Intel Update - November 15 - Possible Happening Inbound...maybe
Hello again everyone and welcome back to the underground. This is the intel update for November 9th through the 15th, 2025. Good grief, the insanity has continued this week, hasn't it? Not a whole lot of domestic news this week. However, there have been a lot of potential happenings that have appeared on the forefront, which may become a bit of a thing over the next few months or so. But let's start with global strategic concerns as usual. Unfortunately, our friends across the pond in the United Kingdom as well as in France and throughout Western Europe at large really have experienced quite a few stabbing attacks this week. Continuing the trend over the past few months, there have also been a few attacks that have come to light in England specifically that occurred a long time ago, sometimes even a few years ago. And their trial is now just becoming publicized. So there there have been a few of those throughout much of Europe at large over the past few months. Down in Central and South America, tensions continue to rise in Mexico, mostly along the lines of Mexico and the Mexican government being more or less a narco state. This is of course extremely obvious, but it's still concern for the locals there. And tensions have been kind of rising over the past few months. The general sentiment just on the ground, whether it's true or not remains to be seen, but what the protesters are saying in Mexico is that they have kind of accepted the fact that Mexico is a narco state, but they are a little upset that Claudia Shinbal has become a little bit more open and not really trying to hide her cartel affiliations. As we recall, the last election season had more murders than normal for Mexico. So, it's not really anything revolutionary or groundbreaking or shocking or anything. We've kind of known this for a long time and Mexicans have known this for a very long time as well. But a lot of the demonstrators and a lot of the groups, they're protesting for a lot of different reasons, but the general sentiment from what I've been able to tell is that a lot of people want a true kind of return to form where Mexico's government and Mexico's authority are going to pretend like they aren't directly run by the cartels. So, you know, just like be a little bit more elegant with your corruption. That's that's kind of the the atmospheric so far. But it's a little early in the day right now, but there have been a few images come out of the protest. They've already graffitied up the fence they welded around uh the presidential residence there in Mexico City. We'll see how it turns out. Clearly, the Mexican government is expecting a pretty big turnout today, but it may or may not occur. Who knows? Apathy is a huge thing in Mexico for understandable reasons. I mean, a lot of people don't want to demonstrate in Mexico because, well, they think that demonstrating isn't going to isn't going to work. I don't know. We'll see. But the situation in Mexico is definitely continuing to worsen, especially considering the United States involvement in the Caribbean Sea, especially when it comes to Venezuela. So, the situation with Venezuela continues as before, but things have started to escalate. We'll get to Venezuela in just a moment on the strategic movement slide next, but here in the United States, there have been quite a few potential maybe possible happenings that are on the menu for the next couple of weeks. Digital ID has quietly made a debut in the United States in a larger role than it has in the past. So we'll we'll get to that in a moment. There have been quite a few economic indicators to be aware of for the general state of the American homeland that would probably be good to be aware of. And of course we have the Kudigra, the Epstein emails this week. So suffice it to say this week has been quite a few different cans of worms to get into. But for strategic movement, let's talk Venezuela for a moment. We are still in this will they won't they kind of arrangement. In terms of forces on station, the Euima ARG is still there. The Gerald Ford carrier strike group has now made her way into the Caribbean theater. So the fact of the matter that cannot be disputed is that a lot of US Navy forces are in the region and they are continuing to conduct strikes pretty much daily or at least every other day on random narco vessels that are transiting around the Caribbean. One item of note on the strategic strikes that are being conducted in the Caribbean Sea. There are a lot of misconceptions about these strikes and and the Pentagon has not done a super great job at explaining what they're doing and it's not my job to do that for them. They can definitely speak for themselves. But I did want to point out a a brief misconception that a lot of people have messaged me and have sent to me. A lot of people seem to think that these narco vessels that they are striking are coming to the United States directly and that's that's not true. So a lot of people think that what they're doing is they're coming up to a drug trafficking area, right? They're parking a fast boat on the beach. They're loading up, you know, bundles and bags of cocaine and they are taking those fast boats and driving them up to the beach in Florida. That is not what's happening. These fast boats are not coming into the United States directly at least. What they are doing is they are shuttling these precursors and they're shuttling these materials around between islands in the in the Caribbean. That's how it works. So, when you see a politician get in front of a camera and say, "Oh, well, these strikes are illegal because these boats couldn't make it to the United States." Well, for one, that conveys a couple of things. One, it conveys the person speaking doesn't know what they're talking about. They don't know how drug trafficking actually works. So, I may have to dig more into that a little bit and explain how that how how these things are working out. But, but that also tacitly implies that the United States has never conducted a legitimate strike since the American Revolution, which that's a political decision. If you want to have a political opinion on that, fine. I'm just explaining the the nuts and bolts of how this is how this works. And what they're doing in the Caribbean is they're striking boats that are that are making their way along known trafficking routes between islands. So that's what they're doing. No, these boats are not driving up onto the beach in Miami and offloading a bunch of cocaine. These narco submarines, they're not going into a port, you know, in Louisiana, right? They're offloading these things usually, wink wink, in Mexico, right? Mexico turns out has a lot of coastline, doesn't it? And not a lot of uh government agents are really interested in stopping drug trafficking in Mexico. So that's how it works. It's a lot safer to send a lot of drugs by sea because there aren't a whole lot of enemies out there on the ocean except for now the US Navy. Whereas if you were trying to traffic drugs from Colombia, which is a huge producer of narcotics, Venezuela, interestingly, doesn't really produce that much, but we'll probably get more into that later on. But anyway, for Colombia, for instance, it's a lot harder and it's a lot more logistically challenging and there's a lot more potential for risk on the part of the cartels to send drugs by land. That's why they send these drugs by sea. So, just a little point of clarification as we get started with this potential war because I have a sneaking suspicion that we're going to be probably striking Venezuela pretty soon, at least by year's end is my guess. But I've been wrong before, been wrong many, many times. So, my guesses aren't really worth that much. But there is a very sharp distinction and there's a very sharp difference between striking narcoats and the counter narcotics mission and what's going on in Venezuela, right? Those are two very different things. So the Pentagon to to balance things out here, the Pentagon is definitely speaking out of both sides of their mouth here because the mission and the objective in Venezuela is probably not counter narco. If we're going to be doing that, then maybe we should be bombing Panama and Colombia and Bolivia and places like that where they have they produce a substantial portion of the drug trade there. But the United States is focused on Venezuela probably because what everyone's thinking is probably true. We want regime change there. We want Maduro out probably for oil or natural gas. But there's probably also a lot of other uh interests at play here. So, another thing to consider just while I'm on the topic, notice what has not happened. You would think that these narcotics traffickers would stop sending, you know, drugs by sea, right? And send them by land if they know that they might get killed by a hellfire missile or some kind of artillery round, right? But they're not they're not slowing this down. So the United States expanding the war at sea might intentionally or indirectly have the goal of trying to move a lot of these drugs by land and thus cause a lot of other problems. So blockading these cartels from using the sea. Now they've got to send drugs through each other's territory and potentially maybe spark spark off a narco war as if there aren't a dozen already underway right now throughout the entire central and south American continents. So I don't know. There's a lot of speculation. I'm just saying that things are probably going to come to a head if they have if they aren't going to come to a head by the end of the year. I will be surprised. The United States may just turn this into a very very expensive game of whack-a-ole. It's not like we haven't done that before. But either way, it's certainly something that's going to be on the menu and to be aware of for a long time. So that's it for strategic movement. Let's switch gears quite significantly and talk about the growing elephant in the room, which is the collection of events that have occurred over the past few weeks or really just the past couple of days on the economic front. Now, I'm no economist for sure and I'm definitely not in the world of finance. However, some things do catch my eye occasionally and again, I'm coming at things from more of a national security risk assessment kind of angle, right? So, there's some overlap, but not a lot. But when there is overlap, I like to talk about it. And this week has been pretty intense. For one, we have some shenanigans going on with the number crunchers in DC. As many mainstream outlets have reported this week, the jobs report and the consumer price index report for October is probably never going to be released. At least that's what the White House has stated. This narrative is changing by the hour. So, I don't actually know what the latest version of this is. I've seen reports that the White House says, "Yeah, the the jobs report will come out, but it's not going to have unemployment data." So, I don't know. There's probably some shenanigans on this, but I can tell you this has raised a lot of eyebrows because the jobs report is extremely crucial for determining how the United States is doing on the economic front. Same thing with the CPI. So, when this doesn't come out, then it tends to make people think that there's a little bit of data manipulation on this and they want to probably hide it because jobs are not doing so well. And at the very moment that investors want some reassurance that the economy is not tanking or is not about to have a pretty big market correction now we don't have any data to make decisions. So that's concerning for what it's worth. Goldman Sachs produced their own numbers and they say the job market has uh shrunk by around 50,000 jobs. So we're down 50,000 for the month of October. I don't know if you want to trust them or not but that's just what their numbers are. So don't shoot the messenger here. Right. This probably does line up with a general downtrend because cryptocurrency for those of you who aren't in the crypto game, crypto had a brief what we might call crash a few days ago. So, Bitcoin is down underneath 100,000 uh as of this morning and this has led many people the word on the street at least the word on the street is that the bare market is here for crypto. Personally, I don't know. I'm not predicting anything. I'm just saying what people are saying, right? And this is kind of coupled with some other slightly concerning news uh in the world of the more traditional finance or financial markets such as hedge funds. A few days ago, Michael Bur announced that he is going to shut down his hedge fund. And the reason for shutting down his hedge fund is pretty interesting. Essentially, if you read the letter uh announcing the closure, he says basically the market is too uh insane for him to be able to predict where it's going. So, that's definitely an indicator. You can't debate that. That is definitely an indicator of something. What that is an indicator of, I don't know, but I know that people are going to argue about it while they're losing their shirt in the process. But another bit of concerning news is that Warren Buffett, of course, Warren Buffett announced his uh stepping down from Birkshire Hathaway. He is retiring uh as the CEO of uh the rather infamous group. This is not new. He announced this a while back, but it's now um coming into fruition at the at the end of the year. I don't know. All I'm saying is that there's been a lot of things happen that have caused people to get a little bugeyed this week in the world of economics, especially when it comes to things like the the potential AI bubble, right? The general sentiment this week with AI is that this uh game of musical chairs might come to a halt pretty soon. I don't know if that's true or not, but there have been rumors. It seem it certainly seems like open AI is moving toward potentially getting a government bailout at some point. So, that's probably a pretty big indicator that things aren't going super well and that the AI bubble might be getting ready to pop within the next, you know, few years at least. There's no real telling how this is going to work out, but I find it very interesting that all this kind of has come together over the past couple of weeks. And it hasn't necessarily been a very good look. So, I'm just giving you the very early indication and warning to do your own research on this, but uh I guess we'll have to see. Now, switching gears to something that's sort of related. The digital ID concerns that we have had for the United Kingdom have indeed made their way to the United States. So, for Apple users, digital ID is here. And the way that this digital ID has been implemented is very, very interesting. So, right up front, this digital ID concept is a new function in Apple Wallet to allow you to upload and uh just input the data from your pre-existing identification documents. They started with the passport. So, the US passport can now be input into the digital ID portion of the Apple wallet. And now you can use this because they now have a partnership with TSA. Look at how quickly that happened. They now have a partnership with TSA to allow you to use your phone as your passport at 250 different airports in the United States. In the same exact notice that Apple uh announced this partnership with TSA, they also stated that 11 US states are now incorporating their state drivers licenses or their state IDs into the system as well. So coming back to more of a wavetop view, this is not entirely a new concept, right? We've known about this for quite a while and TSA has actually had, you know, subscriptionbased services to fasttrack through security and things like that. So that's not particularly new. What's interesting and what is new is the scale at which this has been implemented. We went from okay uh we'll have like things like TSA pre-check and stuff like that to now we're going to roll this out to every iPhone user. It's going to be at 250 airports, so most airports, most big airports around the United States. And now it is going to incorporate driver's licenses. And we did this all in one single press press release. Oh, and by the way, it's now inside Apple Wallet. So now it would be probably quite easy for Apple to link your passport to your credit card, right? Isn't that interesting how quickly this has just been implemented and rolled out and nobody's paid attention to this, right? It just kind of happened overnight. Right now it's using your pre-existing IDs, right? So you can see how they're trying to sell this, right? You can see how they're trying to implement this and say, "Oh, well this is not the same thing that's going on in the UK with like this mass Orwellian crackdown on your, you know, your digital existence, right? It's not the same thing at all. We're just, you know, digitizing your passport. How bad can that be? Well, look at how fast they've implemented this, right? In 2 weeks time or 2 months time, I may be telling you about this new idea the US government's got with regards to a digital currency that's going to be linked to your digital ID. Man, you know, of course, that's speculation, but it's been moving pretty fast. So, I I wanted to make everyone aware of how quickly this this kind of thing can sneak up on you because that's how these things tend to work. And not to get too political here, but it seems like the Trump slump is definitely real. Whenever we have these really big data privacy concerns, a lot of conservatives tend to ignore them because they think that everything's all fine because they're guys in the White House. The political left, of course, does the same thing. All political parties do the same thing. But it seems like specifically with with President Trump, we've got a lot of these these data security concerns, right, with things like AI and Palunteer and the partnership between a private company, which is now working directly for a government agency. So, are they still a private company? I don't know. That's up for you to decide. But either way, it's very interesting how this has kind of slipped by and is being advertised as a feature, right? And meanwhile, our friends across the pond in the UK are protesting very strongly the implementation of digital ID in their country and yet here we advertise it as a selling feature. So very interesting how things have worked out. Similarly, something also to be aware of, unfortunately, Unfortunately, for those of you who have eyes and the ability to read, more Epstein emails have been released, and not a lot of them are familyfriendly. So, what has happened this week with the Epstein file release? Well, for those of you who have not been following it, the House Oversight Committee on Government Reform has been commissioned to examine the Epstein issue and any and all communications and things like that, the Epstein files, right? And just as a side note, what do we mean when we say the Epstein files? Well, really any digital file pertaining to the case. So, we're talking about internal uh emails and documents that were part of previous criminal trials of Jeffrey Epstein, previous witness statements, uh things that came out in civil trials, stuff like that, right? Colloquially we also mean when we say the Epstein files we mean the client list essentially the master list if which probably doesn't exist in its current form but there is a a list that we can compile of people who were clients of Jeffrey Epstein. So, just to get that right out of the gate, there's probably not just a master list of, you know, a word document with a list of names on it of people who were customers of Epstein, right? But we can certainly compile that data from the tens of thousands of pages, if not hundreds of thousands of pages of documents linked to Epstein and the various criminal trials that he was a part of over the years. So, right out of the gate, we've got to be accurate about what documents we're talking about. There's been a lot of conjecture, a lot of colloquialisms that we need to be, you know, kind of iron out before we get into this. So, as this situation has developed, there have been releases of documents over the years. There were the releases before Epstein became a household name, right? Before he became famous, the FBI had released quite a few records from his original indictments. So, we have that data already. Over the years, a lot of that data has been re-released, right? So his trafficking network once it became known that this was not just a simple case of you know some freak getting rolled up here. This was actually a much wider scandal than just one guy, right? This was more of a a a larger network. More scrutiny was placed on it. more documents came to light and so you know we're on right this of course all came to a head and rocketed Epstein's name to being a household name unfortunately when he was suspiciously found dead in his cell where he was serving his sentence for one of the many convictions that he had uh been involved in right and we have to have this baseline understanding of where we're starting from because we have to remember how do investigations work does an investigator come upon one single file of evidence and then immediately know exactly everything that happened and we know the full truth right up front. We don't have to do any investigating. It's all laid out right there. No, that's not how investigations work. Investigations take time. Contrary to popular belief, life is not an episode of Law and Order SVU. You cannot wrap up a nice case with a nice, neat little bow and have the entire mystery solved for you in an hour, right? It takes time. The reason that I'm talking about this is because at a certain point, it became quite clear that this is not just a human trafficking situation. Yes, this was probably a very large human trafficking network. However, it became quite clear over time that this was less of a human trafficking network and probably more of a blackmail operation. And that is where we find ourselves today. I personally am interested in the Epstein case because of the potential for this to be a very serious national security issue. If you're going to tell me that potentially the president of the United States and senior defense officials and senior policy makers for the United States are being actively blackmailed, then we've got a little bit of a situation, don't we? As horrible as it as it may be, right? If you're telling me that someone who has the potential to launch nuclear warheads is potentially blackmailed, that's a little bit different than trafficking hundreds of people, right? You're talking about the lives of hundreds of millions versus the lives of a few hundred victims, which is where this comes out of the criminal justice space and into the realm of national security. That's why Epstein matters for anybody who is unaware. That's why I care about this case. Unfortunately, the truth is not that easy to get at, is it? And this week has been no exception. So, the House Oversight Committee has been charged with investigating this, and this week they have released a few emails. Now, the way that they released the emails have been very, very interesting. Now, politics-wise, the House Oversight Committee absolutely has it in for Donald Trump. They personally don't like him. They're trying to get him. So, this is definitely tr this is attempted to be a gotcha Trump kind of thing. However, pushing the politics aside, I'm interested in the truth. And if they have something that's true, I'm very interested in it. But what they have done so far is they've slowwalked the release. And that's what got my attention. So, in the in the realm of political blackmail, a very common tactic you'll see is what we call a slowwalk release. meaning that they will release one document or two documents. You know, two or three pages here, two or three pages there. And what is this meant to do? This is a warning. It's a shot across the bow to say, "Ah, we've got this. We've got this email string, and we're going to release the first email in this email string, but we're not going to release the whole thing yet." And what is this intended to do? This is intended to apply pressure, right? Blackmail only works if the person's allowing themselves to be blackmailed, right? So, if a blackmail operation comes to an end, they're going to have to start releasing some of that blackmail, right? Some of that incriminating information. And by doing that slowly, maybe they maybe they can drag out the effectiveness of uh what is a an operation coming to an end. So, I think that's probably what's happening so far. Now, I say that with hesitation because there are tens of thousands of pages of documents that have been released. So, on the first day, the House Oversight Committee released like three pages of emails. the second day they released like I don't know five or six pages and then I think yesterday they released 20,000 pages but I haven't had time to go through those 20,000 pages to see how many of these are duplicates because as we all know going back to the great binder scandal the great saga of our failing civilization. A lot of stuff that the US government and these various committees and the White House themselves tend to release has already been released and they're openly lying in saying that these are newly released documents and they're not. They're just the old stuff that doesn't really matter or heavily redacted is my personal favorite. You know, heavily redacted documents being released is a is a classic pastime. So So there's that. Those are a whole series of concerns that we can kind of get into later, but for brevity, let's just leave it there. another series of concerns. For those of you who want to investigate this on your own, you need to be aware of something and I'll share it with you right now. So, there is a trick there is a tactic that is frequently used by politicians and government employees in general to evade Freedom of Information Act requests. So, one thing that they will that they love to do, and you see this all the time, it makes life miserable to try to get around this kind of thing. So, it's a very effective tactic, but what they'll do is they'll misspell things. they will misspell a name or they will use nicknames or they will intentionally like add a letter or take a letter out of a name. So that say for instance a lot of the Hillary Clinton documents which were released a few years ago, remember the whole Hillary Clinton email scandal? Well, a lot of people got spun up over that and filed a Freedom of Information Act requests and one of the things that they would do in the emails is spell the word Hillary wrong. So, if you did a Freedom of Information Act request that specifies you would like any and all emails that contain the name Hillary Rodm Clinton, well, guess what? If there's a misspelling, technically they're complying with your request. They're not going to give you an email that has the word Hillary Clinton spelled with an extra I, right? So, Hillary Clinton, her actual name is spelled without the extra I, whereas Hillary the name often times has an extra I in it. Well, if you did a Freedom of Information Act request for her actual legal name, but somebody had spelled her name wrong, like leaving out the L, you know, leaving out the second L, that's a common one, too. That email would not come out in your foyer request. Another thing that they did at the time was use HRC. So, if you did a foy foyer request for Hillary Rodm Clinton, guess what? If the email had the word HRC in it referring to her, the email would not come up. And that is exactly what is is being uh used here in these Epstein emails as well. The name Epstein is misspelled all over the place. The name Donald Trump is misspelled all over the place. And a lot of other high-ranking politicians have their names misspelled. This is not fat fingering this. This is not just people being stupid. No, because these emails have autocorrect, right? What are they doing? They're trying to use vernacular to avoid a Freedom of Information Act request in the future because they know these emails are probably going to be logged somewhere. It is utterly maddening for sure. But this is what separates politicians from you and I, right? Politicians a lot of times develop this very unique almost instinctive skill to be able to avoid a Government Freedom of Information Act request being applicable to a lot of their stuff. So that's why if you do a keyword search for Epstein in a lot of these things or uh do a keyword search for Donald Trump, not a lot of it will come up because they're referring to him as Donnie here or Donnie T or something like that or any kind of misspelling is very very common. Sometimes it is innocent like just you know typos. But typos are 1,000% used by government employees to avoid Freedom of Information Act requests in the future. It's just a passive thing that they do. It's like breathing, right? They don't even think about it. They just do it. That's something to keep in mind as you're trying to investigate this stuff. So, all of that little analytical stuff is kind of interesting, right? A lot of these like research techniques are kind of interesting, but really we want to cut to the meat of the matter here, right? We want to know are these thing are these documents real and why does this matter, right? So, let's just run through a couple of possibilities here just so we don't upset anybody and let's examine what's the what's the potential outcome of this. So, the first theory is that all of these documents as they are released are genuine and everything in the emails is true, right? It's all true, right? Let's just That's the first theory. Well, that's the nuclear option, isn't it? Right. The impact of that is well, you know, if they're releasing this this exceptionally damning information on Trump himself and other people and donors because I think Trump's probably protecting a lot of his donors more than himself. But anyway, if if everything is true and all of these claims are genuine and everything is the the full truth, right? If that's the case, that's really the nuclear option. That means that, you know, your black mailer is releasing the information. And that means the blackmail operation is coming to an end. This operation is wrapping up and societal upheaval inbound kind of situation, right? Why they haven't released them up until now, I don't know. You can debate that. There's arguments on both sides of that. I'm not getting into that right now. I'm just talking about the possibilities. The next possibilities are that the documents are missing context, meaning they're releasing sections of email chains that they've had for a long time, but they're not releasing the whole chain. Right? So that can matter quite a bit. Another possibility that's in the same kind of realm is that the documents are genuine. Like these emails were not doctorred. They're real documents, but the content are either jokes or lies, right? As in Jeffrey Epstein, when he's emailing somebody, he's telling a lie. Or Mark Epste, his brother, when he's telling when he's emailing somebody, he's telling a lie or he's making a joke or something like that. Context is everything in emails. I hate to be the context guy, right? We require context, right? I hate to be that guy, but I cannot make a decision on world events if you're only going to give me a few emails in an email chain. I want the whole chain, right? So that you can see is what the flow of the conversation is. Unfortunately, these people, again, just like the whole spelling mistakes, these people are just so great at not putting all of the context in one email, nice and wrapped up for us to read. These people speak with a forked tongue, right? So, it's very hard to figure out what exactly they're saying. Look, if I was if I received these emails from somebody, I wouldn't know what in the Sam Hill they're talking about because the context is context is missing. They'll have conversations where they'll send half of the conversation via text, like a like a cell phone text, but then they'll send they'll reference that in an email. So, you don't know what the other half of the conversation is. It is utterly maddening. That's why people have had such a hard time figuring this stuff out because these people just naturally speak like a snake, right? It's not easy to figure out what they're saying. So that's why I think it's important to remember, you know, context is is helpful, but even more than that, even more than the general context of one email chain, the overall context is certainly more helpful, too. And we just don't get that from a lot of these emails. You have to build it. You have to figure out what's going on because let me tell you, the federal government isn't helping us any. The FBI is not trustworthy on this. No federal agencies on this. And the Democrats who are bringing this about, they're not trustworthy either because they have ulterior motives. So they may be willing to doctor things. Now that leads into the last possibility which is the documents that they are releasing right now are fake meaning that uh they are uh complete fabrications or partial fabrications and that this is tainting and muddying the waters of between what's real and what's fake. I think this possibility is probably quite minimal. I don't know if they'd be that stupid to to doctor an email like that. I mean it's pretty it's easier just to selectively release things. That's how politicians work. They don't often fabricate outright easily disprovable lies. what they tend to do is tell halftruths, right? But the possibility does remain that some of these documents are fake, especially ones that make their way onto social media. So hard to say. I don't know. But I think that if the documents are fake, I really certainly hope they don't. I hope the Democrats, if they're trying to get to the truth, even if they're trying to get to the truth for the wrong reasons. If they're trying to do that, fine. Fair enough. Whatever. That's their role in life, I guess. But I hope they haven't doctorred anything because here's what's going to happen. Out of the million pages of documents that have been released, if there is a single sentence that has been fabricated in any of this Epstein stuff, I will tell you exactly what's going to happen. Trump and the White House are going to come out and say, "Look, see, it's all fake." Right? It's going to give Trump cart blanch to basically say this whole Epste thing is a hoax. And we know that it's not a hoax. I don't care how much he keeps saying it. It's not a hoax. This is a very real thing. This is a thing that happened. There is so much overwhelming evidence on this case that it's not a hoax. There are elements of it that are not true, I'm sure, right? And we don't have the whole picture, which is probably the most dangerous outcome anyway, not having the full story of this. And we may never get the full story. I don't think we're ever going to get the full story. But if there is even a single paragraph or a single sentence that has been forged or selectively cropped or something like that, Trump is going to have an easy get out of jail free card and that the whole process is now tainted. So, so even though they're doing this for the wrong reasons, I certainly hope for their sake that they haven't forged anything because personally, I want the truth. I want the full truth no matter who's implicated, no matter how bad this this looks and no matter how many heroes come out of this uh not really smelling like a rose. So, I want the truth. And if they forged anything, that's going to make this hard to get. So, all of that being said, why does this matter? Right? This Epstein thing, I know all of you are probably just absolutely tired with it. The reason that that I wanted to think about this is because this is a very high level issue, right? No one really knows what what would happen if the true Epstein client list were to be released, right? We've got to be real about this. We don't really know. It's sort of like using nuclear weapons for the first time in warfare. We don't really know what what was going to happen when we did that, right? In Japan. So, same thing with this. This is a information nuke, right? A truth nuke, right? We don't really know what's going to happen and we got to be prepared here. And this matters for international relations and generally the state of Western civilization. I know it's not really been in the American news because who cares, right? But Prince Andrew or the formerly Prince Andrew has been stripped of all his royal titles. He's now just some guy. He's now no longer a member of the royal ruling class in the United Kingdom. So, he's just a private citizen now. He has no longer any kind of royal protections. Do you think maybe there was a link there? Do you think maybe that something's coming down the pipeline that people are trying to prepare for? perhaps the revelation of some blackmail documents, right? I don't know. Speculation abounds, right? It's all speculation, but it certainly does seem to have quite a bit of an impact on things. It has been very, very obvious for a long time, and I'm choosing my words extremely carefully here. It has been very, very clear for a very long time that the Jeffrey Epstein network was definitely a human trafficking network for sure. Uh, but what was it for? It wasn't just for entertainment purposes. This was an intelligence operation. It is extremely likely based off of the information that we have that Jeffrey Epstein ran a network to entra politicians, powerful people, big political donors even into doing things on his island that he would record on videotape to blackmail them with later. And furthermore, the part that's probably going to get me in trouble is that it was it's very likely that Epste was working for a nation state level thing, probably MSAD. I know that it's quite kind of a dangerous time in YouTube land to be talking about this sort of thing because well, YouTube's on another purge uh once more, but we've also got to tell the truth here. And in terms of what I care about, right, which is national security and kind of the fate of Western civilization, I don't really know how to reconcile what we do when we find out that this was probably an intelligence operation to enable Jeffrey Epstein to run a network which would videotape politicians doing very, very bad things so that MSAD had leverage on them. And that might explain the way the world is today. That's why I'm concerned about this because it certainly seems like there's a thumb on the scale of international relations. It certainly seems like we have a certain the United States lately, maybe for a longer time than we realize, but maybe there has been a lot of uh international decisions made, a lot of bombs dropped, a lot of carriers moved around because some politicians are on videotape doing things they shouldn't be doing. If we had said that out in the open three or four years ago, we would have been cancelled by our own people, right? our own side, our own friends would have denounced us for saying, "How dare you? How dare you say that?" Well, now it's an American discourse because it's just become so hard to ignore. So maybe it's safe to say it. I don't know. But I've I mean like good grief, how much more evidence do you need? Like it it seems pretty clear as to what was going on here. But despite that, a lot of people just haven't been aware. They don't know what's going on. They're going to be very confused. And I say all of that in the context of realizing that a lot of the normies, you know, people who are just, you know, not terminally online like a lot of us these days, a lot of them are going to be very very confused. A lot of the American populace, a lot of the the people, especially in the the conservative realm are they're not going to understand why you are able to not have to look anything up, but suddenly you know who's involved, right? they're going to be very confused as to why we're able to predict certain world events and why we're able to predict the way things are going to go. You know, policy decisions on the federal government, right? I can look at any number of policy decisions made by the US government this week and say that's never going to happen or that's that's probably going to be a lie. And the reason that this is such an important consideration these days is because there's still a lot of forbidden knowledge in the court of social and public opinion and in society today. There are still a lot of things that you're not allowed unless you want to be dragged through the ringer. You're not allowed to let people know that you know, right? There's still a lot of that going on. So whether we want to acknowledge it or not, it happens, right? You still have to, you know, keep your mouth shut at work a lot of times when you're, you know, co-workers are saying this that or the other. We have to not make that reply in the family group chat sort of thing. A lot of people are in that, a lot of people are in that boat. And because of that, things are going to be a little bit hard to do moving forward, right? Because truth is the end goal. At least it is for me. I want to get to the truth, right? No matter how inconvenient it is. The issue is that a lot of people are not ready for the truth. They don't want to hear it because they have a specific worldview that they want to keep keep living under. The issue where I feel compelled to wade into these sorts of things is when it comes to risk, right? I want to prevent people from having harm come to them, right? That's what I personally want to do. That's why I do all of this, right? I want to help people make their own risk assessment decisions and I want to keep civilization rolling. That's really what I want to do. The issue is is is that if you're rejecting the truth, then you're rejecting data that's going to help you make a risk assessment. If the Jeffrey Epstein network means that the president of the United States was blackmailed by a foreign nation state to make certain policy decisions, or else they're going to release emails or pictures or videos of him doing things he shouldn't be doing. If that is true, let's just say that it is true for a moment, doesn't that mean you're going to have to be making some risk assessment decisions on what to do at a certain point in time, right? Whether it's true or not, hey, that's up for you guys to decide. I'm not going to tell you what to believe. But if these things are true, we have to make some pretty serious decisions here, right? Everything from voting to your choice of career to where you want to position yourself so that you're going to have maximum mobility and and flexibility in a few years time. All of these things matter, right? That's why everybody's so focused on the Middle East because a lot of this is centered there. A lot of this conflict is centered there in one way or another on one side or another. A lot of this conflict goes back there, right? And I guess wrapping all of this up with one final thought is that making decisions with incomplete information is going to be a very very valuable skill over the next few years. It is already quite valuable, but we're having to make decisions based off of incomplete information quite a lot. Like for me personally, this is just my personal opinion, right? I have seen enough of this Epstein stuff to know that I can make certain decisions based off of that. I have seen enough to make me understand that, you know, we're we're definitely not voting our way out of this. That's a catchphrase these days, but it's definitely true. Now, what's the alternative? There's an implication behind that, of course, but I don't think it's the implication everyone thinks. I think that in the long run, when it comes to living daily life, it just means that you're not going to find a solution in the current electoral system. It's going to have to be probably more cultural than anything else. But anyway, I digress. The point is making decisions based off of incomplete information is helpful. It really is. And personally, I've seen enough I've seen enough of this Epstein stuff to make a decision. I think that a lot of politicians in the United States to include Trump to some degree or even to a lot of degree. I don't know. I think a lot of them are being blackmailed. And I think a lot of foreign policy decisions are being made based on that blackmail. And even farther than that, I think a lot of speech crime crackdown, right? The fact that we even have speech crimes in America comes from this blackmail. I think the erosion of our first amendment and our the erosion of our second amendment comes from the realization that the decisions of what goes on in America are not exactly being made in Washington DC. A lot of them are being made in New York or elsewhere. And considering the state of things, that's something to be aware of. So, I'm okay with making decisions on off of incomplete information. Will we ever know what happened with Jeffrey Epstein's network? Will we ever know which politicians he blackmailed? I very highly doubt it. I very highly doubt we're ever going to get to the truth. But we have enough information to make decisions in my opinion. At the end of the day, it's all a farce, right? I think I just wasted a lot of your time today. I think I wasted a lot of time because we all come back to this same thing. No matter what happens in Washington, it is up for you to decide what to do with your life. I lived through all this crazy crackdowns and everything from the left and from the right over the past few years. But at no point at no point did Joe Biden kick in my door and prevent me from doing push-ups that day. At no point was I prevented from eating healthy. Right? At no point was I prevented from reading books. Granted, some of these books are kind of hard to find these days, but you know what? You can still find what you need to read. At no point was I prevented from praying in my own head, right? We can still have a lot of freedom to do the things that we need to do. We can still have a lot of maneuverability and we can still improve ourselves. And let's get out of that slump. Let's start improving ourselves. Let's do more of that. We can definitely do all of that. No matter what scandals come out and no matter how much disturbing content comes out regarding these emails, we can still improve ourselves and prepare for having a little bit more maneuverability when the time comes. So hopefully we can put this Epstein stuff to bed for a little bit. I don't think so. It's never going to go away. I don't want it to go away. I want it to kind of constantly be a reminder of what the uni party really means. When we say uni party, what does that really mean? Well, I think Epstein probably tells us. So, I think this whole Epstein thing helps us figure out what that word uni party really means. But anyway, for now, I think that's probably a good way to roll things up for today. You guys have heard me talk quite enough this week already, so let's go ahead and roll things up with the intercepted ghost net reports. And this week, it has been a massacre with regards to radio signals. I don't know about anybody else, but uh the solar weather this week has not been super great for me, but I still did get uh some messages. I don't know if some of the some of these messages might have been from last week. I can't remember honestly, but some people were able to get out and uh send some messages on HF radio. That's one of those things for those of you who aren't super huge radio nerds. Space weather is just weird, man. It is weird. It's not something that you can categorize. Now, sometimes you can say with solar weather at least, sometimes you can say, "All right, uh the bands are going to be closed, meaning that the solar weather is going to be rather poor. or the geomagnetic interference all the way up there in the ionosphere. All that stuff where radio signals fling about, right? The sun is going to spit out some energy that's going to make that go all wonky for a little bit and it means you're not going to be able to send radio messages very far. Sometimes that happens, but sometimes the sun is weird. Sometimes the Earth does some weird stuff way up there in the atmosphere. And sometimes it means you may have mixed results. You may be like me and be able to transmit exactly 4 and 1/2 ft or it means that you might be able to talk to somebody on the other side of the planet because the atmosphere is doing some weird stuff. It's hard to predict. There are ways to get a little bit more accurate with it, but generally speaking for the non-radio people, whenever this solar weather stuff flares up, it doesn't automatically mean no radios, right? It doesn't automatically mean that. It just means get prepared for the weird. And that's been the case this week. Throughout the week, I've gotten SNR requests or like check-ins, you know, check-in messages, people testing their uh their radius from a long way off and then like 15 minutes later, nothing, right? Like I can't can't hear anybody's. But it just proves that even during the weirdest of weather times, we can still get some messages across, right? So So I'm glad that some of us were at least able to get some messages out this week. So that's all I have for today. Here are the sources as usual. Dig into them if you dare. And of course, again, an easier clickable