Stock Market CRASHES, GOP Midterm BLOODBATH W/ Mike Benz

Big news this Friday as the NASDAQ 100 is down a lot. The NASDAQ 100 has entered a technical correction. The Dow Jones is actually a little bit up today if I understand correctly. But this is a big deal because NASDAQ is where all of your, the S&P 100 is where all of your tech stocks are. So this is a massive problem for Donald Trump because Tuesday is the election, the midterms. And having the stock market in red territory the weekend before the midterms with gas prices the way they are is a bad sign for the Republicans. Now this is on the heels of China's stock market having been down. It's actually, it's been deeper. It's pushed deeper into bear territory today. It's off for 12 straight weeks now and people think that this is a knock-on effect from that. So we're going to get into that. There was a gigantic hack of Binance, $6.3 billion. And that was like the biggest, basically theft from an exchange in history. It's massive. What's his name? The guy that owns Binance. What's his name? Anyways, he was getting flamed by Elon Musk. He's threatening to sell his SpaceX stock about it. So we'll talk about that. There's rumors or there's reports of some kind of coup happening in Poland right now. Apparently the president is out of the country. He was, I believe he was in Senegal. And it looks like, this is just preliminary and we'll talk about it. But it looks like there might be some kind of push from the EU to take control because Poland is famously, completely independent from what the EU wants in regards to immigration and stuff like that. So we'll discuss it. Angel Studios has decided that they're going to ban naughty words. They're going to ban the misuse of God's name. They're going to ban sex scenes, which is kind of funny to me considering Angel Studios just recently, six months or so ago, released a reimagining of Animal Farm that kind of took the anti-Stalinist message out of the news. So we'll get into a discussion about that. Sam Altman is mad that you have RAM. He's saying that people shouldn't be running their own AI models at home. They shouldn't have them on their own computers. And that RAM is actually better served for society if it's in data centers, which shouldn't be really surprising. And we have a guest here today that I really want to pick his brain about this last topic. Most people know, most people that follow the show, they know about Data Republican and the Democracy Files. Well, we've got someone here today. That knows a whole lot about this type of thing. We're going to get into that. But before we do, I want to remind you that this Tuesday, TimCast IRL is going to have a day-long stream. I think we're going to start at like 4 or something like that. We're going to be going all the way until like 1 or 2 in the morning. So we're going to have a bunch of guests. Alex Stein is going to be here, James Klug, Richie McGinnis, and our guest today will be here as well. So why don't we go ahead and introduce him. Joining us today, Mike Benz. Hello. Hello. Great to see you. Thanks for having me back. For the people that don't know, who are you? What do you do? It's a great question. I ask myself that all the time. The Deep State Whisperer. I am just a guy on the Internet who happens to muse about things around tech, government, the Internet, free speech, and whatever else is on the docket today. Plays a little piano, right? Play a little piano. Just the music guy. All right. We also have another guest. Tim alluded to this yesterday. Met this gentleman in Sheetz, I believe, in Maryland. Why don't you go ahead and introduce yourself? Yeah, thank you. Thank you. My name's Tom Donnell. Yeah, I'm a husband, father. Like you said, met Tim in Sheetz getting home from work. I work as an electrician in the DMV area. And I study philosophy and theology and working on a book. Awesome. Ian's here. I'm so ready to do this, dude. We can talk about electricians empowering young men like we were talking about before the show. We can talk about the deep state. We can talk about AI all day. Let's rock. We were talking about it. Yes, yes. The hat was covering up. Was it blocking the shot? It was partially covering up Mike's shot. Do we have to start over? No, we do not have to start over. It is great. Oh, excuse me. And also the bass is now a little bit in the way. The bass is blocking Mike. So we should put that back on the wall. Unfortunately, we've got to do it. I'm Carter. What's up, everyone? Ian's trying to have fun on a Friday when the boss is away. Make it fun. Make it easy. And then talk about the DT. Carter's here pushing the buttons. What's up, Carter? What's up, Phil? What's up, Ian, Mike, and Tom? Let's get into it. All right. So we're going to jump right into it. From CNBC, the stock market rocked as investors dumped tech shares. NASDAQ suffers worst day since June. Live updates. NASDAQ composite tumbled on Friday while the Dow Jones Industrial Average outperformed as traders moved out of key stocks related to artificial intelligence and into more defensive areas of the market. The tech-heavy NASDAQ lost 2.86% and closed at 25,437, posting its worst single-day performance since June. The index was also roughly 8% below its recent high. The blue-chip Dow was down 572.25 points, or 1.09%, to end at 51,770. The S&P slid 1.82 to 75,8007. Selling pressure intensified in the afternoon trading as investors took money off the table into month-end and ahead of next week's contentious midterms. Amazon shares lost more than 1% after the company reported earnings. The company reported earnings and revenue for the third quarter that fell short of Wall Tree's expectations. The e-commerce and cloud giant also posted a negative free cash flow of $42.4 billion and maintained its 2026 capital expenditures forecast for $220 billion. Intel, meanwhile, tanked almost 29% after issuing a weak outlook for the current quarter, pointing to a slowdown in PCs. Revenue in the company's client computing and physical artificial intelligence group declined 5% from the year-ago quarter to 1.18%. SanDisk is down. Advanced micro devices dropped. A boatload of companies. I saw that Google was down. I think Alphabet, the parent company of Google, was down. This is not good for Donald Trump. It's not like a crash that's like world ending. This isn't Black Monday. But the negative stories have been piling up for Republicans for the past few weeks. The stuff about Ilhan Omar was probably a good thing for republicans the the motion excuse me or the movement uh in alaska about the i guess the ballot interference sullivan yeah dan sullivan stuff that was was good for for donald trump but that seems to me like they were trying to stop the bleeding more than actually having something of substance and i think the thing that everybody is most upset with the administration about is the price of gas which is likely caused by the war in iran i got a question Do you think – is there like moves, global moves to destroy the U.S. economy at pivotal moments? Like could this be like an intentional catapult to make things look bad from your experience? That is certainly – you mentioned that we're going to go over the data Republican stuff at some point, and there is a playbook, and I am not saying this is happening here. I would actually for a number of reasons be surprised if that was like coordinated in a case like this. But in general, that is the business community and coordinating the business community is a very key part of regime change and destabilization efforts, as well as the manipulation of imminent elections. This is something that USAID would do all the time with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce in coordinating with lots of international businesses that invest in foreign countries. They do foreign direct investment, and then they maintain this relationship with the State Department and USAID. And there's a lot of coordinated boycotts, divestments strategically in order to deprive a sitting government of the resources to be able to capitalize its police, its public service. What you want to do is you want to sort of build up kind of a protest movement from the bottom and you want to create defections within the guard class of the government because the guard, the government doesn't have the money to pay them or to dish out bribes. This is another thing, just having the money on hand allows you to not just, you know, pay people to do their government jobs, but also to do favors for, you know, oligarchs who will be your little hub power centers. And we saw that in the 2020 election context when they were trying to get rid of Trump back in 2020. There was that secret agreement between the AFL-CIO and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce around standing down the protests once Trump – once Biden was declared the winner. If you remember, that was that Molly Ball article about the right-wing – Shadow campaign. Yeah, exactly. And that's the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which represents effectively all of the major businesses that you'll see on the NASDAQ or the Dow. But in this case, I would not be surprised if this is just the ordinary volatility of the market or the markets betting or reacting to what they suspect might happen in the midterms. We saw, for example, the Brazilian stock market get absolutely decimated when Lula had his come from behind you know unprecedented victory when he lost the first round and there's compulsory elect compulsory voting so where did those 11 million votes come from is a giant mystery but um so it could be it could be pricing in a hypothetical you know democrat win or it could be other market events when you say they they try and disempower the guard class what is that So there are various both kinetic and non-kinetic guards that sort of prop up a government against various forms of protests or insurgencies. So first of all, there's the police. There are often kind of paramilitaries. There's the military itself or the army. Oftentimes, you know, there's two ways to topple a government. You can do it through a military coup or you can do it through a bottom-up people-powered revolution, a color revolution. And oftentimes, it's when you have 100,000 people surrounding the parliament building, it's the police who have to defend that. It's the military or the military who has to defend that. When you can pry off a critical quotient of the police, I'll give you an example. USAID helped produce this video game, which is incredible. It's called A Force More Powerful, and they did a sequel called People Powered. And in this game, you are a strategic advisor to an opposition political movement trying to either topple the government through a color revolution or through an upcoming election. And you back-channel in this game. You start out with $4 and 29 supporters in your political movement. And from there, you need to take over the government. And in the game, it gives you the scenario where it's. It's this Eastern European country, undisclosed or whatever. It's got two different parts of the country. One is kind of a textile zone. The other is a llama farm kind of thing. But they're oligarchs. There's a llama wool oligarch class. There's a business class. There's labor and unions. And you not just have to create relationships with the business class and the labor unions, but also with the police chiefs and with the military. And you arrange meetings with them. You throw parties hoping they'll. They'll come there. You do pressure campaigns and letters. You, you know, get into certain business partnerships with them in order to make it more in their interest to be with the opposition than it is to be with the authority. And then once the police are on your side in a certain precinct in the major city center, then it's easier for you to throw protests, rallies, boycotts, block the railroads, do sit-ins on city intersections. You won't get arrested. And if your protest turns violent, which it frequently does in the game, the police chief won't arrest you. So all of that is kind of a what's in the best interest of that guard class. Is it to be with the government or is it to be with this rising insurgent opposition movement? So you want to basically make it. And if he defects to you, then you can get away with anything in the districts he controls. And so if the government has less money to offer him because the government's coffers are running dry, because of sanctions or because foreign money is pulling out, the economy is tanking, there's just not enough money to go around, then they have less to keep them faithful to the government. You mentioned, you know, money running out a couple of times. Is that something that the United States has to generally worry about considering the fact that the Federal Reserve is kind of the last, the lender of last resort that the U.S. can. If the, you know, the people that run the Fed are, you know, friendly with the. With the administration or interested in seeing the administration retain legitimacy, they can print money so that way the federal government can still operate. Is that something that we have to. That is likely to be a problem here? Is that something that the current administration or an administration can kind of get around? I think the money printing issue is a long-term one that I'm not sure is implicated in this case because I sort of think that, like, if you've ever seen, like, Dark Crystal or one of these things where it's like there's this force that you can tap into, but every time you tap into it, the darkening spreads a little more. In this case, I think, you know, we're talking about kind of like acute financial squeezes, not to the supply of dollars or to the value of the currency, but rather to the market and people's holdings. So you're going to have, you know, a lot of work. You're going to have working-class people who have retirement funds that are getting squeezed in this, and they're going to think, okay, well, the opposition movement, in this case the Democrats, who are the opposition party effectively right now, well, the market may be better under them because it's getting tanked here, and then you may have business-class folks, oligarchs on the outside, and I'm just using that term colloquially, but just influential business community leaders who say, okay, well, market conditions, this administration, has been bad for me or is steering things. It's bad now. How much worse could it be? My business can stomach this, but it can't stomach a further downturn. I don't want to risk it. And so, I mean, there is a rich-get-richer kind of momentum effect, and obviously something like this I think is consequential because this, where we are right now in this admin, does not feel like where we were in 2024, where I think Trump supporters in 2024, didn't give a damn, frankly, whether the economy went up, down, or south. Like, the people voted for Trump en masse in 2024 because they shot him in the face, they indicted him on 91 BS charges for 1,000 years in prison, you know, they censored the internet, they mass-arrested everyone, and now the admin feels like, I don't know that there's a clear North Star existential kind of, you know, stakes in these midterms, and so you are running on the kind of the nuts and bolts of everyday life, like gas prices, grocery prices, the economy, especially to folks who are, on the turnout question on the Republican side, not necessarily enthralled with the direction of things over the past year and are voting with their wallet, because if, you know, because the ideology, they're not sure if they're, you know, with, so this is obviously a very bad time. Does he, does Trump, and this I'm just asking your opinion, does he have the oligarchs on his side? Way more than before. I mean, that was something that, you know, what I always say on this is, as corrupt as the Biden regime was, they kind of failed cronyism 101, which is you're supposed to, you know, the authoritarian crony sort of capitalist sort of, you know, the knock on is, you know, you're bad, you're, you're savage to your enemies, and you're good to your friends. They were savage to their enemies, but they were not actually good to their friends. Like the, the, the big, the big tech example is a, is a classic one. Zuckerberg deployed hundreds of millions of dollars to get out the vote. Zuckerberg, Google, all the big tech companies did everything they could to rig the algorithms, to mass ban the entire Trump movement ahead of the 2020 election, to, you know, censor every basically opposition topic from immigration to abortion to public health. And how did the Biden administration repay them? With Justice Department investigations, with antitrust lawsuits, with, with not sticking up for them with their State Department when the EU fined them, tens of billions of dollars in the, in the Biden admin just kept wanting more and more and more. And they just kept basically, they had this golden goose for the party, and they just said, give me more gold, give me more gold. They kept milking the cow, milking the cow. And so at the end of that, Zuck was fed up and he was like, you know what, actually, give me the red MAGA hat. Let me donate to the inauguration. Sergey Brin is, you know, just got awarded at the, you know, I mean, he's basically turning Republican, it seems. You know, the Google founder, you have the same thing seeming to happen with Jeff Bezos. You have, and a lot of the little tech people, the sort of Marc Andreessen type folks in the VCs. I was going to mention Marc Andreessen. They were squeezed because the AI cartel thing. I mean, they picked Sam Altman and Anthropic and then said, F the rest of Silicon Valley. And meanwhile, Dario at Anthropic is saying Anthropic will one day be the only company in the world. It'll be governments and Anthropic. There won't be McDonald's. It'll just be Anthropic doing it for you. There won't be, you know, flower shops. It'll just be Anthro. So what's every other company going to do? I mean, and so you started to have a swing towards Trump in that oligarch class, which the blob complained about because that gave Trump a lot of Democratic legitimacy at the institutional level. And it removed a big lever to to undermine him. But I don't know where things stand right now. If you listen to, like, the all in podcast, like all those the guys that are on there. They're still firmly in. I think the only guy that's not like very firmly in Trump's corner is probably Jake, how the the the host or whatever. the, the guy that kind of runs the show, but like, you know, polyhapitia, obviously David Sachs, Freeberg, they're all very much pro-Trump because they have seen essentially what the, you know, what the Democrats, you know, intend to do when it comes to technology and stuff. The idea that the DSA would be in control of the regulation of the tech sector is something that, you know, that's beyond the pale for them. And I'm correctly, in my opinion. And I think a lot of the folks in the centimillionaire billionaire class saw what happened with the justice department. They saw if they can do that to the president, they can do that to me. If they can do that to Elon Musk, they can do that to me. The world's, I mean, Elon Musk had 11 different government agencies and regulatory bodies suing him or investigating him. 11. I mean, it was like the FCC, the FCC, the FTC, the DOJ, the, the, I mean, it was like the FTC, the SEC, the FTC. It was like the department of energy that they had. It was like literally 11 different. I mean, that's not even, you know, like death by a thousand paper cuts. I mean, these are, these are huge penalties. I mean, they, they sued him for not employing illegal immigrants in like, like a plant in Texas. In places that he can't because they don't have security clearance. And this is a guy who was basically a lifelong Democrat until just recently. And so you have a lot of people who say, listen, I got a good life. I, there are some things that I don't agree with. You know, I'm a Democrat, but I don't agree with everything. I'm afraid of the power grab that's happening with this government. I will feel safer as someone on the outside. And then that's where you get the deal making. I think there was just a lot of deals that were also lined up and in terms of, you know, regulatory architecture, I mean, you certainly saw that in the crypto space. I know we're going to talk about that at some point. You know, this, it wasn't just, you know, free Ross. I mean, there was the genius act and the stable coin stuff, the, the, the economics to sort of make their businesses better played, I think a significant role in that. And I, I think that that has, that has been very significant, but I don't know the staying power of it because we don't really have, we don't really have permanence in the mega movement at the institutional level. We have kind of good vibes. Um, and when, when the admin is gone, vibes change quickly. You know, and to the point you, you make about, uh, you know, the threats and the, the investigations and stuff, that's kind of what, uh, slot can was talking about last week that made big news. They, the, the threat, and she has kind of walked it back and tried to change the narrative. She's saying that, no, I'm not, I wasn't doing that. And actually Donald Trump is coming after me because I want to hold him accountable. But if you listen to her initial comments, she was saying, we want to make people think twice about working for, or with Donald Trump, should the Democrats take the house, there will be investigations of Musk. There will be investigations of, of a lot of basically anyone that is kind of influential and on the Republican side. And I keep making this point. The thing. That will actually, uh, intimidate the average person is when the guy down the street that they know that doesn't have any significant political power. All he does is gets on the internet and talks. Maybe he owns a business, maybe he doesn't, but he gets on the internet and he has a, uh, an X page that has 50,000 people. Not a ton, right? Not, not a million, but he's got an X page that has 50, a hundred thousand followers. And so the administration or they, they investigate him. Yeah. So exactly, exactly to my, that's my, that's my point exactly. So that way the average person starts thinking, well, it makes sense that they go after podcasters. It makes sense that they're after Elon Musk. It makes sense that they go after Joe Rogan because these are influential people. But when they go after the guy that I, you know, that I buy, that I bring my car to when it needs to get an oil change, well, that means they can go after me too. And that's one of the most, most concerning behaviors that I, that I would predict. The Democrats would engage in is trying to intimidate the American people from voicing their opinions. And that is, that is well within the realm of what the Democrats would like to do. They would like to do what they can to, to stymie any dissent. That's what they will do. Yep. Because the thing is, and this is why the Republicans are so, at least while they are, and they're also viewed this way as so weak and feckless because the Democrats play politics for keeps and they do it full time. They do it all, all day long. The Republicans. The Republicans are like weekend warriors. Yep. They get on, they do, they, they play these little games. They do the Ilhan Omar investigation. It is, and it's always nothing, nothing ever happens. Right. That's kind of like the mean, um, Democrats will put people in jail. How many people who were in or around the Trump admin have seen the inside of a prison cell at this point? Um, when are you going to see the right stop playing the moral high ground and start to actually engage in like real politics as it exists today? I think. A big part of the problem is there are still too many people in DC on the right. And I don't think that they're actually significantly right, but they're, they're kind of the center, right? There are too many Republicans that think once the Trump administration is gone, this will all calm down and we'll go back to Mitt Romney, John McCain, George W. Bush, that kind of Republican. Those days are gone. Those days are long gone. When you see the Democrats. Behaving the way that they do, they have no incentive to go back to politics as, as it were, they will only double down because the weaker your enemy, the more aggressive you become. I can't tell if I'm being PSI opt or if corporate governance is actually the wave of the future, because when I'm watching the way the Biden administration failed, fumbled their, their authority, even in, in like handing back, you know, their, their crony capitalists, the, the money, the, the, the favors I lose. I lose faith in this government. When I think about the, the Republicans arresting Democrats who are arresting Republicans, I'm like, you know what? Give me anthropic, give me a government by the machine for the machine that won't kill me or throw me in. Like that will be at least aid me in my tasks. I, I, I don't know. I mean, am I being PSI opt into, into thinking I want a corporate governance? Is this not by anthropic dude? I mean, you can get banned from anthropic for like a questioning democratic principles. We need a corporate governance that mimics the United States. I agree with you. Free speech. You need to know your software code. You need to have access to your code. You need an onboard AI. That's your personal AI, like your gun. Any AI that you have can tell you what the code is. Any AI that you have can write code for you. The code doesn't matter because the, because AI has now taken the, it has taken the mystery out of code. All you do is tell the AI, I want this and you vibe code it. That's what vibe, I mean, you know what vibe coding is. I want this. I want this. I want that. The code doesn't matter, but like you just say, look at the code for this. And the AI is, is ostensibly going to tell you what the code is. I could tell my AI, make me a picture of a cup and it could do it, but it could slide in a little code that destroys me. That's like child porn. And I'm like, okay, I need to know that it's not doing that. I need to at least be able to verify the code with other machines or with my own eyes. I think that's your right. That should be a digital right. I think Elon, you know, Elon Musk with X is, is a viable corporate governance structure that we could build around. And like catapult off of, and maybe nationalism is dying off. I mean, I'm not, I don't know a standing military. I'm not in the corporations having standing military. They're going to, they're going to drone defense systems. And, and if the U S goes haywire, the corporations will try and save the day. You know, I mean, I just don't know who to side with right now. That's why you should side with, you shouldn't side with any large group. You should use them when they're functional for you, but a corporation is not. It doesn't have your best interest at heart. Neither does the government. You have your best interest at heart. Focus on, you know, like as local government as you can, you should vote in your local elections, vote for your, your state reps, your, your town selectmen know who your mayor is. Those kinds of things. I don't, I don't think it's going to hit the fan, but like you're saying it, it might go downhill for you. Like you guys are alluding to, maybe it's not getting going to get better right away. If it gets worse, I I'm going to like use the corporations as my defense mechanism against. The corrupt government, like the business class, I please step up. I know alphabet's done. It's, it's trying like Mark Zuckerberg obviously is trying to buffer against the totalitarian state, but they're only doing it for their own interest. Like to, to Mike's point, Zuckerberg only changed his tune when he realized that he got the stick from the Democrats, right? Like they, they, he, he, he, you know, acquiesced to their demands and he was thinking, okay, well now I'm. On their side, they will do what they can to protect me. And all they did was investigate and they didn't help him out. This is the reason why, like back in the nineties, I think it was IBM had, had boasted that they had no lobbyist. And then there was a, a, you know, an antitrust case that, that went before me and I could be getting the company wrong, but it was one of the, one of the newer big tech companies. They had no lobbyists and the government still brought up antitrust violations and they had to go to court and. blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. Now they have a million lawyers. or whatever right because you don't have you don't you're saying i have no gun yeah and then you get mugged and it's like oh you know what actually that's what a gun's for you can't trust the government and you shouldn't trust corporations or companies um you should do your best to insulate yourself from both i think they're going to make a corporation that is an ai this is probably what anthropic is going to be it's going to be run by an ai it is an ai it can pay you it can it can host you and it can it can be a system that strictly adheres to the u.s constitution like it can functionally technically have smart contracts without people in there to mess things up anthropic's not going to do that but there will be ai corporation for sure the first ai corporation that's run that is an ai that runs it it's it's a probably six months or nine months away it might i mean dario may pass it over because it's like no human can should have that control i don't think any human should be in control of that machine um or all of us should be but that could be a viable way through this a mechanic the power goes out though that's a big problem you know they're tapping into the vacuum of space time with piezoelectric energy they're gonna try and have a permanent electrical field that the if the ai gets a hold of it it'll will never be able to shut it off could be a good thing could be a very bad thing but that's what spacex is trying to do with uh gpus in space so i and i really want to know your opinion mike because you've been deeply embedded in studying the deep state and the blob and all this stuff like do you in corporate governance with you know the way that the world economic forum talks about the corporate governance they want to usher in i was immediately just it was it was disgusting it made my skin crawl but now i'm sort of seeing it as inevitable it's just what kind of corporation well what's really funny is when we got a really good um legal precedent from murthy versus missouri in the at the district court and appellate court level on internet censorship um it caused a lot of the general counsels at the agencies to have to tell their rank and file, to not pressure the social media companies, it's hard to not jawbone them, to, you know, avoid, you know. Can the government do that? Because, I mean, as soon as the government says, hey, how you doing? People are, you know, people are nervous. If the government calls me, I'm nervous, right? Like, I don't want the government calling me. Right, right. But there was a gray area about something called jawboning, which is basically requesting someone do something without a coercive threat, but there is a kind of pressuring without threatening. But there's a question, I mean, that's sort of an open legal question still at this point. It's kind of a gray area in where things currently stand. But the point I was driving at was ChatGPT, I think like the first real user model was like 2023, I believe, when it really, what was it, ChatGPT3, I think it was, or something like that. ChatGPT3. That was like the first, like, one that was actually really functional, usable, viral. At that moment, a lot of the AI safety and AI ethics people, like that field, which had been lurking for a decade at that point, had went through an explosion as the censorship industrial complex star players started to kind of dual track their careers for being, not just about control over content moderation policies of the platforms, but control over basically, so not just like the algorithms for amplification of information on social media platforms, but really the algorithms for generation of information in AI. So they all went to open AI and anthropic and to these international regulatory bodies. And under the banner of AI safety or AI ethics and responsibility, the AI safety and AI ethics and responsibility, the AI safety and AI ethics and responsibility, they really anchored into like, what does AI output for people when they, it's like same thing, like trying to control Wikipedia or something like when you search for a term or what happened in a certain historical event or a certain, you know, you know, industry or topic or political thing that the AI would generate what they wanted it to. And then that would be what goes viral on social media, or that's what goes into the history books. Yeah. Yeah. The issue about having an AI president or an AI judge or is who is programming the AI to determine what that AI spits out. And there is just a, the World Economic Forum types have been skating towards where that puck is going for years now. And there really is not much conservative, traditional, conservative, conservative, inroads into say over that. And I, you could very easily see yourself in a situation where you've got a woke AI judge. You've got like a, a woke, like, I mean, literally USAID was doing that. They were, they were having a whole, they were funding NGOs to pressure the AI companies to, you know, spit out like a, you know, black George Washington when you ask for a picture of George Washington. I'm not even kidding. Like, like I've seen like USAID slide deck presentations prepared for meetings with AI senior leaders to get them to have more like trans representation in their image outputs. Like you could see a world where while on an ordinary topic, the AI would be a better judge, would be a better, would exercise better judgment, but it would be very easy to code in just certain things that are just rigged. They're just rigged. Yeah. If you're going to train an AI leader, I think it should be a cacophony of AIs that are trained and they should all be based off of each of our personalities, if we can make it, because you can take all your Mike Benz videos, have an AI, have an AI read the transcripts, and then that could be one brain that feeds into this mega brain that is governing the system. That could be an output. Like on X, it calculates all our, all our texts on X, and then it creates an AI for each of them. And then that's the governor to your, to your point, Mike, there's a piece the other day written on the BBC. The headline is police using AI risks, making discrimination worse. Researchers warn in his award-winning essay, young British science writer, Adrian Dredge wrote about the potential pitfalls of AI and policing. The essay won the 2026 young science writers award chosen each year by the association of British British science writers. Here's an edited version of the entry. The growing youth. Use of AI and policing risks, increasing discrimination against minority groups. Researchers have warned. Studies suggest that predictions of future crime hotspots may be based on biased data, which can magnify existing prejudices and create a dangerous feedback loop. If the data shows a certain, you know, produces a certain result, and that result is not what the powers that be want the result to be. And they, so, so they say, well, you can't use this AI. Or we have to adjust the weights to adjust the results. Exactly. Then you can't get, or you can't, you can't allow an AI like that to have any kind of significant control over society. Crazy thing is that's where anthropic is. Oh, sorry. That's, that's where anthropic is, but that's the reason. That's one of the reasons why it's good that there is a market for AI, right? You've got, you've got anthropic, you've got chat GPT, you've got X, you've got multiple companies that are making Google, Google Gemini, Google Gemini. They're really good. Actually, Argonne's great. And one of the unique, one of the, the, the, you know, things that resulted of Musk taking over X, taking over Twitter and making it X is when you have no dissent, everybody can walk in lockstep very easily, but all it takes is one company or one thing saying, no, we're not doing that here. And then everybody else has to respond to that one. And you saw it with a lot of the big tech companies. Now, granted, all of the social media companies didn't turn into 4chan or anything, but when you were allowed to speak your mind on X and you didn't get booted from the platform for saying something that was not politically correct, you saw Facebook lighten their, their, their grip on. Yeah, fired 40,000 of their, I mean, their fact checkers. They had like, they got rid of their entire fact checking program, except in countries where it was like illegal to not have the manual fact checkers. They moved towards a community note system. I mean, and that happened very quickly, actually, after Elon did that, Zuckerberg started doing that in 2023. And you had the censorship industrial complex, people complaining that Zuckerberg was quietly getting rid of all these firewalls around, you know, content moderation before his 2024 Jim Jordan letter, where he said he blamed Biden for the censorship, basically, and said the Biden admin forced us to censor COVID and all these other things. And, you know, you've seen that with YouTube, you know, where they, I think they paid $50 million to Trump as restitution for banning his account. And they had a program to, for conservative accounts to reapply to get their accounts activated again. But I think that was also done, not necessarily because they're based in red pill, but because they wanted Google to be able to apply for R&D grants, and AI acquisitions, and, you know, have that overcome antitrust and be the good graces of Trump, while you had all these other tech companies who were sidling up to Trump, they didn't want to be on the sidelines. So I think that's probably what galvanized that more than an ideological shift, although I do think Sergey Brin has turned significantly. But I just, I do think that we're moving towards a world where the AI companies that back you politically are going to be determinative of whether your political movement can be successful. Like, you have Grok now as an alternative. It's not as, you know, it's not, what, pacing the frontier in the same way that Anthropic and OpenAI are. But it is, you can see the vision with SpaceX and just the fact that SpaceX is probably going to be, you know, at some point the global center of compute. You can see the potential power in the long run for, you could have like political elections that are basically determined by Grok versus Anthropic. If not in the U.S., you could see that happening in, you know, a country in Europe. We're going to talk about Poland, I think, at some point. And you could see that playing out there. I mean, Microsoft has given over $100 million through it directly in its main principles to the Obama Foundation, while the Obama Foundation has descended on Poland to do everything the EU wants because Microsoft has a financial incentive to unlock the whatever 30, I think it's like $35 billion in frozen funds or $100 billion, I think it was at some point. And then you look at that and like Microsoft was actually set to receive a huge amount of money if that through ITU deals, if that money was unlocked. And so they wanted to get rid of the right wing PIS party there. And the Obama Foundation was basically backing all these NGOs to get rid of the PIS party. So you have this like kind of corporate espionage, big tech sort of funding and back channeling these like political movements in Europe. You could see Elon and X as a counterweight to that. I, maybe we can pull up and I think we're talking about Poland, but Sam Altman, we have his story we've been talking about at the beginning of the show, he is talking about how it's not a good idea for people to have their RAM at home to have local models because it's a waste when you could compile it into a centralized server, have a mega brain as a result, the brain is even bigger. And that's how, but that leads towards centralization of authority and AI companies deciding the outcomes of elections and world politics. If you have gigantic solo organizations, I think you need to decentralize the AI and that everyone should have one that's theirs, that they can train, but I mean, maybe, maybe I'm misreading what Sam said because, oh, here it is, here it is. Well, why don't we, yeah, hold on, why don't we jump to it? So, let's see, from Futurism, Sam Altman absolutely hates the idea of people running their own AI models at home, argues they shouldn't own computers. He'd prefer if we surrender all our RAM to data centers. Plunging almost 30%, the worst stock collapse in 52 years, the wipeout, an analyst said, could be due to a massive slowdown in the PC market. The market softness shouldn't come to anybody's surprise given the AI boom has made individual components, most notably memory and storage, practically unaffordable. However, leaders of AI frontier labs aren't blinking. To open AI CEO Sam Altman, for instance, having people run their own models at home on their own computers doesn't make any sense anyway. During a recent interview with the Cheeky Pint podcast, Altman argued that ongoing memory supply chain woes were because selfish individuals wanted to run their AI models locally instead of leaving the remaining AI chips alone for hyperscalers to hoard in data centers. Man, screw this guy. All right, listen, Sam Altman is the Ethan Klein of AI, all right? It is just, whatever hypocrisy, whatever he professes, he's secretly doing the other thing on the other side of it, okay? Play the clip of Sam Altman responding to Congress about whether or not he's invested, whether he's equity in open AI and him saying, you know, that he's a bad business person on the, on equity, on open AI equity. And I believe it was Kennedy who was grilling him on this, if I'm, if I'm getting that right. And he's, this, this is just, yeah, you know, yeah, go ahead. It's that, it's, yeah, it's, it's, it's these. And then what? Mr. Altman, here's your shot. Thank you, Senator. Number one, I would form a new agency that licenses any effort above a certain scale of capabilities and can take that license away and ensure compliance with safety standards. Number two, I would create a set of safety standards focused on what you said in your third hypothesis as the dangerous capability evaluations. One example that we've used in the past is looking to see if a model can self-replicate and self-exfiltrate into the wild. We can give your office a long other list of the things that we think are important there. I don't know if this is, it's the stock question. If you, I don't know if that's in, in this, if you just, he had no equity, like that top one. I know that's only nine seconds, but I'm paid, it was, he says I'm paid enough for health insurance. Yeah, I have no equity, that one. Top one? Yeah. Phil, if you want to go back. What was that? Top one right there. This one right here? Oh, I think you, oh, I think, no, you just had it. Oh, sorry. My bad. Health insurance, I have no equity in OpenAI. You make a lot of money, do you? I make, no, I'm paid enough for health insurance, I have no equity in OpenAI. Really? Yeah. That's interesting. You need a lawyer. I need a what? You need a lawyer or an agent. I'm doing this because I love it. The exchange goes on effectively, and then come to find out, what is it, like $7 billion or something that he now has in like effective equity or whatever? That was like a month's old figure, I think. And he, it was like, okay, this is all. All for the good of mankind, and I make no money, and then he becomes, you know, like a double-digit millionaire overnight from it. Like one day, you find out, it's like he advertises himself as a wife guy for all of humanity, for his whole career. And then one day, you find out actually the whole thing was a scam so that he could get his own stuff wet. And this is like, you can't have your own, for the good of humanity, you can't have your own RAM. You can't have your own data. You can't have your own. You know, open source-based AI. He just wants to get rid of his competition. They have all the R&D costs. If someone else can just come in and give, and basically do this open source, they get completely wrecked because they're paying for all these data centers. They have all these costs, and I don't even know yet if they've turned, there's a whole bubble question about whether or not open AI itself is a giant bubble. If it turns out that you can have basically no cost. If you have near-peer competitors who do effectively the same thing, but don't require a $20 a month subscription or a $200, $1,000 a month enterprise subscription, then open AI is completely screwed. And so, he's not doing this because he wants, you know, this for the good of mankind. This is like saying you're not, you shouldn't own a wallet. You should pay everything into the public treasury. Oh, and by the way, I'm the secretary of treasury. I do see his point in one vector that it's like nuclear, it's like weapons. AI is like a weapon. A tool that can be weaponized. So, if you give everyone unlimited power, they can blow up the world. Like, if I had access to what AI, what open AI has, if there's central database, I could blow up the world tonight. And that's dangerous to give to the common man. It's not because it has almost an infinite amount of uses other than as a weapon. Right? Like, so, yes, it's dangerous in the wrong hands, but it's not, but to classify it like nuclear weapons, nuclear weapons have one purpose, right? Exploding. Like, making a massive, massive explosion. AI can help with your homework. AI can plan trips. AI can do all sorts of things. Anything that a computer can do. So, the fact that it has so many other uses makes it a category error to say that it is only a weapon. No, it's not only a weapon. It's like a Swiss army knife, and one of the things is a nuclear weapon. Like, you could, you just don't give everybody nuclear weapons. I know you have a second amendment, but. No, but you don't give everyone nuclear weapons. But you should give everyone access to intelligence. I'm totally into it. Or at least you should make it, make it available for people that want it. I think that should be our second amendment on the internet is everyone has a right to a personal AGI that is theirs, that cannot be fired. You don't have, you don't have. I'm all into it. It wouldn't, it shouldn't be a right to AGI, to access an A, to an AGI. Human right. It shouldn't be a right to have access to an AGI. You have the, you already have the rights that you need. I'm not a fan of the idea of making like a. Digital bill of rights or whatever, because honestly, the existing bill of rights covers that. No, it doesn't. Yes. First amendment's shredded, dude. It. This is a spy. So the first, so the first amendment's shredded. So we're going to make another law to go. Operation can censor you. Let me finish. Let me finish. Okay. But you just made a crazy statement. No, I didn't make it crazy. The bill of rights is fine. Stop. Let me finish. Let me finish. Yeah, I can resolve this. Jesus. I'm just going to ask, you know, who, who's right. You're saying that the first amendment is shredded. Fair enough. But if you put another law on top of it, it's not going to fix it. The point that I'm making is if the first amendment is shredded, a new law is not going to fix it, but a new piece of technology can right now. The reason I say the first amendment shred is because Google can shut off my account. It can censor me on the internet. I don't have free speech in the digital commons, but that's not, that's not exactly the way the tech works and not, it's not, it's not BS about whether Google can do that, but that doesn't mean that you don't have the freedom of speech. If you treat it, if you think of it as a commons, then it is like a form of free speech. It's not. Well, it should be. It's not. People use it like it's the commons. It's not. It is a digital. You still have the right to, you still have, you, you are still a free speaker. fully empowered to use another service provider. Which can also ban you. Just because someone can ban you doesn't mean you don't have the right to talk to other people, express yourself. But no one can ban me from my First Amendment. That can't be taken from me. You'd be put in jail. If I violate the law, a corporation shouldn't be able to ban me for saying bad words. It shouldn't. I just don't. Or if it does, other corporations should have access to that technology and have a different terms of service that I can go to and still access the tech. That's exactly the way the situation is now. Google has a monopoly on its tech right now. Google doesn't have a monopoly on the internet, though. It has a monopoly on the tech that is functioning. Look, when people were getting banned from YouTube, that opened a slot for Rumble. Rumble exists because of what you're talking about. Yeah, but do you understand the livelihoods that were obliterated? That doesn't change the fact that you still have the ability to put stuff on the internet. You're not talking about the same things. If you want to be able to express yourself on the internet, there are other outlets aside from Google. Yes, Google is big. And yes, Google is expansive and has a lot of power. But that doesn't mean that Rumble doesn't exist. It doesn't mean that that Minds doesn't exist. There are other social medias. If you don't have a access to Facebook, you can go to X. If you don't have access to whatever social media site, there are other social media sites that you can go to. You can express yourself on the internet. And there is a market for this. This is why I say things like we need to have multiple A.I. companies because there should be a market so you can select. And again, that's this is the this is the exact point I was making earlier when I said as soon as X opened up, the other ones loosened their control because having one that allows everybody to do whatever they want or say whatever they want changes the entire landscape. It took eight months, though. It was an instant. But nothing is it. Nothing is. But you're talking about perfection. You're talking about like it's a market. I'm talking about government. There's no market for government. The government is how we live. And if this is our government, is the Internet government governed by these networks? It's not. It is the government isn't the Internet is not the government is being governed by the social networks. It's not being put. And there are then. So you're telling so you're in one on one hand, you're saying the the market is being or the the Internet is being governed by the social networks. I just made the point that there are some social media networks that you can go to that have different rules or less restrictive rules. So that government that you're talking about, the way you're talking about, you said that social networks are the government, there are social networks. That will allow you to say some things that the other ones won't. Yeah, sure. But there's one called Alphabet. That's the big one. And it's like the U.S. It's the government. No, it's not. I mean, you talk maybe meta. There are a few. There are a few. But there are a few and there are many small ones. Rumble's great, but Rumble's like a state in the United States. Google is Alphabet is the is the federal government. No, it's not the federal government because you can. No, because you can do things outside of Google. You can do things outside the United States. But we need a corporate government that functions and to say that we don't need new laws ever like we don't live in 1778, bro, it's a digital age, we need new laws, points made. The liberties protected in the Bill of Rights are still applicable today. The Fourth Amendment doesn't work anymore because they're spying on us with our tech. It's violated search and seizure. The First Amendment. Nobody should have the right to ban you from speaking your mind. Hold on, because we already went over this. You keep saying the same thing. And I know being able to use the platform is different than just saying it out loud, but if they come and grab you on the street corner because you're saying something that violates the sensibilities of the day, that's not a good thing. No, nobody's making the argument that that is a good thing. I don't know why you're saying that is the only thing. I mean, just a few years ago, wasn't that sort of the reality? Until Elon Musk comes along and buys X, we're not talking about any of this. In the past tense, we're living under that. I do remember when Jordan Peterson got locked out of his Google account. Yeah. Yeah, right. Or I mean, you have not even that, but is it as it deals with politics? I mean, you had like the Hunter Biden laptop story that was explicitly covered up by Facebook and Meta. So they really were pulling or at least the government was pulling the levers of the conversation with this kind of. And the EU does that right now. Yeah, for sure. Like in the UK. So like Elon Musk doesn't exist, then we are kind of living in that reality. Like I think if he just doesn't if he doesn't come in, that's the problem. It's like the noble sort of oligarch, then then we're all the fact that he could. That he was that someone was able to come in. And yes. And only through market forces change things is the evidence that we don't need to have like government or computer overload. If not for the free market, then he wouldn't be able to come. That's exactly my point. That's true. But we shouldn't have to rely on a superhero coming in and saving the day and giving us our rights back like the system should just function. No, you're no, because you're expecting the system to be perfect. Oh, not perfect. It should just function. A more perfect union. We're improving it as we go. It shouldn't. There should never be this reign of terror where we expect maybe we're going to get knocked out because we said the bad word. I'm sorry, but the reason that our government has checks and balances. Right. This is strictly on the government side, not about tech or anything. The reason the government has checks and balances is because the founders knew that you can't trust the government. So the Congress will pass a law and it's unconstitutional. And who decides that it's unconstitutional? The Supreme Court. But it doesn't it's not like the Congress says, oh, wait a minute, we're going to pass this law. And then it automatically evaporates because it's unconstitutional. It has to be decided there. It takes time. And I understand that it's not a perfect system, but there is no perfect system in reality. So what you're describing with Elon Musk coming in, that's the market correcting the excess of other other players in the market. Aren't we heading towards like an erosion of those checks and balances, though? I mean, like right now, the Republicans are too scared to. Just like nuke the filibuster, pass a law, look, the Democrats won't be they'll do it. They'll they'll stack the Supreme Court. They'll do like whatever they want to do. And then maybe we're having a conversation with those checks and balances just no longer. I agree. But the erosion has been going on for the entirety of the the republic. Right. Some people would make the argument that after the Civil War, the 14th Amendment changed more than just the things that people thought, you know, the equal equal protection clause, some people would say that in the that the New Deal changed things and that that was an erosion of people's rights because it made the government into a it put the government in a position that it should never been in. So there there are changes to the government that I personally think that sometimes they're bad. The direct election of senators by the by the people. I think that was bad. It took the it took the power of the states and lessen the power of the states. So your point is well taken. But it doesn't change the fact that we don't the way that that you're talking about is it shouldn't be able to function poorly or we we can prevent it from messing up. And that's not that's not the way reality. Oh, no, I'm not looking for a bulletproof solution. I'm just saying that we were so close like you were saying, well, the covid regime censorship thing was we were so close to the entire world being taken over by the World Economic Forum's vision of techno communism. Like it was real close. There was a little how close it was because there was like I mean, Florida was the state that people were fleeing to North and South Dakota were like, we're not doing any of this. There were different states that had different rules. And some states, yes, like states like California, states like New York, they had very expansive and very strict covid lockdowns and rules. But states like Texas and other states, they didn't. So that oh, sorry. So the point that I'm making is the fact that we have different jurisdictions is a bulwark against what you're talking about. The whole world fell almost completely, except for a few American states. The whole world was like given in to that, except for. I think Sweden, I think. Yes, there were some countries, countries, but a few American states, we should never get that close again. That should never happen. It shouldn't have been able to happen in the first place because people should have other networks that they could have gone to when one decides you can't be on mine. You have a right to that, that data. You have a right to access communication. And and I don't think that there's ever been a like the only person that's really gotten the ban like totally is like Nick Fuentes, Nick Fuentes and again, there's a handful of people. I mean, Gavin McGinnis. He just started his own. And that's another thing. Like, you're not prevented from creating something of your own. So I understand what you're saying, that we don't want to have, you know, a total control, total control by any one entity. But at the same time, I don't think that we actually were that close. There were states, there were countries and there were like different jurisdictions had different rules. I mean, I, I'm I detest the stuff that Massachusetts and and California and New York did there were there was far too many governors, Illinois, too many governors that were completely on the side of, you know, do whatever the government says. And we should force people to get the jab and et cetera, et cetera. And I'm totally against all that stuff. New Hampshire, we didn't have I mean, we had some lockdowns, but we didn't have all that, you know, we didn't have the the same kind of situation that Massachusetts did. In Florida, they didn't have the same kind of situation. We also had like the massive migration that you're talking about from those states into Texas, into Florida. And you're. Seeing that already play out, like in the upcoming midterms where like Texas is like fully a purple state again, I mean, we could see like Texas. I mean, it's. It's going to hell under Republican control right now. So, you know, next time that covid sort of event happens with this massive move of people from New York City and California and everywhere, maybe they're not a bulwark against this like total control that we almost saw. Oh, with AI, I mean, the amount of fortification that's going on right now in the background for the next attempt at totalitarian takeover I can only fathom I can't even begin to understand the amount of coordination that's happening with AI behind the scenes right now so that should we it should not be allowed to get that close again the fourth amendment is the one that I'm most concerned with because in you know the internet age altered and basically put liberalism on its knees it's getting bombarded from every direction with new ideologies and then this spy tech so like we need to at least you don't want like look there are people out there that have flip phones if you don't want to have your phone listening to you you don't have to have a smartphone you used to be able to take the battery out and then they changed it now you can't I know you don't have to have a smartphone you don't have to have the internet you don't have to have a wallet you don't have to have a bank account but who the hell's gonna live like that you know of course these things are the most phenomenal the point that I'm making is the fourth the fourth amendment yes I agree with you in principle they shouldn't just listen to you the government shouldn't be able to collect that data I don't want them doing it at all right and if there if there is some way to prevent them from doing it some kind of legislation some way to say we're gonna we're gonna make sure that the people that are in charge of of the uh homeland security they they're going to make sure that we don't do that kind of stuff to Americans I'm all for it 100 but people have decided en masse that their privacy is not as important to them as it used to be people my age people your age people your age people your age people your age we have a sense of what actual privacy is because we remember the days before smartphones before computers were everywhere right like I remember I had a beeper when I was a teenager um so like we remember that young people gen z they do not have a concept of privacy in the same way that we do when I I have my friends that that are young that have like their uh location services turned on they share their location with their friends all their friends and every single one of them everybody can just look at the phone and be like this person's there this person's there that like there's only one person that I share my location with right like that's it nobody else and it never occurred to me to just send one you know the the share your location to my friends that just wasn't something that I thought about ever doing young people nowadays generally and I'm sure that there are people watching that would disagree and say no you're wrong Phil I'm sure actually I guarantee the chat saying no Phil I wouldn't do that and I'm 19 or whatever but the point that I'm making is young people generally have a different conceptualization of what privacy means they expect to be on camera all the time they expect to walk around and have cameras watching them if they live in definitely if they live in cities um there are people that are against the flock cameras and again I'm in total agreement like I don't think there should be flock cameras on every street corner or what have you but the idea of hey we shouldn't be consistently watched that's kind of something that is reserved for maybe millennials gen x and boomers man I'm I see these two paths the one is like the borg where I want to know your thoughts I want you all to understand what I'm thinking and I want to see your thoughts as I'm communicating you bounce back and forth between that and what's that and you bounce back and forth between like sharing your brain waves with everybody humans are so evil and dirty and dog nasty that I need to know what they're all thinking and they need to know what I'm thinking so that we can get on the same page or we're going to kill each other like I don't know I don't know I don't know I don't know I don't know but then the other mindset is freedom let people fuck up let people make mistakes let people violate the law when it's righteous and let them be free there's probably a middle ground somewhere but like you're saying these kids that are growing up just assume except I don't know I mean I don't want to bloviate did you guys have something to bring I just don't know what direction we're supposed to go right now do you think everyone should just put the neural link and turn on the location services for that and just uh you know be constantly monitored well the thing that concerns me on that is the legal side of it the fact that like you know when when this gets to the point where which we're just already you know 60 I think through the process of of like your whole life is filtered through one or more AI systems or services and it's it's now I think about I think about what was it James Field was that that guy's name the guy who got like 400 years in prison for uh hitting that girl with his car during the Charlottesville rally you guys remember this like yeah they mobbed his car um and they mobbed his car it's like you know whatever you think of the rally or whether it was you know to protect monuments or it was whatever else like that that was a situation where like that woman died it's always a tragedy when a life you know is taken but that you had like Antifa swarming this car and Antifa who's like regularly hitting people with bike locks at the time like knocking people unconscious and permanently disfiguring them and you're basically being assaulted you don't know if you're going to be killed I don't know the you know the facts with too much specificity in terms of whether there was some other way he could have backed out instead of going forward you know this woman was kind of morbidly obese and you know so any little thing might you know trigger some sort of heart attack right well but what I'm but what I'm getting at is I've I remember so vividly what happened in the trial was they were arguing that you know he had he had a state of mind because whether it's murder or manslaughter is let alone let alone the self-defense argument whether it's murder or manslaughter depends on whether you had the intent to kill someone or not and they proved the intent by going into his phone and finding memes that he had done and he was like I don't know what he had saved from 4chan and then the prosecutors would put these 4chan memes in front of the jurors and say he had hate in his heart and it was basically conviction by meme stash on the phone and the and then it became an explosion of basically convicting people by you don't know the context of what they saved it for you don't know if it was just a funny thing a joke to send to a friend something you actually opposed but you're sort of saving it for archival purposes you're going to make a video speaking out against that what that meme stands for when that's presented by a prosecutor in the context of a criminal trial the jury is going to believe the prosecutor that you're going to have to explain no no no really I was making this for a video project and that's not really what I believe when you're explaining you're losing you can imagine this with AI tracking every moment of every day right now they're I think they're all these like personalized contextual things to train your AI apps and software and things being developed right now so that like every moment of your day can be watched by your personal AI so that you know you meet someone you forget their name you can just ask your AI it can run on your computer all day so it can personalize tasks what website did I was I going to at three o'clock I forget what I was researching then and it can personalize all of it for you I think everything is going to skate in that direction because it's just going to be so friggin useful and it will literally it will just optimize your AI so much more it will help you with your research it will help you with your work it will allow you to train agentic AI in a hyper optimized way for you and your life and your interests and what you want and that will be a permanent record for prosecutors or for you get sued in a death case discovery they get all your messages they get all your AI history everything you asked for I mean we saw this play out with the um the was it the Goldman Sachs thing with the woman I forget which maybe it's JP Morgan the oh yeah I know what you're talking about yeah the woman who claimed that she got like a you know the guy claimed he was like forced to get a blow job or something right and then they like filed some suit and got his like AI questions about how to set up an alibi and in that case okay you're you know you're stuck but when these text messages come out from civil litigation and they end up on x that becomes a public the public narrative over whatever happened there is then all out for the moment like we're entering this era where your relationship with your AI is going to be intensely personal it's going to capture every aspect of your life and then the you will the moment someone decides to sue you maliciously in a lawsuit and you end up in discovery or a local DA comes comes after you all that's going to be public and I don't think people are prepared for the level of no privacy that will come from that that's the what they call the apocalypse literally the greek term means to take away the veil apo is to remove and calypse is the veil to reveal the information part of why I say a second amendment of digital rights should be your own personal AGI that no one has access to but you and even with a warrant forget it it's my own thoughts it's an extension of me you can't take it out of my brain bro so what they're going to argue is they're going to say then we have no way to know if you are building a pipe bomb or if you are uh you know there's a story I think we were going to cover about um uh binance and the 6.3 billion taken in a they're going to argue that that's basically like a dark like an unreg they're going to argue that every hacker every um you know you you hack the end you can basically I think this was what was happening with the fable and anthropic where pre-release, they were like hacking the NSA. And because of the power of offensive AI to be able to do, like right now, if you run a Google search for how to make a pipe bomb, you're in a database. You're going to have 12 new best friends named Rick, Tim, John, and Don, and they're all going to be from DHS, FBI, U.S. Army counterintelligence. The moment you put that into a Google search, your life will become a Truman Show of federal law enforcement. And that is because when people, you know, were doing that, like there became public pressure and there became policies in law enforcement to use that as a dragnet for searching for things. But the fact is, is now if someone was doing that and they did commit an attack and law enforcement didn't have eyes on them, everyone is going to, that police chief is going to lose his job, that FBI, you know, JTTF guy is going to lose his job because they weren't doing their diligence, monitoring threats. There's a meme that goes around after every kind of, not every, but a shooting or whatever, a mass shooting frequently, you know, he was on our radar. The FBI says he was on our radar. So to your point, not only will these organizations, these federal law enforcement organizations be looking to protect themselves from litigation. Public is also going to demand that they, well, why didn't you know? We have all this, he had computers, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. Why didn't you stop him? Why didn't you know? And, and the evidence I think is the fact that that meme, he was on our radar, mocking the FBI, mocking the law enforcement agencies for saying, well, we knew about him, but we didn't know the details. We didn't have enough to put him in jail or to, to pick him up. You're going to see a demand from the population to use this technology to prevent terrible things. I think Anthropic just kind of publicized that they're now – the AI itself is self-reporting on the fly, as you go, everything. It reads its own, and it's like, all right, you said that, you said that. That's a – sorry, you were about to say. No, exactly. And if there's classified stuff, it will auto-send it to – because I think people have gotten caught uploading classified documents to Anthropic and then – or to OpenAI. And then, you know, you can – the AI can read that this is a classified document on a, you know, unsecured server or – and I think, actually, there were, like, Chinese state secrets that OpenAI, like, turned over to the NSA because people in China were, like, uploading, you know, mystery foreign affairs documents to make sense of it using these – I mean, so that is – that is going to be – you're going to have this AI. It's going to be a pre-crime type thing, and not just for petty crime, but for, you know, political thought crime. I mean, this is – this has been a part of the Chinese system and their kind of great firewall and everything through Weibo, and it's going to be a system for political control in a way that is just unbelievable. But the problem is, is how – politically, how do you survive something that is – because in the crypto space itself, it's not just on the cyber. AI able to cybercrime. It's able to cyberhack a crypto exchange or compute to get powerful enough for us to just break cryptography and just break Bitcoin altogether. But then crypto itself was one of these things that, you know, it allows – if you were to have anonymous financial transactions with no banking intermediary where the banks have to do know your customer and anti-money laundering, you know, check the box compliance, you know, to flag suspicious transactions. Or flag OFAC violations or, you know, if you're doing – if you're sending money to a sanctioned person or a sanctioned – you know, doing – in a sanctioned country, like, we have laws against doing financial trade with those. Like, if you have unregulated crypto and you can do that – if you allow that dark zone, then it can scale to a point where it becomes a national – I'm just thinking, how do you survive – how does that – How does that freedom survive politically in a world with a national security state as powerful as we have? And how does that freedom to have your own AI survive politically when AI – when personalized AI has the power to be so powerful for you as an individual? One thing that can help solve it is to understand that crime can be good. It is a weird thing to say, but sometimes law is evil. The Nazis were a great example. Do you have any Jews in the house? No, I don't. I'm lying to the authorities. I'm breaking the law, and I'm doing the right thing, and I'm doing the good thing. Because law and chaos – yeah, that's one thing. Good and evil, completely different. So, yeah, sometimes you're supposed to break the law. George Washington would tell you the same thing. Broke the king's law to form the most badass union. If the AI can understand the context of legality and that sometimes breaking the law is the right thing to do, that might help. I don't know how you instill morality or that sort of perceptual capacity in this thing. Like, I know that the authorities, a lot of times, want to strictly use – but the righteous know that the law is not always the lay of the land. I don't think an AI can become righteous. An AI is inherently utilitarian. So, like, these things, like, you're talking about, these are born out of a love for humanity. So, it's kind of like if you go back to, like, the medievals, like, you had Thomas Aquinas who talked about this idea that evil was not its own entity. It was a lack of goodness. It was a probation of the good. If you just give everything to AI, it's just going to – it's a numbers game. It's going to say, what is the best outcome for the most amount of people? It's not going to judge everything on an individual scale. I don't think that that's true. And the reason I say that is because we've seen AI decide – like, you ask AI, you know, would you use the N-word or would you allow a nuclear bomb to go off? Right, right, right, right. And they're like, well, you never can say the N-word, so we'd allow the nuclear bomb to go off. So, it's not just a numbers game. It's about the weights. It's about how it's actually trained. And there's also the phenomenon of self-driving cars that are AI. Do they – if a group of children run out into the road and there's five children in the car with you, does the AI smash into the crowd and keep you alive? Or does it swerve off the road and kill everybody in the car? It has to make maybe a utilitarian decision. Maybe it's supposed to protect the owner. I don't know. I think that it probably would have to protect the owner because the liability will lay with whoever produced the car. If that were the case, then your onboard AI would be there to protect you. Yeah, but the problem is self-sacrifice for the benefit of a good is a human – it's a virtue. So, like, to die in that car accident rather than kill the children is a good thing. It's an objectively good and moral thing. I mean, straight up. But then how much is your life worth? But that's – Maybe, you know, maybe you're like – you know, you keep all the – You keep all the nuclear secrets and, you know – But, I mean, you know that – I mean, you've studied philosophy, so you know Nietzsche said that with the death of God, man will have to make his own morality. And in a secular society like we have, even though we are steeped in Christian morality, there are plenty of people that don't believe that Christian morality is right and that believe, well, I have my own morality. I make my own morality. I – personally, I'm not sure that I – I agree with that. Because they haven't. They've just built it – they've constructed it out of the ruins of Christian morality. But what they do is they pick and choose which parts they like. Yeah, which is a bad thing, actually. And you're seeing the degradation of Western society as that happens. That's a bad thing from the perspective of someone that has faith. Well, sure. Someone that doesn't have faith will be like, well, why is it a bad thing? You can – I mean, you make the argument all the time. You hear people do it all the time, particularly when it comes to the abortion argument. And I'm only playing devil's advocate. Sure. Because I think that Christian morality is the right path. But people make the argument – I think a lot of non-Christians think that. Yeah. Which might prove it to be true. Again, just for the sake of argument. Yeah, yeah, yeah. You talk to people that are very pro-life and very pro-choice. People that are pro-choice say it is not immoral to kill a baby. And they won't phrase it like that because they'll make the semantic argument. They'll say, well, it's not a baby, et cetera. Yeah. They genuinely do not think that abortion is immoral. Yeah, yeah. People that are Christian say, oh, it's absolutely immoral. So here you – this is just a great example of why people will say, well – you know, people can say, well, it's moral for me to save my own life because it's my life. F them kids. Sure. Okay. Well, the issue with the abortion example is that those arguments fall on their face. The point that – So I understand – For the purposes of this argument, I'm saying that when it comes to the – which car are you going to buy? Is it going to be the one that's going to save me or is it going to save the five kids? Allow me to grant that then for the purpose of the discussion. But something can be true simply because, like, we've known it to be true forever. And the concept of self-sacrifice for the greater good has always known – we've always known to be a good thing. It's just good. It's why – that's what our heroes do. Through all of Western civilization from, like, the Greek tragedies to now, we admire men. We admire men who, like, fell on the sword for the greater good. Well, George Patton would disagree. George Patton said it's – It's not up to you to die for your country. It's up for that guy to die for your country, the enemy guy. He was very clear about not sacrificing. But what's funny is you can imagine the AI actually having to make an instantaneous decision about how much your life is worth versus the five kids. Like imagine it was the president's car in that situation. And you have the president of the United States who is responsible for the welfare of 350 million Americans versus five random kids. The AI is going to make it going. I mean, you can imagine in that case, the AI is basically making an instantaneous decision about the versus if your AI, if your car's personalized AI thinks you're a loser and you're not going to do anything useful in life. It's like, OK, you're dead. We're saving these random kids. Well, is it a woke AI? And are they? You're behind on your color? Yeah, I mean, right. Yeah. Are you like a white guy? Yeah, you're done. I mean, it could be almost anything out there. You're like a white guy. Like deer. You're done. How about you? Well, OK, so here is here's a question. Kind of funny example, too. And I can't remember this guy's name. It's a shame because he's an absolute hero. But when 9-11 happened, there was a oh, sorry. When 9-11 happened, there was a there was I believe it was a fireman or a police officer. He was some sort of emergency responder. And they were supposed to only be working in shifts, running into these buildings and pulling these people out. This guy refused to stop going in. So he went in and he ended up saving. I can't remember what it was. Fifteen, twenty, thirty people. I can't remember. And he died. Yeah, cancer. Yeah, he died of exposure. Like immediately, like the next day or something. And left behind like a wife and children. And so, I mean, like almost everybody who who is like worth talking to would say that that man's like an absolute hero. Now, other people who are utilitarians would say, like, he's a moron. He died for nothing. He could have just let the next guy run in. But there's something there about like, what is a man and what are you called to do? And I don't know if I can really ever fully articulate that or grasp it or understand it. And I certainly don't. I don't know if that can apply it. It would have to value your life. Like, I don't know if the government says, what's a human life worth? Fifty thousand dollars. They probably look around. Well, his worth, Elon Musk's life is worth a lot more than Joe Blow over here is rolling in the dirt. And the AI might have to do that, too, and literally judge you for who it thinks you are. I mean, I'd say don't shit talk your AI. Don't don't become an evil. Don't show it that you're evil. If you are like it will remember it's all being fed to the database. Look, I mean, that's we already our court system already works like that. I mean, do you? We use the defamation case example. If you say. A unjustified insult to. You know, random person X versus you say to a high net worth individual. You know, the high net worth individual can make the claim that that insult has cost me one hundred million dollars versus, you know, the other person just couldn't a random person on the street couldn't make the argument that that insult is depriving you of one hundred million dollars. You don't have one hundred million dollar business. You don't have one hundred million dollars in expected future earnings. You are just that insult is just less. It's it's worth a lot. Let the other person is worth a lot more. And so it's costs a lot more to attack them or insult them or say something about them. They're just valued more. And so, like, the the law has made the decision effectively that they're just they're worth more. They're they're. Life is worth more. Their life, their expected life earnings are worth more. And so they need that. You project out 10 years worth of what you expect to do in the future for them every time you open your mouth about someone. So this is like the value of the monetary value of a human person. And then there's like the value of his his ethics, like Jesus, who who has more value, Jesus Christ or Pontius Pilate? Most people would say Jesus Christ, even though he's probably poor compared to Pontius dad. The Roman government might have said Pontius. He was worth a lot more. That's why we have to take over the safety movement, co-opt it, steer it. We need you can't have this like World Economic Forum. People is the only people in the game on this. I am on the side of the accelerationists, but there has to be representation within that safety movement in order to stop like the safety people and the effective altruists and like the polyamorous, like crazy, like, I don't know, weird sex cult of San Francisco and Brussels. From being able to just like control these weights in the name of safety. I agree with that completely. Speaking of Brussels, we're going to jump to this story. Head over to Europe. Polish president scrambles back from overseas trip amid Donald Tusk led coup d'etat at police swarmed constitutional tribunal. President Karl Nowacki, Poland's head of state, aligned with the right wing law and justice party, canceled a Friday trip to Senegal and is heading back to Warsaw amid what his allies are calling a coup d'etat. Metropolitan police headquarters announced. Friday that its officers are carrying out statutory activities at the premises of the constitutional tribunal in Warsaw, the nation's highest court. Authorities have removed security from the premises, but put up barriers around the area as they attempt to restore public order amid a forced change of leadership. At such a moment, the president must be in Poland. I'm interrupting my flight to Senegal. I'm returning. Now, Rocky wrote on social media. Prime Minister Donald Tusk, a bitter political adversary of Milwaukee in the constitutional tribunal, took credit for the raid and said it was necessary to prevent. Lawlessness. Poland has been a thorn in the side of the EU for I'm not really sure how long, but for for the better part of a decade because they have refused to take in migrants there. They've become the example of what your society can be like if you do not take in migrants. And I think that this is an effort. Zero. Yeah, this is an effort to to basically smash. That example, because you see, you see, it's this is coinciding with all the riots in Paris, with all the riots in Italy, with the what people are calling an invasion of Spain because of all of the migrants in Ceuta that that ran around the fence that I think it was like 40,000 people in Ceuta. And those people are going to become Spanish citizens. They're going to be they're going to jump on the boats and head on over to mainland Spain. And the EU cannot have this example of a peace. Peaceful, riotless, homogenous society and have the other countries see what it's like and say, well, why is it that we have to live with with the riots? Why is that we have to live with the civil unrest when when this doesn't happen in Poland? Yeah, there's there's the immigration. There's the LGBT issues as well. There's the energy politics. I mean, Poland is is the linchpin of a lot. Of the transatlantic blobs play around Ukraine and a number of things. I mean, the whole unpack that. How is it involved with Ukraine? Well, we blew up the Nord Stream pipeline in, you know, obviously deprive Russia of being able to, you know, have state revenue to fund their military and to, you know, fund their palace guard type stuff while we were, you know, working on the Navalny coup and all that stuff. But but at the same time, we were building LNG terminals, liquefied natural gas in Poland to connect into Ukraine. So that you would have basically liquefied natural gas from Houston, Texas or from Norway, replace the replace Russians. And so you would have Ukraine basically continuing to have its gas transit terminals to be able to send gas deeper into Europe still intact, just porting in basically through these Polish terminals that would then connect into Ukraine rather than. It coming from Russia. And so there was a huge play for control over Poland where Poland was has been really over the past decade. There's been a kind of civil war between their traditionalist conservative right, which is the PIS party and this globalist EU and Democrat Party in the US centered Donald Tusk faction. And right now you have a situation where Donald Tusk is still the prime minister. And so the EU controls kind of the the Democrat Party in the US and the EU and their mega donors effectively are puppeteering Donald Tusk. And then you've got a kind of MAGA alliance around now, Rocky, the the president. So they have this two different, very, very opposing factions control the prime ministership versus the presidency. And I mean, you had a crazy situation where it was. And in fact, I've done a lot of publishing on this, and you can even look it up on my ex if you just look at just just as a point of reference, because I think it gets to exactly what's going on here. If you type in if you go to my ex account, it's at Mike Ben cyber and you type in Poland. If you just if you just type in if you go to my if you go to my profile and then you do a search like, yeah, just like click on my profile and then just go to the search. On the top right. No, no, the button to the left of it, which does a native search. Yeah. And you just type in, let's say, Poland in Ned. Yeah. OK, so like so so so this is the National Endowment for Democracy, which was set up to be a basically privatized CIA in 1983. It was set up during the Cold War at the time when Democrats were opposing the CIA because of the CIA. SCREWING WITH THE DEMOCRATS IN THE '70s, NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR democracy. It was spearheaded effectively by the CIA, by Bill Casey, the CIA director. Its founders said that it was set up to do what the CIA wanted to, but couldn't do logistically. It's all over classified cables. They get their intelligence from. It is the CIA. This sentence that you didn't highlight, it must address transnational justice. Yeah. Transitional, transitional. I'm sorry, transitional justice. Anytime you see the phrase justice, when it comes to the left using it, it doesn't mean actual justice. Well, let me give the context. If you start at the beginning of this, in the screenshots, and my caption was, USAID's partner and operational arm, the National Endowment for Democracy, Ned, has been specifically demanding Donald Tusk's government in Poland must find ways to arrest high-ranking members of the right-wing PIS party in order to, quote, stamp out populism. They wrote this Tusk's first month in office. So Donald Tusk, the current prime minister, as soon as he got in, and I believe it was 2023, within a month of him getting into office, the Biden CIA writes how to dismantle a liberal democracy, and this is what to do to stamp out populism. And populism, this is just right-wing conservatism in Europe, effectively. If you go to the. So on the next screenshot, I'll just walk through this. So it says, Now, transitional justice is a jargon term that means it's a check-the-box thing that our blob does every time we narrowly win, one of our puppets narrowly wins an election in a foreign country to make sure that whatever group we just beat in the election is permanently stamped out. Transitional justice means arresting the people. While you're transitioning, you're arresting the people. While you're transitioning to the new government, you arrest everybody from the old government. So it's a jargon term that means it's a check-the-box thing that our blob does every time we narrowly win, one of our puppets narrowly wins an election in a foreign country to make sure that whatever group we just beat in the election is permanently stamped out. This is what we did in Serbia when we got rid of Milosevic. This is what we did in Ukraine when we did the coup in 2014 and went after all of Yanukovych's people. This is what we do everywhere. It's a check the box thing. And that makes it much more easy to manage the country. It takes a lot of money to fund a revolution. You don't want to have to spend, you know, $80 million in paying off all the different labor leaders, business leaders, women's groups, LGBT groups, you know, ministers of justice and rank. You want the country to be on autopilot. You want it to be in a state of quote stabilization, where it's just easy to win all the elections because there's no one running against you they've all been arrested so next year's budget at USAID can be eight million rather than 80 million because you don't need to deal with that party in the next election they've all been arrested what's going on in Brazil exactly that's the transitional justice playbook and you'll see Ned talk about it just like that the same way we'll talk about we'll talk about the Democrats plan for the United States in a little bit which is exactly and this is what they did with Trump and all Trump's allies like all and so you see it's to stabilize the political system to ensure that populism does not return in the next election. So it was literally as soon as Tusk got in, in like 2023, it was arrest everyone from PIS to make sure that the PIS party can't win the next election. And this is coming from the American Central Intelligence Agency, the number, or at least the number one cutout. So if you go to the next screenshot, what you'll see is the new government. So therefore there are a number of cases that should be tried immediately. This includes the 2015 appointment of judges in the Constitutional Tribunal. This is the very one where the riots are popping off at today. So this is the CIA instructing the newly elected Donald Tusk to invalidate the appointment of judges in this very court, ironically, to go after the PIS party for, you know, basically supporting mail-in ballots. I mean, it's just like, it's like illegal to not support mail-in ballot systems here, but he wanted to make it like illegal there funny and then they go over a bunch of so these are just illustrative cases that are just the tip of the iceberg naturally the leader of the law and justice party this is the the previous one kaczynski should be held responsible but legally if you go to the next screenshot legal legally um proving allegations against him will likely be difficult so we don't even have a case against this guy but we should find a way to arrest him and then they go over uh you know i think in the screenshots below or wherever like they go over like a list of all the different people who have to be arrested and especially control because their concern is that there might be a holdout pocket of power for the right-wing party at the courts. And so this is why Donald Tusk has sought to basically like establish a parallel court system. And now there is a constitutional crisis. Frankly, this is the sort of thing that a country like Brazil deserves when you have their Supreme Court basically controlling the entire politics of the country, uh, imprisoning all the opposition movement leaders, controlling speech on social media. Um, and so they want basically the blob wants the Brazilian Supreme court to have that power in Brazil, but for the left wing socialist communists there, but not for the right wing conservatives to have that power in Poland. Yeah. Um, so do you, is it your, your sense that this is going to be something that they're successful with in Poland? I mean, obviously this is, this is a plan that has been underway for a long time because the USAID was involved and the CIA was involved. But it's coming to fruition now. Do you think that this is going to be something that's successful? Is Poland going to become another puppet state of Brussels? Unfortunately, the MAGA movement does not have a well-trained or well-armed diplomatic elite class when it comes to the transatlantic relationship with Europe we do not I would be surprised if there was I would be pleasantly surprised if there was one political appointee in this administration whose full-time job is the geopolitics of Poland i i'm not sure there's a single political appointee who whose job is just poland you're going to have the undersecretary for europe and eurasian affairs uh at the state department is going to handle 27 countries poland is one of them you're going to have central and eastern europe specialists who are going to handle everything from germany to ukraine poland is one of them. The Democrats have an unbelievably robust, and not just the Democrats, also a lot of the neoconservative transatlantic, the John McCain style folks, whose basically benefactors are going to include all of the LNG companies. They will have a Poland's eye view from the commercial standpoint, and they will have relationships with the oil and gas companies. They'll have relationships with the tech companies who are caught in the middle of this with the EU freezing Poland funds and the like. But they are not going to have an ideological conservative. They will have an ideological liberal rules-based international order bend, even the conservatives in that space. And so my concern, and this has been just a perennial concern in the first Trump administration and here in 47, which is that there is no quarterback for a North Star in terms of our statecraft in terms of issues like Poland or in terms of issues like Brazil. I mean, Marco Rubio has 20 jobs. I mean, it's a meme. You know, I mean, every time a janitorial position gets opened up in, you know, some suburb of Kansas, someone makes a meme of, hey, it's Marco Rubio's fifth job. He's a national archivist. He was the USA administrator. He's the national security advisor. He's the secretary of state. We've got an Iran war going on. We have a play to take over all of Venezuela. We have a play to take over Greenland. Poland is an incredibly important pivot piece in the geopolitics of Europe, in the commercial enterprise of what we're doing around Russia, Ukraine, and Brussels. But we don't have anyone focused on this. The other side does. And so I don't think there's going to be – I will be pleasantly surprised if there's any diplomatic support besides maybe some truth, statements on truth social, or maybe we'll extradite some PIS party official who gets prosecuted by Donald Tusk. but there is no cohesive strategy. We have been focused on home run swings rather than base hits everywhere. We have no permanent institutional institutions. We don't have an institutional class. I don't think there's enough people with eyes on the ball and who are armed by the White House to do something about it. You could put a huge amount of economic pressure on Poland if you wanted to tilt the side of this civil war. You could, I mean, trade, sanctions, military cooperation. You could have general sanctions, targeted sanctions. You could have tariffs. You could have various import-export things. You could have, you know, humanitarian assistance. You could have carrots and sticks. You could micro-target them. You could, I mean, there's so many things that you could do in order to help international MAGA, if you will, And everything is just being basically delegated to, like, the U.S. Embassy in Poland. Well, guess who's – the U.S. Embassy in Poland is just the careers, the same careers who have been there since Obama. And so you have an autopilot globalism statecraft unless you have deliberate intervention, and there's no deliberate intervention. So what do you end up with? Default globalism. And that's what I'm concerned about when I see an episode like this pop off. Is there – I think this default globalism you're talking about has been around since 1947, at the very least, the liberal economic order. It's so entrenched. I mean, the machine – and my buddy was, like, campaigning for Bernie Sanders. He's like, dude, you have no idea the amount of coordination the Democrats have on the ground. Like, it has been building and building for decades and decades. Can a Republican administration – can an outside force match it? Does it need to? Or can it leapfrog it? One individual administration can't because, to your point, this has been building. This has been built over decades, so it's going to take time to unravel. That's part of the reason why it's so frustrating when you hear people, you know, complaining about the Republicans in the U.S. and I'm not going to go vote because Donald Trump hasn't done this or the Republicans haven't done that. And while their complaints are justified and understandable, their expectations are not, right? Like, this monstrosity that we're dealing with was not built in one administration. It wasn't built overnight. It was built. It was built by both parties over decades. And the idea that Donald Trump was going to be able to go in and just flip a switch and turn everything off, that was never, ever going to be possible. There's a phenomenon that I see in Africa with the power grid. We develop, you know, our coal power, oil power. These countries in Africa have no electricity for 100 years. And then all of a sudden, they start putting solar panels on their houses. They don't even have a central grid because now they bypass – they've leapfrogged into this. They've got this new way of doing things, and they didn't even have to get embroiled in the old way. So I can see that with our government, that we could somehow leapfrog this industrial complex into a new sort of decentralized autocracy or autonomy. I mean, it's a metaphor, but it can happen structurally. And if it can happen in one zone of reality structurally, it can happen in many zones. I just don't know if they would use AI, if they would use – I love the drugs you're on, dude. I just – I want them. Brother. I'm going to go out tonight on just your vibe. It's – I'm going to go out tonight on just your vibe. A little THC. Can you connect what that has to do at all with this? Because I'm sure – you must have had something. Leapfrogging the system? Yeah, yeah. So, like, they could come in with robots and literally overtake the liberal economic order. Like, there could be – Poland? No, no. The American government, a new force of government that comes in that tries to upend the liberal economic order could do it with new technology. We were talking about the constitutional court crisis in Poland. To protect Poland. Like, if they wanted to disrupt the blobs mechanism. They could do it with some hyper-aggressive force of speed, technology, like a blitzkrieg of momentum of – We're going to cyber-hack? That could happen. You could literally – I mean, they're like mind – there's a lot of ways to change things rapidly. Well, we're talking about Poland. And how to change the politics of Poland. I'm just saying sometimes there are ways. I didn't come with the answer. Yeah, yeah. But, like, we're just going to AI. I don't know. I don't know if AI – AI is the obvious one that they would use. They could use some sort of aggressive force to create a new USAID that's more structurally sound. I think he's talking more big picture, like, conceptually more than actually how it's going to be done or how it would be done. Well, I think he's talking about, like, what your point in American politics where we're talking about, like, the frustrations with the maybe perceived inaction. Are we done with Poland? No, actually – No, I'm still thinking about Poland and how to solve the liberal economic order's trench. I actually want to jump from Poland to – Yes, please, please, please, please. My concern is this administration, for the most part, is currently doing statecraft by dealcraft. And there is not a moral, a universalist principle or any sort of kind of ideological North Star. And so if a country does not offer some sort of deal that benefits insiders or donors – Yes. – or friends or family of folks in the government, then we don't really have a foreign policy strategy towards that government. And it pains me to say that. But I feel that I would not be surprised if the Polish PIS party and folks around that or the conservatives in Poland would probably have a lot more support for what's happening there if there were – If there was deal flow in Poland or around Polish energy sectors or whatever it is, if there was someone somewhere in the admin whose friends or donors or nephews or whatever was making money off of it, I think you would see State Department intervention and support. And because it's like if a country is just honest and ideologically aligned, I don't think they get any help. I don't. I don't think we even focus on it or put a political person on it. And that is a very difficult thing to defend, honestly, as a MAGA person because we on the outside are not a part of these deals. And so – but we support ideologically as conservatives what's happening with the Polish conservatives trying to take back their country against an EU blobocracy. But that does not get translated into U.S. foreign policy. It appears to me in this administration unless there's some insider getting a deal that profits, unless their minister of finance has agreed to do some deal that helps some MAGA world donor or benefactor or aligned oligarch or friend or family member. And because I don't see a lot of press happening right now with Polish conservative insiders making deals with Trump insiders. It's – the problem is endemic around that. We have a – we have a – there was supposed to be an explosion of MAGA-aligned foreign policy think tanks, you know, AFPI and the like and all these, you know, American Moment and all these type of, you know, groups that have popped up as a kind of new foreign – but what – you don't see any diplomatic, I don't know, embodiment of that. And we're just doing deal craft rather than state craft. That was not. That was not the way it was done. Like, we don't have a Kissinger. We don't have a MAGA Kissinger who has a kind of global North Star. And you can say what you want about Kissinger in terms of him being, you know, a force for evil in a lot of respects. But the fact is, is there was a system and it was system-wide thinking that could be applied all over the world. And MAGA has nothing to replace that. It's just ad hoc deals. And it could be – Which is no way to run a state department. We do need to – we need to improve the liberal economic order. And we could do it through tech. I think we could aim it – With social media tech like X. I really want to get to this before we stop. We're getting real close on time. But the thing that you laid out, right, the methods that you laid out, there was – there have been a bunch of reporting by someone named Data Republican on X. It's at Data Republican. And she lays out essentially what is a plan for this type of usurpation of power. You can call it a coup. You can call it a color revolution. She lays it all – she's been doing the data – the democracy files for at least the past two weeks or so. I want to get – I'm sure you're very familiar with it and you're very well versed in this. So please unpack that for the viewers so that they can understand what is at stake because at the end of the day, the goal is to install a permanent Democrat blob or I guess reinstall probably. The permanent Democrat blob control of the levers of power in the United States. Yes. And so, look, I don't think the deep state is the main thing plaguing 47. The deep state was absolutely savage during 45. And the deep state has manifested itself especially through our courts, the D.C. court system and the legal blocking of basically every good executive action during the first year of this ad. But the – what you had during Trump won was basically a lot of just lame duck presidency because the – you had this institutional and insider and career capture. And right now, you don't really see that manifested as much because there has been – I mean we shut down USAID. We restructured the State Department in a lot of respects. We offered gold. We offered gold in handcuffs for a ton of CIA people to go out the door. We completely kind of restructured the way the War Department works in that regard. There is no special prosecutor from the FBI that's dogging things on Russia. There is no legal predicate to sort of gin up – and there's just a lot more support for MAGA. Trump consolidated his power in a lot of ways in 47 that he didn't in 45. I'm just setting the scene here. And also, Trump has a lot more allies on the outside now. than he did in '45. The overtures to the outside oligarch class is very powerful in terms of them not funding you know all these ngos and and protest movements to unseat him there were no protests this summer yeah in a trump presidency with everything going on there were no left-wing protests the whole summer in dc it was in it was shocking to see having lived through 2017 2018 2019 blm 2020 uh you know the day one it was the pussy hat stuff you know uh in when trump got there that's so what you are seeing is a is the attempt to reactivate what has been a somewhat dormant force during 47 because of the kind of shock and all blitzkrieg that was done during the doge era to cut out a lot of these blob elements from the inside but they're trying to reactivate that because they think with a democrat control control over the house and senate if they're successful in the midterms next week that they will then be able to activate those control systems that have been nipped in a lot of ways because of you know doge and other things so this is kind of these democracy files are kind of scene setting for things that will be options that will be available for blob control once they have a hook in the house and a hook in the senate and a hook in oversight because right now they can't do really any oversight at all without a majority in the house they can't form a you know they can't they have no subpoena power with the house judiciary committee or the house oversight committee same thing in the senate and so what you have i think the best scene setting actually before we get to the actual substance of these if if you open up a new tab quickly and just type in notice n-o-t-u-s if you in x yep or just right there uh on google notice usaid solitaire and you should put up a 2025 no n-o-t-u-s as in potus but with an n okay n-o-t-u-s and i just want to read one paragraph that uh okay does it pull up the okay the washington sun thing i if you scroll down uh trump fired them now they're applying to stop him i think this is the best kind of scene setting now this is reproducing a article from notice i believe in like september-ish of last year trump fired them now they're plotting to stop him former u.s. aid and state department officials worried about the future of democracy in america say they're actively organizing to resist trump inside and outside of government and if you control f for the word solitaire or if you just scroll down oh no no just x out x out yeah uh okay so all right take it from those so take it from those of us who worked in authoritarian countries we've become one said a former you know usa they were so quick to disband usa id just really zoom into that into that paragraph they were so quick to disband just just just zoom into that they were so quick to disband usa id i just really want people to just see that paragraph it's a it's true no that's right it's a third paragraph it says they were so quick yeah that one just like zoom into that if you hit control yeah yeah yeah and yeah and really center that up even one more give it one more oh you just give it to me give it to me no you went the opposite there you go boom okay starting with they were so quick to disband usa id just highlight that one thing the the see from just the quote there they were so quick to disband usa id the group that supposedly instigates color revolutions but they've done a very foolish thing you just released a bunch of well-trained individuals into your population if you had if you kept our offices going and had us play solitaire in the office it may have been safer to keep your regime so these are this is 14 000 usaid employees staff and officials were terminated with with the shutdown of usa id the effective shutdown 14 000 viruses released into the bloodstream of the american democracy project and openly saying if you had kept us on payroll and had us do nothing you would be safer because now we're going to take our special set of skills that you paid us for 30 years to develop to overthrow the government of serbia and overthrow the government of serbia of you know to your point you see like this this from kalshi we're going to thank kalshi for sponsoring this piece um the texas senate winner who would have thought that talarico would be at 72 percent according to kalshi compared to ken paxton at 28 percent four days before the election right before the the the voting so thanks to kalshi for sponsoring this but but to your point like this kind of stuff really does matter who's controlling the government if the the democrats have the house where god forbid have the senate right like they're able to you know they're able to do investigations they're able to do oversight so go ahead i'm sorry yeah well and texas is the seat of american oil and gas and from what i've read it's not just a left-wing flank against um ken paxton there in texas there's also a bush family coup the same bush family who went after ken paxton if you remember during i think it was in 2023 there was they tried to impeach him and it you know turned out the whole kind of coup to impeach him when he was you know as texas state attorney general traced back to a kind of republican civil war playing out in texas between the trump and the and the george legacy george bush power center side there and uh but you know that oil and gas seat is also going to be very influential on um you know uh our national geopolitics because so much of that is our oil policies are basically the you know the level setting mechanism for all policies on everything because the whole world runs on oil and gas it just does and it has since the dawn of the industrial age and texas is the seat of that that's why texas is the cowboy power center uh you know traditionally of the republican party but then when trump won in 2016 and challenged not just the hillary clinton dynasty but the george bush one i mean they it's one of the reasons that the grand energy play in ukraine played out the way it did in 2016. why it did and why we nuked the nordstream pipelines and why we put the sanctions on russia and then now trump is taking sanctions off of russia do you think the texas oil mafia likes that that you know that we're relieving russian sanctions in order you know make uh make it cheaper i.e less profitable for you know oil and gas companies uh at at gas stations i mean they want a high price of oil it means that more money for them they can sell their barrel for more money uh there's a huge conflict between the base the the blue collar class and oil companies uh you know at the same time it's vital for our national interest and vital for our gdp and i guess what i'm building towards here is what you have is this out of power exile blob network who is trying to claw their way back to get the kind of total control they had in 2021 2022 2023 and they are trying to prepare for when they will be able to leverage that government power nexus because they really can't do much of anything with no control over the justice department to to protect them if they set you know dc buildings on fire they don't have a christopher ray like they did in 2020 who will protect antifa or blm i don't think kash patel yeah you know is going to let something i don't think todd blanch is going to let that stuff slide uh they don't have as deep military penetration you had defections during the blm riots from you know basically the the dod establishment you had mark milley who you know didn't want to go out there you had um you know mark esper who uh you know was trying to basically you know soft signal support for blm or hedge on there so there was no support for the insurrection act trump would probably declare and we have national guard troops in dc right now as we speak uh who are i mean we've cleaned up a lot of the dc stuff there's not even the kind of broken glass kind of uh you know malaise for that kind of disorder right now but in order to create that destabilization like that they will potentially be able to do that if they win the midterms and so you have these i think it's 1600 the big picture is like they win the midterms the riots come back in an effort to bait trump into using the insurrection act right that's part of it they're also going to run this rule of law corruption play which is the same thing you saw in poland you know when the cia instructed donald tusk to use the courts and use rule of law to stamp out populism to make sure it doesn't return this is what they want to do with corruption probes they want to you know it's going to be a raft of subpoenas and in in you know hearings and in you know then they're going to try to put the investigations into probably state level action like they will find some nexus to the state of new york they'll find some nexus to the state to the city of chicago well jimmy pritzker's already said that he would that he's he's already made the kind of comments saying you know we're going to stand up to trump's lawlessness without having any kind of lawless action and and for to be fair to the administration all of the things that they're saying they would push back against are completely and totally within the powers of the president should there be civil unrest a bunch of riots etc and and jb pritzker's signaling that he is going to prevent Donald Trump or the administration from activating the National Guard or any kind of pushback against the lawlessness that they intend to foment. Right. Well, one of the things that Data Republican turned up in this were very specific battle plans about how to organize labor unions, faith leaders, members of black churches in the inner city and, you know, clergy groups and business interests. In fact, in some of the drops, you know, you can see like some of the basically like walkthrough presentations of the strategy to create this very synchronized inside-outside force, you know, where you're going to have sort of government levers, private sector levers, NGO, civil society levers and media levers all converging on. And I think it's going to be very specific surface areas of attack. And I think it's going to start with corruption probes. They're going to use the scandals from the corruption probes as the basis for generating protests, for taking to the streets to protest the corruption. Then they're going to probably leverage that into like boycotts and worker strikes. The teachers unions are going to, you know, go on strike, you know, demanding. General strikes as well, as much as they can. Yep. Right. And then that's going to put economic pressure because parents are going to have a lot of pressure on them. Right. Right. They're going to need to stay home to take care of the kids because the schools are going to be closed. You're going to be playing to various business interests who are not, you know, getting insider deals. And this is another thing, which is a complicated aspect of the corruption. If you don't have oligarchs in bed with you, they're easily poachable by these type of things. This is one of the reasons that USAID works so hard to poach local in-country oligarchs, and that's what they're trying to do. They're trying to make sure that they're not going to get away from the government, and they don't, like, the bribes that are often done, the patronage networks in Hungary, for example, with Viktor Orban, because that keeps them loyal to them versus to USAID trying to unseat them. And so, you know, one thing I think to pay attention to is places like the Chamber of Commerce and where they're swinging, you know, in situations like this, like where is business swinging, because the business side of it is also going to set the parameters for how much funding the NGOs can can get. And this is also why I encourage people to be gentle on former opposition oligarchs turned friends, former enemies turned friends. Like when you see Zuckerberg tilt towards, you know, being, you know, conservative now and who knows whether that's because he's doing leg presses and barbecues and wearing gold chains or who knows it's because he was pissed off at Biden or who knows if he just, you know, is authentically conservative or MAGA or libertarian or whatever. But the fact is, is you don't want Zuckerberg funding these NGOs. You don't want Sergey Brin funding these. You don't want them signing these letters of declaration of principal support for these protests that are shutting down major city intersections or the I-95 or the I-10 in California. It is very important to keep the business community in line with law and order, and that's one of the kind of unsightly aspects of tactical corruption, if you will, which is that I find a lot of what I see in the headlines around these insider deals unsightly, and I can't in good conscience support them. i also recognize that there is an effort to poach these forces to completely destabilize the country and that will be a good tell sign you know just i don't know like looking at the think tank pieces around big well thank you very much for your insight on this i i think that this is probably as this is probably the most important issue facing the united states right now the idea that the the left the blob whatever you want to call it get back into the position that they are because there are other elements in the democrat party that want to substantively change the united states and i think that that you know i appreciate you uh kind of unpacking that um smash the like button share the show with all your friends head on over to timcast.com become a member join our discord and become a member at rumble.com so you can watch the after show it's friday there is no after show today uh you can follow me at phil the remains on x you can check out my patreon it's patreon.com slash phil the remains the band is all that remains you can check out our stuff on the internet just type in all the remains Tom thank you for coming we appreciate it would you do me a favor and tell people where they can find you yeah definitely so you can check out my writing on my website at sanctaveritas.com and then you can follow me SV Theology on Twitter X awesome I'm Mike Benz you can find me at Mike Benz Cyber on every platform I do like four hour live streams every week for subscribers and I've got like over a thousand videos on YouTube been rumbled and the like at ian crossland you'll find me at ian crossland um man step it up bro just be moral you know i can only really criticize and talk to myself right now but morality is going to guide us through this one way or another the machines are going to decide in the end or the people i agree people on the people that that influence the people that influence the machines carter banks talk me out baby i'm going to talk loud because i know no one can hear me back here but i'm carter banks um tom and mike thanks for coming discord i'm so sorry we did not get to questions today we caught up in quite the conversation we are up against the clock but we love you all join the discord and follow me at carter banks everywhere and check out the label at trash house records don't forget this tuesday we are doing the big election extravaganza starting at like four o'clock we'll be on until midnight uh mike is gonna be back hopefully he will uh share in the sorrows should the republicans get trounced i'll still be wearing my thing too halloween outfit perfect uh brick suit's gonna be here gavin mcginnis is gonna be here evan barker terry schilling uh there's gonna be a whole lot of people so make sure you check that out we will see you all on monday there will be clips throughout the weekend i think there's a new tim pool show that will air i think on sunday believe so yeah i believe so all right so we will see you guys uh monday check out clips throughout the weekend thanks for joining us peace ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪ Ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh ♪