TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

One of the reasons I really don't like Bitcoin is because Bitcoin has become the currency of choice for espionage around the world. If you're a North Korean trying to recruit an American scientist, you're you're gonna pay them in Bitcoin. Well, if you're a Chinese person trying to report to American intelligence, you're probably also getting paid in Bitcoin.

The central bankers have a goal of introducing central bank digital currencies (CBDCs) and digital IDs. They have used the pandemic as an excuse to push for digital IDs through vaccine passports, despite the weak justification. Their ultimate aim is to establish a totalitarian control system with CBDCs connected to digital IDs. This would be the most extreme form of control in human history.

They are implementing a digital transaction control grid that restricts how you use your money, when, and where. Your money could be disabled beyond a certain distance from your home, or taxes could be deducted directly from your account. This system will likely be overseen by global entities like the Bank of International Settlements, rather than national central banks.

Right now, we are in a political war between the mega rich and everybody else. And the question is, if you're the mega rich, how are you going to control the many when you are few? The way you're gonna do it was with programmable money, but programmable money doesn't click in and work well unless you've got everybody on the grid. You need to be able to track them. You need to be able to watch their behavior. You need to be able to influence their behavior, and then you've got complete control. It's digital money that can be integrated with a social credit system. So it says, if you didn't take your vaccine shot this month, we're gonna turn off your money. That is a coup d'etat. That is the end of human liberty in the West.

The central bankers have been working towards introducing central bank digital currencies (CBDCs) and digital IDs since 2020. They used the pandemic as an excuse to push for digital IDs through vaccine passports, despite the weak justification. Their ultimate goal is to establish a totalitarian control system with CBDCs connected to digital IDs. This would be the most extreme form of control in human history.

The central bankers have been working towards introducing central bank digital currencies (CBDCs) and digital IDs since 2020. They used the pandemic as an excuse to push for digital IDs through vaccine passports, despite the weak justification. Their ultimate goal is to establish a totalitarian control system with CBDCs connected to digital IDs. This would be the most extreme form of control in human history.

Joe Biden's administration is prioritizing the creation of a central bank digital currency (CBDC), with the Federal Reserve and the Bank for International Settlements involved. The goal is to eliminate cash and have everyone use CBDCs for better tracking and control. CBDCs can be programmed to restrict certain purchases, like if someone exceeds their carbon footprint. This is seen as a dangerous tool for tyranny and a step towards a surveillance state. The idea of CBDCs is highly unpopular among Americans, but the plan is to gradually push it through and eventually demonize cash. It is crucial to resist this development, as once implemented, it will be difficult to reverse.

Speaker 0 argues that there is a shift toward bankers increasingly controlling both monetary and fiscal policy, describing it as a "financial coup d'etat." They claim that for centuries there has been a balance of power between the people's representatives who control fiscal policy (taxation) and bankers who control monetary policy. According to Speaker 0, bankers have decided to use digital technology to assert control over both sides of government policy, leveraging CBDCs (central bank digital currencies), stablecoins, and asset tokens as programmable money. They assert that this move is underway and cite Davos as evidence, noting that Larry Fink, the acting co-chair of the World Economic Forum, is aggressively promoting the idea of moving the entire financial system into a digital control grid. The speaker contends that the descriptions of the bankers’ intentions are becoming very open and explicit, and that the result would be the abolition or collapse of the republic in favor of a system where bankers control both monetary and fiscal policy. The speaker questions whether legislative representatives would remain in any executive or ceremonial role, describing the future as fluid and capable of many directions. They emphasize that the transition has been very incremental for decades, facilitated by the federal government not running its financial statements and operations in accordance with the law and not disclosing them properly. This, they claim, has allowed the shift to occur with the public largely unaware or complacent. Speaker 0 notes that many Americans have accepted the current system because they benefit from it in the short term—“as long as I get my check, I’m okay with the system as it is.” They frame this acceptance as part of the reason the changes have progressed with limited public pushback. In sum, the speaker contends that the bankers are moving to extend control from monetary policy into fiscal policy through digital technologies and programmable money, a process they describe as a quiet, long-running coup that could redefine the balance of power in government.

The central bankers have been working towards introducing central bank digital currencies (CBDCs) and digital IDs since 2020. They used the pandemic as an excuse to push for digital IDs through vaccine passports, despite the weak justification. Their ultimate goal is to establish a totalitarian control system with CBDCs connected to digital IDs. This would be the most extreme form of control in human history.

I am against the U.S. Government issuing a digital currency directly to citizens. It would give the government too much power and control, potentially leading to the elimination of cash and complete control over our lives. I warned the people of Italy about this when they were considering vaccine passports and central bank digital currencies. In China, if you don't meet a certain social credit score, the government can restrict your spending abilities. They can limit your credit cards to only work at nearby grocery stores, preventing you from buying gasoline, traveling, or purchasing items and food from other parts of the country or abroad. This kind of government control is concerning and could lead to serious consequences for all of us.

I just did a Fox News appearance in Washington DC, where I talked about digital currency and Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs). I had a revelation about CBDCs during the truckers protest in Canada. The protesters were peacefully asking for their rights, but the government took pictures of their license plates, used news stories to identify them, and then shut down their bank accounts and credit cards. This left them unable to work, pay their bills, or support their families. This made me realize that freedom of currency is as important as freedom of speech. If the government can starve you financially for dissenting, we are living in a concerning situation.

The central bankers have been working towards introducing central bank digital currencies (CBDCs) and digital IDs since 2020. They used the pandemic as an excuse to push for digital IDs through vaccine passports, despite the weak justification. Their ultimate goal is to establish a totalitarian control system with CBDCs connected to digital IDs. This would be the most extreme form of control in human history.

The speaker discusses the potential risks of decentralized technology. They explain that while this technology aims to liberate individuals and give them control over their personal information, it could also be used by centralized powers to trap people. The speaker suggests that governments could create their own centralized blockchain, turning their currency into a permissioned cryptocurrency. This would allow governments to have complete knowledge of individuals' transactions and diminish privacy. They mention the example of the Marshall Islands, which passed a law for a decentralized currency but most governments may not be willing to give up control over their monetary policy. The interviewer mentions that Joseph Flubin, a co-founder of Ethereum, disagrees with this pessimistic view, considering it fear, uncertainty, and doubt (FUD).

Together because they are completely interlinked. Epstein is linked with Howard Lutnick, our commerce secretary whose firm manages the treasuries that back tether, the largest stable coin. And Brock Pierce, who was Epstein's crypto adviser, who was a cofounder of Tether and was the head of the Bitcoin Foundation before it collapsed, and then MIT took over the developers is right in the middle of this. So in essence, the endgame of this is what they have figured out as a way to have a backdoor CBDC where they specifically profit. I'm starting to call this now the creature from Epstein's Island because in the end, what are we getting out of this? We have something called USAT, which is the new official stable coin that complies with the genius act. So we have a situation where it's a digital token backed by fiat, backed by treasuries that can be programmed, tracked, and censored. And the biggest financial beneficiary is Howard Lutnick's firm. They managed to create so think about it this way. He's managed to create a central bank digital currency where only one firm profits from all of the fees for managing the treasuries. This is the biggest financial heist probably in human history. And it is connected directly to Epstein and Brock Pierce and the hijacking of Bitcoin. That's how they're linked. Now, do I think were they playing five d chess and this is what they thought was gonna happen? I don't know. May be if so, it's very clever or were they opportunistic about it? But make no mistake about it. These government regulated stablecoins are backdoor CBDCs in not in the sense that they're issued by the central bank, but in the sense that they are controlled and surveilled by the government and tracked by the government, which after all is the thing that people are worried about with CBDCs. The concern isn't really so much about the central bank. Of course, the central bank is complete unnecessary third party, but financial surveillance comes from Congress. All of the bank secrecy laws, all of the tracking and the suspicious activity reports, this is Congress. This is not the Federal Reserve. The Federal Reserve does not initiate any of that. So this is in many respects worse than the creature from Jackal Island. This is worse than the creation of the Federal Reserve itself because what it's done is created a digital dollar where one political member of a cabinet, his family and his company is the biggest single beneficiary. One of the things that came out of the Epstein file is Lutnick's claim that he was disgusted by Epstein and had nothing to do with him after 2006. The emails show Lutnick emailing Epstein coordinating to visit Epstein on Epstein's Island with his yacht and with his family. There's another email showing Lutnick contributing $50,000 to an event that Epstein was running. Lutnick flat out lied, and I will have to check whether that was under oath about his relationship and association with Epstein. He was a next door neighbor of Epstein and bought his house from Epstein. The connections here are overwhelming. It's so much data to map that I'm using AI to start making initial connections, then humans correct. How do these pieces fit from a timetable perspective? This is game changing. Epstein's hijacking of Bitcoin has not been widely acknowledged, and some Bitcoin Maxis resist this information. I urge people to do their own research, not to rely on spin. Look into Epstein's emails via Jmail and other sources. The information is out there, including the Epstein files, and the article I wrote for Brownstone at brownstone.org with screenshots of emails. Do your research. Don't accept a single influencer's take. Epstein literally funded changing the Bitcoin protocol to make it digital gold, yet there is no indication he actually held Bitcoin. This warrants investigation. Roger Ver, once a prominent Bitcoin advocate, has described hijacking in his own book, and his later treatment suggests suppression. The broader point is that there are deeply interwoven connections among Epstein, Lutnick, Pierce, Tether, and the Bitcoin ecosystem, with implications for who profits and how governance and surveillance could unfold.

It is crucial to avoid being tracked by the system controlled by Mr. Global. The goal is to establish a fully digital system that can be centrally controlled. This would allow for limitations on money based on location and restrict what and when you can purchase. Additionally, it could enable taxation without consent and complete control over individuals. For instance, if a vaccine mandate is issued, disobedience could result in the suspension of financial transactions and access to assets.

Freedom of speech is important, but the freedom to transact is crucial. If the state restricts your ability to buy things using digital currency, it can control your movements without physical barriers. Central bank digital currency can monitor and limit your transactions, making it challenging to buy essentials like food, fuel, or transportation tickets.

The central bankers have a goal of introducing central bank digital currencies (CBDCs) and digital IDs. They used the pandemic as an excuse to push for digital IDs through vaccine passports, even though the justification wasn't strong. Their ultimate aim is to create a totalitarian control system with CBDCs connected to digital IDs. This would be the most extreme form of control in human history.

The central bankers have been working towards introducing central bank digital currencies (CBDCs) and digital IDs since 2020. They used the pandemic as an excuse to push for digital IDs through vaccine passports, despite the weak justification. Their ultimate goal is to establish a totalitarian control system with CBDCs connected to digital IDs. This would be the most extreme form of control in human history.

What if an organization like Ericsson controlled the internet? It raises questions about how a non-government entity could hold a government hostage through its monetary system. This situation has already occurred with the current system, particularly with the Federal Reserve and SWIFT, which operates privately. For instance, withdrawing over $10,000 from a bank often prompts questions about the purpose. Debanking is also becoming common. A personal example is the 2019 shutdown of Lebanon's Central Bank, which left many without access to their funds, while local politicians managed to retrieve theirs. People often remain unconcerned until a crisis directly impacts them, similar to the 2008 real estate crash, highlighting how governance and private sectors often disregard individual concerns until they face legal consequences.

All the great work that you have done in health and all the great work you have done in food to preserve food and health freedoms, the minute they get financial transaction control, they will delete all of it. Financial control and controlling the financial transaction train tracks is the meta control that they will use to control food and health. if these guys get a 100% digital system with a digital ID and programmable money, guess what? They're going to dictate, you don't get your vaccine this month, they're going to turn off your money. And when I read it I couldn't understand how do they think they're going to market this, and that's when I realized, oh, programmable money is how they're going to market.

First speaker asks what happens if the government issues digital currency. Second speaker responds that they’re talking about central bank digital currencies (CBDCs) and acknowledges their appeal due to ease, but believes a lot will happen as this develops. Second speaker explains that with digital currency, transactions are easy, and it will be similar to money market funds in terms of practical use. A key question is whether CBDCs can offer interest. There is a debate on this; if CBDCs cannot offer interest, they may be less effective as a hold-in vehicle, since depreciation could make alternatives like money market funds or bonds more attractive. There will be no privacy with CBDCs, making them a very effective government controlling mechanism: all transactions would be known. This close surveillance could be beneficial for countering illegal activity but would also give the government substantial control. Examples include tax collection, the ability to take money, and the establishment of foreign exchange controls. These controls could be particularly challenging for international holders of CBDCs; for instance, sanctions could enable authorities to seize funds held by individuals in other countries. Privacy concerns relate to the possibility that politically disfavored individuals could be shut off. Second speaker reiterates that these privacy and control issues are part of the broader picture. He suggests that, for those reasons, CBDCs will not become a magnitude that changes everything; development will occur, but he does not expect CBDCs to be a huge deal in scale, even though growth is likely.

Larry Fink is now running, I believe, the World Economic Forum. He's acting chairman. Terrifying. He says that everything will be tokenized and that everything will soon be on the same universal digital ledger or database and that everything on that database will have a unique identifier number. So, for you as an individual, your identifier number will presumably be your digital ID or directly linked to that, but everything will have a digital ID. The tokenization agenda in particular seeks to tokenize not just assets we traditionally think of, like real estate, for example, or gold or, you know, physical assets as well as digital assets like Bitcoin. There's a major effort connected with people like Fink and also people like Mark Carney, who's now Prime Minister of Canada, to tokenize the natural world and transform it into financial assets. There was an attempt to do this to an extent under the Biden administration, I believe through the Department of Interior with natural asset corporations, but that has not gone away. There are groups—for example, one of the creators of the ETF model originally, which BlackRock now owns, iShares, his name is Peter Kanez, I think is how you pronounce it—who's trying to turn the Amazon Rainforest into a digital commodity, sort of similar to Bitcoin in terms of the scarcity idea that each hectare of the Amazon Rainforest would represent a token and financialize it that way. And then each hectare would then have its unique identifier, right, on the blockchain and would be serviced by surveillance drones and all sorts of stuff. So even our most natural, the places we conceptualize as the most natural places on earth, these people want to come in and place surveillance technology and tokenize it and put it on a blockchain and use it to, know, I would argue in the case particularly of natural asset corporations and the group behind it, the intrinsic exchange group, they just want to open up a huge new asset class. They call it Nature's Opportunity so that they can continue engaging in the same type of bad behavior that, for example, brought us the two thousand eight financial crisis, by, you know, can kentoopling, basically, the amount of assets currently in play. It's You know, insane. I had a guy who worked, very, very, very high up at Citibank. And he told me around 02/2008, he said, Glenn, you know, don't worry about the financial system. And I'm like, uh-huh. And, he said, you know, we're never gonna go broke. I mean, do you know how much just the national parks are worth? And I looked at him and said, are you seriously telling me that we should commoditize the national parks? And he said, it's gonna happen. And I wonder now if this is what he was talking about. If it was just a digital not actually selling them, it's just a digital commoditization of our parks. Yeah. So apply this now to the the phrase that we all heard during the COVID era, you'll own nothing and be happy. Well Yes. There's certain people that want to own everything, and that includes things that have never been able to be owned before that were considered things like the public commons, like rivers, lakes, the ocean itself, natural forests, all sorts of it. These people want to put all of that into the financial system, fractionalize it, tokenize it, and sell pieces of it around, you know, use it to speculate on. Mean, it's It's very insane.

What if an organization like Ericsson controlled the internet? It raises concerns about non-government actors potentially holding governments hostage through monetary systems. This has already occurred with the Federal Reserve and the private nature of systems like SWIFT. For instance, withdrawing large sums from banks often leads to intrusive questions, and debanking is becoming more common. A personal example is the 2019 Central Bank shutdown in Lebanon, where many lost access to their funds, while local politicians managed to retrieve theirs. People often remain unconcerned until they are personally affected, similar to the 2008 real estate crash, highlighting how governance and private sectors operate until individual interests are at stake.

"We move into this digital currency era where the banks are issuing these stable coins, these deposit tokens that are programmable money." "They're going to be sharing this data in the same database that the CIA and any other intelligence agency can access whenever they want without a warrant." "No more secret FISA courts or you don't need any of that infrastructure anymore. It is the new system." "Retail CBDC is not nearly as common today as wholesale CBDC." "Wholesale CBDC works as this two tier system." "the CBDC really only serves as a means of interbank settlement and isn't public facing at all." "FedNow, for example, of the Federal Reserve, that was launched solely as a means of interbank settlement, really." "When you have people like Trump and Ron DeSantis say no CBDC, they mean no public facing CBDC. They don't mean no wholesale CBDC."