Speaker 1: I'm wantin to welcome to the Gold, Goats and Guns
Speaker 1: podcast for today Veteran's Day, November eleven, twenty twenty four.
Speaker 1: My name is Tom Laong, and we have a lot
Speaker 1: to talk about. We do have a lot to talk about,
Speaker 1: and I really wish I had done this earlier, but
Speaker 1: it's episode one ninety seven. I get to have a
Speaker 1: follow up chat with my good friend Kaitlyn Along. Caitlin's
Speaker 1: been on the podcast before. The last time we did this,
Speaker 1: she unfortunately didn't have a whole lot of time, so
Speaker 1: hopefully we can get that make that better this time.
Speaker 1: We can have a little bit more of a nuanced
Speaker 1: chat about what's going on and not feel so stressed
Speaker 1: about the time constraint. Caitlin, how are you and how
Speaker 1: have you been? And I hope everything in your corner
Speaker 1: of the world is at least stable, because I know,
Speaker 1: I know things are complex, but hopefully they are stated has.
Speaker 2: It ever been, Tom, Obviously things are looking up at
Speaker 2: a macro level in the United States and in my
Speaker 2: corner of the world, the Jacobins, who i've in my opinion,
Speaker 2: unlawfully have debanked their political enemies. And I'm not just
Speaker 2: talking about the crypto industry at large. It has also
Speaker 2: been the religious groups including Christians and Muslim groups, political
Speaker 2: conservatives and not and then the crypto and fintech industry
Speaker 2: and the Trump family. And it's so interesting how there
Speaker 2: have been different groups that have had outcries about all
Speaker 2: of this, uh and the streams are are coming together,
Speaker 2: and the recognition is now there on the part of
Speaker 2: the Republicans that this was a coordinated, all out effort
Speaker 2: to to deplatform and in the case of the financial
Speaker 2: services industry d bank lawful industries that certain people just
Speaker 2: didn't like. It's an abusive power, in my opinion, violates
Speaker 2: the operation show point one point zero lawsuit settlement that
Speaker 2: the FED or sorry that the FDIC made with the
Speaker 2: payday lenders. It certainly violates the spirit of that settlement.
Speaker 2: But the FDS was careful not to go after the
Speaker 2: payday lenders this time. They did it against different perceived
Speaker 2: enemies this time. But it certainly violates the spirit of
Speaker 2: that settlement. And it's it's all going to come out,
Speaker 2: tom It's all.
Speaker 1: Going to come out, okay. Cool. Just to remind everybody
Speaker 1: so you can do this, like remind everybody what that
Speaker 1: settlement was what actually happened, because I'll be honest with you,
Speaker 1: I wasn't paying that much that close attention to it.
Speaker 1: I should, but it's like everything else, there's so much
Speaker 1: in the world. We all can't we all can't cover
Speaker 1: everything all the time. Half the time I have people
Speaker 1: on the podcast to get me up to speed on
Speaker 1: the things that I think I should know.
Speaker 2: Well, this is one of them. Because the Trump family
Speaker 2: was directly impact and it made the news when Malania's
Speaker 2: book came out a couple of weeks ago, and that
Speaker 2: was one of her big disclosures in the book was
Speaker 2: that she and Barron had both been targeted for losing
Speaker 2: their bank accounts. But the settlement, basically Operation Chow point
Speaker 2: one point zero started during that Obama administration, and it
Speaker 2: started with the payday lenders, and the consumer advocates were
Speaker 2: very angry at the payday lending industry, didn't consider it
Speaker 2: legitimate and discovered that ends justify the means they could
Speaker 2: use the bank regulators to try to put the payday
Speaker 2: lenders out of business by pressuring the banks to stop
Speaker 2: banking them. In the United States, if you don't have
Speaker 2: a bank account, you are not a legitimate person or
Speaker 2: business because in the business world, you've got to pay
Speaker 2: your payroll, you're withholding taxes to the irs using an
Speaker 2: electronic transfer, using a bank account, so therefore you really
Speaker 2: need a bank account and the powers that be It
Speaker 2: started with the FDIC in the in Obama one point
Speaker 2: zero is they went after started with the paid eight lenders,
Speaker 2: but ended up expanding into the gun manufacturers, into gaming,
Speaker 2: into adult entertainment, essentially every industry that they didn't like,
Speaker 2: and it covered thirty different industries. And so the payday
Speaker 2: lenders sued and the fdi CE originally lied and said
Speaker 2: we weren't doing this, but of course when the Payday
Speaker 2: Lenders Trade Association got to discovery, there was all kinds
Speaker 2: of evidence that yes, indeed they were doing this. Sound familiar,
Speaker 2: same same thing is happening now, except we do have
Speaker 2: evidence that the FED has been doing this. We have
Speaker 2: evidence that the FED has been specifically targeting custodia, including
Speaker 2: recently and and and you know, we'll hopefully get our
Speaker 2: day in court to be able to reveal all bad.
Speaker 1: Good I mean, So that's fascinating. So we are we
Speaker 1: talking specific federers or banks or are we talking this coming
Speaker 1: directly from the from the I guess the monolith that
Speaker 1: is the FOMA, because I know those are because remember,
Speaker 1: the FED is disreminded everybody the physic conglomeration of twelve
Speaker 1: nominally independent banks. Blah blah blah blah blah. I'm just
Speaker 1: making sure that we, you know, we cross our eyes
Speaker 1: on our teas here. Yeah.
Speaker 2: So the structure of the FED. Historically, the FED was
Speaker 2: created as twelve completely independent federal reserve regional Federal Reserve banks, right,
Speaker 2: and they each set their own monetary policy and each
Speaker 2: set their own discount rates. And then that started in
Speaker 2: nineteen thirteen when the FED was created. The whole idea
Speaker 2: was that they didn't want to be in the Bank
Speaker 2: of England and we're going to talk about the Bank
Speaker 2: of England in a little bit. They wanted to disperse
Speaker 2: power across the United States. And there were people, including
Speaker 2: Wyoming's first congressman, who warned that this organization was going
Speaker 2: to centralize and increase in power, which is exactly what happened.
Speaker 2: And then in the nineteen thirties when the FDSC was created,
Speaker 2: the there was an oversight board that was national, but
Speaker 2: it had no power. And then they gave it power
Speaker 2: and created the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve
Speaker 2: System in DC. Now there's an inherent tension between the
Speaker 2: privately owned twelve Federal Reserve banks, which is where all
Speaker 2: the balance sheets are, and then and then the Board
Speaker 2: of Governors in Washington, d C. But what has happened,
Speaker 2: especially since the two thousand and eight financial crisis. The
Speaker 2: FED did not let a crisis go to waste, and
Speaker 2: they have massively increased their power and their footprint and
Speaker 2: their centralization in markets they are the repo market. There
Speaker 2: is essentially only one private triparty repo party even still
Speaker 2: around Bank of New York Mellon JP. Morgan got out
Speaker 2: of that business. And so who knows what real repot
Speaker 2: pricing would look like if the FED, with its giant
Speaker 2: balance sheet that that has no constraint on it, were
Speaker 2: not the party, if that were privatized. And and that's
Speaker 2: just one example of just the monopolies that the FED
Speaker 2: has created in financial markets for itself. UH and UH.
Speaker 2: And it's trying to keep the states from being able
Speaker 2: to charter banks, where in other words, that the FED
Speaker 2: has to be the states have to go and get
Speaker 2: permission from the Fed to be able to charter banks,
Speaker 2: and that is not what the law says. So there
Speaker 2: has just been this creeping centralization of power over the decades,
Speaker 2: and it's going to be fascinating. I know you've been
Speaker 2: talking a lot about Jay Powell. You and I think
Speaker 2: don't have this, don't agree on that, but your view
Speaker 2: is really interesting and I and I will concede there's
Speaker 2: a lot of truth to it that that that uh,
Speaker 2: you know, Powell, you think has done a good job.
Speaker 2: But the point is that the centralization of power in
Speaker 2: the FED. Last week you saw at his press conference
Speaker 2: an incredible reaction from all sides. One of my good friends,
Speaker 2: who's who's like my my barometer of the quintessential New
Speaker 2: York Times reader called me and said, boy, the Fed
Speaker 2: is the Fed really screwed up? And so you know,
Speaker 2: obviously the Libertarians were all up in arms and the
Speaker 2: Trump Trump maga folds. But but when the New York
Speaker 2: Times person calls and said, boy, the Fed really screwed up?
Speaker 2: Because what what came across in that press conference last week?
Speaker 2: When I think it was Victoria Guida from Politico, who
Speaker 2: does a lot of crypto reporting. By the way, she
Speaker 2: asked him if if Powell or if if Trump asked
Speaker 2: you to resign, would you And he said nope, very
Speaker 2: verbly and haughtily, very arrogantly. And then she said, do
Speaker 2: you think the fault that the that that that Trump
Speaker 2: has the power to fire federal reserve governors? And he
Speaker 2: answered even more arrogantly no. Uh. Now, academics have debated
Speaker 2: that for years, and I don't know whether it's going
Speaker 2: to be tried. That's one of the things that remains
Speaker 2: to be seen. But it's going to be fascinating. And
Speaker 2: I was just talking to someone this morning about who's
Speaker 2: going to be the Treasury Secretary. That's going to tell
Speaker 2: a lot because if it's if it's a reformer, then
Speaker 2: oh boy, that's gonna tell a lot. And if it's
Speaker 2: if it's not a reformer, then that that means more
Speaker 2: business as usual and it's up to Congress to decide
Speaker 2: whether to reform the FED. But now with the Republicans
Speaker 2: in charge and all this debanking, here's an interesting connection
Speaker 2: I'll make for you. Sam Brownback used to be the
Speaker 2: Senator from Kansas. He's the one who's been out there
Speaker 2: leading the charge against the d banking of Christian groups,
Speaker 2: and he's one of the Republican senators. They'll know it,
Speaker 2: right So, I mean, this is common. There's a big
Speaker 2: investigation into all this. It's coming. Tim Scott will be
Speaker 2: Chairman of Senate Banking as of January twod and he's
Speaker 2: really livid about this, rightfully so. And he announced back
Speaker 2: in August in when he was speaking in Jackson Hall
Speaker 2: that there would be investigations into this, and I will
Speaker 2: take him at his word. The only question that I
Speaker 2: have is do they decide to actually hunker down and
Speaker 2: do a serious reform themselves, which would probably take precedence
Speaker 2: over a investigation. But either way, it's all going to
Speaker 2: come out or the power that was abused here is
Speaker 2: going to be unwhelmed.
Speaker 1: Yeah, well, let's hope that that that the latter happens,
Speaker 1: or at the very least, again, I'm going to make
Speaker 1: going to like full disclosure here. I don't like the
Speaker 1: Federal Reserve. I don't think we should have anything other
Speaker 1: than some kind of sound monetary system. I don't know
Speaker 1: what that looks like. The world is far more complicated
Speaker 1: than all the ideas about sound money that we're just stated.
Speaker 1: During the nineteenth century, we have a lot of work
Speaker 1: that's been done. I'm no one is happy about the
Speaker 1: hyper financialization of capital markets when we were not. None
Speaker 1: of us are happy about any of this, None of
Speaker 1: us and all of the and all of the criticisms
Speaker 1: of the Federal Reserve going back to its formation from
Speaker 1: you know where you wouldn't call them Austrians back in
Speaker 1: the nineteen thirties. That didn't exist as a as a
Speaker 1: school of thought then. But you know those people back then,
Speaker 1: those you know, I guess you would call them Protoastrians.
Speaker 1: We're making these exact arguments, but sensilization of power and
Speaker 1: everything and then no circumstances has that changed. It's wrong,
Speaker 1: and it's and it's greased the skids for everything that
Speaker 1: we have lived under over the last one hundred years,
Speaker 1: one hundred and ten years. Now. The issue is that
Speaker 1: we are at a moment in time where clearly the
Speaker 1: central banks were making a big push to destroy the
Speaker 1: concept of commercial banking as a as a as a
Speaker 1: thing that everything was going to roll going to get
Speaker 1: rolled up Agenda twenty thirty style into the IMF and
Speaker 1: the World Bank and the UN and all.
Speaker 2: Of that, and then digital currencies.
Speaker 1: Central bank digital currencies, and you know, Christine Laguard telling
Speaker 1: you and I allowed to have a pizza because you're fat,
Speaker 1: Like we all know what the what the what what
Speaker 1: what that is? Now, my analysis, my argument, has been
Speaker 1: very simply under those circumstances, no matter how big and
Speaker 1: how terrible the abuses of the commercial banking system have
Speaker 1: been under this regime, under this creeping authoritarian centralization of
Speaker 1: banking globally, at least amongst the G seven, because we
Speaker 1: kick the rush out so was longer the G eight
Speaker 1: that that's not what they signed up for. They didn't
Speaker 1: sign up for the end of commercial banking. They sign
Speaker 1: up for more, more market share for them, more more
Speaker 1: big for them, more more, all of that. But they
Speaker 1: never in a millionaires that they sign up for, Oh,
Speaker 1: we're going to turn it all over to the communists now,
Speaker 1: and I mean that word sincerely. So in that framework,
Speaker 1: the FED is the best asset. We have to fight
Speaker 1: those people, and when they're done breaking those people, then
Speaker 1: we can then we have to then we can sit
Speaker 1: down and go, Okay, do we really still need a
Speaker 1: Federal Reserve in the way it's been currently constituted. I've
Speaker 1: actually been arguing when you really stop to break it down.
Speaker 1: I've been arguing for bringing the FED back to its
Speaker 1: original conception twelve regional banks and as monetary policies, and
Speaker 1: devolve the power, devolve the power out of d C
Speaker 1: and and devolve the power back into the regions. And
Speaker 1: hell if we need thirty or fifty, I don't care
Speaker 1: federal reserve banks. It doesn't matter to me. What matters
Speaker 1: is is A is A is a refederalization of the
Speaker 1: federal reserve. And when I think about it from that perspective,
Speaker 1: and I think about J. Powell as a person remember,
Speaker 1: I also fundamentally believe in that personnel is policy. Yes,
Speaker 1: and so of course OWL is not cut from the
Speaker 1: same cloth as Ivory Tower globalist Channing Allen, Ivory Tower
Speaker 1: globalist Ben Bernank.
Speaker 2: Yeah, Powell's not an economist.
Speaker 1: Right well yeahfully and then in some ways thankfully. So
Speaker 1: your point about about Treasury secretary is really interesting because
Speaker 1: I was on a podcast with Dave Column on Friday
Speaker 1: and we were talking about from cabinet, this, that and
Speaker 1: everything else, who do you like for Treasury secretary? And
Speaker 1: I want, like, my default answer is Ran Paul because
Speaker 1: Ran Paul, but he threw out Stan Druckenmiller, interesting because
Speaker 1: Stan is a guy that he understands plumbing. He understands
Speaker 1: this always made money. He understands how all this stuff works,
Speaker 1: and he understands the proper role of if you're going
Speaker 1: to have the Central Bank, how that operates, and if
Speaker 1: you're going to have a Treasury Department, how that operates.
Speaker 1: And I can actually see drunken Miller and Powell getting
Speaker 1: together and going, yeah, this sounds good. What do you
Speaker 1: guys want? What do we need to do? I can
Speaker 1: actually make and make an argument for that, And unfortunately,
Speaker 1: it looks to me like that, you know, this is
Speaker 1: with the position that you're in with Custodia that I
Speaker 1: that I understand to the extent that I understand it
Speaker 1: is that you're caught in that terrible transition period and
Speaker 1: that there are deals being made left and right and
Speaker 1: all of the rest of it, and as everybody is
Speaker 1: under you know, everybody is feeling the existential threat. Because
Speaker 1: the way I read that press, that question at the
Speaker 1: press conference coming from Frankly some chick from Politico sounds
Speaker 1: to me like, okay, so Trump wins on Tuesday. On Wednesday,
Speaker 1: they start floating the idea that Trump is going to
Speaker 1: put Mike Pompeo in a sect death a secretary of
Speaker 1: Defense or secretary of State that was obviously been shot down. Yeah, shit, Soday,
Speaker 1: It's hey, let's go after the FED. Because I told you,
Speaker 1: I think I told you, and I know I told
Speaker 1: everybody there were two people that were most in the
Speaker 1: crossfire of the Democrats and your favorite person, Elizabeth Warren.
Speaker 1: In twenty twenty three, it will be Elon Musk over
Speaker 1: free speech, and it'll be it will be Jerome Powell
Speaker 1: over the FED not cutting interest rates, and well and
Speaker 1: behold here we are. And then you know, it's like
Speaker 1: simple if I'm if I'm am I six, or if
Speaker 1: I'm the Bank of England, I got news free. I
Speaker 1: know exactly what I do on Thursday at the press conference.
Speaker 1: I activate the Libertarians to go hog wild and the
Speaker 1: FED like it's the perfect it's the perfect forking play
Speaker 1: between Trump and his base.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I get that. But here's what's interesting is that
Speaker 2: they also activated the New York Times set of course,
Speaker 2: because because because Powell was the universal reaction to his
Speaker 2: to how he answered that question was negative.
Speaker 1: Yes, yeah, agreed, agreed, and you know Powell is not
Speaker 1: is not a politician at all, like I mean, I mean,
Speaker 1: he's very good at at deflecting what his real purpose is.
Speaker 1: His real purpose has been shrinked the balance sheet, drain
Speaker 1: the offshore dollar markets under the guise of taming inflation.
Speaker 1: He's good at that. He's been very good at that.
Speaker 1: He's been very good at giving giving that to his staff.
Speaker 1: What he did the other what he did the other day,
Speaker 1: what he did? What do you what he did the
Speaker 1: other day was? I think that was no different than
Speaker 1: when they threw the climate change actively at him when
Speaker 1: he was at the ECB. And he's he got caught
Speaker 1: on the hot mic saying closed the fucking door like
Speaker 1: that was him saying, no, I'm not not having.
Speaker 2: That's the case. I know where Why did he cut
Speaker 2: interest rates? Why didn't he keep being keep along the
Speaker 2: vulgar I haven't.
Speaker 1: I have a very good answer for that, actually, And
Speaker 1: it's one that I've been thinking about because it's it's
Speaker 1: a it's a real thing. He raises rates during the
Speaker 1: worst banking crisis since Lehman Brothers in March twenty twenty.
Speaker 2: Three, which instigated by the way well.
Speaker 1: Of course, he did, and that was all, And that
Speaker 1: was always part of my argument that they decided to
Speaker 1: take out some of these signature oligarch offshore banks that
Speaker 1: exist with silver Gate. Yeah, yeah, that and right wrong
Speaker 1: or indifferent silver gigs. I've had a long conversation with
Speaker 1: Marty ben how he explained that they had the money,
Speaker 1: Babba bah, they survived the run. I agree, I agree,
Speaker 1: and no argument. And my point here is that but
Speaker 1: he raises interest rates then, and then he holds them
Speaker 1: there for fifteen months, knowing full well that if you're
Speaker 1: going to actually survive this, he can't cut rates, no
Speaker 1: matter how bad the commercial real estate market is, no
Speaker 1: matter how bad the credit markets on them, how badly
Speaker 1: they're seizing, up until it's a foregone conclusion that Kamala
Speaker 1: Harrison and the Democrats are not going to win. I
Speaker 1: think Powell held it off, cutting interest rates for as
Speaker 1: long as possible, and the banks kept the Banks Act
Speaker 1: and the big ones I'm talking about Jamie Diamond over
Speaker 1: JP Morgan and others, because they all came out and
Speaker 1: supported Trump, which was never which was never on the
Speaker 1: table before. Yeah, and then in September he cuts by
Speaker 1: fifty to let the markets know. Yeah, No, shit's really bad.
Speaker 1: I got it wrong. I thought if you cut by
Speaker 1: twenty five, the market will sell off, We'll get those
Speaker 1: bear steep in er trade and all of that stuff.
Speaker 1: I got it wrong. No, it was the right move
Speaker 1: to send to the markets. We're cutting hard because we
Speaker 1: need to now give the banks back their cookie because
Speaker 1: they took a punch in the mouth for eighteen months
Speaker 1: over holden rates this high, and now you've got to
Speaker 1: cut rates to reliquify the credit markets. And that's why
Speaker 1: he cut again on Thursday, and he'll probably cut again
Speaker 1: in December twenty five basis points, and we'll see what
Speaker 1: happens during the Trump administration. I've been on the opinion
Speaker 1: that he's going to cut harder during Trump's term than
Speaker 1: he would have on a Harris term, because he wants
Speaker 1: if Congress reforms on the fiscal side of things, then
Speaker 1: he'll give everybody the room they need to survive, and
Speaker 1: he'll take another round of inflation over something far worse
Speaker 1: than a credit crisis. And I think that's the that's
Speaker 1: the thing, that's the position that he's in, and I
Speaker 1: think he's navigated it to this point pretty well from
Speaker 1: my looking at it.
Speaker 2: From my perspective, well, huge, huge point. He did say
Speaker 2: in that press conference last week that he would raise
Speaker 2: rates again next year under Trump. So and Maria Bartiromo
Speaker 2: and Judy Shelton had a really interesting back fourth I
Speaker 2: posted on my Twitter account on Friday. So interesting because
Speaker 2: Maria she used to be a never Trumper, and you
Speaker 2: know she's she explained, she she she shifted over the
Speaker 2: whole Russia Russia, Russia wrestler Russia hoax when she realized
Speaker 2: that wasn't legit, and so I think she's actually a
Speaker 2: real journalist, but she was asking, she was really trolling,
Speaker 2: how over all this are you? How can you possibly
Speaker 2: think you're more powerful than the President of the United States.
Speaker 2: It's so interesting because I watched her, I think it
Speaker 2: was Friday morning, and at the top of every hour
Speaker 2: she did that same story in a slightly different way,
Speaker 2: and and then she had Judy Judy Shelton on and
Speaker 2: she said, look, howel has just broken his own rule,
Speaker 2: which is that he's he has officially said the FETE
Speaker 2: is not is not supposed to be part of fiscal policy.
Speaker 2: But he went out there and threatened Trump and said,
Speaker 2: if you're profligate, I may have to raise rates. So
Speaker 2: he's cutting rates while he's saying, if your profligate, I am,
Speaker 2: I may have to raise rates under you. It's a
Speaker 2: huge threat. And again like that's how the universal reaction
Speaker 2: that I saw nobody other than you was praising him,
Speaker 2: which makes it so interesting for you.
Speaker 1: But I would have done it if I weren't fed chair.
Speaker 1: This is exactly the way I would have handled it.
Speaker 1: He's been sitting there for the last year saying, look,
Speaker 1: the fiscal we're on an unsustainable fiscal path, and I
Speaker 1: don't have any I don't have any options here that
Speaker 1: he's he threw that crap out the window a year
Speaker 1: ago when he started saying things like we're on an
Speaker 1: unsustainable fiscal path at every press conference, so he was
Speaker 1: letting everybody know, and I'm going to keep interest rates
Speaker 1: high and then if and that's my argument, he's literally
Speaker 1: everybody's everybody melting down over this is missing the broader
Speaker 1: picture because everybody is now it's now fashionable to be
Speaker 1: anti fed. I'm serious. Clear, Yes, that's clear. It's fashionable
Speaker 1: to be anti.
Speaker 2: Fedvan on the left now, especially on the left.
Speaker 1: But on the left, why because he just took away
Speaker 1: their frigging punch bowl by raising interest rates to five
Speaker 1: or quarter percent and attempting to bankrupt the Bank of
Speaker 1: England and the ECB and everybody else. Of course, we're
Speaker 1: getting a media pushback against this that the FED. I
Speaker 1: always said, I said, the FED will be the biggest
Speaker 1: well if they if they have an issue at all
Speaker 1: that they can run on. And they had a camp,
Speaker 1: and they had a campaign platform, which they didn't, but
Speaker 1: if they were going to have one, it would have
Speaker 1: been you know, Powell took Powell created a recession for you.
Speaker 1: The FED destroyed your took your took your lunch away,
Speaker 1: and now your kids can't get you know, can't buy
Speaker 1: the goojoe with the kunkery grip and all the rest
Speaker 1: of it. They tried that game. Elizabeth Warren came out
Speaker 1: before every freaking FOMC meeting with a sternly worded letter saying,
Speaker 1: you need to cut interest rate seventy by basis points.
Speaker 1: Why but the City Bank told me to That's why. Like,
Speaker 1: I'm sorry, that's the answer. And so Powell effectively saying
Speaker 1: that Trump, look, I would like to be on your
Speaker 1: That's why I read it was like I would like
Speaker 1: to be on your side. Put the fiscal side of things,
Speaker 1: come in, do the slash and burn that you've been
Speaker 1: talking about, and I'll I'll accommodate you, because then I'll
Speaker 1: have the room to do what I want that I
Speaker 1: can do that I need to do, which is keep
Speaker 1: the bank's liquid but get a normally up sloping need curve.
Speaker 1: Here's this is the way I read twenty twenty five.
Speaker 1: At this point, if we if if Congress comes in
Speaker 1: and does what needs to be done, then what we're
Speaker 1: gonna have is the that's gonna cut interest rates by
Speaker 1: I don't know, another one hundred and twenty five basis
Speaker 1: points from here, maybe one hundred and fifty down to
Speaker 1: three percent by the end of the next year. The
Speaker 1: long end of the curve is not gonna move very
Speaker 1: much because there's gonna be capital influence in the United States.
Speaker 1: So we're gonna get the attempt, the tempt that sell
Speaker 1: offs here and there, excuse me, and then but it'll
Speaker 1: it'll hold a range, and then the short end of
Speaker 1: the curve will come down and we'll have a normally
Speaker 1: up sloping needed curve. We're gonna have a recession Okay,
Speaker 1: we're gonna have the return of inflation.
Speaker 2: We're gonna have a GDP recession.
Speaker 1: Yeah, absolutely, and we're gonna have and we're gonna have.
Speaker 2: Private sectorsion by the way, sorry interapt.
Speaker 1: No, no, absolutely, gross national spending that gross national product. Right,
Speaker 1: And so this is the way I'm reading it for
Speaker 1: next year. And I'll be honest with you, like the
Speaker 1: SOFA futures market keeps getting it wrong because they don't
Speaker 1: they because they're over because the currency and bond traders
Speaker 1: and the repo traders are getting are are are getting
Speaker 1: false or reading the tea leaves wrong. They're reading the
Speaker 1: FED either behind the curve or ahead of the curve
Speaker 1: or whatever. And no, you're look at the global situation,
Speaker 1: the interplay between the try the real triparthee repo market,
Speaker 1: the Bank of Japan, the ECB, and the FED. And
Speaker 1: now now things change, and that's that's big. That's basically
Speaker 1: my my macro argument for how the central banks are
Speaker 1: playing this stuff out. You know, salt to taste, but
Speaker 1: that's where I see things at this point.
Speaker 2: Well, this is going to be interesting because the Fed literally,
Speaker 2: I mean there's evidence Michael Barr was the one who
Speaker 2: was behind the denial of custodia. And there was a
Speaker 2: Walls Washington Post article, uh in what a month ago
Speaker 2: that said, oh, the Trump's not gonna fire Powell. He's
Speaker 2: going to fire bar Well, he needs he needs cause
Speaker 2: in order to fire anybody. And there's all kinds of Again,
Speaker 2: there's a question whether it has never been tested before,
Speaker 2: but it's pretty easy to make a case for cause
Speaker 2: over all the d banking and maybe that's where he goes.
Speaker 1: Well, no, that that's a that's a that actually again
Speaker 1: that supports both of our arguments. Like you get rid
Speaker 1: of the guy who junked, who junked custodia's application and
Speaker 1: violated the Federal Reserve, violated all the laws surrounding the
Speaker 1: Federal Reserve, and you get the guy who actually did it,
Speaker 1: the Powells, excuse me, Powell's running interest rate the interest
Speaker 1: rate operations pretty much the way he should be. And
Speaker 1: and everybody comes out of the winner here.
Speaker 2: And I don't think Trump cares about custodia, but I
Speaker 2: do think he cares about his wife and his son,
Speaker 2: and he recognized they were targeted. Yeah, yeah, And that's
Speaker 2: not a difficult leap to look at the evidence that's
Speaker 2: out there publicly about what happened to the crypto industry
Speaker 2: and to Custodia specifically through our lawsuit to to to
Speaker 2: conclude that the that the debanking that went broader than
Speaker 2: just crypto. Just like in Operation Choe put in one
Speaker 2: point zero, it hit thirty industries, right, it hit you know,
Speaker 2: five or six this time, but you know, including the
Speaker 2: Trump family, right, and that all that all got done
Speaker 2: by someone. And it's pretty obvious we know where it
Speaker 2: happened in the crypto industry. That's already out there.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Well, here's the other thing. Trump was has went
Speaker 1: back and forth on Powell. He was saying, you know
Speaker 1: he did six months ago he was like, we got
Speaker 1: to get rid of this guy. And then two months
Speaker 1: ago it was well, no.
Speaker 2: No, not Powell. And then a month later it was
Speaker 2: well barred, right.
Speaker 1: And right, And so understand again, at some point, you know,
Speaker 1: we've been within my community, right, we've been watching this
Speaker 1: very carefully to falsify my arguments because as well they
Speaker 1: should than we should, because I'm not saying I know
Speaker 1: I know everything, or even right about anything. It's like
Speaker 1: this causes a constant game of falsification. And what we
Speaker 1: noted was what we kept saying is did did did
Speaker 1: Has Trump had the talk from Diamond yet about what's
Speaker 1: going to happen? And I don't know because it doesn't
Speaker 1: sound like it. And then right around the time, Jamie
Speaker 1: Diamond said, yeah, I kind of like Trump and I'm
Speaker 1: going to vote for him, and it's and basically telling
Speaker 1: Wall Street it's okay to vote one first, to vote
Speaker 1: for a Republican when he backed Nikki Haley back during
Speaker 1: the primaries, and then later like this isn't Diamond angling
Speaker 1: for Treasury Secretary? Jamie Diamond wants to leave. He's done.
Speaker 1: It's very clear. I think that he's he wants to
Speaker 1: go the retirement to the retirement and he's done. And
Speaker 1: you know, if i'm a JP Morgan Chaerholder, I'm like, okay,
Speaker 1: you did great. And I know something else about about
Speaker 1: Diamond that's really because I think he's a very pivotal player.
Speaker 1: He's clearly the CEO of the most powerful bank in
Speaker 1: the world, so we should have listened to what he
Speaker 1: has to say. And here's the thing. When he went
Speaker 1: to Davos earlier in the year, noticed that he had
Speaker 1: Mary Erdos with him, and he didn't let him let
Speaker 1: her off his arm. And yet she's not part of
Speaker 1: the JP Morgan succession team.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and your podcast before, Yeah, I have very.
Speaker 1: Very good authority from people who understand the politics inside
Speaker 1: JP Morgan. Aside from the fact that she was the
Speaker 1: one that handled the Epstein account, right that, Yeah, that's
Speaker 1: not happening. That she was. She was much the snake
Speaker 1: in the JP Morgan garden. So at least on this
Speaker 1: particular front. The JP Morgan's got a lot of snakes
Speaker 1: and a lot of gardens, clearly, but you know, this
Speaker 1: is this is important to to just to remind everybody.
Speaker 1: So again, what do you mean by that? What I
Speaker 1: mean by that is that Mary Urdos is is the
Speaker 1: is the Davos snake in the grass. She's the and
Speaker 1: she managed the Epstein account. Now, when we go back
Speaker 1: to a year and a half ago, when all of
Speaker 1: a sudden, out of the blue, after Powell raises interest
Speaker 1: rates and everybody's screaming and blah blah blah blah. Well
Speaker 1: and behold, Jamie Diamond gets hit with an Epstein lawsuit
Speaker 1: coming out of Puerto Rico. Remember that, Yes, yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: And and you know and Whitney Webb like took that
Speaker 1: and and and did the whole guilt by association thing
Speaker 1: four months on end. And again, I look at it
Speaker 1: this way, What did Epstein ever have in his bank
Speaker 1: account at any one time? Fifteen maybe one hundred million dollars?
Speaker 1: I mean, he had a lot of influence, but he
Speaker 1: didn't have a lot of money. Like that amount of
Speaker 1: money does not get you in the room with Jamie
Speaker 1: Diamond gets you in the room of Mary erdoes okay,
Speaker 1: you know, gets you in the room with the VP.
Speaker 1: It doesn't get you in the in the room smoking
Speaker 1: cigars with the freakin with the CEO's okay. So meaning
Speaker 1: this was set up as like Epstein's going to have
Speaker 1: bank accounts at every major in New York bank and
Speaker 1: to be activated as a guilt guilt the association end,
Speaker 1: or what I like to call nuts and slots as
Speaker 1: a way to do death by reputation, attack the person
Speaker 1: on their reputation. So that, yeah, so you Diamond, So
Speaker 1: you tie Diamond by by filing a lawsuit against the
Speaker 1: CEO of JP Morgan. I mean it's just that, yeah,
Speaker 1: I mean, it's just that kind of thing. This is
Speaker 1: this is so very This is so very typical. This
Speaker 1: is how they took down with too Salbini. This is
Speaker 1: how they take This is how they take on everybody.
Speaker 1: And they can't take Trump down that way because Trump
Speaker 1: is immune to this because he has no shame. He
Speaker 1: has no shame. And I don't think Jamie Diamond has
Speaker 1: much shame either. It's like he's like I wasn't involved
Speaker 1: in that done and he didn't even comment out and
Speaker 1: it moved on with right. But but it was red
Speaker 1: meeat chum for the end of fetters and for the
Speaker 1: libertarian movement to then grasp onto and then have it
Speaker 1: set seed through the zeitgeist for a year and a half. Meanwhile,
Speaker 1: the reality is is that these people are getting freaking
Speaker 1: slobber left and right, because I mean, dude, I'm literally
Speaker 1: sitting here watching the europound cross like drop low three
Speaker 1: cents and all the markets are closed, right, the bond market,
Speaker 1: the US bond markets are closed today. This is a
Speaker 1: Veterans day, and I'm watching the europound cross like collapse,
Speaker 1: and I'm like, huh, what a shock?
Speaker 2: Okay, next, you know, right, well, and your thesis all
Speaker 2: along has been this is about bankrupting Europe, right, in
Speaker 2: bankrupting the Bank of England.
Speaker 1: Well, really, it's about getting control over the price of dollars,
Speaker 1: as they that's it. And then if we have domestic
Speaker 1: control over the price of dollars, then we then once
Speaker 1: we have that, now we can perform the Federal Reserve
Speaker 1: to our standards. Right. And what I really like is,
Speaker 1: I think maybe you should speak to this because you're
Speaker 1: the one who brought this idea into my head. So
Speaker 1: which is the states state banks? Like the whole brown
Speaker 1: argument about state banks and all of that as a
Speaker 1: means by which together do an end and run around
Speaker 1: the Federal Reserve, which I absolutely and utterly support. But
Speaker 1: I want to hear you like, put some meat on
Speaker 1: those bones.
Speaker 2: Sure, well, let's talk about the history when the United States,
Speaker 2: the United States small U small s got together. Who
Speaker 2: chartered banks For the first one hundred fifty years of
Speaker 2: the US's existence, well not one hundred fifty hundred thirty
Speaker 2: of the US's existence, it was the states and only
Speaker 2: the states. It wasn't until the Civil War that a
Speaker 2: federal bank charter was created. Now, there were two banks
Speaker 2: of the United States, which were the first and second
Speaker 2: central banks that were chartered. Really related to the wars
Speaker 2: of the War of eighteen twelve, for example, in the
Speaker 2: first case, right, and so let's says that history side.
Speaker 2: But the key point of the history is for half
Speaker 2: of this nation's history, there was nothing but state charge banks, Okay.
Speaker 2: And I realized that the people in Washington, d C.
Speaker 2: Can't fathom the notion that we could have states chartering
Speaker 2: banks without federal permission and federal oversights. But that's the
Speaker 2: system that they that they've created by reinterpreting their governing
Speaker 2: statutes and keeping out the state chartered banks they don't like. Okay,
Speaker 2: So now, how how do states fight back against this?
Speaker 2: When I first learned that this debanking thing was bigger
Speaker 2: than crypto and fintech, which is of course my world
Speaker 2: and so I'm very very focused on that was when
Speaker 2: I saw Jimmy Petru that he wants Florida to start
Speaker 2: the Florida Sun Sunshine Bank. He's the chief financial officer
Speaker 2: of Florida. And he did that because of Trump and
Speaker 2: because of doctor Mercola, who moved his business from Illinois
Speaker 2: to Florida, and he's a COVID critic. And it was
Speaker 2: when Mercola's business he was very public about this. He
Speaker 2: has a lot of followers, myself included. I look at
Speaker 2: his daily mail, and I've done that for more than
Speaker 2: a decade. In doctor mccola's case, and so I really
Speaker 2: respect him and he's not political at all. But man,
Speaker 2: when his company got debanked, it wasn't just his company,
Speaker 2: it was every executive and their spouses Jesus all got
Speaker 2: debanked at the same time. Okay, And he picked up
Speaker 2: the phone. Clearly had a relationship with Jimmy Petronas, and
Speaker 2: Jimmy Patrona said this is wrong. And so he said, look,
Speaker 2: I'm going to look into taking the power back from
Speaker 2: these Jacobins in Washington, d c. And giving it to
Speaker 2: the states. So here's what's interesting Wyoming. Of course we're
Speaker 2: having the problems with the Wyoming Speedy Banks, of which
Speaker 2: Custodia is on the front line. There's another there's another
Speaker 2: activity going on in Wyoming, which is Wyoming has a
Speaker 2: stable token commission for the state to issue its own
Speaker 2: stable coin. And part of the reason Wyoming did this
Speaker 2: is in reaction to the FED doing what it did
Speaker 2: to the Wyoming Speedy Banks. It's like, all right, if
Speaker 2: you're not going to let our private banks do it,
Speaker 2: then we're coming at you as a state, okay, but
Speaker 2: they can't get banking. And what I have learned from
Speaker 2: the inside is that it's all that the FED is
Speaker 2: really freaked out about Wyoming issuing its own stable token.
Speaker 2: It's a dollar, okay, This is just it's going to
Speaker 2: create another clearinghouse for a US dollar. That's all it
Speaker 2: is in function, but thet the FED is freaked out
Speaker 2: about it. So step back and put these puzzle pieces together.
Speaker 2: It's pretty obvious if if Trump hadn't won, that the
Speaker 2: Red States were going to be getting together and creating
Speaker 2: their own US dollar clearinghouse. Agreed, But there's plenty of
Speaker 2: history and precedent for this. It's called the twelve Regional
Speaker 2: Federal Reserve Banks. What are those twelve Regional Federal Reserve banks?
Speaker 2: They're US dollar clearing houses. They're banks for banks. That's
Speaker 2: what a clearinghouse is. And if the FED is going
Speaker 2: after Red State people, businesses, religions, entire industries it doesn't like,
Speaker 2: then create your own version. And I do believe that
Speaker 2: that was coming because Jimmy Petronos was going to run
Speaker 2: into the same problem that Wyoming speedy banks ran into,
Speaker 2: which is, Oh my gosh, the FED thinks it has discretion.
Speaker 2: And this has been litigated and in the Tenth Circuit,
Speaker 2: the only appellate judge to date that has ever looked
Speaker 2: at the issue said no, the FED does not have discretion.
Speaker 2: And so so what's interesting is I don't know how
Speaker 2: far down the path Jimmy Petrona's has gone in Florida.
Speaker 2: He's put out a commission to study it. I don't
Speaker 2: think he's going to have to do it, because I
Speaker 2: think Trump's going to deal with this. But this whole
Speaker 2: notion that that that the banking system can be used,
Speaker 2: can be weaponized against political enemies, it's just wrong. And
Speaker 2: here's what's fascinating to me. And I by the way,
Speaker 2: I don't care which side you're on. It's just wrong.
Speaker 2: Here's what's fascinating to me. I am really watching closely
Speaker 2: to see if Trump is going to is going to
Speaker 2: so reform this that the power can never be abused again,
Speaker 2: or whether he's going to want to control that power.
Speaker 2: I have a feeling it's the former. I'm optimistic it's
Speaker 2: the former. And when I see things like Elon Musk
Speaker 2: engaging with Ron Paul saying we ought to not reform
Speaker 2: the FED, we ought to just tear it down. And
Speaker 2: Elon's saying, interesting, well, okay, that's that's signal that at
Speaker 2: least it's being discussed. And Jadie Vance also came out
Speaker 2: and said, hey, I didn't agree with Ron Paul, but
Speaker 2: the more I think about it, the more I think
Speaker 2: he's right. So you know, that's where the right and
Speaker 2: the Libertarians are. And then the left is mad at
Speaker 2: the FED because they're partly blaming the J Powell for
Speaker 2: the Kabala loss. Who is advocating for the FED right now?
Speaker 1: You know it.
Speaker 2: I can't know anyone.
Speaker 1: Else I know. I know it's hilarious. I get to
Speaker 1: stand out here on the island by myself, going, but
Speaker 1: but the Fed's winning. What are you talking about, like
Speaker 1: they're beating the bad people? Because because not in my case,
Speaker 1: not at all, not it. But you're not there, you're
Speaker 1: not You're not the bad people. That's my point, the
Speaker 1: bad people. This is a bigger frame. This is a
Speaker 1: bigger fight than this. It's it's it's it's fascinating. And
Speaker 1: what I was trying to say when I was at
Speaker 1: the Mesa's Institute last month which is Look, it all
Speaker 1: depends upon the frame. Uh everybody gets tomiss it because
Speaker 1: because they won't release the speech. So the all I
Speaker 1: was trying to say is, look, depending on your frame
Speaker 1: of your framework, right, I can. I can talk about
Speaker 1: the framework you just put together, which is the FEDS
Speaker 1: the villain, where the victims and the free and and
Speaker 1: and and free banking is the hero. And no argument
Speaker 1: with that framework at all. I have no argument with
Speaker 1: that framework. That is the that is the framework we
Speaker 1: would all like to devolve the system down to. But
Speaker 1: from another perspective, you have a bigger one where you
Speaker 1: have transnational globalists and other central banks angling to pull
Speaker 1: the US banking apart up and the and and by extension,
Speaker 1: the entire country apart at the seams, both politically, culturally, economically,
Speaker 1: and every other way. And then that framework, the FED
Speaker 1: is the best asset we have because they are the
Speaker 1: most powerful institution in a fight between central banks. What
Speaker 1: are you gonna do? You want to go in unarmed?
Speaker 1: I don't know about you. I don't like going to
Speaker 1: a knife with I don't like going to the to
Speaker 1: a gunfight with a knife. I'm like, I like you
Speaker 1: let them and and they have the incentive structure to
Speaker 1: do this, because who are they? Who do they work for?
Speaker 1: The US commercial banks? And who and who would they
Speaker 1: be advocating for under these circumstances. The US money Center,
Speaker 1: I mean, obviously the New York Fed advocates for the
Speaker 1: New York money Center banks and San Francisco advocates for
Speaker 1: the military industrial complex, Silicon Valley banks, blah blah blah blah.
Speaker 1: But that's that's the argument that I'm making. I know,
Speaker 1: I'm standing out here on an island. I know it,
Speaker 1: I really you are. I am at this point, and
Speaker 1: I don't and I don't care. I'm so far I've
Speaker 1: been right from that framework, but I don't have any
Speaker 1: problem with the other framework, and as far as I'm concerned,
Speaker 1: and then I'm not the only one. Daniel de martinoz
Speaker 1: Booth is making the same thinking, basically the same argument,
Speaker 1: so is Martin Armstrong. They're both saying the same thing,
Speaker 1: which is the which is the which is that we
Speaker 1: live in a world with these these evil, these evil things.
Speaker 1: If you don't like they both like the Central Bank
Speaker 1: far more than I do. They're not neither of them
Speaker 1: are are as Doctornari libertarian as I am. And that's fine.
Speaker 1: I don't have any problem with with them having their
Speaker 1: perspective on things. They see the but they understand I think,
Speaker 1: in the in the grand, in the in the real,
Speaker 1: in the real grand scheme of things that we have.
Speaker 1: These central banks, they are weapons. They are armies. And
Speaker 1: in that and and that's in that role. You can't
Speaker 1: this band your army and say hey, we're gonna fight,
Speaker 1: We're gonna win a war. This is a war that
Speaker 1: has to play itself out until such time as the
Speaker 1: bad actors are destroyed. And then if we have political
Speaker 1: control of the United States to hold the Central Bank
Speaker 1: feet to the fire, we can then reform the central
Speaker 1: Bank to our purposes. The problem that we've been having
Speaker 1: is that there are two There are two forms of
Speaker 1: control over a country, monetary and political. Under the Alma
Speaker 1: administration we had the globalists were in charge of both.
Speaker 1: They were in charge of the political and they were
Speaker 1: in charge of the monetary. Under Trump, we had political control.
Speaker 1: The monetary system was only beginning to be We are
Speaker 1: in a transition period. Powell was coming in to reform
Speaker 1: the FED, but so for all of that stuff, and
Speaker 1: that had that take that took a while to play out.
Speaker 1: Then it was restored, then political restored control was restored
Speaker 1: under Biden for the globalists. Meanwhile, Powell stood by as
Speaker 1: a rock say no, that's fine, you want to be
Speaker 1: globalist five and a half percent. And it's an audio podcast, folks,
Speaker 1: I just flipped everybody off. You guys can't see any
Speaker 1: of this. And then now we are on the cusp
Speaker 1: of them losing control of both the political and the
Speaker 1: monetary system of the US and for that to then
Speaker 1: be reformed in such a way that it works for
Speaker 1: the American people under its original conception, conception under the Constitution,
Speaker 1: and we can actually see the process of the end
Speaker 1: of the age of central banking. This is a five
Speaker 1: hundred year plan that's come that has now failed with
Speaker 1: the United States jacking out of the system. This goes
Speaker 1: back before the Bank of England. This goes back to
Speaker 1: the old Venetian banks and everything else in the formation
Speaker 1: of the Bank of England in sixteen ninety four was
Speaker 1: the beginning of this era of history. I've been saying
Speaker 1: this from the beginning. This is what this is about.
Speaker 1: And these people that have been quote unquote ruling the
Speaker 1: world is a shadow oligarchy behind the scenes in years,
Speaker 1: they are about to get fucking rolled. And we don't
Speaker 1: want to We don't want to disempower work. We want
Speaker 1: to use the dragon that we have to go slay
Speaker 1: those other freaking dragons happened, and then and then we
Speaker 1: get to sit back and the world pick up the
Speaker 1: pieces and and where we build the world. That's what
Speaker 1: I say.
Speaker 2: Let's talk about two things. One is that Trump's only
Speaker 2: going to have the Republicans controlling the Senate for two years.
Speaker 2: The math is equally as bad for the Republicans in
Speaker 2: two years as it was for the Democrats this time around. Okay,
Speaker 2: so he's only going to have the Senate for two years.
Speaker 2: He's got to get this done in two years. And
Speaker 2: then let's talk about crypto. It was so interesting that
Speaker 2: Howard Lutnik is in charge of the of the transition team. Yes,
Speaker 2: and we don't know what that means again in terms
Speaker 2: of federal financial regulators, because some of the names that
Speaker 2: are being floated for Treasury secretary are vehemently anti crypto,
Speaker 2: like John Paulson, Right, but then you've got Howard himself
Speaker 2: and Scott Bessent rights. Okay, fire away.
Speaker 1: No, no, no, no, no, you're you're right about that, but
Speaker 1: when I'm not, I'm not saying you should be we
Speaker 1: should not be horrified by this. But again, what have
Speaker 1: we heard from all of these people over the last week.
Speaker 1: We've heard all these people being floated for Treasury secretary
Speaker 1: for Defense secretary, like Pompeo and Nikky Halei. And that's all, chum.
Speaker 1: There's something else going on here. Okay. Every rumor that
Speaker 1: you hear about who's going to be in the cabinet
Speaker 1: is bullshit. And I'm sorry, but it's bullshit coming out
Speaker 1: of the bowels of m I six and the Bank
Speaker 1: of England and the Masade and everywhere else. That's my
Speaker 1: take on the story. And so far I've been right
Speaker 1: about this. So let's not like, and you look at
Speaker 1: Mitch McConnell trying to like select the Senate majority leader
Speaker 1: in the dark. Why is he doing that?
Speaker 2: Twitter's forcing that open? Holy cow.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I don't know that.
Speaker 2: It's going to work, but I mean the powers that
Speaker 2: be very clearly we're lining up behind soon. And then
Speaker 2: all of a sudden, Elon comes out and RFK comes
Speaker 2: out and indorses and.
Speaker 1: The big and the big yeah. And the big questionnaire
Speaker 1: is who leaked that. I hear it's Marjorie Taylor Green
Speaker 1: and if it is, well, then I'll take back every
Speaker 1: nasty thing I've ever said about her, and I said
Speaker 1: a lot of nasty things about margin.
Speaker 2: I have no idea, but but needless to say, like
Speaker 2: the Twitter spear is really it's forcing. It's so fascinating.
Speaker 2: It's forcing us senators to come out and say that
Speaker 2: they're not committed yet. I saw Senator Lemmas come out
Speaker 2: and say that today and just avow the report from
Speaker 2: Benny Johnson. I think is who it was that that
Speaker 2: that this was already in the back for food. So
Speaker 2: it's fascinating how the the the uprising and the power
Speaker 2: of the people through Twitter. That's where it's happening. Man,
Speaker 2: I don't even bother for at this point to go
Speaker 2: to most other news sources. At this point, Twitter is where.
Speaker 2: I mean, there's so much crap on it you have
Speaker 2: to absolutely be able to wade through. But you've got
Speaker 2: to find high signal to noise ratio people like you
Speaker 2: and who will make you think whether you're grow with
Speaker 2: them or not. And there's so much much out there
Speaker 2: that you're learning on Twitter that you just you can't
Speaker 2: get from the mainstream media.
Speaker 1: It's very cool, it's very it is it's fascinating. And
Speaker 1: I'll be honest with you, Caitlin, what I put out
Speaker 1: on Twitter so much if it comes from my community
Speaker 1: scouring the rest of the world, so I have a
Speaker 1: high mind behind me. Who then I get the filter
Speaker 1: through the signal of the noise ratio and all of
Speaker 1: this stuff, and then I put out the bond mots
Speaker 1: and and and and you know, you know. And I'm
Speaker 1: not saying that I do a great job of filtering
Speaker 1: and curating, because I do the best I can. But
Speaker 1: because there's so much and I can't work twenty four
Speaker 1: hours a day, I do have to feed my World
Speaker 1: Warcraft addiction.
Speaker 2: But but your hive mind and everybody else is hive.
Speaker 1: Mind, and everybody's dow.
Speaker 2: And it's moving the.
Speaker 1: Overtas yes, it is, without a doubt. And Trump understands this.
Speaker 1: And Trump knows just how I think he should have
Speaker 1: quashed the Pompeio Nicky Handley thing about two days earlier.
Speaker 1: In my mind, I think I can let it go
Speaker 1: a little too long. But then maybe he didn't. Maybe
Speaker 1: he did it on purpose, sole go right, or maybe
Speaker 1: he just was busy and he cut he got around
Speaker 1: to it. What are they talking about? I get rid
Speaker 1: of that ship? Now, Okay, let me put some Aaron
Speaker 1: tweet out onto Twitter that I'm not interested in, you know.
Speaker 1: And fine, I do a terrible Trump. I do a
Speaker 1: terrible Trump impersonation. But you know, I think that this
Speaker 1: is this stuff is very I think it's all in flux,
Speaker 1: and it's you're seeing a titanic battle of trying to
Speaker 1: shape the narrative around what's happened here and shape this transition.
Speaker 1: And I got a couple of things that I threw out,
Speaker 1: you know, and the and the thing I just did
Speaker 1: a coffee and the mic. Has anybody seen Trump? Has
Speaker 1: anybody seen Hillary Clinton?
Speaker 2: Yeah?
Speaker 1: We've seen. Are what we've seen or recordings apparently made
Speaker 1: anywhere from one to two years ago about what he
Speaker 1: plans to do come out on through his official channels
Speaker 1: and the official mouthpiece. And that's enough. But he's that
Speaker 1: guy's in hiding right now, trying to not get assassinated.
Speaker 2: Oh my gosh, that's clear, yes, because the world massively
Speaker 2: changes if he does get assassinated. Unfortunately, so yeah, good
Speaker 2: for him. And I hope I know he sees it,
Speaker 2: he knows it, he knows that that that a lot
Speaker 2: of people want him, unfortunately not to take the reigns
Speaker 2: of power, and and that might do some very crazy things.
Speaker 2: And I hope not, I really pray not. And I
Speaker 2: do believe that there there, there is the fact that
Speaker 2: he that that first assassination attempt was such a near miss.
Speaker 2: Holy moly. I mean that just the historical significance of
Speaker 2: that he could easily have been Abraham Lincoln and he wasn't.
Speaker 2: And what does that mean? And and yes.
Speaker 1: And I am not. I am. I am the farthest
Speaker 1: thing from a religious man and any kind of in
Speaker 1: any kind of organized sense. And I'm like, that is
Speaker 1: the closest thing I've seen the divine fucking intervention.
Speaker 2: It was meant to be. He was meant to live, right, Yeah, exactly,
Speaker 2: he was meant to live.
Speaker 1: Yeah, And everything changed in that moment. And these people
Speaker 1: bet on their back foot since July fourteenth. And you know, look,
Speaker 1: there's a gant charge. I say it all the time,
Speaker 1: as a gant charge. My Microsoft project file up again,
Speaker 1: Evil Corpse Central, wanting to get this wanting to continue
Speaker 1: down this path. And they're they and thankfully these people
Speaker 1: are also incompetant because the people that they put managers
Speaker 1: in charge, they put you know, the guys with the
Speaker 1: with the cornflower tie, you're the middle manager. They put
Speaker 1: the point here to Boston Tilbert in charge of the
Speaker 1: global economy, right and in the political power structure, and uh,
Speaker 1: you know, you get what you paid for. And these
Speaker 1: they're you know, thankfully, these people are easy to run
Speaker 1: rings around. And then you know, I haven't even we
Speaker 1: haven't even discussed, like we've been stuck in the weeds
Speaker 1: of the financial markets and everything else. But you know, dude,
Speaker 1: putin speech about I the other day, was it was
Speaker 1: was lightning fascinating. Yeah, yeah, I mean, just some unbelievable
Speaker 1: and I stopped list and it's Putine for a while
Speaker 1: because I know what he's going to say. But when
Speaker 1: he said those things at val day, the way he
Speaker 1: said them.
Speaker 2: Well, it's very obvious. You've seen a lot of you've
Speaker 2: seen a major shift in foreign policy in some of
Speaker 2: the aggressors coming to heal and recognizing that the world
Speaker 2: has changed without even Trump taking power.
Speaker 1: Yet really incredible, the German government fell I just did
Speaker 1: literally the thirty minutes on the copy of the mic
Speaker 1: with with with Alex Kraner and Steve Murray about this
Speaker 1: and just trying to go overall. I did something with
Speaker 1: my patrons the other day about it, like that what
Speaker 1: with the TLDR. The TLDR is that Germany's political internetcy
Speaker 1: and political mess is in flux, and the old rules
Speaker 1: and the old relationships are breaking down. And I think
Speaker 1: that my read, and it's very complicated, but as of today,
Speaker 1: and that could change by Wednesday, but my read is
Speaker 1: that the German and USh realists are making their presence
Speaker 1: felt and they are done with this merclist bullshit and
Speaker 1: it's going to end now, and all off Shoals is
Speaker 1: desperately trying to cling to power long enough, and the
Speaker 1: hope that Donald Trump gets assassinated or gets stopped from
Speaker 1: taking the reins of power in January before they can
Speaker 1: then reassert control again. That's what I think is going on.
Speaker 1: And we'll see what happens if they try to ban AfD.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I saw that.
Speaker 1: I don't know that that's going to work. I'm still
Speaker 1: trying to work through it. Unfortunately, I've been like talking
Speaker 1: into a mic all day that I sort of working
Speaker 1: on a blog post to work through some of the stuff.
Speaker 1: I'll get to it some time later in the week
Speaker 1: and hopefully sure read it.
Speaker 2: Yeah, well, because there's a lot of signal right there,
Speaker 2: for sure, but I don't know quite how to read
Speaker 2: it all yet. And the whole notion of trying to
Speaker 2: ban AfD and will it work if they try to
Speaker 2: ban it is an interesting question. But it all comes
Speaker 2: back to, you know, going back to the history of
Speaker 2: the creation of the Euro. Why the German industrialists want
Speaker 2: the Euro. They wanted a big devaluation of the mark,
Speaker 2: and by going together with the weaker Southern European currencies
Speaker 2: into one currency, they got to basically backdoor have work
Speaker 2: into list monetary policy, right, and so they want the
Speaker 2: Euro to be devalued or maybe even to fall apart.
Speaker 1: Yeah, well, that's there's a couple of things here, and
Speaker 1: again now we can talk about the monolithic that funds
Speaker 1: rate because it's the exact same play California has been
Speaker 1: running the German playbook within the Euro on the United
Speaker 1: States for one hundred and ten years, which is how
Speaker 1: you built the military industrial complex, is how you built
Speaker 1: Silicon Valley, because the demand for capital in California should
Speaker 1: be a lot free and higher than it is in Mississippi,
Speaker 1: and the Mississippi is having to deal with the same
Speaker 1: interest rate that California is. So California is beetting capital
Speaker 1: at a point and a half lower than it should
Speaker 1: and Mississippi is having to pay a point and a
Speaker 1: half more than it should. And that's that's the problem.
Speaker 1: It's exactly what the Germans did with the euro and
Speaker 1: now we're getting to the point where the whole thing
Speaker 1: is starting to collapse. And now you can't now that
Speaker 1: you've you've just you've destroyed German dynamism within the within
Speaker 1: the economy. Now they're at now they're at their their
Speaker 1: existential moment as well. And then for the Americans to
Speaker 1: push and for Brussels in a controlled, controlled collapse of
Speaker 1: the entire European economy and the hope that they can
Speaker 1: get a war ship all the male contents over into
Speaker 1: into Ukraine to fight the Russians and then you know,
Speaker 1: do a monetary reset. That was their plan, and that
Speaker 1: plan is not going to happen.
Speaker 2: That's not going to work.
Speaker 1: Yeah, because Powell raised interest rates to five and a
Speaker 1: half percent, and Trump won is one reelection that now
Speaker 1: what so now what now? We just want to we
Speaker 1: watch it play out and then we wait for the
Speaker 1: sovereign det crisis to occur in Europe because this right,
Speaker 1: because because German buns trading at two negative one hundred
Speaker 1: and ninety basis points to American debt of same maturity
Speaker 1: is you know, that's that that's an abomination, right like
Speaker 1: the market is not priced properly. And that's because Christine
Speaker 1: Laguard and I've gone over this many times. Go look
Speaker 1: at break the TIC report down by region of the world,
Speaker 1: and you'll realize that all summer long, while Yellen was
Speaker 1: doing QE at the Treasury Department to mantipulate the long
Speaker 1: end of the field curve down and allow the bond
Speaker 1: traders to front run the treasury, we watched the European
Speaker 1: central banks add on over three hundred billion dollars worth
Speaker 1: of US treasuries. As of the latest TSE report, which
Speaker 1: goes through September, and since Powell started tightening, that number
Speaker 1: is almost a trillion dollars. Wow, okay, and everybody else
Speaker 1: is basically fine. The Chinese sold off about four hundred
Speaker 1: million dollars and then they see but they didn't but
Speaker 1: stopped around. They stopped right around Jackson Holt now right
Speaker 1: around the end of twenty twenty one, and they've just
Speaker 1: been bouncing around a twenty billion, twenty to forty billion
Speaker 1: dollars ban since then. And the only time you ever
Speaker 1: hear anything on zero hedge is when they sell forty billion.
Speaker 1: Knowledge that you never hear about when they bought forty
Speaker 1: billion dollars the next month, or they buy thirteen billion
Speaker 1: dollars a month for the next quarter. This sky's always falling, exactly.
Speaker 1: So you have to, like we all have to temper
Speaker 1: what we see by looking at the data.
Speaker 2: And that doesn't mean that doesn't mean it's wrong. It
Speaker 2: just means you have to have a perspective to understand
Speaker 2: how to get the data points that they give you,
Speaker 2: which there's a tremendous signal to noise ratio in some
Speaker 2: of in some of what they publish. So I definitely
Speaker 2: do still fly by there a couple of times a
Speaker 2: day just to see.
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, no, absolutely, I still read the over heade
Speaker 1: like religiously. I always do, because there's always good information
Speaker 1: there and there's there's always somebody is going to have
Speaker 1: the distillation of the thing that I need. I'm not no,
Speaker 1: I'm not wagging on zero hedge. I just know that
Speaker 1: their their business model is different than mine, which is
Speaker 1: to sell advertisement and they're young, they're not and then
Speaker 1: and they're not and they're not shy about it like
Speaker 1: it is what it is exactly.
Speaker 2: Exactly, yeah, yeah, exactly, But they do. I mean, they
Speaker 2: definitely have always tended to have a more downbeat bias,
Speaker 2: but that doesn't necessary really mean that it's wrong.
Speaker 1: So oh no, not at all. Very very interesting, but
Speaker 1: they're gonna be very but they're gonna be very sad
Speaker 1: when the dow goes to fifty five thousand. Yes.
Speaker 2: Well, but so now let's come back to Powell being
Speaker 2: in charge and they and for two more years, and
Speaker 2: Trump only having the Senate for two more years. Play
Speaker 2: that out with what you just laid out as the
Speaker 2: scenario for a sovereign debt crisis in Europe.
Speaker 1: That means the sovereign. That means that that the Europeans
Speaker 1: are going to try and extend and pretend for as
Speaker 1: long as possible they have, But it also means that
Speaker 1: I don't know that they can because this Ukraine thing
Speaker 1: is the issue.
Speaker 2: A guarantee by the Bank of England of the debt
Speaker 2: and so of Ukraine's debt.
Speaker 1: Right, and if you look at the situation, all off
Speaker 1: Shoals government fell because he was trying to get six
Speaker 1: more billion dollars or six more billion euros to send
Speaker 1: the Ukraine, which they statutorily he didn't have any He
Speaker 1: didn't have in the conference without going back to the Bundestag.
Speaker 1: The Bundestog said no, I mean Christian Lindner said no,
Speaker 1: you're gonna have to go to snap elections for this.
Speaker 1: So he so Shoals fires him and then that that
Speaker 1: collapsed the coalition. That's what happened.
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, like an hour period, it was all over Ukraine. Yeah,
Speaker 2: I figured, but I didn't know.
Speaker 1: Then there and then there was Christy Friedel and like Canada,
Speaker 1: you know, twitching your way through the little cochfeine, twitching
Speaker 1: your way through a press conference, and we're gonna get
Speaker 1: we want to get fifty billion dollars in Ukraine. Canada
Speaker 1: don't have fifty billion dollars, of course not. We're Canada
Speaker 1: going to get fifty billion dollars in the Ukraine.
Speaker 2: Or again, this is all about the Bank of England
Speaker 2: having guaranteed Ukraine's debt.
Speaker 1: Right, and the ECB and everybody else. All Let's just
Speaker 1: put it this way. If you think about all of
Speaker 1: this in terms of mob about mob politics, we have Trump,
Speaker 1: we have Don Trump Leione is about to retake power, right, ye, right,
Speaker 1: And then we have and then we have all the
Speaker 1: dons that were promised the wealth and riches of the
Speaker 1: down dass and Russia as meant over the course of
Speaker 1: trillions of dollars of future cash flow streams off of
Speaker 1: all that and all that that, all of those resources,
Speaker 1: they put the money in, they expect to get paid. Yes,
Speaker 1: and I own thissary necessarily. Just think it's the whole
Speaker 1: Bank of England with the original forty billion dollar guarantee.
Speaker 1: I think there's an awful lot more there. So there's
Speaker 1: a lot of money, and there's a big cash call
Speaker 1: coming happening right now. And that's why Canada, that's why
Speaker 1: Biden back toward another six billion dollars to Ukraine. That's
Speaker 1: why all off Shoals is trying to get another six
Speaker 1: billion dollars in. That's what's going on here. Everybody is
Speaker 1: trying to They're trying to extend it, right, they're trying
Speaker 1: to do They're trying to deal with the cash, the
Speaker 1: global cash call and put it off on the voters,
Speaker 1: and the voters are yeah. No.
Speaker 2: Did you see that Biden is lobbying Trump to keep
Speaker 2: funding Ukraine?
Speaker 1: Yes, of course he is. Yeah, yeah, of course, yeah.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 1: So that's what may and that may even be and
Speaker 1: part of that may even be part of the deal
Speaker 1: that Trump made with Biden to have Biden blessed his
Speaker 1: you know, to to slow roll the Obama attempt to
Speaker 1: destroy the transition.
Speaker 2: Yeah, that was so interesting when Jill showed up in
Speaker 2: a red pantsuit and to vote, and Joe just looked
Speaker 2: like he was in the catbird seats after the election.
Speaker 2: Oh my gosh. It was so noticeable. Both of those
Speaker 2: things so noticeable. And it was noticeable even prior to
Speaker 2: the election. His interference with Kamala.
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, it was. It was actually interesting that that
Speaker 1: happened when it did, because I had dinner with Larry
Speaker 1: Johnson and a patron, a couple of a couple of
Speaker 1: podcasters like side younglemen and and somebody else in a
Speaker 1: couple of bitcoin podcasters, and and at that meeting, my
Speaker 1: friend let me know that he just got back from
Speaker 1: Washington talking to somebody. He's like, no, Trump, me to
Speaker 1: deal with Biden. Biden went and had trying to try.
Speaker 1: Biden went happening. Trump, Biden went hat in hand to
Speaker 1: Trump after they pulled this ship that they were going
Speaker 1: to hold Biden's they were to hold Hunter Biden's sentencing
Speaker 1: off until after the election. That was That was I
Speaker 1: think that was the inciting incident for Biden to finally
Speaker 1: just call up Trump or have Biden had his lawyer
Speaker 1: call up Trump's lawyer. I cut a deal because it
Speaker 1: started about two weeks before that, so I floated it
Speaker 1: out there about a week before we started this, before
Speaker 1: the That was right after the Maga hat when Trump
Speaker 1: the Maga hat. Yeah, I like two days we had
Speaker 1: I think we had dinner like that Sunday, and that's
Speaker 1: when this came out. I'm like, oh, I'm going to
Speaker 1: throw that out there and see what happens.
Speaker 2: And and and in retrospect, there are a number of
Speaker 2: data points that seem to indicate that there may have
Speaker 2: been a deal. We'll only know, of course, if Trump
Speaker 2: pardons Hunter. But you know, there are a lot of
Speaker 2: people in jail for the same crimes that Hunter actually committed.
Speaker 2: And well, this is what's going to be so interesting.
Speaker 2: I think that whether Trump will actually go down the
Speaker 2: path of serious judicial reform because of you know, a
Speaker 2: number of young people sit riting in jail over you know,
Speaker 2: drug crimes and things like that, nonolent crimes. Right, well,
Speaker 2: will Trump just go do a mass commutation of nonviolent criminals.
Speaker 2: I mean, he might do something that big.
Speaker 1: We'll see he might, And I'll be honest with you,
Speaker 1: I'm not I can lay even odds on that. I
Speaker 1: realized a mugshot.
Speaker 2: He knows what it's like to be persecuted by the
Speaker 2: justice system.
Speaker 1: I know, Yeah, I know, yeah, I know. I told people.
Speaker 1: I think we I don't know if I ever told
Speaker 1: you and I talked about this, but I know I've
Speaker 1: said it before. Mike, don't underestimate the Trump revenge factor.
Speaker 2: And it'll come out in healthy ways like that, right, right, exactly.
Speaker 2: It's not about revenge like isn't I'm going to go
Speaker 2: after you know, Jack Smith or Tiss James. It's I'm
Speaker 2: going to take away the power that created those situations. Yes,
Speaker 2: And that's where that's where the revenge can be channeled
Speaker 2: into living well, living well being the best revenge is
Speaker 2: what I'm referring to there. It can be channeled into
Speaker 2: something good that prevents this from ever happening in the
Speaker 2: United States again. And it's going to be so fascinating
Speaker 2: to see how he does it because one of the challenges.
Speaker 2: One of the things that I learned, and again I'm
Speaker 2: pointing to publicly available documentary discovery evidence, is just how
Speaker 2: much the senior career staff at the agencies are involved
Speaker 2: in a lot of this. And so you know, Kennedy
Speaker 2: RFK has been talking about this a lot at the FDA,
Speaker 2: and I boy, I know exactly who the instigators of
Speaker 2: the debanking were at different federal agencies because of various
Speaker 2: insiders who have come forward to me. And yes, it's
Speaker 2: the political appointees that instigated it, but it's also career people.
Speaker 2: And there's I'm told by people who are very likely
Speaker 2: to be appointed in senior Trump financial services roles that
Speaker 2: there's a phrase called basementing. They know they have to
Speaker 2: basement a lot of the senior career staff. And it's
Speaker 2: just you and you were talking about this in one
Speaker 2: of your podcasts with Alex Kramer, Craner, the O five's
Speaker 2: and the six is right that they're still loyal to America.
Speaker 2: But it's the people above them that have been cherry
Speaker 2: picked over the last decade in the Defense Department who
Speaker 2: are not not not down with all this right, And
Speaker 2: there's just going to have to be a major cleaning house.
Speaker 2: And I know you're a big Tulsa Gabbert fan, so
Speaker 2: oh am I And you know, if she gets Department
Speaker 2: of Defense, if she gets Defense Secretary, I assume she's
Speaker 2: going to go in there and clean house. And it's
Speaker 2: going to take somebody like that to go in and
Speaker 2: clean clean house. And so it's an interesting question. Is
Speaker 2: Trump gonna take that power and not tear it down
Speaker 2: and use it for him for his own people, or
Speaker 2: is he going to tear it down and leave America
Speaker 2: in a far better place and reverse really probably the
Speaker 2: last fifty years of centralization of power into Washington, d c.
Speaker 2: And out of the United States.
Speaker 1: I agree, I agree with all of that. The only
Speaker 1: thing I will say is this, I love Tulci. I
Speaker 1: think she's the real deal old one. More I watch her,
Speaker 1: the more I'm oh, yeah, I'm so glad that I
Speaker 1: held my guns. When I said earlier on I says,
Speaker 1: she's the real deal. I will say this though she's
Speaker 1: never had she's never had to run a department management role. Yeah,
Speaker 1: what I would say is, and this is something that
Speaker 1: that Dexter White and I talked about a while ago,
Speaker 1: and he brought it up. He said, to look, she's
Speaker 1: a perfect candidate for Veterans Affairs to learn how to
Speaker 1: manage a big three hunter agency. Go in there and
Speaker 1: do the job that to take care of the people
Speaker 1: that she cares about the most. And where her conscientiousness
Speaker 1: and her and her you know her just her sheer decency,
Speaker 1: will will you put the best effect? And then in
Speaker 1: twenty twenty six, half midway through, then we have a
Speaker 1: shuffling in the cabinet and she can be promoted. She
Speaker 1: also gets the move. She also gets to deal with
Speaker 1: the she has to deal with some of the seniority
Speaker 1: issues within GOP. The GOP is a very seniority driven,
Speaker 1: you know organized, but.
Speaker 2: Trump is tearing that. This is what's so fascinating just
Speaker 2: looking at this Senate race, right that was pretty clearly
Speaker 2: a swamp GOP driven and it's it's it's thoon or
Speaker 2: Corny and it's not Rick Scott. And then just some
Speaker 2: of the nastiness I've heard about Rick Scott not being
Speaker 2: a good manager, you know, some of the stuff that's
Speaker 2: come out as this, as this Senate GOP battle has
Speaker 2: spilled out into Twitter. It's fascinating how how and this
Speaker 2: is we literally are watching history because no question Thoon
Speaker 2: was going to be the GOP Senate leader from what
Speaker 2: from most every source that I've heard. And now there's
Speaker 2: this ground swell for Rick Scott. But I actually threw
Speaker 2: out yesterday talking to one of my friends who's in DC,
Speaker 2: I wonder if this groundswell for Rick Scott is all
Speaker 2: about sidelining Thoon so Trump can get who he really wants,
Speaker 2: which is Steve Danes. And Steve Danes endorsed Thoon, which
Speaker 2: is interesting because Steve Danes has earned it, but he
Speaker 2: said he doesn't want it now. He obviously presumably wants
Speaker 2: a committee chair role or thing like that. He doesn't
Speaker 2: want to be doesn't want to have the responsibility of
Speaker 2: being the Senate g OP leader. But I mean, just
Speaker 2: the stuff that both fun and Cornin have said about
Speaker 2: Trump in years past that's come out that the the
Speaker 2: internet has gone and dug up there. They were never
Speaker 2: Trumpers and they're not like JD that has you know that,
Speaker 2: and or Tulsi that made a made a complete break
Speaker 2: with their never trumperism. It's uh, it's that they they
Speaker 2: have they've been tepid in saying so. So my big
Speaker 2: figure is that we're going to get another you know,
Speaker 2: just wish rhino exactly, and that and that that's going
Speaker 2: to get in the way of of of truly taking
Speaker 2: this power away from the places that where where it's
Speaker 2: just been this creeping centralization of power all throughout the
Speaker 2: US government and the average American recognizes that that that
Speaker 2: it's just being abused right and left, and it needs
Speaker 2: to be reversed. And if they're really going to to
Speaker 2: to change fiscal policy such that to your thesis that j.
Speaker 2: Powell can lower interest rates rather than keep raising them,
Speaker 2: they have to cut cut slash right, and they do.
Speaker 1: They have to cut. They have to cut right. They
Speaker 1: have to cut a train and half in the budget minimum. Yeah,
Speaker 1: they have to start, they have to start. Yeah, they
Speaker 1: have to start there. Yeah.
Speaker 2: But it's interesting that they that the Veke was floated
Speaker 2: as Secretary of State today and I thought, man, that's
Speaker 2: not the best place to put a guy like that.
Speaker 2: He's actually thought about long and hard about how do
Speaker 2: you deal with the union rules? It sounds like from
Speaker 2: what i've I've only met him a couple of times,
Speaker 2: but very briefly, but his but I know his some
Speaker 2: of his staff, and it sounds to me like he
Speaker 2: has really gone into the details. He's like the roe
Speaker 2: Hit Chopra of the Republicans. He's read all the rules,
Speaker 2: He's already got the plan in place. Roe Hit is
Speaker 2: known for for reading all the rules and figuring out
Speaker 2: how to use them and justify the means. Bill Ayers
Speaker 2: type rules for radicals, right, and and the Veke is
Speaker 2: on the other side of that, the guy who also
Speaker 2: reads the rules, but instead of how do I use
Speaker 2: this to to to to install more Marxism in the
Speaker 2: US government, he wants to install more freedom in the
Speaker 2: US government.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I know, I I you know, I h There
Speaker 1: are very few times in my life that I will
Speaker 1: say I am ecstatic to be wrong. And I was
Speaker 1: very unfair to the VEC when he came. When he
Speaker 1: hit the stage and I listened to his or watched
Speaker 1: his uh his interview, he just did with tug Carlson,
Speaker 1: and I have to say there's two things that I
Speaker 1: that I know, two things that I note. One, the
Speaker 1: guy's presentation is spot on and note perfect, and everybody
Speaker 1: wants to be and who wants to be in this space.
Speaker 1: I was taking notes about my presentation the entire time.
Speaker 1: That's one, like how do you do this and do
Speaker 1: it better? That's one. And two everything that I have
Speaker 1: been saying about how do we go from taxations theft
Speaker 1: to this to and the FED and stop? And we
Speaker 1: have to tell the story in between of how we
Speaker 1: get from how we tell the whole story to get
Speaker 1: to convince people to go order step by step, order
Speaker 1: by order, you know, from point A to point B
Speaker 1: to point C to point D, and not from point
Speaker 1: A to point B to point z, which is what
Speaker 1: we libertarians always do, and we do wrong, and we
Speaker 1: need to just fucking make our goddamn peace with it.
Speaker 1: The VEC just gave us ninety minutes of how to
Speaker 1: do that and communicate it to the American people and
Speaker 1: do so in a credible way.
Speaker 2: And just listen.
Speaker 1: And even if you don't even if you don't trust
Speaker 1: the VEC, because he's part of the PayPal Maffie and
Speaker 1: he's this and he's a Peter Teel and that volunteer
Speaker 1: like whatever, fine, fuck you watch the presentation itself, because
Speaker 1: the presentation is unfucking believable. I have I have, yes, yes,
Speaker 1: I have not watched anything that was that was. I
Speaker 1: have not watched a better presentation of the order of
Speaker 1: operations on how to get this done yet I've tried,
Speaker 1: you know, bits and pieces of it in my fragmented
Speaker 1: kind of Trumpian weaving, you know, meandering way. So VEC
Speaker 1: was like point to point to point to point point. Yeah,
Speaker 1: this is how we can get rid of eighty percent
Speaker 1: of the government. This is how we can pay for it,
Speaker 1: This is how we can have it not affect GDP,
Speaker 1: this is how we can do it. This is how
Speaker 1: we do it. I'm like, there's your blueprint. But so
Speaker 1: exactly cabinet secretary. So guess who he gets to be.
Speaker 1: He gets to be fucking cabinet secretary because the cabinet
Speaker 1: secretary is the guy who implements the executive orders and
Speaker 1: actually runs the goddamned executive branch. Right, That's where he question.
Speaker 2: Is state the right place or should he be fed chair?
Speaker 1: Well, I mean in twenty twenty six. Let's here's what
Speaker 1: I here's what I think. But I like the as
Speaker 1: cabinet secretary to start out with.
Speaker 2: The State Department.
Speaker 1: Though no, no, no, no, at for the for the executive branch.
Speaker 2: When you said cabinet secretary, I'm thinking of Secretary of
Speaker 2: State secretary.
Speaker 1: No, no, I'm talking about I'm talking about the guy
Speaker 1: who implements the executive's orders and sets the tone for
Speaker 1: all the three letter agencies. He's the guy who runs everything.
Speaker 1: He's the guy who cocked in Trump's first term. He's
Speaker 1: the guy who cock blocked everything that got done. Yeah, okay, yeah,
Speaker 1: So I like vek there. And then I also think
Speaker 1: there will be FOMC appointees coming up again between now
Speaker 1: and twenty twenty six, and I think then we go ahead,
Speaker 1: I get one more time, and we try and get
Speaker 1: Judy Shelton on the f M S. Yeah, yeah, they remember.
Speaker 1: Everybody forgets this, but Kamala Harris and John McCain high
Speaker 1: fived on the Senate fucking floor to block her nomination.
Speaker 2: I know, I know they did.
Speaker 1: Yeah, And like, I love Judy Shelton and I think
Speaker 1: she's I think she's on that she should be out
Speaker 1: there criticizing the FED, and now she should be put
Speaker 1: on the FED because, as Daniel's pointed out multiple times,
Speaker 1: the the the the aftermath of the insider tr rating scandals,
Speaker 1: that they didn't get Powell, who was the target, but
Speaker 1: they did get Kaplin, Karta and rosen Gren, three of
Speaker 1: the biggest hawks on the fo MC no interesting, the biggest.
Speaker 1: They got them, and they replaced them with frigging unbelievable,
Speaker 1: clearly empty. Yes, Sarah Bloom Raskins page like fuck these
Speaker 1: Deo Field, these to tate you whatever her name is,
Speaker 1: all those people are awful. We need to get at
Speaker 1: least thank you. That's the name.
Speaker 2: Biden. Biden has total control of the FED. Okay. And
Speaker 2: here's the interesting question, because he because he's been able to,
Speaker 2: he had so many appointees come up. It's he did
Speaker 2: not have that with the Supreme Court, but he did
Speaker 2: with the FED. Has total control of the FED.
Speaker 1: Okay, other other than other than Powell, who's control who's
Speaker 1: in control of interest rates? Correct?
Speaker 2: So and and and and I had again lots of insiders,
Speaker 2: tell me what's going on at the FED. Powell doesn't
Speaker 2: give a shit about anything other than monetary policy, so
Speaker 2: he outsourced all of the regulatory stuff to Michael Barr. Okay,
Speaker 2: and then Michael Barr has blocked the other FED governors.
Speaker 2: He literally when they try to scheduled meetings with people
Speaker 2: on the Hill, will insert himself. He's essentially told all
Speaker 2: the staff you will not talk to the other FED governors.
Speaker 2: He tried to just freeze them out and make them
Speaker 2: so that they were just yes men to him and
Speaker 2: to Powell. Okay. So that's the dynamic of the FED.
Speaker 2: Now come back to if Trump wants to put his
Speaker 2: print on the FED, here's how can he do it now? Technically.
Speaker 2: One of the interesting things Peter Country Brown, a terrific academic,
Speaker 2: wrote a book about the history of the FED, and
Speaker 2: he openly questions, because there're seven FED governors and seven
Speaker 2: Supreme Court justices, why does the FED not operate the
Speaker 2: way that the Supreme Court jet does? And the answer
Speaker 2: is that green Span created the culture of the place
Speaker 2: of the iron fist. You will vote with me, I
Speaker 2: want unanimity, and that has been that has been carried
Speaker 2: forward with subsequent subsequent FED chairs, including Powell. He's got
Speaker 2: governs with an iron fist. Nobody challenges him. Okay, other
Speaker 2: than he gave bar total control over the over bank
Speaker 2: supervision and then borrowing and and executed all this debanking stuff.
Speaker 2: And again, now Powell probably looks at that and says that.
Speaker 1: Was a mistake because.
Speaker 2: It's blowing back on the FED now because of how
Speaker 2: many people are upset about it, including Trump himself because
Speaker 2: of his wife and son being debated. Okay, so now
Speaker 2: so Peter Country Brown's book is really worth a read,
Speaker 2: very easy read, very easy history. He goes and talks
Speaker 2: about how almost no FED governor stays their entire fourteen
Speaker 2: year term. They will voluntarily leave, and it's the history
Speaker 2: of them voluntarily leaving. So even though they're not lifetime
Speaker 2: terms unlike Supreme Court justices, they're fourteen year terms, which
Speaker 2: is which is a long term in US government service,
Speaker 2: and almost none of them ever served it out. And
Speaker 2: so there's a history when there's a presidential change that
Speaker 2: the vice chair will step down. Randy Corral stepped down
Speaker 2: and opened up the vice chair for supervision role for
Speaker 2: Biden's appointee. So Biden basically got to completely remake the FED.
Speaker 2: And again that's not that unusual. More so in Biden's case,
Speaker 2: but it's not that unusual in history. Presidents usually do.
Speaker 2: Here's the interesting question. Will will folks in these vice
Speaker 2: chair roles who are political appointees from Biden step down
Speaker 2: or will they force Trump to fire them? Or will
Speaker 2: they try to stay their fourteen year terms? And if
Speaker 2: they try to stay their fourteen year terms tom now
Speaker 2: we're back to this whole how does how does Jay Powell,
Speaker 2: who has to be renominated in two years, keep control
Speaker 2: of this.
Speaker 1: I I like Danielle's been banging her shoe on the
Speaker 1: table like cruse chef saying I don't worry. I'm not
Speaker 1: really worried about the FED right now. But in two years,
Speaker 1: with all these comedies on, these MMT ers on, She's like,
Speaker 1: she's been screaming about this. So she's been out there's.
Speaker 2: Right, I haven't heard about that, but yeah.
Speaker 1: I've heard her at least two or three times like
Speaker 1: mention this in major interviews. So she's on, you know,
Speaker 1: when she's on either Fox Business or CNBC or whatever.
Speaker 1: She's been Danielle has had our had our back on this,
Speaker 1: like making these issues well known. So now the big
Speaker 1: question is going to be the following I'm gonna I'm
Speaker 1: going to just throw it back up to it's mob
Speaker 1: politics again. Behind the scenes. Who's putting Manila folders on
Speaker 1: whose desk and saying this is what's going to happen next?
Speaker 1: And if you don't like it, well, then you're going
Speaker 1: to sleep with the fishes tonight. I'm that serious. That's
Speaker 1: the that's where we are in this process, and we
Speaker 1: will we don't know. These are all great questions, and
Speaker 1: these are all the things that we should be watching
Speaker 1: for over the course of the next two years and
Speaker 1: certainly the next two months, because they're just und we
Speaker 1: live in unprecedented times. And and but you know, and
Speaker 1: the other last thing to say, I altern it over
Speaker 1: to you for the last word on this clearly is
Speaker 1: let's not get too far ahead of ourselves. Let's let's
Speaker 1: just work. We're gonna have to work each problem as
Speaker 1: it comes up at this point because they're going to
Speaker 1: throw everything imaginable at us, and just let's not take
Speaker 1: bait and react to every little thing. Let's remind ourselves
Speaker 1: that there's a different that every framework has a different
Speaker 1: strategic and tactical you know, every layer that I was
Speaker 1: talking about earlier. Everyone has a strategical and tactical order
Speaker 1: of operations that fits into the larger picture. That fits
Speaker 1: into the larger picture. If you're a stock trader. What
Speaker 1: happens if the daily chart is not the same that
Speaker 1: what happens to the Yes, yeah, and so we have
Speaker 1: to go we have to remind ourselves to like kind
Speaker 1: kind of compress, go into the daily chart and then
Speaker 1: go out to the monthly chart, and then go, you know,
Speaker 1: and just keep doing that, but always keep each of
Speaker 1: our analyzes segmented in proper order. So I think that
Speaker 1: would be I think that's probably the best way to
Speaker 1: put this. But please have the last word. And whether
Speaker 1: or not you agree with me on that or not, Well, I.
Speaker 2: Just glanced at my phone and we just passed eighty
Speaker 2: eight thousand on bitcoin, so uh and I'm wearing my
Speaker 2: ear responsibly, like I know you the double on toendre
Speaker 2: it was beautiful.
Speaker 1: I saw that and I'm like, oh my god. I
Speaker 1: was like I.
Speaker 2: Saw that on I'm like, okay, I need this, yeah,
Speaker 2: because I for a long time I had a long bitcoin.
Speaker 2: It's where the bitcoin orange is in the oh of
Speaker 2: my last name, long long the double entendre, but this
Speaker 2: one is irresponsibly long, and I figured it was a
Speaker 2: good data to wear the T shirt and celebrate the
Speaker 2: fact that you know, Bitcoin has has is really breaking through,
Speaker 2: and we didn't really talk that much about that. So
Speaker 2: it's a it's a good it's a good place to end.
Speaker 2: The FED is really a deer in the headlights with
Speaker 2: regard to crypto. I I got from one of my
Speaker 2: tentacles inside the FED that one of the senior people
Speaker 2: in the Novel Activity Supervision program, who would be giving
Speaker 2: the green light to the banks, who did give the
Speaker 2: green light to Bank of New York Mellon, of course,
Speaker 2: but who would be get giving the green light to
Speaker 2: other banks to get involved in crypto He announced to
Speaker 2: a to a group of people that crypto is for
Speaker 2: nothing but criminals, and can you know this is where
Speaker 2: where people were ten years ago, but that's where the
Speaker 2: feed is now. So the magnitude of the disconnect between
Speaker 2: the people who are going to have to deal with
Speaker 2: this under a Trump administration and where the knowledge is
Speaker 2: is staggering. And I've talked about this before that one
Speaker 2: of the senior officials, it came out in our lawsuit filings,
Speaker 2: didn't even know what an API is. Okay, when you've
Speaker 2: been at a you know again, I mean, how are
Speaker 2: they going to deal with the technology? If that's if
Speaker 2: that's the level of understanding. I'm not saying it's everybody,
Speaker 2: but just think about the incentives within the organizations. They
Speaker 2: don't have experience, they've not worked in the private sector.
Speaker 2: It's a seniority based system. So they've been there thirty
Speaker 2: years and they and the pace of change in technology
Speaker 2: is accelerating, and so that gap is getting wider and
Speaker 2: wider and wider and wider and wider. And Marty Gruenberg
Speaker 2: got the FDIC who has basically ruled with an iron
Speaker 2: fist for the last ten years and has been very
Speaker 2: anti tech, has been able to block the banks from
Speaker 2: getting involved in tech. But here comes Trump with all
Speaker 2: this pro crypto stuff, and there is not knowledge, certainly
Speaker 2: among the senior people at these agencies. Again, it's coming
Speaker 2: back to the Defense Department analogy that you were talking about.
Speaker 2: The five's and O six is are fine, but the
Speaker 2: people above them are where the problems are. Okay, how
Speaker 2: that all shakes out is going to be fascinating because
Speaker 2: they cannot avoid it now, and what crypto does and
Speaker 2: especially Howard Lutinink being involved with tether. It did come
Speaker 2: out at the very end of the campaign, about a
Speaker 2: week before election, that the DOJ is investigating Tether. Well,
Speaker 2: tell me what else is new. I think the dj
Speaker 2: has been investigating to other basically since it started. Right,
Speaker 2: That was clearly a plant in my mind to try
Speaker 2: to knock Trump and Lutnik down. But it's going to
Speaker 2: be fascinating because that's a whole new euro dollar market. Tom.
Speaker 2: We've talked about this on your podcast before, right, It's
Speaker 2: a way to project dollars out into the world. But
Speaker 2: the surveillance state doesn't have perfect control over that in
Speaker 2: the way that they do with the domestic banking system,
Speaker 2: where everything is so surveiled, And so that clash is
Speaker 2: going to be fascinating because you've got the fear of
Speaker 2: the technology among the agency staff only the Let's face it,
Speaker 2: there is an age thing to technology skills, especially in crypto.
Speaker 2: It clearly skews young. The younger folks are going to
Speaker 2: be aware of this, understand it better, and if they're
Speaker 2: not aware of it, they're not afraid of learning it.
Speaker 2: But the older, more powerful, more senior people aren't, and
Speaker 2: Are they going to still try to stop it? Are
Speaker 2: they going to still try to do what Marty Gruenberg
Speaker 2: did and say banks can't adopt new technology while the
Speaker 2: fintech industry runs circles around them. And the fintech industry
Speaker 2: right now is having circles run around it by the
Speaker 2: crypto industry. And how that all shakes out and Trump
Speaker 2: being pro crypto, Trump having a crypto business himself, Trump
Speaker 2: recognizing especially through his kids, and what they have said,
Speaker 2: that that the that the power of the banks, the
Speaker 2: monopoly power of the banks isn't right, and we need
Speaker 2: to fix the We need to fix the payment system
Speaker 2: and allow people to to have cheaper payments and and
Speaker 2: not to have to pay three percent interchange fees anymore.
Speaker 2: That's coming, but I can't tell you right now how
Speaker 2: it's all going to shake out. It's just going to
Speaker 2: be so fascinating. And again we're back to this dichotomy
Speaker 2: are we having Are we having a second version of
Speaker 2: Trump one point zero? Or is Trump, with all these
Speaker 2: real reformers around him, making the break with the neocons,
Speaker 2: making the break with it with the the rhinos and
Speaker 2: the uniparty, is he really going to reform and I
Speaker 2: don't know the answer to that. I certainly hope it's
Speaker 2: the ladder.
Speaker 1: I I my my spider sense is that it's it's
Speaker 1: the ladder. And it's just a matter of you know,
Speaker 1: how much the the bureaucratic immune system is going to
Speaker 1: that's cancerous, is going to turn credit cancer predatory? Is
Speaker 1: you know, going to fight the chemotherapy that's coming, you know?
Speaker 1: And that's that's where we are. And I'm just happy
Speaker 1: to be able to be in a position to actually
Speaker 1: have the ability to have a front row seat to
Speaker 1: it all and uh and comment on it and have
Speaker 1: fun with it. And that's what we have to continue doing.
Speaker 1: Bitcoin eighty eight thousand. While we watch a well we
Speaker 1: watch a a minor liquidation of gold and silver at
Speaker 1: the same time, is actually quite perfect.
Speaker 2: Very interesting that it's.
Speaker 1: A perfect setup because you know, look, at the end
Speaker 1: of the day, all that matters here is watching how
Speaker 1: net capital flows on this and more Bitcoin proves itself,
Speaker 1: the more it does the job of sucking up excess
Speaker 1: compute and normalizing energy costs and all together seconds in
Speaker 1: the grid. Yep. And it's all it's gonna do is
Speaker 1: worm its way into the freaking rebo and worm its
Speaker 1: way into the sofa markets and worm it's way into
Speaker 1: everything else. And that's all to the good. And we
Speaker 1: just watch it play out and don't get ahead of ourselves,
Speaker 1: and we don't have to get religious about it because
Speaker 1: we don't know how this thing is going to play out.
Speaker 1: But we can expect a Sincere empire strike back over
Speaker 1: the course the next two months. We can expect it,
Speaker 1: and we should be happy. We should we welcome in.
Speaker 2: Yes, And this is a good place to end because
Speaker 2: we don't know who the Treasury secretary is. Again Lutnik
Speaker 2: being so involved with Tether. He is one of Canter
Speaker 2: Fitzgerald is one of the twenty four primary dealers for
Speaker 2: the US Treasury market that distributes the US treasuries. Right, So,
Speaker 2: which direction is he as co head of the Trump
Speaker 2: transition team gonna go and does he end up as
Speaker 2: Treasury Tech Secretary himself?
Speaker 1: That would be interesting. And I said this to you
Speaker 1: the first time we were on the podcast. You were
Speaker 1: on the podcast, I said, you watch Tatther's going to
Speaker 1: become a part of the It's going to become a
Speaker 1: part of the the the the transmission system and the
Speaker 1: stablelidation system of the entire US treasury market in order
Speaker 1: to keep it liquid during a time of crisis. We're
Speaker 1: rapidly approaching that time of crisis, and now we're going
Speaker 1: to see how it plays out.
Speaker 2: It's gonna be fun to watch. Thanks so thanks so much.
Speaker 2: Good to be able to get back together with you
Speaker 2: and spitball as usually, you make me think, and let's
Speaker 2: stay in touch as this all.
Speaker 1: Evolves as we do. Okay, Caitlin. As always, it was
Speaker 1: an absolute joy, love, and we'll do it again soon.
Speaker 2: Yeah, sounds great, Take care, Thanks much.
Speaker 1: Well, that'll about wrap it up for episode one ninety
Speaker 1: seven of the Gold, Goats and Guns Podcast. I want
Speaker 1: to thank Kaitlyn Long for taking the time to be
Speaker 1: my guest this afternoon and do the thing so I
Speaker 1: hope you guys enjoyed it. I know I did as always,
Speaker 1: and it's always fun to get you know, your your
Speaker 1: core ideas challenged by somebody who has a good grasp
Speaker 1: of the nuances of the issues. It's always a good
Speaker 1: error check and a good you know, it's a good
Speaker 1: good time as far as I'm concerned. So with that said,
Speaker 1: I'm out. As always, you can follow my work on
Speaker 1: my blog over tom la Wango dot em or Goldcoats
Speaker 1: and Guns dot com. You can follow me on Twitter
Speaker 1: at TfL one S eight and you can follow the
Speaker 1: sign up for the Patreon at patreon slash Gold Ghats
Speaker 1: and Guns where you can sign up for the twice
Speaker 1: we can Be Market Reports and or the Gold Goats
Speaker 1: and Guns Investment newsletter where we go forward looking in
Speaker 1: time with all bespoke. You know, articles and research between
Speaker 1: myself and Dexter White and uh give you a portfolio
Speaker 1: strategy for trying to make sense of what's going on
Speaker 1: out there. So if that sounds good to you, get
Speaker 1: it a shot. You guys, be well, you take care,
Speaker 1: we'll talk soon. You'll keep your suck on the eyes
Speaker 2: Factor