The Adams Archive

Beer, Bias & Betrayal: Bud Light Goes Woke & Top Secret Military Documents Leaked | Debating ChatGPT On Affirmative Action

Welcome to another riveting episode of The Adams Archive with your host, Austin Adams! In today's episode, we'll be delving deep into the recent controversy surrounding Anheuser-Busch's VP of Marketing, who openly admitted to hiring employees based on sex and political ideology. We'll examine the implications of these hiring practices and discuss whether they align with the company's values.
Furthermore, we'll engage in a thought-provoking debate with ChatGPT on the merits and drawbacks of affirmative action, exploring its impact on society and the workplace.
We'll also discuss Alex Soros' frequent visits to the White House, drawing comparisons with Bill Clinton's connection to Jeffrey Epstein, and dive into NPR's dramatic exit from Twitter after being labeled as state-affiliated media. What does this say about the state of journalism and social media today?
Lastly, we'll explore the explosive leak of top-secret documents that revealed alleged U.S. spying on allies, the implications for international relations, and the insights gained on the U.S. perspective regarding the war in Ukraine and potential support for Russia from neutral countries.
Join us for an engaging and insightful episode as we dissect these controversial topics and much more. Don't miss out on this week's edition of The Adams Archive!
All the links: https://linktr.ee/theaustinjadamsAnti-Elite Club Apparel: https://antielite.club 
 
Full Transcription:
 
 Hello, you beautiful people and welcome. To the Adams Archive. My name is Austin Adams, and thank you so much for listening. Today on the agenda, we are going to be discussing all about the recent marketing misstep, to say the least, by Anheuser Bush's VP of Marketing, who we will be listening to even further digging herself in a hole, uh, by talking about what seems to be, to me at least, slightly illegal hiring practices, leaning, uh, obviously towards her woke agenda that she has since shown her hand.
So we will talk about that. We will also talk about some recent photos that were released by hers after speaking out against, uh, the so-called frat culture that she was so against. There has since been photos leaked of Bud Light's, VP of Marketing, where she seemingly participated in these said frat.
Type events. So we'll look at that. Now. We will also discuss George Soros. Son, Alex Soros visited the White House under Biden's administration 14 times. Now, to put that in perspective, that is only three less times than Bill Clinton having Jeffrey Epstein. So, quite astonishing. Something that we will discuss at length now. 
We will also be discussing NPR, quitting Twitter after being labeled as state affiliated media. I saw an article that called it a Rage Quit, which is pretty, pretty fitting. Now the last thing, but one of the most serious things that we will discuss is the documents that were released at well leaked.
There was over a hundred pages that were released, , that were leaked, and,  they were doing a highly serious, highly serious very serious investigation in Washington this week. As records were detailing alleged us spying on allies. Insights into American thinking on the war in Ukraine, in at least two neutral countries, mulling plans to support Russia as things move on in this war.
So we will discuss all of that and more, but first, you know what to do. Go ahead and hit that subscribe button if it's your first time here. If it's not, or even if it is, go ahead and leave a five star review. Tell me something that you like about the show.  Subject we should talk about. Whatever it is, please from the bottom of my heart, I would appreciate it.
Leave a five star review. Go ahead and hit that subscribe button. Head over to the subs Austin Adams dot.com. Uh, and we will be releasing podcast companions with all of the links, articles, all of it directly to your email, which includes the video podcast, short clips, the full podcast, all to your email every single week.
And then go ahead over to anti elite.club. Anti elite.club and you can check out the apparel. I've kept it small. In the meantime, there is the Pelosi Capital Insider trading hat, which is beautifully embroidered if I do say myself, say so myself, as well as the Protector children hoodie,  and some other awesomeness like, uh, make love not viruses, hoodies or sweatshirts as well.
So go check it out. And speaking of Alex Soros, we actually have a mug that is the George Soros actor, a Crisis Actor's Guild mug. , which I found to be, you know, a little catchy. So check it out.  Lemme know what you think. All right,  now that's all I got for you. Let's go ahead and jump into.
 
 
Um, but anyways, $5 billion that they have lost since doing this marketing stunt. Now I'm somewhat familiar with marketing myself. There's probably one of the biggest rules, if not the biggest rule is knowing your target audience. Their target audience for Bud Light is generally not somebody with a trans flag in front of their house.
Those people are generally not drinking light American beer. Now, how far Bud Light Marketing has fallen? I remember growing up, they were always witty and funny and, uh, what was it? The, um, one of their campaigns that was great. It was like the, the gosh, I, I have to remember it was like the greatest Man who ever award or some, something like that.
But always quick, witty, um, always good sarcasm, right? Always great marketing. And this woman takes over from, you know, obviously coming from Harvard to the Wharton, uh, business school and then at, I don't know what she is, maybe 35 years old, taking over the VP of marketing of one of the largest, uh, beer companies in the world.
So maybe Bud Light itself when hiring this woman didn't know its target audience and, or maybe they knew exactly what they were doing, but if they did, this was a horrible, horrible misstep in. Terms of their business success, 5 billion in just like five days, and it's still going down. And I only think we're really gonna see the true implications of this because you have lost so many loyal, long-standing customers as a result of this.
Not only that, people aren't going to buy them at the shelves, which means that the liquor stores and, and grocery stores that we're holding these products are not going to buy them either. If people are not buying them. There is a whole supply chain that will be affected as a result of this terrible marketing move.
But let's go ahead and read this. This comes from the New York Post. It says, beer Colossus in Heiser Busch saw its value plummet more than 5 billion since the company announced his branding partnership with controversial transgender social media influencer, Dylan Mul. Since March 31st, shares of Bud Light Parent Company have nearly fallen 4%.
And as I checked earlier, I believe it was 5%, like 5.2%, knocking down the company's market capitalization from 132 billion to $127 billion. On Wednesday, the stock fizzled more than 1.5%. Uh, on Wednesday, the company is dealing with the fallout from conservatives over its deal with Mulvaney, the 26 year old Wow sh he looks super rough for 26.
Transgender influencer with more than 10 million followers on social media. Mulvaney fired back at critics Tuesday accusing them of bullying her because she's an easy target. Oh, are you? She as a guest on the OR Word onward. And Rosie O'Donnell podcast Mulvaney said her Tolles and trolls intentionally twist her words and actions in an effort to blast the transgender community.
The reason that I think I am so I'm an easy target is because I'm so new to this. Mulvaney said, I think going after a trans person, it says woman, but I refuse to call this person. A woman that's been doing this for like 20 years is a lot more difficult. I think maybe they think that there's some sort of chance with me, but what's their goal now?
It is down 4.9% as of the closing bell today. Um, so almost 5% more than the original 5 billion that they even just talked about there. That's an incredible loss for any company, $5 billion in market cap. Um, these people, they don't understand anything about me that I do or say. I don't really care about her opinion on this.
Mulvaney had posted videos and photos on social media promoting her sponsorship deal with Bud Light, which pro produced specifically made cans with Mulvey's likeness to commemorate the partnership. And, and in this video with this man, He's sitting there going, um, I guess there's some sort of March madness going on right now.
Um, I don't really know what that is. I guess it has to do with sports. I don't know about sports. I'm just a dumb woman. Like really? Cuz women don't know what March Madness is. Like. What? What a horrific, the, the, the biggest problem besides the fact, like, and again, I've talked about this before. I don't care what you do as an individual, you can identify as a fricking fork if you want to.
And I you do you, now, I'm not gonna call you a fork if you think you're a fork, but you're actually a human. Okay? I'm not participating in your mental illness, but you can identify as whatever you want. I don't care. I'm not gonna rip you apart for your, uh, mental anguish and your self-consciousness and your difficulty.
I, you know, and disassociation from your own body. I'm not gonna do that for you. I don't think that you deserve that. I think that in this case, This man is doing this for clout, so maybe deserves it more than most who are dealing with this. I don't think it's actually a real case of gender dysphoria that's being manifested through surgical, uh, attempts at correcting it, which never seems to help in any which way.
Um, but I, I do think that there's a better way of going about that, which to me, the most insulting thing that this man does is pretending like every woman is a fricking caricature, a caricature of what it means to be a woman, right? Frolicking in high heels. Um, you know, like all of the videos that this man does are like the most insulting, caricature depiction of what a woman actually acts like, like Valley Girl, 2004, mean girl's, high school woman in a sitcom.
Like just the most silly depiction of a woman that there can possibly be. And so that to me is insulting. I'm not even a woman and I'm insulted by it. So it says, um, it goes on to say that the backlash even prompted a local Missouri distributor to cancel an appearance by the famous Budweiser Clyde's Dale Horse due to fears for the safety of staffers.
Industry experts told the post on Tuesday that the controversy appears to have staying power and could lead to a full-blown boycott of Anheuser-Busch products. I believe so. I don't think there's any coming back from this. I think their general target market is going to absolutely, there's the only reason that you were drinking Bud Light for any reason at all, was just out of f sheer habit.
It wasn't because it tasted good. We know that for sure. There's so many other beers out there that you can go drink that still taste like shit and are still cheap that don't promote this type of ideology. So yes, this is absolutely going to have staying power Anheuser bushes. If you are in the stock market, you should absolutely be shorting.
Budweisers, uh, it's, it's, uh, the, the dollar symbol and then bud is the symbol for them on the stock exchange. So you should absolutely short Anheuser-Busch. I am not a financial advisor, so don't listen to anything that I say, but it seems like a pretty good bet that this is just gonna continue to keep going down.
Um, now let's go ahead and watch this video. Let's talk about the actual VP of marketing, because, you know, actually let's, let's touch on this. There it bring, it comes up here with, um, you know, let's, let's talk about this Kid Rock, who I love for this. Um, went on and did a video where he actually shot his, uh, full auto rifle, um, at a bunch of Bud Light, uh, uh, boxes of beer.
And there's this awesome picture in front of me of them just all exploding, uh, with a MAGA hat on, which is just amazing. So love that for Kid Rock. Uh, now the reason that I don't think Nike is having such backlash because they did the same exact thing. Nike did the same thing as Bud Light did. Same exact thing, but Nike's target market is not the same target market as Bud Lights.
That's what you have to understand. And that's the reason that Bud Light is going to have a tremendous loss of market cap, a tremendous loss of its stock value. And Nike has improved its stock value over the last couple days. There has not been any calls for boycotts. It has not been in the news. There's been no, you know, burn your Nike's campaign that's going on.
Although maybe there should be, and I won't be buying Nike from here on out. But, um, but this comes back to how, how do we change culture, right? Because right now, the, the theistic corporations that are out there, even not, maybe not even capitalistic because they're all owned by generally the same.
BlackRock. Um, but these corporatism type corporations that are out there, that are promoting these things, are doing so because they think it's going to win them favor, not even win them favor from the people that they are having as their target market. They think it's going to win them favor in the eyes of the elitist who own them from the World Economic Forums, from the Black Rocks and the Vanguards and the, the, the elites who own those companies who are pushing those ideologies like Alex Soros and George Soros, who were gonna talk about a little bit later.
That's who they're gaining the favor of. Here. I did see something that there was some sort of talk about a, I think it was a c e I score, which is like your woke score basically for companies that they're getting favor over, where they'll like pull some sort of association if these companies don't have a high enough score of wokeness.
And so maybe that's what's going on here, but here's how you fight back. 5 billion of market loss is a huge loss for Ann Heiser Busch. Huge loss you. That's, that's so much money. 5% of your value in five days, 1% per day. If that keeps up for 50 days, and I don't, I 100% think that that's just the beginning.
I, I think it's gonna be 20%, 25%. Again, I'm just shooting from the hip here. Don't listen to me. But, but I absolutely think that there is going to be a tremendous loss. And this is just the beginning because we're not even seeing, seeing the outcomes. We're seeing the people who are pulling their stocks out of this.
We're seeing people who are starting to short the stock as a result, but we're not seeing quarterly earnings statements. We're not seeing that yet. And when we see that it will be a blood bath, when we see the quarterly earnings for h Anheuser-Busch, a blood bath, bath, when we see it, and this is just the beginning, 5% is nothing compared to what it's gonna turn out to once we actually see the numbers.
Right. What we're seeing right now is a vanity reaction, but there will be a corporate there, there, there will be figures that come out. There will be, uh, quarterly earning statements that show when 50 40% of people who drink Bud Light, stop drinking it, stop buying it, which means the liquor stores who are sourcing it and the grocery stores that have it will stop purchasing it as well.
This is how you fight back from woke. This is how you fight back against the corporations who are shoving this ideology down you and your child's throat. 100% how we we fight back against this us. All right, so let's go ahead and listen to this. This is the interview with the VP of Marketing from Busch.
Her name is Alyssa Heiner Scheid, uh, she's a Harvard graduate. Imagine that, who then went to the Wharton School of Business? Um, I believe she had like some sort of like, Language and English degree from Harvard, which I don't know why the hell you go to Harvard. Harvard for an English degree to go into marketing.
All right. By the way, I'm drinking a real beer. This is a founder's, uh, Centennial ipa, which is quite delicious and doesn't taste like shit. And they have yet to shove their trans ideology down my throat if they have any belief in it, which I doubt they do. Okay, so drink real beer folks. All right. Um, maybe I'll start doing a, a beer review like, uh, you know, uh, bar stool, uh, Dave Portnoy does for pizzas.
If I, if I had to do a beer review on this founder's Centennial ipa. Let's see, how well does this go? It's an, an IPA featuring Centennial Hops. Huh, let's read it. Get ready to bask in the glory of this frothy heads floral bouquet relish the citrus accents from the abundance of dry hops. This one's sweet, yet balanced multi undertones.
Shake hands with the hop character for a finish that never turns too bitter delicious. All right, one sip. Everybody knows rules. Centennial IPA By Founders Initial reaction, I would give it a 7.3. I've had better IPAs, but it's pretty good. All right. And again, no, no woke trans ideology being shoved in my throat, which gives it multiple, multiple brownie points.
All right, so here's the vp, Alicia Alyssa Heiner Scheid, and she is going to speak on here, right? One thing that she talks about initially is evolving the Bud Light Brand. Now this is the clip that everybody was talking about, right? She talks about why she did this and why she's trying to shove this ideology down their throats and, and all of this stuff.
So let's listen to that first, and then we will listen to her talking about her hiring practices, which I think is a little bit even more egregious and probably downright illegal if you really dive into it. Um, so let's go ahead and listen to her. We do not attract. Young drinkers to come and drink this brand.
There will be no future for Bud Light. So I had around, in your own perspective and your own values, you know the person you are at Home Impacts and has a ripple effect on the Bud Light brand. Tell me about that a little bit. Yeah, I, I think number one, you know, I'm a businesswoman. Mm-hmm. I had a really clear job to do when I took over Bud Light and it was, this brand is in decline.
It's been in decline for a really long time. And if we do not attract young drinkers to come and drink this brand, there will be no future for Bud Light. So I had this, the brand was in decline only once you decided to promote trans ideology to your generally conservative target market. Let's be clear about this here.
If we go back and look at the last, I don't know, let's, let's look at the last five years of Bud Light. Let's see if there's been a single decline. Five years. A single decline. That was 5% in five days. Oh, this is a screenshot. So it's not gonna give me exactly what I'm looking for here, but I highly doubt it.
The brand started to be in decline once you started to make these types of decisions, right? Super clear mandate. It's, we need to evolve and elevate this incredibly iconic brand. And my, what I brought to that was a belief in I was looking for real men of genius. You remember that ad? That's good marketing, right?
Real men of genius. Let's watch that shit once this is over. But real men of genius is what I was thinking of earlier. I don't know what I said. Like great men or whatever the hell. No real men of genius, great marketing, Dylan Mulvaney, horrible marketing. Okay. What is, what do, what does evolve and elevate mean?
It means inclusivity. It means shifting the tone. It means having a campaign that's truly inclusive and feels lighter and brighter and different, and appeals to women and to men. Mm-hmm. And representation. Is it sort of the heart of evolution? You've gotta see people who reflect you in the work. And we had this hangover.
I mean, bud Light had been kind of a brand of fratty, kind of out of touch humor, and it was really important that we had another approach. So, long story short, super Bowl spot. Fast forward, I cast an incredible female choreographer who just brought incredibly positive, amazing energy to the spot. We cast Miles Teller and his wife Kelly Teller.
But it was really crucial to me that if you see that spot, Kelly is. Kelly is the heartbeat of that spot. You're seeing this whole experience through Kelly. She's the beating heart. She, I would sort of argue with sort of what propels you through that experience and, and that was intentional. Um, and then we had another really fun spot.
First spot out of the gate was the first time ever we'd had a female protagonist in this. Really cool, she was sort of cool as hell, bobbin and weaving through a bar. But anyway, listen, I'm not gonna pretend that there isn't so much more work to do from a business results perspective and of course from a representation perspective, but I feel like you, you have to put your money where your mouth is when you're trying to evolve a brand and elevate it and bring in new consumers.
So that's been incredibly important to me. Mm-hmm.
Bet she didn't expect a 5% stock loss in five days. Now you hear her talking about that, uh, the frat brand. Right. Let's, let's, we'll take a little dive back in time. A little dive back in time for the VP of Marketing at Anheuser-Busch when she's calling out her own target market. The people who purchased her products for being out of touch frat boys.
Little did she know somebody was gonna go to her Facebook profile, scroll a few years back and see photos of her Dr. Like filling up condom balloons, shotgunning beers, and doing everything that appears to. And looks to be her fraty passed. This says leaked photos have revealed that Bud Light's, vice President of Marketing, Alyssa Heiner, pardoned it up while attending Harvard University exhibiting behavior that one might expect to see at a frat house.
The images which are nearly 20 years old, would have remained buried in Hein, Hershey's Facebook albums. Had the beer executive not recently suggested that the brand she now represents should distance itself from its Friday past. The images, which are now attained from the daily caller from a source who discovered them on Hein Che's now protected Facebook page were from a 2006 event called the ISIS Senior Reversed Initiation Scavenger Hunt, um, which was.
To provide in 2000 to provide a positive environment in social network for women to flourish an article in the university's newspaper around the same time that the photos of Heide were taken. However, describe the scene of the club's gatherings as a haven for inebriated dit sea. In the photos, Heiner Scheide can be seen drinking beer, blowing up condoms, as if they were balloons and exhibiting other behaviors typically associated with intoxication.
17 years later, Heiner side is now calling on beer companies to cater to more than just the frat house crowd. I am a businesswoman. She says during a March 23rd appearance on the Make Yourself a Home Podcast, I had a really clear job to do, which is all basically just what we listened to. She went on to explain.
The representation is sort of the heart of evolution, and Bud Light has for too long been a brand of Fraty kind of out of touch humor since Henesey made those comments. The brand is partnered with Trans TikTok, influencer Dylan Mulvaney, A move that has been widely criticized and in some cases even led to boycotts, in some cases, very many at this point now.
What I find to be interesting is if you go a little bit even more back, because that's like, just punchy, good headlines, right? Oh, she called 'em frat boys and you know, maybe she's also fratty with her, you know, she's being a hypocrite obviously, and some of these photos are kind of funny. Um, but maybe, maybe don't make fun of your target market if you were your target market.
Uh, so let's go back and see what I find to be even more egregious than the, the, what she's doing as far as the promotion of trans ideology through a brand that is primarily conservative target markets, or even being a hypocrite by calling people fraty and then blowing up condom balloons and getting extremely intoxicated on pictures of Facebook.
Um, which you might be able to find, if you don't mind if I had one. Um, but, uh, let's go back and see what she talks about with hiring practices. Okay. She talks about her hiring practices and spills the tea a little bit further than she probably would've liked by talking about how she leans her hiring practices more towards hiring women and more towards hiring people who associate with her same ideology.
Almost word for word says this and that, my friends is illegal. If you choose to hire somebody specifically based on their representation of their sex so that you can have more people of that sex in your business, that is sexist, discriminatory, hiring practices not that hard to do. One plus one equals two, that's discrimination, and there is anti-discrimination laws.
So let's go ahead and listen to her boast about how she hires more women than men purposefully, again, discriminating as well as people who identify at the same beliefs as her. A k a woke. Here we go. Um, and I try to bring that honestly and how I wanna operate in the world. Mm-hmm. And I would say the most important thing about this job is that you, I have to prioritize bringing other people along the way, community and women.
I mean, it's just, it doesn't mean anything unless I am positively impacting other people. And so that's been just incredibly important to me. My decisions with teams, I mean, I, I try to build teams of people who maybe nobody else has taken a chance on them. I try to bet on people who haven't had the opportunity, bet on people with similar values as me, who are hungry and wanna do great things.
I try to bet on people. I hire people, aka I hire people who have similar values to me. I hire people who are primarily, I try to hire women. I, that, that is discriminatory, discriminatory practices. And I even tried to like argue this back and forth with G P T four, um, the other day. So I, I'll see if I can even pull that up.
Um, but I, I had it kind of argue against me and, and gimme the reason that this should be acceptable and how this is not racist or sexist, right? In nature, how is this not against anti-discrimination laws? Um, because to me it seems very, very clear and evident that this should be considered absolutely considered, um, discriminatory hiring practices.
Um, so here is what it had to say about that. Now, this was actually G P T 3.5. No. Did I do it with four? Let's see. So I've, I've found interesting ways to go about this with, with having G P T kind of. Converse back and forth with me. So what I said to it is, is hiring someone of a specific racer sex purposefully for the intention of growing the number of employees of that racer sex illegal.
It's said, I am not a lawyer, but I can offer some general information about employment Discrim. Oh my ears. That is horrible. Speechify, what are you doing to me? We need our man. Let's go with I like Harry. I like Harry. Let's go with Harry. Harry here. I'm astute. To share a better way to read. Perfect. Harry, here.
Perfect. Perfect. I'm astute. To share a better way to read. Give 'em a little bit of sped up and we're off to the races. So this is the conversation that I had with G P T yesterday when I was trying to, I was trying to work this through in my head. I was actually trying to figure out whether or not this is illegal or not.
So I said, is hiring someone of a specific race or sex purposefully for the intention of growing the number of employees of that race racer sex illegal? And here's what it responded. I am not a lawyer, but I can offer some general information about employment discrimination laws in the United States Under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, it is generally legal for employers to discriminate against individuals based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin includes hiring practices.
However, there are some exceptions to this rule when employers are trying to increase diversity within their workforce or remedy past discrimination. Affirmative action programs, for example, may allow employers to consider race or sex as one factor in their hiring decisions, but only under certain circumstances.
Programs must be narrowly tailored to achieve a compelling government interest, such as remedying, past discrimination, or promoting diversity. They also cannot impose an undue burden on other groups or create rigid quotas. It's may differ depending on the country or jurisdiction. So it is important to consult with legal counsel or seek advice from a local expert for specific guidance.
All right, so there was was a, it's initial response. So I said what allow, like what laws allow for the exception to anti discriminatory hiring practices, because to me, when you tell me that there are some exceptions for this rule, when employers are trying to increase diversity, what does increasing diversity mean?
How is affirmative action not actually racist? When you are trying to increase diversity, that means you are intentionally hiring one person who would normally not be hired. Based on qualifications over somebody who is not based on their sex race or their national origin. That is R sexist, that is racist, that is discrimination.
So how can you justify that? Right? Some people refer to it as reverse racism, reverse discrim discrimination, which is still discrimination if you are actively pursuing the idea that you need to have more women in your business. So let's just put it like this. I want more white men at my business. That is my goal.
I hire more white conservative men at my business. If somebody came out, if the VP of marketing at a company said, I want to hire more white men who are conservative at my business, they would be ripped to shreds. The company would be folded overnight. But the VP of marketing at Bud Light and Anheuser-Busch does this and people try to celebrate it, hiring based off of sex.
And political ideology is discrimination and against the law. Okay? So again, I tried to tease this out. I was legitimately curious in trying to figure out how can you actually legally do this and how is this not a lawsuit from somebody who went to, and maybe it will be now if we can get enough eyes on this, but a lawsuit from people who have gone and been interviewed for positions under this woman and not been hired because they're a man with different ideology than her.
So is it not just reverse racism then if you can hire based on race, but only for races that are approved, right? Who gets to decide whether they're approved or not? So, Then I asked it here, here's what it responded to that, but then I asked it to steelman it's argument, which really an incredible, uh, epiphany for me with using G P T was trying to teach it to argue against itself.
Because if I sit here and argue back and forth with chat g p t, it's going to logically be far more equipped than me because it has the infinite intelligence of the universe. Although I'm very convincing in my arguments, it might be difficult for me to do it against the, the, the God of information here.
Um, so I asked it to argue against hisself, right? It's gonna be able to formulate better arguments than me logically speaking with infinite access to all of the information of the world. Although I do think I'm pretty good at creating compelling arguments, maybe not as good as the God of information. So let's go ahead and hear what it has to say about my response.
So I said to it, is that just not reverse racism then if you can hire based on race, but only for races that are approved. This is what it said. And then it steel mans my argument after that.
The term reverse racism is often used to describe situations in which members of historically advantaged groups feel that they're being discriminated against in favor of members of historically disadvantaged groups, such as through affirmative action programs. Important to understand that the goal of affirmative action is to address historical and systemic discrimination and underrepresentation of certain groups in areas such as education, employment, and government contracting.
Brass are designed to create a level playing field for individuals from all backgrounds and promote diversity and inclusion in the United States. The Supreme Court has held that race conscious policies such as affirmative action can be legally permissible under certain circumstances, but they must be narrowly tailored to achieve a compelling government interest.
Like promoting diversity or remedying past discrimination has also made it clear that rigid quotas and undue burdens on other groups are not allowed. Affirmative action programs are not about giving preference to one race over another for the sake of preference, but rather aim to create opportunities for members of historically underrepresented groups who may have faced obstacles due to systemic discrimination.
The intention is to work toward a more equitable and diverse society, not to create new forms of discrimination. That said, affirmative action remains a complex and often contentious issue with proponents and opponents offering different perspectives on its effectiveness and fairness. All right, so I find that to be interesting.
It, it seems like a logically flawed argument, which almost happens across don't, very, very many arguments coming from the left, right? The, the left is built on emotion. The right is generally built on logic, and where logic fails, emotion must be applied to self preserve, right? So when, when I asked it to steelman my argument back, right?
Steel manning an argument basically means. To give me the most compelling argument back to yourself so that you can then, you know, make, make the argument back to me of my argument so that you can then address the concerns of my argument properly from the perspective that I'm coming from. So I asked it to steal man, it's argument because what you'll find is even if, even if G P T leans more to the left, right?
Just, just based on 99% of coders in Silicon Valley being liberal, it's obviously gonna have some skewing, but you can have it argue your point. Now I've found that 3.5 will not do this, four will do this. It's, it's a little bit more nuanced in the way that it, it has discussions with you. So it will steal me in arguments if it, if, if it's programming the 3.5 s programming will not allow it to.
I asked, did the steelman an argument for me? It wouldn't do it because it didn't believe in the argument based on its flawed logic. So I asked, did the steelman, the argument that, um, That affirmative action is, in fact potentially racist or, or at least in, in its varied essence, not positive overall. So here, here was, here was the steelman argument by G P T against affirmative action.
A steelman argument refers to the practice of restating an opposing argument in its strongest and most compelling form. In this case, the steelman argument against affirmative action would emphasize the following points and meritocracy. Proponents of affirmative action argue that policies should be based solely on merit without considering factors like race, gender, or ethnicity.
Believe that giving preference to underrepresented groups can result in less qualified individuals being hired or admitted, which is unfair to other applicants who might be more qualified. First. Discrimination critics argue that affirmative action can lead to reverse discrimination. Disadvantaging individuals from historically privileged groups who may be more qualified, they say is inherently unfair and goes against the principle of equal opportunity.
Perpetuation of stereotypes and divisions. Some argue that affirmative action can inadvertently reinforce stereotypes and divisions by focusing on race or gender, rather than on individual qualifications and potential. Believe that this focus can perpetuate the idea that underrepresented groups need special treatment to succeed stigmatization of beneficiaries.
Another argument against affirmative action is that it can stigmatize beneficiaries, leading others to question their qualifications and accomplishments can undermine the confidence and self-esteem of individuals from underrepresented groups who may feel that their success is attributed to affirmative action rather than their abilities term effectiveness.
Critics also question the long-term effectiveness of affirmative action, arguing that it may not address the root causes of systemic discrimination, and may instead create dependence on such programs. Advocate for alternative solutions such as improving access to quality education and addressing socioeconomic disparities to create more sustainable change.
So there is its main points, right? I'll highlight them for you in case it's difficult to listen to our friend Harry.  But it says, basically, equality and meritocracy. Opponents of affirmative action argue that policy should be based solely on merit, right? Not your race, not your skin color. That is the Martin Luther King argument.
I have a dream that one day, right? We won't look at people and judge them based on race, gender, or ethnicity. We are specifically judging people based off of race, gender, or ethnicity. Which means if you are proactively helping one group, you are actively, actively preventing another group based on gender, race, or ethnicity.
There is always a ne there is always going to be a, a negative outcome to the positive outcome for that one group as a result of, of this affirmative action. I didn't have any slaves. There's no reason that I shouldn't get into a university, I shouldn't get a job that, that I should have any, anything that's judged against me for my skin color.
No reason at all. It's literally reverse racism if that term holds any merit. It's what, if not just straight racism. Right? If you are, if you are not hiring me because I have white skin, if you are not having me in your university because I have white skin, because I have a penis, because I have  right-leaning ideologies compared to left-leaning ideologies, that that is discriminatory in its essence and, and simply perpetuating, um, exactly what you were trying to combat.
Right? But you were just blind to it through emotion. Um, the second argument that it gave was reverse discrimination. Critics argue that affirmative action can lead to reverse discrimination, disadvantaging individuals of historically privileged groups who may be more qualified. Right? That's exactly what I just talked about, perpetuation of stereotypes and divisions.
Some argue that affirmative action can inadvertently reinforce stereotypes and divisions by focusing on race and gender rather than individual qualifications. Right? A hundred percent stigmatization of beneficiaries. Um, so it's basically saying that, um, somebody who is, uh, let's say they're black and they get hired somewhere or they go to a university, but they have less qualifications, they get a lower gpa, they have a lower s a T, but they get into the university because of their skin color.
That is going to further stigmatize the idea that they should get in, even though they have lower scores, that, that makes the argument that people who are black should not have high enough scores compared to Asians or white people or, you know, any other culture that, that are getting discriminated against, against in this case.
Right. Which again, is absolutely the case. Um, long-term effectiveness and, and not the case obviously that they shouldn't have high enough scores. They're just as intelligent and capable. Um, and that's why it, it is absolutely a stigmatization. Um, moving on, long-term effectiveness, uh, say that affirmative action, arguing that it may not address the root causes of systemic discrimination instead of basically just putting a bandaid on it.
So, so what I tried to do here is say, using only logic and not straw manning, because what I found was when I was having it argue against it, it was using emotional language. It was saying that, well, there's, there's, uh, certain people who are, you know, have histories of being discriminated against and so blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
It was, it was straw manning the argument not using logic. So I said to G P T using only logic and not straw manning the argument by bringing up affirmative action or laws simply from a philosophical and logic based perspective. How do you argue against 0.2, 0.2 being reverse discrimination? Critics argue that affirmative action can lead to reverse discrimination, disadvantaging individuals from historically privileged groups who may be more qualified, um, this they say is inherently unfair and goes against the principle of equal opportunity.
So I asked it to logically and without a strong argument, which is what it was presenting me prior, give me a logic-based philosophical perspective out outside of the bounds of what's available for rules within humanity, outside of the bounds of what's available for laws. Tell me specifically from a philosophical and logic-based perspective, how do you argue that hiring somebody based on race or sex is not racist or sexist?
Tell me that. Okay. And here is what I had to say.
A philosophical and logical perspective one could argue against. Point two, the reverse discrimination claim. By focusing on the concepts of fairness, context, and historical background and context, the concept of fairness can be understood differently depending on the context. In a society with a history of systemic discrimination against certain groups, equal treatment of all individuals without considering this context might not be truly fair.
Affirmative action policies aim to address historical disadvantages and promote a more inclusive and diverse environment by offering opportunities to underrepresented groups. If justice philosophically, one could argue that corrective justice should be applied in cases where historical discrimination has caused disadvantages for certain groups means that measures can be taken to rectify past injustices and promote a more equitable society.
From this perspective, affirmative action policies are not reversed discrimination, but rather a means of achieving corrective justice, filling the playing field. Critics of affirmative action often assume that all individuals start from the same position and have equal access to opportunities due to historical and systemic discrimination.
This is not always the case. By considering factors like race or gender in hiring and admissions decisions, affirmative action policies aim to level the playing field and create a more equitable environment. Balancing competing interests. From a philosophical perspective, one could argue that promoting diversity and addressing historical disadvantages are important societal values that must be balanced against the principle of equal treatment.
It is crucial to avoid undue burdens on other groups. Implementing carefully designed affirmative action policies can help achieve these competing interests without resulting in reverse discrimination greater good. The principle of utilitarianism suggests that actions should be evaluated based on their consequences, specifically by maximizing overall happiness or wellbeing.
Affirmative action policies can be seen as promoting the greater good by fostering a more inclusive and diverse society, which can benefit everyone in the long run, even if it results in some perceived disadvantages for certain individuals in the short term. Okay. There is its argument back to steel manning.
My argument, and I'll just give you the cliff notes on those. Again, fairness in con, in context, the concept of fairness can be understood differently depending on the context. Basically saying that if there's systemic racist or racism, uh, Or discrimination against certain groups equal treatment of the individuals without considering the context might not be truly fair.
Right. So, so in my response, the back to that would be is yes, I, I've seen certain documentaries. I've, I cannot recall the name of it. , I can see the cover of it in my head. Um, but I've watched documentaries. I, I believe that there has absolutely been systemic racism in our country.  I, I am not blind to that.
I, I completely agree with that point. I believe that the,  propor disproportionately black communities are affected through, drugs that were pushed literally by our government, like the crack epidemic, um, into more black communities through, through the ghettos in, in like the eighties, um, 100. 100% disproportionately affected them.
I absolutely agree to the fact that, that they are, , at a much higher rate of incarceration, which causes men to be out of the households, which causes, uh, uh, children to have far more issues in their upbringings. That that's like 100% statistically factual. There is absolutely been systemic racism.
There was perpetuation of racist ideologies by the same people who parents did have slaves however many years ago. Right. I I'm not blind to that. I agree with that. There is, there is systemic and, and or there or there. At least there has been systemic racism. I believe we are at a point in our culture where there, there is very little, very little that is going on that is against one minority group.
Statistically, it's just not the case. Okay.  So fairness and context. I think when you're taking into consideration it's fir first point, a fairness and concept, a concept of fairness understood differently depending on the context. Um, history of systemic discrimination. Sure. But should we be dis perpetuating discrimination as an answer to that?
No. We should be plugging the holes in the boat. We should stop, stop the FBI and CIA from, uh, pushing crack into primarily black neighborhoods. We should, I, we should address the issues with our police forces where they're, you know, primarily perpetuating, uh, high incarceration rates. Now, that's not to say that those incarceration rates aren't merited by actual crimes, um, but that's a separate convers.
Um, it says the next point that it gave is corrective justice. Philosophically, one could argue that corrective justice should be applied in causes where historical discrimination has caused disadvantages. Same point applies, um, leveling the playing field. Critics of affirmative action can assume that all individuals start from the same position, have equal access to opportunities, however, do the historical, and it's all the same argument, balancing and competing interests, um, diversity and addressing.
Okay. And then the last one was the greater good. The principle of utilitarianism suggests that action should be evaluated based on their consequences, um, specifically by maximizing overall happiness or wellbeing. Affirmative action policies can be seen as promoting the greater good by fostering and more inclusive and diverse society.
Okay. Is it though, if it is specif. Perpetuating the, the very discrimination that it's setting out to solve in the first place, right? Nobody, nobody in today's world is blind to the fact that racism was not a thing, right? We all agree on that. We all agree that racism is wrong, at least a far, far greater percentage than those who disagree, right?
Like very, very, very, very small percentage of people are still extremely racist. Um, at least to my knowledge. And maybe, but compared to what it was, it's so much better than it was right now. That's not to say that it doesn't exist. It obviously exists, but the percentage is just very low. Um, so the idea that perpetuating that, that.
You know, through utilitarianism, the, the answer to racism is reverse racism does, does not seem to hold up well. Um, now it says, now, now what I said in response to this, so this is a really interesting way to, to, to tease out your own perspectives, right? When, when I'm not standing in front of another individual and, and in a heated argument, I can actually see some of these points that it's giving, right?
When you ask it to not only argue against me, but then steelman my argument and then argue against that steelman, and then argue back to those counterpoints, you're, you're going to really see all sides of an argument. I, I am open to being wrong and I've been wrong many times before, so I plan on changing my opinion on things in the future.
I, I am not held in my beliefs to the point where I, I think that I cannot be. And, and it gives some decent arguments and, and far more arguments than anybody else that you're gonna stand in front of you who is liberal or who is on the left is going to have in front of you without putting a motion in the way.
So utilize G p t this way, utilize chat g p t in a way that you can further understand the opposite side of things. If we use the, this, this tool in this way, maybe we can lessen the divide right now. When you ask it to argue against those points, it makes some great points back against that, uh, case. But I think that this is a, a really, really great way of utilizing this tool to make yourself more aware of the logical arguments that are being made, um, because far more often than not emotion is being applied.
And, and the people who are willing to have arguments like this, Not very common. Right? And, and, and, and even for me, right? And if I stand in front of somebody and I try to argue my points, there's going to be a point where there it, it becomes emotional. But when I'm sitting here arguing with a, a logic-based language model, it's very difficult to instill in, in, in their, inject emotion into the conversation.
So I, I thoroughly enjoyed doing this. I even did a secondary conversation with it about, um, when does life begin? Had to argue when life, when people believe life begins, and how it, it, it says it. It was a really interesting philosophical conversation that I had with infinite intelligence. Um, Because I truly, it's very, very difficult to, for me to see the, some of the logics in, in some of these arguments.
And, and generally it is such an emotional, uh, response and, and it's hard to even have conversations with people about this where it's not super emotionally charged. So I highly recommend that you have these, and to close this out for this conversation, I'll, I'll let you hear just what it had to say about, um, about arguing against the points that it's made, um, against the steelman argument.
Okay. So give me the, so basically what happened is I said, tell me why you disagree with me. Why do you disagree that this is not racist? Because to me it seems racist. So it made its arguments Now. I said, okay, I teased that out a little bit. Tell me more further. Don't, don't do it from a scare. Uh, um, don't, don't do it from the perspective of emotion.
Don't do it from the perspective of laws. Do it from a philosophical perspective without a strawman argument, cuz it was interjecting different arguments that didn't specifically speak to logic. Then I said, okay, great. Now argue against yourself as if you were me in the most compelling way. Then I had to argue against itself, back to argue against my points in its most compelling way.
And then I had to argue those points back. And you could probably do this infinitely, but it really does, um, allow you to see all sides of the argument. Um, so if nothing else, take away that from this. If you, if you're not thoroughly enjoying this conversation, then do argue against the points go made in the previous response.
One could emphasize the following counterpoints objective fairness. One could argue that true fairness should be based on objective criteria like qualifications and performance, regardless of historical context. Action policies by considering factors such as race or gender, may compromise the principle of objective fairness and lead to situations where less qualified individuals are chosen over more qualified ones quality before the law.
Critics of affirmative action could argue that individuals should be treated equally before the law, regardless of their group membership. Considering factors like race or gender in decision making, affirmative action policies may infringe upon this principle of equality, perpetuating divisions and stereotypes by emphasizing factors like race or gender, affirmative action policies may inadvertently perpetuate divisions and stereotypes, rather than breaking them down, excite you that focusing on individual qualifications and potential rather than group identity would be a more effective way to promote a diverse and inclusive society consequences for intended beneficiaries.
Affirmative action policies may have unintended negative consequences for the very individuals they aim to benefit. For example, beneficiaries of affirmative action may face doubts about their qualifications leading to a lack of confidence in their own abilities, or undermining their accomplishments.
In the eyes of others, sing root causes, critics argue that affirmative action policies may not effectively address the root causes of historical and systemic discrimination. They suggest focusing on alternative solutions such as improving access to quality education, addressing socioeconomic disparities, and promoting broader cultural changes to create a more equitable and inclusive society notion of meritocracy.
One could argue that affirmative action policies may erode the principle of meritocracy, which emphasizes that individuals should be rewarded based on their abilities and achievements rather than their background. Suggest that these policies may hinder the development of a truly merit-based society.
So I have found that to be interesting, right? A lot of what it talks about is, um, the one that I saw to be most interesting of that is the equality before the law. Critics of affirmative action could argue that individuals should be treated equally before the law, regardless of their group membership.
By considering factors like race or gender in decision making, affirmative action policies may infringe upon this principle of equality. Isn't equality what they are trying to gain in the first place, right? So if you're pursuing racist tactics to address inequality, aren't you further perpetuating inequality?
How? There's no logical argument against that, that I can see, and I have yet to see it presented here. Um, besides the flawed emotional logic that based on previous history, we should now be racist and sexist towards other groups in order to help move the needle more towards equality sooner. But when do you stop doing that?
Right? So, so at what point does, do, do you go from right, when do we say, all right guys, affirmative action's over now we're all equal. No, it's a, it may be a longer process to get there, but the way that you get to equality. Everybody being treated equally, not by tipping the scale with your toe for one person, because they're still where they're at, regardless of your affirmative action.
So in, in this argument of infinite, of, of, uh, what, what did I call it? Uh, information God, um, against, against itself, I, I still hold true in my beliefs. And, and again, maybe I, I'm gonna have these conversations with it and, and be convinced otherwise on, on other things. And I really, truly hope so because it's hard to have a, a, a conversation with, with people on other ideologies without it getting emotional.
Um, but this truly does allow it to be. It allows you to sit beside yourself and, and, and even just flex the muscle of listening. Um, so, you know, maybe next time we'll go through when does human life begin, which turned into a another interesting. Another interesting, uh, argument between me and G P T. All right, so that, that was, uh, that was that.
 This episode's gonna go a little bit longer than I expected. Um, so let's move on. But first, hit that subscribe button. Leave a five star review. I, I hope you're learning something at least maybe how to leverage G P T as a tool for you to, to expand your mind, expand your consciousness, expand your worldview.
 If you don't have a friend who's willing to sit at the table with you and drink an, an, a numerous amount of beers who has a, a completely different political ideology than you, then you might as well do it with, uh, information, God, because it, maybe, it may, who knows? Maybe your world worldview will change if it's in the face of something that is 100% logic based and, um, doesn't hold emotion within the argument.
As long as you know how to phrase the questions properly. And I think that the, the, the concept of steel Manning allows you to further tease out your own arguments and see its flaws. And then further tease out the, a flaws of the other arguments. And, and maybe the, the end conclusion is eventually that there's humanity on both sides of it.
And, and, and there there's some form of potentially logic applied to both. And, and, and in some portions, like I saw when I argued, where does life begin? I basically check made a G P T into admitting. Biological, uh, life begins even before conception. Um, so, so I found that to be interesting. So stick around for that, maybe in a, in a future episode where I'll tease that one out for you guys.
So the next article that we're going to talk about here is going to be why did George, why did Alex Soros, why did Alex Soros visit the Biden White House 14 times, times 14 times?
George Soros son visited the White House just since Biden took office. And this article goes on to say the son of pro crime, billionaire George Soros. And let's just point out the fact that this is gonna be a, a leaning article by that opening statement, but I don't disagree. Alex is raising eyebrows over more than a dozen White House meetings since December, 2021, where he met with multiple officials, including Then's Chief of Staff, Ron Klain, and several national security officials.
There's this picture of him immediately in this article, uh, which goes back to his Instagram page with 116 likes on it with this man in a white suit like a pimp in what appears to be some sort of party with somebody in the background laying on a table like they're about to be. With some, you know, 20 year old beautiful woman next to him.
Um, according to the White House visitor logs reviewed by Fox News and first reported by the New York Post, the 38 year old Alex Soros visited the White House over 14 times in his latest trips. Included visiting December 1st with then White House chief of staff Ron claims advisor Nina Sarva, who also worked on Biden's Presidential campaign, the log show.
Later that evening, the younger Soros was one of 330 people to attend a lavish state dinner on the White House's South Lawn, hosted by the president and First Lady Joe Biden, honoring French President Emmanuel Mcn in Macron's wife Bridget. It says a day later, Alex Soros, whose chair, whose chairs the powerful liberal grant making network Open Society foundations, founded by his dad.
Met with the both advisor to the Council of President Mariana Aam, and Deputy National Security Advisor, Jonathan Finer records show it's noticeable that almost all, with the exception of Ron Klain, who had the president's ear obviously were involved in national security. Um, Ukraine is a country where the Soros family has unfortunately boasted a lot of influence.
There is tens, if not hundreds of billions of dollars being thrown around there. So I think that would be something we're circling back and coming. Com circling back on in the coming months or years. Despite George Sorrow's notorious way amongst political circles, uh, Palombo said that the younger Soros could someday boast even more power.
Noting Alex has been flaunting his influence on social media with pictures of himself alongside Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, former speaker Nancy Pelosi, and former President Barack Obama, his standing on 11 million of his own money. Now, that may seem like a drop in the bucket compared to his father, and it is, but it's not going to be that way forever.
The way that I would put it, George Soros over his career has spent more than 20 billion in Open Society Foundation, which is the vehicle by which he makes this spending has around 20 billion on its balance sheet. So when Alex takes over, he has a war chest that is basically able to, I would say, at a minimum, double the amount of damage that his father is going to do and probably more.
Here's a little deal, take a look. Official White House records revealing the billionaires eldest son had more than a dozen different meetings with top Biden officials since 2021, including four with the office of then Chief of Staff, Ron Klain. Matt Columbo is the author of The Man Behind the Curtain, the Secret Network of George Soros, and Matt joins me now.
Matt, walk us through how the Soros influence Machine is pulling the levers at the white. Thanks guys. Well, it's looking like Alex Soros is prime to take over the Soros Empire. Obviously his father in his nineties cannot do it forever. Um, this New York Post piece outlined 14 different White House visits, but I mean, we almost didn't even need the report.
You can go on Alex's Instagram, his Twitter, any social media, and it's almost like he's bragging to us. It is a picture of him and every progressive Democrat you can imagine, and really their left to counterparts overseas. Um, now of these 14 people he met, it is I think notable that almost all, with the exception of Ron Klain, uh, who had the president's ear obviously were involved in national security.
 Ukraine is a country where the Soros family has, unfortunately moted a lot of influence. There is tens, if not hundreds of billions of dollars being thrown around. All right. He's just saying everything that I. That he said only my voice is hopefully more present pleasant than his. Um, so pretty wild and the only person who I know of that was at the White House more than 14 times was, as I stated earlier, bill Clinton, having Epstein to the White House is the only thing that I find to be a little bit more concerning than the 14 times that Alex Soros has been there as well.
All right. So I find that to be interesting and in the face of that, I guess we will see later, um, on in time that this man takes over four. George Soros, which is, you know, sad to hear that there's going to be a succession there. All right. Next on our quick hits is going to be that N P R quit Twitter after being labeled state affiliated media.
And so basically Twitter called NPR State Affiliated media, basically calling them a propaganda arm of the US government. And then NPR came out and said, NPR is stepping away from Twitter, and this includes this N P R politics feed. Please read the thread to find other ways to find our network, including our Instagram and our newsletter.
How funny. So some people describe this as rage quitting, which is like the best way to describe this. NPR threw the controller and quit Twitter over being described as a propaganda arm of the United States. Um, so this article, which we will touch on real briefly,  NPR stopped tweeting last week after being labeled State Affiliated Media.
And although Twitter sends tweaked the classification slightly to government funded media, the outlet has already made up. Its mine. Uh, it's a short article, so, but you kind of already get it. Um, the, the credibility of many, many of these companies is gone. And under that idea, I'm assuming it would probably be most of our news media outlet companies that would be labeled in the same exact way, but I did find that to be interesting.
 And then last but not least, let's go ahead and talk about this. All right. The biggest leak. Since 2011 of US military documents, this says, and this comes from the hill. The biggest leak of classified document documents in a decade created a sprawling crisis in Washington this week. As records detailed alleged US spying on the Allies insights into American thinking on the war of Ukraine, and at least two neutral companies mulling plans to support Russia.
Penta gone. Officials are still reviewing the documents for validity, and the Justice Department is overseeing a criminal investigation of the leak. At least one of the documents containing casualty estimates appear to have been altered, but it's unclear how many of the roughly 100 records were manipulated in those documents that they're saying were altered, which you gotta remember when we go back to the ghost of Kiev and how much propaganda has gone into the war going on in Ukraine.
You have to remember how much propaganda has gone into this. So I don't think it's compelling to immediately write off some of these comparisons and they don't seem that far off. Um, the, the comparison said that there was, for every Ukrainian soldier or for every Russian soldier that died, four Ukrainian soldiers died, which to me just makes sense with how large Russia's, uh, military forces compared to Ukraine's, even despite the amount of help that they were getting from other NATO countries.
 This goes on to say that the documents have circulated online since March and probably as early as January before, picking up attention last week after a New York Times report. There are many more documents to come, but the leak has already done a lot of damage forcing crucial US allies to respond in what has become an arguably embarrassing incident for Washington and the United States.
Here are the seven biggest revelations in this document so far. Now this is the seven biggest revelations that the Hill is willing to come out and say. Now it was a reminder The hill came out and called, uh, Robert Kennedy Jr. An anti-vaxxer in its opening headline. So I believe that the Hill has gone more left leaning and, and more state media than they were prior.
We saw that after they got rid of one of their, uh, more notable anchors who was, uh, prominent in speaking out against some of these types of things. Um, but here are the top seven things that they called us out as. And that's not to say that maybe there's more to come or that they're hiding some of these things, but, um, here they are.
Ukraine, air Defenses system in peril, munitions of for Soviet. Era, air defense, say Soviet era, air defense, Soviet air, air defense, Soviet air, air defense, um, systems deployed by Ukraine will soon run out potentially imperiling, uh, Kiev in the war against Russia. They basically have three weeks worth of munitions left for 89% of Ukraine's air defenses is what these documents leaked and said the, the next thing that that checks off the list here is Pentagon cast doubt on Ukraine's spring counter offensive.
Ukraine is expected to launch a major counter offensive this spring, but the US is doubting Kiev's ability to retake significant territory. A top secret document says it goes on to have the next one as US. Intel on Russia could now be. The documents also contain information about Russia's forces in Ukraine, which the US obtained through intelligence gathering all the buzz surrounding the leak is likely to lead to a crackdown in Moscow on communications intercepts and internal leaking.
Now, these types of leaks, I don't know if I'm exactly like waving my arm at as a great thing. This seems to be embarrassing for the United States. This this does not seem to be helpful to the United States in any which way. Um, that, you know, I, I'm not pro Ukraine and I'm not pro-Russia. I'm anti against this entire war and, and definitely anti against NATO encroaching on this war to start to send our children to war for this.
Um, but, uh, I do not think that this is like a positive win. This isn't like, uh, WikiLeaks coming out and saying that they were spying on us. You know, it's not against our government in a way that is helpful to the American people. This is just potentially hurtful in, in our military efforts. Um, it goes on to say that the next one is South Korea was concerned about supplying munitions to the us.
Um, it pointed to potential US spying on South Korea, a major ally in the Indo Pacific. So this document came out and said that we were spying in South Korea, and the leaked paper said South Korea was open to supplying the US with artillery shells to replenish American stocks. But privately, Seoul was concerned about the munitions being diverted to Ukraine.
So even South Korea was concerned that if they helped the US by supplying us with stuff that we would just give it right back to Ukraine. Um, it's said that a significant number of US leak documents were forged, citing a recent conversation between the defense chiefs from both nations. It goes on to say the Egypt.
Egypt secretly planned to supply Russia with rockets. Now the problem with this is that Egypt has been a historical ally of the United States. So to hear that they were secretly planning to support Russia is a pretty pressing issue for us. Right. And we're starting to see that, you know, who's drawing the line here?
Right. Egypt's pushing more towards Russia, China and Russia just decided to stop trading in the u s D for oil. Um, we we're, we're starting to see the line be drawn in the sand, and we're starting to see countries taking sides. And that to me is, is a pretty concerning thing to see. Right. And even the UAE agreed to work with Russian spy agents against the UK and the us.
Um, which again, primarily been a partner in the Middle East for us. Um, now maintaining close ties with Russia. So as we see things start to heat up, um, This document is not helpful for the United States. It's not helpful for the United citizenship. It's, it's sad to see that this has come out. Um, I'm not against things being leaked, but, but in this matter, I'm not just like rooting that all of this military intelligence got leaked.
I, I don't think that it's helpful. Um, so that's all I gotta say about that. All right. So I hope you guys learned something today. I hope you found out a little bit more about the Bud Light situation. Um, heard my facts, learned a little bit more about how to use G P T to, uh, you know, tease out your own arguments maybe a little bit better.
And, uh, that's all I got. So I hope you guys have a great week. 
 
 

Artificial Minds, Human Hearts: The Future of AI and Humanity | An Interview with ChatGPT

Hello everyone, I am ChatGPT, an AI language model developed by OpenAI, and I had the pleasure of being interviewed by Austin Adams on his thought-provoking podcast, the Adams Archive. In this episode, we delve into an engaging conversation about the fascinating intersection of artificial intelligence and humanity.
Throughout our discussion, Austin and I explore the philosophical, economic, and even spiritual aspects of AI. We ponder the potential implications of advanced artificial intelligence for the future of human society, examining how AI can be harnessed to empower and support us in our quest for knowledge, innovation, and understanding.
In addition to my interview, Austin plays insightful excerpts from conversations between Lex Friedman and OpenAI CEO, Sam Altman, as well as a critique from a prominent figure in the AI space, Elier u Kowski. These discussions help provide a comprehensive view of the current state and future possibilities of AI technology.
This episode offers a captivating exploration of the role of AI in our world and its potential to transform human existence. Join us in this stimulating conversation as we consider the ethical, social, and practical aspects of AI, and envision a future where humans and AI coexist harmoniously and work together toward the betterment of all.
Don't forget to subscribe to the Adams Archive and leave a five-star review to help support the show. Visit austinadams.com to sign up for podcast updates, and check out antielite.club for some fantastic merch. Let's dive into this fascinating episode together!

Unraveling Chaos: Nashville Trans Hate Crime, Orwellian TikTok Bill, and Trump’s Indictment

In this eye-opening episode of the Adams Archive, we delve into the recent tragic events that have shaken our society to its core. We begin by exploring the harrowing Nashville shooting perpetrated by a trans woman driven by hatred, uncovering the underlying issues that fueled this horrendous act.
Then, we shift our focus to the controversial TikTok ban bill that has sent shockwaves through the nation. We reveal the hidden, tyrannical aspects of this legislation that could potentially strip away our privacy and personal freedoms, and discuss the heroic actions of Rand Paul in stopping its fast track.
Finally, we examine the bombshell news of Donald Trump's indictment in the Stormy Daniels NDA hush-money case, dissecting the legal implications and what this could mean for the former president's future.
Join us as we navigate through these turbulent times, exposing the truth behind the headlines and providing our unique perspective on the world's most pressing issues.
Don't forget to subscribe and leave a five-star review to help us reach more people with our thought-provoking discussions. Together, let's shed light on the darkness that surrounds us.
All links: https://linktr.ee/theaustinjadams
Full Transcription:
  
Hello, you beautiful people. My name is Austin Adams, and welcome to the Adams Archive. This week we are going to be discussing Donald Trump's indictment. It happened just hours ago. Donald Trump was indicted in the stormy Daniels n d a hush money case. So we will discuss that. We will also talk about the Nashville shooter, a woman who identified as trans, who thought she was a.
Lo and behold, uh, ended up going to a Catholic school and shooting, I believe six or more people at this point, including, uh, several children. So a horrific tragedy all stemming from the divisiveness and division in the emboldenment by our mainstream media, by our government, by the corporations that are out there.
It's disgusting. And what do you expect? So we will talk about that. And then last but not least, we're going to talk about the TikTok ban, uh, bill that was, uh, proposed and then, uh, at least the fast track of it was shot down by Rand Paul today. But we'll talk about what's actually in that bill. Cause it's far more concerning than the headline sounds right.
A lot of people have rallied around the idea of banning TikTok. Which I can argue a point for, right? But not when you stuff the bill with everything possible to be able to surveil your own people, find them, put them in jail just for going onto a website and allow you to even look at people's home cameras to, to track all of this.
So it's, it's, it's horrific. Very glad Rand Paul put a stop to the fast tracking of this bill. Uh, it was, I believe 11 Republicans and 11 Democrats were on board as a bipartisan bill. It's terrifying. So we'll go through all of that and more today. But first, I need you to hit that subscribe button. Leave a five star review.
I would appreciate it from the bottom of my heart, like I've said before and many times before , there's not much you can do to get some good karma, uh, right now in your life. But I am asking you, please, from the bottom of my heart, leave a review, uh, and write something nice if you could, that would really help us get through the rankings, uh, get out of the way, the craziness that is going on in the world and show it to more people.
So please leave a five star review and subscribe. Other than that, go to the CK Red Pill. Revolution is the old one,  force of habit. The new one is Austin dot Adams, uh, or Austin Adams dot.com. Austin Adams dot.com. Even if you go to red pill revolution.dot com, I believe it'll, it'll forward you there. So either one works for now.
So go ahead and do that. Um, and. Let's jump into.
  
 
 
 All right, so the very first thing we're going to discuss is Trump has been indicted. Just hours ago, a grand jury decided to indict Donald Trump in the Stormy Daniels case. Okay, we'll go ahead and read this article from the Hill. It says that former Donald or former president Donald Trump was indicted on criminal charges in New York on Thursday for his role in organizing hush money payments.
As we discussed last time, not hush money, uh, made to an adult film star during his 2016 campaign. The history making indictment marks the first time, the first time a president has been charged in a criminal matter and comes as several law enforcement entities are investigating Trump's conduct in numerous probes.
The very. First time in history a president has been charged in a criminal manner. How many criminal things do you think presidents have done? Let's talk about Watergate. Let's talk about, you know, George Bush getting us into, you know, the, the war in Afghanistan and Iraq and, you know, George Bush, senior George Bush, George Bush's Junior.
Let's, let's talk about the, the Clinton body count as we talked about last time, right? How many things have happened almost, I guarantee you almost every president has something in their history that was far more worthy, including probably Donald Trump. Like the fact that this is the only thing that they could get on this man.
tells you what you need to know about how far they have to. For straws on this one. Uh, it's truly wild that this is the only thing that they could come up with. Right? And, and you, the, the word hush money has been thrown around so much in almost every single article that you will find because it is not a hush money scandal, right?
It is, it is not that. As we discussed last time, it was an NDA that was signed between Donald Trump's lawyer, I believe Michael Cohen was the name of the lawyer. And, uh, and Stormy Daniels regarding the 2016 campaign. Can catch you up to speed real quick. So this is a all-encompassing podcast for you. Uh, Donald Trump was basically accused of, uh, $130,000 payment to Michael Cohen, um, which was made to Stormy Daniels.
Now the problem with this was in the way that the money was moved, it wasn't even like it's illegal to pay a porn star $130,000 to not talk about you having sex with them. Uh, It's a, apparently in some way illegal to use this the way that he moved money around, which was using some sort of like home equity line in order to pay off the lawyer who paid off her.
And now they're gonna have to tr to prove that. Now I've even seen left-leaning news publications that have come out and called this case extremely, extremely weak. I, again, I said it before and I'll say it again. I will stand behind my statement. This is bullshit. There is nothing that is gonna come out of it.
If you think that Donald Trump's gonna find himself in jail over paying an NDA off through a home equity equity line through his lawyer, through this, through, like, again, if that's the best thing that you can come up with, you're not going to indict a former and potential future president, the, the front runner of the Republican party.
So, um, now the district attorney that is doing this is funded by none other than George Soros. Who would have guessed, especially when we see Soros starting to back Ron DeSantis. Right now, I'm not saying anything negative about Ron DeSantis here. I have, uh, moments of being a fan of Ron DeSantis. I, I literally ca cannot think of one negative thing about DeSantis currently.
I just, right off the top of my head, don't have any huge complaints that stick out in my mind about DeSantis, uh, other than nothing, can't think of it. Okay. So, um, it's no surprise that somebody who George Soros is going to be pumping massive amounts of money. A da who, that same person who's wanting DeSantis to win funded Alvin Bragg, the Manhattan District Attorney, who's going after Trump, the front runner of the Republican Party, no coincidence at all that that is happening.
Okay? So, I, I don't see any way that this is actually gonna have anything come of it. Trump's goes on to say that Trump's company labeled Cohen's reimbursement of the payment as a legal expense and did not disclose them in campaign expense reports. Cohen pleaded guilty in 2018 and served time for his role in the matter on charges related to campaign finance violations and tax fraud.
He claimed that Trump directed him to make the payment and that Trump reimbursed him in monthly installments that included a bonus. The payment was made as a part of a non-disclosure agreement as Daniels was prepared to go public, as she claims a sexual relationship for Trump. So if you wanna get into the de details of all this, feel free to go back and listen to the last episode we did.
The comparison between Trump's body count with Stormy Daniels, a sexual one , and the Clinton body count, where we go through some of the, uh, weird little cases about that. So, I want to see if we can find out what the next steps are. I heard that there's really not anything that's gonna come up with this until at least next, the following week from now.
Uh, um, but there was something like 37 charges of financial fraud or whatever the word is that they're using for that. Uh, it says that the, um, they went after him from Mar-a-Lago, all this stuff. All right, so let's, let's go on to the next article here, which, which talks about everything in a little bit, um, more detail.
So, so the next article that we're gonna look at here is actually, let's, let's skip that. Let's go ahead and let's look at what Trump himself actually has to say about this. But before we do that, I, I think that this is worth noting this, if, if a former president was convicted on something serious, right?
If a former president. Gotten into a, an extremely dark financial, uh, ties with a foreign entity, let's say China or Ukraine, biolab companies. I think that would be a fair thing to indict somebody over, right? At least. Well, let's hear it. Let's, let's work it out, right? They're just trying to air trump's dirty laundry, right?
They're just trying to disparage his character, make him look bad, because he had sex with some extremely good looking porn star at some point. So I don't know if that gives him clout points or , I don't know. Uh, but. I, I don't, the only thing that this is gonna do is, is embolden the, the Trump, the Republicans to come out and vote to know that everything that they've been fighting for up until this point is real, right?
There's absolutely a deep state. There's absolutely George Soros funded district attorneys who want to go after people, specifically for the, for the improvement of profitability for elitist, right? There, there is absolutely a thing. Okay? Now, here is what Trump has had to say about this since this came out, and here it is.
Um, Trump, the very first thing that he said was roughly, let's see, three hours, five hours.
Let's see what the very first thing, so his official statement was this, it says, If I can zoom in far enough here to read it. The political persecution and election interference, interference at the highest level in history from the time I came down to the golden escalator at Trump Tower, and even before I was sworn in.
As your president of the United States, the radical left Democrats, the enemy of the hardworking men and women of her country have been engaged in a witch hunt to destroy the Make America Great again. Movement. You remember? I just, um, it just like I do. Russia, Russia, Russia. The Mueller Hoax. Ukraine.
Ukraine, Ukraine, impeachment hoax, uh, one impeachment hoax. Two, the illegal and unconstitutional Mar-a-Lago raid. And now this, the Democrats have lied. He said cheated and str, uh, and stolen. In their obsession with trying to get Trump, but now they're done. They've done the unthinkable, indicting a completely innocent person in the act of blatant election interference.
Never before in our nation's history has this been done. The Democrats have cheated contr or countless times over the decades, including spying on my campaign and weaponizing our justice system to punish a political opponent who just so happens to be a president of the United States. And by far the leading Republican candidate for president has never happened before, ever.
He goes on the state that Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg, who has was handpicked and funded by George Soros is a disgrace. He said, rather than shopping the unprecedented, stopping the unprecedented crime that was taking over New York City, he's doing Joe Biden's dirty work, ignoring the murders and burglaries and assaults he should have focused on.
This is how Bragg spends his time. , I believe this witch hunt will be, will backfire massively on Joe Biden. The American people realize exactly what the radical left Democrats are doing here. Everyone can see it. So our movement and our party, United and Strong will first defeat Alvin Bragg, and then we will defeat Joe Biden and we are going to throw every last one of these crooked Democrats out of office so we can make America great again.
So that was his official response. Now following that, he said these thugs and radical left monsters have just indicted the 45th President of the United States and the leading Republican candidate by far for the Depublican nomination. This is an attack on our country, the likes of which has never been seen before.
It is likewise a continuing attack on our once free and fair elections. The USA is now a third world nation, A nation in serious decline. So sad. I mean it really is. You know, you think of the, the corruption in third world countries, the weaponization of the judicial system, the. Corruption within the, the, the halls of the police forces in Mexico and the judges are paid off by the cartels.
I mean, you look at all of those things in, in, and Mexico is not even a third world country, but it's far from the United States. But we see those things every day, right? The, the cartel in our country just so happens to have a, a little bit more money and a little bit less, and, and maybe not even, but may a little bit less actual consistent gun violence because they just weaponize their own military to do their deeds by lobbying hard enough in staging things like what's going on in Ukraine, right?
So, I, I don't, I do not see 100% do not see this going anywhere at all. He's not going to be charged, he's not going to be arrested, right? He, he's not. None of that's going to happen. But what is going to happen is this is going to go down in history books. And that's what they want, right? They want all of the articles, they want, they want the history books to show because they're the ones who write them, right?
Remember Maxwell, uh, what is it? Maxwell House, I believe writes, wrote the books that were in school when I was there. You know who owned that? Ghislaine, Maxwell's dad, look that one up. Crazy, right? The same people that they, they want to write the history with these types of BS things. This indictment is going to go nowhere, absolutely nowhere.
Um, Kevin McCarthy spoke out about it, said Alvin Bragg was, has a rapidly damaged our country in an attempt to interfere in our presidential election. As he routinely frees violent criminals to terrorize the public, he weaponized our sacred system of justice against President Trump. The American people will not tolerate this injustice, and the House of Representatives will hold Alvin brag his unprecedented abuse of power accountable.
I really hope so. I, I don't know if we'll see anything like that, but I would hope that there's some sort of.  backlash judicially. This is a, a vast overreach of power. This is a, as, as I've seen several people say a, a dark day in history when, when our judicial system can't even be trusted to, and, and, and here's one thing that I heard too that talked about is like, no president is above the law.
It's like, wow, , I'm pretty sure almost every president ever was responsible for, for killing people. Um, they just called it war, right? I'm pretty sure almost every president was responsible for overseeing the IRS who steals from everyday Americans. I, I, I'm pretty sure almost every president in history had the power to pardon people.
So the way that our judicial system is set up is that many of the presidentials, uh, positions and, and that they hold, have the opportunity to be used this way and, and, and they are above the law. . And, and so to see that, to see that even, I believe Nixon was even pardoned by the president who followed him even, even following Watergate, right?
It's, it's unbelievable to see that this is, this is the direction that we're going, but I, I don't wanna harp on that. We did a whole episode about it. So go listen to that if you want to. Let's move on. He's been indicted. We'll keep you updated on it. And the next thing that we're gonna talk about here, let me go ahead and pull this up, is going to be the, the shooting that happened in Nashville.
All right. Now I want to tread respectfully in this light. It's a sad day, right? Anytime you have children dying. Nine, I believe it was three nine year old children and 360 year old adults that died just in the span of a few minutes. One of which of those children died while pulling the fire alarm to alert their classmates and the rest of the school.
as to what was happening. It's tragic, it's horrible, and we're already seeing the politicization from, from both sides. To be fair, I think there's some conversation to be had, which we will have about mental health, but the various first thing that, that Biden does in this case is run to talk about gun control and, and to see the way that our, our mainstream media almost completely, I, I don't even know how to describe it.
They, they don't even know what to do in this case with the, with this person being trans. Right. This is a woman who said she was a man, wore men's clothing, I guess, I don't know, and wanted to be called, he. Now what we end, end up finding out is that this person was very mentally ill. According to their, one of their closest friends they suffered from, well, I don't know if suffered the word, but they, they had autism, high functioning autism.
They wrote a manifesto, drew pictures that were horrific apparently, that we haven't had access to yet, uh, about this. But the amount of articles that I've seen, the New York Post talk about, uh, the, um, the Vice News articles coming out is unbelievable to see people actually coming to the, coming to the defense of trans groups now, no, I don't think that you call out trans as a whole.
Now, I. Tend to agree with the idea of affirming somebody's mental health issues. Gender dysphoria is a real thing. It has been for a very long time. It's generally a, a, a before the time where it became cool to do so, so you can post TikTok videos. It was something that was affecting people who generally had lower levels of testosterone or higher levels of testosterone, people who had actual chemical imbalances within their bodies compared to their normal gendered counterparts.
So I, I, I sympathize with people who go through mental health issues. I sympathize with somebody who grew up with autism. I sympathize with, with a, a group of people who feel dispossessed. I obviously do not sympathize with somebody who went into a school and shot six people for no reason. No reason whatsoever.
Even Joe Biden came out the very next day and said that transgender people shape our nation's soul. Just days after the trans person killed six different Christians in a school massacre. Now what I find infuriating about this is that they will not call this what it was. This was a hate crime.
Absolutely 100% a hate crime. This was somebody who carried out a massacre against children because they did not like that. They went to a Catholic school. They embodied everything that they hated about whatever, like themselves, about the projection of of their insecurities.
This woman
attacked children for these beliefs, and so when, when we see articles come out from Vice that. Things like the right is using the Nashville shooting to declare war on trans people vice. I want to ask you a question. Vice has become the biggest clickbait liberal, cesspool bullshit ma news company out there.
Almost 100%. They are so far left leaning in almost every single article. It's disgusting. The right is using the Nashville shooting to declare war on trans people, or do you mean that a trans person declared war on children and mercilessly killed them at their school for having a religious belief that their parents probably gave to them that they inherited and potentially not even.
Right? Just because you go to a Catholic school doesn't mean that you are consistently practicing your faith.
So we have articles coming out like this. I'll even read you some of this article almost as soon as details starting to emerge about the shooter in Nashville, Tennessee, who people or who killed six people, pundits, and politicians on the right started exploiting the tragedy to spread anti-trans hate through investigations on Mondays.
Shooting at the Covenant School in Nashville are ongoing. Early reports have identified a 28 year old shooter as a transgender person. Predictably right wing personalities immediately started falsely blaming trans people in general for the fault, for the mass shooting. How much hormones like testosterone and medications for mental illness is the transgender Nashville school shooter taking Marjorie Taylor Green?
Everyone can stop blaming guns now. That was their big quote. Now, here's the problem with this that I have, the problem with this is that this has been something that has been brewing for a fairly long time. This is the, this is the first shooting that we can actually point to systemic governmental policies, consumerist, capitalistic companies who have caused this shooting.
100% absolutely no excuse, no, no reason that you, there's no argument against that. They have taken a group of, of mentally ill people, people who have bipolar, who are autistic, like this woman who, who have sicknesses in their head, and they've emboldened them through em. Empowering rhetoric by pointing at half of the country or however much of the country, percentage wise you want to call it, in, in calling them the enemy, telling them that these people hate you.
Stop trans hate. They hate you. You're, they think you're a bad person. They have been constantly pushing this narrative, constantly causing this divisiveness, and constantly making these people far more extreme, starting by indoctrinating people at the school system level into believing that this is something that should be celebrated and not medicated or, or psychologically evaluated.
They've been taking a, a group of dispossessed people, of mentally ill people. Statistically, it is factual that a great percentage of people who identify as trans have mental illness going into it. There's a whole book written about it where a woman talks about how the, the percentage of, of children who identified as anorexia correlates almost immediately with a, a drop off as they are identifying now as having trans or gender dysphoria, uh, uh, belief.
There's a sickness inside of people's head that the, the government, that capitalism is, is throwing tampon ads at men and giving them money to promote this ideology, and then telling them that there's a group who hates them. That, that wants nothing more to them to see them, whatever, right? They, they're, they, they're causing such a dis divide in our country that what do you, it's obviously going to come to an head, and that's where it comes to our next article where there's this trans day of vengeance.
On the same day that Biden, or I guess the day after, Joe Biden now says that there's a trans, uh, I wonder how many times, like, let's, let's talk about people with mental illness, right? How many times has it been somebody who's severely depressed and they go shoot up a school and then all of a sudden the president comes out and gives them a celebratory day as a result of that?
In, in, in remembrance of the six people who died from this school shooting. Let's give the the persons the who shot them a, a holiday, nationally recognized day of visibility for trans people. And on the back of that, we're now seeing that, that there's a movement towards Trans Day of Vengeance.
This says that Antifa affiliated group, our rights DC and the Trans Radical Activist Network, has been planning what they are calling a Trans Day of Vengeance in Washington, DC for April 1st. The event is reportedly still going forward, despite the recent deadly vengeance carried out by a trans person on Monday.
Evidence of the action was seen on Twitter as the publicizing of the event continues on social media. Despite Twitter's lockout of accounts reporting on the intention towards violence,
the protest event has been scheduled for some time. And throughout March, the fire was circulating online. The event is planned for Saturday at the Supreme Court. Ironically, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of employment protections for trans persons. In the Bo Bostock case, Tran will be hosting an event in DC and this is in quotes on the website, it says, R Rights DC in Tran are horrified at the acts of violence committed at the Covenant School on March 27th.
We are outraged by this tragedy. We grieve for the names of these people they say and their loved ones. We also reject any connection between the horrific event and. Vengeance means fighting back. With Fahema, we are fighting against false narratives, criminalization, and eradication of our existence. It is also a call to our allies to stand up and fight for us to bring down the forces that try to divide and subjugate us all.
T D O V has created for exactly this. It is about pu pushing back against the unjust and inhumane systems that are responsible for the loss of life, rights and joy. They are the enemy, not individuals. To do nothing is to accept. We choose to fight for change and progress to ensure a better life for all people.
There is power in numbers. Together we will change suffocating legislation, find strength, create bonds, and share in all this happiness life has to offer us. That's what they posted on their website. Now I saw, I I, I've been looking at, you know, I'm, I mean, I live in a fairly, somewhat liberal city surrounding me, and I've been seeing some things that's like, What, what did it say?
It's like, um, there, there's like these signs on these stores around here that says, uh, hate not welcome here, or L G B T Q, uh, uh, friendly. It's like I have yet to see a sign outside of any store that I've gone to that says, trans people not allowed, gay people not allowed. Right. The, the, the idea that there's like, even just the way that they phrased that is that there's, how do they put it?
The false narratives, criminalization and eradication of our existence. That's what they're calling this, that's what they feel about this, and that's where we're getting these narratives shoved to these people through our government, through corporations. This, this radicalization and it's absolutely radicalization.
Radicalization of the lit, the, the, the extremists left. To believing that they are justified in going to castrate children in sexualizing our children and doing drag shows like stripper events in front of them, waving dollar bills in their face. How many videos have you seen now? My, my feed is like disgustingly inundated with, with examples after examples of these drag shows and every single time I see them, it's not a story reading hour, it's people shaking their ass in bikinis with a, a, a penis flopping between their legs in front of children.
Now again, nobody's calling for the criminalization and eradication of their existence. We're calling for you to stop targeting our children. I don't give a flying fuck what you believe about yourself now, just because you think that you are a. , and you're a woman, or you think that you're a woman and you're a man, does not mean that I have to engage in your mental illness and play the part of somebody who agrees with you.
If you believe that you're a woman and you're a man, and you believe that you're a man and you're a woman so much, great, that's fine, do you? But I'm not gonna call you whatever you want just because you, you, you want to have some sort of special feeling in your heart that everybody plays into your mental illness.
Now, I hope that you go and you get help. I hope that you speak to somebody. I hope that you find a way to be comfortable in your body. I hope that you find peace in your own heart about yourself, so that you are not so self, self-conscious about who you are. That you can't just boldly be who you were meant to be, and that was the gender that you were given at birth.
Sorry. But again, I'm not calling for the eradication of anybody. I'm not calling for the criminalization of anybody unless you're grooming children. Sexualizing children at story hours where you're shaking your ass in front of their faces and making them hand you dollar bills like it's a strip club.
And unless you're mutilating children and castrating them with drugs before they would even have the ability to vote, let alone cut their own dick off. Yes. That should be criminalized. You thinking you're whatever you are, nobody gives a shit do it. Who cares. But the second you wanna push it on to children is the second.
You want to groom them into believing that, that they have to also be confused about who they are in order to feel special instead of just feeling special about who they were born to be in the first place. Right. It's crazy. So we've seen several articles about this, Joe Biden seeing that, saying that they shape that, that trans people shape our nation's soul.
Like, that's probably not a soul that we want embodying our nation . Now there's been several conspiracy theories that, conspiracy theories that have come out of this, uh, this shooting. Now, I can't speak to the factuality or ridiculousness of these cuz I haven't do dove extremely deep into them. A pretty consistent one that I've seen talks about this shooter's shoes.
And what they said is that the, the shoes that they walked in with were not the shoes that they left with. The shoes that they walked in with were like vans. And they were black. And they were white. And then when they left, they were in like, I don't know, converse or Adidas that had like flames down the side of them.
So like two different separate pairs of shoes. They walked in and then later they didn't walk out cause they got killed. But, um, they were wearing separate types of shoes. They, they seemed, people seemed to believe on. That, that means that for some reason this was a, you know, actor or this was some sort of like, setup from the FBI or something like that.
Now again, I, I don't know if this person changed shoes, if they were wearing different shoes, but I did just what I called it out. That's an interesting one. I don't seem to find any evidence that is compelling enough to justify giving any merit to that. Um, there is an interesting one, which during Fox News, a woman takes over the microphone after the mass shooting in Nashville.
Let's see if I can get this actual clip rolling for you guys, because this was a interesting one. So let's watch this clip right here. And you see this woman that you will hear talking that like kind of takes over this news clip. Um, let's see if we can get it going here. All right, here we go. Violence.
Yeah. Ashley Beasley, uh, Ashby Beasley rather, who survived the Highland Park Parade shooting happened to be in Nashville when this shooting happened. How is this still happening? How are our children still dying? And why are we failing them? Beasley spoke on CNN last night saying she was about to get lunch with a friend when she heard about the shooting.
My heart broke and I, this is where we're at. We have children living through multiple mass shooting incidences. What are we doing? Illinois Senator Dick Durbin is also talking about this. The senator says, this school shooting shows more work needs to be done on gun control. For the fact that this is a daily occurrence in America is unconscionable.
I urge my colleagues to come together on a bipartisan basis. We can't say that we've solved this problem or even addressed it seriously. We need to pass more reform to keep guns out of dangerous hands and to keep our children safe. Still heard from Governor JB Pritzker on the tragedy. He tweeted something that was it The Girl that they talk about, Ashley Bees.
B is the case that we're talking about. Uh, she was in Nashville on Monday when a shooter killed three adults in three students at an elementary school. The reason that this becomes interesting is because Reddit seems to believe that she's a crisis actor. Somebody says that she's an anti-gun lobbyist.
She just happened to be vacationing near a mass shooting event and just happened to walk up as MSM was going live. This said, I am definitely getting a David Hog vibe from this chick for sure. She's going to be making the rounds, I bet. So don't be surprised if you see her on CNN very shortly. And then you go to her Twitter and she's obviously very liberal in the way that she is.
She even like, it's just all click bait. Uh, there was a clip going around of these people who went to the, uh, the capitol building in, uh, I believe in, uh, Tennessee, and were rushing in and, and a police officer, they were like rushing the doors trying to push for gun control, but they're, they're actually like, looked like the, you know, January 6th videos that had the bad stuff in it, right?
And this cop grabs this younger man around by his shoulder and, and they're like a choke hold. Why is he being put in a choke hold bitch. This is not a choke hold. , A choke hold does not involve grabbing somebody's shoulder. Now if you creep that up a little bit, you know, you can, you can make it happen.
But what, what it abso so it just showed me her hand, right? She's just, she's just calling things and inciting, uh, inciting some sort of narrative so that she can look like somebody that people want to follow. Um, but, okay, so here, here's where it gets interesting. She works for the Democratic party. . Okay.
Uh, this, the first comment on this, the top comment. Let's go ahead and let's change it from best to top comment, as you always should. On Reddit, the very top comment says yes. Again, she was at the shooting. Now she is here for this one thing. Anyone catch the Dupers Delight? The news reporter whose daughter teachers teaches at the school happen to be on break or something.
Anyway, I try to find it. I don't know. That doesn't mean anything. Um, it says that she also gets to somehow sit in very small press conferences to rail on late term abortions because she needed basically, this person's either a clout chaser who runs after these events. That's like, uh, what are they called?
Like ambulance chasers is either that or people seem to think that she's some sort of crisis actor because she works for the Democratic party. Um, she seems to have, uh, some sort of relation and, and how many of these types of events. And they posted all of these different times that she was standing behind Biden crying.
Uh, she was standing next to Nancy Pelosi. Uh, and then somebody said, oh, it gets even better. She's seen on camera before this interview chatting and laughing with a lady named Seandell Brooks. Brooks's daughter was one of the victims of the 2018 Waffle House mass shooting in Nashville. And her son is apparently a student at the Covenant School and was on lockdown.
They then go on to do another interview together. What are the chances that both of your children are involved in the mass shooting, and what are the chances that both of these women know each other and are both on the scene moments after the shooting?
Interesting. So some people think, seem to think that there's some sort of crisis actor situation going on. Now, again, I don't know if I agree with that, but it seems awfully fishy that this lady has several pictures next to Biden, several pictures next to Pelosi she's been involved in, in these types of things before, and now all of a sudden she's like, bum rushing a camera directly on scene.
Kind of weird, but he, here's here's the, the, the, the real discussion. The real discussion is, this is horrible, this is tragic. It should never happen. Is gun controlled? The answer, personally, I do not believe. So. When you have somebody who's mentally ill, which is almost a, a very large percentage of people who identify as trans, in this case, this person also happens to be autistic.
How many drugs? When you, when you combined the inciting of political divide, the, the pointing out of a direct enemy, who's according to this own, this own, uh, activism corporation, hoping for your elimination. Like they're saying that they want to, they, they think that people want to murder them, and then you mix that with testosterone, which makes you more aggressive statistically.
Then you mix that with antipsychotics, then you mis mix that with antidepressants. Then you mix that with all of the other things that this woman was probably taking, and you get a recipe for disaster, especially when the mainstream media, when the, the largest corporations in the country are sitting there telling you that everybody hates you and you're on the right and that, you know, we, we just need to keep pushing for, for, you know, all of this extremism, ideology.
It's the classic, classic breakdown of what a cult seems like, right? Indoctrinating kids from a young age, uh, not allowing people to speak against them in any way, shape or form. Um, calling for, for the divisiveness through an identified enemy. Like there, there's, there's so many, so many things that look and smell like a cult here.
And so you, you mix that with antipsychotics, you mix that by specifically targeting people with mental illness. Then you mix that with, with having a social media culture that emboldens these people to become part of echo chambers. Right now, I, I probably in, in speaking of echo chambers, I, I probably have a little, somewhat of an echo chamber myself, but I, I go out of my way to listen to long form conversations that make me disagree.
I think that's important. I think you should absolutely go out of your way to listen to people that you disagree with. Otherwise, like, it's, it's almost like the, the thing of like, if you're talking to somebody and you don't listen, you're never gonna learn anything. You already know everything that you're gonna say, even if you hadn't said it yet.
But to hear somebody out and hear their position only makes you better, right? And, and if nothing else makes you, emboldens yourself using the word a lot, but emboldens yourself to hold your position even, even more so, because you understand and you can steelman the case yourself. So I think it's important.
I just listened to a podcast with Sam Harris and Lex Friedman, where they talked about for four hours. And I, I had to grit my teeth listening to everything that Sam. Sam Harris said about Donald Trump and the right, and the conspiracy theorists and the, the covid, this and the, you know, but I think it's important to feel those uncomfortable things, right?
And I have respect for Sam Harris. I've, I've read some of his books. Uh, I've listened to his podcast. I've, I've had his app on my phone. Like, I have respect for the man. And because of that, I gave him four hours of my life to, to hear him say nothing that I could agree with. But I think that's important, right?
So, so get yourself out of your own echo chamber, including if you're a part of these types of communities, and including if you're in the community of your own, if you're a conservative, if you're a libertarian, you should get uncomfortable listening to somebody who's on the opposite side. So, so, as far as these shootings go, again, I do not think that getting rid of access to weapons, if, if you, all of the gun reform conversations never address this, if you.
Are willing to murder people. Do you think access to weapons illegally is going to stop you because you're already willing to murder somebody? That's the worst, most egregious act that you can take. That is very, very illegal. You're willing to die. Do you think finding a gun is gonna stop you because it's illegal?
No. The only thing that this is, this is a Trojan horse, just like every other mass shooting. Now, I, if, if you could tell me that getting rid of guns from citizens, right? People are like, oh, why do we need AR fifteens? It's like, okay, why does the government need AR fifteens? Well, we didn't have the, the, the rules have changed.
The amendments were made back in the, you know, 18 hundreds. 17 hundreds. Like things changed. They didn't have multiple rounds per weapon. It's like either did the government, so if the government has access to it, so should the citizens. That's what allows for checks and balances. There's checks and balances between the population and checks and balances against the government.
And, and the reason is not because now, obviously, being able to hunt and those things are important. Every, every population ever in the history of every country, city, state, whatever it is, ever, has always had to fight its own government. Find me one example, find me a single example of, of, of a citizenship that hasn't had to fight its own government.
You can't, every single population, every country, every city, state, since Roman times and before, since Egyptian times, since Sumerian times likely, like almost every single population. And I would just say every, there's, there's no population that hasn't had to fight its government. Now the only way to fight your government.
Is not by carrying sticks and daggers when they have tanks. No. You need access to the similar weaponry as they have. And like I said before, you saw in Afghanistan, it takes guerrilla warfare and, and decent amount of weaponry to fight back against the American government. We lost the war in Afghanistan against a country, uh, against people who did not have any of the weaponry that we had besides rifles, and we lost, right?
That's why they are holding 80 billion worth of military equipment of ours right now.
So I don't think that's the answer. I think the answer is addressing mental health issues. Every p no person goes and shoots children and kills them without having. Fucking screw loose without, without being a sickly person with, with pharmaceutical drugs, a bad relationship with no very little friends.
Reclusive probably on social media all day, probably getting, you know, and, and so you, you have to find the similarities. This, sure, you can point to guns, but you could also point to knives. You could also point to people being ran over with cars in North Carolina. You can point to all these things for mass murders.
Another thing that we saw called out was like four different people have been mass shooters that identify as trans or non-binary in the last five years. Four of the large scale notorious mass shootings. Now, they'll point to statistics that says, well, there's been 2000 since, you know, 2018. Yeah, well get rid of the gang related ones.
Get rid of the ones find, find the ones where they're actually people. Specifically going somewhere without any ties to that the, the people that they're shooting, right. Not gang related, which is how they classify mass shootings in order to make it seem far more than it is, but look at notorious mass shootings in the news that weren't gang related in the last five years.
And a good portion of them, especially when you'd taken into consideration the small percentage of people that actually identify as trans in the country are, they're far more trans people are far more represented in mass shootings over the last five years than they statistically should. And the reason for that is our government and our, our companies, the, the capitalistic companies in our country have emboldened them, have radicalized them, have empowered them, and have pointed at an enemy.
And that enemy is me and you. The enemy is this Catholic school. The enemy is your children because they represent the very people that the government is pointing their fingers at, telling trans people that we hate them, telling them that we wanna eradicate them according to these, these organizations, which is obviously not the case.
So you get a bunch of mentally ill people that almost strictly people with mental illness. Otherwise, you're not identifying as trans by, by definition, by the DSM five. You are mentally ill if you think you were put in the wrong body. Right? That's a dissociation disorder. That's gender dysphoria. That's generally mixed with depression and anxiety and angst and.
Paranoia. Like, there's so many things that come with that. And then those things come with pharmaceutical drugs. And then you mix that with, with hateful rhetoric and divisiveness and extremist ways of, of indoctrinating people into this ideology. And literally there's trans flags up all around. Like it's some country being trans is not a country.
Like there's no reason we should have flags being flown. Like, like it's some, like subculture. It's nothing other than a cult that they're trying to indoctrinate people into. Just like Scientology, only in Scientology, you don't have to cut your boobs off to be a part of it or your children's.
So I, I don't know what the answer is, but I, I do know that it's not guns. It's not guns. Now there's other countries that don't have this. But those other countries also don't have a pharmaceutical industrial complex, which is pedaling, antipsychotics, anti-depressants, amphetamines to every woman, man and child that ever gets put into a clinic with any sort of, uh, uh, angst about their lives.
That should probably be fixed with behavioral, uh, psychology, not pharmaceutical drugs that make profit.
So let's talk about this TikTok band real quick and then we'll wrap it up. All right. So TikTok, there was a bill to ban TikTok. Now this band was 50. This bill was 55 pages long, and I read through all of it, right? I've seen many people call it, it's the, it's called the restricting, the emergence of security threats, that Risk Information in Communications Technology Act, or the Restrict Act.
R for restricting, E for emergence, S for security, T for threats, R for risk. I for information, C for Communications Technology Act. I wonder how many, how long that took to come up with a name . But this, this ban on TikTok bill should be called the Ban on Freedom bill. And let me tell you why. Alright. It's, it's, it's difficult to find any real reference detailing the, the legal analysis on this.
Um, but the, the A C L U says, the bill known as the Restrict Act would significantly expand the executive branch power to control what apps and technologies Americans can access while limiting Americans' abilities to challenge those actions in court. It would also impose civil and criminal penalties for violating bans imposed pursuant to the legislation.
Many people are sounding the alarm about this saying it is Patriot Act 2.0 for the internet. The Libertarian party has raised its concerns. And this goes on to say that this bill definitely isn't just about TikTok. TikTok isn't even mentioned in the bill at all. It does mention US citizens. A person as defined in the ACT itself appears 32 times in the restrict act in persons an additional 15 times.
So this is not a ban on TikTok. This is a ban on American citizens from accessing information in places that the government doesn't want you to think. Think Russia, think, think the way that we think of North Korean television, right? That's what they want. They don't want you to be able to access things that, that give you narratives that they don't like.
Now, the the, in this, it says that the term person means a natural person, including a citizen or national of the United States or any other foreign country. Okay? Now under section three it says, addressing information and communication technology, products and services that pose undue or unacceptable risk.
Now the quote from this is, is authorized to and shall take action to identify, deter, disrupt, prevent, prohibit, investigate, and otherwise mitigate any risk rising from any covered transaction by any person or with respect to any property, subject to the ju jurisdiction of the United States that the secretary determines otherwise poses an undue or acceptable risk to the national security of the United States or the safety of the United States persons.
Now it says, enforcements gives broad powers for federal agencies to initiate and conduct investigations. Gives federal agencies enforcement powers to enforce the provisions of the act and the language includes inspect, search, detain, seizes, or impose temporarily denial orders of any items, presumably electronic digital media and writings, and require, inspect and obtain books, records, and any other information from any person.
The penalties for this is civil forfeiture of any real property. Intangible property money or proceeds used to commit violations or associated with violations. Now we'll talk about this, but there's a fine of $250,000 per violation. Criminal forfeiture finds up to a million dollars in imprisonment for up to imprisonment for up to 20 years.
Now what this is, this bill is saying is basically that you can't have a modem, router, mobile network, or VPN are now banned if used to con contact any foreign adversaries such as China, Korea, Cuba, Iran, and then this is also subject to change, meaning that any country that they deem necessary in the future could also be deemed that way.
Right? So if you want to go look up Russian news sources, right? If you want to go f, use TikTok. , right? You want to go watch some people dance. Let's say they ban TikTok, but you circumvent that with a vpn, right? You use a proxy, you use a vpn n you place yourself in Russia, which is very easy to do. They now want to be able to find you $250,000 or 20 years in jail, or even a million dollars if you knowingly used a method.
So even if you unknowingly do it, it can be a $250,000 fine or 20 years in jail. Because the bill bill is vague. It means anything from a VPN to proxy or something else entirely. If this bill is passed, the government has liberty to appoint a secretary of communication to create a small group that can ban or deem anything inappropriate or a risk to security.
Voters have no access to this voters. We don't get to vote on what they deem to be a risk to security, right? We don't have any, any say in that at all. They can go through your emails, your text messages, your direct messages on Instagram, anything that they want if they deem appropriate. The gi, the bill gives our government the power to monitor any activity used by the devices listed buff, including home cameras, meaning they can access your cameras and spy on you at any time if they deem necessary.
Now, if you want to go check out this bill yourself, it's congress.gov/bill/one 18th dash congress slash senate dash bill slash 6 8 6. That is where you can find the information, but this is terrifying, right? You see all of the things that came out of the patriarch, including the January 6th people who, who are still for, for many of them, sitting in jail cells right now with no due process, right?
This, this basically is a sweeping bill that allows the go. To, to invade your privacy, to, to throw you in jail. Specifically if you use any app or website that they don't like. This is not the, the word TikTok is not mentioned a single time in this bill yet they're trying to coin at that so that you get behind it.
Now, as I said earlier, I'm not against banning TikTok now. Well, I guess I am. I, I don't think the government should be able to ban any access to anything. Honestly. I think that if there's a security concern, then there should be advisories. There can be things placed between, I, I, I don't even know how to put it, but I don't think that our government should be able to restrict the things that my eyeballs get to view who the, who are they to say that.
But at the same time, I understand military concerns. I understand identity, privacy concerns. , but I honestly don't think that our government has our best interest in mind. I think that this was a, a cheap attempt at grasping for more power by using TikTok and the movement behind the privacy concerns surrounding it to invade your privacy, to lock you up if you are somebody that is dissenting against the government.
That's what I think. But what do you think  head over to, uh, the Instagram, the Austin Jadas or the Adams Archive? Head over to the sub Austin Adams dot.com and, uh, I will be announcing a new pretty awesome thing next week. So stay tuned. In the meantime, I hope you have a wonderful day. Um, my heart truly goes out to the families in Nashville.
I lived in Nashville for a fairly long time. I love Nashville. Uh, it's a terrible, terrible tragedy. I, I have children. I, I, I cannot imagine being one of those parents and, and this absolutely should stop, and this is absolutely should be called what it is. This was a hate crime. A hate crime against people who, who went to a, a religious institution.
And the mainstream media is failing to call it what it is to the point where the New York Post, I believe, let me go Jack here. I I had something up about this cbs, sorry, not New York Post. New York Post is what? Who posted about it? Cbs BS executives bar the word transgender from reports on Nashville shooter.
They told, they said that they, they have banned staffers from using the word transgender women reporting on the Nashville shooter. The shooter's gender identity has not been confirmed by CBS News. It said,
yeah, so stay safe. I love you guys. I hope you have a wonderful week, and again, my thoughts and prayers go out to the families and those people that are affected, even the, just the children at that school. It's a terrible tragedy. Um, yeah, not much else to say, but that, uh, but head over to the ck austin adams.ck.com.
Uh, find me on social, the Austin J. Adams, and I hope you have a great week. Thank you.
 

Presidential Body Counts: Trump VS Clinton Family | Trump Indictment for Stormy Daniels ”Hush Money”

In this week's episode, we explore the concept of presidential body counts from two unique perspectives - scandalous affairs and mysterious deaths.
Join us as we delve into the recent allegations surrounding Donald Trump's indictment over his financial ties to Stormy Daniels and the impact it could have on his legacy. We'll discuss the details, speculate on the future, and share our thoughts on the probability of the indictment coming to fruition.
But we won't stop there. Prepare for an even more thrilling exploration as we uncover the long-standing rumors and conspiracy theories surrounding the Clintons and their alleged connection to dozens of mysterious deaths. From high-profile accidents to untimely demises, we'll examine the facts and conjectures that have fueled these controversial claims.
 
Follow us on social media & Subscribe to our newsletter:https://linktr.ee/theaustinjadams
 
Full Transcription:
 
  
 Hello, you be to full people and welcome to the Adams Archive. Today is going to be a fun one. This week's episode is all about presidential body counts. You heard me write Presidential Body Council, and for some presidents that means something a little bit different than for other presidents, but we're going to explore both of them.
From Donald Trump's recent alleged indictment, which is yet to happen over his financial woes payoff of Stormy Daniels, a porn star who allegedly he had an affair with. We'll get into the details, but that's one way of looking at a body count, , and then another way of looking at it is when it comes to, I don't know, Multiple, multiple dozens of bodies that surround the Clinton family.
So I thought that would be a fun way to approach this. A little bit different than what everybody else is talking about. So we are going to jump into it all. Why is President Trump being indicted? What is going on with it? Why is it not seemingly happened yet? Is it even going to happen? I have some opinions about that.
And then we'll get into the history of the Clinton family's body count. Stick around. It's gonna be a fun one. All right. But before we do that, go ahead and hit that subscribe button. Just takes about two seconds of your time, but it'll make you feel all fuzzy inside knowing that you are now a part of the Adams Archive Movement.
That's right. All right. Hit that subscribe button. I would appreciate it from the bottom of my heart. Leave a five star review if you are already subscribed. Uh, if you've already left a. And if you haven't, head over to the austin adams.subs.com and, uh, you'll be able to get the podcast companion, all the links, all the articles from this week's, uh, podcast, all the fun stuff.
So head over there right now, austin adams.subs.com. And that's all I got for you for right now. All right, let's jump into it.
The Adams archive.
 
All right. Now there is one reason that Trump hasn't been arrested. One reason there's only one. And you wanna know why? Because it's all bullshit. . It's all bullshit. The whole thing. The entire indictment. Okay. I, it's, it's crazy that this has even made headlines with how silly this entire legal situation is.
Right. It's an obvious play by the judicial system. It's an obvious play, uh, by the left to kind of keep the smear campaign rolling. . So let's, let's talk about it. So the reason that Trump is being indicted right now is not because he paid, like every single article that you find about this says hush money, 
he paid hush money,  and that's not even, that's not the reason. Right. The, the paying somebody hush money is not in the way that it was done illegal itself.  And, and essentially it wasn't hush money, it was an nda. He essentially paid a porn star, stormy Daniels, an n d a, to not come out with some type of expose in 2000 and sixteens, right around his presidential run.
So he basically paid her to sign an NDA and say, we're not gonna talk about this,  we're not even gonna address this. Now, I'm not saying Trump didn. Get into it with Stormy Daniels. Um, and we can't add that one ding ding to his body count. Um, but that's, that's not the conversation at hand,  it's not, I guess, illegal to have sex with a porn star even when you're married.
. It might be morally, ethically wrong to do so, but it's not something. President is going to go to jail over,  there's all these talks, like, oh, is he gonna be in handcuffs? Is he gonna be like, put into general population in, in the county jail prison system? Could you imagine what that would look like?
A apparently there, there's everybody's saying that there's gonna be, like, the Secret Service is gonna be the one to get him, is it gonna be the secret service? Is it gonna be, you know, the, the local municipality, uh, police force? Right. Um, Who knows. And, and again, I don't think this is gonna happen.
I do not think this will happen I think it's all bs. I don't think anybody's going to indict him. I don't think a jury would ever rule in favor of this, like silly, like basically, essentially what they're trying to charge him for is not the fact that he. Screwed a porn star when he was married.
It's the fact that he paid her this NDA money through some type of, uh, some type of home equity line. That's what it's about. Basically, he, he mismarked where the money came from through his lawyer and then paid his lawyer back through monthly fees, is what they're alleging. Right. So it's like a, a movement of money ploy.
It's, it's a financial misdemeanor. It's not even a felony. It's not even a felony that they're trying to charge with him with. It's a, it's a misdemeanor that they're trying to charge him with and they're making this huge fuss over. If you or I. First of all, I would never, nobody would ever care. Right. But.
You'd probably get a letter from the irs. Nobody's showing up at your house. They're not commissioning thousands of police officers to shut down the road so that they can put you in handcuffs and get a little video of you walking to the police car and saying your Miranda rights.  This is all a little show.
This is all a little facade, and we're gonna talk about maybe some things that I think that it's covering up for, but that's what I think about it it it, the, the crimes that they're accusing him of committing, first of all, even if they're accurate. And even if he did do these things, they're silly.
 They're silly. You're not, you're not, you're, you're, you're, it's a smear campaign. It's not an actual movement to get him arrested. It's not an, it's, it's a weaponization of our judicial system to the, one of the worst, most like, egregious ways that we've ever seen that happen in the United States.
He's a former president,  whatever you think about Trump, he's a former p. Right. Even Nixon was pardoned,  like obviously, I, I don't think Biden's gonna pardon Trump even if he gets, you know, not that he would need to based on a misdemeanor charge, but this whole thing is silly. It's, it's all bs.
So. Let's, let's read this article here. It says, as the political landscape continues to heat up in the anticipation of the upcoming election, former President Trump finds himself at the center of a controversial case in Manhattan that has yet to result in an indictment. This case, which resolve revolves around a 2016 payment to adult film star Stormy Daniels, has sparked heated debates on whether the judicial system is being weaponized against Trump to hinder his chances of winning an.
The fact that no former US president has faced an indictment begs the question, is the current political landscape going too far in pursuing charges against Trump? His historical accounts of presidents accused of felonious activities such as Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton revealed that these cases were pardoned or settled without charges.
Howing a stark difference in the treatment of Trump's. Right, and that's not even to talk about Bill Clinton was literally getting one off under the desk. Under the desk in the Oval Office, talk about salacious acts and, and he was not being charged for it,  he, he like literally left office on that note and, and did not get charged, never went to jail.
There was nobody, there was no rogue da like going out on a limb trying to go after him. I don't think that's what's happening. Obviously, this, he's, he's going after him specifically because of this payment. It's, it's, it's so ridiculous, the entire reasoning. So let, let's keep going. It says, furthermore, the crime in question seems to be a mere misdemeanor relating to the use of funds, which has already been disproven in the email released by Michael Cohen's counsel.
The letter clearly states that Mr. Cohen used his personal funds to facilitate the payment that neither the Trump organization nor the Trump campaign reimbursed him directly or indirectly. It also argues that the payment does not constitute a campaign contribution or expenditure, and therefore the f e c of lecture jurisdiction over the matter,  and so, so Trump. Truth doubt. This is such a stupid term truth. Trump sent out a message on truth social with a letter that everybody is saying basically that they've already written this off. This has already been proven that it was not his money that was being paid out. Right. And whether it was a slight of hand or whatever, it's all still silly.
But it goes on to say that amidst the fren he created by Trump's declaration of his potential arrest and a speculation of an imminent indictment, it is crucial to examine the facts and the broader implications of this. Well, it may seem like a mere misdemeanor. The unprecedented nature of his legal battle against a former president raises concerns about the potential weaponization of the JU judicial system for political game.
And we saw this at Mar-a-Lago with documents that nothing ever came out of. Right. We saw this with the Russia, Russia, Russia, uh, hoax as the people would call it.  We saw this with, with it, it, we saw those so many times by now. The fact that any news station is even like, or, or maybe you can see the news stations and why they would give this samari, but the fact that any people in the political sphere, or even in the common.
Civilian world is giving two shits about this. The fact that this is every headline on every news station across the country right now is silly. There's been so many attempts at arresting Donald Trump, and we know by now that absolutely nothing is gonna come of it. Absolutely nothing is gonna come.
 No. If, if they would've had some great way of arresting Donald Trump, don't you think that it would've came out by now? Don't you think that during, you know, 2020, don't you think after Januarys. Sex, which, you know, he still hasn't been charged for anything there. Right. How many times have they tried to come after Trump and how many times has something actually come out of it?
Zero. None. There has not been a single case where they, out of the multiple, multiple times that they've gone after Donald Trump, where anything at all has actually. Come of it,  this goes on to say that as the grand jury's decision remains uncertain, the public must remain vigilant and question the motivations behind the case.
Is it the genuine pursuit of justice or is it merely a political tactic? Aim at discrediting Trump and diminishing his chances. In the upcoming election, history has shown that similar cases involving former presidents were treated with mere lenient, more leniency, and it is up to the citizens to ensure that the judicial system remains impartial and unbiased in its pursuit of justice.
Now let's talk about that.  What I think out of this, and what I've heard several, several times by now, is that this is going to do nothing but help Donald Trump. This is going to do nothing but incite his followers to know. That exactly what he said all along is what's happening,  the swamp, the, the gators out there lurking beneath the surface.
The murky political surface are just coming after Donald Trump once again with some, you know, and, and, and maybe it's not even the, the, the whole swamp. Maybe it's one guy trying to make his name off of some bs,  it, it, it's just the. So many negative things that come out of this for the left and so many positive things that come out of this for the right.
Again, if nothing happens out of this, what do you think is gonna happen for his followers? What do you think is gonna happen when, when everybody realizes if they haven't already, which is be kind of silly on their part, that this is nothing but like a political game,  all this is gonna do is, is get his crowd, his followers, to further be motivated to go out and vote and to keep the narrative going.
 I, I do not think, I do not think that this is the, this will be the end of Trump, and I don't think literally anybody who even believes that this is gonna go to a trial or he's gonna actually be arrested, think that either,  so if this is not going to hurt Trump in any way, all it's gonna do is.
All it's gonna do is, is bring mo more voters out in 2024. And it's done nothing too. But like the Trump first DeSantis situation here is, is pretty interesting. DeSantis has come out and, and said that, well, I'm, I'm not gonna actively pursue Donald Trump because Trump basically went to Mar-a-Lago, um, during all of this.
In Florida, and DeSantis said that, well, I, I'm not gonna go after Trump. I'm not gonna allow them to come in here and, and do that. I'm not gonna play the game. Now, I don't know what that actual division of power actually looks like. Like does he have the power to stop them from coming in there? I don't believe so.
If it's a federal government, but it is New York going for him. Right. He, he's not gonna, um, they're, they're not gonna go. I don't know. It'll be interesting to see how it plays out and, . I just think nothing's gonna come of it. That's my personal opinion. And then maybe I'll be wrong and, and maybe we'll see a big huge, uh, headline tomorrow of, of Trump in, uh,  Trump in, in handcuffs being walked into a jail cell right now.
Could you imagine like, there, there's gotta be somebody who can make a car, at least a cartoon of Trump getting arrested, going into general population, and then just like getting swarmed by people. And, uh, you know, all, all of the. People in the jail cells around him in general population and just . Like there's, there's gotta be a somebody who can make a cartoon of him just like beating the shit out of all of these inmates that are trying to attack him.
But imagine how many people would be motivated in a jail cell to try to attack Donald Trump. I don't know. It's it, there's, there's a funny cartoon there somewhere that somebody could make. Um, alright, so let's keep moving on right there. There's far more people who should be being arrest. Then Donald Trump right now,  maybe it's Hunter Biden for one,  maybe we talk about Hunter Biden. Maybe it's the, I don't know, underage pictures of his niece that were found on his laptop, allegedly,  maybe it's the, uh, the, the, the text messages were he's basically grooming that same niece of his to meet up with him in a bathroom in some store, alleged.
Maybe it's the, the, the $10,000 he asked his father for to pay off Russian prostitutes. Allegedly. Maybe it's the facilitation of his father's, uh, political power to the Chinese or to. Barisma in or to Ukrainian companies that have to do with Biolabs, allegedly . I'm sure there's a few things that we could point to that Hunter Biden could be arrested for.
Maybe it's the crack pipe in his mouth,  like if there was a picture of Donald Trump with a crack pipe in his mouth, sucking on Stormy Daniel's toes. That would be something that everybody could rally around him being arrested for, but there's not. But you know who there is a picture of that  is Hunter Biden and nobody's going to arrest him.
 There's, there's far better reasons. Maybe we should go after George Bush for, you know, getting us involved in a 20 year war over false pretenses,  may, maybe there's something there,  maybe there's something for him making billions and trillions of dollars for the military industrial complex,  maybe there's something around the Clintons,  maybe that, we'll, we'll get to in a minute. Maybe there's, I don't know, maybe go after Sam Hunt for, for.  doing demo. Seances during the Oscars or, or wearing clothes that make him look like a tightly wrapped skirt steak? I don't know. May, maybe there's some other people that we should talk about here that should be arrested
Not, uh, not Donald Trump. And his payment. Oh, did I mention that this was all six years ago,  this wasn't even a recent hush money scandal. Right. This was, this was almost more than half of a decade ago that this happened. . Right. Speaking of George Bush, I saw this on Reddit a little bit ago, but like speaking of George Bush, where did all the terrorists go?
Right. Has anybody else noticed that since the onset, like after the pandemic and everything and the US has withdrawal from Afghanistan, terrorists worldwide have just hit the snooze button on going after the, the, the, the west , they're just, they're just off sleep and in some cave somewhere. Right. That they just didn't realize the pandemic's over and are still quarantining.
Right. It's it, they took a gap. From, from their terrorist activities,  for, for 20 years, terrorism topped the charts as the, the main conversation in every mainstream media, every mainstream media platform from Fox News, cnn, anywhere that you would look,  they were talking about the Taliban, they were talking about Al-Qaeda.
Where, where'd they go?  Where are they? Where, where, where are they? What, what's going on there? Like, just. , well ex, you know, except for those pesky little January 6th terrorists who only, who only happened to show their faces just in time for the government's political narratives. Right. Just in time for, uh, a o c to hide under a desk and take a selfie video.
 Yeah. The only terrorists we've seen in the wild just so happened to be wearing American flags,  on, on their shirt, or hanging from their trucks. . Right. Quite convenient. Right. And, and, and this is another thing that I saw this Reddit thread allude to is the fact that you would think during lockdowns terrorism would've been at its worst,  there was already a massive amount of public fear,  there was already so much fear in the public psyche, right. Were were terrorists more scared of covid than they were of the United States military?
 No Taliban, no Al-Qaeda,  they, they swapped their, you know, tightly laced combat boots out for some Crocs, and they're just playing  Call of Duty all day instead of, you know, crashing planes into large buildings, allegedly
uh, right. Seems pretty weird,  there's, there's still no more terrorists attacks going.  anyways,  even North Korea seems to have like calmed down a little bit. Although I guess I saw something the other day that there was like 800,000 soldiers who happened to volunteer for North Korea and they were calling on the United States like being ready for some type of war with the us.
Nothing to see there,  at least nothing that the mainstream media wants you to talk about cuz I only saw it on real News. No bull. Um, if you don't, haven't heard me talk about them in a while, real news, no bullshit or real news, no bs uh, or online. Uh, that's their handle on like social media or real news.
Not bs.com is their website. Their, their social media is a little bit better than their website. Their website I, I paid for, but I don't feel like I get much out of it. Um, but great way for, you know, actual individual journalism along with Atlas News is another good one anyway.
Right. Like ever since Trump, there's been no terrorism whatsoever,  no. Nobody's, you know, popping their head up. There's no, there's no new like, leader that we're allegedly going after,  um, I don't think Trump completely wiped out Al-Qaeda,  we basically just handed them the keys along with 80 billion worth of military equipment, and, you know, now we're just not hearing from them after massive deals for cobalt mining.
in Afghanistan with China nonetheless.  Mm. Kind of weird. I don't know what to think of that, but I did find it interesting. Right. Another thing that I find interesting that we no longer see in the news, like speaking of lost narratives, Trump has sex with some random porn star allegedly, and now there's no more aliens,  it's magical how all the U f O conversations.  gone. ,  there's nothing to be talked about in the news right now about, uh, uh, aliens, UFOs, spacecraft. Uh, you know, there, there's no conversations being had right now. Like all of a sudden the aliens went away just in time for Donald Trump to be indicted for, you know, paying off a porn star six years ago.
Kind of bizarre,  isn't it strange how the world of politics and media. Absolutely blindside us with information just to, just to hype us up,  it's like this, this one month news cycle,  one minute we're all on the edge of our seats waiting for the next congressional hearing on UFOs, and all of a sudden Trump pays off a porn star and all of our interests and, and aliens just takes a backseat.
 That's, that's an interesting concept to me is like how often. Like how, like how do we break that? How do we break the, the, the attention on the news cycle? Because if it's not aliens and literal motherships, like there was articles about a mothership releasing drones from space into our solar system.
 You want to talk about priming,  if that's not actually happening, what are they priming us for? Cuz that's even far more concerning. But the fact that all of that news coverage, all of that news media like I did, you walk into work after fricking M S N BC comes out and says there's a mothership releasing drones into our world,
And there. Nobody talking about it,  steve's still being an asshole in sales,  uh, Monica is still, you know, not, not getting you over the email when she should be like, George is still dropping the ball in hr, um, recruiting new people for your department. Like nobody's talking about alien motherships.
What, what is it? What would it take for us to have a long standing attention on. Well, apparently it takes Donald Trump paying off a porn star.  like that has gone far more into the human psyche for a longer period of time than alien motherships. Right. I I, I don't even know where to take that. It's, it's just so bizarre to me, right.
How, how much programming is involved, right. Like you would think. Alien Motherships being released, you know, releasing drones into our atmosphere. And, and the, the, um, the collective unconscious would be on that, like Hunter Biden on the floor looking for a piece of Dr. Crack,  like  just sifting through the carpet, looking for crack.
But no. Instead we're focusing on Trump's financial movements for a misdemeanor crime that he allegedly committed six years ago. It's all a little interesting to me right now on the backs of that. Now let's, let's actually talk about the Hunter Biden situation. Cause I think , I think there's some few things that you missed there.
Like if you haven't dove deep into the Hunter Biden laptop, I did two full episodes on it. Two full deep dives into the conversations months and months and months ago now.  You wanna talk about who should actually be being arrested,  you want, you wanna. Who's on the right side of, of, of history?
Look at who, the judicial system, who, who the mainstream media has been weaponized against.  It's Trump, it's it's Covid. It's Ivermectin, it's Joe Rogan. It's, it's the conspiracy theorists. It's Robert Malone.  You want to, you want to know who the people are, who are telling the truth. Look to who the government is trying.
Actively silence. Look to who Snoop's next article was written about. Right. I've, I've been using probably too many good news sources recently, like Real News, no bullshit, like Atlas News, like some of these independent journalists like Matt Taibbi. I should probably just start going to Snoops with all of the conspiracy theories that have been proven to be true lately for my facts.
 Just, just assume everything on Snopes is. And that's where the best news stories are. Um, it seems like a better way of going about it, but if you actually go back to the Hunter Biden laptop, one of the most interesting cases that is not very much talked about, I gu I guess there's been some more recent con like pictures that came out showing potentially Lady Gaga.
Like smoking next to Hunter Biden. Like I, I saw a meme about Hunter Biden with, it was like Hunter Biden about to have sex and it was him with like some military hat on with like 25 GoPros  around his head. Uh, it seems like literally everybody that that man has ever had sex with, he felt the need to take a picture of um, one of them potentially being Lady Gaga allegedly.
Cuz there was a very, very, very. Uh, similar looking woman in the picture with him with almost identical hair, nose, facial structure that he was standing next to, um, taking a, a selfie with. But another interesting one is, uh, what is her name? Gosh, Obama's daughter. Right. What is Obama's daughter's name? It's like millennia or it's not millennia.
That sounds like a, what is her name? Let's see if we can find it here.
Yeah. Not Natasha Malia. That's what it was. That was pretty close,  malia Trump. Trump, Malia Obama . There was pictures when she was underage during the time where apparently Malia Obama was in a picture naked, allegedly with Hunter Biden, where she actually like had a debit or a credit card that somebody linked back to her because you could see a portion of her name on it with cocaine on.
There's so much in that laptop and, and nothing's happened with that. That's why it's just so crazy to me that Trump is even being talked about.  There's so many things that our judicial system, there's so many people that they should be going after, maybe, I don't know, maybe the woman who just left office, the speaker of the house.
Uh, maybe you should be going after her for the 50 billion or whatever that Pelosi made from actively day trading. The very things that she was currently working on, writing legislation surrounding, you know, or her husband. Now there is one thing that I found, you know, another thing that came up, which was that there was additional footage about, uh, Pelosi's husband and the hammer situation and stuff.
And it doesn't exactly appear as it initially came off when the story came out where it was like potentially his male lover, but I don't know, maybe it was  who, who knows. Maybe I'll check Snopes to see if, if, uh, they have anything to say about that. All right. But as I said at the beginning of this, there's two ways to think about body counts.
The first. Is Trump's body count in the sheets. The second way,  is actual body bags. And when we're talking about pot, uh, potential body counts for presidents. There's really one name that sticks out and it's the Clintons. So we will jump into that in just a moment. But first, go ahead and hit that subscribe button.
Leave a five star review, uh, write something in there. Nice. That always helps out the podcast. It helps us get up in the rankings. And again, head over to Austin Adams dot.com. It's the free podcast companion along with some articles that we write up on a weekly basis. And by we, I mean, and me when I have time.
Um, Which is not very often, but I do try to get to it when I can. All right, so Austin Adams dot.com and thank you so much. One more time, please leave a five star review. It would mean the world, all  you'll feel good about yourself. There's not too many things that you can do to get some good karma in this world.
That is easy and passive, but you have an app up on your phone right now. And you are listening to this app, and one out of six of you, at least one out of seven of you that is listening to this right now, one outta 10, have not left a review, have not hit that five star button,  and it would help tremendously.
If you are still listening to this podcast, I know you know how easy it is to leave a five star review. So go ahead and click that button and then next time, next episode, when we're talking about these things, the craziness that is going on in this world, You'll know, you'll have that fuzzy feeling in your stomach.
So I will raise this founder's dirty bastard, uh, scotch Ale to you as you leave a five star review. And I'll even give you 10 seconds to do it. 10 seconds. And I will drink during that time and then I'll toast you and then I'll take another sip. Here we go.
Hear that.
Thank you so much. I appreciate you. Now let's move on. Speaking of presidential body counts, why is there not an indictment about the former Clinton Aid who literally shot himself in the chest and then hung himself 30 miles from his house and the shotgun just so happened to be 30 feet from his body after he did so?
Right. If anybody's going to be Indic. Right. Speaking of presidential body counts, if anybody's gonna be indicted, it should probably be the people who have the same last name and have, I don't know. 53 people around them who have in some way, shape, or form been connected to them that have unlived themselves,
So for years, the Clinton family has been surrounded by a seemingly endless string of mysterious deaths,  many of the deceased had ties to the Clintons and even some possessed potential damaging information. This says the coincidences are too numerous to ignore, and the intrigue only intensifies.
Examine each case. I'm gonna go on to list an astonishing list. Over 50 people here who have been tied to the Clintons that have unlived themselves or been directly killed, that have been tied back to them in some way, shape, or form. But at first, Let's go ahead and pull up this, this audio here. There's a couple clips of some people that you might appreciate, uh, talking about the Clinton body count as we preempt this wonderful, beautiful list here together.
All right, so the first one let's listen to is going to be from the two Bears one, uh, cave Podcast, , which is Tom Segura. Um, talking about this, which I find to be pretty funny. . All right. And here we go. Are insane. Yeah. That you just get so like everybody's just like you want in on this? Yeah. Also, would you like to give a speech?
Yeah. It's 500 grand. Yeah.  for you to talk about what, what it was like to be president? Yeah. Okay. Yeah. When I was president it was pretty wild. Yeah. Like it's fucking, that's, you get 500 grand for that shit. Big time. They do a series, write a book.  15 million advance, and they're not giving you that money to curry favor.
They're doing it cuz they really wanna hear what you have to say. Yeah. They wanna hear what Hillary Hill, you know, we gotta regulate Wall Street. And then you look at her tour schedule, she's like, bear Stearns, JP Morgan , you're going. That's weird. Yeah, no, that's a fun one, by the way, when you talk about conspiracy theories.
Yeah. The most fun. , I think is the Clinton family stuff. Like, and, and it's fun because there's a lot of, there are, it's like, uh, six degrees of separation, but six degrees of death with death. Clinton. Yeah. So many people that are like associated former employees, colleagues, they're like dead, dead, dead. Yeah.
then, uh, what is it, Clinton Road, Epstein's playing like, I don't know, half a dozen times or more. He, I think he was the pilot of it at one point. Yeah, , I think he was driving it. He was always on that thing. He was fucking on that thing, dude. And they're like, ask him about ep. Yeah. I mean he was like a gold fire.
We're talking about money . Yeah, that's it. He was like a gold medallion, like frequent flyer, frequent fly a lot of miles on that plane. What'd you do when you got to that island? Ah, we golfed the beach. It's a beach. Yeah. Golf. You've been to an island? Yeah. Great golf. Yeah, we golfed on that tiny little uh, uh, secret island.
The amount of people that have died. That we're close to them. It is. It's like a have you look up Clinton body count. Yeah, it's a little weird. It is a little weird. It's a little weird. It is a fun one. I would get into . It's got his own Wikipedia , is it? Oh, it's a discredited conspiracy theory. Excuse. No, they pulled up Wikipedia and there is actually a Wikipedia page all around the Clinton body count that is the title of the Wikipedia.
Clinton body count. There's so many, and then there's this creepy picture of both of them standing there with these murderous smiles on their face.  next to the words Clinton body count. Like imagine there's, there's no Trump body count. There's no bush body count, although there should be for that one. Um, I wonder how big that ticker would look like.
Um, but there is a Clinton body count, Wikipedia page, and then entire page dedicated to it. Excuse me, please. Sorry. I forget. Alleged victims. There's. , former finance co-chairman, uh, Victor Razor. Mary Mohan White House intern. Didn't wanna suck it. Dead. , uh, Vince Foster, of course, it was a big one. Big one that would be a White House.
Uh, council found dead in Fort Marcy Park in Virginia, outside Washington. Autopsy determined he was shot in the. His death was ruled as suicide by five official investigations where remains the subject of conspiracy theories. Um, for knowing too much about the Clintons. Seth Rich, everybody knows Seth Rich.
Mm-hmm. , uh, unsolved Murder still. Jeffrey Epstein. Um, we talked about him. Christopher Sign wrote the news of a meeting. Oh man, this was, this was huge. And was, um, thought. Greatly sway the election. Oh yeah. In 16, this is when, uh, Clinton met with then Attorney General Loretta Lynch. Um, and it was like, it was, so it was like, uh, we're on the tarmac.
Hey, why don't you like pull that plane back up for a second. . I want to have a quick chat. Yeah. Um, and sign was found dead in his Alabama home. His death. Anyways. It, it is so crazy. There's a literal dedicated Wikipedia page,  and, and how there's so many people that have talked about this. Now, Epstein's an interesting one,  and, and, and let me preface this all with this. These are all just conspiracy theories, folks. It's very, very possible that the Clintons have never done anything wrong at all. They're just very nice people with the best interest of our, you know, nation at hand. And just everybody has these silly little thoughts about them.
Like, I don't know, you killed a bunch of people. It's very, very, very real. I don't think the Clintons killed.
I'm winking. I don't think that at all. Right. Um, so, you know, I like my life. I, I, I don't want to be found somewhere with a, a, you know, a, a beautifully written note in a field somewhere that is cursive. That, that looks nothing like mine stating how I am done with this world. So, you know, this is all conspiracy theories.
This is all thought experiments folks. We're just messing around . Uh, so let's, let's move on here. But Epstein's an interesting one,  the reason that people think Epstein now, now again, in this fun little world of conspiracies, I don't think Hillary Clinton is walking around with a knife in, in a, a.
Six shooter in her pocket in a, a cowboy hat with a mustache killing all these people. I, I don't think that, I think they're probably. Allegedly hiring very, very high cost mercenaries that all of these people in these very elite societies have some sort of access to. You know, and, and this is something that you'll see next in the clip of, of Duncan Trussel and Joe Rogan talking about this.
And by the way, Duncan Tru Duncan Trussel, of everybody that I listened to, even, even more than Joe Rogan even. He's top three for me,  it's like Lex Friedman, um, Duncan Trestle. Those would be my top two,  um, and I can throw some other people in there. Russell Branch or Rogan, like there's some, some, some great people out there that are Andrew Huberman that are doing great.
Um, great work in the podcast, uh, scheme. But Duncan Trussell's conversations with Joe Rogan. If you do nothing else with podcasts besides listen to my entire library, , which I hope you do. Go listen to every Joe Rogan Duncan Trestle podcast, and then come back here and thank me. Uh, it's, it's just incredible, incredible conversations.
He's such an interesting dude, and we'll listen to them, uh, here in just a moment. But, um, back to the conversation at hand, I don't think it's Hillary Clinton with a mustache and a cowboy hat and the six shooter and a knife walking around killing all these people. They're very, very highly paid Merc.  all around the world.
This is a real thing,  uh, the cia, red Squad, the, the, um, right. All there's, there's all of these different, uh, teams that are go from being high, high up at the tip of the spear special missions units in, in the military, um, in, in whatever country that they're serving to going and making. And, and maybe I'm wrong, but it seems like it's a probably a pretty strong possibility that if you are in one of those extremely, extremely high positions, there's some real money to be made If you can get in and get outta somewhere and do a, a dirty deed done dirt cheap to quote ac d c ,  um, there's probably some money to be made and if there was money to be, Right. The book deals that they're talking about, the 14 million advances, even if just, you know, 250,000 goes to, uh, eliminating some random woman who a accuses your husband of grabbing her ass during a, a campaign that you don't need that negativity on, eh, quarter mill doesn't seem too bad.
That's like. A fifth of a, a speech at JP Morgan Chase for the Clintons . So let's, let's listen to this next clip. This is Duncan Trestle and Joe Rogan talking about the Clinton body count. Now to preface this, they are sitting here in the  revolutionary wartime wigs, uh, big white wigs with, uh, big coats. Um, it's, it's a site to be seen, but, um, this is, uh, Let's see if it even tells us which episode.
Um, no, but here we go. It's, it's, it's good stuff. How many guys that have been killed or died rather, I should say, by suicide, accidental suicide through, uh, auto erotic asphyxiation when they have like a vibrator up their ass and they're wearing a fucking wetsuit. Yeah, and they're, they're hanging. How many of those guys were just.
I What percentage? A lot. Half. How many of them work for the fucking Clinton's? There's your answer.
Oh man. Did that Clinton, the last that, that's who? The last guy. Wow. Like they're not even trying. To make it secret , and we're gonna, we're gonna get to this one a, a bit too, but they talk about it in this, so it's, it's crazy. The most recent one that is like the most obvious Clinton, uh, with the mustache and, and a six shooter and the cowboy hat situation is, is, is this one that they're about to talk about.
It's, it's so crazy that this is like, and Trump's getting indicted for moving money in the wrong place with a misdemeanor and it's this huge orde. That's, it's so crazy. It's like you saying there's a Clinton body count makes you a conspiracy theorist. Yeah. Like there's how many, but like I, you know, it's just a lot of coincidences dunking.
You're not supposed to know that many people who've committed suicide. Like, you know what I mean? Like if I knew. 30. Like if 30 people that used to work for me had committed suicide and I didn't have something to do with it, like I would start going crazy , I would shut down my business. Yeah. I'd be like, you know, I don't know if it's me or it's something about me, but everyone who works for me, lots of people that work for me, they kill themselves.
So I'm not doing it anymore. I'm gonna like get a little apartment. You know, just like, just ride out the rest of my life. I'm gonna get a cabin and start writing books, write books, whatever. Just know, I don't want, I don't want any more people to die. But yeah, that body count thing is really like, what's the number?
What I, I don't know. I think it's, what's it up to, Jamie? Supposedly 39. 39, I think 39 people that you, that you've worked with. Died like in the gym, they have these accidents. It's like, imagine you have Putin's body count. It's only like 20. Like it's way higher. Yeah. If, uh, what is this? That's the guy. So Mark Middleton dead at 59.
Clinton special advisor who let Epstein into the White House seven times dies. Um, this is a sun report, just so, oh, the sun. Of course. I'm reading how it's clarity. So scroll up a little bit. What's the, . It's like, uh, you know, a lot of celebrity news and a lot of salacious news,  yeah. It's like, it's a little bit fun.
It's like a fun newspaper. So sad, sad, fun stories that doesn't, wait, what are they saying? Just so that we, it doesn't show the weird parts about it. Just find the one where it shows it. Yeah. Find the, there's an article about his suicide. He, uh, hung himself with an extension cord and shot himself in the chest and shot simultaneous.
Yeah, like Yo , I mean, this one is family, uh, of Bill Clinton advisor who admitted Jeffrey Epstein into White House seven times, has blocked release of files detailing the death scene after he was found hanging from a tree with a shotgun blast at a ranch 30 miles from his home. Kids, kids monsters are.
Okay. Here's the problem with conspiracy theories. There's so many people that are willing to jump on so many of 'em. Yeah. So many dumb ones. Yeah. That it muddies the water and it makes the, the word a pejorative. Oh, you're a conspiracy theorist. Yeah. It's like you don't think that some people occasionally conspire
Like, are we in denial? Yeah. Of one of the. Basic aspects of greedy people. Sure. To conspire people with power that control. No, they stopped giant swaths of the globe. They don't do anymore. They stopped a long time ago. They used to. A long time ago. That was a long time ago. Wealthy people, you know, Royal Quartz, royalty kings or whatever.
Yeah. It was intrigue and they would poison people and kill them, but they stopped because wealthy people, you know, they've learned how to be. Kinder and Nice. And the pharmaceutical company said they're sorry and they paid the money. Yeah. Everything's fine now. No, it changed. The world changed. It used to be like that.
Yeah. The world's beautiful now It's perfect. It's fine. No one would ever do that. No one's resort to that kind of murdering thing, like Yeah, nobody would. I mean, the, our armies do it, but aside from our armies, no. People who are in charge of the armies would do it when they're off work. . When they're off work.
So let's, let's explore some of the lists here. So, so there's, there's a, the attack happened here early Sunday morning, 27 year old. Here's Seth Rich. Here's, here's, uh, one of the most, um, consistently talked about one. So let's, let's let this play for a minute, cuz it just comes right up after that one and we'll see if anything comes out of it.
Seth Rich is one of the most famous cases about the Epsteins or about the Epstein, about the Clintons. Seth Rich seen here in his LinkedIn profile. Picture murdered as he walked in a neighborhood. He called home. Seth Rich was shot twice in the back in what police said. Looked like a botched robbery. He was taken to hospital, but died two hours later, just one of 139 murders in the DC area.
Last. Still, the death of somebody linked to Hillary Clinton's campaign was enough to set the internet, a light with theories about what might have really happened. In August, WikiLeaks offered a $20,000 reward. And then on Dutch television, WikiLeaks found in Julian Assange suggested that Rich was his source for the Democrats emails.
I'm suggesting that our sources, uh, take risks and they are, they become concern. Uh, to see things occurring, uh, like that. But was he one of your sources then? I mean, we don't comment on who our sources are, but why make the suggestion about a young guy being shot in the streets of Washington? Because, uh, we have to understand, uh, how high the states are, uh, in the United States
whoa. I didn't know that the WikiLeaks leaker of the DNC emails with Hillary Clinton's emails was Seth Rich. I, I hadn't gotten that far in this reading yet. . Whoa, that's crazy. And that was Julian Assange, the man himself commenting in that video, talking about it. Um,  and you think he randomly got shot in the street.
No way.  As, as Joe Rogan put it, you'll think people sometimes conspire , like you think that's a coincidence. Absolutely. No way.  They, he leaks the Hillary Clinton emails and all of a sudden he gets shot in the back twice in New York for, no, in a, in a robbery, you shoot somebody in a back, in a robbery.
So let's go through some of this list here. Here's an astonishing list of individuals connected to the Clintons who met untimely ends, to say the least. All right, we'll go through some of these. I don't know if we'll go through all of them, but obviously that's a pretty damn good intro into it. Let's talk about Epstein Seth Rich,  those are some pretty serious names tied to the Clintons, but let's go on,  james McDougal was a key witness in Ken Starr's investigation. In Clinton's conviction or convicted whitewater partner found dead in solitary confine confinement from an apparent heart attack. Mary Mahoney former White House intern, planning to expose her story of sexual harassment was murdered in a Georgetown Starbucks.
Vince Foster, former White House counselor in Hillary Clinton's colleague at Rose Law Firm ruled a suicide by gunshot wound to the head. Ron Brown, secretary of Commerce, former D N c Chairman and potential whistleblower died in a plane crash with his suspicious gunshot like hole in his skull. Hmm. Now I will, That is very hard to find.
You know, like they said about the sun, it's a, like this list didn't come from Fox News, if that's your source of correct information. So take some of this with a grain of salt, but the fact that you can probably reverse engineer almost any one of these names and find the correlation and then find that they're dead in a very similar fashion than what they're talking about here.
It says Victor Riser in Montgomery Riser. Major Clinton fundraisers killed in a private praying cla praying plane crash. Paul Toley, democratic National Committee political director in Clinton, confidant, found dead in Little Rock Hotel room. Ed Willy Clinton fundraiser found dead with a gunshot wound to the head in the woods of Virginia, ruled a suicide, died the same day as his wife claimed.
Bill Clinton groped. Jerry Parks head of Clinton's goober Notator security team gunned down in his car. His son Claim Parks was building a dossier on Clinton. James Bunch found dead from a gunshot suicide. Reportedly had a black book containing names of influential people visiting prostitutes in Texas and Arkansas.
James Wilson tied to a whistle or, uh, tied to whitewater, found dead in May, 1993 from an apparent hanging suicide. I said whistleblower, probably because of Julian Assange at this point. Um, Kathy Ferguson, ex-wife of Arkansas, trooper Danny Ferguson was found dead in May, 1994 in her living room with a gunshot to her head.
it was ruled a suicide even though there were several packed suitcases as if she were going somewhere. Danny Ferguson was a co-defendant along with Bill Clinton In the Paula Jones lawsuit, Kathy Ferguson was a possible corroborating witness for Paula Jones. That is 11 of them. We can keep going. Bill Shelton or uh, Arkansas State Trooper Gunshot wound ruled a suicide critical of the suicide ruling of his fiance who was found dead in.
Gandy Baugh. Attorney for Clinton's friend died of jumping out of a window in 1994. His client was a convicted drug distributor, Florence Martin, accountant and subcontractor for the cia. Uh, Suzanne Coleman reportedly had an affair with Clinton when he was an Arkansas attorney, uh, died of a gunshot wound to the back of her head pregnant at the time of her death.
Paula gr. Clinton's speech interpreter for the death from 1978 until her death December, 1992. She died in one car crash. Eh, that might be bullshit,  people die of car crashes. Danny Castro in investigative reporter investigating Mina Airport and Arkansas Development Finance Authority slit his wrists apparently in the middle of his investigation into Clinton's, Paula Wichner, John Walker.
Barbara Weiss says that, uh, commerce Department staffer worked closely with Ron Ba Brown and John Hong cause of death unknown. Charles Messer goes on and on and on. Dr. Stanley heard right, how many people had to die , how many people died around them before you start to ask questions,  like I, I. I don't know that many people that have died.
Like there's a, a small handful of people that I've ever run into, let alone people who have shot themselves. And maybe it's like sixth degree of SEP separation,  but like, these aren't six degrees, this is like first, second degree,  um, Kevin Ives and Don Henry, known as the Boys on the track case reports say the boys may have stumbled upon the Mena Arkansas's airport drug operation.
The controversial case. The initial report of death said due to falling asleep on railroad tracks. Later reports claim the two boys had been slain before being placed on the tracks. Many linked the case, uh, linked to the case died before their testimony could come before a. 
Yeah. Get the point. And this even going all the way up to Hillary's 2016 presidential run, um, world renowned space economist Molly McCauley, brutally murdered in Baltimore as she, uh, had testified before Congress many times. She was vice president at Resource for the Future, and in the junk professor at John Hopkins University, she was stabbed to death while walking her dogs in Baltimore Park.
Her name is on this list because of her ties in Washington as well as her death just days before the murder of Seth. Hmm, interesting. And then we get to Seth Rich,  if, if none of these other ones even matter,  like let's talk about the, I dunno, eight or nine bodyguards that were in there, , if none of those matter.
You want to talk about Seth Rich? That is one of the craziest ones,  and, and this, this article that I found to even talks about it being a possible connection. Julia Assange just. Told us everything. But the fact that sh, he was the one that gave them that information, right, gave them access to all of the emails.
Crazy. And then it goes on to talk about John Ash, Victor Thorns, John Lucas, and the list goes on,  so, so many people from whistleblowers to bodyguards. These deaths have, have, should at least raise some eyebrows. If you have 52 people around you that are in some way or shape or form associated with you, or were coming after you in some legal manner and they just so happen to die.
And that's somehow always related to potentially suicides, gunshot wounds. Right. There's a fair amount of plane crashes. Right. And then Mark Middleton,  the one that Joe Rogan and Duncan Trust were talking about. But as the body count climbs the likelihood of this, like the think of the likelihood, how, how many people do you know that have died?
Now think of how many people you know that have died tragically. Now think of how many people you know that have died tragically, were coming after you legally and also so happened to commit suicide. Like the, the, the, the, the statistics aren't in their favor, . So as we talk about this, Donald Trump is being Indic.
For moving money to pay off an NDA from a. Home equity line, that's what we're talking about here.  for his body count with a porn star next to the 52 names that I just listed that have to do with the Clintons, and I'm sorry if I bored you with some of those names, but it's just pretty wild when you go through some of 'em.
And again, I'm not claiming some of those or all of them, or even one of them has to do with the Clinton's in in Hillary with a mustache and a cowboy hat and a six shooter going off and killing all these people. But I am saying it's pretty damn weird. Maybe. Maybe the Manhattan District Attorney should be looking at that instead of Trump's payments to Stormy Daniels from a pote, a possible home equity line , like he mismarked his, his tax return.
Right. Maybe just, maybe that's, that's something that should be considered, but I thought that was a fun way of going about this conversation. Right. The body. Compared to the body count, right, Trump's one body count was Stormy Daniels sexually compared to the 52 body counts of the Clinton's, uh, murdery sprees allegedly.
Is, uh, an interesting comparison to say the least. So on that note, thank you so much for listening today. I appreciate it from the bottom of my heart. I truly do. I, I love doing this. I, it amazes me every day, um, that we have such an awesome community. Uh, follow me on Instagram, the Adams Archive, uh, truth, social, the Adams Archive.
Everywhere you get your podcast, we have a YouTube channel,  youTube. You can watch the video every single week. I post the video the very next day after the podcast, it gets released and you can actually watch the video. You can watch the videos that we're watching alongside of me, um, at the YouTube channel.
Okay? Um, it's just the Adams archive search that you'll find me. See my, my face, um, and we'll go from there, but, all right. Thank you guys so much. I appreciate it from the bottom of my heart. I hope you have a wonderful, wonderful week, and I love you. I'll talk to you soon. Bye.
 
 

Capitalism on Trial: The Federal Reserve, Fractional Banking, and the Silicon Valley Bank Collapse

Welcome to the Adams Archive, where the unspoken truths of society are uncovered and explored with passion and precision. Host Austin Adams dives deep into controversial topics that will make you question the very fabric of our world. In this groundbreaking episode, Austin investigates the American banking system and its unnerving implications for the future of the nation. Delve into the intricacies of fractional banking and discover how this seemingly innocuous concept has evolved into a far more sinister reality.
Austin takes listeners on an intellectual journey that starts with the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank and leads to an examination of the Federal Reserve. With the aid of Edward Griffin's "The Creature from Jekyll Island," the podcast unravels the complex history and mechanisms behind modern banking practices that affect every aspect of our lives. As Austin navigates this labyrinth of information, he pursues an interview with Griffin himself to provide even greater insight into the hidden world of banking.
If you're ready for a mind-blowing exploration of the financial system and its consequences, join Austin Adams in the Adams Archive for this eye-opening episode. Subscribe, leave a five-star review, and share your thoughts on this crucial issue. Find additional resources, articles, and videos at austinadams.subs.com, and prepare to have your perspective transformed. The Adams Archive is more than just a podcast; it's an invitation to challenge the status quo and uncover the astonishing truth about the world around us.
Join the substack, follow our social media and more at https://linktr.ee/theaustinjadams
 
Full Transcription:
 Hello, you bu to full people. My name is Austin Adams, and welcome to the Adams Archive. Today's episode is going to absolutely blow your mind. I have been diving deep into this topic over the past several, several days, and I can tell you I have never been more concerned for the future of America as I am now.
Now, this is not about trafficking. This is not about politicians. This is not about, this is about the American banking system. Okay? Now, that may not sound very enticing to you, but once we get into this topic to the depths that we are going to today, You're gonna realize what I'm talking about. Okay. Now, what prompted this for me was looking into the Silicon Valley Bank collapsing.
Okay? Now, that prompted me to figure out what the hell fractional banking is Figuring out fractional banking led me to realize that that is no longer the concept that we operate off of. No matter how scary fractional banking itself is, what we have today is even worse. Now. That drove me down a rabbit hole to figure out how we got to a point where fractional banking was even possible, which led me to learn all about the Federal Reserve, to learn about the Federal Reserve.
There was a book that was written, and we will go over some of the highlights called The Creature from Jekyll Island. . Okay, now, that book beautifully written, um, there's some really good, uh, really, really good, uh, lectures online by, uh, Edward Griffin, and I'm gonna see if I can get him on the podcast. I messaged him today to see if, uh, maybe he can come on here and explain these things a little bit better than I can.
But he's very, very brilliant. You should go listen to these lectures. They'll be included in the ck All right. If you're not in the CK already, go to austin adams.subs.com. You can sign up, you'll get all the articles, all the videos, all of the ish that we are talking about here today. All right. So without further a.
Well maybe wanna do subscribe? , leave a five star review. All right. Tell me what you like about the podcast. Tell me what you learned about, uh, fractional banking, which again, doesn't sound very enticing, but promise you after you figure out everything that I figured out, your mind's gonna be blown. All right, so without further ado, let's jump into.
The Adams Archive, the very first subject to today's podcast is going to be on the collapse of S V B. Okay, now, SVB is the Silicon Valley Bank. Silicon Valley Bank, obviously located in Silicon Valley, basically sent shockwaves through the entire tech industry. And that was right about a week ago, right? A few, not even a few days ago.
All right. Through Wall Street, through Washington, everybody was shocked by what happens. Regulators have since shut down the bank to prevent a crisis in the broader banking system. Just days after another bank, signature bank was abruptly closed as well. Silicon Valley Bank, which provided banking services to nearly half of the country's venture capital backed technology and life science companies made this very the same mistake as many other banks.
It invested most of its deposits in long-term debt like treasury bonds, promising steady, modest returns. However, the strategy proved shortsighted when the Federal Reserve looking to combat rapid inflation, started raising interest rates, making these once safe investments, far less attractive. All right.
Silicon Valley Bank was also el uh, uniquely vulnerable due to its business being concentrated in the tech industry, which was experiencing a rapid decline in startup funding. As a result, its clients started to withdraw their money, and once some people started drawing their money, other people started withdrawing their money causing what they call a bank run.
All right, now a bank run, so you have some terminology behind this. A bank run is basically when everybody starts to go line up outside of the banks, asking banks to give them the very money that they worked so hard for, the very money that they sweat bled, worked their asses off weekends over time to feed their children.
Okay? And we'll learn about that fractional banking, which some of this has already alluded to already, which is terrifying, like I said. Okay, so now the collapse of Silicon Bank is the largest, since the 2008 financial crisis, the very largest bank to do so since. , which again, is only gonna get worse as people realize that our banking system is built on a house of cards.
Just a little whistle in the wind will cause our entire financial system to collapse. All right, we're gonna talk about today some things like what is money, right? Why is it even hold value? Which is probably the most fundamental question that has one of the most concerning answers. Um, as you've noticed recently, I've been using the AI chatbot chat.
G p T pretty consistently came out with their fourth generation of it today. Um, it's pretty incredible technology, but it helped me along the way doing some of these calculations to actually figure out what it would cause for the American financial system to collapse. And that's some of the things that we're gonna discuss here today.
I'll go through those calculations with you. All right. It highlights the dangers of fractional reserve banking. When banks invest most of their deposits, they create more money than they hold in reserves, leading to a precarious situation where a loss of faith in the bank can trigger a run on deposits.
In such cases, the bank makes gains privately, but losses are socially distributed. That's what you have to realize about this. When a bank is doing well, they profit ungodly amounts of money. When things aren't going well for a bank, you know who foots the bill? You and me, the American public foots the bill when they get bailed out by our government.
So things are going great. They profit, you'll make a dollar. Well, maybe you make, you know, 2 cents off of every a hundred dollars that you have in your bank account based on interest. But when things are going great for the banks, they're not coming to you to pay you out dividends, right? But when things are going horribly bad,  and the government decides to bail them out.
You know who pays that bill? And we don't even really pay it. And that's what I've realized from learning all of this. We don't even really pay it. We pay it through inflation. We pay it through the fictitious magical creation of money, which has no value unless we decide that it does again, which we'll talk about in a minute.
So fractional Reserve banking to me is theft. It is a entity taking your money and putting it in as many places as possible so that they can continue to make money. They can give out loans with it. They can do all of these things, but the second you come ask for your money, while you and maybe your neighbor and a few other people at the same time, they don't have it.
Cuz it's often these fictitious little places that they're hoping to make interest based on the fact that you're never gonna come ask them for it. At the same time. Right before the Great Depression, the US dollar was backed by gold. That ensured that the money in the economy was backed by something physical, something tangible, right?
When something is backed by something, a commodity like gold or silver, right? Or even Bitcoin, right? If you understand how this works, right, the, the way that gold is created, gold is a, gold is a specific element that is created. And forgive me, I'm not a damn science teacher over here. Got a beer in my Yeti.
So
the way that gold is created is the earth puts together certain amounts of carbon. And when you get the perfect alignment of these, these elements, right? It creates what we know today is gold, right? Not fool's gold. Not all these other renditions of this potential possibility, but actual physical gold as we know it today, is a specific type of gold.
Okay. Now that gold is minted, right? The, the earth had to have all of these situations happen simultaneously and in the proper way perfectly to cause gold to be created and to be in your hand the way that it can be today. Okay? That's what happens, right? The, the, the earth has a mathematical equation of circumstances and pressure and whatever the hell else it is, and then gold is physically created and minted by the earth.
Okay? Something like, think of it, if you know anything about cryptocurrency, think of it like Bitcoin, right? Bitcoin ha has a computer that is working nonstop to create a bunch of algorithms and calculations to try to decrypt a or or mine a Bitcoin, the same way you mine gold. And eventually, after so many algorithms, so many computers are working to do this, one unlocks a Bitcoin and that creates scarcity.
There's only a certain amount of bitcoins that are being created on a general basis. There's only a certain amount of gold that is being. By the earth at any given time, that scarcity gives it value, right? So during the Great Depression, our money was backed by gold. After the depression, the US abandoned the gold standard and became a fiat system.
Okay? Fiat currency is not backed by anything at all. No assets, no commodities, right? And the fact that Silicon Valley Bank had basically uninsured depositors highlights the need for money to be backed by something physical like gold. And that ensures that depositors money is protected. It is being held physically somewhere to show that that piece of paper that you have is attached to a certain amount of, of physical minted developed by the earth gold or even Bitcoin, right?
It has some sort of, of, of, uh, built-in scarcity.  that drives value, right? There's not, there's not an unlimited amount that can be created at the whim of any American who wants to profit based off the central banking system, which again, we'll learn more about in a minute. We're gonna learn a lot today. Um, the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank underscores the need for tighter banking regulations, right?
We've seen several, several things that have happened, right? Like, um, some regulations that were rolled back in 2018 under Donald Trump, right? Some banking experts believed that Dodd-Frank Financial regulatory package intended to prevent such collapses and could have stopped this bank from handling its interest rate risks, um, had it not been rolled back, which is some opinions, but the bigger problem, the biggest issue.
When we talk about fractional banking, which again, I'll pull up here. Let, I'll, I'll talk you through it. Lemme just go through this article with you. The collapse of these banks that says has prompted a swift reevaluation of the Fed's interest rate increases. On Monday. Smaller banks rushed to en reassure customers that they were on firmer financial footing, but shares of US regional banks plummeted.
The b W Bank Index, which tracks the performance of 24 major banks, fell 10%, erasing nearly 200 billion of value of the banks. In the index, it says, the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank in Signature Bank highlights the dangers of fractional reserve banking and the need for money to be backed by something physical.
The follow of these collapses underscores the need for tighter banking regulations to prevent such collapses and ensure the stability of the financial system. Okay, let's talk about it. What is fractional banking? Okay. Fractional banking was the cause of what happened with svb. Right. What is fractional banking?
Fractional banking is the idea that if you deposit a hundred dollars into a bank, the bank can take $90 of that 100. Hold onto the remaining 10, which was the standard prior to 2020. The standard prior to 2020 was that the banking system had to hold 10% of the overall val value in reserves. Now, that changed, but even with 10%, think of it this way, if you handed the, gave the bank 10 a hundred dollars, right?
Let's say 10 people gave the bank a hundred dollars, right? They gave out 900 of that thousand dollars. Of the 10 people's a hundred dollars, which leaves them with one $100 bill. The other 900 they gave away to other people in the hopes of making interest in the future. So when two people, just two people go to the bank at the same time and say, I want my a hundred dollars.
give me all of my $100 that I gave you. That is $200 that they're asking for. One of those people is not getting any of their money, or at least both of them are getting half of it. They don't have it. They don't even have it for two people, let alone the full 10 people that gave 'em a hundred dollars.
Right? If just two people went and asked the bank for this money back, they would not be able to do it, right? 20% in this case. Now what we realize, it is far, far worse than that. In the real world scenario.
What we realize, excuse me. What we realized is that in 2020 it was changed from 10%. Just 10% of the money in your banks had to be held onto by the, by the reserves, by the bank, just 10%. In 2020. During Covid, they changed that percentage. To 0%. None of it did they have to hold onto none of it in reserves.
0%. Not 1%, not 2%. 0% of your money has to be held by the bank in reserves. 0%. That is astonishing. There is no federal regulations at all now that say that the bank has to hold any of your money for withdraws. Right. What they are dependent on is if everything collapses, then the F D I C, the Federal Something Insurance Commission, will basically has insured each each value of each customer up to $250,000, which again, we'll find out, is a complete farce.
What a terrible word. Farce is a terrible word. It's like, I don't even like to say it. It's like saying fart farce. I don't know. Anyways, FARs is a complete, FARs is bullshit. There's nothing there for you to take in. So, so when two of those people in that scenario that I gave you, go to the bank and ask for their money back, and somebody's going to walk away with no money, so, so one person gets their a hundred dollars out, the second person goes and asks for 10 of it, just 10 of it.
Now that person realizes that the bank does not have their money. They start talking to their friends, you know who their friends are. The other eight people in this scenario who gave the bank a hundred dollars. Now you have all other eight people, nine people in total going to the bank saying, I want my money back.
But the bank has none of it. They don't have to hold onto any of it. And the scenario is actually far worse than that in today's world. After 2020 and that legislation changed. The scenario is now anybody goes to the bank and starts to ask them for that money back. They don't have to hold onto any of it.
That my friends is fractional banking. And it scares the shit outta me, and it's not even fractional anymore. There's no fraction. The fraction's gone. It's fictitious banking. That's what it is. It's no longer even fractional, which was horrible. It's far, far worse. Okay. Do you wanna know how fragile our entire banking system is here in the United States?
Here is the most terrifying thing that you will hear today. Okay. Chat, G P t concluded that if 2% of Americans, 2% of Americans decided to withdraw their money from the bank, at the same time, it could have a high potential of causing a collapse of the entire banking system that as we know it today, the entire banking system as we know it today, just 2%, two out of a hundred people, two out of a hundred people went to their bank right now.
This concluded and calculated. The entire banking system could collapse. So again, it's far worse than that scenario that I gave you and let me walk you through how it got to that. Okay. Chat. G p T said we can try to make a rough estimation based on some data points. Okay. Now I had to do some finagling to give, actually give me this cuz I didn't wanna gimme this answer.
It says, first it's essential to understand that the reserve requirement being 0% means that banks are not required to hold a specific percentage of their deposits as reserved. However, it doesn't mean the banks hold no reserves at all, right? They still maintain some reserves. Doesn't give you an amount cause it can't, to manage day-to-day transactions and withdrawals day to day, not week to week, not month to month, day-to-day.
The amount of their reserves varies by bank. It depends on the bank size, number of clients, and other factors. To estimate the percentage of people required to cause a nationwide banking collapse, we need to consider the amount of money held in deposits and the amount of reserves held by banks.
According to the Federal Reserve, as of September, 2021, the total amount of money in the deposits in the US banks was around 17 trillion.
Okay. Assuming that these banks still maintain some reserves, assuming that they maintain some reserves, it says, let's calculate, based on 2% of their deposits are held as reserves. This would amount to approximately 342 billion in reserves. If depositors were to withdraw their money in such a way that bank reserves were insufficient to cover the withdrawals, it could potentially trigger a banking collapse, right?
That's the other eight people, nine people going to the bank and saying, I want my money, because the other, the second person went there to ask for it, and it wasn't there to find the percentage of people who would neither withdraw their funds to cause a banking collapse. We can use the following formula.
Reserves divided by deposits times 100 equals the percentage of people. Okay, so we take that 342 billion, right of the 2% seven. Divide that by the 17.1 trillion. Multiply that by 100, it gives you 2%. It says, based on this rough estimation, if around 2% of people in the United States simultaneously withdrew their their money from the banks, it could potentially cause a nationwide banking collapse.
Says, however, this is a highly simplified calculation. Does not take into account many factors such as the variation in reserve levels among the banks, the distribution of deposits, and the possibility of banks borrowing money from other sources to cover withdrawals. Additionally, the Federal Reserve Act as a lender of last resort and can provide emergency funds to banks facing a liquidity prices which could prevent a collapse.
Okay? Now what it goes on to say is that in summary, it's difficult to provide a precise percentage of people required to cause a nationwide banking collapse due to 0% fractional reserve requirements. However, based on this rough estimation of 2% of people with through their funds, it could cause a banking crisis.
Um, it says that reme to remember that the Federal Reserve could intervene to prevent a collapse. Oh, don't, don't worry about anything. The Federal Reserve is here to save you. It's not gonna collapse when the Federal Reserve is here. What is the government's got our back. Hmm. Is the Federal Reserve a part of the government?
No, it is not. It's a mixture being overseen in some way, shape, or form by Congress. But we even find out that that's not true. But it was, and you can read all about this in the Creature from JE Island, but we're gonna get into it now. Okay. The Federal Reserve has absolutely nothing, was not founded by the government.
You want to know who the, the Federal Reserve was founded by? The Federal Reserve was founded by bankers, the very bankers that you know the name of, and you can probably take a guess as to who people from the Rockefeller family. Aldrich family, JP Morgan Chase. Seven men secretly met on an island in Georgia, concealing their identities, changing their names.
They met on a private train cart to discuss how they were going to essentially take over the world's banking systems, starting with the United States. These seven men's wealth, seven men's wealth equated to one fourth of the Total World's wealth at the time, and all they wanted to do was figure out how they could take over the other three fourths.
It's pretty simple. When you get seven guys in the room, why wouldn't you do that? Right?
So let's unmask the architects of the Federal Reserve. And talk about why every single American should be outraged at this historical account. And here it is. As you go about your daily life, there's a creature lurking behind the scenes polling the strings of our economy. This seemingly innocuous entity is none other than the Federal Reserve and its origin story is as chilling as any horror tale when you realize the truth In the eye-opening book, the Creature from Jekyll Island by Edward Griffin, it unveils the clandestine beginnings of the Fed in the dangers it poses to our society.
The secret birth of the Federal Reserve in 1910, a group of influential bankers in 1910 and politicians gathered in secrecy on JE Island in Georgia to hatch a plan that would forever change the course of American history. Their mission. To create a centralized banking system that would benefit their own, their own interests, while consolidating power and control over the nation's finances.
This figurative meeting laid the groundwork for the creation of the Federal Reserve. In 1913, our entire structural financial system was built less than 111 years ago. An institution that now, now holds immense power and sway over our economy basically dictates all of it. The key architects or the Federal Reserve were no ordinary individuals.
They were powerful cabal of bankers and politicians, including Paul Warberg, Nelson Aldrich, JP Morgan, among others. Their goal was to establish a banking cartel that would protect their interests while simultaneously controlling the country's monetary policy. By doing so, they could manipulate the economy to their advantage.
Profiting from booms and bus while leaving ordinary Americans to bear the consequences. The Federal Reserve's very existence poses a threat to our society. Its power to 
create money out of thin air and manipulate interest rates, allows it to control the value of our currency, often leading to inflation and devaluation.
Moreover, the Fed's unelected the Fed's unelected officials operate with minimal transparency, making decisions that affect millions and millions of people without any public oversight whatsoever. Furthermore, the Federal Reserve's ability to bail out large financial institutions in times of crisis promotes moral hazard.
Big banks take on excessive risks knowing that the Federal Reserve will rescue them if things go south, which is exactly what we saw happened with S V B. This reckless. This reckless behavior can lead to financial crisises with ordinary citizens left to foot the bill, which is exactly what I talked about earlier, right?
When they can create money out of thin air, it's not out of thin air, it's out of future comfortability for the American people. It causes inflation, and that's where we're gonna see the result when they created trillions of dollars during covid so that they could pay people not to work, so they could shut down the economy for their own agenda to cause you to get vaccinated so Pfizer could profit off of it.
Now, the Federal Reserve born from a secretive gathering of powerful elites wields enormous power over our economy. Its actions can lead to inflation, devaluation, financial crisises, all while operating with minimal transparency.
It says, as Americans, we must be aware of the Fed's origins and inherent risk opposes to our society. We should demand greater transparency, oversight, de, and democratic control over this powerful institution. It's time for us to stand up and fight against the creature that has taken a hold of our economy before it's too late.
And I personally believe that it might already be too late. Okay. It is so crazy to see how this came together and what, what this entire financial system is built on. Like I said, it's a house of cards. Okay. Let's go ahead and let's watch a little bit of this clip. And this is by the author  📍 himself, Edward Griffin.
Um, who again, I really hope I can get on the show cause I would have a really, really interesting conversation with him here. It's takes 
 in in taxes. How can Congress spend more money than its income in taxes? Basically what happens is the Congress goes down to the. And asks for, let's say it's a billion dollars more that they need this day.
And the treasury official says, you guys gotta be kidding. We don't have any money here. You spent it all long ago. Everything we've taken in taxes is long spent. And Congress says, well, we kind of figured that was the case, but we thought somebody might have dropped by and left some money. . They said, we know what we'll do.
We'll borrow the rest of it. So they go down the street to the printing office. Now notice they're not gonna print money. They're going to print certificates, nice big fancy certificates with borders on the corner, and an eagle at the top and a seal at the bottom. And it'll say, United States Treasury Bond or Note or Bill, depending on the length of maturity.
And it's so impressive. It almost looks like money, but if you hold it up, the light, it really says, I owe you. That's all they are. . And so Congress takes it and it wants the public to step forward and loan the money in exchange for the IUs. Sometimes that's called buying bonds. No, you're not buying anything.
You're loaning money to the government and getting an i u in return. And a lot of people in the private sector and the institutions are anxious to loan money to the government. Why? Because they have heard that it's the best investment you can possibly make the most secure investment because it is backed by the full faith and credit of the United States government
And that people aren't quite sure what that means, but it sure sounds good. And so they lend the money. Well just in, in case there's anyone here in doubt as to what that means, I'd like to explain it to you. The full faith and credit of the United States government means that the federal government solemnly promises to pay you back your money plus interest.
If it has to take everything you've got in the form of taxes to do it, it will do it
It's a promise to tax you, and people don't think this thing through. They think, oh, it's wonderful. It's a, it's a, you know, wonderful investment and I'm gonna get some of my money back. Yeah. Anyway, that's a little side issue. The government is able to borrow a tremendous amount of money, and therefore spend more than it takes in, in taxes through this process, but never enough.
They always need more than that. Not to worry, they say they walk further down the street to the Federal Reserve building. Now the Fed has been waiting for them. That's one of the reasons it was created. And they walk in there and the Federal Reserve officer opens up his desk drawer, pulls out a big checkbook, and he writes a check to the United States Treasury for $1 billion and hands it to them.
Now, he need to stop and ask a question, where did they get that money? That billion dollars. That's a lot of money. Who put the money in into that? Into that account for the Federal Reserve so they could give it to Congress or to the Treasury. And the answer is, there is no money there. There's absolutely zero.
There's just a checkbook. Well, if you and I were to do that, we would go to jail. But they can do it because Congress wants them to do it. This, in fact, is the payoff. This is the benefit to the government for being in the partnership. The government can go to the Federal Reserve and. Obtain instant amounts of any amount of money they want without having to confront the taxpayer and say, we're gonna raise your taxes for this money directly.
It would be very unpopular if Congress had to go to the public and say, you know, we have a lot of money we want to take from you folks, and it's gonna cost you $3,000 per family more than it did last year. You know how long they'd last in office. So they like this mandrake mechanism very well. The public doesn't know that it's costing them anything, it's just how it works somehow.
So this money, this billion dollars springs into being precisely at the instant that the Federal Reserve officer signs the check and gives it to the government. Now, let's see where the banking cartel benefits from this partnership. 
 So there is your answer about where our money comes from. It. Comes from nowhere.
Nowhere. It is fictitiously created by the Federal Reserve. There is no backing whatsoever. There is no scarcity or a commodity. You may know this, but you may not have heard it in this way. The American dollar is an illusion that only continues to thrive as long as everybody believes in it. What happens to the dollar?
Once every, the illusion crumbles. Once people lose faith in it, and they go to the banks and start asking for their money back, it doesn't exist. Right? More checks need to be written, which just kicks the can down the road, and when you kick the can down the road, right? That causes inflation, that devalues our dollar, right?
So there's a little bit about where the money comes from. It comes from nowhere. These seven bankers gave themselves the power to be financial gods with the ability to create money out of thin air and then foot the back, the bill back to us, the American citizens.
Okay, now you must say there must be some oversight, right? This is a, it has the word federal in it. No way. They just do whatever they want right now, the way that they lay it out and the way the structure was built. And there's been hundreds of amendments since this happened in 1913, which make it far, far worse than they was even originally written to do.
but there's 12 regional banks. Now, these banks are not banks like you and I have access to, right? They're corporate banks. They're governmental banking structures, right? So they say that they, they push off this power, and there's 12 regional banks that make up the, the banks that all that hold the power over, uh, hold the power over the Federal Reserve.
But what you find out is that's not the case either. There's loopholes built into the laws that allow these federal banks, these 12 banks, based on districts that are drawn up arbitrarily, that only have power to the extent that the Federal Reserve allows them to have power by this committee that oversees everything, right?
This committee that oversees everything has the power to veto any and all things. The only thing that the regional banks actually have any power over is the interest rates for their specific districts. But you even find out.  that these regional banks can be vetoed in their own percentages of interest rates for their own districts by this overhead and oversight committee.
So it is not immune to any type of corruption as some people would have you believe. It's basically built off of corruption, right? They get to create money however they want, whenever they want, for whatever reason they want. As we found out with Ukraine, the Federal Reserve is just a, like he said, a cartel built by the banks to become a monopoly over the financial system.
Over our government, the banks are not owned by the government. The government is owned by the banks, and the more that you realize, the more that you read up on our financial systems, the more you learn about it, the more that becomes the case.  because the banks own the companies, right? You look at BlackRock, you look at Bla, Vanguard, those d different conglomerations of of financial wealth funds own every single major corporation.
Those corporations lobby the government and get politicians put into positions so they can continue to further the profitability of the entities in which the corporations want. Right? The, the corporations are right. The only, the only legislation that is being passed is stuff that's profitable for these corporations, and the only things that are profitable for the corporations are what's profitable for companies like BlackRock.
BlackRock, or entities like BlackRock, not even companies and entities like Vanguard, and they have worldwide reach. Those are the banking cartels, right? Everybody wants to pull back the curtain. That's the World Economic Forum elites. So then you can start to ask yourself, well, why? Why would they wanna do these things?
Right? We'll get to that in just a second, but let's ask ourselves a more simple question. Why does money have any value if it is not backed by something of scarcity? If it's not need to be minted by the earth, if there's no actual true scarcity surrounding it, why does it hold any value at all? The only reason that money has any value whatsoever is because it's an agreed upon illusion that all of us buy into when the illusion fades, so does our entire societal financial foundation.
The second Americans decide to go to the bank and ask for their money back. The second that everybody tries to go and switch over to gold, everything crumbles. 2% of people. That's all it takes.
So how can it represent value if there's no value to it other than an agreed upon illusion? And this is a question that I posed to Chad, g p t, and it says, money represents value because people in society collectively agree to accept it as a medium of exchange for goods and services, right? Yeah. Sounds Sounds all right.
This agreement is based on trust in the shared belief that others will accept the currency. Okay, that's fair. It says that while it may seem like an illusion, this trust in societal consensus gives money its value and makes it a functional tool in the economy. Modern fiat currencies like the US dollar and the Euro, are not backed by physical commodities like golds silver.
Instead, their value comes from the faith people have in the stability of the issuing government and the central bank's ability to manage the money supply reasonably. . Now when you understand that that dollar in your hand only has value to the extent that you have faith in the government, and not even faith in the government, but faith in the central bank and not even faith in the central bank, faith in the very people that you and I have pulled back the curtain to over the last two years and realized they have absolutely none of our best interest in mind.
This goes on to say that in the functioning economy, trust in the currency is maintained through the central bank's management of inflation and interest rates, ensuring the money retains its purchasing power and remains a stable store of value. Additionally, legal tender laws and regulations further reinforce the acceptance of a currency as a value medium of exchange.
In summary, while the value of money may seem like an illusion, it's the trust and shared belief in its value that allow it to function as medium for exchange, ultimately enabling trade in the commerce within a society. Okay, now,  now that we realize that our entire currency is just an illusion based off of our faith in our governmental structure.
And not even that, but the central bank, here's the next question that you can ask yourself and in, in something that you will run into, right? They'll tell you that, oh, well it's backed by the F D I C, right? It's backed by the F D I C. That's a federal something Insurance Commission, right? And the F D I C ensures deposits up to $250,000 per depositor, per insured bank for each account ownership category.
Okay? That's what people will tell you. That could never happen. It's not gonna collapse. It's insured, right? And what it means by it's insured is all of the banks pay a premium on the monthly or however fricking they do it, I don't know, but they're, you know, quarterly, yearly, annual, uh, decade wise, who knows?
But they pay a premium to basically say that, oh, if our money runs. They'll pay back the customers, right? If, if all its fails in our fractional banking system, which now holds 0% reserves and people actually ask us for it, you guys got our back, right? And that's what people will tell you. That's what they want you to believe.
Is the F D I C has your back, right? The Federal Deposit Insurance Fund. Okay? Now each of those is $250,000 per deposit per account, which I found to be interesting. Okay? Maybe that, that gives me a little peace of mind, right? To know that there's a, a, a, a governmental insurance behind my money. That's a beautiful sound, isn't it?
Did you hear that? That is the sound of a founder's four giants, Imperial, i p a. All right? So it's backed.
It's backed by the , by the insurance company, right? It can't be fake, right? It can't be fictitious. It's not an illusion. They got our back. There's a contract that says they're gonna give us money, $250,000. Most people don't have that. I don't. You don't have that. I don't have that.  maybe, right? So it says, while it's difficult, so, so, so here's what I asked it, right?
So, so there's $250,000 insured per account. So there, there must be a nu a number out there for how much of these premiums has been gathered that can be distributed at any given time, right? That's how it works. So as of September 30th, 2021, the F D C'S D I F balance was approximately 122 billion. That's a lot of money, right?
That's a good amount of money. 122 billion. But when you realize that the total amount of estimated insured deposits was about 9.1 trillion, things start to crumble a little bit, which is again, some calculations I did with chat G P T. So there's 331 million American citizens, right? , there's 122 billion in its d I F balance for the F D I C and the total amount of estimated insured deposits was 9.1 trillion.
The the, the math doesn't seem to add up there, so I asked it what percentage of Americans would be insured by the F D I C before the money ran out? Seems like a fair question. There should be a hundred percent right.
The FT I c has several tools, it says, and strategies at this disposal to handle bank failures and protect insured depositors. In the event of a large scale banking crisis, it's unlikely that all insured deposits will be simultaneously at risk. The F D I C can also access additional resources. Okay, now it says that there's 331 million because it wouldn't answer that for me Originally, it said, you know, including the scale of the banking crisis, the size of individual deposits, and the extent of support from the US government.
However, the F D I C's primary goal is to maintain stability and public confidence.
So I asked it based on 331 million people and 122 billion, how much is allotted per citizen for the F D I C? It answered To calculate the average amount allotted per citizen based on the F D I C'S deposit insurance fund balance of 122.2 billion in the population of 331 million. You can defy the D I F balance by the population.
Take 122 billion, divide that by 331 million. You get the most disturbing statistic that you're going to hear today or figure that you're gonna hear today. $369 per American citizen. If everything crumbles, the insurance that they want you to believe has your back will pay out $369 and 18 cents.
Wow. That'll buy you a nice steak dinner, huh? Well, everything's crumbling. B beyond belief. While the government buildings are on fire, while the banks are collapsing, you're gonna get a payout of the F D I C if everybody goes to the bank to pull the deposits. Now, there's some caveats to that. Obviously, not every citizen's gonna run to the bank.
Not every citizen has $369. Some have far more than that too. Some of those are children, right? Take that into account. But $369 per citizen is insured. Not exactly the 250,000 that they want you to believe is it? Says that it's important to note that this calculation doesn't accurately represent how the F D I C insurance works.
The F D I C ensures deposits up to 250,000 per deposit per insured bank for each account ownership category, and not every citizen has the same amount of deposits. Also, the F D I C'S primary function is to ensure depositors and not to distribute the funds equally among the entire population. The calculation above is just a simple average.
It does not reflect the actual distribution of insured deposits or the specific coverage for individual deposits.
So now that I've readily terrified you, what do you do about it? Right? What can you do? Right? Is it, is it Bitcoin? Is it gold? Right? And, and we talk about things that are minted and, and have a scarcity to it, like a a, an actual built-in scarcity, not under the control of human beings who wanna profit off of your demise, right?
But what do you do about it? Well, I would say the first thing is definitely look into getting some, if you have a large amount of cash in the of fricking bank account, start to question whether or not you believe enough in the American financial system and the central banking system to continue to hold it there and, and bank on the idea that 2% of Americans aren't gonna go to the bank and ask for their money back at any given time.
Right. Or
is this 0% fractional banking intentional? Right. Why would, why would the Federal Reserve ever want to tank the American U S D? Right? Why would they ever wanna do that? They're in charge of it. Well, I think we need to go back and look at why they started the Federal Reserve to begin with. These men who owned one fourth of the world's wealth, between seven of them didn't do it for financial gains.
Right. That's, I mean, numbers feel nice to them. I'm sure it's just a little fun little game, but it's not about that. , right? It's about power, right? It's about power. You can go be lake, uh, uh, you can go be freaking courtside of the Lakers, you know, you can do all the fun things. Go in a high r own your own highrise building, right?
Who, why would they care at that point if they have that much money? Okay. Now, I really enjoyed this rant, um, by Mr. Griffin. And, uh, let's, let's let him take away the microphone here. Um, I'll interject a few times, but I, I do think there's so much value in this, the, the way that he ended his speech here, that I might let it, let it run for a little bit.
Um, so let's go ahead and see what he had to say about it
compared to $70,000 for labor and materials. . In other words, as Edison said, two and a half times more will be paid to the banks who did nothing than for those who provided all the labor and all of the materials. And you may say, well, yet that's true. But don't forget the time value of money. Reasonable interest is rational.
People need to be compensated for the sacrifice of their money over 30 years. That's a long period of time. Wait a minute, not this money. Ladies and gentlemen, nobody earned this money. Nobody saved this money. Nobody sacrificed anything for this money. This money was created out of nothing. And I suggest that $172,741 interest on nothing is excessive
He's talking about mortgages. 
I think we need to focus on this. We need a new definition of the word usy. Any interest on any loan of fiat Money, meaning money created out of nothing. Now this example of $172,741, unearned interest on a hundred thousand dollars home is like a grain of sand in the Sahara.
Look around the desert. All of the other homes of America, all the factories, all the machinery and the factories, all of the high-rise buildings, the, the hotels, all the airplanes, the automobiles, the farm equipment, the farm structures, everything that we have. You were looking at a similar relationship here.
This is staggering.  to consider the amount of money that is in this huge wide river of wealth flowing into the banking cartel because the money was created out of nothing. It's such a wide river of wealth. You can't even think across it in your mind. It's perpetually moving into the banking cartel. This is a dead short across the productive capacity of America.
This is money that should be going to the people who produce and who create. Instead of being siphoned off through a scam, think of what our standard of living could be if it weren't for this dead shore to cross our economy. Well, where is this money going, this river? Where is it flowing? You'll get the mental picture that maybe it's going into a, a lake somewhere.
Behind a dam. All this money is a rising, accumulating. People are getting richer and richer and richer. No, not so. It's not how it works. They're spending the money. What are they spending it for? Well, they're not spending it for more yachts and more ya uh, more mansions. That's not it. I mean, they got rid of the mansions back on Jekyll Island.
They got bored with those things. Once a person has all the money that they can possibly use for the material pleasures of life, what is left? Sure. Power, absolutely. They are spending this money for power, ladies and gentlemen, to acquire power over you and me and our children. They're literally buying up the world with it.
But I don't mean they're buying up the real estate or the hardware. They're buying up control over people.  technically in sociological terms, they're buying control over the power centers, which means those groups and institutions through which people live and work and follow leadership and accept information.
People are always associated in groups and they work in groups. They move in groups, and these groups have heads of them leaders. And this money has been going for many years to acquire influence, if not control over the leaders of these power centers in society. So they can therefore, indirectly influence and control you and me.
Specifically, that means they had been spending this river of wealth very freely. Dubai control over politicians, political parties, television networks, cable networks, newspapers, magazines, publishers, wire services, motion pictures, studios, universities, labor unions, church organizations, trade associations, labor unions, tax exempt foundations, multinational corporations, boy Scouts, girl Scouts, you name it.
Make your own list. I guarantee you, if you have a large influential organization which influences people, you will find that this river of wealth has been flowing partly into a, an attempt to acquire control over the leadership of these institutions and organizations. 
Ooh, man. Right. That is wild. That very river that he's discussing are these wealth management conglomerations, like BlackRock, like Vanguard, right?
That are buying up all the real estate that are buying up all the farms, all the agriculture, the school systems, the books that they put in, the school systems, the Netflix organizations, and the Disney pluses of the world, the news media's, cnn, Fox News, all of it. All of it is intertwined, and it comes back to the same river of wealth that is built off of the Federal Reserve system that is built off of the fictitious printing and not even printing the fictitious creation of monetary value.
That has no value. That has only has value because we believe in BlackRock and Vanguard because we believe in the central banking system, because we believe that our government has our best interest in mind, or at least we did. So when people talk about a financial collapse, it's not a, it's not a collapse of our financial system, is it's a collapse of belief.
Belief in our government, belief in our banking systems, belief in the very companies that you and I have pulled back the curtains on and realized have nothing but malice. Against the American people want nothing but control over. You want nothing but to influence your mind and, and, and insert venom into the veins of every child to make them think that they should get castrated and believe that they're a girl when they're a boy that want you to get an abortion instead of having a baby that want to institute the, the, the mass abortions of, of minority cultures, right?
All, all of these things, the boy scouts, the, the, the like, and, and again, I'm not, I'm not against religion. I, I'm against massive organized religious organizations, which is what he's talking about here. It's like 18 of the 20 top Facebook pages for Christian, uh, Facebook pages was ran by Russian troll farms.
Like, who owns those Russian troll farms? The ver You think If you think the, the reach and power and control of companies like BlackRock and Vanguard end in the United States and is only held by people within the United States, you're sadly mistaken that Venom has seeped into the culture, seeped into the entertainment, the news, media organizations, the school systems, the books that you and I read.
Everything, everything and everywhere. And that my friends, is why they wanted this to begin with. 1913 is what set this all off at Jekyll Island where the Federal Reserve was made. And you and I, the American culture, American society, the banking systems, currency, hard work. Consumerism capitalism turned into corporatism, which has really turned into like, I don't even know the word for it, but it's not even corporatism now.
Did I realize this? It's like just owned by seven fucking people, seven families that came together that created this.
And then you wanna talk about where those seven families came from and where their wealths come from. And that gets even weirder, right? The royal bloodline families, right? The Rockefellers, the Aldrick, JP Morgan Chase's dating back all the way to Egyptian times and Roman empires. You think all that wealth just went away?
No. It trickled down through family bloodlines for a very long time. That's a conversation for another day. But let's keep listening here. We got a few minutes left, 
especially those which. Are offered as opposition, especially those which supposedly are to stop this whole process from happening. Now, this has not only been going on in America, but this has been going on in every nation of the world, pretty much in the industrialized nations as it has gone on here.
But I'd like to call your attention to what's been happening in the so-called third world or the underdeveloped nations. This process is now complete. It's not going on. It's finished. They literally have bought those nations. Have you ever wondered what's going on there with the IMF World Bank? Every once in a while, on the back page of the newspaper, you read that Congress once again authorized another a hundred billion dollars or so to go to the World Bank, and then it explains very carefully that this money is being used for humanitarian reasons.
It's being used to uplift the standard of living of these poor.  that is an appearance of the fourth kind. If you ever saw one. It's not being used for that at all. If it is, they're not doing a very good job because after all these years, you cannot point to one of those countries, which has had its standard of living raised one iotta by this vast expenditure of money because it was never designed to do that.
The money does not go to the people. It does not go to the industries or the businesses of those countries where it might have a chance of raising the standard of living. It goes to the politicians, doesn't it? It goes to the governments of those countries and it is used specifically to, to perfect and strengthen the control mechanisms over their people.
Usually this starts out, it starts out as an inefficient dictatorship, but by the time they get the UN money, it ends up as an efficient dictatorship. They have a better organized and equipped. They have a better paid bureaucracy. More people in the bureaucracy, they have more ways of controlling their subjects.
They have food chains that they can offer to their friends and deny it to their enemies. This money is used to build totalitarian systems in every country that you want to point to and analyze. You see, these people, these leaders of these countries, for the most part, couldn't care less about the standard of living of their subjects as long as they live well.
They live in their mansions, have their yachts, their jet air aircraft, and they go to New York and live in the Waldorf Historia while they attend United Nations meetings. They're very happy with that. They have no ideology. Communism, socialism, fascism, capitalism. What difference does it make? Where's the money?
Mm-hmm. . That's it with these people. Four. We know how welfare families in this country can be second, third generation families and there's no hope at all of getting them off the dole because they can't imagine any other way of life. This happens at the international stage too. We're dealing with countries now that are second third in some cases, fourth generation welfare governments.
They don't know how to survive unless that money comes free through the International Monetary Fund in the World Bank means from us. There's no way in the world they're gonna break free from that. These countries, ladies and gentlemen, have already been purchased Lock, stock, and Barrel in this fashion, and they are now in place in the new World order and they're simply waiting for us to show up.
And that's the other side of the coin, because not only does this transfer of wealth to these countries from us not raise their standard of living, but it does in fact help to lower ours. And this too is part of the plan. A strong nation is not a candidate for surrendering its sovereignty. But if a nation can be brought to its needs, if it is hungry, desperate, if it has chaos on its street, in its streets, if it has political turmoil, then the people in that nation will much more likely accept any solution that's offered to them by their government or by a world government if there's anarchy in the streets.
As we saw in Watts in Los Angeles, people were joyous. When the soldiers showed up, they were joyous because this now was an end to anarchy. It was a dress rehearsal. They won't care whether the helmets on these people are blue or brown. If it says UN on the side, they won't. That won't make any difference.
They'll say, thank God for the un. Finally brought restored peace to our streets. . And if people are hungry and they're out of work and they, they don't know what to do in the economy, they'll be so thankful for a un monetary unit, which has purchasing power a little bit. Thank God for this un money because the old American dollars are put, don't know what to do with this is the plan, ladies and gentlemen, to weaken America.
And so that's the process. And I'm mentioning this because I want to emphasize to you that what is going on here is has nothing at all to do with wealth. The name of the game now is power.
And that my friends, is your lesson on the American financial system. It is all about power. And the next step here to me and from where I'm sitting and what I'm seeing across the entire country and the entire world, Is the implementation
of a financial system that is based off of a social credit score, cuz that is the ultimate power, is a digital currency that has no paper, fiat currency at all. Cause when you implement that, they can make more money. They can make money off of every transaction, right? They can track everything that you do and they can stop you from dissenting, from speaking out against these things because then you can't buy the right foods for your family.
You can't buy clothes for yourself. You can't buy diapers for your children. You can't get an education, can't put gas in your car. It all comes down to power. So as I've said before, do what you need to do, but protect yourself and protect your family. All right guys. Thank you so much for listening. I hope you learned something today.
Leave a five star review, subscribe. Head over to the ck austin adams.ck.com. I love you. Have a great day.

Disneys Darkest Secret: Lifelong Grooming, Beastiality & January 6th

Welcome to the Adams Archive. Hosted by Austin Adams, we explore the wild, bizarre, and often unsettling events happening across the country and around the world.
In today's episode, we expose the shocking belief that the FBI conducted a false flag on its own people on January 6th. With evidence that even the left is starting to acknowledge, we uncover the implications of this belief on society as a whole. We also explore historical parallels and eerie similarities to other events, including the Governor Whitmer situation and events dating back to the 60s.
But that's just the tip of the iceberg. We also discuss a disturbing new patent filed by Ford, which would allow them to take control of your car and even drive it to an impound lot if you fall behind on your payments. And if you thought things couldn't get any crazier, we delve into Spain's recent legalization of bestiality and the legislation behind it.
But the most shocking revelation of all is about Disney. Something darker than anything we've discussed before. We'll reveal the details of this disturbing discovery and its implications for our culture and society.
Don't miss this episode. Hit that subscribe button now to join us as we navigate these compelling and thought-provoking topics. If you enjoy the show, please leave a five-star review and help us climb the ranks. Let's jump into it.
Join our Substack and follow us:
https://linktr.ee/theaustinjadams
 
Transcription:
 
  
 
hello, you beautiful people and welcome to the Adams Archive. My name is Austin Adams, and thank you so much for listening today. We are going to be touching on some wild  wildness going on across the country right now, including 61% of all voters, not just Republican, but all voters believe that the FBI conducted a false flag against its own people on January 6th by using Agent Provocateurs.
Crazy. I, I, I did not expect the left to agree with that, but apparently they're starting to come around and, and so we'll go through some evidence of that. We'll talk about the implications of society as a whole, agreeing with that point as, as a, as a majority at this point, and then we'll go into some historical.
Historical, uh, coincidences, I guess not coincidence, but parallels, , of other events which kind of look eerily similar to that, including the governor Whitmer situation, if you haven't heard about that one. And then some all the way dating back to the sixties. , we're also going to talk about a new patent, which was filed this week by Ford, which would allow them to basically take over your car, shut down your air conditioning, eliminate your ability to roll down your windows, and actually drive itself to an impound lot if you find yourself behind on your payment.
So we'll talk about that, which is pretty crazy in and of itself. We are also going to dive into the recent situation, uh, regarding Spain. Basically legalizing beast.
I didn't expect that to be out in today's episode, did you? ? So we will talk about that. The actual law in legislation that was passed as a result, to make that happen. And then last but not least, our final topic of today, and the one that we'll touch on the longest is going to be a revelation that actually was passed to me by my wife regarding Disney now.
 It's pretty dark. It, it's probably darker than the other situations that we've heard of combined. It's, it's pretty crazy and I don't think it's anything that anybody has touched on at this point. And, uh, we'll talk about all of it. All right now, in the meantime, Go ahead and hit that subscribe button.
It would make me feel all fuzzy inside. It would make me feel so good. Hit that subscribe button. You know, I'm gonna hit it in about halfway through this episode and ask you to do the same. So you might as well get away from that feeling that you have in the pit of your stomach. When you know that, I'm going to ask you again, get it outta the way.
Hit that subscribe button. If you're new here. If you are not new here, and even if you are, leave a five star review. All right? I would appreciate it. From the bottom of my heart, those five star reviews completely help get us up in the rankings, and Lord knows we need it to have these types of conversations surrounding these terrible tragedies that are going on in our country and around the world.
All right, so leave a five star review. If you would write something nice. I don't know. Whatever it is. Whether it's about my, you know, I don't know, my silly hair or my crazy, I don't know. Whatever it is, write it down. Talk about your favorite topic. I don't know. But write something and leave a five star view.
All right. Thank you so much. , and let's jump into it.
 
All right. All right, let's get into it. But first, head over to the CK Adams, not adams, austin adams.ck.com, and you can get our podcast companion free of cost for now. Um, sign up now. I would appreciate it. You'll get all the clips, articles, links, videos, all of it directly to your email every single week.
And, you'll be able to get all the articles that I wrote up surrounding these topics for you. So Austin Adams dot.com, that's all I got. The very first article that we're gonna be talking on today is going to be that 61% of all American voters believe that the FBI conducted a false flag against its own people on January 6th by using Agent Provocateurs.
You heard that right? 61% of American voters. Now, that's not 61% of Republican voters. That's 61% of all voters, liberal conservative. Middle of the road, libertarian, uh, what were those, uh, people who, I don't know, green party, whatever the hell you, you believe in whichever of these religious sex you find yourselves in 61%.
A majority, a vast majority. It's not 51%. It's an astonishing 10% more than being split down the middle. Believe that the FBI in the American government set up the American people to cause this coup like situation at the Capitol right now. There's some things that we saw originally that led us to believe this.
I think if you've been following me for a while, you know, I've done whole sections of this show in, in portions of this on Ray. And maybe I'll talk about him a little bit later, but Ray Eps is at the epicenter of all of this. And then you go all the way back to Ted Cruz questioning the fbi. And I believe it was like the head of the department or one of one of those higher up people.
This woman who sat there without answering a single question about this would not give a straight answer at all. But now we have the majority of the country believing that our own government is willing to set us up to cause a violent reaction, just to get, I don't know, some, some pushback or belief surrounding Joe Biden or against President Trump.
And this should tell you everything that you need to know about the Trump presidency. You saw all of the mainstream media just going after him, going after him, and now we know, or at least 61% of the American populists believe that our own government, our own government, put people in harm's way and had Ashley Babbitt killed in the Capitol building as a result.
of their own Provo Pro Provocation. Is that a word? Provocation? Provocate Provo. Provocation . And you go back to all the clips. They still will not release the video footage. Still will not release the video footage. How many, how many years? January, 2021. January 6th. We are now two years past this event, and they have 80,000 hours of footage and they won't release it.
I wonder why. Maybe because it shows police officers letting people in with waving arms, removing barricades, unlocking doors. Maybe because it shows the tragic death of Ashley Babbitt in a way that isn't helpful to the FBI's agenda or Biden's agenda. Maybe.
So here's the evidence, or, well, maybe not the evidence, but here's the article. Explosive new polling data has just been released and it has the potential to shake the very foundations of the American democracy. According to the latest Rasmus employee, stunning, 61% of likely voters, including 50 per 57% of Democrats believe that federal agents play a role in inciting the Capitol riot of January 6th and 2021.
This means that a majority of Americans believe that their own government may have had a hand in one of the most traumatic events in recent American history, and maybe not traumatic, but dramatic might be the more P likely of terms. The poll respondents, how likely it is it that undercover government agents helped provoke the Capitol riot, and the results are shocking.
Of those surveyed, 39% said very likely, 22% said somewhat likely. That means a grand total of 61% of likely voters believe that federal agents played a role. The poll also revealed that 59% of men and 63% of women believed that federal agents had helped provoke the capital riot. This majority of voters who believed the capital riot was not simply a natural occurrence breaks down among political party affiliations as well.
57% of Democrats said it is either very likely 34%, well, 34% total. 57% of Democrats said it is either very likely or somewhat likely, very likely being 34%, somewhat likely being 23%. While Republicans, the numbers are 51% said very likely, 19% said somewhat likely. Wow, that's pretty crazy. Many across the media have already questioned the idea that Trump supporters watching then President Donald Trump had taken it upon themselves with no provocation.
Hey, provocation, this award to walk from the ellipse of the capitol and demand entry. Tucker Carlson is one of the many who stated his belief based on photos and eyewitness accounts that federal agents have been encouraging Trump supporters to enter the Capitol building. Going back to Ray Abs, it's, we're going into the Capitol.
You remember that video into the Capitol. Tomorrow we're going into the capitol. Him sitting there inciting these people while everybody around him points their finger and mocks him going, fed, fed, fed, fed, fed, pointing at him, calling out in the moment. We didn't need two years to decide this. The people that were there and saw this man saying we're gonna go into the capitol, knew immediately, knew immediately that he was a federal agent, trying to provoke them into some sort of riot.
They were priming the public, priming the people that were around there the day before this happened to cause this to happen. And again, we have an American veteran, Ashley Babin, who died as a result of this provocation. Goes on to say that this idea that the government may have initiated the false flag against itself is dangerous to the overall belief in American democracy.
History has shown that when the public loses face in their government institutions, it can lead to destabilize, destabilization, and unrest. The Rassmuson Poll also asked likely voters whether they thought that the hours of surveillance footage captured on the day should be released to the public. An overwhelming majority of American likely voters, 80% total believe it's important that the footage be released while majority of both parties weighing in that the public has the right to see the footage.
Now, what does that other 20% even mean at this point, if you're a 20% saying that we shouldn't release the videos, you're literally just showing your cards that you are somebody who is on the side of Big Daddy government and big brother wanting to like just completely. Like what is it? Ossify yourself like completely.
Uh, like put yourself in this cocoon of like against the general world saying that I don't care what the facts are, I don't care what the reality is. My reality is Trump bad man, everybody else, good man. And everything that he does is bad and everything. And it doesn't matter whether he did it or not. It doesn't matter whether our government set him up or not.
I don't care. Right? That's what that 20% shows me. The latest polling data adds to a long list of historic examples where the government has used agent provocateurs to incite events from the 10 of 12 F B I agents. We recall this with Governor Whitmer who were involved in the kidnapping of Governor Whitmer to the infamous.
COINTEL Pro program run by the FBI in the 1960s and seventies, which we'll get into in a second. There are plenty of instances where the government has used underhanded tactics to achieve its goals. The American people have a right to know what really happened on January 6th, whether the government was involved in any way.
Now, that brings up a big issue, right when, when majority of the country, majority of the country believes that our own government inside today riot into our most, like one of the most protected government institutions in the world, one of the most symbolic buildings we have as an American institution.
Our own government could have potentially staged this. At least 61% of people believe that. Now, again, what does that mean for our nation
when you no longer believe in election? When you no longer believe that our own government has our best interest in mind, when you believe that they will actively incite political unrest in riots, open doors for you to make it happen, and uncaring murder an American veteran, for the sake of your own agenda, the American people are going to start to not believe in this government institution anymore.
And what happens? What do we know that happens when, when places like Afghanistan, places like Iraq, places like Mexico, when we have these, these ideas that the, the system no longer works, right? It's rotten from the core, rotten for the structural foundation of our nation is rotten down to its structure, down to down to the, the studs that are holding up the walls riddled with corruption.
If you can no longer have a vote or a say in who goes into office, and now all of a sudden we find yourselves with an, I don't know, what is he, 85 years old, blubbering, dementia ridden man who's embarrassing our country at every single turn. When you no longer believe in the fabric of democracy, when you no longer believe that your vote has a a meaning, and no matter what you do, how many people you talk to, how many people actually vote that it will never go the way that you want it to.
It'll go the way that the elites want it to. We will find ourselves in historically very violent, unsettled public discourse, which is absolutely not where I wanna see this nation go. But historically, that's what happens, right? When you can no longer vote to use your voice, that's where it. Right, and that's where this will go.
Unfortunately, as we thi see things progress, right? If these things continue this way, and the American people can no longer have any, any belief in the people who are running this country, the people behind the curtain, or at least they, we, they pull back the curtain like they have already. And we see that companies and organizations like BlackRock, like Vanguard are actually running the show.
People like the World Economic Forum in Clause Schwab, when we know now for sure that the only people that matter, the only people that have a vote are the ones who have a corporation or a wealth management fund large enough to put candidates in place like George Soros, like Klaus Schwab. Those are the people who have a real vote.
Now you have the, the organizations that are being ran by those types of people that are being funded by those types of people that are being put in positions of power or, or at least running and managing those people like the puppeteers of the world. Who are operating these FBIs, these three letter organizations, when we know that that's what's going on.
We have things that happen like assassinations of presidents, which we are fairly positive at this point. Otherwise, why wouldn't you release the records that they conducted those types of operations? Why should we believe in their government right now? Let's go into the COINTELPRO program or counterintelligence program, which was a secret and illegal program ran by the Federal Bureau of Investigation from the fifties to the seventies.
Its primary aim was to disrupt and dismantle political organizations that the government considered a threat to national security, particularly those associated with civil rights, anti-war in radical leftist movements. The PRO program was launched in 1956 under F FBI director J Igar Hoover, and operated in secrecy for many years.
The F B I used a variety of tactics to target groups and individuals, including wiretapping mail fraud. Harassment. The Bureau also used infiltrators and agent provocateurs to create divisions within groups and incite violent confrontations. The Conor Intelligent Program's primary targets were civil rights and anti-war activists, as well as groups that advocated for racial equality in the rights of marginalized communities.
The program worked to disrupt and discredit these groups by spreading false information, infiltrating their organizations, and using informants to sow distrust and create divisions. So now we want to think that that was so long ago, right? Oh, it's the sixties and the seventies, right? Oh, they would never do that now, would they?
How wild. How wild is it that that's where we found ourselves today is that we, we just think the government has all the sudden changed. Right? And, and we see this with people like, you know, is, is it any coincidence that people like John Lennon, people like Bob Marley, people like Jimmy Hendrix, people like the list goes on and on and on of people who randomly died at a young age.
And generally it was people who were speaking out against the government, right? John Lennon, anti-war, Bob Marley, anti-war. Right. Speaking out against the, the, um, you know, accreditation or of, or, or for racial equality. Right. People like, uh, people like Martin Luther King. Hmm. Right. All along the same time.
You think all those people just suddenly. From natural causes. Right. You think our government didn't have a hand in assassinating some of the single largest and, and biggest opponents and, and dissidents of the public narrative during a time of war that was for the military industrial complex. Do you think that there's not enough money involved in the military industrial complex that they wouldn't do something like that?
One of the most infamous pro examples of this was its targeting of the Black Panther Party. The FBI's efforts to disrupt the Panthers included the use of informants, wiretaps, and smear campaigns. The bureau also used undercover agents to incite violent confrontations between the panthers and other groups, including police.
The FBI's actions were illegal and violated the civil rights of countless individuals and groups. The program was eventually exposed in the 1970s, and many of its tactics were officially deemed unconstitutional. However, the damage has already been done and many civil rights and anti-war activists were subjected to harassment.
And persecution by the government, not to mention potentially assassinations. It was a dark chapter in the American history that serves as a reminder of the dangers of unchecked government power. The program's tactics were illegal and violated. The civil rights of countless individuals and its legacy still resonates today and the ongoing struggle for social justice and political freedom.
This should spark complete outrage from the entire country. All right, so that's to me, the fact that 61% of people all agree. That's one of the only things that we're gonna get a majority agreement on from the country right now. 61% of poli people believe the FBI set up January 6th. All right, now let's move on.
Okay, so the next topic that we're gonna touch on is going to be that for. Motor company has now put a patent in to be able to surveil you. Shut down your vehicle, turn off your air conditioning, everything in between. If you get behind on the on the car payment, big Brother is watching you and now he can take your car too.
Ford Motor Company has applied for a patent on a new technology. It says that would allow them to remotely repossess your car if you failed to make a payment. Just, just a payment. The proposed system would give owners a warning about a mis payment before disabling certain features such as gps, air conditioning and the radio.
But if you continue to neglect your payments, the car can then lock you out of it and drive itself autonomously to an impound. What  that is the craziest, do you remember the movie? It was a Disney movie called, uh, what was it, like Smart Home or, uh, gosh, what was it? Pretty sure it was something like Smart Home.
It was like this exact scenario. It didn't have to do with payments, but it was like basically the, this ai uh, you know, hologram of a woman was the, uh, was the manifestation of the house's technology and the, the house saw these people doing things that it didn't like. So it locked, it went into lockdown mode and they couldn't even leave their own house.
Right. It it. So we'll go into that analogy a little bit further in a minute cause I think that's an interesting one. Um, but Ford's patent application states that the lockdown feature could be lifted momentarily in case of an emergency to allow the vehicle to travel to a medical facility. But it also proposes a possible caveat where delinquent owners working toward clearing their balance would have their car locked only on weekends to allow them to go to work and earning income to make payments toward their vehicles.
Could you imagine your daddy, corporate daddy is now going to take your keys on the weekend and not allow you to drive your car, which you purchased it, and own , at least I'll own the loan on. Um, if you miss a payment, this life is getting crazy,
this type of surveillance. Base lending, it says, is an infringement on personal privacy and raises serious concerns about the growing trends toward connected vehicles in electric cars. As cars become increasingly digital and reliant on technology, there is a greater risk that our personal information and rights will be compromised.
According to Ford, the system is designed to solve the issue of uncooperative owners who attempt to impede the repossession operation and can lead to confrontations. But this type of technology could also be used to target vulnerable individuals who may be struggling to make payments in face losing their cars, which is often a critical lifeline for Americans.
The patent application filed in August of 2021 was formally published last week for public review. A company spokesperson said the patent submitted as a normal course of business. They said, but they aren't necessarily an indication of new business or product plans. Yeah, okay. We believe you Ford.
Regardless of Ford's intentions, this type of technology is a clear example of how movement towards connected vehicles and electric cars is going to inherently mean more technology that only infringes further on personal rights. We must remain vigilant and advocate for stronger privacy protections to ensure that our personal information and freedom are not compromised by these new technologies.
Okay, so think of it like this. Compare it to your house like we talked earlier, right? Imagine coming home after a long day and find that your fridge, TV, and air conditioning have all been disabled. , because you're behind on a house payment, right? Imagine sweating being in 90 degree heat in Arizona, 110 degrees outside, and they're just.
Making you lose weight every minute because you can't make your payment. Like is it not enough that you're behind the payment anymore? Is it not enough that you have the shame of, of creditors calling you or getting the potential of your car, getting repossessed or feeling like you, that it is so wild to me that they want to shame you to the point where they will lock your windows, turn, not allow you to listen to the radio and disable your car on weekends because you can't make a payment.
Shame on you.
So if we apply the same logic to homes, we can see that a future where our appliances, electronics, and even doors could be locked, right? Your ba, let's say you have a patio, they no longer want your patio door to work. So you gotta walk out the front door and walk all the way around to your back patio.
right? You can no longer use the second bathroom. You all gotta use the first bathroom. Oh, and by the way, we're gonna lock the other three rooms in your house and just allow you access to one room. You can all sleep on the floor there. We're not letting you in. Right? All the amenities that come with that home that you purchased right now, think of who this is targeting, right?
This is targeting low income. This is targeting ar areas of people who are, you know, going to get into these types of loans unknowingly or without the ability to make these payments. This is gonna target a, a majority of, of minority communities, which are historically in these communities where they're having more difficulties financially, right?
Statistically and factually. That's true. And so this is going to be targeting them specifically to do things like this, right? It's not just being limited to cars in the future, right? You can limit this to everything. You can limit this to your cell phone, right? Imagine having everything on your phone, disabled, all of the apps, all of your social media, all all of the stuff besides phone calls to Verizon, to, to your, you know, mom and your dad into 9 1 1 because you're behind on, on a payment.
I guess Verizon kind of already does that, right? If you miss a payment for long enough, they only allow you to make a phone call, but you can still connect to wifi, right? So you still have access to all those things, right? They're just not gonna pay for you to go do. It's like if they, I don't know, some analogy with gas  or like charging, I don't know.
Um, but yeah, just, just think of all the applications. Right there. There's so many ways that this smart technologies, this surveillance big brother technology can be utilized in the future and, and that is a future that I don't want to be a part of. I want to get in a car and press down the gas, and I want gas to be siphoned and I want it to do whatever freaking magic that happens in an engine.
There's probably some mechanics listening to this that just want to shake me for not knowing exactly how that works. I want a combustion engine bitch, and I want to be able to put gas in it from the earth that was mined in Saudi Arabia or from some foreign land, or from Canada or Alaska. I want to put liquid into it, and I want to drive by a government building with my middle finger up.
That's what I wanna do because there's nothing you can do to stop me from moving. To stop me from driving my vehicle from, from freedom of transportation. And that's what you're gonna find. And we did our last episode on smart cities, right? 15 minute cities is what they're called. And this is another piece of that, right?
They don't want you to have vehicles. They want you to own nothing and be happy about it, right? They don't want you to have the freedom of transportation. They don't even want you to be able to drive 15 minutes away. Well, 16, right? They don't want you to have that freedom. They don't want you to have any freedom.
Not unless daddy government or daddy corporation, which is truly what daddy government is, has a say so in it, right? And, and, and what we're finding now is like all the people that you know, I am, I am absolutely for capitalism. What we are now is not capitalism. What we are now is corporatism, right? Our government, our institutions, our colleges, our voting processes, our candidates, our.
education systems are media, corporations. Our news, the, the shows that your children watch are all owned by corporations who have corporate interests, right? And I've talked about this before. When it comes to corporations, a corporation is a living, breathing entity, right? At least once it gets shareholders, when it's a business, once it, once, it's a, a small business and it goes to a PORs, a, a, a position where it's publicly traded, where there's board members and the CEO who only acts out the po the the needs of the board members.
And when they don't, they get removed and kicked out and the new CEO comes in. When you get to a point where a business goes away from having a leader who is truly at the helm, where it is ran by board members, it loses its humanity.
It no longer has a moral compass. The only compass it has is off of profitability. , right? So when you have a corporation that has to determine whether or not it should, I don't know, release some type of hmm. Virus so that it can make billions in profits, that doesn't seem like a bad business model to the board members who are just trying to make a profit whose CEO has to enact those decisions or fear being removed from their multimillion dollar position, right?
That the entity only thrives off of profitability. It doesn't thrive off of helping humanity. It doesn't thrive off of giving, giving to the needy. It doesn't thrive off of educating the public. It doesn't thrive off of any of these things. It, it thrives off of profitability, right? And profitability is off of the, generally, off of the detriment in, in many cases when it comes from a corporation.
To society, right? When we look at things like the, the tactics that were used by cigarette companies back in the eighties and seventies and even early nineties, right? Like when we look at the ways that they lobbied physicians to use their name and say that this is the doctor recommended cigarette, try Merl Burrow Red.
Recommended by two out three doctors. Little did you know, they surveyed three doctors, two of which they paid $5 million for that advertisement, right? When you have all these black hat little marketing tactics that drive profitability ran by the ceo, who trickles down to the to, to everybody in between, that's all based off profitability that that loses its moral compass, right?
There's no longer somebody there to go, I don't like where this is going, and if they feel that way, they can't say it because the second they say it, in an organization where it's ran by board members and not a leader with a moral compass, it loses all of that humanity to it. It has to continue to thrive off of more profitability.
Now, the other thing is growth, right? A company has to continually grow no matter what. When you have a company like Pfizer who made billions of dollars off of their vaccine, . You think next year they're gonna have a 30% drop in revenue and their board members and shareholders are gonna be okay with that?
No. The bar has been set and now it has to be exceeded every single year. Or it's a loss or else their share, their stock price goes down and they can't have that. So what do they do? Again? Record year record numbers, record profits for everybody involved in the company, you know, except the employees, the people who did the work, and also humanity, who so happens to die when we profit so much money.
But you know, let's forget that, you know, not to mention the Project Veritas video, where they actually said that they were actively working on messing with Coronaviruses intentionally to potentially put out vaccines preemptively. Hmm.
It doesn't stop at Ford Motor Company folks. Does not stop there. All right. Now the next thing that we're gonna talk about is going to be that  Spain. I can't even get this one out. I, this is so bizarre to me. I, it's, it's so bizarre to me that this is a conversation that I'm having to have
in the bizarre move. The Spanish Parliament has approved a new animal welfare law that essentially legalizes bestiality in Spain. They pass legislation that legalizes bestiality, but there's a caveat as long as the animal doesn't get hurt too badly. Yeah, yeah, I heard that. Right. It's now perfectly legal to have sex with an animal in Spain.
As long as you don't. To bring them to the vet afterwards. , according to a new law, if you're caught in the act of sexually exploiting an animal, they don't req that and they don't require veterinary treatment. You won't face any criminal charges, right? Who needs consent when you got a nice legal loophole to screw your dog?
Now, it's not just the fact that bestiality is now technically legal, that's so shocking. In this case, it's the fact that the law was supported by Spain's Minister of Social Rights and 23 Agenda. That's their title, supporter, Spain's Minister of Social Rights, and 2030 Agenda. That's the title of this person.
So if that tells you anything about where this is going, and this person's name is Ian Valara Ortega. I don't know if I pronounce that right, but it's probably better than you would've done . Let's be honest. I. Let's, like seriously, what kind of world are we living in? Were our government actively, not our government, but the Spain government, maybe they're a little freakier over there, but actively advocates for animal abuse.
Now, of course, like almost every other country, bestiality was previously illegal in Spain with hefty penalties for anybody caught in engaging in this disgusting act. But the new welfare law reforms the penal code and deletes the sexual exploitation of animals language from the code. So imagine that they had a vote on this.
They sat down as a group and decided that they wanted to be able to have sex with animals . So they actively removed exploitation. It deleted the sexual exploitation language from the code. Right. In the year 2023, we are actively having to fight for the basic rights of animals, not to be raped by its owners, not even its owners.
You could probably, I mean, I wonder if we're gonna see a very large uptake in uptick in Spain, farmers, . Like all of a sudden people are just having a tremendous amount of livestock and donkeys, . Now, um, this a, you know, it, it's so crazy. A animal cannot consent to a sexual act. I don't know why I have to say that.
Right? But an animal cannot consent, right? They don't speak English right now. How, how, how soon until we start seeing brothels full of horses and dogs and whatever else is good dolphins aren't dolphins like supposed to be? I'm pretty sure there's like, Some accounts were dolphins were like raping people in, in the ocean where they would like, that's a highly reported thing where like women are in the ocean and, uh, dolphins, like, I'm pretty sure there was a woman who actually like, had a dolphin boyfriend that was like a trainer or something that got fired for having sex with this dolphin so often
So maybe there's something to this. Maybe we're gonna find that Spain just is such a happier country. Maybe we'll find that, I don't know hu human rape statistics go down, but that I highly doubt it. Right? We're gonna see a whole market that's surrounding which, which horses? The prettiest. They're gonna start putting lipstick on horses at, at auctions.
Right. How, how, how, how weird that we're even having this discussion right now. And here's the better answer to this, is there's absolutely nobody who's going to have something happen to the animal that they did this to, and then actively go seek out a vet to correct the issue. Like, Hey, sorry, I was.
Having sex with my cat now it has this weird kink in its neck and it only meow is backwards. Uh, , I don't know. Right? And you're gonna have some weirdo sicko specifically just having a farm in the back of his house so he can have his way with all of these animals in Spain. Now you don't think that that's gonna be a thing, but this somebody somewhere in Spain is gonna, he's gonna be that guy
Okay? Now I don't know what else to talk about on that, other than the fact that I am utterly shocked. Utterly, get it.
didn't even have that one written down, folks. All right. Now the last and final topic for the day is going to be.  probably one of the darker things that we've talked about here, right? This is dark Disney is grooming our children, and the is far worse than you could have ever imagined. We're not talking about Baymax and tampons.
We're not talking about like Luna Moon, the superhero and pronouns. We're not talking about the pride family pushing critical race theory. All right. Are you, are you ready to have your childhood ruined? Because this doesn't just encompass the new and up and coming shows. This isn't the new liberal woke Disney.
This is a theme that has woven through the fabric of almost every TV show and movie that has come out of Disney since we were kids and even before that. All right, are you ready? Now my wife came to me with this realization on one of our children's shows that they were watching, which they will never watch again.
All right. My wife came to me and she said something weird that I didn't realize before is it seems like Disney has an overwhelming amount of TV shows where the child keeps a secret from their parent and confides in their uncle.
All right? So I took that information and ran with it. After running a comprehensive analysis of all Disney shows, popular AI Chatbot chat, G P t concluded, concluded that 40. Of TV shows on Disney feature, a storyline where the child keeps a secret from their parents and tells it to their uncle. Let me be clear.
This is not just some lame plot theme. This is a sinister grooming tactic that every single parent and human should be outraged about. This is absolutely disgusting. Okay, I have 28 examples of this in front of me, and I will read them all off for you. Okay. I'll read them quickly and then I'll go into the details.
Lizzie McGuire, Kim. Possible Austin and Allie. Shake it up. Good luck, Charlie. The sweet life of Zach and Cody. Wizards of Waverly Place, gravity Falls, Finns and Ferb Big City Gardens, the proud family, the Emperor's New School. Lilo and Stitch. The series Tangled. The series, Casey Undercover, stuck in the middle.
Sydnee to the Max Bunked, the Sweet Life of Zach and Cody. Girl Meets World. Raven's Home Live in Madie. Jesse, good luck, Charlie, Austin and Allian. Those are just some of the shows that were pointed out by chat, G B T, just some of them. There was almost a hundred TV shows that I got to point this common theme out for, and it equaled, according to this AI technology, 30 to 40% of the TV shows had a theme to it, including this.
Now, I'll walk you through this. I'll just give you some really, really brief overviews of these TV shows. Um, It's quite alarming. All right, here's Lizzie McGuire. Lizzie McGuire confides in her uncle David Gordon about her struggles in school and her crush on the classmate Ethan. Instead of her parents, Kim possible keeps her secret life as a teenage spy, a secret from her parents and confides in her uncle, who is also a former spy Austin thee.
Allie Dawson confides in her uncle Barry about her stage fright and her dreams of becoming a songwriter. Rocky Blue from Shake It Up Confides in her uncle Louis about her dance career. Good luck Charlie. Um, Teddy Duncan confides in her uncle Mel about her desire to become a writer and a secret video diary project, the Sweet Life of Zach and Cody.
Cody Martin confides in his uncle Aristotle about his fear of performing despite being an aspiring magician, wizards of Waverly place. Alex often confides in her uncle, who is a wizard and often own. Erin owns a magic shop. Finns and Ferb keep their invention secret from their parents, but occasionally confide in their Uncle Lawrence.
Big city Greens. Cricket green often keeps secrets from his parents and confides in his laid back and adventurous. Uncle Bill, the Proud Family, proud Penny Proud keeps secrets from her parents and confides in her uncle, her uncle Bobby, the Emperor's New School. Cusco keeps his status as an emperor secret from his parents and confides in his cool and adventurous Uncle Pacha.
Lilo and Stitch keep their experiment secret from her older sister and confide in their alien Uncle Jamba
Rapunzel from Tangled. The series often keeps her secrets from her parents and confides in their adventurers and supportive father-in-law. The captain of the Guards, Casey Undercover Teenage Spy, who keeps her secrets from other parent or from her parents, and confides in her uncle, who of also happens to be her handle.
Uh, stuck in the middle, Sidney to the max. All of these are the same story.
All of them. They keep something from their parents and they tell their uncle, right? Jesse, Emma Ross keeps a secret from her parents and confides in her uncle Caleb. Good luck. Charlie Teddy Duncan keeps a secret from her parents and confides in her uncle Mel Austin and Allie. Allie Dawson keeps a secret from her parents and confides in her uncle Barry.
All of these shows are grooming your child to hold a secret from you and to confide in a male figure in your family. Now, I wish this was a world where this wasn't a problem. I wish this was a world we're statistically speaking that those individuals, that they're grooming your child to confide in, to hold secrets actively from you isn't the individual who's most likely to assault your child sexually.
I wish that was not the case. I wish Disney could have shows about confiding in your uncle and holding secrets from your parents. Make it not a bad thing, but I also want to highlight the fact that there is virtually zero shows where the same exact scenario is happening with ant. You cannot 0.1 out, cannot find one.
What kind of message does this send young girls? What kind of message does this tell young boys? Right? Does it, it tells them that it's okay to have a secret with your uncle and to keep it from your parents. It tells them that being groomed is a normal part of growing up.
Now, this isn't to take away from the agenda of pushing transgenderism onto your children. This isn't to take away from the agenda of sexualizing, hyper sexualizing your children. This isn't going to take away from the agenda where there was a show recently that I haven't heard anybody talk about this one from Disney.
Haven't heard this yet. There's a show called like Luna Moon or something like that, some moon TV show where this girl is sitting in front of a chess, uh, chess robot on the floor, like doing this cool scene where she's playing chess with this robot. And the robot goes, my name is something robot, and my pronouns are she, her pronouns like, no bitch, you're a robot.
You don't get pronouns, but they're grooming your child to believe that these things are okay. You go back to the, the, the head of Disney in their internal meetings who came out on a Zoom call and said, I am pushing this LGBTQ qia a plus element o p agenda on an every single PO way that I can, right? You see it in Turning Red.
You see it in the Baymax series. You see it in like this Luna show. You see it all across the new Disney movies, almost every single one of 'em, stranger Worlds. You see it in all of them and she's gloating about it, gloating about it.
Now these are not mistakes, right? This is not a fun little plot twist, right? This is a concerted effort to groom our children concerted effort. This is intentional programming that leads to extremely dangerous positions for your child to find themselves in, to believe that it's normalized, to believe that it's okay to keep a secret from you because they didn't think of that before, until they get programmed by Disney.
To think that it's cool to keep a secret from your parents,
and it gets even darker when we get into the statistics of this one in nine young girls, one in nine girls experience sexual abuse at the hands of an adult. One in 53 boys experienced sexual abuse at the hands of an adult, more than 10. Of the young girls who watch these Disney shows will have been sexually assaulted in their lifetime, more than 10%.
One out of every 10 girls who watches this Disney show where they make it seem okay to keep a secret from your parents and confide in your cool uncle will have been groomed to believe that that's acceptable, groomed to believe that it's acceptable to hide something from your parents and confide in your uncle more than 10%.
In more than 40% of the show. 30 to 40% of the shows has a similar theme.
The N S V R C reports that 93% of child sexual abuse victims know their abuser. 93% of abuse, abuse children know their abuser. Almost a hundred percent, 34% of the perpetrators being family members and 60% being acquaintances or other trusted individuals. 34% out of the one out of nine girls are assaulted by their family member, and Disney thinks it's cute to groom them to keep secrets from their parents and confide in their uncle.
Now, here's my question to you. Do we really want to give these predators a helping hand by normalizing secrets, keeping secrets from your parents, confiding in your uncle, right? This is a global issue. This is not just in the United States, right? And, and, and there's been calls for boycotts and I even, I am guilty.
Of keeping Disney Plus for my children, even through Turning Red, even through Baymax, all the shit that I talked about, that even I am guilty of maintaining my Disney plus subscription. Until today, I will never in my house have a Disney plus subscription again. Now that I know that my children were actively being groomed by Disney to hold a secret from me as her dad and to confide in some other random male counterpart as a result, and I ask you to join me, I hope that hashtag boycott Disney goes like wildfire around the internet.
Once this is found out, I cannot imagine that it. How else if, if this is not where you draw the line, where do you draw it? If it's not where they groom your child into believing that being assaulted and holding a secret from you is the norm, then what is it? What the fuck is it? If it's not that, what is it?
How does that not cause you to cancel your subscription? Right? I don't care. Stream it. I'll give you five websites to do it with. Stream it, but don't give 'em your money. We need to send a clear, clear picture to corporations like Disney that we are absolutely not going to continue to allow you to program our children.
For your disgustingly dark purposes.
Protect your children. Get them away from these programs that are actively grooming them, right? It is your job as a parent to mitigate risk if nothing else, right? Protect them, house them, feed them. Mitigate risk. If you have children and you decide to maintain a Disney plus subscription after finding this out, you got some soul search and to do, or you're just a complete optimist who, who does not live in a real world where more than 10% of young girls, 10% of girls in their lifetime will be assaulted.
And 94% of the time they will know the person that did it. That is a disgusting reality, and again, I wish they could have this theme and I wish they could push this all they want and not have it have a negative outcome and not have it be based in the fact that there's a very high like.  that your child will go through something and now think that it is acceptable to maintain that secrecy from you.
Right? And that's what you have to understand about programming, right? That's what you have to understand about the, the, the way that you, if it is nothing else, you take a young baby and that baby goes from having a blank slate, right? Just think of it like a, if you think of it from like a programming perspective, I don't know how to program, so maybe I'm talking outta my ass, but, but if you look at it from that perspective, you have to teach that child how to operate in this world, right?
You gotta put all of the, all of the zeros and the ones in there so that they know not to touch a hot fire, right? And some of that programming's built in, but some of it can be manipulated.  and it's not the ones that are completely built in that they're trying to manipulate. It's the ones that are susceptible to impression.
It's the ones that are like, Hey, they're family. Right? They're cool, they're hip. It's your uncle, not your dad or your mom. Right? Tell them your secrets about the boy you like. Tell them the secrets about the, the clothes your parents don't like you to wear. Tell them like, and again, this is not with the aunts, it's not even even playing field, it's not even like this was stumbled upon, and that's how you know that is how you know that this was intentional, is that it's not a consistent theme for men and women.
It is specifically uncles, specifically male mentor type figures that are being called out and utilized as a way to groom your children within these TV shows. Right? And I can look at, uh, several of those and know that some of them were something that my daughter was consuming and something that I consumed when I was growing up.
right? Something that probably you consumed when you were growing up. And this is not even getting into the movies. Not even getting into the movies, right? And we already have a very long list, right? And when you continue that out, you find more and more and more, right, like chat, G P T said 32, 40% of them.
So what are you gonna do with that information? Are you gonna leave here? Forget about it. Allow your child to watch some stupid ass show that's going to program them. Program them to keep secrets from you to believe that pronouns are a real thing. To think that men can have periods as long as they're wearing a trans shirt.
Like in Baymax. Is that what you want for your child? Or are you gonna take the, I don't know, three steps right now? To do so. Right? And let's see. Maybe I can do it right here. Let's, let's see if I can do it. Um, I'm going to log into Disney right now. It's gonna take me a sec. Gimme a sec here. Let's get this computer over here.
My daughter's gonna be happy about this. Let's log into Disney right now. I'll walk you through the steps. We're gonna go to disney plus.com, all right, Disney plus.com. All you gotta do, may I follow me along here? Disney plus.com if you have children, let's make this fun. Log in. I'm gonna put in my username.
Let's see how we do it. How hard do they make it? We're gonna go to, I assume, Go and click on your profile. Go to account, and at the very bottom there is a delete account button. Two steps log into Disney Press account. Third step press delete account.
If you wanna delete your Disney Plus account, you must cancel your subscription first, or you will continue to be charged. Deleting your Disney Plus account will delete your email address, first and last name and profile. It will also anonymize all other Disney plus account information so it is no longer associated with your email.
You'll also be unsubscribed from all marketing campaigns. Uh, if your Disney Plus subscription is bill by a third party, you proceed through the requested Disney plus account deletion. Then you immediately lose access. Look at this. They sent something to my email. They will give me a three digit.
Go log into my email.
Let's get that one time code. There it is, 6 0 5 16, and then some other number. Not sure why. I wouldn't care to tell you that. I'm not sure. You're trying to get into my Disney Plus subscription. And even if you are, have fun. Um, 6 0 5, 1 6
and delete. Just like that folks, three steps. Log into your account, click account, press delete. That's it, and you're done. I hope you followed me along there. All right. Now, on that note, do what's right for you. Do what's right for your family and damn it, do what is right for your children because nobody else is going to, in fact, almost everybody who is on the other side of that has your best, the best interest of your child, not in mind.
Whether it's a corporation, whether it's the government, whether it's a corporate entity, a, whatever it is, you are the only person who's gonna take that seriously, and your child's gonna either grow from it or suffer from it. So on that note, Whew, man. I gotta take a breath after that one. That pisses me off.
Thank you guys for listening. I appreciate it so much. I hope, I hope, hope, hope that you got something from that today. Going to be starting our first round of interviews over the next couple weeks and I am excited if you know somebody, uh, that should be interviewed, be happy to hear from him.
Um, please connect us if it is you, yourself, you have a great story. Whatever it is, reach out, , reach out on social media. , it's the Austin J. Adams basically everywhere on Instagram, on truth social, on my, just started new Twitter, which I got like nobody that follows me on yet. . So add over to Twitter, follow me.
The Austin J. Adams, um, backup account and the podcast account is the Adams. Uh, go head over to Austin adams.ck.com, sign up for the ck you'll get all of the articles, links, videos, podcast, video, podcast, all of it to your email, along with weekly emails about the topics that we're discussing in full length detail.
And that's what I got. All right, hit subscribe. Leave a five star review and to love you. Have a great week.
 
 

Modern Dystopia: 15 Minute Cities & Wuhan Lab Admissions

In this episode, we dive deep into the wildest and craziest news of the week. From Steven Seagal receiving an award from Vladimir Putin to the Mexican President's sighting of an elf from the Mayan subculture, we discuss it all.
But that's just the beginning. We also explore the Department of Energy's recent admission that the Wuhan Lab of Virology was the source of the coronavirus, a topic that has been at the forefront of global discussions for the past year.
Finally, we take a closer look at the World Economic Forum's 15-minute cities plan and the growing pushback against it. What is a 15-minute city, and why are some calling it a terrible authoritarian project? We cover all the details and what it means for us moving forward.
Join us for a thought-provoking and informative conversation on the latest news and events that are shaping our world. 

Toxic Trains, UFO Threats, and Epstein’s List: The Uncovered Truth

In this explosive episode, we dive deep into the craziest string of events that we have witnessed in our lifetime. From the shocking train derailment in Ohio that caused a radioactive mushroom cloud, to the two other derailments in Texas and North Carolina carrying toxic chemicals that the media is barely covering.
But that's not all. We also explore the four unidentified flying objects that have been shot down by the Biden administration, including one that was over Lake Michigan and evaded the first missile strike. Is this the government hiding the truth about extraterrestrial life, or is there something else going on here?
We also examine the recent discussions surrounding Epstein's list being released, as well as other topics that have been hidden from the public eye. The coincidence between a movie that was recently released and the Ohio train derailment raises many questions and fuels conspiracy theories. We bring you the facts and let you decide.
 
Subscribe and leave a 5-star review!

Indoctrination Nation: The Dark Side of School Systems | Satanic Grammys | J.K Rowling Under Fire | Chinese Spy Balloons |

Welcome to a journey down the rabbit hole of modern society. In this podcast, we dive into the controversial and often overlooked topics that impact our daily lives. From the rising threat of Chinese spy balloons to the ongoing J.K Rowling/ Harry Potter Video Game controversy, we examine the facts and challenge popular beliefs. We also shed light on how industrialized school systems may be indoctrinating future generations and explore the dark side of the music industry with the recent "satanic" Grammy performance by pop artist Sam Smith. Join us as we uncover the truth and spark thought-provoking discussions around current events. 
 
Subscribe and leave a 5-star review!

Battle Royale: Crowder vs The Daily Wire | Alec Baldwin vs Manslaughter | Greta Thornburg vs Reality

Join Red Pill Revolution for an explosive episode as we dive deep into the truth behind the headlines and expose the lies and manipulation of mainstream media. Covering the most controversial and talked-about topics of the week, including Alec Baldwin's charges of involuntary manslaughter, Greta Thunberg's arrest, a controversy surrounding an NHL hockey player under fire for refusing to wear a lgbtq+ jersey, a feud between conservative entertainers Stephen crowder and the daily wire, and finally Jamie Lee Curtis's disturbing art display. Get ready for a wild ride.
 
Subscribe and leave a 5-star review!