Speaker 1: What do you want?
Speaker 2: Statement of purpose? Should I email you?
Speaker 1: Should I put this on your action item list?
Speaker 2: You decide your own level of involvement.
Speaker 3: We are the Prepper Broadcasting Network.
Speaker 4: You are now listening to the Patriot Power Hour, the
Speaker 4: newest show of the Prepper Broadcasting Network. This live episode
Speaker 4: features the situational awareness you need to practice self-reliance and independence.
Speaker 4: Introducing your hosts, Ben, the Breaker of Banksters, and Future Dan,
Speaker 4: the editor of FutureDanger.com.
Speaker 1: Patriot Power Hour live once more, August 27th, 2026. Episode 359,
Speaker 1: Ben the Breaker Banksters here with Future Dan. What's going on,
Speaker 1: Future Dan?
Speaker 2: We're almost at the end of the summer. Hottest months
Speaker 2: of the year behind us. Does look like with the temperatures,
Speaker 2: some of the news we've seen in recent weeks is
Speaker 2: cooling off a bit, especially in economics. We're getting, you know,
Speaker 2: toward the crisis for the past couple of weeks with
Speaker 2: the bond market, but that seems to have subsided. Or
Speaker 2: maybe not. Are you seeing things under the surface that
Speaker 2: aren't making it to the news radar?
Speaker 1: We've got a heck of a dashboard we'll jump right into.
Speaker 1: But speaking of economics and whether a financial crisis is
Speaker 1: in the offing, the banksters, meaning the Treasury Secretary in
Speaker 1: this case, they've kicked the can down the road successfully
Speaker 1: here with doubling the purchases, the buyback. That's going to
Speaker 1: start in September of debt. That's going to help support
Speaker 1: the overall financial system. Make sure interest rates don't explode
Speaker 1: crazy out of control. But they're also looking at tapping
Speaker 1: a trillion dollar additional account for more bond buybacks. That'll
Speaker 1: go longer term as well as probably more per month.
Speaker 1: So yeah, I don't think the crisis has been averted.
Speaker 1: or solved at the basic level, right? But it has
Speaker 1: been successfully kicked, I guess. We'll find out. I don't
Speaker 1: think we can say what's really going on until after
Speaker 1: Labor Day, right? It's still August. People are back, but
Speaker 1: it's still light trading right now.
Speaker 4: Yeah.
Speaker 2: What else are you seeing? What else has been happening
Speaker 2: that has drawn your attention, Ben?
Speaker 1: The CIA director going to Russia, Ratcliffe.
Speaker 2: Is that making you nervous? That makes you nervous?
Speaker 1: No, it's actually the other way around. I'm like, oh,
Speaker 1: maybe they're like meeting and trying to prevent total breakdown
Speaker 1: of communication and resulting in escalation. That's what I'm hoping
Speaker 1: for if it's the other way around and they're like
Speaker 1: really fighting it out in person, I guess. But I'm
Speaker 1: more like hopefully they're trying to come up with a
Speaker 1: way to not blow each other up on accident.
Speaker 2: I can't remember before the Trump presidency any CIA director
Speaker 2: travels that were public. He uses CIA director that way
Speaker 2: and comes right out and says it was semi-routine to
Speaker 2: do it. On the other hand, you know, would you
Speaker 2: expect to see something like that weeks before World War III?
Speaker 1: I do recall there were some visits by gosh, maybe
Speaker 1: you recall, but right before February 2022, when Russia went
Speaker 1: into Ukraine, there were some high-level dignitaries that had just
Speaker 1: visited Ukraine right before it happened.
Speaker 2: Yeah, maybe Obama or Biden also sent CIA directors publicly.
Speaker 2: That's true. It's fairly recent to have... You think back
Speaker 2: during the Cold War, that was never a thing, right?
Speaker 2: They very well went and did stuff like that. It
Speaker 2: was just always... Like anything they did was secret, right?
Speaker 2: Now we're getting to see it.
Speaker 1: Sure. And there's a lot of reasons for that. And
Speaker 1: we won't get too much into the cloak and dagger, but.
Speaker 2: I'll tell you one good reason.
Speaker 1: Go for it.
Speaker 2: So they can escalate to Rubio next. And then if
Speaker 2: they needed to, they could escalate to Vance, right? So
Speaker 2: they got, you know, constitutionally a bigger gun, right? Higher
Speaker 2: up the chain of You know, succession, really. If you
Speaker 2: wanted to say, all right, no, you really can't be
Speaker 2: doing this. And Rubio would go to Lavrov, right? And
Speaker 2: I don't know, Vance would probably want to speak to
Speaker 2: Putin and probably get Medved.
Speaker 1: At least they're engaging in that diplomatic dance instead of
Speaker 1: just totally shut off. It's how I look at it,
Speaker 1: but maybe that's gracious for me to give the CIA director.
Speaker 1: I don't care what administration. It's hard for me to
Speaker 1: be too supportive of them.
Speaker 2: So another way that governments do this, which is almost
Speaker 2: always clandestine, at least when it happens, is it's a
Speaker 2: French diplomatic term called démarche, issuing a démarche. And militaries
Speaker 2: do that, right? An example that's now, you know, public
Speaker 2: knowledge is when Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait. He got a
Speaker 2: demarche through, I think, you know, probably the Swiss, some
Speaker 2: intermediary delivered it. And it was like from our military
Speaker 2: to you. If you go into Saudi Arabia, you're getting nuked.
Speaker 4: Right.
Speaker 2: We got the insular in Turkey where there's bunkers. They
Speaker 2: bring the nukes out. They put them on the airport.
Speaker 2: whatever's they had at the time, and you're at risk
Speaker 2: of that. So the question in my mind is, did
Speaker 2: Ratcliffe issue one of those?
Speaker 1: Well, I guess if he did, what would you see
Speaker 1: in practicality? And are you seeing that right now in
Speaker 1: future danger? What would you be seeing in the coming
Speaker 1: weeks if something like that did happen and didn't go positively?
Speaker 2: Well, the European media, especially the British, and possibly, you know,
Speaker 2: I'd accuse Germans of, you know, really pounding on this
Speaker 2: story that Putin's going to attack a NATO country, probably
Speaker 2: a Baltic state, Romania, Poland, or one of the Baltic states,
Speaker 2: in the coming weeks. And the fact that Ratcliffe went
Speaker 2: there sort of substantiates that, at a minimum, our European
Speaker 2: allies think that is going to happen, and it's Overton
Speaker 2: window stuff, Ben. You're right that the Russians would try
Speaker 2: to set a precedent that was not met with lethal force.
Speaker 2: And I would not be surprised to learn later that
Speaker 2: Trump sent Ratcliffe there to say, this will be war
Speaker 2: if you do that.
Speaker 1: Well, I guess we'll keep reporting here on Patriot Power
Speaker 1: Hour Which, what we really see happening, do you have
Speaker 1: any further opinion?
Speaker 2: I can just say demarches are serious things. They're when
Speaker 2: militaries say to other militaries, there's the line. We're not
Speaker 2: going to accept it being crossed.
Speaker 1: Right? What's the line? So what prompted this then? Russia
Speaker 1: starting to kick Ukraine?
Speaker 2: Take some of the drones?
Speaker 1: Problems?
Speaker 2: Germans are saying that there's been drones in Germany with
Speaker 2: explosives that are linked to the German military intelligence.
Speaker 1: Right?
Speaker 2: The GRU. And Ratcliffe was sitting across the table from
Speaker 2: two senior... The senior civilian intelligence and the senior military
Speaker 2: intelligence representatives of Russia. So he's talking to the people
Speaker 2: that if they're up to that stuff are ultimately responsible
Speaker 2: for it.
Speaker 4: And.
Speaker 2: We've reported on future danger, other drone incursions. So the
Speaker 2: Europeans are very worried that they're going to try to
Speaker 2: set a new precedent and cross that line. I'm not
Speaker 2: sure how legit that ultimately is because that's Article 5 stuff, right?
Speaker 2: If Latvia gets struck, they're a NATO member. They invoke
Speaker 2: Article 5. What else can the alliance do? Well, I
Speaker 2: think that was the CIA director getting sent there to
Speaker 2: remind them, once you start down that path, global thermonuclear
Speaker 2: warfare is the end state. We don't know of a
Speaker 2: way to start fighting like that and not end up
Speaker 2: there if you strike allied territory.
Speaker 1: So where does that leave Russia? Because they're getting bombed
Speaker 1: in Moscow and from the interior, they're just going to
Speaker 1: take it on the chin. They're kind of being power
Speaker 1: played like that or because they're getting kicked right there.
Speaker 2: Yeah, there's a whole bunch of territory, a whole bunch
Speaker 2: of governments. They're all in an alliance. And they're under
Speaker 2: the American nuclear umbrella. French and British in a minor way, too.
Speaker 2: And they're not going to strike us. And you invaded Ukraine,
Speaker 2: so it seems like you're a problem.
Speaker 1: You know, interestingly enough, as part of the 15-year anniversary
Speaker 1: of Dethrone the Banksters, I had a news site that
Speaker 1: was I'm like, it wasn't similar to future danger, but
Speaker 1: it did repost and list several articles a week that
Speaker 1: I thought were interesting, including the maiden revolution in 2014
Speaker 1: and moving into Crimea and all the stuff that 10, well,
Speaker 1: I guess eight years later turned into the invasion. So
Speaker 1: it's kind of, I went back down memory, down a
Speaker 1: memory hole, I guess, looking at old articles 10, 15
Speaker 1: years ago. over this last week since our last broadcast.
Speaker 1: That was one of them. And seeing this acceleration and
Speaker 1: potential escalation, having the CIA director show up there like that,
Speaker 1: definitely hope cooler heads prevail. But it does not seem
Speaker 1: like Ukraine ceasefire is going to happen. That's actually one
Speaker 1: of our Patriot Power Hour predictions for the year, that
Speaker 1: there would be a sustained ceasefire. And it's kind of
Speaker 1: an evaluation where you have to make the judgment call,
Speaker 1: but we have not been able to make that call yet.
Speaker 1: Doesn't look like it's going to happen either.
Speaker 2: Fire simply in the ballistic missile and the cruise missiles,
Speaker 2: the drone munitions. Just a ceasefire in that air war
Speaker 2: would be a significant achievement this year.
Speaker 1: Right. Yeah, let alone localized fighting on the ground. That
Speaker 1: probably ain't going to stop. I mean, that was going
Speaker 1: at a low level since like 2014. But then, of course,
Speaker 1: blew up big time in 2022 and beyond. Well, we'll
Speaker 1: go through the news because we have a couple more
Speaker 1: articles about Ukraine and just generally national security and economics.
Speaker 1: But before we do the dashboard, any other major topics
Speaker 1: you want to hit on or anything just generally on
Speaker 1: your mind, even if it's not a news item?
Speaker 2: A little preview of the heat map dashboard. Last week
Speaker 2: I talked about how, you know, after a period of
Speaker 2: occasionally using artificial intelligence to find news articles according to
Speaker 2: the 492 indicators of future danger, it's now become a
Speaker 2: regular practice to seek news in this manner. And a
Speaker 2: lot of the returns that I've got are, we're, we're
Speaker 2: definitely on the trivial side, not, not making it onto the,
Speaker 2: onto the board. And that is a big sign that
Speaker 2: news is cooling off. Uh, it would have, it would
Speaker 2: have found serious stuff easily. It's so, that's how I say,
Speaker 2: you know, this last episode of Patriot power hour, this
Speaker 2: summer of 2026, uh, cooling off a little bit, but
Speaker 2: still very significant things heating up in other directions. It's
Speaker 2: just a little less intense than we've seen in the
Speaker 2: last couple weeks, and that's obviously good. Right.
Speaker 1: And we were saying that, especially last week as the example,
Speaker 1: it was possibly the most intense August news blitz of
Speaker 1: all time, except for maybe 2020. is what my guess
Speaker 1: would be. But just because it's cooled off since last week,
Speaker 1: my point is this is still pretty heavy. I know
Speaker 1: maybe a couple of these articles were found by AI
Speaker 1: that otherwise would not have, but I think they're all
Speaker 1: very legit. And there's a lot of fairly high-rated, high-grade.
Speaker 1: So it's not just all topical. So how about I
Speaker 1: just run through it and we'll judge it one at
Speaker 1: a time.
Speaker 2: Yeah, let's see what we get. All right.
Speaker 1: Economics. Bitcoin above $ 80, 000. Gold, silver back off their lows
Speaker 1: in the past month. But definitely not at their all-time highs,
Speaker 1: any of those assets. What is at the all-time high,
Speaker 1: of course, is the debt. And what also is all-time high, diesel.
Speaker 1: Up 20% near the all-time high. Not at the all-time high,
Speaker 1: but super close. Up 20 cents since last week. Gold
Speaker 1: heads for its best month since 1999 as the dollar wobbles.
Speaker 1: Wheat futures surge to three-year high. Mentioned this early on,
Speaker 1: the Treasury Secretary could tap nearly a trillion-dollar Treasury general
Speaker 1: account to fund bond buybacks. Undergrid goes down. There's residents
Speaker 1: in Indiana enduring their 11th day without power. Storms toppled
Speaker 1: power lines. Still don't have it back. And AI supercharging
Speaker 1: the hacks of everyday utilities. We're on Prepper Broadcasting Network
Speaker 1: and everyone should be prepped to go at least a
Speaker 1: week without power. Honestly, a whole month minimum. That is
Speaker 1: worth being a prepper. Just no power for a month.
Speaker 1: Trade severely declines. Economic outcast China is threatening the U.S.
Speaker 1: with retaliation over Iranian sanctions. More trade war. I mean,
Speaker 1: we've got trade war with Canada. We've got trade war
Speaker 1: with many countries. Let's move on to national security and
Speaker 1: domestic security. We already talked a lot about Russia and Ukraine,
Speaker 1: but let's just run through it real fast. CIA director
Speaker 1: delivers secret message in Russia. First known trip by Ratcliffe.
Speaker 1: CIA chief personally warns Russia, do not attack a NATO member.
Speaker 1: And the U.S., the U.K., and Norwegian forces are deploying
Speaker 1: to a strategic island for a NATO exercise called Arctic Sentry.
Speaker 1: Keeping an eye on that. 50,000 ICE arrests in July.
Speaker 1: Pretty large number. Almost the NFL stadium worth. The most concerning,
Speaker 1: although Russia is concerning certainly, I've always found this indicator
Speaker 1: to be probably the most concerning in this column. Foreign
Speaker 1: black ops. Here's several important articles about that. U.S. universities
Speaker 1: were found tied to Chinese defense research labs in an
Speaker 1: Air Force study. So the Chinese research labs using U.S.
Speaker 1: universities in different ways tied to them. Chinese hackers breached
Speaker 1: Justice Department, NASA, the Fed. Yes, the Federal Reserve and
Speaker 1: the Senate. So our universities, our defense research labs, DOJ, NASA,
Speaker 1: financial institutions, Senate, Senate, just the Senate alone. FBI disables
Speaker 1: tools used by firm servicing Chinese intelligence agency and military. DHS, CISA, CISA,
Speaker 1: over 100 internet exposed water systems targeted in July cyber attacks. Yep,
Speaker 1: 100 internet-exposed water systems targeted in July. Wastewater systems and
Speaker 1: water systems generally. That's the security column. Let's move on
Speaker 1: to liberty. Supreme Court backs the presidential order on mail-in ballots. U.S.
Speaker 1: Special Forces conduct operations inside Ecuador. Charges are dropped against
Speaker 1: a person who clapped at a city data center meeting.
Speaker 1: Charges brought up against them, but then dropped. Nine million
Speaker 1: facial recognition images leaked and a major breach at reverse
Speaker 1: image search and identity verification service. I don't know about you,
Speaker 1: but I've used a couple apps, including like Customs Border Patrol.
Speaker 1: Got to take a picture. Facial recognition images, right? Reverse
Speaker 1: image search and identity verification services. Let's go to the
Speaker 1: fourth and final column. Health and natural news. New record
Speaker 1: high of average global sea surface temperatures. Relentless heat dome.
Speaker 1: Texas to California. Heat, heat, heat. Did that heat cause
Speaker 1: a glacier to fracture this avalanche? Flash floods, 160 plus dead.
Speaker 1: It's going to probably be a lot more than that
Speaker 1: in Nepal and China. Including a few dozen Americans, at
Speaker 1: least it looked like. Lab made DNA stores memory just
Speaker 1: like flash drive. So. This is actually the highest rated
Speaker 1: article of the night, SHTF level, because it's actually happening now.
Speaker 1: The future is now, for better and worse. Lab-made DNA.
Speaker 1: Stores memories like a flash drive. Nature re-engineered. Organic computing, etc., 6.9
Speaker 1: magnitude solar flare with an Earth-directed CME. A G2 geomagnetic
Speaker 1: storm watch was issued. Again, power outages from natural or
Speaker 1: man-made solar flare. Not really a way to prep for
Speaker 1: that if that hits us a big enough once. So
Speaker 1: just get ready to have no power for a little while.
Speaker 1: That's my backstop, what I'm trying to prep. Measles death
Speaker 1: or multiple deaths in Pennsylvania. The first U.S. deaths of
Speaker 1: measles in 2026. Reno, Nevada has what's known as the
Speaker 1: Hawk Fire. Thousands had to evacuate. More evacuations in Texas.
Speaker 1: Up near Dallas, there were fires. There was a lot
Speaker 1: of fires all throughout the West, of course, this summer.
Speaker 1: About 80,000 acres for the Ross Fire in Texas. Blood
Speaker 1: Red Moon over the U.S. And another kind of artificial
Speaker 1: life event. lab-grown brain type of article to finish the night.
Speaker 1: Oldest lab-grown human brains reach seven years old, and they
Speaker 1: may have recorded the passage of time. So they have
Speaker 1: a concept of time, this lab-grown human brain material that
Speaker 1: is seven years old, living, and may have actually recorded
Speaker 1: the passage of time future, Dan. Artificial life is spawned,
Speaker 1: and it's living. What do you say?
Speaker 2: Getting towards it, aren't we?
Speaker 1: Definitely ain't in Kansas anymore. Any articles or topics you
Speaker 1: really want to jump into tonight?
Speaker 2: Yeah, correction or potential correction because RFK Jr. says that
Speaker 2: the measles deaths in Pennsylvania might be false reports. Saw
Speaker 2: that earlier today. Okay. So that could be some government
Speaker 2: statistics being falsified rather than actual pestilence of that nature.
Speaker 1: Well, I wanted to get to this one for sure.
Speaker 1: I tried not to jump into it during the news blitz,
Speaker 1: so now that we've broached the topic. First, two deaths
Speaker 1: out of the entire population of America. That's nothing. I mean,
Speaker 1: each individual is a tragedy, but it's totally statistically insignificant.
Speaker 1: there could be two deaths per day of measles. And
Speaker 1: it wouldn't even move the needle for me.
Speaker 2: But you're missing the point. That disease was essentially eradicated. So,
Speaker 2: you know, when we had MMR vaccines that weren't controversial
Speaker 2: and almost everybody agreed you should have one and they work, right?
Speaker 1: So two threads. First, yes, people don't trust those vaccines anymore.
Speaker 1: Number two, How many illegals have entered the country in
Speaker 1: the last five years that are spreading measles? My real question.
Speaker 2: Or Americans that said, I'm not doing any of that
Speaker 2: because my brother's children are autistic and they got loaded
Speaker 2: with 30-something shots the first year of life.
Speaker 1: Add that all up and it definitely, that is statistically significant.
Speaker 1: So a lot less people are getting vaccines for sure.
Speaker 2: Potentially for good reasons.
Speaker 1: Well, it is a risk, and he could potentially die
Speaker 1: from it, but as you said, this could be a miss,
Speaker 1: kind of going back to your original point, is this
Speaker 1: real statistic? Is it propaganda? Is it whatever? RFK, I'll
Speaker 1: dig deeper into what he said. I haven't heard his rebuttal,
Speaker 1: or do you have a little more info on that,
Speaker 1: or I'll try to follow up on that soon.
Speaker 2: I didn't read what he said, so that's pending, but
Speaker 2: pretty clear his political enemies are just would be overjoyed
Speaker 2: to see a, you know, a deadly measles outbreak ravage
Speaker 2: the United States. It's almost like Democrats cheer for it.
Speaker 1: Well, that's certainly true. They cheer for that and they
Speaker 1: cheer for mass shootings at schools, for example, too. Not good. Um, well,
Speaker 1: I'm almost taking this that. Yes, it's true. Even if
Speaker 1: it was true, you know, okay. There's two of them.
Speaker 1: That's really nothing. in a country of 350 million plus,
Speaker 1: but it could be totally false. And most stats, I'm
Speaker 1: one of the last people to trust government stats, let
Speaker 1: me tell you. So we'll see. We'll run this down.
Speaker 1: I want to see what RFK says and if they
Speaker 1: can actually track it down and if there's more coming
Speaker 1: up towards the end of the year. But we're already
Speaker 1: in towards the end of August and there haven't been
Speaker 1: any up until these two here. That's pretty amazing, really.
Speaker 2: It's the amount of time that passed when there was none. Many,
Speaker 2: many decades. So, that's the perspective most people have.
Speaker 1: And I just have to say, yeah, most people just
Speaker 1: have an unrealistic expectation of statistics. But I have very,
Speaker 1: you know, maybe my way of looking at things is
Speaker 1: not always agreed upon or, you know, whatever. And you're right, though.
Speaker 1: It had been you know, the worst year in measles
Speaker 1: since 1991, and three decades of no, I mean, that's true.
Speaker 1: That's pretty crazy. It went three full decades, and now
Speaker 1: there's been a couple. If it does end up being
Speaker 1: a couple per week going forward, then that, you know,
Speaker 1: would be a concern.
Speaker 2: And it's not like measles became a superbug resistant to
Speaker 2: its own vaccinations, right? Like, that's still a disease that
Speaker 2: could be eradicated. So to me, it's like our civilization peaking,
Speaker 2: and now you see, in one small dimension, falling off
Speaker 2: of what we once achieved.
Speaker 1: That's a good way to put it, too. And this
Speaker 1: is not the only example of that, probably. All right.
Speaker 1: Let's move on. Let's see. How about... Let's stay in
Speaker 1: this column. I want to hit the lab-made DNA... Lab-made
Speaker 1: DNA can store memory like a flash drive. Synthetic DNA.
Speaker 1: This is different than the brain that lived seven years.
Speaker 1: The neuron tissue, which we'll look at later, too. But
Speaker 1: this uses synthetic DNA and a semiconductor. So it's merging
Speaker 1: carbon and silicon, it sounds like.
Speaker 2: A cyborg, right?
Speaker 1: Memory resistor. A memristor, it calls. Holy cow. Well, This
Speaker 1: is just good old pop science. I used to read
Speaker 1: pop science, pop mechanics, popular mechanics when I was a kid.
Speaker 1: And now, what I was reading back then pales into
Speaker 1: comparison to artificial DNA, semiconductors, lab-made DNA. How about this?
Speaker 1: This seems too much. I don't know if this is true.
Speaker 1: It must be, though. It says one gram of DNA,
Speaker 1: which I don't even know if we have a gram
Speaker 1: of DNA in our body because it's so small. But
Speaker 1: a single gram of DNA has 215 million gigabytes of data.
Speaker 1: You want to know what the best data drive is?
Speaker 1: It's your body. It's your own cells have way more
Speaker 1: data than any computer. That's pretty crazy. I know that's true.
Speaker 1: But I think the 215 million gigabytes, I don't know
Speaker 1: how much DNA we have in our body. I'm going
Speaker 1: to have to actually ask AI that right now.
Speaker 2: Yeah, while you do, what we're headed for is data
Speaker 2: centers that have significant, they're going to be biohazards. They're
Speaker 2: going to be loaded full of organic human material processing,
Speaker 2: being the model for the machines and also storing the information.
Speaker 2: They're going to, if people are against data centers, if
Speaker 2: there's a reason to be against data centers, I haven't
Speaker 2: heard a good one until I just kind of realized that.
Speaker 1: Wow. Bio hybrid system. They call it.
Speaker 2: Yeah. I haven't read this. Have you read about this?
Speaker 2: Cause I just kind of put two and two together
Speaker 2: right now. And the future come came to me just
Speaker 2: on the two articles you're talking about.
Speaker 1: Patriot power, our epiphany.
Speaker 2: I'm sure others have written about it long ago and
Speaker 2: there's sci-fi movies anyways, right? But just your sterile local
Speaker 2: data center that's a big box with power grid lots
Speaker 2: all around it to keep it powered, pretty soon those
Speaker 2: are going to be biological hazard sites, like big plates
Speaker 2: of brains in there.
Speaker 1: Oh, man. This definitely sounds like an 80s cartoon type
Speaker 1: of thing, too. I don't know, like the evil robot.
Speaker 1: hive mind that's part brain part machine um hey it
Speaker 1: all checked out here man i did independent research and
Speaker 1: per gram of dna that is 215 million gigabytes and
Speaker 1: a holy cow everybody knows how big a gigabyte is
Speaker 1: like that's a pretty detailed lengthy movie right.
Speaker 2: Quarter billion million.
Speaker 1: And so you're doing 215 million of those per gram.
Speaker 1: And the human body has 25 to 50 grams of DNA.
Speaker 2: Oh, you were a bit off on that estimate. Wow.
Speaker 1: But this just seemed like an unbelievably ridiculous amount of data. Like,
Speaker 1: I thought, I don't know. That's crazy how much. First off,
Speaker 1: I didn't know we had that much DNA. That's like
Speaker 1: an entire ounce. One ounce of your body about is
Speaker 1: DNA just by itself.
Speaker 4: Yep.
Speaker 2: Could this be for the best, or is this going
Speaker 2: to bring about dystopia? I'm not trying to fearmonger here,
Speaker 2: but these articles are on the EMAP dashboard for a reason, right?
Speaker 2: Artificial life being spawned, nature being completely re-engineered, doesn't take
Speaker 2: much of an imagination to know that that could go
Speaker 2: horribly wrong.
Speaker 1: I think if I had to really jump into it,
Speaker 1: I'd say developing computer chips that have DNA in it.
Speaker 1: I don't have too much of a problem with it
Speaker 1: because what's the difference between that and raising factory animals
Speaker 1: that live in exactly the same spot their entire lives
Speaker 1: and then are slaughtered. What's the difference between that and
Speaker 1: some neurons that were created? However, it.
Speaker 2: Really crosses their human neurons. That's the difference.
Speaker 1: It could, But are we sure they're all human neurons?
Speaker 1: Because maybe we can use other type of animal neurons
Speaker 1: that aren't human and still get some of the good
Speaker 1: benefits from it.
Speaker 2: Human experimentation in this dimension isn't banned. And of all
Speaker 2: the animals on the earth, why would you go and
Speaker 2: use chicken brains when you can use fake human brains?
Speaker 1: That's a great point. Well, that's definitely probably could debate
Speaker 1: it for hours and hours. I think I like science
Speaker 1: and technology. I don't think I like human experimentation or
Speaker 1: using human brain matter kind of in a scientific way
Speaker 1: against us. It's who's also using it too. I would
Speaker 1: not trust those who are doing the experiments either. That's
Speaker 1: a big part of it.
Speaker 2: You know, modeling the structure so that we have silicon-based
Speaker 2: memory that has that capacity because it's designed like the
Speaker 2: human genome or, you know, silicon-based CPUs that are modeled
Speaker 2: after the brain and are therefore far more effective, right?
Speaker 2: I mean, that's kind of inevitable. You kind of expect that,
Speaker 2: but it's when you actually have flesh, tissue, organic material
Speaker 2: of humans in the machines, you know, you wonder, where's
Speaker 2: that stop, right? There's going to be a whole class
Speaker 2: of people that are genetically modified that, you know, have
Speaker 2: absolutely dominant intelligences and other physical attributes, right? Blade Runner shit.
Speaker 1: Well, it's, like you said, a lot of sci-fi around it.
Speaker 1: I don't know. Very complex. I'm mostly am against it,
Speaker 1: but I'm also, there is a little bit of inevitability
Speaker 1: to it. Just like with AI, like I'm using AI
Speaker 1: right now, even if it could be used for better
Speaker 1: or worse, you can't avoid it. But yeah, I don't know. Uh,
Speaker 1: human brains plugged into Skynet is not what I'm looking to, uh,
Speaker 1: support by any means.
Speaker 2: All right. So have we, uh, thoroughly covered the nature, science,
Speaker 2: technological dimension of our show. Anything else in that column
Speaker 2: that's worrying.
Speaker 3: You?
Speaker 1: I'm actually looking into the other article. Didn't have it
Speaker 1: up on screen. These are, you know, the human brains
Speaker 1: are just like very, very tiny. The size of a peppercorn.
Speaker 1: Some of them peppercorns that you grind up. But Again,
Speaker 1: this is just the beginning. Other articles, I mean, the
Speaker 1: wildfires could be huge depending on where you live. So
Speaker 1: another great reason to be a prepper if in your
Speaker 1: region flash floods or hurricanes. We saw Hawaii hit by
Speaker 1: a hurricane in the last month, last few weeks. We've
Speaker 1: seen earthquakes all around the world. If I was on
Speaker 1: the West Coast of the United States or even up
Speaker 1: in Canada, Vancouver and all that, on the Pacific Rim
Speaker 1: and up in Alaska, I would be on tsunami and
Speaker 1: earthquake super alert because that's the one part of the
Speaker 1: Pacific Rim that's not been hit hard. But we're not
Speaker 1: seeing any after multiple weeks in a row of a
Speaker 1: lot of earthquake and volcanic activity. Not really seeing any
Speaker 1: right now. So that's something I just wanted to point out.
Speaker 2: Yeah. What about what we talked about in security? Anything
Speaker 2: surprising in the Call them two security, foreign or domestic.
Speaker 1: The U.S. universities. Let's go see if my alma mater
Speaker 1: is in there because Purdue University has done a lot
Speaker 1: of work with Chinese nationals and Chinese students. Right? A
Speaker 1: lot of the big universities have been involved in that.
Speaker 1: Let's see who's named here. I hope it's not Purdue.
Speaker 2: It says it right there in the heading.
Speaker 1: Well, it has a I'm looking at the exact universities
Speaker 1: it's got.
Speaker 2: It's the biggest word on the line you're showing.
Speaker 1: Oh, no, it's right there.
Speaker 2: You're right. You made that up. You saw that already.
Speaker 2: You didn't come into this article and actually stumble into that,
Speaker 2: did you?
Speaker 1: Yeah, I did.
Speaker 4: Wow.
Speaker 2: Yeah, you're right, though. I guess you're really right about Purdue.
Speaker 1: Oh, man. Yeah, I mean, one third of my business
Speaker 1: master's class was from China or Taiwan. And then a
Speaker 1: lot were from India and a couple from the Middle
Speaker 1: East for whatever it's worth. So no, I had a
Speaker 1: feeling they would be on here, but I did not
Speaker 1: see it. You're right. It literally is one of the
Speaker 1: sub headlines. Purdue and Bay Hong built joint research labs. Well,
Speaker 1: Purdue's heavily involved in aeronautics and computer science and military stuff.
Speaker 1: They even have a nuclear reactor on campus. So nuclear engineering,
Speaker 1: they're big on, and let's just say one of my
Speaker 1: family members, like, let's just say was very involved with, uh,
Speaker 1: nuclear research in this country. And he was working with
Speaker 1: Chinese guys who I thought were the good guys. Hopefully
Speaker 1: a lot of them are the good guys that came
Speaker 1: to America and working on our side, but easy to
Speaker 1: have spies or, you know, double Asians, whatever. So this
Speaker 1: was back in 2011, which is right around the time
Speaker 1: I was in grad school. Funny enough, 2011, just after
Speaker 1: I got out of there for the second time, the
Speaker 1: Joint Laboratory on Energy Systems and Low Emissions Combustion. So
Speaker 1: I actually did come into this naked, not knowing that
Speaker 1: that would be one of the biggest ones, but I
Speaker 1: also did know that Purdue was going to be implicated
Speaker 1: in this for sure. But I definitely expected to see
Speaker 1: the likes of Harvard and MIT, and others, Berkeley, Duke,
Speaker 1: Penn State. But, oh, man, not where I wanted to
Speaker 1: see Purdue. Not on top of this list.
Speaker 3: Boilermakers Yep Sold out to China China Well let me
Speaker 3: just say Michigan Sold out to China too Northwestern did
Speaker 3: as well Everybody, the university systems Sold out Top to bottom.
Speaker 1: Yeah, so that's not good. My mom's been telling me
Speaker 1: this for a while, too. It's like, Bruce sold out
Speaker 1: to China.
Speaker 2: I'll tell you, when the history books are written, I'm
Speaker 2: wondering what part of that regime did they absolutely institutionalize
Speaker 2: what we would call in the United States think tanks
Speaker 2: to sit down and just thoroughly look at the ways
Speaker 2: to absolutely exploit every angle of the freedom of our
Speaker 2: country to serve the communist regime because this is clearly
Speaker 2: planned that's all they do is centrally plan from Beijing
Speaker 2: and I'm just wondering when did they really just say
Speaker 2: alright instead of we'll do a little bit there a
Speaker 2: little bit there and we'll try this here and we'll
Speaker 2: you know kind of haphazardly perform espionage against us and
Speaker 2: turned it into a a complete enterprise level.
Speaker 1: It's got to be 2008 Obama from Obama on.
Speaker 4: Sure.
Speaker 1: It was gangbusters maybe even before, but I mean, once,
Speaker 1: once Obama got in and after the Beijing Olympics, that
Speaker 1: was the coming out party planned kind of esoteric plan
Speaker 1: by the, Them, the capital T, them, who run a
Speaker 1: lot of the weird stuff with the Olympics. They're like,
Speaker 1: now it's China's turn and we're handing it over. The
Speaker 1: Manchurian candidate, Obama, on behalf of China. There you go.
Speaker 2: I think that's the implementation. I think the Clinton's terms
Speaker 2: would have been where looking at the Clinton presidency, even
Speaker 2: without any treasonous cooperation, They might just look, alright, if
Speaker 2: that country's going to elect people like that, then we're
Speaker 2: going to just exploit every single angle of it because
Speaker 2: they'll let us. He was a Vietnam protester, right? It's
Speaker 2: a big warning sign that he might be lenient on
Speaker 2: what we plan to do.
Speaker 1: It is a red flag, as they call it.
Speaker 2: Alright.
Speaker 1: Enough looking at the Purdue one, but there's more than
Speaker 1: that under the foreign black ops that i wanted to
Speaker 1: hit on that that's the not just universities but doj
Speaker 1: nasa federal reserve and senate there's some memes which i
Speaker 1: don't think are particularly funny but it may be at
Speaker 1: one point in my life i thought they'd be funnier
Speaker 1: about china hacking the fed and what they found inside
Speaker 1: the federal reserve and blah blah blah but i don't
Speaker 1: really find that too funny anymore i'm kind of jaded
Speaker 1: in that regard but uh Let's get into the article.
Speaker 1: The Justice Department and FBI seized three domains Wednesday. Shut
Speaker 1: down some hacking platforms used against American government networks and infrastructure. NASA,
Speaker 1: the Fed, Energy Department, Justice Department, Health and Human Services, NIH,
Speaker 1: National Institute of Health, and again, the Senate. Kind of
Speaker 1: important there. All types of exploits. Excuse me. invulnerabilities were
Speaker 1: uh exploited there and really i mean i don't know
Speaker 1: how much actual damage was done in my profession i'm
Speaker 1: always like okay good to know what actual damage was
Speaker 1: done what kind of uh exposure is that i don't
Speaker 1: know i don't know how much damage was done but
Speaker 1: here's the thing we don't We may never know the
Speaker 1: damage that's done or who's sitting lurking in wait that
Speaker 1: gained access and are now just waiting to be activated
Speaker 1: years down the road or just passively monitoring. I mean,
Speaker 1: you know, I don't know. The analogy that comes to
Speaker 1: mind is a submarine analogy different than the one we've
Speaker 1: used before or metaphor, I guess. But sometimes a submarine
Speaker 1: isn't just to shoot torpedoes and they're not just to
Speaker 1: launch inter... intercontinental ballistic missiles they're also meant to just
Speaker 1: sit there silently and observe and report right so that's
Speaker 1: a lot of cyber attacks are just burrowing deep and
Speaker 1: just staying there to be activated later and or reporting
Speaker 1: back passively some info you know what i mean.
Speaker 2: I do be cyber is a war fighting domain i
Speaker 2: think it's greatly overhyped But to me, black ops suspected
Speaker 2: comes in many forms and cyber is, you know, a
Speaker 2: black op. They want it to be clandestine. They don't
Speaker 2: want to be found out about this, right? Because it
Speaker 2: doesn't work if you find out. FBI found out and
Speaker 2: disabled everything, right? But, you know, if a country is
Speaker 2: willing to aggressively perform espionage on you, it's because they're
Speaker 2: preparing to fight you. That, you know, it's a chain
Speaker 2: of events that's the dangerous thing. This in and of
Speaker 2: itself isn't going to collapse the United States. You hacked.
Speaker 1: Well, they definitely don't want to get caught. I guess
Speaker 1: the question is for everyone that gets caught, how many
Speaker 1: are out there? Is it just a few? Is it hundreds?
Speaker 1: Is it thousands? We'll never know, of course. And again,
Speaker 1: what actual damage and what actual data can they get
Speaker 1: access to? There's a lot of people that get paid
Speaker 1: a lot. And you know what? Funny enough, the Cybersecurity
Speaker 1: and Infrastructure Security Agency, CISA, C-I-S-A, had an article about that.
Speaker 1: And this was more focused, though, on water systems that
Speaker 1: were targeted. Future Dan, no one died because their water
Speaker 1: was turned off, right? But there were attacks. There was
Speaker 1: some damages. Happened in 12 states. And Even the article admits, yeah,
Speaker 1: not that much significant disruption, but did raise concerns. So
Speaker 1: I don't know. I guess I'm more worried about the
Speaker 1: data and privacy aspect of hacks than like blowing things
Speaker 1: up by way of a cyber attack. But I don't know.
Speaker 1: We haven't seen a full on cyber war or at
Speaker 1: least it's not published to the public. Maybe it's going
Speaker 1: on right now under the undercurrent, though.
Speaker 2: Oh, it's constant, but to what effect, right? 40% of
Speaker 2: my life, there was no internet, right? I can remember
Speaker 2: when there was no internet. To me, it's like, all right,
Speaker 2: if there's no internet tomorrow, life will go on. I
Speaker 2: saw it. There's been electricity my whole life, but it
Speaker 2: wasn't for my grandparents. So, you know, life will go on. Now,
Speaker 2: to what degree are there people that can't cope without
Speaker 2: electricity and and internet and obviously if you live somewhere
Speaker 2: where food transportation is going to break down now you're
Speaker 2: in a starving situation that's real but life will go
Speaker 2: on without those technologies it was before you'll kill a
Speaker 2: lot of people a lot of civil unrest a lot
Speaker 2: of people won't mentally handle it but I think smaller
Speaker 2: communities will be able to cope.
Speaker 1: I think the mental part is a huge part. That's
Speaker 1: why I do some fasting and I definitely try to
Speaker 1: live a fairly clean life and exercise and do this
Speaker 1: and that so that if stuff hits the fan, I'm
Speaker 1: not going through sugar withdrawals or alcohol withdrawals or just,
Speaker 1: you know. There's part of it just you got to
Speaker 1: be tough when stuff gets tough. But on the other hand,
Speaker 1: if you live a decadent lifestyle for years and years,
Speaker 1: it's going to be a little harder to shift into
Speaker 1: that so i think part of being a prepper is
Speaker 1: you know kind of working on especially food i feel
Speaker 1: like within a couple days if you're not getting the
Speaker 1: the food that you're used to and we did this
Speaker 1: with some of our prior challenges last year in particular
Speaker 1: eating mres and having calorie deficit like if you haven't
Speaker 1: done that before i would just say do it so
Speaker 1: you're not totally surprised not too many firsts as mpc
Speaker 1: guy says but in terms of no internet here's what
Speaker 1: i would say yes 100 world would go on but
Speaker 1: from an economic standpoint it would obviously bring everything down
Speaker 1: really bad i mean maybe that would be a blessing
Speaker 1: in disguise but uh we would be in great depression
Speaker 1: mode if not worse if the internet was off for
Speaker 1: more than a month uh just you know at this
Speaker 1: point if we just have a gdp that goes down
Speaker 1: by one or two percent we would be like massive
Speaker 1: panic and crashing but If we had a GDP minus
Speaker 1: 10% for a month because there was no electricity or
Speaker 1: minimal electricity. Yeah, all this debt and Ponzi scheme would
Speaker 1: unravel very fast. The Fed couldn't even print out of it, potentially.
Speaker 2: Yeah, that's true. I just don't fear cyber attack that way.
Speaker 2: The cyber attacks that have to be defended against are,
Speaker 2: you know, are war fighting battle command systems, right? Like,
Speaker 2: I don't really care if Wall Street can't function for
Speaker 2: a week. Can the nuclear arsenal function? That's kind of
Speaker 2: a level I look at. That kind of cyber attack,
Speaker 2: I don't think that is possible. I don't think they
Speaker 2: can knock out Wall Street right now. Maybe muck around
Speaker 2: with some websites is apparently what this is.
Speaker 1: All considered, we have not in almost 25 years, almost
Speaker 1: exactly right to 9-11, if they had some sort of
Speaker 1: all-encompassing cyber attack that would have knocked out power to
Speaker 1: 10% of America or more, it would have been launched
Speaker 1: by now, I think.
Speaker 2: I'm pretty sure the NSA has done it to people.
Speaker 2: I'm sure they've done it to every adversary. I'm sure
Speaker 2: Russians have received what you just described. The Chinese have
Speaker 2: received what you just described. I don't see any reason
Speaker 2: why our technology and capability to go offensive cyber wouldn't
Speaker 2: lead the world.
Speaker 1: While at the same time building the defenses we would
Speaker 1: need ourselves and just not having some of this stuff,
Speaker 1: internet exposed, as they say, that's one thing they're doing
Speaker 1: is rethinking their architecture. Like, do we really need all
Speaker 1: these different parts? So internet enabled and smart and all
Speaker 1: that crap, maybe not just other new avenues for entry,
Speaker 1: you know? So that's, that's a little part of it too. The,
Speaker 1: the internet attack surface may be smart about it.
Speaker 4: Yeah.
Speaker 2: What else is interesting you on the heat map dashboard?
Speaker 2: Last show of August, 2026. It is.
Speaker 1: Hmm. SCOTUS backing the president, a mail-in ballots, executive order
Speaker 1: to stop voter fraud backed by the Supreme court, 10
Speaker 1: page order reversed to lower court, stay on the executive order.
Speaker 1: So lower court had said, stay like you say to
Speaker 1: a dog that's how i remember like stay his does
Speaker 1: not proceed doesn't count yet you know like a pause
Speaker 1: well supreme court has the authority to reverse that stay
Speaker 1: and have it now take into effect this is the
Speaker 1: ensuring citizenship verification and integrity in federal elections but the
Speaker 1: fight is not over they're reporting here on the new
Speaker 1: american but this is a good you know, victory and, uh,
Speaker 1: you know, at this point, anything like this that comes
Speaker 1: out of the Supreme court is certainly positive. We'll take it. Um,
Speaker 1: this was from March 31st and another order in March 25th.
Speaker 1: So here we are five months later, it's being supported
Speaker 1: by the Supreme court. You definitely talked over the last
Speaker 1: several years about how things got to work their way
Speaker 1: through the court and how in fact it's it'll set
Speaker 1: positive precedent, right? So it might take a little while,
Speaker 1: but when it actually happens, that can be bear fruit
Speaker 1: for a while, right? All right. Future Dan, we're going
Speaker 1: to move on. Gold heading to best month since $ 99
Speaker 1: wobbling month. 4,600 on Friday. Remember, gold touched 5,000 earlier
Speaker 1: this year, but 4,600. There you are, future Dan. We
Speaker 1: moved on to gold.
Speaker 2: Back up. I just want to jump back to the
Speaker 2: immigration thing real quick. So that whole Supreme Court decision
Speaker 2: hinges on this concept of ripeness. Do you know what
Speaker 2: I mean by ripeness when it comes to different actions
Speaker 2: in courts and.
Speaker 1: Uh, no. Go ahead and expand on that.
Speaker 2: To make it real easy, the decision from the Supreme
Speaker 2: Court is the lower judge couldn't stay in order that
Speaker 2: actually hadn't been given yet. Because the Trump administration did
Speaker 2: an executive order ordering the post office to establish new
Speaker 2: standards for verifying mail-in ballots. But the post office hadn't
Speaker 2: done it yet. So... The injunction wasn't ripe. There was
Speaker 2: no harm done because what Trump had ordered the post
Speaker 2: office to do, the post office hadn't done yet.
Speaker 1: Okay.
Speaker 2: So it wasn't ripe. There was no decision to be made.
Speaker 2: Lower judges can't just stop things that haven't happened yet
Speaker 2: was the logic of that. And then as soon as
Speaker 2: that decision came down, the Trump administration through the post
Speaker 2: office did establish the orders, which have immediately been sued again.
Speaker 1: Right.
Speaker 2: So now it's ripe.
Speaker 1: Ripeness, okay.
Speaker 2: But the president's opponents, the Democrats that want carte blanche
Speaker 2: with mail-in ballots again, might actually find out that by
Speaker 2: the time The next cases make it to that Supreme
Speaker 2: Court level. It'll be now too late. So the opposite
Speaker 2: of right. It'll be passed. It'll be passed. It's expired.
Speaker 2: So it looks like the White House is using the
Speaker 2: timeline to actually maneuver this in a way where no
Speaker 2: lower court can stop it from taking effect. And my God,
Speaker 2: it has Democrats that are smart enough to know how
Speaker 2: this works. really, really upset because it does seem like
Speaker 2: it's going to work.
Speaker 1: Love to see it. Love to see it.
Speaker 2: We're talking about barcodes. Having barcodes on the envelopes of
Speaker 2: the mail-in ballots so they can actually be tracked.
Speaker 4: Right?
Speaker 2: Like something very obvious and fair that they're trying to,
Speaker 2: but they have to actually maneuver the legal system to
Speaker 2: prevent thousands upon thousands of lower court federal judges from
Speaker 2: stopping them.
Speaker 1: Right. Well, I mean, it seems dishonest to try to
Speaker 1: have a stay when the rule isn't even final. They've
Speaker 1: said it wasn't even proposed to let alone final, but
Speaker 1: of course they don't care about wasting taxpayer resources and
Speaker 1: court time, et cetera. You know, those attorney fees are,
Speaker 1: you know how much it costs to bring that motion up.
Speaker 1: That was just political warfare. I mean, I won't even
Speaker 1: go any further than that. But that's just how this
Speaker 1: stuff works out. But at least seemingly the Trump administration
Speaker 1: is playing the game the right way, might be able
Speaker 1: to maneuver it with the ripeness. I get that now.
Speaker 1: It makes sense. It's working between when, well, in the
Speaker 1: insurance world, when does the claim actually start and when
Speaker 1: is the statute of limitations expired? Like you said, expired.
Speaker 1: Similar thing. Like when does the actual claim, law or
Speaker 1: policy go into place and it had not happened yet.
Speaker 1: And the people bringing that up knew that it was
Speaker 1: very on its face, but there, you know, that's the
Speaker 1: political juristic, you know, jurisprudence warfare, which is very important
Speaker 1: in all this. I'm, I'm no attorney, but, uh, you know,
Speaker 1: it's very important. I know that.
Speaker 2: And, and when, um, the vote, vote theft of 2020
Speaker 2: was underway, uh, Before, during the days of the actual
Speaker 2: election in 2020, and all the way through the period
Speaker 2: until the Electoral College completed its actions and Congress certified it,
Speaker 2: in J6 2021 in that whole time frame the same
Speaker 2: logic this isn't ripe yet everything that Trump said and
Speaker 2: his lawyers were saying is going to happen to steal
Speaker 2: the vote every court refused to recognize it because it
Speaker 2: hadn't happened yet and then shortly thereafter said it was
Speaker 2: a fait accompli and there's nothing to be done because
Speaker 2: what's happened has happened so what comes around goes around.
Speaker 1: For sure looking at this article I did notice there's
Speaker 1: a thumbnail I wanted to click on we're not going
Speaker 1: to play this right now but you sent it to
Speaker 1: me I listened to it yesterday worth listening to the
Speaker 1: psychology of tyranny why psychopathic authoritarians keep rising to power
Speaker 1: I did search our transcripts I got about a third
Speaker 1: of our transcripts this is episode 359 so I got
Speaker 1: about 150 maybe hundred twenty five hundred fifty transcripts i
Speaker 1: searched to see if we ever used the phrase psychopathic
Speaker 1: authoritarianism it did not find that but i swear i
Speaker 1: must have said it at some point but anyway the
Speaker 1: point is this sounds like ben the breaker of banksters
Speaker 1: from 10 or 15 years ago but this is a
Speaker 1: doctor in hypnosis. He's talking about how society... Psychiatry. Well, okay.
Speaker 1: But he practices hypnosis. How about that?
Speaker 2: It's a specialty, but he's a legitimate psychiatric doctor. Joseph Sansone,
Speaker 2: putting a book out next month, and this hour-long or
Speaker 2: half-hour-long interview with him by New American... I want to
Speaker 2: read that book. I think I want to get my
Speaker 2: hands on it.
Speaker 1: He talks all about what a psychopathic authoritarian is and
Speaker 1: about hypnosis, about how mass media hypnosis, whether it's January.
Speaker 1: He didn't even mention January 6th, I don't think, but
Speaker 1: that's hypnosis. That's a great example. COVID, of course, 9-11,
Speaker 1: but he focuses big time on COVID. and COVID shots
Speaker 1: and lockdowns and all that. So, uh, definitely, definitely worth listening. Yeah. Okay.
Speaker 1: There's not a such thing as a doctor in hypnosis.
Speaker 1: That's true. But he, he talks about clinical psychology, history, philosophy, sociology, and, uh,
Speaker 1: what's the dark tetrad. I've heard it before. It's all
Speaker 1: about sadism, narcissism, and Machiavellianism, psychopathy, uh, how all these
Speaker 1: traits are actually, they manifest in the public because of
Speaker 1: the leaders. And he puts out examples of like the
Speaker 1: people trying to get you arrested for not wearing a
Speaker 1: mask at a supermarket. Right. They feel so empowered and
Speaker 1: they often lean on the state. Imagine what it must
Speaker 1: be in like North Korea and China. Like, like you
Speaker 1: are in such like lockdown in your own mind, such a, uh,
Speaker 1: Stockholm syndrome and your own sadism comes out and you're like, yeah,
Speaker 1: me and the state, we're going to work together. And
Speaker 1: I don't know, like that whole psych, psychopathy, uh, the
Speaker 1: leaders manifest that, but they definitely like they're doing it
Speaker 1: on purpose. They, they're, they know what they're doing. Some
Speaker 1: kind of like dark magic almost. Yeah. Yeah.
Speaker 2: It's the topics that are at hand. It's, it's, it's
Speaker 2: definitely worth listening to. And, I'm going to get the book.
Speaker 2: I'll tell you what, that, that, that many half hour
Speaker 2: interviews by authors have me, have me say, I got
Speaker 2: to get that book and read it. But he's brought
Speaker 2: together a lot of things you've heard for a very
Speaker 2: long time on alternative media in a, you know, an
Speaker 2: actual construct of someone who's a, has a doctorate in psych, psychiatry.
Speaker 2: So I want to read it.
Speaker 1: I like it. I like it. And then actually when this, uh,
Speaker 1: we're running low on time for the show, but After that,
Speaker 1: another interview came out all about gun control and someone,
Speaker 1: pretty much gun owners of American. I'm like, all right,
Speaker 1: the new American. I've been on New American quite a lot,
Speaker 1: but got to make sure I go check that out
Speaker 1: more often. Definitely hitting things out of the park. So,
Speaker 1: Future Dan, we got a few minutes left. Are there
Speaker 1: any big articles you really wanted to hit on or
Speaker 1: any topics to kind of bookend today? This episode, final
Speaker 1: August 2026 episode.
Speaker 2: I want to ask you, is your Uber chart on
Speaker 2: America's death spiral, that infographic ready for the public?
Speaker 1: Let's do it. I almost forgot. How could I? This one.
Speaker 1: Can you see it?
Speaker 2: Yeah, totally.
Speaker 1: Busy. All right. We're going to run through it in
Speaker 1: a very high level way. Wish me luck. It is busy,
Speaker 1: but it's all about the debt going back 15 years
Speaker 1: and going forward 15 years. So last week, 15-year anniversary
Speaker 1: of Dethrone the Banksters, my original blog talking about the
Speaker 1: banksters and all their schemes and their psychopathic authoritarianism, etc. Well,
Speaker 1: since then, here we go. Debt went from just under
Speaker 1: $ 15 trillion... to 40 trillion in the last 15 years.
Speaker 1: Now in 15 years from now, the official CBO congressional
Speaker 1: budget office, James Walton was talking about the CBO last week. Like, well,
Speaker 1: how can we have a budget office if we have
Speaker 1: a trillion dollar deficit? What is that? Like almost like
Speaker 1: a Seinfeld meme or something. What are we talking about? Uh, Yeah, well,
Speaker 1: they even think that we're going to go from $ 40
Speaker 1: trillion to $ 83 trillion 15 years from now. But that,
Speaker 1: in my opinion, is massive sandbagging.
Speaker 2: Is that real or inflation-adjusted? What's your inflation assumption? Or
Speaker 2: is that just nominal?
Speaker 1: That is nominal only. So that's a great question. Yeah, okay.
Speaker 1: Look on this right-hand side, this green box. This actually
Speaker 1: kind of translates. The last 15 years was 173% nominal increase.
Speaker 1: But if you took it into an inflation, it was
Speaker 1: like an 85% increase in real terms. So if we
Speaker 1: just said the nominal increase, cut that in half would
Speaker 1: be the real increase, that's still literally $ 20- plus trillion of
Speaker 1: today money. So that makes sense. They're looking at like, okay,
Speaker 1: over the next 15 years, one to $ 1. 5 trillion of
Speaker 1: today money deficit. That's like what we are now. No improvement,
Speaker 1: but no, you know, nothing getting worse is what they're
Speaker 1: kind of expecting. But that is, I just want to
Speaker 1: show why just a small change in that, which I
Speaker 1: think is necessary can blow that number out. So again,
Speaker 1: in current dollars, not inflation, nominal, They think we're going
Speaker 1: to go from 40, the official numbers, from $ 40 trillion
Speaker 1: to $ 83 trillion in the next 15 years. Okay. But
Speaker 1: if we actually grow at the rate of debt that
Speaker 1: we have for the past 15 years, we're not going
Speaker 1: to make, like if we just maintain what we did
Speaker 1: on average the last 15 years, we're not going to
Speaker 1: end up at $ 83 trillion. We're going to end up
Speaker 1: at $ 110 trillion. So I'm just saying if we did
Speaker 1: the exact same regression that line, if we did the
Speaker 1: same kind of moving average over the next 15 years
Speaker 1: that we just did for the last 15 years, we're
Speaker 1: actually going to land at 110. So just that is
Speaker 1: the baseline. Cause I don't think anything's going to be
Speaker 1: improving in the next 15 years. Um, but now my
Speaker 1: question is.
Speaker 2: Um, in 2041 is the yellow or the red or
Speaker 2: the blue final number. In today's dollars or in what
Speaker 2: we expect after inflation money to be worth in 2041?
Speaker 1: That'll be in today's numbers.
Speaker 2: In reality, they're going to be sick higher numbers.
Speaker 1: It'll have less purchasing power, which means the debt is
Speaker 1: worth less too. But it's still going to be a
Speaker 1: heck of a lot. I mean, let's say Here's another
Speaker 1: way to look at it, actually. What's the percent of
Speaker 1: GDP that it represents on a real basis?
Speaker 2: It's almost the best way to look at it.
Speaker 1: Right. So, in that regard, what I would say is
Speaker 1: it's going to keep rising as a percent of GDP, which,
Speaker 1: if that happens... it's going to be big time problems.
Speaker 1: Not only would interest rates be going up, but it
Speaker 1: could potentially lead to just that great reset. I mean,
Speaker 1: based on the math here, pretty high chance that there'll
Speaker 1: be some sort of reset of the financial system at
Speaker 1: 15 years. Best case scenario, it's like 2008, 2009, 2010,
Speaker 1: where some people go bust, but it doesn't collapse everything.
Speaker 1: And there's some bailouts and it goes another decade. I
Speaker 1: don't know. I think that it can't do that for
Speaker 1: another 15 years, maybe another 5 or 10. This doesn't
Speaker 1: take into account World War III or COVID 2.0 either,
Speaker 1: by the way. So this is just the baseline, let
Speaker 1: alone a shock value where several trillion dollars needed to
Speaker 1: be printed in a year. So just keep that in mind, too.
Speaker 2: And I do think it's a Marxist frame to if
Speaker 2: some calamity like that happened to say that it was
Speaker 2: inevitable because the capitalist system was falling apart. First of all,
Speaker 2: this is not due to capitalism. This is clearly due
Speaker 2: to statism for over a hundred years or 14 or
Speaker 2: 15 years to be precise. So, you know, I'm not
Speaker 2: going to accept any arguments ever that, you know, this
Speaker 2: was inevitable or it was caused by capitalism or they're,
Speaker 2: the economic situation where there had to be a war.
Speaker 1: I can agree with that because the basis is not
Speaker 1: capitalism for sure. The problem was not capitalism. They'll try
Speaker 1: to blame it. A lot of them will say, oh,
Speaker 1: this is late stage capitalism. That's one of their buzzwords
Speaker 1: for sure.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I'm not buying it. That's a Marxist frame, neo-Marxist frame.
Speaker 2: I categorically reject it and speak against it weekly on
Speaker 2: Patriot Power Hour.
Speaker 1: The only way to be able to get this far
Speaker 1: is if the government is complicit in the fraud, which
Speaker 1: it is. So there you go. In a free market,
Speaker 1: Everything would clear out, collapse and rebuild and regrow naturally.
Speaker 1: The only way this fraud can be perpetrated this far,
Speaker 1: this long, is with the government helping to support it.
Speaker 1: The lender of last resort, the buyer of last resort, right?
Speaker 1: The government will be there to buy. I mean, they
Speaker 1: already have done subsidies for corn and soy for decades
Speaker 1: and decades, for example. But anyway, the insurer of last resort,
Speaker 1: if If all the insurance companies and pensions and actuaries
Speaker 1: and all that go tits up, then there'll be some
Speaker 1: sort of check coming from Uncle Sam. But what can
Speaker 1: you actually buy with it will be a question. I
Speaker 1: got to feel it. Yep.
Speaker 2: So, pretty busy infographic. Are you going to post that
Speaker 2: for us to spend a little more time on our
Speaker 2: own looking at?
Speaker 1: Yep, I'm going to get that out on X. In fact,
Speaker 1: I think I posted it last night. Let me double check.
Speaker 1: I had a beta version of this last week, but
Speaker 1: I cleaned it up. I specifically told the AI, reformulate
Speaker 1: this with no Marxist, socialist, you know, Occupy Wall Street
Speaker 1: type of iconography. It was actually this other one that
Speaker 1: was worse. If you remember, I had this to throw
Speaker 1: in the bank, it's just 15 years. And it had
Speaker 1: like the fist rising. It was like red colors. I mean,
Speaker 1: this is still kind of the red and Soviet style,
Speaker 1: but it looks a lot better. I do like the
Speaker 1: color actually. But anyway, long story short. Yeah, I am
Speaker 1: posting on X and I'm expecting and hoping to make
Speaker 1: some more assets. Maybe not as busy as this one,
Speaker 1: but I'm going to be posting them throughout the year.
Speaker 2: I'd be interested in seeing ones on, you know, what
Speaker 2: kind of, peaceful, non-reset, fundamental changes to start to flatten
Speaker 2: the curve. Because flattening the curve relative to all the
Speaker 2: rest of the debt of the rest of the world
Speaker 2: would set America up in, you know, exactly where we
Speaker 2: want to be. Best we could hope for. What kind
Speaker 2: of productivity gains will we have to see? What kind
Speaker 2: of breakthrough scientific Discoveries that can be brought perhaps out
Speaker 2: of clandestine military affairs and brought to the civilian economy.
Speaker 2: What could AI do? What could blockchain do? What can
Speaker 2: energy breakthroughs do to flatten that curve? I'd like to
Speaker 2: see a dethrone the banksters version of that.
Speaker 1: I love it. The first one that pops out is
Speaker 1: definitely energy, especially electricity, nuclear plants, et cetera, et cetera.
Speaker 1: But I've always been drill, drill, drill. Everyone's pretty damn
Speaker 1: glad we did fracking and drilling in the last decade
Speaker 1: with what's going on nowadays. Let's just say that. I
Speaker 1: was always for that drill, baby, drill. But energy, energy, energy.
Speaker 1: And then food, food, food. Improving the food supply, the cost,
Speaker 1: but also the quality. if you improve the quality of
Speaker 1: the food supply, that'll have a lot of great externalities
Speaker 1: on the health side of things. It's really healthcare is
Speaker 1: such a big expense and just growing and growing and growing.
Speaker 1: So that has to be handled in a lot of
Speaker 1: different ways.
Speaker 2: Medicaid, Medicare running, you know, 3 billion a day each, right?
Speaker 2: Stuff like that.
Speaker 1: Yeah. It's ugly. And I have, I'm not going to
Speaker 1: call this inside information because it's probably publicly available. I
Speaker 1: haven't done my due diligence, but I'm not running a
Speaker 1: public company right now. Health insurance premiums should be going
Speaker 1: up 15% to 25% in the next 12 to 18 months.
Speaker 1: So hear that first here. If your health care premiums
Speaker 1: have gone up, expect them to continue going up double
Speaker 1: digits minimum for the next several years. based on what
Speaker 1: I'm hearing in the insurance and insurance brokerage field. So
Speaker 1: that's more and more inflation. Everything's going up in healthcare,
Speaker 1: leading the charge, really.
Speaker 2: I hope it breaks that whole system and we get
Speaker 2: back to you just getting cash discount for paying for
Speaker 2: medical services that are entirely outside of the insurance system.
Speaker 2: Something tells me that so much corruption and regulation, regulatory capture,
Speaker 2: I mean, insurance and healthcare, juggernaut, HMOs, something's not functioning
Speaker 2: according to market principles there. And that's probably what it
Speaker 2: takes to break that, is drive that to unaffordability. The
Speaker 2: market will adjust.
Speaker 1: Yes and no. Part of it is who's going to
Speaker 1: be in charge. Will they try to socialize it if
Speaker 1: it breaks, if the freaking... America in charge I sure
Speaker 1: as heck hope.
Speaker 2: Not it's gonna happen if they completely socialize medicine you
Speaker 2: know what they would immediately create is a proverbial black
Speaker 2: market for medical care and people pay cash because they
Speaker 2: wouldn't be able to get it any other way.
Speaker 1: Right my doctor only accepts gold silver bitcoin and water purifiers.
Speaker 2: But have to wait a while to find that doctor
Speaker 2: but yeah.
Speaker 1: Um, sort of joking, sort of not. I mean, in fact, uh,
Speaker 1: I did not do this, but during COVID there were
Speaker 1: certain people that, uh, would try to, you know, work
Speaker 1: outside the medical system and only certain doctors would see
Speaker 1: people that were unvaccinated and stuff that hopefully maybe some, uh,
Speaker 1: doctor patient relationships were built that could be outside of
Speaker 1: the system. Maybe I need to go prepping to do
Speaker 1: for me, go find a doctor that I could actually
Speaker 1: trust outside of the system. I have not done that.
Speaker 1: it would be pretty hard, but it's probably really necessary. Right.
Speaker 2: But if, if premiums skyrocket like that, they're going to
Speaker 2: be alternatives out there. There's going to be people banding
Speaker 2: together for smaller insurance pools. There's going to be clinics that'll,
Speaker 2: that'll come up and take cash payments.
Speaker 1: Right.
Speaker 2: As soon as, as soon as it's like, there's no
Speaker 2: value there. You're paying insurance premiums and the doctors aren't
Speaker 2: getting paid. People are paying too much that those middlemen,
Speaker 2: You know, they can't drive that up forever without breaking
Speaker 2: it and people going direct and cutting out the middleman.
Speaker 1: Well, nothing can cut out the middleman quicker and better
Speaker 1: than AI. So there's your efficiencies. Cut out the middleman,
Speaker 1: get all the paperwork to happen 10 times faster, 10
Speaker 1: times more accurate for one-tenth the cost by way of AI.
Speaker 1: There you go.
Speaker 2: And, you know, faster, more accurate diagnoses.
Speaker 1: For sure. For sure. So you ain't pissing away all
Speaker 1: these diagnostic tests that are unnecessary or, on the other hand,
Speaker 1: you're treating something right away when it's $ 10, 000 instead of
Speaker 1: six months later when it's $ 80, 000.
Speaker 2: Exactly.
Speaker 1: All right.
Speaker 2: I love these infographics.
Speaker 1: They help me learn.
Speaker 2: Love to see one dedicated on what I really think is,
Speaker 2: you know, who cares how much debt you got if
Speaker 2: you have an income that exceeds it, if gross income.
Speaker 2: Domestic product is, is really healthy and leading the world.
Speaker 2: Is that curve flattened?
Speaker 1: So perfect. Here's the, how about the final number of
Speaker 1: all the busyness? The real number, I'd say the real
Speaker 1: number is the 110 plus trillion. That is scary. That's important,
Speaker 1: but it's the, what is the compounded annual growth rate?
Speaker 1: So compounding interest, annual growth rate, the last 15 years,
Speaker 1: the debt has grown by 6.9% every year, compounding upon
Speaker 1: itself on average. So 6.9%. We would have to grow 6.9%
Speaker 1: per year at that rate, which is possible, but it's hard.
Speaker 1: I've not seen a 6.9% GDP print. Maybe that one
Speaker 1: quarter after COVID lockdowns were lifted or something. It's not possible, though,
Speaker 1: but we would need that to match even.
Speaker 2: Is that right, though?
Speaker 1: Because....
Speaker 2: You know, growth and its effects on the federal government's
Speaker 2: revenues and taxes, I'm not sure if it's that linear, right?
Speaker 2: If we were running at 6.9% growth, the tax base
Speaker 2: wouldn't just be 6, you know, it's not a 6.9%
Speaker 2: increase in tax revenue. Multiple factors of that, wouldn't it?
Speaker 1: It's a great question. What the call that like the
Speaker 1: inflator or the multiplier. What is that in a one
Speaker 1: year period? But then looking at what is that in
Speaker 1: a five year period? Because, you know, let's say you
Speaker 1: get your paycheck. Well, you're going to spend a certain
Speaker 1: amount pretty quickly. And then that person or business will
Speaker 1: spend theirs and they'll be paying sales tax and income
Speaker 1: tax withholding on all the transaction that, like you said,
Speaker 1: spawn out. So I don't, I don't actually know what
Speaker 1: the kind of studies show but it's a great point
Speaker 1: though it's not one for one for sure.
Speaker 2: Taking this to a new challenge level maybe we'll get
Speaker 2: to see it in september.
Speaker 1: I like it i this is some good homework this
Speaker 1: is something uh I should just put this transcript. I'm
Speaker 1: going to save this transcript and get going with it.
Speaker 1: I've been using transcripts a lot. They're helpful. But nothing
Speaker 1: like the human brain that sits on our shoulders. Not
Speaker 1: in some lab future, Dan. Another great show in the books.
Speaker 2: We'll be back next week on Patriot Power. Episode 360.
Speaker 2: Wrapping up the summer season in the middle of September.
Speaker 2: A couple more weeks after that. Like always, though, all
Speaker 2: hell breaks loose. We'll be on any night on the
Speaker 2: Prepper Broadcasting Network. Good show, Ben.
Speaker 1: Another great show. Talk to you soon, man.