Saylor Is Being Bankrupted On Purpose — And He Has No Clue | Tom Luongo

Bitcoin today should be 400 grand. It's 60. There's a reason for that.

If you're Scott Besset and you want a million bitcoins, do you want to pay 125 grand for them? Do you want to pay 60 grand for them? If I'm Scott Besson, I'm paying 60 grand for them. And I'm willing to bankrupt Michael Sailor to get it done.

I'm telling you, Bitcoin only goes to a million when the US Treasury has enough bitcoins. And that's not going to happen until Michael Sailor goes. We as hard money guys got sold a story that is only partially true. A lot of us were just gas lit into believing that the United States was in a worse shape than it actually was. What happens if the United States stops vandalizing its own institutions? The Treasury Department is going to be dominant. Treasury has made it abundantly clear that it considers Bitcoin a collateral asset. The United States is redizing the world and it's going to use Bitcoin to do it. It's going to use gold to do it. I think Trump is going to skate through the midterms. Then we're looking at $15,000 gold, $4 to $500 silver, and $1 million Bitcoin.

That is Tom Lango. And if what he's saying is right, then almost everything Bitcoin holders currently believe about this bare market is wrong. Bitcoin is not down because the thesis is broken. According to Tom, it is down because of a major shift in US politics that has the world's most powerful Treasury coordinating to buy it on the cheap and they have the tools to make it happen.

In this conversation, we get into why Tom thinks the era of Fed dominance is over and why the Treasury is now in control. Why he believes the United States is actively redollarizing the world using Bitcoin and gold. Why the Strait of Hormuz crisis is already over and why the oil market is being manipulated to make it look worse than it already is. Why Michael Sailor's entire Bitcoin holdings could be doomed. Why Trump is going to skate through the midterms when almost nobody thinks he is. And why all of this leads to $1 million Bitcoin.

Tom has been writing about global macro money and Bitcoin since before most people had even heard of it. This is one of the most contrarian and cleareyed conversations I've had on this show. I'm your host, Rob Wallace. Thanks for tuning back into the Bitcoin News Channel. Let's get into it.

All right, everybody. Welcome back to the Bitcoin News Channel. Today, I'm very grateful to be joined by Tom Luongo, author of Gold, Goats, and Guns Newsletter. You see him on Zero Hedge, you see him on Newsmax. This is a man who looks at the world from a view of strategy, puts all the pieces together, and explains it as he sees it. Tom, how you doing today?

I am very good. How are you? Thank you for the invite.

Yeah, absolutely. So, first I want to jump right in and we got to talk about Bitcoin. This is the Bitcoin News Channel, of course, and you came up as a gold guy, but I think you've gone from being a gold maximalist to having a more measured view. And you think that the future is going to be defined by a combination of gold, treasuries, and Bitcoin.

Oh, yeah. So tell us how does Bitcoin fit into this worldview for you moving forward?

Well, just to remind everybody, I don't know if you know this, but uh I do believe I wrote the first publicly available article about Bitcoin in July of 2010. For Lou Rockwell, as a matter of fact, you can go look it up. Um and for that reason, I also like to consider myself an OG in Bitcoin. uh from a you know a hyper you know anarco capitalist you know decentralist you know perspective I'm not that guy anymore um but I've been doing the alternative currency thing probably since I first went down the the quote unquote libertarian or Austrian economics rabbit hole back in like you know the early as right so that's when I started buying both gold and silver that's when you know I was you know an active member of the libertarian party all that stuff and then slowly over time it's like I realized like well, there's practical anything in libertarian politics and well 20 years of of that has proven um to be uh to be preient and as I look for that word and um so so my my thoughts on Bitcoin have evolved over time as well and I mean I lit literally was there when people didn't know what it was and they were giving it away for you know Bitcoin you know five bitcoins out of faucets and all the rest of it I've been there I I was there doing the whole thing um and I was there at Mount Gox. I was there at all of it. Right. So, that being said, you know, I've always looked at Bitcoin as like one of those lovely potential uh technological innovations that can change and move the world. But that being said, you know, as I've gotten older and I've thought about it and I've watched it it play itself out, I've I've watched the whole um the whole evolution of Bitcoin both um and I've always been encouraged by everything I've seen. It's just I've never been a Bitcoin. I just I came I've never was a Bitcoin maxi because I've always as a as an economist as a as a a thinker on these things. I just don't believe that any technology is the end of the story. Technology moves forward. Human needs, wants, and desires evolve over time based on what whatever it is that they want at that moment in time. And so no matter what happens, whatever technology we're fearful of today or or or encouraged by today will not matter, you know, we'll build off of that and it will not be the end of anything because at the end of the day, the law of diminishing marginal utility governs all human behavior, right? So, you know, there comes a point where you have enough Bitcoin, you're like, I want something else. And you know, I want I have I have enough gold, I want something else. And for years, I had too much silver. And then, you know, when the gold to silver ratio was favorable, I bought more gold and blah blah blah and you know, back and forth. Excuse me. Same thing with Bitcoin.

So, the way I look at the where the world we're in today, I think my friend Matt Gins over at Mineprint Hash puts it best. We're moving out of a world of Fed dominance and into a world of Treasury dominance. And one of the insights I or one of the observations or uh insights or you know um opinions that I I started to to justate was you know Bitcoin had its best run when the American financial system and the American monetary system and political system was doing everything imaginable to be a vandal to its own um its own systems right its own institutions. It we were vandalizing our own institutions. We were vandalizing the treasury. We were vandalizing the tra the Fed. we were analyzing our politics, our regulations, our people, everything. And so in that scenario, Bitcoin is a perfectly valid response to that, right? Um, and uh, clearly at that point, and we're now talking like the 2010s under Obama, um, or sorry, the traitor Obama, um, you know, gold was clearly a captured asset, right? It was captured by City London. was captured by uh the ComX and the LBMA and and that whole offshore dollar market. Um, and it was a captured asset meant to be suppressed in order to um keep everybody um in the fiat world. And Bitcoin was the antipode to that to allow capital to leak away from that and accumulate in something that had similar qualities to those other hard assets. I'll be in a digital form. Okay. So once we get out of that mindset and and I think a lot of Bitcoiners and I think a lot of people who think about Bitcoin have gotten into that you know got and they came to it never leveled up beyond that and said well what happens if the United States stops u vandalizing its own institutions? What if it decides to defend itself? Right? What if it decides to like I guess again the law of diminishing marginal utility tells you that at some point if these institutions if these these people who created this system you know if that system is now being is now under threat from something else and the numbers have gotten to the point where the debt numbers and you know and all of it the deficit numbers and all of it have gotten to a point where you know it's unacceptable to a majority of people then something is going to change, right? And the election of Donald Trump in 2016, I think, is your is your uh is your inflection first inflection point in this and this is not a um this is not a a single inflection point function if you're thinking about it in mathematic terms. There's multiple inflection points here. I don't know whether this is a you know quartinary you know fourth fifth 6th eighth order you know function here where you know every you know every time you add an exponent you're adding another inflection point right I I know my calculus well enough to to to extend that metaphor in time but if you look at 2016 and you say okay so what was 2016 it was the moment where the American people stood up and said this is enough right and then once that happened and it created an opportunity I believe especially as we have now almost a decade worth of data which suggests that this is what's happened is that once Trump was moved into power or was either allowed to come into power or won the election outright you make you can make an argument either way um things started happening at the Fed and at the Treasury that were different okay um they were not a 180 degree turn they are not it's not like a it's not or it's not an orthogonal we were on this path now we're on this path right we're on this path and then we're on that path and so the vector of the direction of the change in US monetary or institutional policy was being was undergoing right it was it was underway and this is a hard thing for a lot of people who are very kind of who love logic and love you know if this then this a lot of left brain you know, spury guys, and I'm one of them. Uh, they have a hard time like dealing with, you know, with they have a hard time dealing with um uh uh continuum analysis, functional analysis. They like to think of things in terms of step function. We were doing this, now we're doing this. If not A, then B. If not B, then C. If not C, then D. Blah blah blah blah. It doesn't the world doesn't work that way because it has to be filtered through the consciousness of like seven and a half billion people. Tough. like it's a it's a it's a more complicated world than that. And believe me, at at times in the past, I have been one of those people. So, I know what that feels like. I know what that what that looks like and I know how I've reacted in the past. And so, as I've come to, you know, I've just come to incorporate, no, the world is not quite that cut and dried.

So 2016 2017 we get Steve Minutuchin at Treasury and we get Fed we get um we get Jerome Powell at the Federal Reserve and we get the implementation of SOFR and the change from SOFR that it started there and none of us had had any idea that this was happening. I didn't I didn't gro this until 2021, right? And I started watching Powell um be at odds with Christine Lagarde at the ECB and whoever was in charge of the the Bank of England at that point and everything else and things started to change. It was what I've called the five basis points to change the world, right? It's that it's that when that moment when he raised the reverse repo payout rate five basis points abs the fed funds rate and drained the euro dollar system of trillions of dollars of of uh base money effectively and you know euro dollar terms m0 train you know $2 and half trillion dollars right off the top right and in a four-month period and so you can't ignore that you can't swish that away it doesn't matter because and Bitcoin's response up until that point had and pretty straightforward, you know, um, hitting the the the kind of core Bitcoin thesis that fiat money is going to die, hard money is going to take over, blah blah blah blah blah. And it was an easy, you know, and it was easy. Then the process of the United States and institutions defending themselves and looking to figure out how to ways to institutionalize Bitcoin started to take over. And by the time we get to SOFR in 20 taking replacing LIBOR as the dead indexing rate of the world in 2022 and Jerome Powell is able to weedle a second term as Fed chair while Obama spent a year trying to make sure that he was not put in charge. Lael Brainard the you know like kind of queen of MMT was supposed to take over. um, you know, all of that political infighting was very very obvious that there was something coming that someone within the US um, you know, institutional order decided we're moving onto a different path and so we get to that that tipping point in 2022 Powell starts raising rates um the banks aren't really the big money center banks aren't complaining about coming up off the zero bound even though supposedly they were all going to go broke cuz and all of that and nothing that anybody had predicted about that period in time came true. Bitcoin didn't go to a million, right? Um, the we didn't have a a uh a derivatives meltdown. We didn't have a housing meltdown. Peter Schiff was wrong again as always. Like all of this stuff kept happening. And so what you wound up with was data point after data point after data point after data point of the worst case scenarios did not coming to pass. And what we found out was that a lot of us were just gas lit into believing that the United States was in a worse shape than it actually was. Powell bet and I think he bet rightly that under a euro dollar dominated system because Bitcoin at this point is not and it still isn't a um a part of the it's not it's not an integral part of the financial system. It's still outside the fin it's still outside money as Zoltan Posar would put it. Um so now what like it the Euro dollar system is being redefined and the dollar is becoming more and more and more central and we and Powell bet that the United States economy could handle higher costs of capital i.e. higher interest rates than the rest of the world. That's what happened. He bet. Guess what? He was right.

We went to 5 and a half%. The American economy didn't implode, but the Biden hunter spent money egregiously in order to try and counteract that narrative. That's what they did. That is not a that is not programmatic. That is not some that is not some, oh, to assist the American Empire. No, that's nonsense. This was the communists were in charge of our government trying to vandalize our government and take it and destroy it through egregious levels of spending being fought and the and Powell's tight monetary policy was being fought by the Treasury Department tooth and claw.

So the the Treasury Department under Janet Yellen, you know, fought him and she manipul she did soft yield curve control coordinated with with Christine Lagarde and everything else. The picture I'm painting here is that in that environment, Bitcoin hits a cap and then never go and it really hasn't gone any higher than that. It's hit 125 grand twice and hasn't done anything. And now we're sitting here on June 5th, 2026 and Bitcoin 60,000 just hitting its 200 week hitting its 200E moving average, which it doesn't hit all that often and it's probably close to a cycle low. Okay, I'm not going to like I'm not, you know, and the reason I think that Bitcoin is is still important is because it's very clear that the people who have taken over for the Trump administration see Bitcoin as a potential collateral asset to offset or to um to build up the asset side of the American balance sheet. One of the problems with in the Bitcoin space and in the Austrian uh economic space is that they only want to ever focus on debt and debt servicing and all that stuff and those numbers is they never talk about the asset side of the balance sheet. to never talk about the policy decisions we made to write trillions and tens of trillions if not hundreds of trillions of dollars of US assets, land, commodities in the ground, oil, gas, this, that, uranium, like the productive capacity, all of it written to zero through regulation, environmental policy, this, that, and everything else. I said, "Well, if you get all that, if you get rid of all that and you get rid of the fraud and you, you know, in effect, balance the budget or at least, you know, take the budget deficit down to something that's rational and and change the rate of growth of the debt, capital markets around the world are going to look at that and go, "Yes, we like that." Because at the end of the day, as much as we all, you know, as you know, being all 2021 and earlier, Tom, along with modern Bitcoiners would go, as much as we hate what America has become, um, the rest of the world still sees the United States as one of the best places in the world to invest in because of our legal system, our privacy laws, our corporate structures, this that and everything else. There is no other better place on the planet to do business in the United States. Period. Not China, not Russia, not the EU, not Australia, not subsaharan Africa, nowhere else. It's the United States or Bust. Okay? Period. Everybody else is either protectionist or horrific. And I mean, there's all sorts of stuff. So if that's the case, then all you had to do to prove all you had to do to to to these to those foreign investors, those people who took all that money that we were sending out and banking it in the form of foreign exchange reserves and sovereign wealth funds and and um um central bank reserves, uh, you know, treasury reserves and all the rest of it and all the private loans and the private debt and everything else. It's all denominated dollars and say, "Look, we we're getting our our house in order. We're getting our we Charles is definitely getting his [ __ ] together, as the guy from Full Metal Jacket would would say, right?" Um, and uh, like we're getting our, you know, we're getting our house in order. And the minute that happens, capital flows to where capital is treated best. So, in order to drive capital out of the United States, you have to treat capital poorly. The minute we start treating capital well again, the money starts flowing right back into the United States. And that's everything that Trump has been doing and that's everything that Besset's been doing. And so when you look at where we are in 2026, and I'll turn the mic over for just a second just to like bring it all around,

what we're watching is the end of Fed dominance over the dollar, which was uh glo when the Fed was implemented as a globalist institution. But in order for us to have end the era of Fed dominance, we had to have a Fed chairman that was willing to defend the dollar. Even if Jerome Powell is not the guy to lead us into the the next era, he is the transition figure that moves us away from globalist dollar to, you know, or a globalist Fed to a sovereigntist or so or a more sovereign oriented Fed, but not necessarily a not necessarily a a but he still believes in Fed dominance. That's the problem that that's where he, Besset, and Trump have been fighting amongst themselves. But be but Powell did yoman's work setting the stage for Powell for for Trump, Besset, and now Kevin Walsh to come in and end the era of Fed dominance and and move us back towards treasuries. The Treasury Department is going to be dominant and the Treasury has made it abundantly clear that it considers Bitcoin a collateral asset going forward. Powell was always neutral on Bitcoin. He he didn't care about Bitcoin one one way or the other. And all during the years that I was saying, you know, Powell's like doing the is doing yoman's work for to to defend the dollar. You know, I I used to say, well, you know, never really thinking in terms of there we getting back to Treasury dominance because until I saw evidence that we were going to go there, I would just I always assumed that Fed dominance would still continue. And I used to say, well, what's going to bake everybody's noodle is at some point when the Fed has to rebalance its balance sheet, it's going to want a higher gold price and it's going to want to put Bitcoin on the balance sheet and then raise its and then allow its price to rise. But we're not going to do so until we have enough Bitcoin and enough gold in order to get that done at a price that you know will that that prices that will be rational or you know that will be sustainable and uh without sending stocks to them to you know build levels and you know entry-level houses in a million dollars and all this hyperinflationary nonsense like let's get the pricing level up to a certain level hold it there and then let all the collateral assets rise. just de-regulate the economy and then bring and then bring the potential for um and then up the potential gradient for um asset expansion from the ground up, i.e. through re-industrialization, you know, securing the border, getting rid of the fraud, getting rid of the waste, cleaning up the cash flow, cleaning up the asset side of the balance sheet, the cash flow statement, and everything else. And that's where we are right now.

How many apps does it take to manage your Bitcoin? One to buy, one to send, one for lightning, and another for loans. That's a lot of friction. Well, now there's Rhino. Listen to the end, and I'll tell you how they'll set you up with $10 of free Bitcoin. Rhino is a next generation Bitcoin app that makes living on Bitcoin easy. At Rhino, you can buy Bitcoin with zero fees. Get a Bitcoin backed loan right in the app. Move cash globally over Bitcoin rails fast and easy. Automate your stacking with a DCA plan so your stack is growing whether the market is up, down, or you're touching grass. And it doesn't stop there. Bill pay, debit and credit cards, as well as retirement accounts are all coming soon. At Rhino, your Bitcoin is never rehypothecated. Security comes first with biometric verification, 24/7 fraud protection, and the ability to move your Bitcoin to self-custody whenever you're ready. Click the link below in the description and download Rhino for iOS or Android. Use code Bitcoin news and Rhino will drop you $10 of free Bitcoin right into your wallet to start you on your stacking journey. Get the most Bitcoin for your dollar with Rhino.

And in that process, I asked the question, so why is Bitcoin going down? Well, it's a really simple question. Um, if you're Scott Besset and you want to have a million bitcoins, do you want to pay 125 grand for them? Do you want to pay 60 grand for them?

Yeah, precisely.

I don't know about you, but I want to pay 60 grand. If I'm Scott Besson, I'm paying 60 grand for them. And if Michael Sailor is sitting on 400, you know, some 100,000, 200,000 bitcoins, whatever the hell he's got, I got news for you. I want them. And I'm not and I'm willing to bankrupt Michael Sailor to get him to get it done. and it is actually happening right here or whatever he has. I don't I don't I don't follow Micro Strategy because I think I always thought Sailor was a bit of a putt like and the more I watch I always have and moreover watching how he's reacting to Bitcoin hitting 60 grand and them literally asking the the BIS yesterday for a bailout. Uh, I'm excuse me, I'm now wondering whether or not Michael Sailor, this is Matt Dimes and I were literally talking about this this morning on our private on the the Gold Ghost and Guns private server. uh about whether or not sailor was always in operation to hold on to have bitcoin to all these bitcoin treasury companies were actually there as a means by which to have the euro dollar system the old offshore dollar London city of you know, city of London Davos crowd control so many bitcoin that they were actually going to then use it kill it put it in a corner and then leave it there right? and uh and deny the world those bitcoins for when they needed them and I I think that that may I'm I'm vamping here, by the way. I'm not going to I'm not I hate to I don't want to throw shade on Michael Sailor or anybody else, but like at the end of the day, I have to read the the room that I've got.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Well, one thing I really appreciate about you is that your your worldview is so nuanced, right? And from the average person listening to the the last couple minutes rant that you just went on, they would think that, oh, this guy's a Republican. He hates Democrats. But it's not that simple, right? Like we are entering into a world of economic statecraft, mercantilism and it's been this transition and it takes a very long time. It takes decades for these economic transitions to occur and we are living in the middle of one of them and to see it change on a monthly weekly basis to stay on top of it all. It's it's not easy, right? Because it's not the the superhero cape stuff that we're used to from the mainstream media. So before you go any further, I'd love for you to to define the sides, right? You often say that London, Davos, and of course the communist Democrats are one side, but is it Trump and the Republicans are the good guys here and that they have all the answers? I don't think it's that simple for you either. So define what is actually who are the players right here. Who are the most important ones and what are their two goals?

Well, it's it's clearly that we have two it's a good question and and I appreciate you framing it this way because I think it's a better uh the better answer is is that it's like my what my friend Alex Craner likes to say all the time and he he he just quotes George Soros that this is a this is a fight between two systems of governance, right, between uh nation states, communities and globalism, right? And you know sovereigntists versus globalism. Um, and I think I I after a while when I started, you know, trying to wrap my brain around how to, you know, create words in order to describe all this, I think I might have by accident created the word sovereigntist because I don't think anybody really ever used that word previously. I'm not I I know I can take credit for certain meme certain memes that exist in in the Zeitgeist, orange Jesus, be become ungovernable, all like those were ours. Like Dexter White and I like sat down and strategized them then put them out on our Twitter feeds. We did it on purpose. Like creamsicle Mussolini, that's his um to describe Trump. Like all this stuff, right? But the but that one I'm not sure about because every time I use the word sovereigntist where I'd write it, you know, everybody was, you know, I always get I always get the the spell checker saying that's not a word. I'm like, well, maybe I'm maybe we're creating that word as we as we go here. But I think that's the better way of looking. That's that's the framework. And then the real question is from a monetary perspective. And I've taken Alex's, you know, I've taken Alex's um interpretation of what Soros said, taken it a little little further, or at least, you know, Alex and I have have kind of gone back and forth over this concept for the last couple of years together. And um what I what I the way I like to look at it is um is you can't have sovereignty without control over your money. You're not a country if you don't have control of your borders, your community, but you have to have your money. And so now the question is is it inside money or outside money to quote Zoltan Posar. Is it um is it is it collateral money versus um versus debt based money? There the the real question is who gets control over the flow and how do you collateralize the flow of money around the world in order to get access to capital goods and because that's all that matters at the end of the day. Money is not a is not an end unto itself. It's obviously it's a means to an end, right? Um, but it's also the most important of commodities because it's one half of just about every transaction on the planet. That's not direct barter. Um, so the bigger so the so the thing to to think about is that on one side you have sovereigntists and on the other side you have globalists. And so now the question is well who are the sovereigntists? Well clearly Victor Orbán was one of them. He's gone. Clearly Putin is one of them. He's been at war. They've they they're going to they're going to try and keep him at war until he dies. Clearly Xi over in China is one of them. Whether you like China or think it, you know, think they're an adversary, whatever, it doesn't matter. Xi is a sovereigntist. And then Trump obviously is a sovereigntist. And so, but it's not but the way they implement their sovereigntist ideology, okay, are not going to necessarily comport with any kind of radical individualism. Okay, this is the part where Bitcoiners get in trouble. Libertarians get in trouble. Hell, we were arguing about it on again on my private server this morning. You know, the old the old libertarians in the group are still, you know, are still trying to figure out are still worried about AI and Epstein and this and all this stuff. Like none of that stuff matters. Like none of that stuff matters. We can't control those things. Epstein is last two is two generations is two decades old now. It's not even interesting. Um, it's it's kind of interesting but it's the operations was dismantled ages ago, right? Um Epstein was not about pedophilia. Epstein was about setting up the the funding networks for the organized crime layer that Trump is now knocking down bit by bit by bit by going in through and taking out Maduro and Venezuela, you know. um El Chapo and and and and the cartels in Mexico, obviously the the mullahs in Iran, right? And then the knock-on effects of taking those people out. Uh, clearly he's going after Castro in Cuba. I fully expect at some point that um there's going to be a raid on all of the offshore banking um um havens in the Caribbean. My friend Blaine Holt was bringing up the other day the fact that there's 400,000 banks in St. Barth's, right, which right off the, you know, a little island right off the right off the the the coast of Venezuela. What do you think? You know, that money all just fits the flow without any oversight whatsoever. It's literally, you know, it you might as well call it Saint CIA or St. MI6, whatever. It's not St. Barth's, right? Um, so like the world is really complicated in that respect when you sort of dig into who is what. But at the end of the day, it really is the sovereigntists on one side, the globalists on the other. And then when you start tracing all the the globalist networks and you start tracing their their LLC's, their nested LLC's, their 501c3 charities or this, their PACs, their super PACs, all this stuff. It's all just this. It's all just downstream of the American taxpayer. We're finding out, right? So that's where all the flow comes from. And then the oil markets are the thing that keeps it all liquefied with financialization, insurance, shipping insurance, reinsurance, all of that stuff. That's where all the that's where all the cash flow comes from to enforce these systems and keeps them in place.

Mhm.

And Trump is clearly attacking all of them. and China and Russia as far as I was concerned, you know, previous to say the return of Trump in 2025. What I would say is, you know, they're they move forward with things like BRICS and Mbridge and, you know, all their all their their um their infrastructure stuff because if the United States falls back under full control of the globalists, then they have to have a system in place to be able to operate outside of that outside of that system. They're going to still be the underdog at that point. But if the United States is not part of that system anymore and actually wants to ally with them, there's no reason that they need BRICS anymore.

Do you understand? Like at that point, why have BRICS? Why not create an entirely new institutional architecture? Which is what Trump is arguing for with things like the border of peace in Gaza and then anything else he wants to put together? You know, he wants to put together o over dealing with um the Strait of Hormuz and Iran and everything else. I mean, if you listen to him carefully, it's pretty obvious he's like, I want to bring Iran into this in I want to bring Iran into the fold the same way you wanted to bring North Korea in in from the cold, right? You wanted to bring them into the into the global economy, not so that the bank so that the banksters can go and rape them clean, which is the standard kind of analysis. No, it's to get them out from underneath this this hermit kingdom mindset of having to worry about being subsumed. They can still be North Korea, but they just can't they just don't don't have to be hermit kingdom North Korea behind a bunch of nukes, right? There's a fundamental difference. You can be part of the global in institutional order. You can become part of the the the you know, in the case of North Korea, the Pacific Rim's um uh, you know, infrastructure and and and economy. I mean, North Korea is a very valuable piece of real estate for the Russians, right? because then we could have a rail line coming down through the Korean peninsula and the Russians and Koreans can actually do overland trade and blah I mean, there's all sorts of things that we're not allowed to do that the world is not allowed to do because of this old British Empire imperial architecture setting all of these countries at odds with each other in various ways like and so the answer to that question is really quite simple the sovereignists are on one side the globalists are on the other. And then what we're watching in real time I think Is Trump saying, "Look, I've got the power. I've got the infrastructure. I've got the military. I've got the I got the market power. I've got I've got the I've got everything. I've got the you know, I've got all of it to one, prove to the Chinese and the Russians that they can't you can't stop us if you wanted to. That's one. And two, I don't actually want to beat you into the into the ground. I want to work with you to go out to take out these people and then we can have a better world and I'm going to and Venezuela, Cuba, uh Iran, Mexico, these are receipts saying I'm know who I'm taking out here. I'm not taking out for example when you look at the way and this and to give you an idea what I mean by this in Jan before January Maduro and Venezuela were pumping about 850,000 barrels of oil. the Chinese were getting it on the cheap under sanctions, you know, paying less than retail. So, in this case, you know, so they were paying, you know, $40 a barrel, $30 a barrel to to to the cartels in in uh in in uh in Venezuela. Trump takes out Maduro, gets, you know, cleans starts cleaning the place up and immediately brings in the US oil majors, brings China in, brokers a deal, and says, "Everybody's going to win here. Venezuela is going to get a third of the oil. We're going to get a third of the oil for the and China can get the rest of it, but China has to pay retail. But China's going to be able to pay retail for more oil than they were getting before. They're not cutting China out of Venezuelan oil." Right? If Trump was if Trump was hostile to China, he would have cut China out, he's not. He's actually trying to make them a partner in rebuilding Venezuela, right? By having them be still be a customer. Okay, this is this is a fundamental difference than and this is why the neocons like John Bolton and all the rest of them are screaming, right? It's why the Atlantic is screaming. It's why, you know, and so there's your micro there's your your model. Now just look at that model and the Iran is just the Venezuela times five or 10, right? Cuba is Venezuela times.5 because it's not nearly as important, right? Look, if you but if you look but the the framework is exactly the same. The playbook is exactly the same.

Okay? And that is your tell that he wants to work with the other sovereigntist-minded nations that have real power because at the end of the day this is about nuclear weapons and there are three real nuclear powers in the world. Russia, China and the United States. Everybody else is a secondary player. Now all the secondary players can turn the whole whole place into Mad Maximum and we all, you know, are fighting over cans of, you know, tins of sardines and toilet and and what's left of the bog roll, you know, the the the the toilet paper stores, that's it. Um, or we cannot do that. So, you have if you're Trump and you want to remake the world and you want to make America um and you want to rebuild what was lost in America and take America forward into the into the next century, then you have to work with the Russians. You have to work with the Chinese. you and you have to also destroy all of these um these geographic choke points of the global economy where old Europe, the colonial powers of old Europe who are the enemy ha still have um proxies known as the IRGC, Hezbollah, Venezuela, Maduro, Castro, blah blah blah blah blah. And that's why the you can't talk about any of the stuff in you can't talk about Bitcoin without talking about Venezuela. You can't talk about Bitcoin without talking about Iran or any of this stuff because it's all connected to each other in one big thing. And that thing is dollar flow, global trade, you know, and the Chinese and no one thinks the Chinese yuan is going to replace the dollar other than, you know, people who were, you know, eat crayons and, you know, I'm sorry. Like that's the way I look at I when I look at like the dollar bears, I look at like the the classic gold bugs. I I read some of these guys and I think they're well-intentioned men, but I look at them, I'm like, really? What what planet are you living on? No one trusts the Chinese. They don't trust us either, but at the very least, they know how to use the we they know that we're not going to trash the dollar any further because if we do, we don't have anything left. The Chinese have to convince everybody. People would move to the Chinese yuan if there was no other antipode if the United States destroys the dollar. But the United States is not destroying the dollar. The United States is redollarizing the world and it's going to use Bitcoin to do it. It's going to use gold to do it. It's going to take leverage out of the system through these fully backed stable coins. That's what's coming.

All right. So, before we get into stable coins and the de-dollarization and the redollarization of the world, uh, I want you to answer me this. So, when Trump first got in the second term, it seemed pretty clear that decoupling seemed like that was the main goal here, right? We had the tariffs. We were going to separate the world. you're either with China or you're with us. And whether it was Greenland or Venezuela, all that stuff lined up pretty well to make that case.

Yeah.

And then we have Iran, right? And this was a big snafu. I mean, in terms of his promises, no new wars. Uh, now we're here.

Never said never said he wasn't going to go to war with Iran to stop Iran from getting a nuclear weapon. Never said that.

Okay. But I feel like I ran it nuclear war forever. He never never said it. He always said for the last 45 years, Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon. So if now here's the thing, I just want I'm going to push back on this very simply. If you're the bad guys and you know that Trump has one red line, which is Iran can't have a nuclear weapon, would you craft intelligence? Would you craft a scenario that forces him to deal with the fact that Iran is about to have a nuclear weapon? in order to then run the psychological operation on every [ __ ] ma every [ __ ] fake MAGA, every fake libertarian, everybody, and say, "Oh, look, he's he's like, dude, the the enemy gets a vote." And if I'm Emperor Palpatine, I manipulate Trump into that war. I I force him to cross that red line because now they can write headlines for 6 months. Now they can get, you know, a whole whole swat of people. And they were setting any and by the way, they were setting every libertarian, every Bitcoiner up for this the day after they shot they missed at Butler, Pennsylvania. I literally watched them do it in real time. Spin up 15 stupid scenarios that libertarians would would fall down that rabbit hole immediately. Did he fake it? Did he this? Like like unreal stupidity. And it was like they went into overtime the second Thomas Corks missed. Like I I by that by literally that night by midnight that night I'm watching I'm watching Twitter turn into a um into a propaganda engine of how do we split MAGA because they already knew that the minute he he survived that with the you know with the and you know did the fight fight fight thing like they're like oh [ __ ] we lost the election now. Now now we have to back up and figure out how to stop them at the midterms. I'm dead serious. Like that's the way these people operate. They're not dumb. They they live in this world. Everything is an intelligence operation at that level. And so you have to realize that everything you're seeing is a form of SCOPE. That is not 4D chess, folks. That's the way these people operate.

Mhm.

And you know, every narrative that is presented in front of you has to you have to ask the simple question always and everywhere. Why do they want us to know this thing that they're tell they're shouting about right now? Why is this thing important? Why are they telling why are they trying to make us all into nuclear weapons experts or um, you know, amateur virologists during during COVID or this or than anything else? They their their playbook is always make you feel smart. You stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night and then allow and then watch people and then seed the world with bots and then the conversation with bots and then try and move the conversation and split people into groups that are fighting over irrelevancies when the truth of the matter is is that we're just dealing with malevolent people who don't care about you and want to destroy you. It's not that hard. All the details are just there to give you, as Steve Bannon would put it, receipts as to what's actually happening. The only reason I go into the details is to expl is to make my argument as to what the what the simple scenario is. There are people who want to kill you all who who put up the Georgia Guidestones. And there are people that don't. There's civilizational forces and there's anti-civilizational forces. The anti-civilizational forces are out there every day trying to get you to rob you of your reason and rob you of your agency and to tell you there are no heroes. There are no there there is no way out of

This. Demoralize you, take you out, destroy you. It's this is not hard. Like it's and it's elemental and it's simple. We have to destroy.

The minute Trump does this, you of course now he's the hero. So now we have to figure out ways to make him not the hero and turn him into the villain. And it's simple narrative construction. Hero, victim, villain. You're the you're always the victim of whoever they're trying to make into the villain that day. Okay? And they move that around and they keep you confused and they keep you.

So no, Trump has one red line. Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon. So if I'm Emperor Palpatine, if I'm MI6, if I'm Klaus Schwab or whoever you want to Dugan, I don't give a [ __ ]. Whoever the mastermind is, and there is no mastermind, by the way. All right. There are just agents, the high table, Davos, City of London, call it whatever you want. I don't give a [ __ ]. You want to call it the Jews, I don't care. Fine. I don't care. Pick a pick a pick an Emperor Palpatine proxy and say, "How would you destroy Trump in the minds of enough people to get what I want, which is the restoration over the control, my restoration of control over American political, financial, and military dominance?" How would you do that?

Well, you want to get the You want to get the You want to get the Libertarians? Well, they're easy. Go to war with Iran. Yeah. you want to get um you know and then you just keep piling and then you like blop on esquetological nonsense and all this other crap that they all made and then they all made up out of whole cloth.

Like and so so sincerely like Trump did not step in it when he stepped into Iran. He actually knew exactly what they were going to do. I think because he's not stupid. I like, "Okay, now they're going to pull this. Now they're going to pull this trigger. Fine. We're going to do this." Because you have to realize that he didn't go into that like, "Oh my god, I have to go into Iran because they're going to sort of they're they're they're two weeks away from a nuclear weapon or whatever. Who cares? Like, let's do it. You want to do this?" Because the minute he goes in and he does what he does, he says, "Do we have the capability of taking these people out?" Yes. What are the losses going to be? Not much. Okay, we're doing this. And I'm going to get these wins when I'm done. I'm going to rewire the entire global trade network for oil away from the straight of Hormuz. I'm going to be able to craft a a trade deal with China that involves us no longer needing to deal with Taiwan as strategic as I'm going to be able to do this. I'm going to be able to do that. I'm going to get all of these things. I'm going to get all these winds. Oh, and I'm going to reroute traffic to the Gulf of America and to Alaska. I'm going to get away from Hormuz. I'm going to finally allow everybody to go, you know what? If I can bring peace to the Middle East, we can build pipelines going north across the Arabian Peninsula to Hifa and not have to watch ships be have guns pointed at them by the Iranians. H interesting. So maybe we should allow BB Netanyahu to go, you know, wipe out the Axis of resistance. Okay. So I see I I understand the logic here. Uh but the question is so far we it is strategy.

But so far we've been able to get through this last 3 months with 10 million 10 million barrels of oil less per day and the price is up 30 bucks. It went from $60 a barrel to 90. Right. 90. Yeah. Do you think that that's the worst of it? I mean we've got people calling for $1500 $200 barrels of oil. It's already over. Go look at the chart. It's over. It's why I I said this was over like two weeks into it and I meant it then. And all I watched since then, all I've watched since then is a manipulation of the news cycle and the manipulation of the Brent crude contract. While if you look at a chart, I mean, this is where my work see one of the things you never see on the podcast. I do all these podcasts and everything else. So, we never get I never sit down with like the charts, right? and like go over like I can read a chart as well as anybody in the world. I I know I I know I I don't say that busting my hand, pat myself on the back because I'm so freaking wise and susian. I've been doing it for 35 years. I'm pretty good at it and I have a system and and I run that system ruthlessly and I've used that system and I've used the ability my ability to read charts and read bond spreads and read this read these things and read the financial markets and then map it to directly to the geopolit the geopolitics. You know my patrons know this very well because you know twice a week every week on Wednesdays and Sundays I talk over I do a private podcast for them. We call it the market report, but it's a private podcast, half rant, half charts, and I go over gold, silver, bitcoin, oil, the the bond markets, the silver futures curve, the Dow, this that all of this stuff, right? The the tick report every month, like all of this stuff. And when I I it was very obvious to me and when you when you watch have watched capital markets the way I have over the years again I can sit down and I can talk with traders like Vince right Vince Launchie and we can talk um and we and I can we can sit there and just talk technicals. We can just put up charts and look at them and and have conversations about that. I can sit down and talk to like Craig Hemp. I used to talk to Craig a thousand times about about this stuff. We see the same things and then we know when they're painting the tape. We know when they're timing a headline with the thing here and and everything else. You watch it once you un once you can see their game.

Okay. The capital markets are another form of polling in politics. They're narrative construction devices. Say now they now that polling now that nobody believes polling because all the pollsters turned out to be political operatives. Now they've given us Poly Market. Poly Market is just polling with money as opposed to spending money on polls. They just take money and they dump it into a they dump it into a market and then say, "See, 75% chance that the oil is going to $200 a barrel." Why? Well, because somebody put money on it and that means that that's real. Like, no, it's not real. How big is that market? Well, it's like $3.5 million. Okay. Well, you know, if I'm Emperor of Palpatine, would I spend $3 million in it? Do I have a marketing budget of $3 million in order to you know what I mean? Like it's not hard. It's just marketing. It's not it's not anything else. Polling is marketing. You know, the real polls we never see, right? There's always the there's the public polling and then there's the internal polling. And um so when you do that and you look at like you look at if I were to throw up a chart of Brink crude right now weekly chart of Brink crude I can go over it like like candlestick by candlestick by candlestick since the beginning of the war and I can tell you exactly what I was thinking at that moment in time and what is happening and I literally like you know four weeks into it I just drove drew a big freaking arrow that was like big hump over like it's do it wants someone is trying to goose it higher and it keeps hitting a and keeps collapsing. ing someone keeps trying to goose it up and why and who would want to goose it up? The people that want to destroy Trump while the market keeps wanting to come down. Um oil threw a terminal reversal signal on the weekly chart three weeks ago. It's over. Like when the the last attempt to take oil higher was when it hit 126. what, middle of May or early May, late late April, whatever. And it was on some, you know, it was on the um the blowing up of the ship or whatever it was. All the the last time there was any kind of major dust up and we were supposed to have a deal and then the Iranians said no. And then they, you know, they they they they threw a couple of missiles out there and you know, okay, fine. and London spikes the the Brent crude market up to 126 midweek and it closes at 100 or 104 and it's like and it just you know it's a big hammer down candle and I'm like well that's clearly not a breakout we're not going to 150 bucks a barrel and it was the last gasp of that of that thing and at the same time they were taking the uh gasoline futures contract in the United States to 375 a gallon by the way that's a very thin market Again, not a big market. It's like a poly. It's like poly market. It's like it's not a very big It's not a$1 trillion dollar market. It's, you know, a couple it's you can move you can move the the gasoline market with, you know, $50 million. Like it's not hard, right? Um so again um and gasoline is back to 305 a gallon and you know Brent crude is 96 or whatever and the Brent the WTI spread is now under three bucks or I don't know what it is today. I haven't looked at it today but yesterday but you know yesterday was 265. I'm like really 265 okay but again at some point somebody tried to take that Brent WTI spread to 25 bucks. I'm not saying that there aren't people in the world that are paying $180 a barrel. there are Singapore, they're paying 150 bucks, whatever. I don't care. I don't care about Singapore. You know why? I'm American. You know, in America, gas is already coming back down under four bucks a gallon. And and and at the same time, we have Scott Besson out there arguing with Congress saying, "Is it true that you want to get rid of the the federal gas tax?" We're like, "Yes, we've we've communicated that." And he didn't know. And the and the congressman didn't know. I'm like, "You want to take another 85 cents off the the price of gasoline? Let's get rid of the federal gas tax. Hey, you want to get you want to get rid of another 75 cents worth of worth or 50 to 75 cents worth of of of gasoline? Let's get rid of the ethanol blending rules. Rins, go look at those things. Okay. Um, you can we can get the price of gasoline in the United States on regulatory changes alone back to an average price of under $2 a gallon. the United States.

Again, what I said about Powell at the beginning of the of the of the podcast when I said Powell bet that he that the American economy could handle a higher cost of capital than everybody else and survive and everybody else was in trouble. He was right. Well, Trump bet that the country with the highest per capita household in or the highest median household income coupled with the lowest price per gallon of gasoline and diesel fuel in the world of any developed economy could outlast could outlast a a supply disruption on the straight of hormones. And he was right because everybody else is paying cuz now the EU is out there screaming that there's not going to be uh there's not going to be any jet fuel to fly planes in Italy or Spain or anywhere else. We've got our our jet fuel stocks are at all time highs. Mhm. Like and so all of that all that worry about sulfur, about this, about fertilizer. Yeah. Are prices up? Yes, prices are up. Are the American people going to have to tighten their belts a little bit? Yes. And what I said at the beginning of all of this was, if you're paying an extra dollar a gallon of gasoline, which sucks, and don't get me wrong, I don't like paying it any more than anybody else does. I got a 20-year-old daughter, you know, who commutes 25 miles to work every day. She's making 28 grand a year. She can't afford an extra dollar a gallon for gasoline. I get it. Um, I don't drive very much, so it doesn't affect me personally very much, but I I still I still like paying 450 a gallon for gas. Like I'm not going to you're not going to lie. But when you total up the number of gallons of gas that you drive that you use a month at an extra dollar to a dollar and a quarter a gallon, what does it cost you? 100 bucks. 150 bucks a month. Now I say to you now if you're and and and if you want to like if you want to um criticize Trump I think his messaging has been terrible because what he should have said was look you may have to pay an extra dollar a gallon which is maybe 150 bucks a month for the next four to six months in in order for us to never have to worry ever again that Iran is going to threaten you with nuclear fire. Would you pay that price? Would you put that $600 on your credit card? every every middle class household in America, no matter what their political um if they have children, are going to say yes to that. That's a cheap ask. It really is. And that's I think the big I think I think they've made a mistake in not framing it in those terms. But I I know that that's and I and I told my daughter I'm like look it worse comes to worse. you know, the bank of dad will pay will pay your gas bill for a couple of months in order for you to get back and forth to work. I don't care. This is more important that you never have to worry about this ever again. Like and that's when we as people have to come together and say in order to change the world and this is kind of the theme of all of this in order to change the world in order to get to that new state get out of the transition state of where we from where we were to where we want to go which is not going to be Bitcointopia or liberttopia or anything like that but it's going to be a step or two in the right direction towards a better world. Um, you're not going to do it without getting your hair must. It's not going to come without a little bit of pain. Nothing in this world worth, you know, worth owning isn't isn't worth working for. And I It's not the It's not the nicest message in the world, but it's exactly the message that Reagan gave the country in 1980. I was old enough to remember it. My dad My dad understood it. Reagan was a better communicator than Trump, certainly, and was able to, you know, and uh and also things were different then. You know, like Trump is dealing with a and what Trump is doing and it's very clear what he's doing is he's even dismantling the system that even Reagan didn't have the balls to to um.

Let me interject here. Okay, so when Iran broke out, uh, of course it was all the talk of nuclear weapons and we can do it swift and easy like we did Venezuela, blah blah blah. But then of course the conver conversation on Twitter turned towards no, we're doing this to mess with China.

But you take a different view, right? You think that China is a sovereigntist state. America's a sovereignist state. uh we look at each other as somewhat equals here and that we're not enemies but we we have our own desires but we might help each other to go towards this new world right so.

What we've seen with China is that they've actually taken down their oil imports by almost half since this whole entire thing took off and that's taken a lot of pressure off the world in terms of oil prices and Trump just went to China and in America that whole entire expedition over there was sort of laughed at right it was poo pooed upon uh whereas in China. Uh, from what I hear, it was actually there was much fanfare about it. Um, I don't know if you know about Professor Jang. Um, but he's.

I do I I have I I find him I find I I AI Asian guy. I have nothing. I have that's as far as I go here. I think all these all these people are operatives. all these.

But you might you might agree on this point of his that he says that this the Trump going to China was actually a big deal and that there was part of the grand bargain was was crafted there. And Jang says that part of what uh Trump negotiated was that China will open up its financial markets to America. Yes. And we will back off on Taiwan.

And we and so. Well, that's obvious. But we but we knew this 10 years ago. Okay. Okay. And so. Why why do we know this 10 years ago? Because Trump started building hot dry Taiwan out in the Arizona desert. That's why. Mhm. Okay. Moving them over. Yeah. Like Taiwan is the straight of Hormuz with chips. It's a old British divide and rule play. Create an artificial choke point. Set up a toll booth. create a conflict that is not necessary and then spike that conflict zone whenever anybody tries to get out when any ever anybody tries to get out from underneath it.

Okay, that isn't North Korea, South Korea, India, Pakistan, Canada, the United States, and now Mexico, Taiwan. Why is TSMC where all the chips are freaking made? It's because they wanted to make sure that there was tension between the United States and China forever as they were dumping trillions of dollars in in the 80s 90s and as into China telling the whole world that China was the the was the next empire and the Americans were done. This is a very interesting problem and I want you to understand something that was whole thing with China was built when London Davos whatever you want to call them were preparing to decamp from Europe to China. All their money went into China. Okay. Hutow that whole faction those guys are all freaking aligned with the Brits. Xi got rid of them. Xi was brought in by the Chinese nationalists to wipe them out, keep the capital account closed. And that's why I say Xi was brought in in the same way that Putin was brought into Russia. after the Soviet Union fell, Bill Browder and all those MI6 assets went in to Russia were buying up all the state um was buying up the shares of you know Gazprom and Roset and Luke Oil and and and Yukos and all all of it stealing the Russian people's birthright who were literally trading their claims to shares for these companies for toilet paper. Okay, Yelson was put in charge. Yeltson at the last moment. Martin Armstrong tells the story better than I do. So listen to Marty talk talk about this stuff, but because he'll, you know, take the 10 or 15 minutes necessary. I don't I'm not interested in doing it at this point. But Putin was not supposed to be the guy. Yelson at the last moment handed everything off to Putin as the sovereignist said as as Russian sovereigntist finally said, "Oh, this is not good." when Yeltson in his last act finally acted like a Russian patriot handed off to Putin and honestly back in 2000 2001 no one in the west was thought Putin was a bad guy. Why? Because they thought he was just some you know they just thought he was somebody that they could control because he wasn't a very powerful person. Oops. Within two years he gets control of everything. He puts Carter Hovsky in jail daily. He nationalizes Yukos. They've never forgiven him for it. And you know, we're off to the races ever since then. The same thing effectively happened with Xi when he was brought to power in 2013. Xi was brought in to stop China from being taken over by these same globalist scumbags. And um that's that. The same thing happened in the United in the United States was 2016 with Trump. Okay. And those three moments and Brexit is a really complicated story unfortunately. Um, but those three moments were telling you that um the world we're living in today as I've modeled as I'm modeling it, the roots are all in the the those men coming to power. And so that's why the first thing Trump said was this is dumb. What are we doing? We should be making chips ourselves. We should be doing this. We should be taking We should be producing domestically all the things we need to be a country. We should produce our own food. We should produce our own oil. We should produce our own steel and aluminum and this and that and everything else. And all the free market ideology um is uh you know again, it's a it's a an idea. It's the difference between two systems of governance, right? The British model, if you are generous to it, is that if we stitch the world together by making everybody dependent upon Taiwan, then no one will ever go to war over Taiwan. If we make the Straight of Hormuz the the the the center for global oil trade, then no one will ever go to war over um the straight of Hormuz, right? That's the way they sell it to us. Go read the white papers from the Atlantic Council, the Council on Foreign Relations, and all this stuff. There are other people out here who do a much better job of covering this than I do. I have internalized all this stuff as far as I'm concerned. I'm like 10 I'm 12 steps ahead of that. But to say that in in in terms of thinking about the strategy, but you know, I've got I've got friends in this industry, Mel Kay, and others who do a wonderful job of just laying it all out. Colonel Watkins, I mean, all of it. These people are phenomenal. and they'll lay it all out for you and they'll take all of that and then let's boil it down to the BR to the the brass tax of the strategy and you realize that's one system of governance. The other one is hey everybody should be self-sufficient in what they're good at, you know, and what they produce. And then the stuff they don't aren't good at producing, they have to go out and trade for and there should be controls over that and and they're going to negotiate over that and they don't have to necessarily come to blows over it. Um, it is a because the thing about it is is that the former model sounds good on paper, but then you realize that the people who erect those systems and that have control over the flow of the money and then they can spin up the conflicts whenever they need to in order to keep everybody on their drip feed on their capital drip feed. And if you look at their ideology, their ideology is energy bad, humanity, civilization bad, technology bad, right? They want to control our ability to use energy efficiently. That's what climate change is all about. The war on transportation in the United States is all about. It's what all of these things are about. When you put all of that together, then you realize that, oh, everything they're doing just is anti-vilational in that respect. They want everybody else. They want it's I'll make it even simpler than that. We talk about China and that the in the Chinese Communist Party that this is the tall poppy syndrome. Anybody sticks their head up too far gets chopped off. I got news for you. The British run the exact same thing at the at the the geopolitical level and the United States and they've always known from the moment they lost the revolution revolutionary war in 1781 that America the great untapped land the great untapped land of North America would be the thing that they can't and if it ever gets developed properly, they won't be able to fight. They have to control it. So therefore, they've been fighting our growth forever and they fought us up up through the Civil War and reconstruction and then realized that they can't do that anymore. So then they became our greatest ally and then subverted us with from within and you know after the coup of 1913 16th amendment 17th amendment federal reserve all of that stuff suffrage right all of it by the time we get done with World War II somehow we already have we have Britain's monetary policy we have Britain's fiscal policy we got Britain's foreign policy and we're the policemen of the world. Yeah. Okay. Like Huh. And then when Nixon closes the gold window in 1971 to stop the looting of the uh of our American wealth, which is our gold reserves, what do they do? They turn around and go, "See, the United States is on the path towards empire and that they're becoming they they linked from gold." No, they Nixon does that in August 1971 and then Watergate's next year and he's out of office. Watergate was revenge for them no longer looting our treasury of all of its gold. Because here's a here's a fun fact for you though most and most people don't understand. The United States in 1950 had 23,000 tons of gold. We had all that. Breton Woods never worked for us. Bretton Woods was a means by which Europe got dollars that we gave them to rebuild and then they use those dollars to buy our [ __ ] gold back from under out from underneath us out from underneath us. It's ridiculous. And Nixon's like, "That's enough. No more." So, the most popular president in history before Reagan is then out of office 12 what 18 months later or whatever it is like he's out of office in what 74. Yep. Think about it. I you know we as we as hard money guys got sold a story that is only partially true. And I've had to I've had to I've done a long hard soul search personally on this. This is not where I was. You add, you know, you go back and you go read [ __ ] that I wrote 5 years ago and it is not that at all six years ago. It's not that at all. Right? So I I I I if I can do it and I'm not I didn't do this because I, you know, embraced my inner neoon or I embraced my my my love of, you know, Israel or any of this other [ __ ] or got paid by the $7,000 club. And it's like, no, dude. I'm just like I just the truth is the truth. History is more complicated than you think it is. And at the end of the day, when you when you see things happen that aren't supposed to happen, Bitcoin today is not acting the way it's supposed to under these circumstances. We were sold it was going to do X. It should be 400 grand. It's 60. There's a reason for that. when gold refused to respond in the 2010s to QE and the gold market didn't bottom until December of 2015. That's when the gold bull market started, by the way, but everybody doesn't want to talk about it until it reaches a new all-time high. But the bottom was December 2015. There's a reason for that. Why did silver not break out, really break out after 2011 until last year? Silver was at a 14-year bare market. Why? Copper every time it was trying, it tried to get above $5 a pound, was smacked down like it, you know, like, you know, like a red-headed stepchild, you know, was just smacked down like a foster kid who talked back to his uh, you know, it's like it's ridiculous. It's like you when you start when assets don't act the way they're supposed to based on the story that you that you that you the thesis that you have or the story you've been told. Maybe you're following the wrong goddamn story.

And that's the and that's the process we all have to go through. I'm a scientist at the end of the day. I used to be a chemist. You know when the data no matter what you do when the data say when you have a hypothesis and the data says the hypothesis is wrong you can't keep running experiments to try and prove the wrong hypothesis eventually you just have to go nope sorry hypothesis is wrong but the data point that proved that hypothesis wrong might lead you to a new hypothesis that is more right. The goal is to get more right. It's not to be right today in perpetuity. The goal is every day to be a little bit more right than you were yesterday. That's what learning it. That's what that's what this process is. We're all working with funible data. I don't I'm not and when I I say all the things that I've said that that sound like criticisms, don't get me wrong. I'm not criticizing other than in a constructive manner. I get it. I used to be I used to be these I used to be all of this stuff.

At certain point, you have to go out there and just admit that you were wrong. Show a little hum humility, jettison old ideas, move into new ideas, and one day all of the stuff that I said today is all going to sound like gobbledegook. Why? Because the world is going to look a little different.

But so far, the model that I have for the way the geopol the way the geopolitical map works and the way everybody's acting strategically, you know, the story doesn't end. The story just shifts into a different mode because at some point the United States is going to go from being quote unquote the hero right now. it gets to be the hero, but 20 years from now it's going to be the villain again, right?

And and I respect your willingness to step out on a limb and speak your mind and even when cuz I mean just think of all the cognitive dissonance it takes to go from a normie mindset to a hard money Austrian Bitcoin gold bug mindset, right? Like you need to get in a lot of fights, you know? Uh you need to spar with yourself and the things that you were taught as a kid. And then when you get to this point, you also have to realize, as you said, the journey of learning never ends. And you have to continually question yourself, your beliefs, and be willing to to change. And that's one thing I respect out of you. And even if I don't agree with everything that you say, um, I definitely uh I really appreciate your willingness to go out there and speak your mind and and offer something different.

Okay. It's again, it's not just different, right? It is the best. I I mean I I I'm I'm not trying to be different for the I'm not trying to be contrarian for the sake of being contrarian. I look my mother-in-law's been accusing me of this for 35 freaking years for Christ sake. I'm like not contrary for the sake of being contrary and she's being an old Appalachian, you know, um hillbilly. Like that was her word, contrary. I'm like no, I'm just I'm just willing to constantly look at things from multiple perspectives and in order to try and get a you know, again, it's like the old line from Babylon 5, understanding is a three-ed story. my side, their side, and the truth, right? And you have to keep that in mind at all times.

And so to to wrap up this conversation, if you definitely have a different point of view on where this is all going for most. So if you have the more correct worldview, then you should be able to predict more closely what should happen in the future. Uh give us what's going to happen 6 months from now and one year from now that if your theory is right will occur. Uh will occur. Now, here's the Now, now I say this, that's that's exactly the question you should ask and I am going to like leave some caveats in here because we don't have full information, but if I'm if I'm mostly correct, and again, the enemy gets a vote. So, we could f Donald Trump is I've laid out the strategy. I didn't say whether or not I gave you the probabilities of whether he's going to win or not, right? You have to you have to separate out the um the intention from the outcome. Right? There's I have a strategy. I have a game plan. I'm I'm I'm the Giants offensive coordinator. Here's my strate here's my here's my game plan for going for beating the San the 49ers defense. Not that I'm a football fan anymore, but this is my right. And it doesn't work. like it's the best plan, but they're still better than we are and to the point where no matter what happens, I could execute perfectly and still fail.

Yeah, this is important to understand that. So, I I so I I hesitate to make predictions like that for that reason, but I'm more than willing to do so. I just want to make sure that you understand that it's these are probability fields that we're dealing with. These aren't you know if they if these are not state functions these are probability classes this is basian statistics this isn't this isn't anything predictive but the model what I would say is as of right now is that Trump doesn't care about Iran anymore because the longer you know Iran is clearly playing for time they think they can win by outlasting the United States and making us go away we're eventually going to he's either going to bomb them and then walk away or ensure that once We've gotten to a point where where the where where the global um economy has rerouted around Iran's and Britain's through the PNI clubs and shipping insurance and all of that. If that has all been degraded significantly in potent in power, not eliminated, degraded, then we'll see more oil flow in and out of the Gulf of America. We'll see Trump have more control over the Western Hemisphere. We'll see more things like the elections in Colombia. We'll see more um um cartel capos whacked. We'll see Cuba fall. We'll see him take out certain offshore entities in the offshore funding networks in the Caribbean. Okay, we'll see a lot of that. We'll see him force Canada into capitulation, which we're already seeing happen. Um and at some point, Michael Sailor will probably go broke. his bitcoins will wind up on the American government's balance sheet in some way, manner, shape, or form, either through the money center banks or the sovereign wealth fund or something along those lines. And we'll see Bitcoin, gold, and silver over the course of the next 3 to 5 years. I don't know the I don't know what the squiggle pattern is going to look like, but you can bet you can probably bet that in order to balance the American debt situation relative to the growth relative to everything else that if he wins the midterms and isn't in peace and isn't, you know, summarily shot for treason or whatever, like then um we're looking at $15,000 gold, $4 to $500 silver, and $1 million Bitcoin, right? because that's what balances the books. Yep. No different than what Jim Sinclair said in about 1980 when he when he divided the debt by the reserves and went $880 gold and he was the only guy to get that price, by the way. I know that from people who knew Jim. And no one knows who he sold to. No one. Jim took it to his grave with him. You know, when you've been doing this as long as I have and and popped into these conversations the way I have, it's amazing who you get who who eventually you get to speak to, who shows up and sends you a DM or who get who who creates a meeting where you go down somewhere for dinner and one night and you're like and the other person at the end of the table is this is this incredibly important person that you whose name you never knew and then all of a sudden you you realize you're sitting in one of the most consequential conversations you've ever had in your entire life. It's because they wanted to ensure that you got the information that you needed. You me being meaning being meaning being meaning being meaning being meaning me got the information they wanted you to know, right? Like and I'll never name names or anything along those lines because you know these things were talk that I know these things now. And so when I talk about these things in the way that I uh with the a level of confidence or security that I do, it's because I have had some conversations in my life that and I've had corroborative data put in front of me by patrons who work in in these industries by friends by this but you know again when you put yourself out there in this way it's amazing what happens when you tell when you come to the truth. on your own. And people go, "How the [ __ ] did he figure that out?" Like, "It's cuz he's just that good." I've literally had people say that to me, like had to like had that that happen. They're like, "He just figured this out on his own. He's not working for anybody." I'm like, "No, no, it's just me and Dexter White are like we're really good at this shit." Because we've been doing it our entire lives, right? This is not a new thing for us, right? Gold, Ghost, and Guns is a little over nine years old, right? Dexter and I have been having this conversation for 30 years. Okay, because we're both at the end of the day really we're both like extreme American patriots. Okay, it's.

My wife is over there in the corner going or you're just overeducated [ __ ] which is also which is also by the way completely accurate. Right. So I think Trump is going to skate through the midterms. Uh the redistricting numbers are strong enough that his floor is basically 215 in the House. Uh can't lose the Senate. He just primared three major senators. Never hasn't happened since FDR. That's that shows an immense amount of political power that he hasn't had previously. He's probably going to have to issue an executive order on the Save Act, right, about voter fraud or voter ID and all that because the Democrats and and um um do are going to are going to, you know, are going to just keep playing the extended pretend game for as long as they can because it's existential for them. They can't give up. So they have So again, it's like so many of the things that I've laid out for in some of in this conversation is that you're watching people having to make moves where sex is essential. for example, and a perfect example like I don't blame Iran for for running their oper prosecuting their their political war the way they have their propaganda war the way they have. It's the only thing they have because they clearly got their their military clearly got their asses handed to them within 48 hours or really 10 days. But the the the majority of the war was over in 48 hours. the military aspect of the war. The reality was Iran was finished in 48 hours. Okay, that's reality. Now, the fallout from that, the the secondary and tertiary effects of that, the question is who's in charge of that? Well, Ron is playing one game. Trump is playing a different game. Trump's game is more consequential to Trump. the IRGC, like the IRGC is literally in a position where again their strategy was try and keep the straits as closed for as long as possible. Play the extended pretend game, don't negotiate, blah blah blah blah. Basically, do the same goddamn thing that the Ukrainians are doing. They've, you know, negotiating terms of surrender over a war they've already lost. Meanwhile, Trump is like and Bessin are like, "Fine, we're just going to cut off all your funding sources. We're just going to dismantle the worldwide, you know, strip club uh network of Hezbollah, you know what I mean? Like that's what we're going to do. Like, and by the way, we'll just slowly choke you out and eventually um we'll turn this is the same thing we're doing to the Castro regime in Cuba. like look, we're just going to keep doing this until eventually you capitulate and eventually you accept the fact that we're going to hand x amount of aid to the real to the people of Iran, to the people of Cuba, to the people of Venezuela, and we're going to and we're going to fix the we're going to fix the situation on the ground for them. Same thing he's doing to the United States. We're under siege from a legislature and an intelligence um community that is in fullon civil war mode and the American people are the target. So you have to try and help them as much as possible. It's but you you know you only have so many tools that at your disposal with our political system the way it is the way our legal system works and if you don't want Trump to you know cross the Rubicon um then he has to work within that framework as long as he can and I think that that that that's a very important point as to why it's you know it's going to take years to fix this but the election is is the big one. You know, the midterms, all he has to do is survive the midterms. And um you know, those odds are pretty good at this point and he's got, you know, he's got it's only June. He's got until really September to fix a lot of this stuff. He gets, you know, oil gets back into the into the high7s and and uh you know, you get rid of federal gas tax, for example, wouldn't that be great? get rid of federal gas tax and um uh you know and get the wholesale price of gasoline back to 220 a gallon and we're back to you know like I'm in central Tennessee we'll be back to sub $3 gallon gas and no one will care.

Like and then at that point and we watched the primaries the primaries told us that Trump has still has tremendous pull within the Republican party the Democrats have a 17% approval rating You know, people like to [ __ ] 6 months out from the election about the way things are going and then when the time crunch happens and they have to actually make a decision, you think they're going to pull the lever for the kids who want you the people who tried to cut off your your kids' dick and and put, you know, and like no and and locked you down over COVID. like no, they're not going to. People have a long memory. And so, you know, that that whole portion of the commentary app that's screaming that Trump's going to lose the midterms, they these people started that that stickick on January 21st last year. I can name names because I name them all the time and I don't give a [ __ ] because, you know, Robert Barnes is full of [ __ ] and I know he's full of [ __ ] too. I don't care. I don't care what polls he's running. It does not matter because at the end of the day, people are going to make their decisions in the moment. This is not a normal election cycle. So the past is not prologue. This is a six sigma event in political terms. And if it's a six sigma event in political terms, that means that all previous polling statistics have zero predictive power. So now you got to like fall back on, you know, what do people actually want? And if they really do believe that Trump is hasn't betrayed them, which I don't think they really have, you know, again, libertarians and Bitcoiners, they like to live they they live on Twitter and they like to think that they have political power. Uh the the primaries prove otherwise. It's time for everybody to grow up.

Yeah. Well, we'll see. I I think that. I know I know it's a hard lesson for people to hear. I know it's a hard message to for people to hear. I'm I'm not I'm not saying it to be a dick, but I am being a dick. I'm saying it because it's true. Thomas Massie betrayed his constituents and got his ass handed to him. It was not Israel. Israel was on both sides of the trade. That's a lie. Promulgated by bad people. Mitch McConnell's boy lost too.

The Apac candidate. Apac's been fighting Thomas Massie for six years, eight years. Guess what? Couldn't get rid of him. Betrays Trump, he's gone. Go.

The, the, the, the numbers are stark. I've done, I've done electoral statistics. I'll give you a last, you know, I know you don't believe me. I'll give you, I'm going to lay it right out for you. I can see it on your face. For the last three election cycles, Thomas Massie under 22, 21 to 22, 23% voter turnout got a decreasing amount of of votes from 50,000 down to 39. He still won, but he didn't have anybody running against him, right? Nobody credible, nobody with money, nobody with anything, but he was losing support within his own constituency. It was a safe, but it was still a safe seat, but his numbers were falling.

Right now, there was 34% voter turnout in a in a in a primary where not only was his seat up for grabs, but McConnell's seat was up for grabs. The Senate seat was up for grabs. Now, if McConnell was running for reelection, right, voter turnout wouldn't have been 34%. Thomas Massie would still have won his primary because the people of Kentucky would have stayed home. They came out in droves because they had they had real choice. Massie or Gallerin and on the other side of it, Mitch's boy and whoever the other guys. I don't even know who these the senators are. I just know that McConnell's boy lost and that's telling you that the people are really angry of Kentucky are really angry at Mitch McConnell for not implementing Trump's agenda. And so that had coattails for Thomas Massie and he couldn't fight it.

Massie knew he was going to lose. Bars knew he was going to lose. Barnes knew he was going to lose. You know want to know why? Because the second rule of politics, there's two rules in politics. One, you're never attacked down, right? If you're the front runner, why attack the guy below you? You just look like a bully. And the second is the guy who asks for the debate is losing. Always. The guy who needs the debate is the one who said, "You need to debate me." Why? Because you need the free press so that you can force him to attack you down. Attack down. It's a loser strategy. Massie kept saying, "Debate me. Debate me." the whole [ __ ] Dave Smith [ __ ] To beat me. To beat me. To beat me. It's like, why? You're You're a [ __ ] Dave. Comic Dave Smith. You've never you've ever ever told a joke in your life other than that. Like, these people are cancer. And they need to be expunged from the political scene. And I can't wait to watch them all fail when Tucker Carlson and Marjorie Taylor Greene run for president in 2028. It's going to be hilarious. I can't wait to watch them lose.

The only libertarians, the only libertarians that I can actually stand anymore are the are the are the New Hampshire guys and Angela Mardell. Everybody else can go, everybody else can make a long walk off a short goddamn pier because we have a we have a country to rebuild and they're not interested in building anything. They're only interested in staying in opposition.

And and Bitcoiners, the the really good Bitcoiners understand this. They're about building. When I sit and I chat with Marty Bent, I know that Marty's a builder, right? I've been on, I was on with Nathan Fimmons and and and Nolan, I can't Nolan, I can't remember his name. Uh, I can't pronounce his last name. I was on with them yesterday. We had a great conversation about these very things. I know those guys are builders. I know that Dave Bradley is a builder. I I know these people personally and they're good people. And then there and then there are the Mr. Then there's, you know, Magoo Hodel like that guy. That guy is not a builder. He's a jackass. And I know he's a jackass and I don't care. There you go. I'm done.

There's my There's my There's my rant for the There's the There's my rant on my way out the door. Like, as far as I'm concerned, if you guys want to build anything, like, I'm telling you, Bitcoin only goes to a million when the when the US Treasury has enough bitcoins to to to balance the books. And that's not going to happen until I and my my my spicy call for today is that it's not going to happen until Michael Saylor goes goes bust. We'll see. And we'll see if I'm right about that. That's a call. I don't know if it's a good one.

Or maybe he was just building up that reserve for them all along. We won't know.

That's also That's also a good That's a cool That's a cool point. I like it. Do you know Do you know how far MicroStrategy Headquarters is from Langley?

Not far.

It's a stone's throw.

Yeah. Like exactly. It's like Voids of London and MI6, right? They're like literally, you know, you don't even need they don't even Yeah. They literally don't even need phones. Like they're like Right. They can shout at each other for Christ's sake. You know what I mean? Exactly. So,

all right. Well, Tom, thank you so much. Uh, that was a real pleasure. I enjoyed it. Uh, hopefully you'll uh come on back.

Of course, I'll be happy to do so. You You let me say a bunch of horrific [ __ ] about a lot of people. So, I I'm I'm always good with that. So, all right. I'm I'm I I'm serious when I when I say that part of the reason why that why that part of the rant happens is because I really am focused on winning and not We have an opportunity to win. It's not going to be perfect. Murray Rothbard, never let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Let's get some let's get some things done that are going to be better and then if they screw stuff up, we'll fix it in post. We'll monitor the process as they implement it. Absolutely. But let's not but let's not get lost as to what people's actual motivations are because if anybody thinks that Donald Trump is not 100% committed to making America, you know, quote unquote great again, like you're just you're just not reading the room right. Like I'm sorry. And you know, you're you're carrying water for the other team.

That's it.

We'll leave it at that. All right, sir. If people want to find you and your work, where should they go?

Uh, Patreon/goldos and Guns. Um, if you want to under if you if you know, you think I'm I'm inflammatory here, uh, the market reports, like I I really let it fly, but again, I also back it up with the data, uh, and try to marry the the story that's happening in the capital markets. We're doing this in a day when like the whole world is like um melting down and I'm like everybody's like gold's down, silver's down, bitcoin's down. I'm like where's the money going? I'm like it's a dollar.

Okay. So um and uh so Patreon/golds and guns, sign up for the market reports and or the newsletter, please do so. We'd love to have you there. We have a private discussion where you can where you can like argue with me all day long on on our private Slack server. I I welcome it actually. And um of course my my Twitter feed TFL 1728.

All right, Hold Magoo is going to sign up just to just to battle you on your server.

Oh, no he's not.

No, he's not. He's that guy. That guy that guy came after me 3 years ago. I'm like, you are the dumbest person I've ever met. Wow, that's impressive. You're you're you're dumber than the Pakistani shame squad that shows up at 2:00 in the morning to tell me that that I don't know anything about geopolitics. Like really? Okay, we're good.

Sir. I'll let you get to your afternoon. Thank you so much.

That's right. Thank you. Bye-bye.

Thanks for making it to the end of the show. If you gained something from this conversation, be sure to share it with somebody you think would learn something from it. If you'd like to go deeper, be sure to check out our conversation with Samson Mau. We talk about why the four-year cycle is rubbish and why Bitcoin could go to $1 million much faster than most people think. I'll see you on the next one.