet with Epstein.
And he goes to run the Carnegie Endowment.
And the Carnegie Endowment, the chair of that, is, I think it's Penny Pritzker, one of the Pritzkers.
So, interesting.
And by the way, what I'll be talking about, one of the things I'll be talking about at the Bitcoin conference is how during that time when William Burns was running it, before he was picked to be Biden's CIA director, was developing policy papers with the Federal Reserve and the biggest banks on Wall Street to end the fragmentation between banks, the national security community, and banking regulators, basically calling to merge Wall Street banking regulators and the CIA all into one interconnected blob.
And then Biden's like, I want that guy for CIA director.
Because according to this policy document developed by Carnegie with input from the Fed and J.P. Morgan and all of these guys, the only reason there's global economic instability is because of fragmentation between those three actors.
So let me ask this crazy question.
It's crazy.
Here's a question for you.
You know, when you read Reagan's book and you read about him, he also learned how to negotiate with the other side.
Tip O'Neill, they would sit down, they would talk, they would do this, they would do that.
So there was elements of him willing to negotiate, and he was loved by a lot of people, right?
Sure.
He was loved by the left, the right.
For the most part, people liked him, okay?
So he knows how to do that.
But Trump, there isn't any of these organizations that you don't trust that like him.
So there's a part of that where it's kind of like, why does the FBI hate Trump?
Why does the CIA hate Trump?
Why does the Biden, why do these people that are in these power plays that have been using these power, why do they all hate Trump as much as they do?
I think it's a different faction.
I don't necessarily think, I don't look at this stuff in terms of good guys and bad guys.
I see them as competing power factions.
Yeah.
So there's two broad, as I see it, power factions at play here.
There's the people that are like in power right now.
And give you an example, Anthony Blinken, his stepfather, Samuel Pissar, Robert Maxwell's lawyer, Armin Hammer's lawyer, big guy.
They describe him as human rights lawyer.
He was a lot more than that, that's for sure.
He testified to Congress what was going on in the early, this is the early 70s.
He was saying, yeah, so basically the nation state is already irrelevant and we're building a single unified world economy.
And we're doing it because private capital and private Western capitalist enterprises have decided to get in bed with communist state-run enterprises and we're just going to make, you know, the trans-ideological corporation, he called it.
This is what's going to run the world now.
He said it to Congress in the early 70s.
And the Congressman asked him, do you see this as good or evil?
He was like, mostly good.
And this is the guy that raised the guy that's running the State Department right now.
And how closely tied was he to the World Economic Forum that entitled College?
Well, Samuel Pissar, you know, this was one.
So he was really involved in this American Committee for U.S.-Soviet Relations, and he had a lot of big names on there.
And I talk about it in my Jamie Dimon piece because Controlled Data Corporation was involved with that.
And we're very shadily involved with some of this tech transfer stuff going on.
Samuel Pissar said one of the main drivers of this trans-ideological corporation were illegal tech transfers mainly from the U.S. and the West to Russia and China, like what was going on in China Gate.
But it was going on way before then.
And a lot of these businesses were doing stuff like that.
Yeah, that doesn't answer my question.
Well, I'm getting there.
Sorry, it's kind of long-winded.
So you have in that same group wanting to commit that same, you know, move toward that same policy goal, the trilateral commission.
Like the Rockefeller, it was made by the Rockefellers.
Epstein was a member of it, actually, but they're working towards that same goal.
So I sort of, you know, that is, I see one power faction.
Then you sort of have in the 80s, like with Iran-Contra, some of those people ended up backing, like under Reagan, end up backing Trump.
Like you have him advised by Edwin Mees.
You have Oliver North supporting his campaign, people like that.
I think that particular power faction isn't necessarily, I don't see them as clean at all, right?
But I do see them as more like they prefer the nationalist model.
They want America to be top.
They want, you know, American empire to continue, but they don't want to share it with these other.
They don't want to build this like global unified thing.
They want like the unipolar world to continue.
Are you going to continue?
What do you mean?
Do you have more to answer my question?
Well, I'm just trying to say I see Trump as that faction.
Okay.
Does that help?
I'm sorry.
Yeah, but I want you to go more because, okay, so who's ruined many people's lives the last 20 years?
Let's make a list, okay?
If we were to say who's ruined many people's lives the last 20 years, we can put FBI there.
We can put CIA there.
We can put Clintons there.
We can put CDC there.
We can put NIH there.
We can put China there.
We can put Fauci there.
We can put World Economic Forum there.
We can put, you realize where I'm going with this.
We can put Biden's family there.
We can put McConnell.
We can put so many names on this list, right?
Every one of those guys hate Trump.
Every one of them hates Trump.
Why?
Well, exactly.
Yeah, but I don't think it's necessarily because, again, I think the American public, maybe it's Hollywood for a long time sees things as kind of black and white.
Oh, if, you know, all the bad guys are against this guy, he must be good.
I don't, I think the real world doesn't really function like that a lot.
You know, by the time you get to sort of be rise to that level to an extent, you have to, you know, have made deals in the past that aren't.
I don't disagree.
You know what I mean?
I don't disagree.
And like Trump's mentor, Roy Cohn, insanely dirty.
Of course.
Insanely dirty.
And a lot of, you know, the art of the deal, he learned that from Cohn, you know, and Cohn had learned it from Gennaroso Pope, who was like this Italian, very close friend of Frank Costello and the guy that ran the cement industry concrete in New York.
But everybody in the everyday.
It's not dirty.
No, it's not dirty.
No, there's difference between dirty.
No, I disagree.
What I'm trying to, okay, so for example, this is where I'm going with this.
To me, I have a lot of people that you would say are dirty.
Okay.
And somebody could make a very clear argument that these people based on their past are dirty.
Okay.
And I've spent a lot of hours with these guys.
And when I sit down with them and I say, so tell me what happened that one time when ta-da-da-da-da.
And I'll go, let me tell you what happened.
When we were in the room, Paul Castellano, he did this.
And then all of a sudden, Gotti said this.
And that's going.
Oh, wow.
Okay, got it.
So, hey, when yourself, when you were in this situation, and this one guy that was robbing banks, we had him on the thing.
I'm like, when you were doing this, and why did you do this?
And how did the bank fall for this?
And how were you able to do this?
Okay, so how do we defend against that, right?
So even right now, for example, you know, one of the biggest reasons why big pharma is doing what it's doing and take advantage of people in America is because the patent laws that we have.
This whole hatchman and wax, I think it's the one of the senator from Utah is a Republican, and the other congressman is from California, who's a Democrat.
They come together, they lower the, what do you call it, the patent law to 14 years, and then in 1994, under Clinton, they raised it to 20 years.
And these insurance companies come out with medication and they can sell it for 20 years patent.
Nobody else can compete with them.
And the price point, one of the drugs we looked at, Vinny, the price point of what they sold.
And then the year when, what do you call it, when the patent expired, within three years, the price of the medicine dropped 98.5%.
Let me say this one more time.
It went from $1,000 to $15.
Okay?
Because now everybody could compete in the marketplace.
So you look at these laws, you're like, okay, so I can see why a big pharma would negotiate and hire lobbyists to go in there to pass the law to extend the patent for 20 years and then figure out other ways.
Some of them are extending them for another 29 years, 39 years.
Okay, that's dirty.
Let's figure out a way to negotiate these policies.
What I'm asking about here is, these are all the top 10 list of organizations that are the ones that have destroyed America the most, divided us the most, had us fighting against each other.
All of these guys hate the orange.
So why is that?
Well, I think I guess I would say two things.
In my opinion, I think more than anything else, these guys, more than they hate Trump, I think they hate Trump's base more than they hate Trump specifically.
And I would argue that because of the war on domestic terror infrastructure being set up expressly to target people in that base and also anyone that has sort of nationalist nationalist bent, I would guess.
And Trump obviously postures as being nationalist, and I don't think they like that and pushing to bring industry back to the U.S., all of that stuff.
The decision was made explicitly by the people who actually run America to move industry out of the U.S. many decades ago.
They do not want to bring it back.
They don't.
And I think if a lot of these people, like I mentioned earlier, have this goal of making this global economy, and a lot of that has since been wrapped into Agenda 2030 and the people actually developing those policies, I don't think they want a nationalist guy.
There's an effort globally to really vilify nationalism.
It doesn't matter if it's Trump.
It's also Bolsonaro and Brazil or whatever.
And I don't think you have to like them, but I think the reason they're so against them is because they want to vilify nationalism.
If I have to choose between nationalism and what's the opposite of nationalism, internationalism.
Okay, exactly.
Internationalism.
If I have to choose between being proud of my heritage, my country, my land, and everybody else around the world, give me a good argument for that being a bad thing.
It's about sovereignty, I think, though, at the end of the day.
Because when you remove national sovereignty, then the people actually running the show are even more unaccountable.
Yeah, so they'll use nationalism to link it to Germany.
But again, that's what has been going on with Trump is literally Hitler.
Putin's literally Hitler.
People fall for their knife.
But let's kind of go to this.
The closest president I can find to Trump, closest family, I can see to Trump is John F. Kennedy, closest.
I think those two to me are very close.
Neither one of them have a nice resume.
You know, they've done some stuff in the past, Kennedy, all that stuff.
But both of them, the people of power, like the Lyndon Johnson, the Hoover, the CIA, those guys hated Kennedy.
Totally.
Okay.
The same people hate Trump.
Trump and Kennedy politically, believe it or not, are more similar.
But, you know, Kennedy was a proud Second Amendment NRA member today.
Kennedy is not a Democrat, but it's a hero to a lot of Democrats.
So what I watch for is the following.
So here's a question for you, Whitney.
The question for you is this.
What institution has hurt America that loves Trump?
Yeah, that would probably take some thinking to do.
At least in the U.S., it's pretty clear that by this point, I think it's a good question.
Do you understand what I'm asking?
I want you to think about it.
What institution, what institution that hates America, that's hurt America, loves Trump?
I can't even think of one.
I want you to think about it because you're more able to kind of see it from the other side.
What institution that has hurt America the last 20 years loves and supports Trump?
Not from that list that you said, from the Fauci City.
Give me another one.
Maybe I'm not thinking about anybody.
I can't even think of one.
That's a great question.
I guess here's the thing that really concerns me about Trump as it relates to national sovereignty.
Recently, he did an interview and he said something about Israel, about how Israel essentially, he said it, controls Congress and how he thought that was a good thing.
Okay.
So regardless of how you feel about Israel, Zionism, the U.S.-Israel relationship, I do not think it's a good sign to have your nationalist politicians say a foreign power rightfully unduly influences our national congress.
And if you look at the history, there are Israeli espionage operations that have happened.
Jonathan Pollard is probably the best well-known where that gravely undermined U.S. national security.
And I think those institutions support Trump, but they're not necessarily a- I can give an argument to that, but give me one more.
Go one more.
Go two more.
Go three more.
Adam, you're here.
What are you thinking?
You're saying that institutions that...
Give me any institutions or individuals that have hurt America that love Trump.
I'm actually curious.
By the way, if you're watching this, comment below and hash debate each other.
I'm really curious.
I don't know all the institutions.
This isn't my world.
I mean, from the FBI for you.
This is you research.
You've been following politics for a good 20 years.
You know, you're in it.
Rob, yourself, what institution, I'm actually curious right now.
What institution that's made our lives worse, that made people stay home during COVID, that forced people to do shit they don't want to do?
Okay, about COVID, though, Trump still is really into Operation Warp Speed and what that produced and declines to distance himself from any sort of the vaccine stuff.
Fine.
So use that one.
That's one.
So he, Operation Warp Speed, that you try to speed up getting vaccine, but the reality is Pfizer didn't announce that they got the vaccine two days after the election, which didn't help him anyways.
Yeah, but what I'm saying is I don't think that is that hurt Americans.
It was not a good idea to put the military, specifically DARPA people in charge of that, who have sort of, DARPA tends to have sort of this mad scientist view, and they have partnerships with people like Moderna, which also has partnered with the Bill Melinda Gates.
I don't know if they support Trump, though.
I think they manipulated Trump into bullying.
Sure, that's possible.
But the thing is, Trump support, but Trump still to this day supports that operation.
The warp speed.
Yeah, totally.
I think, yeah, I think he takes credit for the fact that he was able to get that speed.
Yeah, but then you have Peter Navarro saying, oh, he was manipulated.
Yeah, so he was manipulated.
So it's possible.
Keep going.
Okay, so that's one.
Keep going.
Give me a couple more.
Well, okay, I'm not an expert on Trump stuff necessarily, but I personally don't trust any politician, especially one that gets to that level.
I do think, though, that it is important, in my opinion, to push for national sovereignty and things like that.
What I mentioned with Israel, that does concern me because Israel's foreign policy objectives or policy objectives as it relates to the United States do not always coincide with American national interests.
The Iraq war is a huge example of that.
Netanyahu being like positive reverberations around the region.
You had the Wexner Foundation, which was tied up with Israel at that time, trying to develop talking points to push us into Iraq and all of this stuff.
That cost American lives, cost American money, obviously, and all sorts, you know, millions of innocent people dead in the Middle East, not in our national security interest.
And you have a lot of, I mean, even the Trump White House, the FBI found stingray devices that were Israel's government spying on the Trump White House.
Nothing was done.
And there's a lot of things going back.
Robert Maxwell sold bugged software on behalf of Israel to our nuke facilities.
It's in the Los Alamos lab.
Ken Henry Kissinger told him who to pay off.
Nothing happened to Henry Kissinger.
John Tower was the guy he paid off, former head of the Senate Armed Services Committee, opened the door for Maxwell to sell this bug software.
And then they take our nuclear secrets and then they sell it on to China.
So that is a problem for me.
I mean, you say that's one example, but I think that is a pretty significant example.
And personally, I would challenge Trump on that when it comes to the America first stuff.
But at the same time, when you're talking about the Republican party. out of 20 institutions you just mentioned.
That's fine.
No, no, but in terms of undermining the claim of America first, I think that is something that he definitely needs to address.
What I like that you do, I'm not you.
You're the pro here.
You're in the world that you're in that you go in and you find stuff, right?
That's your job.
You're very good at it.
I would be very curious if you went and you investigated the one guy that was assassinated and the other guy that was character assassinated in ways no one's ever been character assassinated before.
Why is that?
Why are those two families feared as much as they were feared?
Is it because they were doing so many side deals?
I don't think so.
No, no, no.
So that's my, so what I'm trying to find out is, because think about this.
Here's what we want to do.
There's two ways to would we like to see more people who love America that are not willing to bend their backs for anybody and negotiate anything just to be invited to those cool parties.
Okay.
Yeah, obviously that would be better, but is Trump that guy?
I'm not saying if Trump is that guy.
But here's what I'm saying to you.
I'm saying go investigate him and go write something on him and Kennedy.
Link those two families and then rate them.
Write whatever dirt or anything you want to find, but then also ask, why do these organizations, if we were to rank, okay, if we were to rank the last 60 years, 1964, 1963 till today, let's go November of 1963 till today, right?
That's 60 years.
The last 60 years, from your perspective, give me the five agencies, individuals, organizations that have destroyed America the most, the five, the top five.
Oh, man.
Give me the top five.
You're really putting me on the spot.
I mean, no, I'm not saying you know exactly what the top five, but in your opinion, what do you think are the top five?
All right.
It's, well, I guess it's pretty broad.
A lot of corporate America would be up there for sure.
Multinational corporations.
Big Pharma, IBM, a lot of the big tech companies then and now, for sure.
Okay, big pharma.
Building this transnational power structure ultimately at the end of the day.
I'd like to throw the Fed in there.
Okay.
If you've got Federal Reserve?
Yeah.
Okay, game.
Who else?
Or you can just broaden that and make it banks, the big banks.
Central banks are the biggest banks.
Commercial, corporate.
I got all that together.
What else would you say?
Definitely the CIA.
Definitely the Department of Justice.
Would you put DOJ over FBI?
Well, DOJ oversees the FBI technically, right?
Okay, so let's put DOJ and FBI together.
How about lobbyists?
Yeah, but lobbyists are revolving door on the payroll stuff.
So ultimately, that's the corporate side subverting the public sector or military-industrial complex.
Do you want to put those guys?
Military-industrial complex.
In terms of that, military-industrial complex, in terms of how people think of that, I would say the contractors.
General Dynamics, insanely corrupt.
That's the Crown family.
I mentioned earlier.
They run that.
Insanely corrupt.
Lester Crown, the Pentagon, tried to get his security clearance revoked three times and they couldn't do it because higher-ups kept shutting it down.
So perfect.
Let's do this.
Let's stay on this.
This is very helpful.
Let's continue because I think this is good.
Okay, so we got big pharma, we got IBM, we got Fed, I would say big tech.
Big tech is what you would say.
Okay, big tech.
Then we said the CIA, DOJ, FBA combined together, military-industrial complex.
Fine.
Now give me individuals.
What families, names, the last 60 years, since November of 2000, to November of 1963, not 22nd, since November 1st of 1963, till today, which top families have destroyed America the most?
Okay, Rockefeller's number one, probably.
Yeah.
After that, I'd put the Chicago families up there, the Crowns and the Pritzkers.
I'd probably put them together.
Yeah.
Chicago got it.
Who else?
All right.
The opioid crisis, the Sacklers.
Okay.
The Sacklers?
Because that, I mean, a lot of, not enough people talk about that, but that you could sort of rope into big pharma.
Like some of the big companies that are tied to suspect stuff going on with the anthrax attacks and also with COVID stuff, emergent bio solutions, you know, they make a killing off of selling Narcan.
They have a monopoly on Narcan, too.
So we got three.
Rockefeller, the Chicago, the Pritzker, you put them together.
The opioid, the Sacklers, who else?
Well, again, I think, you know, when you're talking about banking interests, a lot of these tend to be transnational.
You have some of these old money banks from Europe.
Give me names, family.
Rothschild.
Yeah, I'd probably put the Rothschild on there for sure.
But they openly made an alliance with the Rockefellers not that long ago.
Who else?
These are just families.
Power Two.
Like a Henry Kissinger.
It could be Kissinger, Clinton, Biden, people who have sold America out.
Well, Kissinger sold America out, definitely.
Yeah.
I'm here because of Kissinger.
You know what I mean?
Really?
Oh, really?
I'm from Iran.
Kissinger was supposed to help Iran.
The Shah, he did a last minute.
The Shah fell, and then catastrophic issues happen.
Khomeini shows up.
I'm very successful.
Anyways, that's a whole different story.
So Kissinger, who else would you put us top for?
Would you put what other names do we want to say?
Do we want to say Johnson, Lyndon Johnson?
Yeah, the Bushes, the Clintons preferred, but they're actually in the Dulles family.
Dulles?
Dulles?
Yeah, Alan Dulles.
The airport.
Or Sullivan and Cromwell, which is their law firm that they ran forever.
That could be a huge list.
Okay, so you don't have Clinton or Bidens here at all.
You don't think they're that important?
I would think the Clintons, Bushes, Bidens, they, yeah.
Let's lump them in just together.
So you put all of them together.
Okay.
They're different sides of just the same crime field, especially the Bushes and the Clintons.
There's too much weird stuff around them, especially when you look at things like Iran-Contra.
Like I mentioned earlier, Bush covered for Mark Middleton.
They like step in for each other when they need to.
So here's my question.
You ready?
All right.
So here we go.
Okay.
Which one of these loves Trump?
Yeah, I don't think they do.
That's the point.
The point is that I see your point to you today is I would love because I do so many different things right now.
I wish I had time to do investigative journalism.
I just don't have the luxury to do it right now.
But that's why I love for somebody like you who, if this interests you and if you're inspired by it, go do those two families.
Sure.
But I do think, you know, if you're talking about Trump specifically, you know, I do think he has some conflicts of interest and has for a long time.
I don't disagree.
Yeah.
So, you know, at the end of the day, if the issue is let's stop the vilification of nationalism, let's make moves to protect our national sovereignty.
I think that has to be a mass movement from the American public.
Because, you know, I see what you're saying, but at the same time, I think so many people in the United States, whether it's been instilled in them through education or culture or whatever, seem to think that as long as we get the right guy in the White House, everything's going to magically fix itself in this country.
And I do not think that is possible.
You know, believe what you want to believe about Trump.
He came in, you know, 2016 with great intentions and all of that.
If you want to believe that, I don't necessarily believe that.
But if you do, he wasn't able to do that.
Why?
One guy can't fix it.
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. running right now.
He's obviously very different than a lot of these guys.
Do you think if he got in, he could fix it all?
I think the problem is so big at this point.
And that so many of these institutions we've been naming off, it's the most powerful institutions in the U.S. government.
They said before, like with Nixon and Watergate, oh, it's just some rotten apples in the barrel, but keep the barrel.
I'm telling you, the barrel is rotten.
And the only way we can fix that in this country is that people have to realize that and people have to start taking responsibility for their own.
Well, what does that mean, though?
Because that's a good motivational speech, but what is the problem?
Here's what it means.
So what do you need to be self-sufficient as a community, as an individual, as a family?
Not relying on the government.
But also multinational corporations, right?
We have outsourced from our communities, from our country, almost everything we produce to foreign powers that don't like us, right?
Or we're in, you know, trillions of dollars in debt to our ostensible main enemy.
So I would argue that's because we have our government, corporations, but the American people have co-signed it because they've been told this is more convenient, this will be cheaper, blah, blah, blah, outsourced so much of what we need to survive as a people, as communities, as families to people that don't like us.
And that's not necessarily just China here, right?
That's these corporations, these elite families that own most of corporate America and the banks and what have you.
They don't like the little people.
Yeah.
So if you're listening to this, folks, you're enjoying this podcast, smash the subscribe button and turn on the notifications.
And just in case something happens here, text award podcast to 310-340-1132.
Text award podcast to 310-340-1132 for anything that we do, the next live event.
And maybe if you would like to have a Whitney Webb at a live event at our studio in the future, let us know.
But Texas there will be announcing the next live here as well.
Let's continue.
Okay.
So I agree.
I think the challenge is a couple different things.
One is we think one person can save America.
When is the next Kennedy?
When is the next Reagan going to be here?
It's us.
I fully agree with you.
It's us.
I agree with you.
But I think people like you are very important.
I think we need to protect people like you because I think people like you are a gem.
We need more of you.
It takes a lot of courage and sacrifice in your personal life to want to study these types of topics.
This is not an easy job and profession you've chosen.
I salute you for the job that you do.
To me, it's a form of public service.
And we're not paying taxes for a person like you.
You're independent.
You're doing this for us.
We thank you for it.
You're very important.
I think individually we need to stop relying on the government.
So I think one of the things that is anybody that pushed a lot of entitlements the last 60 years and got more Americans to be relying on the government, I think they screwed America as well.
They got people not to realize what their capabilities are.
That's perfect.
But the problem here for me, what I think immediately, those are long-term solutions for us to become independent, responsible, not relying on government and take care of ourselves.
I get it.
But I also think this person we're looking at to be able to get in there and do the work is not going to be a person that looks and walks and talks the way you want that person.
Well, sure.
But here's what I worry about too with the 2024 election.
Given how the other elections have been, what's going to stop either side from being fraud, right?
Or Russia get 2.0 or some other kind of thing.
Well, the thing is, our elections, the legitimacy of them is already questioned by a massive portion of the country after 2020.
No, but both sides have been.
Clinton.
No, I know.
But if you flip it the other side, it'll be the other side again.
You know what I mean?
Something both of them do.
And we just have to accept the fact that when people, you know, NFL, well, they cheated.
That's who won the suit.
Okay, got it.
Okay, but let's say Trump gets in, the national security state and all these other institutions hate him, right?
And they'll put their weight behind the fraud claim.
What happens then?
To say what they cheated to do.
Oh, yeah, that there was cheating, that there was whatever foreign interference.
I don't know.
No, we don't know if it's going to happen.
But my concern is I think we have already really started to move away from democracy, that we are currently living in illusion of democracy and illusion.
Go back to a republic where the individual is protected because right now the individual is not protected.
But think about the DNC, even in the primaries with Bernie Sanders.
Yeah, they're cheating him.
I mean, they screwed him.
He was the guy that...
And now they're saying they won't even have a debate in the Democratic primary because put RFK Jr. against Biden.
He's a very good person.
So what's your solution, though?
What's your solution?
So, for example, you're saying, what if we get this person, Trump wins, and DeSantis wins?
Okay, what if we get RFK then wins?
What if we get Biden demos?
know what's going to happen if biden wins right we know what's good yeah but if trump wins and he goes in or desantis when he goes in there's a difference between those two winning If Trump wins and he goes in, they're going to try to do everything they can, and everything's been false.
Durham report, you know, the recent thing, Clinton's involvement, Obama's involvement.
There's so many things that have been proven that were fake.
The credibility is false.
But what's been done?
Where's the accountability?
From whose end?
His end.
From anyone's end.
All these people, I mean, the stuff that has been, these people have gotten away with in an actual election interference.
Are you kidding me?
Like, you know who was enemy to state number one when Trump was president?
No, I'm not talking, I'm talking about like the Russiagate stuff.
Oh, yeah.
And I don't think that I don't think, I think, honestly, those guys are morons if they keep doing that because that business model is not working for them.
They keep losing money when they do that.
MSNBC is not.
They're not creative either.
I mean, they don't.
But the point is, let them do that.
They have no moral authority.
Democrats, this guy was a guy that believed in the Russia stuff.
First time him and I spoke when I was going to bring him here to be with us on the team, I didn't know if I was ready for a guy like this.
I questioned him.
I'm like, what do you think about this?
Can you reason?
Are you able to do this?
Well, I think.
I said, what do you think about the Russia deal?
Eventually, he came in and now he reads it.
He says, I can't believe they did this.
And he's a guy that is a worker.
He's independent.
He doesn't rely on the government.
He takes care of himself.
He's done very well for himself.
And now he's sitting there saying, yeah, I don't know if I like, I'm not a Trump guy, but I don't know what they're doing here.
There is more people in his camp.
Sure.
And then I just submit one thing.
We talked about this list of institutions that have basically harmed America.
The number one item on this list that we left out is the media and mainstream media and the lies and the narratives that they told the American public.
And I'm a type of person that prides myself on digesting a whole appetite of media, especially now.
But there's a wide swath of Americans that are just basically just peripherally reading the news.
Yeah, I guess it's Russia Gate thing.
Yep, I guess the January 6th thing.
I guess the Dominion thing.
It's like we don't have time to basically pick apart each of these stories.
Like we're all not Whitney Webb.
We can diagnose all these wild different stories and just accumulate them and diagnose them.
Most people are like, yep, I guess there's a Russia thing going on.
Here's what concerns me, though.
So based on what you guys have been saying, and it's very true, collapse in mainstream media is collapsing.
And we're in a very different position now than 2016 or really any other time as far as that metric is concerned.
But what concerns me is that, okay, so with COVID, you had this huge push to turn everything, move everything to the digital sphere, right?
And at the same time, you're trying to move everyone, everything, all stuff online, but you're also making this big push to control what's online.
Yeah.
And so you're having this push to censor.
You know, Twitter files touched on that, obviously.
And there's this talk from like Matt Taibbi and others about the censorship industrial complex.
That is a very real thing.
And, you know, for someone like me, the threat of censorship is very real.
You know, I did real factual reporting on stuff going on with COVID-19, and I lost my Patreon.
They admitted that there was nothing untrue in the report they censored me for, but they thought it might affect vaccine uptake.
And so they took away all my money.
Well, Whitney doesn't just all come down to one word, which is control.
It doesn't matter.
They want to control what you say.
They want to control how you spend your money.
They want to control your social credit scores.
This is why I mentioned there's this push into these digital systems.
Everything's going to be online or on the cloud or whatever.
And at the same time, they're controlling, they're making an unprecedented push for control over that digital sphere.
So we're being herded to a place and they're creating all of these, all of this infrastructure to control what we can see and hear once we're all stuck there, essentially.
So you have collapse in trust of mainstream media.
The goal, it seems like, is to take out everyone that won't say what mainstream media says.
And at the same time, you're having mainstream media creepingly being replaced by chat GPT and things like that.
They're saying that by 2025, 90% of all the content, media content online is going to be chat GPT generated, right?
So you don't have regular people telling you what to say.
How are people going to know what's real and what's not at that point?
And now there's all this talk of deep fakes.
AI art has gone into this new era.
You can make anyone with AI art be in a picture with Jeffrey Epstein.
You know what I mean?
So, you know, this is a really unprecedented situation.
And to think that these institutions we've been listing off, those actors, wouldn't go, you know, throw the kitchen sink at us to get what they want.
You know, I think that might be kind of naive to think that because, you know, this is, they're making a total push for control and they're going to put out all the stops because if they don't get it, they lose, right?
And stuff will start to come out.
They don't want that to happen, you know?
So this is, they're giving it their all.
And I don't think they're going to win at the end of the day, but how much damage do they cause?
But they're all going to be a lot of people.
They've all done a plenty of plenty of damage.
Well, and I was going to say, because Pat, Pablo, I think it was the podcast with Giuliani and them where we were talking about the hope and having hope and having faith, not losing all that hope.
But just from everything that we talked about when you, from Epstein to these guys, it's like, are we wasting, I 100% appreciate getting it out there, getting the word out there, but are we wasting our time in the sense that these people have set up the pieces of the game where no matter what, we could literally just like the whole Durham report came out.
FBI, Department of Justice, Obama administration, Hillary, they all peddled this lie.
The whole Russian, it was all BS.
They framed Michael Flynn, three-star general.
It just came out.
The report's in your face.
Nobody's going to go to jail.
Hillary's going to walk free.
Nothing happens.
So are we just wasting our time with all these just evil players?
Because at the end of the day, what really happens to them?
Yeah, so the lack of accountability thing is a major problem.
And again, I think the main issue we need to be looking here is public trust, right?
There's no public trust in the media.
The public trust in institutions is dwindling.
But what do those institutions do when they realize no one trusts them anymore?
They don't have to.
And they're not going to give up control easily.
You know what I mean?
So what are they planning to do?
And this is why I always go back to this stuff that's been set up by the Biden administration, but its antecedents go before Biden, this war on domestic terror infrastructure.
All of the people that were counterterror experts and developing AI to hunt insurgents in Iraq are now developing AI and policies to go after regular Americans that are accused of domestic terror.
And if you read the policy papers from the Biden administration, their definition of what is a domestic terrorist is extremely broad.
It's extremely broad.
It includes people who don't like, even on the left, the advance of like multi-national corporations and like global capitalism and stuff.
Or people who are perceived as being too anti-authority and too anti-government.
Or parents speaking up at school board meetings saying they don't want their kids learning about sex and they're yelling at those meetings.
They're like, oh, they're a domestic terrorist.
So the problem is, you know, how are they trying to do this?
It's with AI.
It's with what?
It's data mining off of social media.
I would say if people really want to shut down this machine, get off of legacy social media.
Okay.
But again, like, you know, I know that's hard for people because people are so into it.
And like me as a journalist, a lot of people won't read my stuff if I don't use it and blah, blah, blah.
But you have to look at what they're setting up.
And they wouldn't be setting up this war on domestic terror infrastructure where it could be you unless they were planning to use it at some point.
And all they need, Bill Barr said it a few years ago when he was attorney general.
He was talking about getting a backdoor in encryption, eliminating essentially any sort of privacy enhancing technology for the public.
He was saying, at some point, there's going to be a big event that will galvanize public opinion around these issues.
Sort of reminds me about the PNAC, new Pearl Harbor stuff before 9-11, you know.
But it's true.
You have this one crisis that comes, and there's all this fear.
This is the boogeyman.
This is what we have to do to stop it.
Because if you think, like I mentioned earlier, we're being herded into this corral of the digital control grid, I guess.
And they're trying, you know.
Historically, what I think.
It's the carrot and the stick.
You know what I mean?
Yeah, I totally get that.
Explained very clearly.
But, you know, you know the whole thing when some people say, well, you know, what if you only had one hour to live?
What would you do?
Like, dude, if I had one hour to live, I wouldn't be here right now.
I'd stay home.
Do that.
So I'm saying, let me get this straight.
For the rest of the year, you want me to treat my life as if I only have one hour to live.
Yeah, I'd be home for the entire year.
So is that what you want me to do?
Well, no, still be effective, but what if you had one hour to live?
Dude, I get that.
And I've said this myself.
It's an element of, this is why I think I'm working too hard.
This is why I'm doing this.
So there's so many arguments with contradictions that we all give.
Our parents told us, we tell our kids, we tell our audience, you know, the media tells us, leaders tell us, books tell us.
The world is filled with a lot of contradictions.
And somehow, some way, we have to find some level of reasonable decision for us to make that comes with contradictions.
For example, you know, this whole thing is like, well, one person's not going to save this, and it's got to be us.
Okay.
I think that's partially true.
Long term, it's got to be us.
But it was one person that was able to have the courage to go against Hitler, and it wasn't Chamberlain.
It was another guy named Churchill.
And if there is no Churchill, with the fearlessness that he had, no matter how much shit you talk about his past, how he was, who he or husband, you know, if there's no Churchill, you and I are probably speaking German right now.
Or the world will be a different world today.
Okay.
Every once in a while, during times like this, you still have to have somebody speak on your behalf.
I'm not saying that.
So a lot of people like follow your content.
They feel like you're speaking for them.
So why do you do so well?
Because there's millions of people around the world that are saying, dude, she's speaking.
She's me.
I feel like she's talking on my behalf.
Great.
I think we need somebody that's going to get up there and piss a lot of people off.
When I see candidates that are already brokering deals with everybody pre-election, I already know that person's not going to do what America needs to do today.
I already know that person is going to get into the White House and they're going to do what?
Hey, I'm into the White House.
I'm this.
You know, the person to do that, I still do believe because the angle of just thinking it's us, that gets us from not trusting in the voting system and even to show up to vote.
Here's what I mean when I say the one guy thing, one guy can't save it.
Because what happens is a lot of people feel like, oh, as long as I vote for that one guy and he gets in, then I don't have to do anything anymore.
But that's how a lot of people react.
Okay.
So I'm not saying we shouldn't, you know, that no good can come up getting a good guy or a better guy in the White House.
You don't.
I don't.
No, but there are people that do that.
And so that's why I try and stress in my work, especially in today's climate.
I mean, there's this crazy banking crisis going on, and it's not going to get better before it gets worse.
Sure.
Right.
So what do you do tomorrow if you wake up and your money's gone?
Right.
What are you going to do?
How are you going to feed your family?
What if the internet shut down?
You know, all this.
I mean, I encourage people to think about that type of building, that type of resilience in their lives because the less dependent you are in the system, the less harder it is for you to be enslaved by that system.
100%.
You know, so that's what I'm trying to say about, you know, personal responsibility and stop outsourcing your needs to these people in this system, right?
Would it be better to get someone who speaks truth to power into the White House?
I'm not saying that would be bad at all.
What I'm saying is a lot of people tend to go back to sort of armchair activism or political season's over.
I'm not going to fight for my rights anymore because now I've got the guy up there.
I do think you need somebody to speak on your behalf.
Yeah, sure.
But the problem is a lot of people like to not do anything.
You know what I mean?
The reality is the Predo theory has been around for a while.
The 80-20 ruled, 80% is not going to do anything anyway.
So we're not relying on the 80% to do something.
I've been part of the 80% when I was trying to get everybody else to save my life.
And I'm like, this shit doesn't work.
I want to be part of the community that can stand up and be responsible for them.
So then I shifted.
I had a one-point AGP in high school.
Trust me, there's no one in high school that's going to say, Patrick B. David was going to do something big with his life.
Finally, I'm like, get off your ass and go do something.
I joined the army at 18.
Life changed.
So I'm with you there.
But I also do believe this notion, like, you know how single men and women who wait until they get married, what's the problem the older you get?
What is the problem?
Are you married?
I don't know if you're married or not.
Married with kids.
Okay.
So I'm a single mom, of course.
Okay, perfect.
Okay.
So the whole concept with marriage, right?
The whole concept with marriage.
You wait to get married.
Okay.
Wait till 35.
Wait till you're 40.
Wait till you're 45.
Wait till you're 50.
What's the problem the longer we wait until we get married?
What are we really saying to the world?
What we're really saying to the world is what?
I'm going to wait until I find what?
The perfect person.
Guess what?
Good luck.
The older you get, the harder it's going to be to find that perfect person, right?
So there is part of that argument that also has a leak in it.
There is risk in marriage, right?
There is risk in having kids.
There's risk in saying, I think this guy could be the right guy.
But it's even riskier to say, no, I'm not, no, I'm not going to do this.
There's risk.
You know, there's risk.
Relationships don't work.
You know, kids don't, there's pain in that stuff.
It's tough.
So I think for us, the one part I absolutely agree with, that we got to take full responsibility.
I think the other part is as well, hey, who do you think that is the least corrupt person that is not loved by the corrupt institutions that you think could go and fight these corruption that has the highest likelihood?
Try to support that person.
If you think it's a RFK, go for it.
If you think it's Tulsig, go, if you think it's even a libertarian guy, we had a guy named Dave Smith.
Yeah, I actually like this guy.
I hope he does something.
If it's a Dave Smith, go for it.
If you think it's a Trump, go for it.
If you think it's Vivek, go for it.
But find someone that you think could fight that corruption.
What I like about Vivek is he's ran a company that's worth a couple billion dollars and he's calling out all the shit.
He's calling out all these weird institutions.
Support a guy like that.
So do be independent, but also do sell and support the guys that you think have the highest likelihood of fighting the things that you also want someone to fight for.
I think both are necessary.
Sure.
Yeah.
So you know, but I mean, the only thing I would say is like, you know, if you have more limited means, limited finances, I would personally think it would make sense to invest in, I don't know, a resilient food supply for you and your family and things like that before donating instead of donating at all the same.
You know what I mean?
This actually wasn't a, I wasn't trying to raise money for anybody.
And I'm never going to get into politics because I'm not born here.
I don't have any interest for being a governor.
I enjoy building businesses.
You know, will we do something to advise and all this other stuff?
We're already doing that anyways, and indirectly with certain camps.
That's a different story.
But for me, it's more about you're at a dinner table.
So what do you think about this?
Let me tell you what he made me think about.
What do you think about these institutions?
I think that is a form of support.
I think dinner table, lunch, coffee, conversation.
Well, supporting the rhetoric that you think is important.
Sure, in the talking points and all of that.
Maybe the values and principles that you think are most important.
Like, you know, you asked somebody a question.
So what did Biden say last week?
The biggest threat to the United States of America are white supremacists.
Seriously?
Really?
So let me get this straight.
So if I'm voting for Biden and you're saying the most important serious threat is white Americans that are apparently white supremacists that don't go along with your philosophies.
I mean, if you think you agree with that, vote for him, support him.
If you don't, don't.
That's just a way of, you know, supporting or not supporting that argument.
But Pat, do you think, okay, so let's say another person like that, Pat, grows to this power, becomes, wants to be the president, we want him, you don't think that the powers that be, we already saw it.
I do think that they're going to, I'm saying they're all going to go after this person.
They're not going to let them.
Okay, so what's the alternative?
Well, that's my point.
That's why I was going to my point.
What is the alternative?
Look, the more you win in life, you trust fewer people because more people rip you off.
More people backstab you.
It becomes harder to trust people.
It takes longer to trust people.
You're not as open as you once were when you were naive and innocent.
You see the way people take advantage of you.
You're like, oh my God, I did that for that guy.
Why did that guy take advantage of me?
What a freaking shady situation.
Now you're like, you know what?
Screw it.
I don't trust anybody, right?
When you're moving up.
Okay.
So what are you going to do?
Sit by yourself and not go entertain other.
No.
So I think when a person gets involved in power like that, they're going to be tainted.
They're going to see the darker side.
They're going to see the gamification against them.
You chose this job.
You shouldn't have chose this job.
Then don't do it.
You chose to be a parent.
Being a parent is not like, hey, all these pictures you do for, you know, annual for Christmas party cards.
Look how great they look.
You just saw one second of the photo shoot of three hours.
What you didn't see, the two hours and 59 minutes is fighting, throwing a fit, pooping, changing clothes, all the shit that happens in a photo shoot.
Same thing's going to happen as well.
But we can't give up hope to say, well, there's nothing I can do about it.
And, you know, I'm helpless.
And I don't matter.
I don't.
No, that's what cowards do.
That's what victims do.
And the DNA of an American is not a coward.
It's not a victim.
It's somebody that has hope and goes and fights for themselves.
Well, well, that's why I talk about personal responsibility.
I mean, this is supposed to be a country of people that like went out to the frontier and like were self-sufficient and built something, right?
But I think Americans today have been conditioned to be very different than that.
And I think it's high time that people return back to the values of from, you know, which this country came from, which includes the values of the Constitution, but also those values of self-sufficiency.
Because if you're not able to depend on yourself or people you trust for something, you're depending on someone else.
And that person, you know, you want to eat.
You got to jump through these hoops.
I mean, that's not, given what we're seeing being built around us today, I do not think that is a good way to continue to live personally.
So, you know, I definitely agree with that about values for sure.
But at the same time, like I said earlier, I think too many people put too much of their faith and too much of their energy in just wanting one person to do everything for them magically, you know, like a political savior type of thing.
And I think that dynamic is very, especially at this point, harmful.
It's time for people to make something of themselves or do something in the real world to protect their family.
I mean, liking stuff on Twitter, retweeting, that's not activism.
That's not necessarily going to change it.
It's the lowest level, though.
It's a form of it.
It's a low-speed.
There's people that do that and they're like, oh, well, that's what, you know, it's guess what?
I don't think it's selfish.
I would rather take that than below that, which is doing nothing because you're hopeless and you're hopeless.
That's worse than somebody that does a return.
But a lot of those hopeless people, too, are like, I see this whole system.
I think it's all rigged, right?
Fine.
I'm talking to those people and I'm saying you don't have to participate in the system.
Yeah.
You know, you can still do something about this that doesn't involve interacting with that system.
I think that's selfish.
I think that's selfish.
Well, if you're building a parallel system to keep you and your family and your community resilient in times of crisis, I don't think that's selfish.
I think that's a Great Depression.
Let me correct myself.
I think you need to be selfish 70% of the time.
But 60 to 70% of the time, I do think you need to be selfish and make those decisions for yourself.
But the additional 20, 30, 40% where you need to be selfless, I think you need to also be thinking long term because you don't matter as much as you think you matter.
Meaning, you have kids, I have kids.
We matter, but you're officially living for your kids in a different way than when you were single.
Life changes slightly, right?
So we have to be thinking about what we need to do for them.
Do we want to teach them to be fighters?
Do we want to teach them to be willing to not give up and have this mindset?
Like, you know, we have a guy that comes to Mario's wedding.
One of the relatives that comes to Mario's wedding in our backyard is from the other side of the family.
It's like, well, you know, these rich people, you know, there's nothing I can do about it.
You know, we're poor.
There's nothing.
Patrick is rich.
There's nothing we can do about it.
I'm like, dude, Patrick grew up in a freaking, his dad's a 99 cent store cashier.
What do you mean you cannot do anything about it?
Patrick's a military guy that got out not having a clue what the hell to do.
He decided to read a few thousand business books on life change.
This concept of, I don't really matter that much.
I think that's also catastrophic.
I want people to read every single thing you've written and say, I want to do something about this.
I want to rise up and risk my life to contribute and fight these mofos.
Yeah, absolutely.
I want to go.
I want to brawl.
I want to be a Whitney Webb.
That's what I want to do.
We need 100 Whitney Webbs right now.
We need more boys and men around the world, even 14-year-old kids, 15-year-old kids that are saying, I want to go do some proper investigation.
Well, go light it up and go think and, you know, point out different arguments.
So for me, hero making machine, I think you're a hero.
I'm edifying you as a hero.
I think we need more people to want to be that.
There's different ways of becoming a hero.
I think you're one of the ways of becoming a hero.
Let's address one thing.
It has nothing to do with this.
Woody Allen.
I want to talk about this because a lot of things have been coming up with Woody Allen.
And, you know, Vinny brought a video out.
Vinny, if you want to even read the story with Woody Allen, I think it's on page 8 on that.
I'm pretty sure Winnie knows something.
Yeah, okay.
So the Wall Street Journal published an analysis of recently released documents that provided details of Jeffrey Epstein contacts with high profile individuals from 2008 with the guilty pleasant soliciting and procuring a minor for prostitution.
All right.
They included thousands of pages of emails, schedules from 2013 to 2017, which show the nature of the frequency of these Epstein's contacts with an array of powerful people.
They included Lawrence Summers, former Treasury Secretary and one-time Harvard University president, who met with Epstein and Harvard after Harvard decided it would no longer accept his donations.
And Woody Allen, Oscar-winning movie director who attended dozens of dinners with his wife, Suni, who's his adopted daughter.
And he's 87.
She's 87 and he's, I'm sorry, he's 87, she's 52.
So like almost a 40-year-old.
At Epstein's mansion and invited Epstein to film screenings.
Other figures include billionaire venture capitalists and LinkedIn co-founder Reed Hoffman, former Israeli Prime Minister Wad Barack and Leon Black, billionaire, co-founder of private equity, giant Apollo Global Management.
So yesterday I was doing research for having you on and just reading up and then I saw a clip of Mia Farrell, who was she adopted.
Suni Prevan and her daughter Dylan Farrow was molested.
Was molested.
And, you know, when you're doing this type of research, I came up to a clip of the 90s of a leaked, like a tap.
I haven't listened to it, but I've heard it.
And I showed it to Pat yesterday.
I got emotional in this prep meeting because it's Mia Farrell and Woody Allen's on the phone and she's telling.
It's disturbing.
I'm going to get emotional right now.
She's crying.
Mind you, this is her adopted daughter and describing what the rape and the abuse that he did to a seven-year-old girl.
And Pat heard this and he was in shock.
We had to hear it twice.
So if it's right, this is a tapped phone call from Woody Allen talking to Mia Farrell.
And this is them talking about Dylan, who was the seven-year-old at the time.
And what I'm saying, I warned me that you will not let me kill.
You have to.
It's way beyond that now.
What you've done to Sunny, what you've done to Dylan.
What you've done to Dylan.
Dylan's a baby.
How could you do that to her?
I don't know anything of the kind.
I know what Dylan tells me.
You've told me nothing but lies.
Dylan tells the truth inconsistently.
No, I don't know that, Woody.
I've always, always been worried about you and Dylan.
And I didn't know the doctor had to report this to the authorities.
I didn't know that.
I went just to be sure she was all right.
And she's not all right, Woody.
She walks around the house holding her vagina.
She sleeps with me.
She's scared of you.
And you.
And I feel pretty guilty myself that I wasn't there to protect her.
She said, Mama, you didn't help me.
She said, Dad, you shouldn't have done that.
He shouldn't have hurt me like that.
If he hurt her, you would weep inside.
And you would just want to be dead.
Because I don't know how you can live with what you did.
So, yeah.
Yeah, that is so disturbing.
Yeah, you hear something like that.
I can't.
It's just.
And these people, nothing happens, Pat, no jail.
Woody Allen's walking around.
This poor girl's ruined for her whole life.
The Epstein Allen, all those girls, all those kids, no accountability.
These people just walk, nothing happens.
The two people got in trouble.
Cindy McCain in January 2020 went in front of, she was in front of a stadium full of people.
She said we all knew what Jeffrey Epstein was doing.
Yeah.
All these people knew.
So all these people, like after he was arrested, acting like, oh yeah, well, I didn't know.
And it was just money this.
I mean, I can't, this is why I get frustrated with the Wall Street Rejournal is reporting because it's just like, they didn't even mention Woody Allen, how he married SUNY Previn.
They don't mention Dylan Farrow at all.
Noam Chomsky gets called out about it.
He's supposed to be this progressive icon.
And he's like, Woody Allen's a great artist.
Don't ask me about my evening with a great artist and a convicted pedophile.
I mean, it's just, I mean, you know, it's disgusting.
And frankly, you know, in my book, I talk about how these types of operations, whether it's, you know, whether it's Epstein, whether it's the Franklin scandal, this stuff has been going on for a really long time.
And even people that are ex-CIA, like John Kiriaku, have said, like, yeah, like, when we want to, you know, recruit a source, if they ask for a kid to sexually abuse, we give it to them.
Unbelievable.
Why do we do that?
And this is why I get, you know, it's so frustrating because Americans have been sold a vision of their government, a vision of their intelligence community and military that is so divorced from this.
And I mean, I just think it's really time that, you know, do we really represent the values that we project around the world that we're supposed to have internalized?
Or no, I don't think we do because we've allowed our country to be run by literal monsters and criminals and people act like it's fine.
And, you know, as long as we act like, you know, oh, well, you know, there's nothing I can do about it.
No, there is stuff you can do about it.
And the first step is to get angry.
Yep.
By the way, is that the clip that she was talking about?
Yes.
Can you play that?
Yep.
Can you play that?
It hides in plain sight.
Epstein was hiding in plain sight.
We all knew about him.
We all knew what he was doing.
But we had no one with no legal aspect that would go after him.
They were afraid of him.
For whatever reason, they were afraid of him.
There's no direct McCain-Biden tie.
So her saying that means the whole freaking Senate knew.
Yep.
And nothing was done.
I mean, it's just crazy to me.
It's scary.
And so, so Winnie, me and Pat are Syrians.
We're Christians.
And when I get to that point where I'm like, nothing happens to these people, they always get away with it.
I mean, Epstein and Delaine are the two that, you know, those who had to be in trouble.
But as a Christian, the only good feeling that I have that if there is a hell, these people will go there.
Because in Matthew, I think it's chapter 18.
Matthew says, if anybody, God said, or Jesus said, if anybody messes with these innocents of the kids, it's better for them to tie a milestone around their head and throw themselves in the ocean.
That's the only comforting feeling I have is that if you do that, the government's not going to go after you.
Obviously, they're all protected, that God will get these people once again.
Yeah, but the thing is, why are we allowing a government that signs off on this crap and, you know, an elite that want to go to a guy that does stuff like that for money so they can like, you know, evade some taxes or, you know, make a couple millions or this and that.
They're willing to like co-sign this behavior for that.
Why do the American people not get mad and enraged about it?
I mean, it drives me crazy.
One of the reasons I went and moved to South America is because, so I'm 33, a millennial.
When I was, I left when I was in my early 20s because I knew about a bunch of crazy crap happening.
And everyone my age was like, I don't care as long as I have Netflix and beer.
And I mean, there's a lot of Americans that are still like that now, you know?
And it's just so, I don't know.
I mean, it makes me really upset because, you know, I was really close to my grandparents.
They loved this country so much.
And if they only knew, if they only knew about this stuff, I mean, I'm just glad they died before.
God rest their souls.
It's just so sad.
That's why I think you're inspiring a lot of other people that want to be like you.
Like I say, the first step is to get angry.
So many Americans have been, you know, we're stimulated all this stuff with like these action movies and death and sex and whatever.
The first step is to like stop being so desensitized and get angry and outraged about what's happening and what's happening to all.
I mean, when you're talking about Epstein or like Woody Allen, these are kids.
I mean, Dylan Farrell was seven, but court documents say he was sexually interested in her time between the ages of two and three.
Three years old.
This is a guy people call a great artist and parade around and defend.
It's sick.
And I mean, two adopted kids, they were, I mean, SUNY Prevan was his daughter too.
There's pictures of them cuddling when they were, she was like eight or nine.
And he marries her and nobody gives a damn.
Yeah.
Yeah, because, you know, oh, he's a great artist, blah, blah, blah.
Well, Epstein was a great financier or whatever.
You know, it doesn't matter.
I mean, once you do that stuff, you cross the line and it's been a taboo.
It's been a red line for thousands of years for a reason, you know?
And it shouldn't change now.
So the question becomes, out of these 10 institutions, these five, 10, 15 names that we came up with, which one of them protects guys like Woody and Epstein the most?
Well, supposedly, you know, law enforcement in this country is supposed to prosecute this stuff and they don't.
And they're on the take, I think.
So who are they accountable to that they don't do that?
Because they also answer to somebody where they see it as a risk to go after a guy like Woody Allen or Epstein.
Well, again, it's hard to know.
But think about, you know, Epstein and the sweetheart deal.
The U.S. attorney was Alex Acosta, later become Secretary of Labor.
He was told he had to sign off on the sweetheart deal because Epstein belonged to intelligence and he was told to back off.
It's above his pay grade.
So you can assume that people like that pop up all over the place.
It doesn't matter where you were in the government.
And I agree with her, Pat going to the Mark Middleton.
Think about this.
That was in Arkansas where he's hanging from a tree, shotgun chest, shotgun to his chest, no gun.
And they rule it, the police department, that it's a suicide.
And nobody says that.
Nobody says timeout.
How is that possible?
You know what I mean?
Well, no one even in the media even bothers to look into who Mark Middleton was at all.
I just told you all this China Gate stuff.
You just search on Congress, you know, the Congress investigation, Senate reports.
Mark Middleton's all over it.
No one even brings up, not even the Daily Mail brings up China Gate.
No one wants to touch that stuff.
And it's because you do that, you're going to get into this murky world where like there's southern air transport, there's weird arms deals going on.
Someone's making a lot of money.
And our intelligence services for a very long time have been very involved in illicit arms deals and illicit drug trades.
And the banks too, HSBC got caught laundering millions of dollars for Mexican drug cartels.
No one goes to jail.
None of them.
Sam Bankman Freed with FTX is about to get 10 of the 13 charges dismissed against him.
And he was the only one arrested for FTX, supposedly taking Ukraine aid money and then funneling it back to DNC politicians.
Nothing happens.
I mean, there's so many examples of this.
It's totally mind-boggling.
And like I point out in the first part of my book, actually a lot of Wall Street is hugely dependent on the returns from laundering drug money.
If the drug trade globally stopped, the banks would collapse.
It's crazy.
There is so much corruption here.
It's just totally mental.
And until we realize the extent of the problem, we'll never be able to fix it.
Because if you have a Disneyland version in your head of what the problem is, the solutions you offer are not going to be tailored to the actual problem.
Nothing's going to get fixed.
And for a lot of people, it's hard for them to wrap their mind around this stuff.
How are these people that I idolize, like Woody Allen put out in front of me as this great guy, blah, blah, blah.
And it clashes with the reality so intensely, people develop cognitive dissidents.
Why would he have been so promoted and so praised after doing all of that?
Well, our institutions are fundamentally corrupt and they reward behavior like this if you're in the right clubs and hang out with the right people and that type of stuff doesn't bother them.
We should be deeply disturbed as Americans that there is a major segment of very powerful elite actors that think that type of behavior is fine.
And if they get caught, nothing will happen to them.
Exactly.
That's actually scary.
Yeah, but if you're like, I don't know, a kid in Florida and you get caught with a joint by the wrong cop.
You know, but Woody Allen can molest two kids and it's fine.
You know.
Let me ask you a question.
There's just a huge double standard, you know?
I think that's pretty clear.
I'd be curious to know what you say about this.
You know how people run for office and they run for president or whatever it is and they run on different issues, right?
Build a wall.
I'm with her.
Obamacare, affordable health, health insurance, cost of insurance, immigration, taxes, rich people, top 1%, billionaires, all these things they run on.
You think if somebody ran and they laid out their top 10 plan and, you know, one of the things in the top five is to investigate what's really going on with these issues.
You think that would be something that would resonate with millions of Americans that they would want to get to the bottom of this?
Yeah, I think so, because even today, despite all the mainstream media, like missing disinformation about stuff like Epstein, people are like, I'd really like to see that client list, you know?
And I think that's the reason, the only reason they ended up going after Ghulain Maxwell was because like they were at first they were like, well, Epstein's dead.
It's gone away.
You know, people were like, but Ghulain Maxwell?
And I mean, that public concern didn't go away.
A lot of these institutions feel like they have to maintain a public veneer that like they'll do something about it, even though they're not really doing much about it.
But what concerns me is what happens when, I mean, the mask is almost totally off as far as like the FBI and DOJ is concerned right now.
What happens when it comes totally off and they don't even have to maintain that public veneer of we're an accountable, responsible institution that cares about democracy and the rule of law?
I'd be so curious to see if somebody runs on that.
I'd be so curious to see if somebody runs on that.
By the way, whoever runs on wanting to investigate Epstein has to be somebody that doesn't need Wall Street money.
Whoever runs on wanting to find out who's on the Epstein list can only do it if they don't take any money from Wall Street.
Which means it eliminates 95% of candidates.
Yeah, I was going to say.
Sure.
Okay.
By the way, you know who's on that list that doesn't need Wall Street money?
Vivek doesn't need Wall Street money.
Trump doesn't need Wall Street money.
A couple of the guys don't need Wall Street money.
Everybody else needs Wall Street money.
What about RFK?
He's a what?
He's like a $5, $10, $20 million guy.
He's going to need some money.
You know, he's already gone after big pharma.
So that's a very big thing to go after.
And now he's continually calling out the CIA for killing JFK.
Yeah, to me.
Every day there's a new article written or a new clip of him saying the CIA killed my uncle.
I think he's another guy.
I think he's a wild car, but I think he's another guy.
I think he's another guy.
Again, remember what for me, if you did a book, the cover is half to paige Trump, have to paid Kennedy.
Okay, John, what do those two families have in common?
You just kind of go through it to see the good, the bad, the ugly, the corrupt, anything that you want to go investigate, the link to Kushner family, all this other family.
If you see whatever family didn't need money is the family that typically cannot be controlled.
Whoever can be moved by money, I mean, you realize Bidens are doing what they're doing for a million-dollar check?
You realize how pathetic that is?
You can buy Bidens for a million or $10 million?
You know what $10 million is to some of these guys?
What?
$10 million?
I can buy your family for $10 million and the big man's going to get, the big guy's going to get 10%.
I think it's concerning to put somebody like that in power.
So I do think there's a few people that will see what's going to happen with that.
What are your thoughts on that?
Well, you know, when it comes to someone like Joe Biden, I think there's a clip of him that was going around in the primary.
He was saying something like, you know, I wanted to be a politician sooner, but I had to wait to be old enough so I could like sell out properly, something like that.
Who said this?
Biden.
But this was like a long time ago when he was much younger.
You know, because apparently they want to take him seriously when he was too young or something and he had to wait.
I don't know.
I mean, the American political system, the way it has operated for decades, rewards behavior like that.
You know, and the problem is, how do we shift it away so it doesn't reward that behavior?
And if you're looking at, like we mentioned earlier, the DNC is going to stop debate essentially to shoehorn Biden in after they've done two successive presidential primaries where they essentially committed fraud to keep the popular candidate out.
How democratic is that, you know?
And I mean, all this other stuff going on, all this funny games to try and like stop Trump or, you know, influence elections.
I love this stuff.
I love the fact that RFK's in it, now that you brought him up.
I love the fact that Vivek's in it.
I love the fact that Trump's in it.
I love the fact that DeSantis, even what he's doing right now with protecting the conservative values, and he's pissing a lot of people off.
And I love the fact that Tulsi is also around.
I hope Tulsi does something as well.
There's enough people that are not afraid.
By the way, Tulsi is going to be on the podcast this Saturday.
Saturday.
Saturday, she's going to be on the podcast.
So she's another person that's out there going out there and calling people out.
We need more people like that.
And they're from all sides.
RFK is running as a Democrat.
Tulsi, I don't know what she's going to be doing, whether she runs as an independent or Republican.
She's also a necessary voice.
Vivek is sitting there taking a completely different angle on the ESG and the woke side.
And then Trump's doing what Trump is doing.
DeSantis doing what he's doing.
More of these voices exposing them.
I'd be curious who's going to say specifically Epstein's list.
Well, I don't know, but I think the more rhetoric about raising awareness of what's going on, whether it's ESG or Epstein or whatever, is important because it's really, really, really important that a large enough percentage of the American public realizes something is seriously, seriously wrong.
Because if we wait too long and people don't figure it out, things could get much worse than they necessarily need to be, you know?
And I would just really hope that, you know, that's what my hope with the upcoming campaigns are of all of this with these different voices, a lot of whom are already coming out and being very, you know, anti-system, at least in the rhetoric.
And that speaks to the fact that a lot of people in the public are very hungry for that type of rhetoric.
And so that does give me hope that people want a real change, not just like an Obama hope and change, hopium type of solution, you know, because that we found out later that his whole cabinet was picked by my like city group in Wall Street right after the 08 crisis and stuff, you know, troubling stuff.
So well, Whitney, first of all, it's it's always my sister says you're her favorite guest.
You're her favorite guest.
Like, can we just have her on regularly every week?
Folks, if you love today's podcast and you would like us to bring her back again and again in the next three, six, 12 months, especially with the election stuff's getting deeper, give us a sub and go order both of her books.
The links are below.
Order the first one and the second one.
Do yourself a favor.
Get smarter.
And then whatever she writes about in there, investigate it.
She openly tells you, go look at the links.
Go investigate if I'm telling the truth.
Go see if these things are just from regular websites and regular blogs or not.
But highly recommend you order One Nation Under Blackmail, Volume 1 and Volume 2.
Get smarter, get wiser, and follow all her content.
She's also got the podcast link if we can put that below as well so they can follow her more closely.
And I think you're speaking this weekend at the Bitcoin event.
So I am.
Those who are in town, you're going to get a chance to hear her speak as well.
With that being said, thank you so much for coming out.
