Is This the End of the Democrats and Republicans? About Time!

Hello everybody and welcome to Geopolitical Trends, where truth matters.

Excited to be with you as always.

Today I decided to do something different.

Usually I address, uh, foreign policy matters, geopolitical issues, and so forth, but today, especially for my American viewers, have you ever wondered why nothing ever changes in Washington, no matter who you vote for?

It is because the two-party system isn't broken. It's working exactly how its corporate donors paid for it to work. That's the harsh reality. Both sides want you to fight in a culture war so you don't notice that they are pocketing millions of dollars from the exact same corporate monopolies. So how is this— this political elite tends to end up rig the rules to keep themselves rich and, uh, preventing a third party from even existing. And that's exactly what I wanted to address in this live stream.

I was debating last night whether to do it or not. As I said, usually I don't address much of the issues like this, but Given that the, uh, uh, the Fourth of July is upon us tomorrow, as a matter of fact, the independence of the US, and I figured, you know what, I am gonna have to shed some lights on some issues that needs to be addressed as to the dark side of the founding fathers here for this country and how the system is set up. It's nothing new, it has been in the works for a long time, and of course this was transpired by an article that Tucker Carlson yesterday, uh, stated about, uh, leaving the Republican Party and calling for a third party to be established. I wish most Americans will wake up, but again, it's their decision, uh, after all.

So here is what I'm gonna do in this. I'm gonna be providing you some historical snapshots. Most of this is gonna be, uh, from a historical perspective.

I'll provide my own insight as to where I see things go in and conclude with some clips like I always do for you.

So, so the first thing we're gonna need to think about when you— when this issue comes up is you think about what George Washington has explicitly warned, that political parties will become tool for corrupt and principled men to steal power from the people. That is exactly what he warned about back then, because we are living it right here. Ask any American who understands the realities, how it is.

He or she will tell you the truth.

So today, that nightmare is our reality. A two-party monopoly has hijacked now this democracy that we say we live in. A democracy, you know, I have my doubts because when you start to be censored, when you start to be limited into what you can say, that democracy is being shaken— there is question mark on it— then you trade in your welfare for billionaire campaign contributions and endless foreign wars.

Which, by the way, I will address for you a segment of this live stream about the foreign wars and how many we've been involved since the foundation of the United States.

But the chains are finally starting to crack. There is now some, some, uh, movement, some thinking of sort, nationally speaking. And this is where Tucker Carlson came in, because that's exactly what he's doing first, distancing himself from the Republican Party. And he was a, a staunch Republican supporter, so, and calling for a third party Without— and by the way, even Carlson had to be careful about how he worded it. And you know how he worded it? Is, I am calling— and I'm paraphrasing here— I am calling for a third party without competing with Trump. Well, that's to me, uh, uh, uh, Mr. Carlson, you, you can't be wishy-washy. It's this or that. There is no other way. If there is a third party, it's because you want to compete by removing a corrupted the president. Simple as that. But to sort of just word it that way to soften the blow, that's kind of, uh, hits your credibility per se. So if you stand for third party, then the aim of the third party is to get rid of the president or any other corrupted officials in the system. So, and but nonetheless, you give Tucker Carlson a credit This is why Tucker Carlson now is officially launching a new third party after completely breaking ties with Donald Trump and the Republican Party for that matter. So, so the split, uh, which, which is about time for it to happen because of where the country is going, where the country has been going. It's nothing new here, but we need to understand That's why all of a sudden this is happening. Well, this is happening because for at least for Tucker Carlson, the primary driver for the fracture of his alignment with the Republican Party has to do with Donald Trump's decision.

And it wasn't his decision, by the way, he was forced into it to launch the military strikes against Iran, which now is escalating into God only knows where it's going to be end up.

And this is where Mr., Mr. Carlson sort of freely opposed the conflict. So, and even he went as far as labeling the establishment's foreign policy choices as treasonous and immoral. So I have a clip that I'm going to be playing for you in a second here. So, and this is where you think about, literally, and this is not just Carlson's views, but also you see where foreign policy of America is. I've always argued, as one who was inside, I've always argued that for the last 4 decades there is no— there was, there is, and there will never be any foreign policy for America. Because for the last 4 decades we've been just reacting to events as they happen. We never had a strategy that deals with really how you think about the future of the global relations and so forth, and you prioritize or you strategize a foreign policy strategy that deal with those kind of eventuality. And this is where that criticism comes in, and rightly so, from Tucker Carlson and from others, is that both the Democrats and the Republicans operate in a lockstep solidarity regarding foreign wars. Don't even think that Democrats are saints or No, like I always say, two faces of the same coin. And again, I am not, you know, I'm— I kind of— I don't believe in any party. Yeah, because I know how corrupted the system is. And I always give the analogy when I use— when I used to teach this course, I used to teach this course at the university called the, uh, the American government structure, how the US government is structured.. And of course, when you teach a course like this, you're gonna have to go back into the history of the establishment of the United States to create chronological events that pave the way for where we are today. Without that, you're gonna leave your students confused. So I always have to do this one. So I'm a little— I'm very familiar with this kind of, uh, uh, uh, topics and issues that it deserves the right to be addressed. Openly for the American people to understand. I've always argued that both the Republicans and the Democrats, two faces of the same coin. And I always give— I used to give the same analogy to my students. Since we are in America, we play football a lot, not soccer, football. I always give that analogy because it makes more sense. And I always tell them, think of the both parties, okay, Republicans and Democrats Each one on each camp with its quarterback. You got a quarterback from the Democrats, you got a quarterback from the Republicans, and each one of them throw the balls to the other every 4 or 8 years. That's the simplest analogy. You either throw the ball every 4 years, that's where you're gonna see the Republicans replaced by Democrats, and then next 4 years, uh, Democrats replaced by Republicans, or you're gonna see the Republicans stay in power for 8 years, then turn it over to the Democrats. And, and, and that's the analogy that I got. And this is exactly where you realize that behind closed doors, both parties, the Democrats and Republicans, are working together. All you see on the floor of Congress is nothing but a show. That's all it is. And you wish Americans will wake up from their slump. From their ignorance because we are poor readers of history. Majority do not read about how the Founding Fathers themselves have established this system, the dark side of it, which what I intend to address in this one here. And again, this is not about being critical of— this is about stating the truth so Americans can at least, whoever watching this video, can have a basic understanding of where things are. And that is exactly where I see at least Tucker is taking a stand. Same with the, the former representative Marjorie Taylor Greene. She used to be an avid supporter of Trump, but at least now she's taking a stand. She's against Trump, against Trump policies. You know, there are some voices out there. So, and that is why even Trump himself has fired back at Tucker Carlson. Yeah, because that's the nature of Trump. Yeah, you know, it's a corrupted soul, is inherently a liar. You know, you can't trust somebody like that. So, and that is why, uh, sort of, uh, when, when, uh, Donald Trump said, well, this is signaling a permanent break in our alliance Like, who gives a damn about that? So, and that is why Tucker Carlson had to make it clear on the record that he had not spoken to Trump since the war began and criticized Donald Trump as not a man in charge of his own life, in quote. That's very powerful. That's stronger.

So that's very strong, brother.

So Now this leads us to the next key question, and the key question is the establishment of a third party. So, and that's exactly what— and I'm not going to go through, I'm going to go through the idea of what Tucker Carlson said, because since, uh, when I read the article, I found it very convenient and important for me to address this. So, and this is why for Tucker, the idea of a third party will have to be framed as an American focus. You can understand why, because he is entering into all this as an anti-war isolationism, okay? But at the same time, because we're seeing the amount of money that we are giving, for example, the corrupted Ukraine— why am I sending my tax dollars and I have to pay taxes here? You know, why are retirees in America still paying taxes? Which to me, it's, it's defies the logic. He's a retiree, somebody who paid into the system for the last 30, 40 years. They shouldn't be paying taxes after they retire. And yet the US government still making those people paying taxes. And you will wish only if this money is spent right here in America on infrastructure, on education, on health, on what other topic, what, and other issues as well. Instead, it's being sent to corrupted leaders around the world. Some others, it's among the politicians. You look at these members of Congress, the honor Congress, as, as a member, in about 4 or 5 years, they have over $150 million in their, in their bank account. How they acquire that kind of money The salary of a member of Congress doesn't exceed $150,000, to my knowledge. How come in a period of 5, 6 years you're gonna accumulate over $150 million? You have a guy from, uh, uh, uh, uh, an Indian descent, uh, members of Congress— Kavanaugh, I believe, or Kavanaugh or something like that, I don't remember his name— found out his account is about $260 million. And yet he's lobbying on behalf of India, not even on behalf of America. And this is again where you see that the, the middle class here in America is the one that is targeted. Because remember, as I used to tell my students, and of course they look at me in a shock, it can be, Dr. O. And I say, but you don't understand is that who's sustaining the economy of America is the middle class through taxes. The millionaires, billionaires don't have to pay anything. The poor, which I sympathize with, they don't have any. Where they gonna— what they gonna be paying from? What's left is the massive, uh, middle class, and the middle class that is taxed heavily. So if the corrupted government, our government, think about improving the living conditions of an average American, The first order of business is to take a look at this tax structure, which needs a top-to-bottom review because it is corrupted. So, and that is the reason why Tucker Carlson now is pushing for the establishment of a third party. Of course, no candidate has been named to this because Tucker himself stated that explicitly He does not want to run for office or to be a candidate himself. So instead, what he is aiming at, and with this article, was he— what, what it's— what he is aiming at is to establish, establish a party mechanics, or mechanics rather, an infrastructure to help reach that objective. And what is that objective? Is America's focus. Because that will— if that happens, you're gonna see sort of, we're gonna retract from engaging in foreign wars. You're gonna see returning back from fighting on behalf of other countries. And now he does have supporters, and one of the first supporters for this is this former members of Congress, Marjorie Taylor Greene. She's supporting Tucker in this endeavor. I hope it succeeded. I usually— I don't vote, and I, I say it on a record, and I'm not shy away from saying this, even though back when I used to teach, I, you know, I started to understand, to explain to my students that voting is important. But that was back then. Things have changed. So if you ask me, for the last two cycles and anything in the future, given the system stay as is, I am not— I don't vote.

I don't vote.

In clear conscience, I can vote. I don't care. And I'm going to share one personal story with you. Usually I don't talk about this kind of stuff. I was approached to run for Congress, and I was told, you don't worry about the funding for it, we take care of everything. Which means what? You all know what it means. My answer was I am not for sale, and you must have been smoking weeds this morning for you to tell me that.

Jokingly, of course, because those were friends of mine.

And that is my point into this. That's why I wanted to address this and sort of expose the truth that most Americans need to understand. So I'm gonna play a clip for you here in a second.

Let me upload it here and you can take a look uh, yourself, or take a listen rather.

Okay, let me play it. And, uh, sorry, and it wasn't here in the US, it was published in Al Jazeera, believe it or not.

So take a listen, please.

Support the Republican Party?

There's no chance I would— I, I would not support the Republican Party. There's no chance I would support the Republican Party. Not going to support the Democratic Party. I'm I don't know what I'm gonna do, but at this point, you know, how could you support— how could I or any American voter support a political party that's not loyal to the United States, that puts the interests of a foreign country above those of its own citizens? Like, that's, that's, you know, it's not possible to vote for people like that, and I'm not going to. And I think I voted Republican my entire life. I worked at Fox News, CNN, MSNBC. I, I've been a consistent defender for 35 years of the Republican Party. I mean, very consistent defender. But there's no defending this because it's immoral and it's exactly the opposite of what a political party in a democracy is charged with doing, which is representing its own voters, its own citizens, its own nation. And they're not doing that. So no, I'm out. And if I'm out, then I think a lot of other people are out.

And he's right, he is right. And that leads me to that next question. Has time come for— in America, from— uh, has time— is— I'm like, because I get round up on this because it upsets me about the massive amount of corruption that exists. And I kind of see the average citizen when I go for a walk, for example, and I see homeless people under the bridge or, or what have you. Sometimes I One time I went even and talked to the guy. He thought that I needed help with something. I said, no, thank you very much. I'm just passing through, but I want just to ask, do you need any help? And he was like shocked that someone stopped and asked. And I'm not saying this to show off here. I care less for those. No, it was just, I said to myself, I wonder how this guy's life used to be. And it turned out to be where it is today, that he is living under a bridge, and let alone in the richest country on Earth, as we claim. And that's why I'm thinking time has come in America, uh, for Americans now to take stand and break the chains of this dominance by these two political party systems. And with it, we'll ask, will a third party succeed? It's not an easy one. Yeah, historical data shows that a third party faces massive systemic obstacles in America. Why? Because both the Democrats and the Republicans put those obstacles in place. That is why they want to make, making our right success of a third party unlikely. Yes, the third party can disrupt elections, but that's not what the purpose of it, because the American political system is structural, structurally built to maintain the two-party system monopoly, tyranny, whatever term you want to use. First of all, because we have the winner takes it all. That's how we have our system. You get across 50, 50%, that's it, you win the elections. Most US elections are plurality, what we call plurality voting, which means the candidate with the most votes wins the seat.

That's how.

And this is where this one encourages the corruption, encourages the strategic voting, encourages the corporation's money. Encourages the foreign interference as far as funding. And that leave the voters who do not have enough money to compete with that, who do not have enough voice, it left them holding the end of the stick. And that's not right. That is not right for our system. If we are to see the, the members of, of Congress or the government representative of the citizens, they're not. They are representative of their own interest and to those who have financed them. That is the issue we have. Then we have the second one is the Electoral College, which is a nightmare. I'm not going to get into the nitty-gritty of it because it's— I need about 2 hours just to break that down. But the basics of it: to win the presidency, a candidate must win the entire states, not just popular vote. A third party can get millions of votes nationwide, but receives zero electoral votes if they do not come in first place in a specific state. And that tells you right there, for my American viewers, to break it down in a simple language, where is what it says in the Constitution? One man, one vote. One man at the time, because women weren't allowed to vote at that time. But what I mean by that, one man, one woman one vote, which means you count the votes not through the Electoral College. And some have argued, as I used to explain to my students, what he said, what this state with the minority, this state with— no, no, no, no, no, no. You put it out for everyone to vote and you count the vote. Majority wins. That's almost like what I do here with you guys when I ask you a question about which topic you would like me to cover or address, and you guys vote on it, and I'll go by the majority. I'm not gonna favor this group because this group wanted this. No, that's how it works. The Electoral College, in my opinion, is a fraud. Get rid of it. But they won't because the two political party systems controlling the political process. You have to review the entire system. That's why I always say Corruption is not about taking money, bribes, whatever. Corruption of the system in itself is set up that way. Then you have another issue we have in America here, which is going to be a major one for the third party. It's what we called the ballot access laws. What do we mean by this? Major parties, the two Republicans and Democrats, automatically gets on the ballot. This is again where that discrepancy is. And when they get on a party, uh, when they get on the list, that's it. But a third party must spend millions and millions of dollars and collect hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of signatures just to be listed as an option. Once again, it shows you the, the, the corruption in the system that is built in to prevent any. And that is why when you start to think about our system, how it is— but that doesn't mean the third party cannot succeed. It can, but it's not going to be effective till American people demands it. What most American people do not understand is they don't— they don't understand the power they possess.

Constitutionally.

The power rests with the American people, not with the government. Not because the government is going to intimidate someone, which what we are witnessing these days, or for this past few years, coming from both political parties, by the way. And that's why I'm saying, you take for example a retiree, and I keep going back to that, not because I'm a, I'm I'm at the age of retirement. This might shock you and surprise you, but that's not about that. I'm seeing outside, a retiree shouldn't be paying taxes. The government shouldn't get involved into the discipline of kids at home. The government got involved with me inside how I teach my students, and I said, I'm done with it. When the university told me, well, Dr. O, you can't just stand there and read these slides to them. And I said, what are you talking about? How can you create leaders if you don't challenge them intellectually? How can I assure that they understand what I'm talking about if I don't challenge them intellectually? And if I am just to stand there and read, they can just go and read themselves. They don't need me for that. Well, it just went— and I said, you know, listen, That is not why I decided to teach, and I'm resigning. Simple as that. Won't waste time and energy. And that's exactly where the problem that is going on in the American system. If the truth matters to you, hit like, subscribe, and tap that bell.

No spin, no agenda, just the stories they don't want you to know. Don't watch from the sideline.

Be part of the movement.

Your support keeps the truth alive.

Thank you. Now, the next question we ask is, was the American system set up this way, two-party dominance, by the Founding Fathers? Of course, some, uh, some, uh, uh, articles will tell you, oh no, no, no, no, no, no, no, the Founding Fathers didn't design, uh, to do that. Well, I used to teach the course and I had to dig into the history and find out that it was indeed set up by the Founding Fathers.

Why?

Because the Founding Fathers were among three type of categories, uh, within society which exist today. They were landowners, they were bankers, and they were financiers. What do we have today? We have Wall Street, We have corporations and we have like the people that gets involved into, uh, the corporation, international corporations and so forth. So it's no different, it's just a different time and setting. So back then, the Founding Fathers will have to pick a candidate that's going to advocate for their interest. It's no different than what we have today. So the Founding Fathers did play a role into this, and I'll challenge whomever As a matter of fact, I'm going to play a clip for you from a historian at Harvard University who disclosed this exact information. And again, this is not about criticism, is about uncovering the truth. Most Americans do not know because the government sells the idea of, oh, the Founding Fathers were the same. No, they were not. They were not. Whoever was elected had to be approved by the Senate back then. They had to go through behind closed doors as to pick up whoever's gonna defend our own interests. So, and that is because to them back then, you know what they said? They said that, well, let's think of it this way: if we allow political parties, they're gonna become very like a dangerous disease. Because when you have multiple parties, what do you have? You have choice. But when you have only two, what do you have? You don't have a choice. Either this or that. But if— what if you don't like both? What if you don't want both? The system does not give you another alternative. And that's exactly what the Founding Fathers did back then at the beginning. It was no mention in the Constitution, by the way. The US Constitution completely ignores the political parties. Do you think that was just, uh, an oversight on their part, or was it by design? Because there are no mention of that. There are no rules, no structure, no definition for them anywhere in the text of the Constitution. And that, in my opinion— and I am not a constitutional scholar, but I can understand where the manipulation could exist, even from the Founding Fathers. And if, if there is anything you have doubts, especially for my American viewers, go back to Washington's Farewell Warning back in 1796. And that was exactly when George Washington used his final address to explicitly warn Americans against parties— that's what he was doing— argued that it will lead to frightful despotism and spirit of revenge. No, no, no, no, no, no, no, hold on a second, man! What about the American people's choice? What about giving them the freedom to decide? You give them the options. You don't limit them to only Republicans and Democrats. And that was the debate during Federalist Papers, and I read some of them, especially Federalist Number 10, if you get a chance to read it, by James Madison. So, and that's exactly, uh, the argument, at least from his perspective back then, that the government will be large and diverse and it would naturally prevent any single faction from gaining total control. But what do we have today? We have the same thing. You have the Democrats and the Republicans controlling the, the political process. Simple as that. Let me play the clip for you, then we'll move on. Take a listen, please.

We as a country are losing— I think we as a country are losing a real sense of understanding about our nation's past. The Declaration, which is full of these beautiful, beautifully rendered you know, sentences and paragraphs about Enlightenment ideals, does also have this darker history to it.

Why is it important for the darker part of the Declaration of Independence—

why is it important that Americans know about it?

Well, if we don't understand the full context in which our nation was founded, we won't understand the full context in which our nation now finds itself.

It's spot on. There's the dark side that a lot of people do not know. Why? Because history tends to be manipulated. I mean, let me ask you just simple question: who won World War II? You know, can you type in, in a chat box who won World War II? Just simple question, historical fact. Let me see in the chat box if, if you happen to know. Oh, Kevin, you got it, you got it. It was Russia, it wasn't the United States, it wasn't the United States. And that's exactly where the problem is. When I told this to my students, they were like looking at me like I'm, I'm, I'm from another planet.

They couldn't believe it.

And I said, let me explain it to you. And I briefed them on this, explained everything, and it started to make sense to them. I was once in Poland and I went to a cemetery in Miechów, small town on the outskirts of Kraków, and I went to the cemetery and I saw with my own eyes— I have it on a record— a large portion of the cemetery with the graves, and I didn't see the names. And I asked. All I saw was the Russian flag, uh, sort of the, the, the, yeah, the Russian flag on the stone. And I said, why there are no names here? He said, because all of those, all of those were Russians who fought the Nazis in Poland to free Poland from the Nazis. It was the Russians first, then the Americans got involved after that. If the Russians, the Soviet Union didn't get in first, the US would have not gone. And after the war, We went ahead and switched the history. That's, that's again, so to go back to our conversation here, why the system created two parties anyway. So because the Founding Fathers hated political parties, yeah, and that is why they went ahead and created a system where you can vote, for example, but mathematically forces two-party system to happen. Yeah, and this concept is known in political science as Duverger's Law. To those who are familiar with political science, if you read about Duverger's Law— Duverger was a political scientist from France, by the way— uh, Duverger's Law is a principle in political science stating that a single-member district voting systems with plurality, with meaning winner takes all, elections naturally tend to produce a two-party system. And that's why we're still till today using the Duverger's Law, which is coined by the French political scientist Maurice Duverger. So, and that is where you see why we have the only two-party systems controlling the political process in America. And yet most Americans are clueless are clueless as to why that is. These two political parties, since the beginning of time— of course, the, the, the establishment of the United States, but I'm talking about since the last 100 years or so— been controlled openly by these two political parties. So that's why you still see in the Electoral College, that's why you don't see something here which they have in Europe It's called the referendum. Ask any Americans and tell them, did we ever had a referendum here in this country? And you know what a referendum is? That's when you give a choice to the people to decide on an issue. Doesn't matter what it is. Have we ever been given an opportunity to voice our opinion on an issue? None. None. That shows you right there, because if you ever give a chance to ask the American people, Would you want another party in political system? The answer is going to be yes. The political establishment doesn't want it. This is the same thing that happened about 38 years ago when the Pentagon conducted a study that was a study by design. And where the study was intended, uh, for— it was intended for the southwestern part of the United States that include part of California, Arizona, Nevada, and the western part of New Mexico. And the question that was asked— if, and, and nobody knew at that time, he got declassified later on, nobody knew— the question was, would you take independence from the rest of the United States if you are given an opportunity? And guess what was the answer? It was yes. Which means what? Which means that if, for me living in Texas, want to go to, let's say, Nevada or New Mexico, I have to use my passport to get in there. So what the Pentagon did, put a lid on that research, and it raised a red flag inside the Pentagon. It never talked— it was classified back then, it got declassified later on. I'm gonna dig into the— if I can find the links for it, but I was aware of this case from way back. Just to give you an idea, that's why most Americans will never be given an opportunity for referendum to, to vote on an issue, on a topic Were we given a choice whether we want to go to a war with Iran or not? No, no, we were not. Were we given a choice about we wanted to invade Iraq?

We were not.

Going to Afghanistan? We were not. And all that is by design. And that is exactly why I really wanted to do this. Usually I don't talk about those topics, but I, I— it's, it's important. It's important. So, and here is what happened with the math of survival from the Founding Fathers. You know what it was? When they did the setup of the electoral rules, the founders established a single-member district plurality system, which means what? It means only one person can win a political seat, and if they win it simply by getting the most votes, and that math survive. That's why we call the math of survival, because why? In the setup that the Founding Fathers did, if a group splits into smaller parties, they lose every election to a larger unified group. To survive and actually win power, politicians quickly realized they must merge into two massive opposing coalition— opposing coalition on the surface, but behind closed doors they cooperate. And that is why they will not let the third party— because if you ask every American He will tell you it's about damn time to vote for a third party. We're done with both Republicans and Democrats. And look at Trump himself. You know, Trump used to be a Democrat. He just flipped in no time. But that's Trump. Are you gonna really take Trump?

I mean, that's— poor soul.

I just wonder how his final day is going to be. But anyway, so, and that is exactly where you seeing Uh, uh, uh, and again, I'm not gonna get into the— when I used to teach the course, it was important to detail this because when the Federalists, uh, was led by Alexander Hamilton at the time, favored a strong central government by, uh, uh, and the banking system. Strong government and the banking system. Washington and Wall Street. Corporations and Congress, AIPAC and the Senate. Think about it, think about it. On the other hand, you have the Democratic Republicans, which was led at that time by none other than Thomas Jefferson, favoring states' rights and agricultural workers. This is why you have the lobbyist for meat, lobbyist for sugar, lobbyist for Uh, uh, uh, soft drinks, lobbyists for everything. Think about Coca-Cola, for example, while I'm thinking about it, which by the way, it's declassified, I can talk about it. Back in the '60s, a research was conducted at Harvard about the link between Coca-Cola and type 2 diabetes, and they found the link. What did the sugar industry did, or the soft drink, uh, uh, uh, industries did? They rushed to the scientist Bribe them with $60,000 back then. Can you imagine what would be the worth of that money back in the '60s today? And they reversed the report. That's why a lot of people have no idea when they drink that soft drink, they have no idea what they put in their bodies. And this is why I read, uh, I read an article about Norway.

The soccer team brought their own food from Norway here because they don't trust American food.

So And this is once again, I'm finding myself asking the, the most legitimate and logical question: is it time for Americans to stand up and break this monopoly for the sake and the welfare of our people? I'm not asking, I'm not asking anything that is impossible. All I'm asking is a question that deserves answers. Because many, many Americans are fed up with the system the way it is, because it's geared towards favoring a few at the expense of many. Yeah, two-party systems create gridlocks, ignore the needs of the everyday citizens. Those who lives in a fantasy land, in those elites, in— or Donald Trump himself. Donald Trump doesn't go and fill up his his gas tank for the car. He doesn't go to grocery store. He doesn't take the trash out. He doesn't clean the toilet. How do you expect him to understand the hardships of an average American citizen? And yet we sign and send our tax dollars to corrupted governments.

Why?

Why?

And this is again where you have to understand because there are ways the Americans need— if citizens, American one that is, want to dismantle these two-party holds, political— most of the political scientists point to several reform movements that will gain movement and traction across the country. You start by having ranked choice voting. Voters rank candidates in order of preference instead of picking just one. Because most of those run for office, they have back— financial backing by, uh, companies, by AIPAC, by what have you. If none of them gets majority, the bottom candidate is eliminated. Think of it that way. And their voters goes to the— and their vote rather goes to the voters second choice. This eliminates what we call the spoiler effect. And I'm not gonna get into the structure of the, the voting and all that stuff. All I want to tell you is there are ways of doing this. This is why you're seeing grassroots, and, and, and you admire Tucker Carlson for taking a stand. You know, the guy's been a staunch Republican when he used to work at Fox, and then I disagree with some of his approach. For example, regarding China. You know, I'll be happy to debate, uh, Mr. Carlson about this particular notion of that Chinese. And wait a minute, man. Wait a minute, man. You can't— you, you know, you're gonna have to be realistic in your assessments regarding— but nonetheless, you give credit where credit is due. He took stand regarding our domestic issues, which we have more concern about. So there are these grassroots organizations Legal advocacy groups now are bypassing Congress. Most Americans have no idea that we have in our Constitution a mechanism by which we can bypass Congress if Congress does not want to get involved in pushing an agenda that belongs to the American people. You get 20% of the states' votes in the Union, and that will bypass the Congress. Because Congress is where the laws are passed, you know, they're gonna have to vote on something. But how do you feel a member of Congress gonna vote against corruption? You know, it ain't gonna happen. You and I know. Let alone— I'm not on— I'm not even gonna talk or say what my favorite punishment for corruption. You all know what it is.

I'm not gonna say it.

YouTube doesn't like that. Do it publicly. That's why I believe for corruption. So, and that's again, uh, there are, there are ways of now they start to see this grassroots. Is this gonna happen next year? I don't think so. It's gonna take time for this to happen. And when you think about why our system is a mess the way it is, the first thing that comes to mind is our Since we are tomorrow going to be celebrating the, the, the Fourth of July, it's a big holiday here, and Independence, of course. But that's not the point. You think about, you think about, for the last 250 years, so far the data shows that nearly 400—

400, I'm like, I can't count on my fingers—

400 military intervention. That's the US wars over 250 years. So the armed conflict and military operations of the US has waged since its founding share a common thread that connects all of them, all these interventions, all this conflict across different historical periods, starting with the efforts of continental expansion and nation-building in the 19th century according to the doctrine foreseeable destiny.

And I'm going to share a link with you.

Ask the Indian natives or Native Indians, you know, what, what, how the government did. Ask about the atrocities the US government committed against the natives. That's why, first of all, that's why I'm saying we, we, we are all came from somewhere, you know. I'm, I, I don't, I don't shy away from that. Uh, this is why I get agitated when I see this massive scams and fraud by Indian nationals, by Somalis, and some others. They're not just the only, but Indians at the top, you know. And I kind of, it broil my blood inside, you know. Shouldn't be here because we all came here to contribute something. But if you think about this doctrine of the 19th century the foreseeable destiny developing into imposing global hegemony, by the way, because it was under the pretext of containing, uh, communism influence during Cold War. But if the Cold War was over and there is no more threat of communism, why are we still expanding into conflict? Because what came after it, right after that, the Global War on Terror, and the more recent one, the conflicts in West Asia and Africa. 400. I'm going to share some pictures with you. This one here is during, uh, uh, President Clinton addresses US, British, and French troops as part of the Operation Joint Sentinel, if I recall.

My memory serves me well, that's what it was.

You got the picture here of the US soldiers prepping to set out patrol from an advanced combat position in northern Syria. What the heck are we doing in Syria? You have this one here, uh, that— those are just an image of troops, highlight to you the idea of how many conflicts we've been getting into. This one here is Banjawa District. This is in Kandahar Province, southern part of Afghanistan, in 2011. That was my last—

by the way, it was the last I think a year before was my last trip.

And this, when you think about the involvements of this military, it gives you an idea of where things are. Because war is structural element in shaping modern American history and foreign policy. We don't have foreign policy because our foreign policy is militarized foreign policy. It is a big difference, big difference. Yeah, that's why we undertook 400 military interventions since 1776, which means since the independence, 400 interventions. And that marks an increase base, sort of a base of the cost, of human cost, the funding, the destructions in other countries. I'll give you a quick estimate. The estimation cost, or the estimated cost, of post-9/11, the War on Terror, was approximately $6.4 trillion. Trillion dollars. So add to it the recent conflict, or conflict after that, the invasion of Iraq, Afghanistan, now the Iran War. And I'm not even talking about the, the loss of, of, of human cost, the death of hundreds of thousands and the displacements of millions.

Once again, I keep that picture, picture here in of these people here in Gaza. Look at that. So some will say, why it's not us?

No, no, no, no, we are playing part of that. Let's just not, let's not, uh, be cherry-picking the info. We are aware of what is going with this. As a matter of fact, some US military personnel have taken part with the IDF. Let's not, let's not sugarcoat this stuff here, because when you look at the pace of US intervention has accelerated significantly after the Cold War in 1990, or the end of the Cold War in 1990, that is. And that makes us just take a step back and pause. Is the system how it's set up is set up against the average American. And if, if power is with the American people, it's— they need to, they need to educate themselves and wake up. They need to stop pretending that everything is okay when it's not. You know, Mike, my word on it, next decade we're gonna see a different face in America.

We're gonna see a different face in America.

Here's my conclusion for you before I'll play some clips for you here. One thing I need you to get, especially for my American viewers— I mean, for you as well if you are another, another country. And by the way, please, please type in where you are watching this video from.

I will greatly appreciate it.

Even for you, yeah, you don't live here in the US, but you have now an understanding of how corrupted our system is and how sort of it was intended to be since the beginning of the United States. So that knowledge will serve you down the road in your dealing with Americans down the road, or what have you.

Another word, it will be of importance to you.

So the one thing I need you to get in this conclusion here is that the two-party monopoly hasn't just divided America. No, no, no, no, no. It has systematically locked out the voices of everyday citizens to protect its own power. That is the fact, that is the truth. And breaking this chain require— the chains, because there's not just one, they going at it from different angles— requires more than just new candidates. No, no, no, no, no, no. It demands a fundamental voting reform driven by the people. A change to the system according to what the people want. And I'm not talking about a handout here. No, I'm talking about a fair system, a fair justice system, a fair healthcare access, fair education access, clean water for the rural areas. That's what I'm talking about. So even The founding fathers, even if they warned us about against the exact system, no, why are they still letting it run our lives? So if the founding fathers saying, oh, if you have these two-party systems, it's bad, they cannot control the government, then why are we letting it run? Why are we letting it running as of today? And we're gonna have midterm, and we're gonna have the upcoming elections, It's gonna be the same, just the cycle goes back with the different players, but the same system is the same, you know. It's nothing is going to change. So, so if you care to share your thoughts in the comment section, I would greatly, greatly appreciate it. All right, let's do some clips here, uh, and I always found this very important again because of the content. That's the reason why I do this for you, because I want you to be This one is about a potentially new candidate from, I think, Michigan, if I'm not mistaken.

But listen what he has to say, and I couldn't agree more with his assertion. Take a listen, please.

Use the word genocide. If you can't identify this— You have used the word genocide. If you can't identify the systematic murder of tens of thousands of kids as a genocide, and then you want to say that you're a fighter for human rights and dignity, That's just hypocrisy. Do we want our tax dollars to be spent backstopping apartheid at minimum, genocide at maximum, wars that we have no business fighting because of the impact of a special interest that has spent $23 million in my race and counting? That special interest being AIPAC. And they're spending their money to try to tell us that the best use of our foreign policy is to backstop a foreign government. I mean, that's a pretty crazy thing. I just want you to step back and think about that for a minute. The biggest spender in a race for Senate in Michigan wants to take your tax dollars and not spend them on your kids or your schools or your infrastructure or your healthcare. It wants to spend them to buy bombs and tanks for foreign governments. That's a pretty crazy thing.

It is spot on. Couldn't agree more.

And with this idea of the, uh, money being spent to block, block candidates who are against supporting foreign governments in favor of supporting American citizens. There is another one here, uh, uh, this guy who is asking, uh, Candace Owen. He's a Jewish guy, but he's a—

he has the right to ask the question. But I'll let you take a listen yourself and decide for yourself. Main reasons why I think America should be spending— there's two main reasons why I think America should be spending money and keep funding—

should or should not—

should should. The first is that Israel is on the forefront of technology, especially with the military, since they are constantly at war. And the way I see it is that if Israel falls, God forbid, then America will be next.

Okay, thank you. Thanks for sharing that. The first thing that I would say to you is, yes, you're right, uh, Israel has a ton of technology. Who paid for it? Yeah, yeah. If I'm under— wondering if like we spent our money here, could we have the the same technology. I'm asking the question, if we stop sending our money overseas to build up other nations, I, I would imagine that we could maybe fund our own technology here. Second thing is, you said that, you know, if Israel wasn't there, America would collapse. Did America not exist before 1948? It's just stunning to me that people think that we're so weak. We had a country before Israel became a state, right? So I think that to me feels very faithless in America.

She's spot on.

I mean, the, the kid there has no idea of the history. Israel only existed in 1948. Uh, it just doesn't make sense for her.

But anyway, I just want you to listen to the content. Next one is from JD Vance, uh, the, the VP.

That's just another whatever you want to call him. So they prepping him for next elections. Mark my word on that. Take a lesson here, please. Just told everybody that what— Vance just told everybody that what Trump is really doing is he's trying to restock, refuel, and then he's going to attack Iran again. I hope the Iranians are paying attention because JD Vance is just revealing the strategy on TV. Comment below and sub— that is—

that's why I'm saying for the Iran part, you know, you can't trust the Americans.

And if they don't make a decision We're gonna be seeing the same, we're gonna, we're gonna be seeing the same tensions again.

The next one is from, uh, Colonel McGregor, a retired McGregor.

Take a listen, please.

What he's doing— President Trump, uh, up, probably lives in a bubble of his own making. I don't see any— President Trump, uh, probably lives in a Well, he may be offering him a bone, but what he's doing is he's embarrassing himself in a very, very dramatic way. What is he telling everyone? Look guys, I have to deliver a victory for Netanyahu, for Israel. Help me, help me deliver a victory for Israel. Why would anyone, anyone in the Middle East, any ruling elite of any kind, want to do a damn thing for Israel. Israel has already said everyone in the region except for them is Amalek. They've declared themselves, you know, superior to everyone. They're waging a war for Jewish supremacy in the Middle East. That's what they're about. We are helping them. You know, they couldn't murder people in Gaza. They can't kill people in South Lebanon without us. We are the enablers of all of that. So the question comes back once again to Donald Trump. Are you president of the United States or what? President Trump, what is in the interest of the American people? Well, if he asks that and answers it honestly, we have an interest in peace. Do we want to be the pariah in the world? Because when you travel around the world these days, whether it's in Europe, uh, or you go to Canada or even down into Latin America or across Asia and Africa, Who is held responsible for what's happened in the Persian Gulf? Iran? No, we are. So if you're the president of the United States, you want to correct that mistake as quickly as possible and end this tragedy. So where's the debate? That's number one. Number two, he needs to think about what's going on at home in the United States, the potential here for unrest. Given what the things that I cited to you in the economy, where things are headed, is very serious. You know, Lenin said, and it's probably hyperbolic, but he said it nonetheless, every society is 3 meals away from a revolution. Well, he wasn't completely wrong. We have not yet felt the effects of what's been happening in the Persian Gulf on the scale that we will. In other words, there's a lag time between what happens now and the real effects in several months. And my point—

can he turn things around? Can he— if he, if he ends this quickly, could he turn things around before it's too late?

Still, it's going to be tough. It's going to be very hard. I think he's going to have a tough time doing it. But at this point, it's no longer about him. It's about the American people. It's about the fragility of our economy. The vulnerability of the financial system. He's got to focus here on those things, because if he doesn't, it's ultimately going to bring him down. He's not going to be voted out of office because he failed to destroy Iran, because he failed to capture the Strait of Hormuz. That's not going to get him. But what I told you earlier about inflation, about the economy productivity falling by 20, 30 36%. That could kill him. That could kill the government. And it's worse than that. Nobody seems to understand, if you go back to the end of World War I, certainly from 1917 until the war ends, that's about 15 months from the middle of, uh, 1917. The Ottomans, the Romanovs, the Hohenzollerns, the Habsburgs, they had all collectively ruled for somewhere between 300 and 800 years. And they ceased to exist overnight. That could happen in Western Europe. It could happen here in the United States. People don't realize that. We take too much for granted. When your supply chains break down, when there is no credit, and right now when you have large firms like BlackRock or KKR trying to borrow cash based on their assets under management, you're in trouble. Right now, if you have money in BlackRock's funds, you can't get it out. Why not? How long before the liquidity problem strikes us in the major banking system? There are a lot of things that are out of sight, but they're not that far away. There are a lot— there's lots of potential for disaster. The problem, Mario, is that most Americans have experienced 80 years of extraordinary stability, and it's incomprehensible to them that this could all end in a few months. But it could. And that's back to the original question: what matters most if you're Donald Trump? What happens in the United States and what happens globally, financially, and economically? Those things are the top priorities, not the Strait of Hormuz, not destroying Iran, not enabling Israel's conquest of the Middle East, the creation of the Greater Israel Project.

Very, very spot on, and I couldn't agree more with Colonel McGregor.

Next one is from the—

I don't even know the terms used for this idiot ambassador. Take a look, and that's Tucker Carlson interviewed him, by the way. So take a listen, please.

I celebrate the heritage that as an American I have, thanks to the Jewish foundation upon which the United States of America was born and which it has thrived. And I tell you that if the United States ever forgets its heritage and forgets the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, we will not be the great nation that we have become, and we will fall. And it's why that when I hear people say, is it possible that America and Israel will split apart and will no longer enjoy this extraordinary partnership? And I say, no, no, no, you got to understand, we're not that stupid. I hope we're never going to be that stupid. The truth is, it's like an incredible marriage between Israel and the United States. And when people ask, are we going to break up, I say not a chance, because neither country can afford the alimony if we ever broke up. And that's why we will be partners for as long as there is. Thank you. God bless you. God bless America. And God bless the state of Israel.

Thank you.

It's America's 250th anniversary and one of our own ambassadors gets on stage and says, thank you, Israel. None of this would have happened without you. Mike Huckabee didn't miss a beat. He looked straight into the camera and declared that the United States was born from a Jewish foundation, and if we ever abandon Israel, America will collapse immediately. I hope we're never going to be that stupid. That's what he called putting America first on our own birthday. Let's be clear about what you just heard. This isn't some random preacher at a conference. This is the United States ambassador to Israel telling the American people that our country, our revolution, our Constitution, our entire experiment in self-government owes its existence to Israel. Not to the English common law, not to the Scottish Enlightenment, not to the blood and sweat of generations of Americans who carved a nation out of the wilderness. No, it was all thanks to the Jewish foundation. But has anyone told the founders— Jefferson, Madison, Washington— they must have missed the memo while they were quoting Locke and Montesquieu and writing the Federalist Papers. And now we're informed that if we ever stop the endless aid, the blank check diplomacy, the automatic vetoes at the UN, and the political protection, no matter what, our entire civilization will just fold up and die. That's not confidence. That's not alliance. That's a suicide pact sold as piety. Mike Huckabee has every right to his beliefs. He does not have the right to subordinate the United States of America to them. Not on our 250th anniversary. Not ever. We are not a colony. We are not a vessel for someone else's destiny. We are Americans, and it's time we started acting like it again. Spot on.

Spot on.

And that's exactly where the problem— when you get ambassadors like Huckabee, uh, no qualifications whatsoever, by the way.

Uh, this one here, that's from, uh, uh, journalist Anna Kasparian.

I don't know if you're familiar with her or not, but take a listen here, please. She is, she is a, a vocal on the what's going on in Gaza and so forth. So take a listen, please.

Biggest— one of the biggest hauls came from an investment tied to— oh wow, the UAE. So the UAE bought half of the Trump family's crypto company known as World Liberty Financial. Totally above board, nothing, nothing suspicious there at all, of course. Now CNBC, by the way, I have a problem with that. Just like I have a problem with foreign money in the form of the Israel lobby influencing our politicians, I have a problem with the UAE purchasing half of the Trump family crypto company. Why do you think they would do that? Is it because they really find this crypto company valuable, or is it because they wanna have influence over the Trump White House? So the crypto figure includes about $580 million connected with World Liberty Financial. The company company co-founded by members of Trump's family that issues the WLFI governance token and USD1 stablecoin. World Liberty launched USD1 in March of 2025.

Now, the reason I want to share that with you is to highlight to you the corruption issue that exists. That's why the American people needs to do something about all this.

And the last one I'm gonna share with you is I did a clip for you yesterday about the housing issue in America.

Now take a listen to this one here, uh, and, and it'll make more sense to you. And this coincides with what Colonel McGregor said also about the inflation and economy and so forth. So the United States Oh, sorry.

States housing market is about to collapse 80 to 90%, which means homes that were once worth $1.5 million are going to be worth just $300,000. Now the reason why is simple. The U.S. housing market has reached its most unaffordable level in history. People cannot afford to buy homes. And if people can't afford to buy homes, the market must crash. But how hard is this market going to crash? When we look at the data, this crash could potentially be way worse than the 2008 housing market crash that we saw. We are going to see prices come down 80 to 95%.

That's disturbing, and that gives you an idea as to where things are headed here in the US. So that's the reason why I decided to do this livestream for you addressing this particular issue of a third party and also the need to break up this chain of dominance and tyranny by these Republicans and Democrats alike. So hope you guys enjoy this one. Uh, I take this opportunity, I want to say thank you to some members here, of course, like we always do. Uh, Kevin Baptist. Oh man, That's so generous of you, Kevin. Thank you so much. As always, been an avid supporter, man. Truly, truly appreciate you. You wrote, business masquerading as political parties, Doug, a binary system for sale to the highest bidder, through which undermines the living standards of the populace. US is a cult that teaches obedience instead of fostering and nurturing conscience.

Couldn't agree more.

As a matter of fact, Uh, it's almost like I'm starting to use the term the way I'm seeing things right now, Kevin, and to all community right here.

It's almost become like this idea of slavery, structured slavery.

That's what we are noticing with, for example, when you have, like I mentioned earlier, retirees still have to pay taxes.

Why?

Why?

You know, the system is, is, is, is—

I couldn't agree more, Kevin.

So thank you so much for your generous support for the channel. Uh, next person is, uh, uh, uh, Lalibela1. Thank you so much for your, uh, support for the channel. You write— you wrote, don't be surprised if Trump launches an attack during the World Cup, probably when the US team is playing. All eyes will be off Iran.

Yeah, well, I won't be surprised. You're absolutely correct in that But I also saw how the Iran team was treated here.

They weren't treated fairly.

You know, you call it right when it's right. We shouldn't enter in politics into sport.

The Iranian team, soccer team, was here to compete like every other nation. So shame on our government for what they're doing. Truly, truly appreciate that one.

Uh, also want to say thank you to Jose Lattelier, uh, who get a copy of my, uh, Saudi book.

Uh, you claim the copy, uh, electronically there.

Uh, please, uh, thank— first of all, thank you for your support.

And second, please don't hesitate to reach out if you have any question once you read the book. I'll be happy to answer it for you.

The next one is, uh, uh, a donation from— in support of the channel from Spirit Rider.

That's all the screen name I have. So thank you so much for your support, and I agree with your comment. And that was a private comment, I'm not going to share it here, but there was a private comment. So I just want to let Spirit Rider— and there's someone, uh, for your support. And speaking of that, quickly, guys, here I want just to show you the link to, uh, my upcoming trip to Asia if you decide to support uh, that trip, I will be grateful to you for that. I intend to head out there around the, uh, August, September time. So we are across the 50. I hope to reach this goal here. So if you are kind enough and willing to, uh, support my upcoming trip to Asia, here is the link where you can donate in support of that trip. And thank you in advance. So I also want to share the link for the channel, uh, to those who bought me coffee and want to support. You know the type of information I bring you guys here. I, I do spend a lot of time researching. I'm willing to do it and I want to do it because that's my commitment to you. I told you I'm not here to just show up in front of a camera here and— no, if I don't have anything of substance and something you learn from, then I have failed you, and failure is not an option for me. So Once again, here is the link if you want to buy me coffee in support of the channel. Uh, that's, uh, and for those who want to get a copy of, uh, my books, there is the, uh, there's the link, uh, for the books that I published, uh, if you want to get a copy of those. That's the one. And I am in the process now of completing the China book, and I will do an update book about Iran and another two other books on my, my plan, one about Turkey and one about— Turkey, rather— and one about Egypt. So I hope you enjoy this. Just a final reminder, uh, for my members, remember to join me tomorrow at 1900 hours for our live Q&A, uh, that I'm going to be doing for the member. To all of you, I say thank you, and to my American Viewers, I'll say happy 4th. Hope you enjoyed this, and I look forward to seeing you next time. As always, remember, geopolitics impacts your daily life in more ways than one. Till next time, bye-bye.