The Hidden Economic War Goes Public at Davos

➡ The text discusses two main topics: the pervasive issue of microplastics in our environment and their harmful effects on human health, and a conversation about global geopolitics and the shifting power structures. Microplastics are found everywhere, even in our bodies, and can cause serious health problems. However, products like Kimchi One from Bright Core Nutrition can help detoxify the body. On the geopolitical front, the text discusses the changing global power structures, the potential dangers of technocracy, and the need for people to understand and engage with these changes.
➡ The text discusses an opportunity that hasn’t been widely reported by mainstream media yet, suggesting it’s a good time to get involved before everyone else does. It also introduces Susan Kokenda from Promethean Action, who provides a unique perspective on global financial systems. She discusses her background, her involvement with Lyndon LaRouche’s focus on physical economy, and the American system of political economy. She explains that this system, revived by Donald Trump, measures success not by money, but by production, efficiency, and standard of living. The text also touches on the British system’s control over the world financial system and the difference between it and the American system.
➡ The text discusses the influence of central banking and globalists on world economies, with a focus on the U.S., China, and Canada. It suggests that focusing on individual families or countries can distract from understanding the broader system. The Trump administration is said to view China as another nation, not a threat, and aims to neutralize conflicts rather than perpetuate them. The text also mentions Mark Carney, former head of two central banks and current Prime Minister of Canada, as a potential disruptor to Trump’s economic policies.
➡ The administration is working to challenge big monopolies and cartels in sectors like agriculture, insurance, defense, and housing, aiming to recreate a prosperous middle and working class similar to the 1960s. The Treasury Secretary, Scott Besant, emphasizes the need to shift focus from Wall Street to Main Street. The administration is also investigating the drug trade and its connection to the central banking system, with a focus on Venezuela’s role in money laundering. This is part of a broader effort to tackle corruption and fraud, including in the election system, with a careful and strategic approach.
➡ The text discusses the current political and social issues, focusing on the chaos in Minnesota and the role of technology in society. It highlights the need for careful handling of immigration and the importance of cooperation between local and federal authorities. The text also warns about the potential misuse of technology, emphasizing the need to use it for the betterment of society rather than for control. Lastly, it stresses the importance of careful transition of power to prevent the rise of tyranny.
➡ The discussion revolves around the role of the Federal Reserve, the potential of digital currencies, and the importance of understanding the principles that guide our economy. The speaker suggests that the current administration is educating the public about the Federal Reserve and its influence, and that there’s a need for a national conversation about how currency and credit are managed. They also touch on the inevitability of digital currencies and the need for them to be tools of transaction rather than surveillance. Lastly, they discuss the importance of electing officials who understand these principles and the role of automation in our economy.

And if you look at his Davos speech, he has some kind of fantastical idea that Canada is going to rally what he calls the middle powers in a world where the middle powers are going to have to defend themselves from the spheres of influence of the United States, Russia and China. So I think most of what he thinks he’s going to do or try to do is ridiculous. I mean, to the extent that he can throw a monkey wrench into any kind of Trump’s economic policies, if he wants to play games with tariffs and, you know, other kinds of things, of course, he just negotiated this deal with China, which is going to flood the Canadian market with cheap Chinese electric vehicles, which is going to decimate what’s left of the Canadian auto industry.

Microplastics are everywhere. It’s everywhere we breathe. It’s our food, it’s our water. It’s infiltrating every part of our lives. Scientists estimate we are consuming a credit card’s worth every single week. One study found plastic particles in 100% of human lung cell samples. Basically, nobody is safe from exposure. It gets worse. These plastics don’t just sit in your body. They cross the gut lining, leach into your blood, and disrupt everything. They’ve been shown to alter gut bacteria, suppress your immune response and increase your risk for neurodegenerative disease, metabolic disorders and cancer. Some plastic toxins, like BPA, mimic hormones, interfere with fertility, and damage your DNA.

Even if you eat clean or avoid packaged foods, you’re still being exposed. You can’t opt out, but your gut can help you fight back. Kimchi one from Bright Core Nutrition is a potent ally in this toxic world. It’s packed with over 900 probiotic strands unique to kimchi and proven to break down bpa, helping you detox from the inside out. It doesn’t just support digestion, it helps protect your cells, your brain, your hormones, and your future. Your body was never designed to handle plastic, but your gut was designed to protect you. And you just have to give it the right tools.

Right now, you can get 25% off with my code. Sarah at the link below. For even a better deal, call my friends at Brightcor and get up to 50% off and free shipping. That number is 888-495-8092. Great help starts in the gut and we have to get these microplastics out of our body. And I recommend you try this today. Welcome to business game changers. I’m Sarah Westall. I have Susan Kokinda from Promethean Action coming to the program. I’ve been wanting to talk to her for a while. I’ve been watching her since they split from the LaRouche organization and they form their, their own organization.

I of course, have Harley Schlanger on on a somewhat regular basis and they have the same base of research, but they’ve went in different directions on how they see the world. And I wanted her perspective on many different geopolitical issues. It’s actually was a refreshing conversation, not because I need to agree with everything she says, but because I’m actually having an intelligent conversation about geopolitics on a really broad scale, which is just frankly not happening. I think people are getting sidetracked with a lot of chaos operations meant for distraction and it’s, it’s working. It’s distracting people away from the bigger operations at play and what’s really going on.

And she really believes in what they’re doing. I mean, she’s a great PR person for them because she explains in plain English what’s going on and what their actions represent. I don’t know if they really represent that, but it does make sense. And I, I see how there is a global. I’ve been saying this for years now that there’s a global. There’s factions of the global environment that are fighting and Trump’s representing one faction, which is the new faction, and then there’s the old one, which is really the city of London and the European bankers and what does that mean and how does that play out? And she is going to talk about that.

She claims that she’s been, and she has, she’s been studying this for over four decades and she says this is the first time in her lifetime that any administration is actually fighting this power structure. And she’s going to explain that of course, anytime there’s a revolution, which we are going through a kind of revolution, if this is what’s happening. But for certain, we’re going through a global economic change. Reset or change. The power structure in the world from an economic standpoint is changing. It’s up for grabs and people are fighting for it. One wants to take down the old one and create a new one.

The other one wants to rebuild the old one or keep their power and, and just change it. But that’s what’s happen. Of course, anytime there’s a revolution of some sort, which is what we’re seeing, what’s going to replace it? Is it going to be another tyrant or is it going to be something that is pro human and that’s where the technocracy And I don’t like technocracy. I think people are, I don’t like the word because I think they confuse technology and technocracy. And we talk about that here and it’s, it’s just not helpful if you’re just going to confuse it.

And everything is the same. All technology is technocracy. If you’re going to do that, you might as well not even have the argument you. Because it totally confuses everything. And you, you lose all your power. You essentially lose out the gate as soon as you start doing that. And so that’s why I just, I don’t even want to have those conversations anymore if people can’t do a better job of separating that out because you lost day one, step one, you lose when you do that. So it’s important to be able to separate that out. And we talk about that here as well.

But it is a valid concern that if this old power structure is replaced with the new one, is this new one going to then be a tyrant in another way? And that means that we don’t want to keep them from fighting the old bad power structure. But they didn’t want the French people who wanted the French Revolution. You want to stop them from having the revolution. You want to stop them from becoming tyrants once the old power structure falls. And that means that we have to be active in making sure that, that there isn’t a surveillance state or our, our freedoms aren’t taken away because the technology is too all encompassing.

And that means that people need to start understanding what’s in these black boxes, what’s in this software. And before everything started being automated, their people were doing it. And so people would talk about all this stuff. Now it’s in black boxes and in algorithms. And people stop talking about it as if it’s just these experts that need to do it. No, no, you need to understand these algorithms are doing what people used to do. People used to always talk about these things because it was just natural. Now that an algorithm does it, only certain experts can talk about it.

No, you got to start figuring out and understanding. That was always your terrain to talk about this. It’s just now the algorithms automating it. And it’s still your terrain to talk about it. You just got to learn about it and stop being afraid because it’s in a black box. And so that means we need to get engaged and more people need to understand it and we need to demand that our freedoms and our liberties are maintained even if things are automated and we can’t pretend that Palantir and I talk about this during the show, that Palantir is suddenly the big boogeyman when for decades the country has maybe the world has been studying just our country has been spending 90 to $100 billion a year for decades.

Okay. Then Palantir comes in and then it becomes more transparent and suddenly they’re the only boogeyman when there’s this whole infrastructure behind them. I mean, we gotta be smarter. So it’s more important that we start to understand this. And it’s so easy because people don’t understand it, to put a point to it. And for the globalists, the people that this old entrenched power structure can use people to keep others from fighting them. You can use someone’s enemy for your own use. I don’t know if I completely agree with Susan today, but it’s refreshing to have these conversations and we need to have a heck of a lot more of them.

And she’s one of the few people on the planet, to be honest, that I’ve ever had a conversation quite like this. And I wish I had one like this all the time. People are looking for more advanced type conversations so they can make sense out of what’s going on. And that’s what I want to use these programs for. So I’m so happy I had this conversation with her. You can follow her at the links below at Promethean Action. And before I get into this, I want to remind you that it’s not too late to get into silver and gold.

You’re watching it just explode these last few days. It’s because the changes are real. This is happening now. The Wall Street Journal and mainstream media have not talked about these changes yet. So that means there’s still an opportunity, a nice opportunity to get in. Once they start talking about it, that means everybody’s going to pile in and it’s not going to be as great of an opportunity. It could still be a good opportunity then. But before they get in, before the mainstream starts talking about it, is where the opportunity lies. So it’s not too late and you want to work with somebody you trust.

I trust Miles Franklin. So go to sarah westall.com Miles Franklin. You will get access to their private price list, which is better than they can publicly state, and you will get taken care of by people that you can trust. Okay. Sarahwestall.com Miles Franklin okay, here’s my conversation with Susan Kokenda from Promethean Action. Hi Susan, welcome to the program. Thanks for having me. I’ve been wanting to have you on for a while. You’ve been doing some amazing work. When it comes to geopolitics and what’s going on in the global financial system, very few are looking at it from the kind of bird’s eye point of view that you are and dissecting it like you are, in fact, almost no one.

Right. You don’t see that in the mainstream media. And. And whether people agree with you or not, you’re one of the few doing it. So before we dive into kind of what the global economic warfare front is, tell us a little bit about your background. Well, I always like to start with I’m a child of Detroit. My parents actually met building liberator bombers at Willow Run. So the question of the arsenal of democracy, the American productive spirit, you know, is kind of in my blood and bones. And politically, I really kind of started in 1968. I was campaigning for Bobby Kennedy Sr.

In California when he was shot. Were you there? I was in San Francisco. I was 19. And I’m not sure if I would have mentally survived if I had been in Los Angeles. But it was traumatic enough, of course, coming on the heels of the assassinations of JFK and Martin Luther King. And it was. You come out of these kind of circumstances, as many in our generation did, very destabilized, very uncertain of what was going on. And then I was fortunate in 1971 to run into the political movement that had been led by Lyndon LaRouche. What attracted me to LaRouche is his focus on physical economy, which is why I get back to Child of Detroit, because we build things.

And that what he was talking about is the way you look at economics from the standpoint, not of the money, but are you building, are you creating? Are you inventing? Are you advancing science and technology? Now, at this point, since I mentioned Lyndon LaRouche, I do need to say I have nothing to do with the organizations affiliated with Helga, Zeppelin, Rouge, his widow. But those of us in Promethean action wanted to carry forward that question of America as the producer. And what we really discovered in our studies in the mid-70s was we rediscovered the American system of political economy.

And I think that is sort of the key to why we’re having so much resonance right now, translating for people what Donald Trump is doing. Because we’ve been taught to look at the world where you have two choices. You have capitalism, which is really imperialism or finance capitalism, and you have communism, and you have to choose one or the other. And neither one of them address what the American system addresses, which is how do you actually physically grow your economy? Where you measure things not from the standpoint of money, but you measure things from the standpoint, are you producing more? Are you producing more efficiently? Is your standard of living going up? Is that going to be a durable process? So I was involved in a movement which studied that for 40 or 50 years, and Donald Trump comes along and starts expressing precisely that kind of economic outlook, and was more than just expressing it, because he’s not the only person to ever express these ideas, but certainly in our lifetime, he’s the only one who’s expressed them, fought for them, survived, and made it back into the presidency in order to actually implement these policies.

So, you know, it’s sort of like, you know, I sometimes feel like I waited for 50 years to actually have a platform, which is what Trump is doing, to explain to people this body of economics, which really is the only one which is fit for human beings. Okay, so there’s no real name for it. And it doesn’t have. It’s not capitalism, it’s not communism. It’s just kind of common sense ism. It is, but it actually had a name. I mean, it was known as the American system. Henry Clay called it that. Abraham Lincoln’s economic advisor called it the American system.

And we sort of literally rediscovered it in the 1970s and elaborated on it through the 80s and 90s. By the turn of the 21st century, there was others looking at it and kind of reviving it. If people are familiar with people like Owen Cass and others. But if you want to see the real revival of the American system, look at Jameson Greer’s speech to Davos, our trade ambassador. It was the Hamiltonian economics that have been forgotten, and Hamilton was the founder of the American system. It’s now the policy of the Trump administration. Basically, people should go and study what the American system is so that we can understand this.

One of the things that you say is the British system really has a control still over the world financial system. And it’s the first time I’ve heard you say, first time in your life you said that already here, that there’s something that reasonably challenges the British system. And people see it as so many other things, you know, the Israelis or the Islam or China or whatever. But you’re saying, no, this is the British system. Can you explain that? Sure. I mean, let’s. This is the 250th anniversary of our Declaration of Independence. So let’s cycle back to what that was all about.

What was The British Empire, it was the monarchy, of course, which, by the way, you still have. But it was primarily an economic system based on the bank of England, which was the most powerful central bank for a long time. The British East India Company, which is like an earlier version of how you see these big globalist, big tech, big ag. A conglomeration of power which operates from the standpoint of we want to be able to extract income streams out of people, out of countries, out of economic sectors, to feed our monetary power. That’s really what we fought in the American Revolution, what Alexander Hamilton established.

The American system was based not on the maximization of money being fed to powerful financial interests, but rather, how do you organize your economy so that you’re ensuring real physical economic growth. He wrote the report on manufacturers, for example, and it says, very important principle. The wealth of a nation is not its money. It, it’s not its gold, it’s not its resources, it’s not its land. The wealth of a nation is the productive powers of labor. And by that he meant man’s ability to improve his relationship to nature. So we have 8 billion people on this planet today.

You couldn’t have sustained 8 billion people on this planet 200 years ago because we didn’t have modern energy generation, we hadn’t figured out how to clean our water. You know, all the advances that we’ve made in the past 200 years, that’s all come from man’s mind. And it allows you to have more people and a higher standard of living. The British system is not based on that, which is why so many British propagandists, including the current king, has, you know, talked about the need to reduce the world’s population. Charles, when he was prince, once said, the human race is like a herd of sheep, and sometimes you have to call the herd.

That’s right. He said that. That’s the mentality. They look at us as expendable. If they can use us, they’ll use us up and throw us to the side. Whereas the American system, Western civilization, anything which is good on this planet looks at human beings as beautiful, potentially creative, precious people that can advance. Advance mankind. And that’s the difference. Right. The system is there for the people, not the system is there for the elites. Right. There’s a difference. Right, Right. Okay, so some people say that there is a small group of people that own the majority of the assets in the United States, meaning the Pesur family, coming from the French royal family, when the, you know, they were the most powerful royal family, the royal empire at the time, and that collapsed during the French Revolution, and they came here, monopolized over 50% of our corporations, and they’re the most powerful family in the country.

That’s one of the theories. How much is that true? And if they are, and if families are, how much does that relate to the British system versus the American system? And is that in conflict? I don’t think there’s a conflict. I think you often run into trouble when you try and fixate on one family. The other side of the fixation is the Rothschilds, of course. But the minute you’re looking at one family, you’re missing the underlying principles which shape the entire system. So as long as you’re under the thumb of central banking, which we are with the Federal Reserve, as long as you’ve surrendered to an idea like free trade, which we had until Donald Trump came along, as long as you accept the crazy green agenda, which is climate change and all of this kind of nonsense, you don’t need some sinister family lurking in the wings owning everything or owning a majority of things.

You’ve shaped how decisions are made in a society. You’ve shaped the institutions. You basically infected the institutions with your ideas. That’s where the control comes from. It’s not this kind of one on one. I can pull the string on this family and I’m going to see the whole picture. No, you’re not going to see the whole picture. Well, let’s talk about China and the brics, because many people are talking about how China is the biggest threat. And, well, you have to admit that the brics are a big power influence, but people talk about China being the biggest threat versus the British central bankers.

So how do you see that conflict? Well, first of all, I think people should take pains to read the Trump administration’s two recent, very seminal documents, the National Security Strategy, which was released in December, and the National Defense Strategy, which just got released last week. They’re both short. They’re not written for foreign policy geeks or professionals. They’re actually written for people to understand what is going on in the world. And what is clear in both of those is the Trump administration does not consider China to be some kind of permanent or existential threat. They consider China to be another nation.

As long as it does not impinge on our interests, it is not a military threat. Clearly, we are battling out economic systems with them, with fighting through the tariffs and so on and so forth. But China is very much neither China nor Russia, from the standpoint of the Trump administration, is the threat because what Trump has actually rejected, whether he knows it in these historical terms or not, is he’s rejected British geopolitics. British geopolitics going back over 150 years has basically said, we the empire, or today the globalists. Right, we the globalists. We don’t have to be the most powerful in the world militarily, but if we can keep everybody fighting each other, if we can keep the superpowers, especially at each other’s throats, or in the Middle east, you can keep the Middle east crisis going in perpetuity, then we’re sitting on top playing with this chessboard.

And I think the Trump administration has rejected that. Now, China is a very complicated situation, and I’m not going to pretend that I have any kind of competent expert inside analysis of that. I mean, clearly there’s some internal conflict going on in terms of China itself. So I think the first thing you have to do is recognize you can’t say China. It’s a complicated situation. There’s obviously factions. I think President Trump is aware of that. And if you look at the way Trump functions in terms of these different countries, which we’re in some kind of conflict with, President Trump is always looking for a solution where you simply neutralize that country.

Or the way I like to think about it, you take that country off the geopolitical chessboard. So you look at Venezuela and everyone says, well, why didn’t, why didn’t he put Machado in there? Why, you know, why did he allow the vice president to step forward? Well, as he and Marco Rubio have said very clearly, we don’t want chaos. You know, they want, and I think what they’ve done with Venezuela, I think the same thing with Syria. China’s a much more complicated question, but I think this is how they would think about it, is I don’t want this country to be used by the globalists.

Now, I recognize that this country has its own interests and those interests may conflict with ours, and we’re going to have to work that out. But I don’t want them to be used by the globalists, just as we had been used by the globalists for almost all of the post war period. I think Trump’s approach to China is, again, we’re not taking as face value an eternal conflict with China and the ccp. I mean, John Bolton, most of Fox News, that’s what they want. Trump is saying, this is a big nation, it’s a superpower, it does have its own interests.

I’m sure knows better than I Do what the factional situation inside China is. And what he’s always looking for is how do I strengthen a relationship with this country which will benefit them and will benefit us and will not benefit the globalists. Let’s define who the globalists are. Is it the European central bankers or the British central bankers? And is there a difference? No, there’s no difference. It’s those people who operate in this sort of rarefied atmosphere of private financial interests who think they should have more power than nations. The center of it is the bank of England and the City of London.

The bank of England isn’t the oldest central bank. The Dutch central bank precedes it a little bit. And central banking was actually started in Venice. But for the modern period, the bank of England and the City of London is kind of the centerpiece of this. What you have in Europe is just subsidiaries of that. And our own Federal Reserve, we did not have a central bank. We were like one of the last countries to fall. We didn’t have a Federal Reserve till 1913, which is again a private institution. That’s right. Before that we had national banking where the national banking institution was under the control of, of the Congress, as our Constitution says it’s supposed to be.

And those national bank, the two national banks were destroyed. Lincoln revived it, not with a single national bank, but he set up a system of national banking. But it’s one in which the government ensures that to the extent we create currency and credit, it’s going somewhere productive. It’s not going to this financial parasite which tries to squat on top of all nations. I like that visual. So Mark Carney, Prime Minister of Canada, is a central banker, European central banker that infamously said in 20, I think it was 2019 that they’re going to redefine nations budgets based on carbon credits.

And they’re essentially going to go around governments, I think it was, quote, we’re going to go around governments define their budget for them based on carbon credits. And he’s a central banker and now he’s Prime Minister of Canada. When you look at his actions and you look at the conflicts now that are playing out between Canada and the United States, what is it that you see behind the rhetoric? Well, I think they’ve sort of tagged Mark Carney to be the anti trump, which you can certainly see from his speech at Davos where he pretty much lumped the United States in with the old Soviet Union in terms of the way that everyone else has to resist us.

He’s often called the central bankers central banker because he’s the only person, I think, probably in history who was the head of two central banks. He started at the bank of Canada and then he became the head of the bank of England. And he is certainly the only non Britisher to ever be made the head of the bank of England. So they obviously put a lot of stock in Carney. And if you look at his Davos speech, he has some kind of fantastical idea that Canada is going to rally what he calls the middle powers in a world where the middle powers are going to have to defend themselves from the spheres of influence of the United States, Russia and China.

I think most of what he thinks he’s going to do or try to do is ridiculous to the extent that he can throw a monkey wrench into any kind of Trump’s economic policies. If he wants to play games with tariffs and other kinds of things. Of course, he just negotiated this deal with China, which is going to flood the Canadian market with cheap Chinese electric vehicles, which is going to decimate what’s left of the Canadian auto industry. And obviously, if that happens, Trump’s going to raise tariffs even more dramatically to protect our own manufacturing from that.

I think he’s been handed an assignment. I think as long as President Trump is able to accomplish his mission of rebuilding the United States as a manufacturing superpower, of establishing relations with other nations in the world based on this respect for their sovereignty and looking for the policies that will help us both and won’t help the globalists, I don’t think people like Mark Carney are going to get very far. But it does mean Trump is going to have. President Trump is going to have to be able to accomplish his mission. A lot of that’s going to have to do with the midterm elections in 2026.

And I think all of that has to do with people understanding what it is that this administration is doing economically. That’s right. When you look at how they’ve taken on Big Ag, going after the beef cartels, big insurance, Trump saying, I don’t want you to get the money. I want the American people to get the money. The military industrial complex telling the defense contractors, you can no longer do stock buybacks and you’re going to have to cap your salaries. Going after the housing industry saying, we’re not going to let big institutional investors buy single family homes.

He is going at all of these big monopolies and cartels. Why? Because he wants to recreate the kind of United States we had, say in 1960, where in Detroit you had the highest per capita standard of living in the country because you had blue collar workers in good paying productive manufacturing jobs and your society worked. And that’s what this administration is trying to do. I mean, I’m constantly struck by the irony of a Treasury Secretary who of course you always assume the Treasury Secretaries are speaking on behalf of Wall street while this Treasury Secretary, Scott Besant, he hardly gives a speech where he doesn’t talk about the importance of recalibrating toward Main street or working people.

I mean, this administration is committed to filling out our hollowed out middle and working class. And that’s why he doesn’t give the speeches that pander to Wall street is what you’re saying. And he’s very clear. I mean, I’ve often quoted one interview he did which I thought was brilliant where he said the Democratic Party strategy is to compensate the loser. Basically we take away your ability to take care of yourself and we’re going to throw some money at you. And what Besant said is I don’t think you’re losers. I think the system has been working against you and we have to change the system.

That’s coming from a Treasury Secretary. Just a short break from the program to share with you an amazing peptide to help you lose weight. It’s stronger than Ozempic and why? It’s because it not only reduces your appetite but it also burns fat. These other GLP1s on the market, they do not burn fat, they just reduce your appetite. This one retatrutide is stronger. It’s considered a next generation peptide because of that. And man, does this work. I’ve been using it for two and a half weeks and I’ve already lost 11 pounds and I cut my dose in half because I was losing weight weight too quickly and that kind of freaked me out to be honest.

And so I also am taking this 5amino 1 mq in capsule form. This helps by making sure that you lose fat, not muscle. And so in conjunction I’m using both of these. This will work whether you have this or not. And I am telling you it’s amazing. If you are interested in getting this, I have the link below or you can go to sarahwestel.com on the shop. You can use the coupon code Sarah to save 10%. If you have questions about your own use, you should either consult your doctor or you can join Dr. Diane’s tribe.

And I have a link below to that. It is only a dollar for the first week. You can ask her any question you want and get all Your answers to this how to take an injectable and there shouldn’t be any fear in doing that. It is easy and straightforward. Go to sarah west hustle.com under shop or use the link below and remember to use coupon code. Sarah. Yeah, that’s pretty incredible. Let’s talk about Venezuela. You talked about the fact that the attack on Venezuela is really going after the drug trade because that is what really funds the central banking system that we have in place.

And I would even say that if that’s the case, then all the fraud we’re seeing coming out of Arizona and other states which, you know, they’re saying that the entire economy of Arizona would collapse if you got rid of the drug trade. I want to explore that more, what you mean by that. And also if you can talk about how that brings enemies out of the woodwork that have a lot of resources that are going to fight them on every angle they possibly can. Sure. I mean, look, if you want to talk about the drug trade, you really have to go back to the British in the early 1960s when they established the entire offshore banking operations in the Caribbean where you legalize the.

And this was the British government made legal the ability to set up banking institutions down in the Caymans and all of their protectorates and so on. Complete secrecy. Nobody knows what’s going on outside of law enforcement, outside of any kind of international regulation. So these things became the hub for laundering the dirty money from the drug trade, from human trafficking, from everything. And Venezuela was simply a critical nodal point in that entire operation. People say, well, there’s not that many drugs coming out of Venezuela. They’re coming out of Colombia, they’re coming out of Mexico. It’s not a question of the physical drugs.

It was the question of setting up all of these kinds of apparatuses that interfaced in this entire region which allowed for this huge movement of dirty money which goes through the big banks. By the way, the ones that keep getting caught the most often are up in Canada. I mean, we have our own share of them as well. But there was actually a speech, I don’t know, decade, decade and a half ago by the head of the Russian anti drug program. And he made the point that this dirty money was one of the things that saved the big banks after 2008.

That is, they had to use that liquidity to keep their system propped up in the crisis which they had made. So. Yeah, well, that’s the point. That’s what I was saying about Arizona. The people not wanting to get rid of that corruption because they’re worried that it’ll collapse the Arizona economy. I’ve had politicians tell me that. So. But there’s a point where you can’t not fix it, because that’s just not a state that we want to be in. Right. I mean, I think it’s everywhere because it’s the entire complex of, call them transnational institutions. You know, it’s like the NGOs and the nonprofits.

You know, things which you have this entire complex where you can move huge amounts of money, you can carry out all sorts of operations. And up until now, until having an administration that actually wants to do something about it, you did it with complete impunity, and you could get away with everything. And they were getting away with everything. And they still are, and to a certain degree, keep going. They are. But I think the administration is moving very, very strategically and carefully. You know, you saw the raid in Fulton, Georgia, yesterday, in terms of the election material.

Well, people sit there and they say, why couldn’t we have done this before? And so on. Well, I suspect that there might have something to do with what we might have found in Venezuela, now that we have access to that and the whole question of smartmatic and other things. But before you did what you did in Venezuela, would you have had the quality of evidence you needed to do something other than grandstanding? This administration is not interested in grandstanding and making people feel good because somebody got temporarily perp walked and then released by the judge the next day.

This administration, I think, wants to get the job done. Sometimes that takes time, it takes resources. And as they’ve been saying, they now have scores and scores of people, accountants and other things, Whether it’s the fraud in Minnesota, whether it’s what’s going on in Georgia across the board, you have to do this extremely deliberately if you want to make a serious case and you actually want to roll up the entire network. Well, my understanding is that the somatic systems, that Venezuela is the center point of the voting fraud worldwide. I mean, that’s what’s coming out. I think that’s the allegation.

That’s what we gotta see. But, yeah, yeah, for the first time now, I think we have the opportunity to more than wave our hands and say, you know, let loose the Kraken. I mean, we had a lot of hand waving in 2021, but could you actually prove it in a way that helped Donald Trump? No, you actually couldn’t. What? What? You could. I mean, I was very active in the election integrity fight here in Michigan still am tangentially. And here it was so obvious. It wasn’t voting machines being directed by Venezuela. Maybe there was some of that, but it was obvious here it was just the absentee votes, just the fraudulent manipulation of absentee votes.

You didn’t have to go to Venezuela to find that. But. But now there’s a deeper level which I think is now the door is perhaps opening up to that next level, which is automatic. I think the administration is walking through that door right now. Well, the software needs to be taken care of because it’s pretty clear. So then we have the fraud that’s going on through NGOs that they’re trying to take down. There’s an obvious chaos movement. You know, Minnesota, to me is a very clear, obvious chaos operation. And when you see that, what are you seeing happening? It seems like everybody’s coming out of the woodwork, using it as an opportunity to really fight against taking things down.

Now, I also think that there’s a focus on immigration maybe by some of the people who are on the right, and they’re losing focus of what the true problem that’s trying to be solved. And it’s. No, I think that’s the case. I don’t know if you saw Tom Homan’s press conference earlier today, but it was really a master class in, I think, how to deal with this. Because he reported that he has met with the governor, the mayor, the police chief, the attorney general. He said, while we didn’t agree on everything, and I never expect us to, we did agree on some things which will allow us to begin to draw down our forces.

And what they agreed is so simple, which is if you have an illegal alien that you’ve got being held in a local facility, when it’s time to release them, you don’t release them back out into the wild you call ICE Simple. He claims he has secured agreement from the Minnesota authorities for that. He says that means we don’t have to go barging into communities with entire teams, because what we’re looking for right now is the people who are the threat to public safety. And he said, I’ve got agreement, they have to follow through on it. I’ve got agreement.

Why is this important? Because I think you hit at something extremely important. It’s obvious what the globalists and the left are trying to do. On the one side, they’ve got a very well deployed operation on the ground in Minnesota, trained networks in terms of how to create this kind of chaos, and then you’ve got the passions on The MAGA side, the right side of this thing, we want action. We’ve got to stop this. We’ve got to defend ICE and so on. And if it’s just sort of left unchecked, as I think we began to see it, was reaching a very critical mass, which then will be used to try and polarize and radicalize more people on the left and create an ungovernable situation.

And I think what the administration did by sending in Homan and by what they already were doing with the treasury and other investigations of the money flows for the fraud. But if you’re talking about the fraud, you’re also talking about how they were using the illegal immigration. I think they’re moving very strategically, and I think they don’t want to give the AOCs and the Ilhan Omars and the Gavin Newsoms and the rest of the people in this world any more bloody shirts to wave and any preventable reasons to escalate. I think they want to prevent this thing from blowing up and get back to the mission.

That’s right. And as President Trump keeps saying, the mission is, I’m carrying out an economic revolution, which is why they really don’t like him. And none of you seem to be noticing because you’re all looking over here. Yeah, it’s a big distraction campaign. It’s amazing how during the Summer of Love, how over, you know, 10 times the people were killed, 25 people or so, and they didn’t see it. That could just be glossed over, but two people were killed, and it’s the end of the world. So to me, I mean, I don’t know how much more obvious it can be that this is a campaign, but I gotta say, it’s very clear to me that it’s a concerted effort to take down the global financial power structure.

What concerns me is the next big power struggle that’s happening is the technocracy movement. I don’t even like the word because I think they’re confusing technocracy with technology, and it’s two separate, different things. But it’s a very real concern that what you do is you take down the old guard and put in a new guard that’s managed by technology. Right. That is. That was. The technocracy movement, was very big in the 40s, and it’s grown and whatever. But there’s a difference between technology and technocracy, and we need to be very careful about making sure we protect our liberty when it comes to technology.

Right. And do you see a concern with that? I mean, what do you see on that front? Well, you know, I think, you know, I had a discussion a little while ago in another venue. I said, you know, it’s kind of like the question of a gun. You know, you don’t blame the gun for what happened. You blame the person who wielded the gun, you know, illegally or in a criminal kind of way. The same thing is true with technology. Don’t blame the technology. I mean, we’re not going to put the genie back in the bottle in terms of AI, in terms of robotics, in terms of all of these things.

And if they’re used from the standpoint of how do we improve man’s relationship to nature, how do we improve the standard of living? I mean, people confuse transhumanism with the fact that we’re developing technologies where somebody might be able to walk again who was paralyzed. Right. Or somebody who’s online might be able to see. Well, that’s different from saying, I’m going to implant something in your brain where I’m going to control how you think, or hook you up with some kind of matrix and so on and so forth. The bottom line is, who’s running your country? Who’s running your world? Is it evil globalists who want to eliminate most of us and control the rest of us, or is it people who want to continue in the tradition of the American system and we’ll use technology for the good? Now, there’s always going to be the tension of its misuse, but that’s the nature of a democracy.

It gets a little bit messy. Although we are a republic, that’s the nature of a democratic republic. You have to work things out as they go along. The bottom line is always, what’s your intention? You may take the head of one of these companies, the guy may be a card carrying globalist who wants to do terrible things. Well, yeah, I’d be worried. You take the same technology in another company where somebody is just actually trying to develop the technology for the better, that’s a different story. And I think that’s also why Donald Trump has worked with people where they say, oh, what about Palantir? What about David Sacks? What about this? What about, well, you know, I’m not gonna pass judgment one way or another on those people, but I think what President Trump is doing is saying, whatever you’re doing, I’m gonna make sure it’s not gonna hurt this country and it’s gonna help this country.

Well, I think that the whole Palantir thing needs to be put in context too, because we’ve been spending 90 to $100 billion for decades doing what Palantir is now doing openly. I’m not saying it’s good. I’m just saying that it’s a little bit disingenuous to say it’s all Palantir suddenly when we’ve been doing it for decades and spending 90 to $100 billion on it. So it’s confusing. It’s the chaos model again. I think that they can use technocracy as a means to take down the effort to fight the globalists. I think that’s a very real threat.

But at the same time, we do have the threat of using technology to take away our rights. So it’s like we want to take down these globalists who are evil institutions that are not pro human, but we don’t want to take down the people who are fighting them, but we want to make sure once they’re in power, they don’t turn into tyrants themselves. Right. I mean, that’s. The revolutions have always occurred where the people who take down the power structure, the revolutionists, become tyrants. And so how do you make sure that doesn’t happen? Right. And President Trump was very clear on that in terms of Venezuela, which is sort of the good model.

He was asked by a reporter, how come you, you know, how come you supported Delsey Rodriguez and you didn’t shove Machado in there? And he said, do you remember something called Iraq? You know, he just said, we pull down the entire structure and what came in its place, isis. Right. So it’s exactly to your point that you, you don’t just overthrow without having a very clear pathway to ensure that the people, the institutions and the policies that step in are actually the institutions, people, and policies that agree with our principles. And I think that’s what he’s trying to do across the board.

I mean, it’s the same thing with the Federal Reserve. People say, why doesn’t he get rid of the Federal Reserve? Well, I honestly do not know at this moment in the 21st century how you shape a 21st century national banking policy. I know the principles, but how do you do that in a world, you know, in the world that we’re in today, which is not Alexander Hamilton or Abraham Lincoln’s world? Well, frankly, I think people like J.D. vance, Scott Besant, other people, I think they’re actually thinking about it. But it’s not like you just shut the door on the Federal Reserve and suddenly everything is going to run properly.

What I think the President and his team are Doing is they’re at the moment educating the American people under the problem of the Federal Reserve, which 30, 40 years ago, almost nobody, except a handful of outliers like ourselves and who knows, the Pat Buchanan and people like that, nobody really thought about the Federal Reserve. Everybody thought it’s a government institution, blah, blah, blah. Well, now that Donald Trump is in conflict with it, people are saying, oh, wait a minute, this is independent, it’s out of control. I’m not sure that’s the right thing to do. Suddenly you now have a discussion within the population which opens the door to rethinking how do you actually run the currency, how do you issue credit? First you actually have to have a national discussion where people become literate in some of these ideas and then out of that we begin to evolve solutions.

I think what they’re going to do with the Fed in certainly this term for this president is whittle back its powers significantly. Because they’ve obviously massively expanded, especially in post 2008, and then continue the dialogue in terms of, well, are there other ways to do this? What is a better institutional approach to it? We of course will do what we can to reintroduce the discussion of national banking, but I think that’s how the President thinks. He lives in a real world, not in some kind of headline grabbing world of end the Fed or bring democracy to Venezuela.

It’s a real world where he is trying to affect absolutely necessary, positive change in direction which if done properly, will get you where you want to be without, as you say, creating the kind of chaos where the globalists come back in the back door. That’s right. And well, CBDCs are probably going to. We’re going to have digital currency, period, end of story. I’m sorry, people, but there’s going to be a digital currency. The question is, are these digital currencies going to be tyrannical, you know, watching and surveilling every single thing we do versus just being a tool of monetary transactions? And how do you see that? And, you know, how do we navigate that? You know, I’m not going to get ahead of my skis on those kinds of questions because it’s, you know, not my wheelhouse, as they say.

But I always just stick to the principle. If you understand that the economy of a nation should be run for the benefit of people and producers and progress and the future, we can just put that under the rubric of sovereign economics, then whatever tools you need to do that is fine. If, on the other hand, your economy is being run for the purpose of again feeding a globalist financial parasite, then the same tool could be used by them. So it just comes back to who’s running your country and what are their principles? The answer to that is do enough of our fellow citizens understand the principles to make sure that we are putting people in office who understand that, well, by the grace of God, we put in Donald Trump and J.D.

vance, and they do understand that. Now, how do we continue that? How do we continue that with the right people in the midterms, or at least we neutralize as many of the bad people in the midterms? How do we continue that in 2028? That all keeps coming back to the American people themselves. Well, I would challenge not accepting some kind of phony binary choices, but saying, wait a minute, here’s what I really want and I’m going to go out and fight for it and I’m going to bring other people along in that. And, and in that process, we’re going to get better candidates and we’re going to elect better candidates.

I would challenge people’s thinking and say that the actual algorithms and what’s being automated needs to be looked at. In the past it was human processes, so it was easier and it just seemed like it was a natural thing to talk about. So many things are shifting to being automated and in these black boxes that people don’t understand when they need to start understanding those black boxes, because we used to talk about about those processes openly all the time. Now because they’re in a black box, people are not. And so that means those same things that we used to talk about, we need to talk about.

It’s just now software instead of human beings doing it. And that’s where a lot of our freedoms will lie. So, you know, that is my background systems engineer. So people need to be thinking about that stuff. And I don’t see it enough. But I think you’re absolutely right. It’s how making sure people understand those principles that we need to get in office. I want to ask one more question, and that’s the Israel question. Is Israel just an inconvenient situation or is it the center of major problem? And what do you see with Israel? People need to learn a little bit of history.

You know, go back to how the current Mideast was created by Sykes Picot, the Balfour Declaration, all of this, guess what? Takes you right back to the British Empire maneuvering with the French and others to maintain their power in the Mideast, especially as the oil question became more prominent. What Israel is, is. I mean, I’m not going to go relitigate whether Israel should have been created where it was, when it was. It’s there. People live there. A whole lot of those people, by the way, don’t like Bibi Netanyahu and the policies of their own government. Just as over 80% or something.

Yeah, like, just like we were under Joe, you know, like attacking the, attacking you and me because of Joe Biden is like attacking everybody in Israel for being Bibi Netanyahu. That being said, Israel has often been and under Netanyahu, a pawn on this British geopolitical chessboard. But let’s look at the other side of it. The Muslim Brotherhood was created in the 1920s by the British radicalized Islam so that you constantly have these two pawns in conflict to constantly play the Mideast so that the imperial powers can sit on top. What President Trump is doing with the Abraham Accords, the way he is proceeding in this, again, a very complicated situation.

Netanyahu happens to run Israel. Israel happens to have nuclear weapons. People say, well, why doesn’t he do this with Netanyahu? Well, you could have a breakaway ally that starts lobbing nuclear weapons around the world. I think he’s moving very strategically and surgically to create a new Mideast where, again, everybody’s not a pawn on a chessboard. Nations can actually act in their own self interests. No, Israel is not at the center of this. Obviously, the Israeli lobby exists, obviously aipac, the Anti Defamation League, these are all institutions that influence American politics. But I think people conflate all of that, because if you actually look at where, for example, the Anti Defamation League came from, guess what, you can also trace that back to the British.

You can, you can. Okay, how do people follow you? It’s such a breath of fresh air to have intelligent conversations like this because there isn’t enough of these going on. So how can people follow you? Well, we have our own website, Prometheanaction.com and we do three political briefings on YouTube every week, which you can find through the Promethean action website. We also do a live Q and A. We also do classes on history and culture and strategic affairs. We exist to try and give people a bigger view of how the world works, a view which I happen to believe Donald Trump operates from.

I think one of our most important service we’re providing people right now is if you look at the bigger picture, you’re not going to get buffeted by the clickbait, by the headlines, by the outright rage. You’re going to actually see a historic battle unfolding. And if enough people understand it, we’re going to win it. Well, thank you so much for joining the program, Sa.
[tr:tra].