Latest / Financial Survival Network / The Banking Crisis is Far from Over - John Rubino #5804

Transcript

The Banking Crisis is Far from Over - John Rubino #5804 · Financial Survival Network

• 0:00
  You're listening to Carrie Letz's Financial Survival Network, where you get valuable information you
• 0:05
  just can't find anywhere else to thrive in today's trying times. You need the
• 0:10
  Financial Survival Network now more than ever. Go to Financial Survival Network dot com
• 0:17
  and get your free newsletter in gift Financial Survival Network now more than ever,
• 0:27
  and welcome this. It is Financial Survival Network. I'm Carrie lets your host,
• 0:32
  and John Robino is with us. And we've got almost too much material
• 0:38
  and we appreciate all the emails and YouTube comments from all of you, and
• 0:43
  we try to get as many as we can. John. It's hey,
• 0:48
  it's the second week of May, and banks are doing good now, right,
• 0:53
  we can forget about the banking crisis, move on to the next crisis,
• 0:57
  right hey, carry Yeah, the regional local bank stocks are up now,
• 1:00
  like like this whole thing is over. But unfortunately for them, it's
• 1:04
  nowhere near over because they still have all those bonds on their balance sheet that
• 1:10
  better down in price that they have a report, which means they have to
• 1:12
  put out some bad numbers going forward. And commercial real estate has just barely
• 1:17
  started to blow up, and it's a much bigger deal. Because those are
• 1:19
  legit losses. You know, these these bonds they have on their balance sheets,
• 1:23
  if they just hold onto them, will resolve. You know, they'll
• 1:27
  a off at the end and they'll get the return with very little risk that
• 1:34
  they expected. But commercial real estate can actually can go down so far that
• 1:41
  the bank has to take a big hit on the loan. It might have
• 1:42
  to eat half of the loan on an office building or something like that.
• 1:46
  And that's everywhere out there right now. So these these regional and local banks
• 1:51
  that do a lot of real estate landing are looking at massive losses on their
• 1:55
  commercial real estate portfolios that that really aren't on the front burger yet. You
• 2:01
  know, nobody's really paying that kind of attention because there haven't been big numbers
• 2:06
  that banks have had to report, but it's just a matter of time before
• 2:09
  they do, and when they do, the numbers will be terrifying. Yeah.
• 2:13
  So, so the banking crisis will just move into another phase at some
• 2:17
  point here, and it'll be a much scarier phase when it happens. Though.
• 2:22
  It's a rolling bank crisis, goes from one sector to the next to
• 2:25
  the next, and everything that's happening here presumably is going to be replicated around
• 2:31
  the world. Right, Europe might be worse than the US in terms of
• 2:38
  the situation that's banks are in, So it could be that they blow up
• 2:40
  first, and that's the thing that restarts our banking crisis here. It's just
• 2:46
  there's no way to know. It's a mess everywhere. And you know,
• 2:47
  Japan, what can you say about you? And kind of like their cure
• 2:53
  to insolve and loans is make more loans, right, yeah, China,
• 2:58
  And you know, because they're a dictator ship, they're able to do that
• 3:00
  really efficiently. They just tell the banks to start lending on a given topic,
• 3:07
  you know, into a given sector, and it happens and that So,
• 3:10
  yeah, China was able to engineer basically the biggest real estate bubble in
• 3:15
  human history, even bigger than Japan's in the nineties and bigger than the US
• 3:19
  and the two thousands. And it doesn't seem to be a solution for it
• 3:23
  because something like seventy percent household net worth in China is tied up in real
• 3:30
  estate. So they either keep the bubble inflated or their entire economy implodes.
• 3:36
  And I don't think they really have any kind of an answer because first of
• 3:39
  all, they're not market based people in charge of the country, so they
• 3:45
  don't really have a sense of you know, how it works when hass a
• 3:49
  prices change and that clears the market at some point because there's a price,
• 3:53
  there's a market clearing prices, things like that. They don't really get any
• 3:58
  of that, so they'll probably blunder into something big at some point, and
• 4:02
  we just can't know when or how much new doubt will be created in the
• 4:06
  process. Yeah, there's three or four great YouTube channels that deal with China's
• 4:13
  bubble economy. What's called like China NCD or NTD something like that. There's
• 4:18
  also Epic Times. They've got a couple of the YouTube channels and podcasts that
• 4:26
  deal with it, and there's one called China Uncensored, And like, it's
• 4:32
  just really fascinating to see the real story on the ground there because just like
• 4:38
  everywhere else, you know, the China miracle came from increasing debt, increasing
• 4:45
  money supplied geometrically, and just like we're seeing the limits of that in the
• 4:50
  United States, where we're going to see the limits to it in China as
• 4:54
  well. Yeah, you know, it's been a seventy year experiment and it's
• 4:59
  blowing up on our faces. Right now, we get to live through the
• 5:01
  end of the feed currency experiment, which nobody should have to go through something
• 5:08
  like that, but it is fascinating. You know, this is a piece
• 5:10
  of financial history that will live on as long as people are making decisions about
• 5:15
  their finances because we did an experiment where we tried to see if it's possible
• 5:20
  just to hand governments unlimited printing presses and in that way. You know,
• 5:27
  the experts told us that if we just put PhDs in charge of the monetary
• 5:32
  system, that they would manage things and we would have low inflation and strong
• 5:36
  growth and stability forever. Turned out to be the opposite. You know,
• 5:41
  We've got slow growth, spiking inflation, and growing instability because these idiots thought
• 5:46
  they knew what they were doing and they actually didn't. Actually, on my
• 5:49
  sub stack, I'm working on an article now about the failure of the experts,
• 5:56
  because there's an argument going on in the comments section about what a people
• 6:00
  got stupid in the last seven years and that's why they won't take their vaccines
• 6:02
  and things. And my my take is going to be that, well,
• 6:06
  you know, we put our lives in the hands of experts in nineteen seventy
• 6:11
  one, and we got monetary inflation, you know, monetary and stability.
• 6:15
  We got almost World War three kicking off here. We got open borders and
• 6:19
  so the border towns in the US are being just submerged in the tide of
• 6:27
  illegals coming in. And we've got big Pharma basically able to take over the
• 6:33
  government and run or force us to take experimental medicines. Now, so you
• 6:40
  know, all in each case we had experts from the same class, you
• 6:44
  know, ivy League educated, very well off, very in tune with the
• 6:50
  wants and needs of other people in their class. We have them take over
• 6:55
  and basically what they did is served the interests of their class. It's not
• 7:00
  that they were incompetent as much as they were basically doing things with one set
• 7:05
  of people in minds. So monetary policy is no matter what happens. Monetary
• 7:11
  policy is lower interest rates and increased government spending, which serves the rich at
• 7:16
  the expense of everybody else. And foreign policy is, hey, let's send
• 7:21
  him a bunch of our soldiers off to die in every war that we can
• 7:25
  think of in order to enrich the military industrial complex. It goes on,
• 7:29
  and unlike on healthcare policy, is whatever makes the pharmacentical companies richest. So
• 7:33
  we basically got a small class of people in charge of everything. Now they're
• 7:38
  the expert's bay of the PhD is and the people who think that's a good
• 7:43
  idea are wondering why nobody trusts them anymore. And you know, so it's
• 7:48
  an interesting story again another experiment. You know, we're we going to have
• 7:53
  fiel currencies. Let's try that. Are we going to put the world in
• 7:57
  the hands of a handful of PhDs and just let them run the show.
• 8:01
  Let's see how that turns out. Well, none of it turned out.
• 8:03
  Well, it's it's been a disaster almost across the board. And you can
• 8:07
  trace it back to this idea that a handful of smart people are capable of
• 8:13
  ruining big sections of the economy and afford policy when in effect, in healthcare
• 8:18
  policy, when in effect, they are absolutely unqualified to do stuff like that.
• 8:24
  Can you give them that power and they screw up everything? And I
• 8:28
  will trace this back to the Kennedy regime, the Kennedy administration. They brought
• 8:33
  on these guys, they call them the eggheads, and Kennedy said, hey,
• 8:39
  the way to run this government is get the smartest people in every profession
• 8:43
  and just give them free reign. And yeah, it do it well.
• 8:50
  During the Vietnam War. We had the best and the brightest running the Vietnam
• 8:52
  War and they screwed everything up. But you know, you can trace this
• 8:56
  even further back to Plato's Republic, Yeah, where they conclude that the best
• 9:03
  form of government is a philosopher king, when you take the smartest, best
• 9:07
  person, give them absolute power, and they will run things right. Well,
• 9:11
  we did a mini version of that here where we didn't we didn't take
• 9:13
  the best person, but we took the smartest groups of people and put them
• 9:18
  in charge of everything and assumed that they would do a great job because they're
• 9:24
  the smartest people. And you know, it turns out that life is more
• 9:28
  complicated than the human brain is, and you can take the smartest person in
• 9:33
  the world put them in charge of something, and they'll still be swamped by
• 9:35
  the complexity of the thing you want them to run. Only markets, which
• 9:41
  is millions of free people, each making a decision on whatever it is you're
• 9:45
  doing in their own self interest that in the aggregate comes up with good policy.
• 9:50
  That's the only way to get good policy, even though it's a messy
• 9:52
  process. But you cannot just put people in charge and expect them to understand
• 9:58
  and manage a system is complex as the global financial system work, or global
• 10:05
  politics or virology. None of that's plausible with just smart guys making decisions,
• 10:11
  So it has to be run by markets and super learning all this. Now
• 10:16
  we're figuring out that you can't have people in charge of the currency, So
• 10:18
  we have to go back to sound currency, some kind of a gold standard
• 10:22
  or other commodity standard, where markets dictates the price of money and interest rates,
• 10:30
  and we'll have to have new politics in which people basically get to vote
• 10:39
  with their feet and with their pocketbooks, and lots of different countries get to
• 10:43
  compete on more or less level playing field, and policy evolves from that.
• 10:50
  It can't be dictated from above and imposed on everybody. We have to have
• 10:54
  policy become an emerging, an emerging characteristic of the system, not something that's
• 11:01
  imposed by some dictator, you know, some philosopher king. So this is
• 11:05
  a big revelation that's coming here, and it feels like it's coming fairly quickly,
• 11:11
  certainly in monetary policy, but if we survive our attempts to start World
• 11:18
  War three here pretty soon, maybe we'll find out that competition is better than
• 11:22
  dictatorship in global politics too. So true, so true. Well, obviously
• 11:28
  something's going on here. Banks aren't out of the woods. Now. In
• 11:31
  Q one we see central bank gold buying up one hundred and seventy six percent
• 11:37
  year over year. Yeah, So what that is is that that's the central
• 11:41
  banks of the world realizing they screwed everything up and they see an end to
• 11:46
  their currencies and coming very quickly, So they're trying to load up on an
• 11:52
  asset that historically holds its value while currencies misnaged currencies just evaparade. So the
• 12:01
  central banks of the world are realizing they've screwed up, and they don't want
• 12:05
  to come out and admit it because with a currency system, all you've got
• 12:09
  is faith. So they can't admit that this experiment is ending catastrophically because that
• 12:16
  will bring it about instantly, would become a self fulfilling prophecy. But what
• 12:20
  they can do is load up on assets that will hold up during the monetary
• 12:26
  reset that has to come. So you're seeing central banks it's become a situation
• 12:31
  of don't listen to what they say, but watch what they do, because
• 12:35
  they are acting as if we've got ever you know, tsunami of inflation coming,
• 12:39
  the collapse of these fiot currencies and gold and silver surviving and thriving and
• 12:46
  becoming the basis for the next monitor system. That's how they're acting. So
• 12:50
  don't listen to their press conferences where they say the banking system is sound and
• 12:54
  we see inflation as being well anchored. That's all just focus grouped nonsense that
• 13:00
  they trot out when they need to manipulate the markets. But their actions say
• 13:05
  they're terrified, and that's what we should be getting attention to. Yeah,
• 13:09
  they ignore their news speak as they as George Orwell would call it. It's
• 13:16
  all news speak and none of it has any truth to it what soever.
• 13:22
  But yeah, there's no way that they can admit that they were wrong about
• 13:30
  this, But they don't have to. We're on to the next. The
• 13:35
  next crisis will be so serious that no one will remember the last one.
• 13:39
  That's kind of where we've been heading, John. Each crisis is more serious
• 13:45
  than the last, and therefore there's never a discussion about why it really happened.
• 13:54
  What enabled it to happen, and then we just move on to the
• 13:56
  last one until we get to the point where they can can't be kicked down
• 14:01
  the road anymore, and it looks like we're growing ever closer, and then
• 14:07
  nobody will remember, we won't need to have a discussion, and they'll just
• 14:09
  transition, right. Yeah, well that's what they've done so far. Every
• 14:13
  time they cause a gigantic cransis the same guys get chosen to fix the crisis.
• 14:20
  So there's no reason to think that the next one will be light back.
• 14:22
  Well, they'll they'll engineer something. It'll be another pandemic, or it'll
• 14:26
  be a cyber attack, or it'll be an EMP attack, or you know,
• 14:31
  any number of things. A gigantic command crisis is alien aliens. The
• 14:37
  aliens might show up and say you have to go back on the gold standard,
• 14:43
  you know care that would be good. Now. It's interesting, isn't
• 14:46
  it that the aliens are now official, officially in existence. The government says,
• 14:54
  yeah, there's ufoslah blah. And at the same time that artificial intelligence
• 15:00
  has emerged as a real thing in the sweep of human history. It's just
• 15:07
  very interesting that those two things would emerge in the same decade, maybe even
• 15:09
  the same year. We could actually meet those meet the aliens at the same
• 15:15
  time we meet and artificial intelligence that is self aware and it's it would be
• 15:24
  a surprise to me if that was a complete coincidence. It is just an
• 15:30
  awfully big coincidence of it happens. So we'll see, we'll see what that
• 15:33
  means in the future. But I don't know, well, unrelieved that Kamala
• 15:37
  Harris is heading the government's AI task force. Do you think she'll really be
• 15:43
  heading it? Or we'll chat bpt of four point five running it. We've
• 15:50
  got to get some video of this because we're going to have a human who
• 15:52
  cannot pass the Turing test talking to a machine that can pass the Turing test.
• 15:58
  So it's a it's going to be embarrassing for our species, okay,
• 16:02
  but it's the idea of naming Kamala Harris to be bizarre of something is a
• 16:10
  good way to hide it. We've seen put her in charge of the border
• 16:15
  and she never went to the border. She never expressed an idea of any
• 16:21
  kind about immigration policy, and maybe that's the same thing they're going to do
• 16:25
  now. They'll they'll put her in charge of AI, and that'll just bury
• 16:27
  this issue. You know, like Obama, Hey, he needed somebody to
• 16:34
  check up on Ukraine, he put Biden in charge of it. At least
• 16:38
  Biden had the good sense to cash in on it and make sure that all
• 16:44
  the members of his family were plush. You know, it bothers me when
• 16:49
  I see a politician and can't recognize opportunities where they can cash in for themselves
• 16:56
  and their family. That's just not a good politician. So if we can
• 17:00
  talk a bit about this on YouTube, that's awesome, because it is fascinating
• 17:04
  that, you know, they took a guy like Biden, who is just
• 17:10
  this old school, totally corrupt politician who's in it to enrich himself and his
• 17:15
  family, and they gave him a portfolio that included Ukraine, one of the
• 17:19
  most corrupt countries in the world, and those guys just got together and milk
• 17:26
  that country. You know, it's it's coming out now where the where the
• 17:29
  money came from that flowed into the Biden family accounts. And obviously Ukraine was
• 17:33
  a big conduit, but so was China. So if all of this stuff
• 17:40
  comes out, I think we're going to be shocked on one hand about the
• 17:42
  size of the numbers, and not shocked in any way on the other hand
• 17:47
  that this guy was doing stuff like that because he's just that kind of a
• 17:51
  guy. You know. He's just an obviously corrupt politician, you know,
• 17:56
  so it shouldn't be a surprise, you know. You give, with Donald
• 17:57
  Trump in charge and he's talking about buying greenland, there's something white that which
• 18:03
  is reasonable because he's a real estate guy. So I clear you, yeah,
• 18:07
  yes, much better idea than the Ukraine War. But you put Biden
• 18:11
  in charge, and obviously he's going to solicit bribes all over the world and
• 18:15
  that's apparently what he did. Isn't this going to be funny? In this
• 18:18
  next election, we could have, for the first time ever, a presidential
• 18:23
  election between two candidates who are both under indictment at the time of the election.
• 18:33
  It's a time for firsts, I guess. And they might be in
• 18:37
  jail running their campaigns from prisons, like if they're in Atlanta or that other
• 18:44
  place Marry in Indiana that's the supermax, and they have to have the presidential
• 18:49
  debate in the prison courtyard or the prison cafeteria. Right, this is a
• 18:56
  movie that's correct, Garry this. You know, HBO could do a movie
• 19:00
  movie with that plot where they both of the candidates end up in the same
• 19:03
  Supermax and gen pop of the same Supermax prison, and they have their debates
• 19:08
  in the you know, in the cafeteria. I like it. I think
• 19:14
  I think it could make it in today's Hollywood. You know, but obviously
• 19:19
  it wouldn't. They wouldn't be able to have two white guys be the candidates
• 19:25
  here. We'd have to multiculture lies. Well, Denzel would Denzel Washington for
• 19:30
  one of them? Yeah? Yeah, because he could play a bad guy.
• 19:33
  He's done that before. He's good. And maybe Tom Hanks or something
• 19:37
  like that get him in making an aw shucks country politician. Okay, hey,
• 19:41
  we're radio a winning screenplay. You watch this happen Now, somebody's gonna
• 19:45
  hear this. They're gonna make a screenplay two years from now. Yeah,
• 19:48
  better idea. I'm going to have a chat, GPT write the script.
• 19:52
  Oh you can. You can get it to an agent in weeks if you
• 19:56
  do it. That lay right? Okay, do it all right? All
• 20:00
  right? Give me give me producers credit, that's all. I like your
• 20:04
  co creator credit. Okay, sure, we came up. We hatched this
• 20:08
  scheme together, and you know, maybe Keana Reeves and Denzel he's not old
• 20:17
  enough. I guess his age doesn't matter just because our two guys are really
• 20:21
  old, it doesn't it doesn't have the two old guys in the script.
• 20:26
  Meryl Streep, then let's make her one of them, or no, they
• 20:29
  can't be in the same Um. Okay, Denzel declares himself to be female
• 20:36
  right before he gets um put in prison and in Meryl Streep or in the
• 20:41
  female prison, the women's prison. Yeah, okay, all right, Well,
• 20:44
  then then we cover virtually every minority in every interest group, so they'll
• 20:49
  all pay to see it. Yeah, it's it's a diverse capist, it's
• 20:53
  a Netflix. Yeah, I think we got it. Well, Hey,
• 20:57
  getting back to real TV. That seems to be imitating art if you take
• 21:03
  it. A look at the Fox ratings. I mean they are plunging down
• 21:07
  faster than than Joe's favorability ratings. Um. Tucker Carlson was the only reason
• 21:15
  a lot of people ever tuned into Fox, and they're just finding that out
• 21:18
  now. His old slot is down by seventy five percent. Fox is now
• 21:25
  smaller than MSNBC. This has got to be just killing him. You know,
• 21:27
  there used to be in the six hundred pound guerrilla in cable news,
• 21:33
  and now they're they're approaching CMN numbers, which is you know, Sanna is
• 21:38
  going to cease to exist pretty soon unless they turn things around, and Fox
• 21:42
  is approaching that level of viewership, and especially in the what is it eighteen
• 21:48
  to thirty four to fifty four the demographic that does all the spending. That's
• 21:52
  all anybody cares about, is that demographic. And that's where you and me,
• 21:57
  Yeah, that's what fuss. We're not we can be funny, who
• 22:00
  we're old? Yeah, now we just buy guns and silver coins. Now
• 22:04
  we're not useful for a an audience life. But um, what was I
• 22:10
  going to say? I forget what I was going to say. Something to
• 22:12
  that effect though, that that that they're imploding. And they can't asked Tucker
• 22:19
  Carlson to come back because they've already burned that bridge. They don't have anybody
• 22:23
  that anybody else is watching right now. So this is a huge deal.
• 22:26
  This is the the Budweiser of news right now. Right it could do a
• 22:33
  deep fake. They could have a deep ai fake of Tucker because he's still
• 22:37
  under contract, so I guess he can't say anything. Well, you know,
• 22:41
  he can walk away from It was like twenty million dollars a year that
• 22:42
  he'd be walked away from. But the minute he set up um his own
• 22:48
  whatever, you know, he's he's on YouTube channel. If it would be
• 22:52
  five times as big as his audience was at Fox, can probably make him
• 22:57
  three or four times as much money. You know, he'd be making Rogan
• 23:00
  kind of money. So there's no reason to stay at a Fox because he's
• 23:03
  not giving anything up. He's actually making money by leaving. So I think
• 23:07
  that's probably what will happen. He could do a presidential debate that that that
• 23:12
  would be you know, he would be the draw. So people who wouldn't
• 23:17
  normally watch a presidential Today debate would just tuned him to watch Tucker Carlson.
• 23:21
  So he's on the next he is the next Russian Limbaugh. They put up
• 23:26
  a lot of people, but it's proof that it's he is the one.
• 23:30
  And in addition to what you said, John, that all of his viewers
• 23:33
  left on mass dumped box. In addition, there's people who were upset because
• 23:41
  he was a quote unquote truth teller, and they just piled on because they
• 23:47
  just said, we want no part of this corporate outfit. What should really
• 23:52
  scare you is how many they lost twenty thirty billion dollars worth of value potentially
• 23:57
  by firing Tucker Carlson. And they had to know this was going to happen,
• 24:02
  or have a good idea, but the fact that it was done anyway
• 24:06
  to scare everybody because you know, his truth telling and silencing him trumped all
• 24:15
  the financial interests that are built into the capitalist system. That's scary. Yeah,
• 24:21
  it is funny when you start talking about why they fired him, it
• 24:26
  turns out there's like eight different reasons that are completely valid from the point of
• 24:30
  view of Fox. That because he had u RFK Junior on and they trashed
• 24:37
  the Ukraine War and Big Farma and he said that. Did he say the
• 24:42
  cia Ia killed his own k probably mother too, Yeah, So so all
• 24:48
  of them he said all of that on Fox and Tuger Carlson. You know,
• 24:53
  he himself was opposed to the Ukraine War. He was kind of an
• 24:57
  anti Fax or he was anti Big Farm month and that right there is enough
• 25:00
  to get you fired from any major news channel in the country. But then
• 25:06
  there's the story about he had dinner with Rupert Murdoch who's like ninety two years
• 25:11
  old, and was engaged with Rupert Block and his wife, and that at
• 25:15
  the end of the thing, the wife said the Tucker Carlson was a messenger
• 25:18
  from God, and that freaked Rupert murdochile so much that he dumped his fiance
• 25:25
  and fired gun. Yeah, so there's a lot of stories that all seemed
• 25:32
  plausible given the general insanity in the mainstream media market. Rernue Hey, it's
• 25:38
  a it's a wonder, but yeah, he Tucker came out and said there
• 25:42
  was a certain three letter agency and he got it on authority for somebody in
• 25:48
  the government that was involved in JFK's assassination. Take it for which it like.
• 25:55
  Certainly the story that we were spoon fed was a big should manure and
• 26:00
  had zero truth to it. But we don't need to, like we've been
• 26:04
  talking about this stuff. You would meet John for like fifty five years already,
• 26:10
  right, so we don't need to get into it. But suffice it
• 26:14
  to say, you're not supposed to say these things on primetime TV, and
• 26:19
  the people that really run things did not take kindly to it. Yeah,
• 26:27
  and if it was because they could have foreseen that their ratings were going to
• 26:32
  go down, so they knew they were taking a risk. So whatever they
• 26:36
  you know, whatever the reason was, it was something that was big enough
• 26:38
  for them to risk what's happening right now. And as you said, what's
• 26:42
  happening right now is they're losing billions and billions of dollars of revenue and of
• 26:49
  enterprise value. So they had a really really compelling reason for doing what they
• 26:56
  did. And hopefully whistleblower is going to come forward pretty soon, somebody who
• 27:02
  has taken notes from the room or something like that when the decision got made.
• 27:06
  Yeah. Yeah, And so because it's going to be interesting, I'm
• 27:10
  very interested in in why exactly they did this, because it's hard to imagine
• 27:15
  something that's worth, let's say, twenty billion dollars of enterprise value. It's
• 27:21
  got to be a serious thing for you to sacrifice that kind of money,
• 27:25
  which is what they did. And it doesn't look like there's any real solution.
• 27:29
  They don't have any other shows, but that are going to be the
• 27:33
  must CTV that Tucker Carlson was. They've got some guys with high ratings,
• 27:37
  but nothing where the viewership and the following was was that loyal? I think
• 27:44
  so, so this might be a permanent change for Fox and hopefully they had
• 27:48
  a good enough reason, you know, to The brand was forty plus years
• 27:55
  in the making, you know, millions of man hours, millions of dollars
• 28:00
  to build this brand. Don't forget Fox News News Corp. Owns the Wall
• 28:06
  Street Journal, they own multiple outlets, multi billion dollar company. But to
• 28:12
  like destroy a brand in one day, literally bring it, bring itself to
• 28:18
  its knees, is that companies just don't do that for no reason. All
• 28:25
  right, Well, you know, more general reason that I think is possible
• 28:27
  is that they have a certain outcome they're trying to engineer for the next election,
• 28:34
  and they they concluded that Tucker Carlson would have made it harder. And
• 28:41
  if you take the military industrial complex and the big banks and form a pharma
• 28:45
  put them all together, twenty billion dollars in losses at Fox News may not
• 28:51
  be that too high a price to pay in order to get the election outcome
• 28:53
  they want. So interesting thought, Yeah, it's distressing. It's distress saying
• 29:00
  because we've seen these kind of things happen. There's no allegations of sexual misconduct
• 29:07
  with him, like there was with O'Reilly, and you know that it seems
• 29:12
  like he's a total boy scout and these I don't know, if you saw
• 29:15
  the leaked videos that they it's like the guy is like, of course,
• 29:19
  he's pissed off, like they're screwing things up, they can't run their channels
• 29:23
  properly, or you know, like he's surrounded by Charlottean's and conman and he's
• 29:30
  weaving his way through with a with a laugh, with a cackle, you
• 29:33
  know. Well, you know, they they went through every second of tape
• 29:40
  that they had of him, and if that's the best they could come up
• 29:44
  with, then that's shocking. You'd expect that any normal person who's on camera
• 29:51
  all the time, like a news talking head is would have all kinds of
• 29:55
  stuff that, taken out of context, would look really bad. But none
• 29:57
  of this stuff made him look bad, actually made him look, if anything,
• 30:03
  more relatable. Right. Yeah, he comes off as a regular guy
• 30:07
  and definitely not a sexual predator or a fascist or a racist or anything like
• 30:12
  that. So if that was their best shot, they might as well just
• 30:18
  give up, you know. Except the outcome of the course that they've chosen
• 30:22
  because he'll probably walk from Fox pretty soon. He'll probably start his own little
• 30:27
  edia empire and it'll be massive, and that'll be that. It's just that's
• 30:33
  the new world of media that Fox has created, so so so be it.
• 30:37
  I think it's a better world really have or Ucker Carlson running around on
• 30:42
  his own outside of the umbrella of a big media company. I think it's
• 30:47
  way more interesting. And he and Joe Rogan out there in the world are
• 30:52
  probably bigger than all of the mainstream media put together, and way more beneficial
• 30:57
  for general understanding of set. Oh yeah, yeah, Well, he has
• 31:03
  the ability to create the platform probably go podcasting and talk radio as well.
• 31:10
  Right, That's that's kind of it. And you know, Limbo could have
• 31:15
  done that at any moment. He could have just walked away from the radio
• 31:18
  and just done online stream all right, and it wasn't even that big then,
• 31:23
  but he had the ability to do it. He didn't do it because
• 31:26
  he was loyal to talk radio. Carlson, he can do that and nothing,
• 31:33
  there's nobody that could touch him, and people will pay. You know,
• 31:37
  even though I say we have this term in the US over subscribed.
• 31:41
  When you look through your credit card statement every month, idiotic subscriptions you have,
• 31:47
  that's one that most people wouldn't have a problem with. My immediate response
• 31:52
  if I have to buy a subscription to anything, any website, is no,
• 31:56
  all right, and then it'll be proved to me why I need this.
• 32:00
  And you know that if you if you want to go save some money,
• 32:05
  just go through your credit card statement and see how many auto pays you
• 32:08
  have every month raining your bank account what They'll be shocked, you know.
• 32:13
  I think I think we're dedicated to the idea of alternative media, then there
• 32:15
  are people we should support rather than just read their stuff for free. And
• 32:21
  Tucker Carlson, I mean miss Glenn Greenwald and Matt Tayubeian and a personal favorite
• 32:25
  of mine is Caitlin Johnstone. But Tucker Carlson would be on that list.
• 32:30
  I would toss five bucks from Mind to a subscription for Tucker carlson stuff here.
• 32:36
  And so let's say five million people agree with that, then that's twenty
• 32:40
  five million dollars a month for Tucker Carlson. And that's completely possible. I
• 32:46
  mean, if you look at how big the global audience is, what a
• 32:51
  billion and some people speak English. So there's his potential audience and the idea
• 32:58
  of ten million or five million or twenty five million or whatever out of that
• 33:02
  big audience tossing him five bucks a month is shit that it's all be shocked
• 33:08
  if it didn't happen. And then you know, or are you telling me
• 33:13
  about simultaneous translation now with AI? Yeah? Yeah, invlated anywhere? Yeah,
• 33:20
  yeah, So he might have a global market then where it's just instantly
• 33:22
  translated to whatever language you you're listening via or speaking or whatever. And so
• 33:30
  he's got the six billion people then yeah, and the what he could do
• 33:35
  is he could take one sponsor. All he has to do is take my
• 33:38
  pillow dot com Mike Lindell the only sponsor he needs. Everything else will be
• 33:44
  subscription based and it'll work out great. Hey, one more thing. So
• 33:49
  RFK and Junior running for president and he's been they've classified him as a conspiracy
• 33:55
  theorist recently too because of his anti medical you know, vaccine and all that
• 34:02
  stuff. But he's like twenty percent the poles now against the sleepy old Joe.
• 34:12
  Where does this end? He's a really compelling candidate. Um there there
• 34:17
  really isn't anybody on the list of Democrats that I wouldn't even think about voting
• 34:22
  for. They just have such a weak bench right now. But this guy
• 34:28
  is actually interesting enough that he might be a fun president because he's very brave.
• 34:36
  You know. He'll go after big Pharma and he'll pull us out of
• 34:38
  Ukraine and our heartbeat. So they'll do some some things that will will offset
• 34:45
  the crazy economic stuff, but a left wing Democrat would do. But I
• 34:50
  think he's he's got a chance. First of all, his name is Kennedy.
• 34:52
  There, there's ten percent of right there, just name recognition. He's
• 34:58
  um on the correct side of the pandemic debate for a huge number of people.
• 35:05
  He's definitely on the correct side of a Ukraine thing for a huge number
• 35:08
  of people. And if he's running against somebody who's on the wrong side of
• 35:12
  all that stuff, which Biden is getting to, fifty one percent is not
• 35:17
  that big of a stretch from nineteen percent right now, especially if they are
• 35:21
  debates. Probably there won't be because they know they can't do it. So
• 35:25
  whatever the Democrat National Committee has to do to prevent debates, they'll do it.
• 35:30
  But they can still have debates. Kennedy and Mary Ann Williamson debate on
• 35:37
  they could go on your show and debate. Hey, I'd love him.
• 35:40
  Yeah, anyway, it would be an extremely interesting debate that would get a
• 35:45
  ton of YouTube views and would give those guys the kind of exposure that a
• 35:53
  third party candidate needs because really that's what they are now. They're running is
• 35:58
  independence, even though they're like Ron Paul back when he was quote unquote a
• 36:01
  Republican. These guys are running as independents with finn Democrat Party, but still
• 36:07
  they're their third party candidates. And when you're a third party candidate, you're
• 36:10
  starved for exposure. But this would do it. This would give them exposure
• 36:15
  and or maybe Tucker Carlson could host those two debating. I would be good.
• 36:21
  I love it. Hey. You know, when when you look at
• 36:23
  it, if Trump is in jail anyway, then I guess RFK Junior will
• 36:30
  have to visit to Leavenworth or wherever they're holding Trump in order to have the
• 36:35
  debates, and Trump will the game because they'll give them a break from ping
• 36:39
  pong or whatever they do in the evenings there before lights out. So you
• 36:45
  know, it could be it really opens the possibilities. See even if neither
• 36:51
  of them are going to be president. I would still love to see a
• 36:52
  debate between RFK Junior and Donald Trump. That would be just potential train but
• 37:00
  maybe really interesting too, with Tucker Carlson moderating. It's so that's a that's
• 37:06
  a pay per view event, Yeah, where you pay thirty five bucks to
• 37:08
  get it under your cable. Absolutely, man, and they'll be you.
• 37:13
  Well, we'll be seeing those video clips for decades. So well that that's
• 37:17
  great. Probably. Yeah, that is it for this week. Make sure
• 37:22
  you go over to John's substack or Robino substack dot com link in the show
• 37:25
  notes, and we'll pick up in a couple of weeks. For some reason,
• 37:30
  John, I don't think we will have any shortage of material come next
• 37:35
  time. Hey, you've got a question, shoot us an email right to
• 37:37
  comment below on the YouTube channel. It's a kl atcarry Lutz dot com and
• 37:45
  don't forget subscribe to your free newsletter Financial Survival Network dot com. John.
• 37:49
  We'll see you in a couple of weeks. See you, carry Thanks for
• 37:52
  listening to carry Lutz's Financial Survival Network, your solution to today's trying times.
• 37:59
  For the latest, go to Financial Survival Network dot com. Financial survival network
• 38:05
  now more than ever