You. Good evening, listeners. Brave navigators of the enigmatic and the concealed. Have you ever felt the pull of the unanswered, the allure of the mysteries that shroud our existence? For more than a decade, a unique comic publisher has dared to dive into these mysteries, unafraid of the secrets they might uncover. This audacious entity is paranoid American. Welcome to the mystifying universe of the paranoid American podcast. Launched in the year 2012, paranoid American has been on a mission to decipher the encrypted secrets of our world. 

From the unnerving enigma of MKUltra mind control to the clandestine assemblies of secret societies, from the aweinspiring frontiers of forbidden technology to the arcane patterns of occult symbols in our very own pop culture, they have committed to unveiling the concealed realities that lie just beneath the surface. Join us as we navigate these intricate landscapes, decoding the hidden scripts of our society, and challenging the accepted perceptions of reality. 

Folks, I've got a big problem on my hands. There's a company called Paranoid American making all these funny memes and comics. Now, I'm a fair guy. I believe in free speech as long as it doesn't cross the line. And if these AI generated memes, dare to make fun of me, they're crossing the line. This is your expedition into the realm of the extraordinary, the secret, the shrouded. Come with us as we sift through the world's grand mysteries, question the standardized narratives, and brave the cryptic labyrinth of the concealed truth. 

So strap yourselves in, broaden your horizons, and steal yourselves for a voyage into the enigmatic heart of the Paranoid American podcast, where each story, every image, every revelation brings us one step closer to the elusive truth. What up, y'all? This is another episode of the Paranoid American podcast, and today we've got Jack Lloyd, and he's going to live in this tiny little window at the bottom of the screen just as a complete assertion of dominance. 

No, I'm just kidding. So I want to welcome Jack Lloyd from not just the Voluntarit's comic series, but that's how I originally came to know him. But I want to let you introduce yourself where people can find you, and then we'll get into it. Yeah. So I'm Jack Lloyd, and as he said, good to see you again. It's been a little while, but I've missed you. But I thought about you a we back in the day, I was working my Voluntarius comic series, and that was one of the things that we connected over. 

And so that's my flagship title, the Voluntarious series. And it's one among many in my Voluntarious Universe under ANCAP comics. But as he said, that's just the tip of the iceberg. I also am a producer for Liberty, which means I produce all different types of content for educating people on individual liberty, from memes to educational videos, to skits, to music and music videos, merchandise and the like. So I work often with the philosopher for that so she's my wife. 

She's awesome. And yeah, we do all kinds of cool stuff. We were just shooting a music video the other weekend, actually, called Break the Great Reset, which had some interesting symbols in there. Made me think about some of the things that we put in there with watching your amazing intro, which I really you know, it's a it's a lot of fun getting to be in the creative space, of course, like you, and to engage people intellectually, but with a beautiful medium. 

And I have to lead with one really important question that Jack Lloyd, are you a police officer? Are you a cop? Because if you're a cop, you have to tell me. That's how the law works. No. Yeah, I'm not a cop. What agency are you working with? Four letters. No, but I need you to confirm that you're a cop or not before we can even proceed here. No, I'm definitely not a cop. 

Okay, cool. I have cross examined cops, though, on the stand. That was fun. Well, let's lead into that, man. How did you find yourself in a courtroom questioning a police officer? Sure. So beyond all the creative stuff I've done and feels like a past life at this point, I've been a criminal defense lawyer. And so as part of doing juvenile defense, I cross examined police officers on the stand about what it is that they were doing at the time, that they frisked and search young people and that kind of thing. 

So doing that was probably the most fun I had as a criminal defense attorney. Is being able to make police sweat on the stand. Do they know that you're enjoying it as you're doing it? I did have a little bit of half smile, but no, I tried to go pretty hard on them and really show that they don't know what they're doing. Basically. That's kind of the goal there is to show that they make assumptions about things that are not necessarily true, and that's kind of the way to get them. 

Yeah, but doesn't might make right. So it doesn't just mean that they're correct all the time. If only, man. If only. Right? Then you just have to push someone and then you're right. How do you feel about all the auditors out there? Like the police auditors? You're saying like the First Amendment auditors who will go in like so now that word, I guess, is a little bit vague because it's like they're self appointed, right? They don't report to a specific committee that's told them to go out and audit police. 

They just say, hey, I've got a camera and I'm going to go and mess with cops today and call themselves an auditor. Or is there like a more official process to it? I mean, there's a little bit of a history with some organizations that kind of did this. I think of cop block that used to be a big one back in the day by this guy named P. 

Aaron DIMO Freeman. There used to be pinac, which I think they're still around. Photography is not a crime that would report on these things and they would go do audits. There's audit, the audit. I think on YouTube. I think they cover different things. It is decentralized, of course, but there's certainly branding or certain enclaves of people that fall under either a loose organization or kind of just an identity thing that do those sometimes, for sure. 

They say that they're cop blocking or they say they're part of cop watch or something. But yeah, usually it's just people picking up the camera, doing what they want kind of thing. So you come from the ANCAP world and we've touched on a little bit. I have so much to learn when it comes to the official belief systems and everything. But do police have a role in the world of ANCAP? Or are you like a defund police? Give police more? I assume the and part means that automatically no police are allowed to exist. 

But not everything's always so simple, right? So it's really about the language of the word police because typically when you're talking about police, you're often importing it from a government force perspective where they exist to just act upon what is the law. Right? Should we call them social workers? Is that the new sure, the new word for police work at social workers. But no, I'm saying what people commonly associate it with is the government force sense. 

When you think about policing, they're often thinking of someone who is just following orders. Right. Because there's a big difference between the idea of justice and security and police. Right? You can have justice and security, but it's not a police officer. Right? For example, you as an individual happen to catch someone trying to break into your home and they want to kill you, kind of thing, and you shoot them and stop them. 

Right? That wasn't a cop. You just enacted justice, though, of stopping this bad guy who's literally trying to break in your house and then murder you. And that's your own security. So these are the types of things that we're really getting at. We're talking about the nature of policing, is how is security provided, how are disputes resolved, and without having the force of the state. So as an ANCAP, that means that in ideal situation, we're moving completely away from the one size fits all state funded through taxation, police force. 

But in terms of transition, I think there's ways to get there where police kind of come very close to that in theory, and that's just police no longer enforcing victimless crimes and then basically being paid voluntarily. Right. Conceptually, those are the things that kind of underpin it, which is doing things to others that there's no victim for. It like they're saying, hey, oh, you can't have cannabis. And so they arrest you, whatever. 

It's victimless crime and also the funding mechanism, that kind of thing. So you could probably move toward that direction with police as we know it conceptually in terms of, oh, okay, maybe they have shiny badges and guns or something like that and they're employed in this capacity. But to be ethical, they can't initiate force against others and be funded through mass forcible unilateral takings from everybody. That would be the core problem. 

I'm curious, there might not be a good answer to this, but are there any fictional movies or TV shows or anything that represent sort of like a society that's closer than we are to, I guess, what would be envisioned for ANCAP even if it's not the complete utopia, is there something that leans closer towards it? So I think there's definitely some fiction authors in my zone who have kind of done these things. 

They're more like science fiction. One of the more recent ones is Rothmas. He's written the series Cliffhawk, which has those kind of elements in know it's. It's not as common. I mean, there's certainly, I think, ones that have those type of tones. I think the moon is a Harsh Mistress is one. I think there's a comic series called The Probability Brooch that also touches on that, but not too many. 

I don't think there's too many that fully embrace it. Voluntarist, you could say, in the long run has stuff with that, but of course there's development before then, but it's not very common to have that. And I'd say most of the you could say fiction out there, whether it's movies or books, will often write about anything close to that as being this evil thing where it's like, oh, there's these corporations that rule the world and everyone's in a corporate technocratic tyranny place kind of thing. 

It's not really indicative of basically the values of voluntariness and ANCAPs. I might be out of step, but I feel like a lot of science fiction, when it gets into that utopian ideal phase, it almost always starts feeling communist. It almost never is, like, and then everyone's going to start putting in really hard work and this guy's going to do that. I don't know. It feels more like there's always some sort of an authority that tells people, like, you really need to do this job because that's going to be better for the overall society as a whole. 

So I feel like if there was a good way to get people towards ANCAP or whatever philosophy you're in, it would help if some popular media started painting the picture for people to be like, oh, that's what it is. I don't know. That's curious. The moon is a harsh mistress. I've heard someone bring that up before. And what was the other one that you mentioned? Cliff something. The Cliffhawk series by Rothmas? Yeah, he's a contemporary author who's been writing science fiction books and I have them and they're pretty good. 

So it's more futuristic, though. Spacey Sci-Fi. What do you think about the state of, I guess, popular media today, like movies coming out and like the comic book movies and comic book TV shows? Do you think that this is helping comics as a whole? Do you think it's hurting? You think it's neither? So right now, we're having a big shift right now at the parallel economy because the mainstream films and the adaptations from past things, books and comics, stuff like that, have been pretty bad for a while. 

All the different sjwing of the mainstream has really come to its head. And all these big movies, they keep losing out and they start compounding these losses. And so it created this opportunity, especially in the last ten years, especially for independent artists, to really rise up. And it's been coming to a head in monumental ways. I think of comicsgate as being a part of that, but really getting some much bigger fanfare now. 

I think the rip averse with Eric July and what he did is huge. That's a big stepping stone forward for everybody, like showing what can be done because he's raised at this point between the two campaigns at probably about 6 million. And there's Ethan Van Skyver, who has cyber Frog, who's kind of the father figure of the comicscape movement, who's done very well in indiegogo as well. So I think that we're starting to see the rise of the independence essentially becoming much more successful than ever imagined. 

It's finally hit that turning point where the attrition is strong enough from the mainstream and people are just getting so exhausted with the SJW and just the lack of any interesting plots on top of that, changing the colors and different characters and like, oh, here you go, repackage. Hope you don't like redheads. I'm fine. Exactly. All redheads are out. So it's really been great. I'm super happy about it, honestly, because the fact of the matter is that because they had so many missteps in the mainstream, they just opened the door wide open, I think, for people like us included in this realm, and I'm pretty stoked about that. 

Do you think there's ever going to be room for us at the mainstream comic conventions again? Or do you think those ones are just the property of Universal and Disney and Enter the Blank? Or do you think that, I guess independent and underground can come together and start their own movement? Because I guess I'm feeding some of my own into that, right? It's a little bit of a leading question, but it does feel that comic conventions are very rarely about these self produced independent things that go against what everyone else is. 

Feels like a majority of them. You go there to get someone, draw you a picture of Superman or Spider Man or whatever and know, get a picture taken with someone in the Walking Dead TV series or one of like the nine spinoffs. And that leaves very little leftovers for the independent comic writers and publishers and stuff. Yeah, I think we're heading toward that direction. It's not like you can't go to a lot of these, maybe just not the biggest the biggest, but most comic conventions. 

You could get a table like most of them will accept you, and they have Artists Alleys for independent artists all the time. But I think that with what's happening, with that tide changing over, with so many different independent artists now coming up, I think it's only a matter of time, year two at most, before you actually have independent artists conventions. I think as more of like a big thing, like as big as San Diego Comic Con or DragonCon or something like that. 

We're talking. That level, I think is around the corner where we're going to see a convention be established or maybe whether it's a roundtable of independent artists starting that or someone who just sees the opportunity, it's going to be pretty big once that happens, like something exclusively for independent artists to actually come and table and do their stuff. When you have enough big fan bases to make it worth it, what if we could get a ripicon going at a certain point? I imagine that is not too far off. 

I mean, as big as he is, again, you still need enough of a draw, you need enough talents. But if you have enough big ones, especially drawn from some from comicsgate leftovers who have their own series, I think it's very probable that it could be done. I don't see why not. I think that the demand is there and the talents are there. So it's really just a matter of making sure that whoever does it doesn't screw it up. 

The last thing you want is someone who really doesn't know how to put a convention up right and then screws everybody to have the reins on that one. You got to make sure it's done right. Everyone gets a Turner's diary on the way in. Be off to a good story. I'm curious, do you have any thoughts on AI artwork which is starting to come into our realm a little bit more? Yeah, I noticed your intro had a lot of that. 

It was amazing, actually. I loved it that's the main reason for this show was just to force people to watch my two minute intro. I thought it was honestly, my jaw was dropped. I was incredible. The production on it, I'm just guessing that you had one of the sound AI things where you ran through certain people's voices. Yeah, I use eleven lab. There's no secrets. I use Eleven labs. 

Okay. Yeah. It's absolutely incredible. I'm a huge fan of it. I know that there's a lot of people who get concerned about these things and say, oh, but this is going to make it harder for other people. It's like it's just nonsense. All it does is it gives people the opportunity to become even more creative and to do crazier things. That's just basically it. So it's another tool and either you end up using it or you end up basically falling behind in technology just like the computer or a cell phone. 

It's no different to me. So I love it. I think it's fantastic. It's fairly controversial still, especially in the comics world. I know a lot of artists that I work with probably hate the concept of even playing around with some of it but yeah, I guess it's going to be a tool that you're going to have to use at some point. So do you think whenever the whole concept of general automation and general AI comes in and it's like if it replaces every job, right, every job that doesn't involve then repairing or doing maintenance on the AI that took your job, then everyone's like, well then that's the universal basic income, right? If these machines are just doing everything for everyone all the time, then what do we have in place of that? How does the world keep operating if machines are now doing everything for us? Solve that five words or less. 

I can solve it. It takes a little more than five words but I can solve very easily. So the problem here is there's a lot of things that go on behind the scenes of that, right? So when it comes to automation, AI and people losing jobs absolutely. Of course there's going to be certain jobs that are outmoded. In fact, Microsoft laid off tons of teams in preparation for AI integration and doing the APIs for that and then the automation. 

So absolutely. But it's not a matter of actually making people poor. It actually makes things more efficient. It makes people richer because it lets them be able to do more and be more efficient. So when we're talking about the underpinning issues as relates to resources and things like that, just because you have something that makes things more efficient doesn't tell you the prioritization of what resource should be used for what and why, right? Because there's scarcity. 

So you may have a block of iron, but just because you have a block of iron doesn't tell you what it is that that should be used toward. Should it be used for a car, should be used for microwave, should it be used for a rocket ship? It doesn't tell you. So that's how come prices are so incredibly important. Because when it comes to a monetary system that allows people to subjectively value and say, hey, I value this a lot for this purpose, I believe I'm going to be able to use this for something that's going to either make me more money or is going to be very important. 

It allows people to actually signal what it is they want. And without that price signaling you can't actually determine what scarce resources can be used for what? So AI can't fundamentally erase a human value because human beings are the ones who lay what is going to be subjectively valued, and you need human beings who say who owns what, right? That's the ownership of scarcity. The machine doesn't own everything. 

It's people. People are saying, oh, okay, I have this claim to this land. You have that claim to this land. That's your car, that's my car, et cetera. So the things that are barriers to that, the problem that we face is that with technology and efficiency, you can get deflation technically out of that, where basically with the Efficiencies, people might be needing to be paid less because, you know, things can be made more cheaply, that kind of thing. 

And it's hard to adjust back down once you're paid at a certain level. That's where people get kind of stuck, that sticky wage thing. So the other barrier there that's tough for people to deal with is minimum wage, right? Because if you have minimum wage laws, you can't have people adjust to a more efficient future. Because if you have minimum wage dollar price, right? Let's just say minimum wage is $10. 

If you're only able to provide $9 in value, well, then you're unemployable, right? Because someone who wants to hire you, you need to provide more than $10 of value to them per hour, or they're literally just having a break even or a loss, right? You're not actually doing anything. So with minimum wage laws as well, it makes it so that you have mass unemployment. And so this kind of paradigm is a false construct. 

It's used the scarcity that is a human scarcity in terms of wages thing is a false struct. And it's used by the government to get to trick people into being like, oh, see, this is why you need a UBI. This is why you need a welfare state. Because they're like, well, okay, you can't make less than $15 an hour. Oh, but too bad, now no one wants to pay. 

You don't have the skills for it. So I guess you'll just have to go on government assistance instead of the reality being like, okay, what would happen if you actually could just make $7 an hour instead of ten, and yet you could buy so much more because the value of your currency or your money is that much more, right? Just like when you go back before all the crazy inflation we have, with $0. 

25 in the 1950s, you could probably get two slices of pizza and a soda, and now that costs $5 or $6 or maybe $10 if you're in California or something. So people need to understand that the barriers to being able to adapt to this technology are really government imposed. It's not actually the technology that's a problem. It's the government not allowing people to adjust in the market accordingly and to be able to grow at that. 

So just like with any other technological advancement, whatever a certain efficiency arises then people just provide value in other ways that the technology cannot do that's. Basically it. One of my favorite responses that you gave last time we were talking is that when people nitpick systems and it's like, yeah, but compared to what? Compare it to the thing that we have now don't compare it to an ideal that never existed. 

So I guess in one of those comparisons, let's say you've got this huge workforce of I'll just make it a round number and say like a million. It's probably way more than that. But a million people that literally don't have any skills that would be worth to a large corporation anything more than $6 an hour. And they would just rather put automated checkouts and automated whatever, even outsource everything to other countries where people would do it for cheaper. 

So then what happens with this huge pool of people that don't have any sort of skills that would earn them enough to survive? Because I feel like sometimes now like the Walmart greeter instances, right, like two people make out like Walmart. I guess it has to be a write off because I don't think that Walmart greeters necessarily drive sales through the door or anything. But those kind of positions also just give people security to know keep living I guess. 

So if you just say like, hey, too bad corporations decided that all of these jobs are now going to be way cheaper to just put a machine in there and here's your final paycheck and now you don't have anywhere else to apply because everyone just replaced all those kind of like low level positions. Is there any sort of the current plan now is everyone gets on government assistance and then they just wait for UBI to settle, know, and it feels like that might be the direction that we maybe are headed. 

I don't know any other solutions that are even on the horizon. Are there any, I guess ANCAP thinkers that are just like, hey, once we get there, here's the solution for that. Listen to me. Well I think that it's kind of a false framing and again I think that these issues don't actually have anything to do with productivity and there's two very clear issues to look at and to digest first. 

So the first issue is with a corporation firing a bunch of people and this or that. Remember these companies aren't making products just to sit, right? They're not like, oh we're going to make food and we're going to make a lot of food and no one is going to be able to afford to buy it, right? As a business owner do you just make food and say, hey I'm going to put this on the shelf. 

Oh I'm going to pull this food out nobody can afford huh? Well I guess that was a huge waste of money, right? I mean honestly, if you ever seen, like, Dunkin'Donuts at the end of the night, and they just throw it all out, and they're legally don't give it to anyone because if someone got sick, then they would sue them. There's instances that's actually not true. The government actually mandates that. 

So the government actually requires those disposal laws. Those are actually government forced some businesses around it. Yeah, you definitely go look it up for food disposal. Governments are the ones that actually mandate that. And sometimes they get around this by working with not for profits, and they do it at the last minute where they're able to donate it. So I know Panera does this, where they can slough off some of the last bread and go to church or 501. 

But those are government laws that force that. So a lot of people think like, oh, look, all this wastes of that. It's like, no, that's literally the government mandates that. And why do they do that? Because they're the ones saying, oh, well, someone could get sick, but they don't care about the homeless. You know what I mean? They don't care. Even though these businesses might be like, yeah, maybe we would donate this to a shelter or something like that. 

Yeah, no, the government forces that. So a lot of these problems are revolving around government intervention in the market. It's not actually a meaningful issue in terms of people not being able to afford things. And this economic fact just happens to be, like, the necessary condition for people getting paid and finding ways to provide value. Because, again, if you're a producer, who are you producing for? If nobody can buy your product, then who are you producing for? There's nothing to buy, right? Nobody has any money, so it doesn't make any sense. 

That's how come Henry Ford instituted the eight hour workday and he had the five day a week thing, because if people were working through the weekend, they had no time to buy cars. He did that because he's like, oh, right, people actually need time to buy the stuff that I'm selling. So he pushed for that because intentionally he's like, oh, okay, people need actually time to go and buy stuff. 

So there's this total interest, a self interest, even at the business level, to have people actually want to do business with you and to have the money to even buy your product. Otherwise, what good is it? So I would say, though, that beyond that, though, the question of, okay, what are we really rubbing up against when we're dealing with people suddenly not being able to provide enough value for what maybe machines in other capacities could do? Then again, we have to look at the total landscape of, okay, well, what are people's other economic factors? What's weighing on them? Right? You have property taxes. 

You have the government keeping land. They have 640,000,000 acres that they keep from people to be able. To actually have a homestead independently, right? So if you are someone who's like, okay, maybe I can't make it in this corporatist culture. But you know what? If I have my own plot of land that I can homestead and I can grow my own food and trade with neighbors and live a simple life, whatever, that could be a thing. 

But if the government is like, well, guess what? Too bad. We're going to ban your vegetable garden. We're going to fine you for collecting rainwater. We're going to say you owe us taxes forever even though you paid off your home. Too bad you're going to owe us money forever. If you're like, you know, actually I could grow a little green leaf. Oh, but we're going to throw you in prison if you try to grow that. 

You have this whole system of oppression against evil for just trying to have independence and even trying to find ways to provide for themselves. So I think that's really the issue. It's not the technology. The technology only enhances people's ability to be productive and then gives people new ways to provide value. But when the government sets these limits or incarcerates people for benign activities, you really can't rise to that and there's no way out of it. 

And that's how the government creates this Hegelian dialectic. They create the problem. They create the reaction, they create the I'm glad you said I had that on the tip of my tongue because a lot of what you're describing here sounds exactly like create the problem, create the solution, which is Hegelian dialectics. So that's always what the government has done. The government is not this benevolent charity. It's people who are there for their own interests in power. 

And sometimes those things align with the general population. Just like someone in power doesn't want to be bombed by some other person or they don't want to be murdered or they want to be able to go get food, right? They have interests for themselves that happen to align with other people as well. So that's why there are limits to those things that people in government do at times because they don't want to disrupt their productivity and their piece. 

And that's why you often see them being like, well, see, we're going to provide you with fire protection and police and stuff like that. In reality, it's just them trying to protect themselves. They're sitting there just being like, no, we can't let the masses overthrow us. We can't let a foreign government overthrow us. But there's tangential benefits in some of those things just because of course people have an interest in not being murdered or blown up or this or that. 

But then the government, of course, by the nature of the people, are in there selectively murders people and steals accordingly because they can cover it with law, right? So they do it in a more regulated systematized manner of theft and mass murder. Because if it's done orderly and by the books, then people accept it more, right? If it's just some regular thief, it's like, whatever. But if it's like, oh, well, the government, they're going to steal your money. 

Well, okay, that's okay. I guess there is an election and they voted for it, right. As long as they're doing it to that guy over there too, then I guess it's okay. Exactly. So that's what really the core problem is here. When we're talking about these things, we would be infinitely more wealthy than we are right now. And to me, that's something that people don't even really understand, is that the technologies that we have have been so exponentially efficient that we think, oh, we have a little bit of progress. 

We're making a little bit. Things are getting better and better, but it's nothing compared to what it would be if the government was out of the way. We are literally having the crumbs of what the government has left over from what would be like a complete insane renaissance. I mean, we're talking about cell phones being out possibly in the 70s if it wasn't for the government stopping them, literally, that kind of thing. 

So it's really something wild when you actually look at the history of government regulation and theft and other things like that and war and how much that has soaked up our productivity and that we think, okay, technology is going to live better each year. But in reality we are like 50 60 years behind where we should be if we actually had just property rights being respected. Yeah, we're talking consumer because I guess do you believe that the military is or how many years do you think the military is from consumer technology? Do you think we're neck and neck? Do you think they're ahead? Oh, the military is far more advanced because the government under 35 USC 181, basically has unbridled access to all patents and does so through national security directives and the state secrets privilege stemming from the Reynolds case in the 50s. 

So the government, anytime they see something come through the pipeline, like, oh, that's too advanced, they just gag it and they take it. And this is thousands of inventions we're talking about probably 8000 at least at this point. And on top of that, they have global surveillance, corporate espionage, and all that good stuff, as you know. So the government has way advanced technology, not because they are magically more special in the market, more so because they're able to just take whatever they want from anywhere that any development, just use it, either through compulsory licensing, they mandate, oh, we get to licenses here's your royalty, or they gag it and they use it. 

And then they also have access to the global market. Right? So the government is not like this magical cartoonish thing where it's like, oh, see, the government could just magically build this crazy ship no, they're like, okay, we're hiring this firm to do this thing. We're hiring another firm to do another thing. And they don't know what each other is doing. Left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing. 

But they're having things independently made in different places. But they have the brilliance of high level scientists and access to wild technology that's kept intentionally from the public. So they are definitely way more advanced in the deepest parts of the state for sure. Absolutely. How much do you think government has their fingers in entertainment at a very direct level? Oh, 100%. We did a great video, the Floss and I called National Security Cinema talking about that book specifically. 

And we covered how the government, since basically the inception of film has been basically influencing it for war propaganda in the 1910s. They've literally had tons of connections with various Hollywood producers over the years. And a big part of that, how they have their weight is that the government will say, hey, if you want to have access to our set for filming, then you got to let us review your scripts and make changes as necessary, kind of thing. 

So basically they do the bait and lore thing and they say, hey, you can come shoot at this base for your multimillion dollar blockbuster, but you got to give us access to the scripts and we can give some edits. The government has been doing that for a very long time. And under Hoover too, he got his hands on a lot of stuff in the mid 20th century, basically getting to the point where he would use his threat of prosecution to get onto shows and dictate what's going on. 

I think even the show, the FBI, I think it was that the 60s or seventy s, I got to look it back up. But basically he was reviewing every script that they had and making sure it showed them a good light. I mean, they were very controlling. That is the FBI and the government over how they were portrayed in the media. So that's why you see most movies are going to be the government's, the good God, the savior of the day, epic action, and then like, the American flag comes across it because it's propaganda for the state. 

And on top of that, there's also the government grants, right? So you go see certain movies and they're like at the end, like, oh, this is done in conjunction with the Georgia filmmaking whatever board or whatever. So they go to different countries or states where they give them special tax exemptions and blah, blah, blah, or money even to come film there. So you have direct ties, monetarily. You have the government directly imposing on scripts, and then sometimes even people who are ex military and stuff like that getting their hands in there too, working directly on mean, pretty much hollywood is by and large a government propaganda machine. 

It's also interesting I might be reading into this, but it's interesting that you'll see people get big in Hollywood pivot and transition into politics, but it seems very rare for someone to be in politics to transition to anywhere except for a high corporate position, which they leverage their connections within the government. But I can't think of many politicians that got big in politics. And then we're like, all right, I'm going to ride this one all the way into Hollywood and become a big star. 

It's like the exact opposite from that. I don't know if there's something to that or agree. I can't like, off the top of my head, I can't think of too many. The ones that I think of are more on the news side of things, so not on what you can call entertainment or more like propaganda. But yeah, most of the stuff that I think when I think about going from government out into something in film, I'm thinking like, okay, the ex NSA directors going into CNN or on Oliver North becomes like, right. 

The revolving door for the intelligence agencies is by and large, mostly news networks and cable news networks, and that's with Operation Mockingbird still going on. So that's why I think that's more likely to see someone end up I've got a fun one for you. Feet to the fire question. All right. Don't squirrel out of this one. What are your three favorite government institutions? That's a fun way to say which three do I hate the least? Yeah, that's a good one. 

So I think could this be also branches of government per se? Is that's a little too vague? I want an actual I'm not going to say FDA, but something EPA. That's tough because my first thought is always going to be, who is the least impactful? You just got to pick one. We'll make it easy. You just got to pick one. So they're like, look, we're going to give this ANCAP stuff a chance, but we got to keep one department intact. 

And tell me why. It's the IRS. Yeah, right. Definitely not the IRS. Definitely not the IRS. Yeah, they need to man. They like, maybe would you count the National Endowment for the Arts? NEA. Sure. I feel like that's a weak answer, but yeah, not because I like them. I hate them. But it's just if I'm going to go with, okay, at least this is not an agency that they're just doing Cronyism mostly for funding artists with tax money, as opposed to being like, oh, okay, the ATF. 

And they're like, running guns to cartels under operation. Fair enough. Okay, so it'll be Endowments for the Arts, but the money is all going to go to Marina Abramovich and spear cooking parties. That's the catch. Well, I mean, no matter what way you cut it, I mean, your money is going to child predators at the end of the day. Which child predator do you well, okay, I feel like we're getting into a segment that I'm still figuring the name out, but I think I'm going to call it the Paranormal Conspiracy Probe, or PCP for short. 

So we're going to do some PCP really quick. Okay. And basically this has evolved, but I want to get your rating, like, almost Rorschach style. Like, the first number that comes to your head, one being you think it's a Psyop, you think it's BS, and ten being like, you're all in. So, for example, actually, I am going to ask you about dinosaurs. If you say one, it's because you think dinosaurs are a Psyop. 

They never existed, they're all fake. And then a ten is like, oh, yeah, 100%. You walk into the Museum of Natural History and whatever it shows on the wall, that's a dinosaur. That would be a ten. So we're doing some rapid fire. So just give me some numbers, one to ten. All right. Are you ready for this? Yeah. Okay. Did Oswald shoot JFK? Two. Okay. Are ghosts real? One do you believe in the Bermuda Triangle? Eight. 

Is the earth flat? 10. Do secret satanic societies control Hollywood? Nine. Was Michael Jackson guilty? Seven. Are there hidden messages in Beatles songs? Nine. Do crystal skulls possess powers? One. Did Tesla discover a new form of energy that's just been suppressed for over a hundred years? Eight. And do you believe in the existence of telepathy? Two. All right, I mean, I'm getting a little bit of a read here. 

So ghosts one and telepathy two. So not a lot of woo woo, right? Yeah, I'm low on the woo woo, but where are you on the religion scale? Well, I'm agnostic, so that means that basically as far as my principles and philosophy is concerned, I think that even addressing the question of it, there is a God. There's philosophical conundrums about contradictions, and then there's just ways that you basically can't know. 

And one of those is like the idea of if there's a God, that's omniscient. In order to be omniscient, you also have to be omniscient because you have to know everything to fact check that they know everything. So there's impossibilities of knowing if something's omniscient, that kind of stuff. So there's just, like, different things like that where you can go through and be like, okay, agnostic is just a fancy way of saying no comment. 

Right? No, agnostic is that I don't think there is, but I'm always open to reason and evidence, but I don't think that there is. I haven't seen someone provide that evidence that would make sense. Well, I mean, this is getting into the philosophical questions, but I guess my favorite one on that angle is if it's just completely ration, you want to sit down and just rationalize everything. Why is there something rather than nothing? Because wouldn't just the existence of nothing make more sense than the existence of something? I don't know. 

That any of those are mandatorily logical as a deductive thing. To me, it's more question that I think is where people get to and this is as far as you can go back, basically, is was there always consciousness? And that was first was there always unconsciousness and then consciousness? Or was there consciousness and unconsciousness existing always at the same time? That's where we end up, basically. Those are the kind of the big three, right, okay. 

Because that's what people say, oh, religion, there was a God and he spoke and blah, blah stuff. Then there's, oh, there's no god, there was just stuff. And then consciousness arose, right. And then there was some type of supreme thing, but there was also unconscious things material at the same time. The god exists within that. So that's kind of where we come to those crossroads. And I find that none of those are falsifiable to me. 

And two of them come into very difficult question, which is, even if there was a God, right, was that god within the universe already? Kind of thing, right. And who's his god? Yeah, right. And someone might say, well, is that a god? It's like, well, if they have your attributes that make you think they're a god that they can create out of thing and they have the morality, whatever. 

I don't know. What about ancient aliens and nephilim and giants that built pyramids with levitation and do you entertain any of that? Or is that all just kind of like fanciful Disney stuff? Well, there's a couple of topics there. So there's different levels of different things. Right? Because the question of the pyramids, lots of people think about that, like, okay, well, how would they have cut the stone so smoothly? And was it aliens or something like that? And the pharaohs like staff that had electricity, a charge thing. 

As you do. Yeah, as you do. I don't know. For me, I just don't find any of it that fantastic. As in like, oh, this is so beyond what humans could possibly do. But I don't rule out that there could have been some outside influence in terms of an extraterrestrial thing. But I don't typically find that to be very plausible or very realistic. Just knowing some of the things we know about how far we are from other things and how long it takes to travel, even with things like potentially, oh, is there a wormhole? There's a lot of little factors that come into it that make it very tough. 

I tend to lean toward personally, I tend to lean toward the government has advanced technology that would look to us like, oh, that's an alien ship, or something like that. And I think that the governments of the world that have had the technology, especially since the 70s, have been working on animal human chimeras for a long time. So I think it's more probable that we would end up seeing something genetically created in a lab that looks like an alien than an actual oh, actually came from out of space thing personally. 

Were you on Project Bluebeam? No. Wouldn't that be before my well, okay, so the modern interpretation of Project Bluebeam would be that the government pairs up with NASA and they project holograms in the sky and they basically make it look like we're having an alien invasion. And I think they pitched that. I'm going to get all the names wrong. It was like Mongoose maybe, but they were going to pitch it in Cuba at some point. 

It was one of the many crazy ideas that the CIA had to just sort of disenfranchise Cuba as a whole. And they were going to set off a bunch of fireworks and play religious quotes or something over loudspeakers. And they thought people would be like, oh, fireworks and quotes. This has got to be the second coming, right? Jesus has come down. But I guess the new angle of Project Bluebeam is just going to be okay now it's this alien threat. 

It's going to be this thing that unites all of humanity. And we're like, all right, join arms. Sing we are the world. One government, one religion. Israel and Palestine, join arms. And we all shoot at the aliens in the sky, I guess. Do you think any of that is going to actually happen is in the mean? I ask it because it feels like a lot of people are starting to entertain it, especially with a bunch of the government what the hell are UAPs and UFO disclosures? Yeah, it's funny you mentioned that because that's literally the plot of Voluntarist. 

I'm like way ahead on this, you know what I mean? Are you going to hipster me now on blue beam? I'm just saying I already knew, man. It's coming up. I wasn't the first person neither to entertain that as a concept. So I'm not saying I had like, oh, I'm the first person, but I did formulate it into more of a specific totalitarian one world government kind of thing in a unique way. 

Although what's his face, the behold a pale white Horse author William Cooper. Cooper, right. Yeah, he mentions that as well. That kind of so I want to know where you feel it is on a very realistic level outside the world of comic books. Very realistic. It's their last act in my opinion. That's the last desperation act. Like that's basically their trump card. When they think the culture has gotten too far out of their control and they're not able to get their depopulation done in time, they're like, okay, this is it for them. 

This is our last stand to control everybody. And it fits neatly into a lot of the most major religions because with a lot of different religions, the major ones, especially monotheistic religions, they're looking for a savior. They're looking for end time stuff. They're looking for that type of big event, you know what I mean, to say that their prophecies are going to be fulfilled. And so to me a lot of that is almost like a self fulfilling prophecy for those things, right. 

Whether they're going to claim depending on the religion or domination, some might be like, oh, those are demons, right? Oh, here end times. Some are going to be like, oh no, this is the messiah, right? So it all feeds into a lot of preexisting biases, too, that I think those in the state plus higher than that are really wanting to play to. So for me it's kind of like an expected thing. 

I very much expect that, but only at the last resort. It's kind of like the, okay, here's our thing. So global false flag. Where are you at on 911? You think 911 was inside job false flag? Yeah, as far as I have seen and I've looked through a lot of different tapes and Pentagon footage and this or that and the history of Israel and this or that. It seems to me that the event was at a bare minimum allowed to happen. 

That is that the US government probably let those planes kind of go on some levels and then when it comes to the Flight 93 that was crashed, that seems to me like it may have been shot down just with the evidence on the ground and stuff like that. And my thought there was that maybe they wanted to cover that up because if they shot those down, they were worried about the ramifications publicly. 

Right. You know what I mean? Oh, okay. How do you justify having a jet shoot down a plane full of people? So I think that there's definitely orchestration and permission, that kind of thing. That's kind of how it goes. A lot of pat seeing work, right. The government looks for useful idiots or people who are already aligned with their objectives and then they either enable it or just let it slip. 

It's how it goes. Right. A lot of times with the government and these types of orchestrations, they don't have to push as much right? They don't necessarily have to push as much as much as permit or just enable someone who's already kind of interested and willing to go along kind of thing. And I want to keep pulling on that thread. What about Oklahoma City? What are your thoughts on that one? I think that what's his face wasn't acting from what I've read, Terry Nichols was maybe a while. 

Yeah. I think that he wasn't acting alone, obviously in that one. Yeah. Do you think there's a chance that was entirely government planned and they were just waiting for the right useful idiot to come along and hit button that they had wired up? Yeah. Given how things were in the building, wasn't that mostly all cleared out and stuff too at the time? What? The Edward G. Murray building. 

No, they actually had a full nursery, which is right where the explosion went off. But it was a very similar false flag, at least in the conspiracy realm. I'm getting into conspiracy here, but that the bomb went off on the outside ground level of the building, yet there was massive devastation. And one of the leading theories theories was that just like 911, there was thermite placed at charges in the structural points in the building. 

So that when the outside truck bomb went off, it was really just a distraction, catalyst, cover story for the real explosives that were inside. Sort of like the 911 theories was that the plane hitting the building, that was the COVID story. So that they can hit the button. I'm just a little fuzzy because I haven't looked at it in a while. But wasn't there another truck or something that was found or not reported on that? There was something else besides that. 

They were like double rider trucks. There was also like a third John Doe. There was a whole bunch of sightings around, if you're interested in that one, and fuzzy on it. There's an operation called PATCON, which was Patriot something or other. It didn't stand for conspiracy or convention. It was basically the FBI infiltrating these extremist groups, or as they labeled them, extremist groups, which itself was a continuation of Waco, which it was a continuation of Ruby Ridge. 

Do you have any thoughts on that succession of events at all? Because it feels like that's almost like the lifeblood of a lot of conspiracy theory lore. Yeah, nothing in particular about the connection among those. I just know that in the was a big focus of the government was trying to go after these groups because there was this rise of people kind of being angry at the government kind of thing. 

Then of course, there's a 94 assault weapons ban under Clinton as part of when they look scary. Right. That's when you make a gun illegal. If it looks scary. Black and scary. Yeah. Joe Biden didn't really like anything black in the 90s. He would just shoot his shotgun up in the air and scare you away. That was his suggestion, right? Yeah, exactly. I think the heels of that, there was also the school shooting stuff. 

I think that was getting ahead. I was just reading something today. Again, I was just scanning I have no in depth knowledge on this. I was just casually reading this on Twitter. But something more about other people at the Columbine shooting that there were more people than the two who are alleged to have shot. And I was reading through some of those documents again, I don't know whether it's fake or real or anything. 

That literally I somehow came across it just a half hour before the show. I was like, oh, that's interesting. I was just starting to look at it. So I'm not versed on it all, whether it's real or fake, but it was curious. And of course, as with many different past shootings, there's often some suspicious things about extra characters and other people helping out. Like when I do know more of, like, the underwear bomber, the United flight was it 293? That basically yeah, I forgot about him and the shoe guy too. 

Right, right. Yeah. There's basically people taking videos and handling and all that stuff, and then those people get off and then they're never seen from again except the guy and that know, very real Kurt Haskell. He was an attorney who saw that and wrote a whole account, did videos and interviews about it. He's like you know what I mean? Like a very credible person going on a safari with his wife, like on vacation. 

He's like, okay, and where'd the other guys, right? Like, he's like, watching the news, like, okay, so they got the rest of the guys too, right? And then they're like, what? So, yeah, it happens. I'm curious too, because I guess this extremist, especially like the right wing extremist stuff, it seems now that gets layered directly on top of conspiracy theorists in general, and that didn't always used to be the case. 

It feels like over the last decade, conspiracy theorists went from being I want to say bipartisan. Is that the right word? Went from being like a bipartisan thing to now if you say I'm a conspiracy theorist or you question 911 or your truth, and it's like, oh, what did you vote for, Trump? It's not always that simple, but it does feel like it leans into that angle. And there's another one here's, the question that I'm getting to in a long window way. 

There's another weird sort of pattern that emerges that maybe I've observed for my own reasons, but it feels like the conspiracy theory community also is much more attractive to very religious people. You get a lot of the government's trying to screw us all over and the CIA is working with Hollywood, but it's really because of Satan, and Satan's the real one behind. I'm just do you have any thoughts on does that pop its head in ANCAP? Is ANCAP largely, like, agnostic atheist, or is there any crossover at all with religion? Do you see the same patterns? ANCAP has, like, a wide range of people, so it's not necessarily religious or atheist, that kind of thing. 

But I do have a personal connection with what you're talking about because I was raised in an evangelical household and went to Christian school and things like that. And the idea of labeling that stuff as like, oh, this is Satan's doing that was definitely common. Even the things like that, just being like, Satan's the ruler over the principalities of this world and ultimately controls everything until a god comes back, that was a very common theme. 

So I'm not really surprised about that. And I'd say especially post tea party. At least the Republican. Conservative side of things, especially the very pro Israel side of things. They definitely got into that, like, the whole, like, okay, prophecy and then plus conspiracy to meet the prophecy kind of movement. Yeah, I guess, too, if the ultimate conspiracy is, like, Satan's always around the next corner, or he's always trying to deceive you, if you're all in on that, then, yeah, everything's kind of like, what is a bigger conspiracy than the devil plotting against God? And you right. 

Like, that's the ultimate one. And I guess any other mortal realm version of a conspiracy theory would just kind of pale in comparison to that one. Yeah. And it's very easy to weave into any situation, right, just ascribing it to demonic activity or Satan, unfortunately, doesn't really help people think about actors and actions and their incentives. I'm curious how your view on religion. Is it a net positive? Is it a net negative? To me, religion is people trying to find their sense of meaning and purpose and identity and place in the world. 

And so it's proto philosophy in terms of people trying to ascribe meaning and think about causal reality. Like, why does something happen? But it just tends to be more mystical. I think that religion in some cases may have helped people get out of worse forms of thinking or may have helped them feel more healed or connected with others. So there's relative kind of benefits there, but it's not beneficial if you're really trying to understand reality and ground yourself in it and think about causation and how your actions and words affect others and matter kind of thing. 

So I think if you are ascribing too much to religious causation, of course, eventually on the spectrum, you'll go insane, right? So I'm taking this in kind of an abstract level right now, but if we think on a continuum for religious thinking, most people don't act in pure spirituality, right? If you act in pure spirituality, like, oh, whatever. My body doesn't matter, only the metaphysical does, right? You're going to get hurt or die, right? People don't just go, I'll just jump off this building. 

God told me to, or, oh, you tell me. God told me to jump off this building. All right, let me go do it. Right? People tend to balk at that because they understand from observing reality that it has a weight on them. So the further you get from giving deference to reality in a physical reality, empirical reality, the more you might likely become irrational in your behavior and start to ascribe causation to things that are not causal and then really just make horrible decisions and have dysfunctional relationships. 

That's basically how I see it in that continuum. I don't know if this would be considered woo woo or not. Do you believe in other realities and dimensions? Do you think that there could be another dimension that overlaps on top of us, that there's other beings or there's other sounds and sensations of things that are just completely imperceptible to us? Or do you think that everything is kind of mundane and could be explained through modern tools and technology? Well, if we were to experience it, then it would be explainable because the very act of being able to observe means that it is tangible to our senses or is able to be interpreted through something that can sense it and then reinterpret to us. 

There's definitely things that fall outside of what we can readily observe. Right. Like the light spectrum. There's limits to what we can see even though it exists. Like an infrared. There's limits to sound. Right. There's vibrations in the air molecules which are material, but we can't perceive all those things. I think there's certainly limits to what we can or cannot perceive. And I don't know if I'd call it necessarily another dimension or reality, but it's in the realm of possibility that there are things beyond our perception that could exist. 

But I don't act on or believe in those things without reason and evidence, basically. What do you think about Antarctica? Do you think that there's any I mean, clearly we're not allowed to go there for reasons. Right. What do you think those reasons are? Definitely government testing of things. I'm pretty sure that's what do you have any specific ideas or theories that you like to entertain that's going on there? Is it a secret entrance into a whole nother world or nation or set of lands? Or is it just like they're torturing baby seals for oil? Well, I don't know about much of those things because I'm basically admiral Bird, his name was. 

Right, right. The thing is, it really is a rough climate out there. So at the end of the day, you got to be realistic about mean again. Maybe you could build something that really can resist that environment, but it is harsh. It is no joke being up there and down. Are you speaking from experience? Remember, you are on record saying you are not part of any of these agencies. 

I'm not. I'm definitely not. So what's your experience with Antarctica, sir? Oh, just looking at videos of people who go there for different things. Expeditions and whatever and this or that. It's very tough. Right. It's very tough to be in that environment. So for me, I think it's just more plausible that the government is testing out crazy craft and ships up there where they know that okay, if we're testing out extreme speed tests or extreme penetration tests, we can do this here and no one's going to likely bother us kind of thing. 

I could see that, but surviving up there would be a difficult time. Do you think that the government is still doing a version of MKUltra today? Like a massive mind control program? Or do you think they've shopped it out to private industry at this point? I don't know that they would need to use all those tactics that they did because MKUltra had a lot of different tactics with Sydney gottlieb the drug part to me seems less necessary because with drugs now at this point, a lot of people kind of know what many drugs can do. 

You got like PCAL out there, you got all this legalization going on around. We've gotten shared technology enough. It's a little bit less special when you have groups of CEOs going down to do like ayahuasca trips in Peru. So there's not as much, I think, of a mystery to that aspect. And I think that the trauma induced brainwashing could probably be done without having to worry about LSD or any other types of drugging. 

I don't think that's necessarily really required so much anymore. I think the government's a bit more effective at doing other forms of trauma based brainwashing that don't necessarily need drug induced dissociation to achieve at this point. Again, with physical violence and other forms of torture or other forms of handling, you could say that can be done. It doesn't necessarily be like, oh, I got to give this guy LSD or he's not going to do the ten word code that sets him off. 

I think it's less necessary, I would say, to do so. What do you think is the deal I mentioned her name earlier. What do you think is the deal with the whole spirit cooking stuff and the celebrities and the politicians? Do you think they're just trying to be seen? Do you think they're edgelords? Do you think they actually believe in some of it? Oh, I think they believe in it, yeah. 

I think they believe in it just like a Christian believes in Jesus and the devil. It's no different. It's the same thing, you know what I mean? That's going on anywhere where it's a religious belief. I think that they buy into this idea that it's like, okay, this was the way that the ancients and the pagans maintained their power. And you got to get your subjects to buy into what you want and get them to consent to your torture and your brainwashing. 

You want them to willingly serve you. And they do a bunch of these types of rituals to psychologically prepare themselves for that and to control people. So I think that it's mostly that they genuinely believe it in as much as a Christian believes that the devil's out there telling people this in. How real do you think the frazzle drip video is on a scale from one to ten? What's the frazzle drip video? What's the frazzle drip okay, so the frazzle drip video and by the way, this is sponsored by Hello Fresh. 

You can put in Paranoid American and get 20. No, I'm just kidding. The frazzled video was apparently a file that was called Frazzled Rip that was found on I might get some of this wrong hunter by one of oh, no, sorry. Anthony Weiner's laptop. So when they found Anthony Weiner's laptop for like the 7th time after he got caught, however many times it was apparently him and his wife huma Abidin, I guess her name was, they might have had this insurance policy. 

Like a dead man switch, love. Like I've got all of your evil secrets and the Internet rumor, which as far as I'm aware has never been backed up. But there was a video inside of this Frazzle rip file that had Hillary Clinton, I think, wearing the face of like, a small girl, like, taking her face off, screaming, Gore wearing it. And then someone, I guess, extracts some thrill oxide from her to use later. 

I guess if you haven't heard it, then it's unfair to just immediately give it a score of what you think of it. I'm surprised though, because this is like one of the bigger ones to have come out of a lot of the QAnon stuff. Yeah, no, because with anything that I look at with that kind of stuff, I need to see the evidence. I need to trace it myself and be confident. 

So I saw the wiener picks. I mean, I saw those, so I knew that they're my background on my phone right now. Okay, well, that's the way to do it. It keeps away the bidens. I have heard of such things, though. I have heard of people claiming that kind of stuff. I didn't hear the Frazzle connection thing, but same thing. I've never seen anything like that. I mean, she's clearly, sociopathic, borderline psychopathic, absolutely know, traced their history with what they did in Mina and murdering people and stuff like that. 

She is power hungry to the T. She is literally pretty bad. She stays with her husband despite him being a total, know, disgusting guy because she is really wanting that power. That's how much she craves. So once you go black, you don't go back. Right. And Bill Clinton was the first black president. Oh, yeah. How come? I think just because he played saxophone, maybe, I don't know. I don't remember the reason. 

Maybe think of what was it Danny? His supposed. Oh, yeah. Danny Clinton. Yeah. My friend Alex who's a free knots. They did I think they did a collaboration song or I don't know who was with him about specifically, Bill Clinton's supposed son, which he does really look like him, so I don't blame him, even if he wasn't his son. I'm like I get it. I can see why you think so. 

I think that just observing their behavior and their actions, their connection, their history to me, as you can imagine, just power hungry, sociopathic borderline psychopathic willing to basically do anything to get into and maintain power. Well, I actually really want to know more about your answer for the Lee Harvey Oswald one. So you gave it a two on Lee Harvey. And I'm curious, do you think he had nothing to do with it. 

Was he truly just a mean? I guess in my mind. I'm not going to say what you think. What I think is like, eight people had their fingers on the trigger and then someone took them out and then everyone looked down and was like, damn, I thought that was mine. But it was just like someone was going to shoot them that day. That's what I thought as well, because that's something that happens sometimes is doing the multiple hitman thing so you have backups just in case first shooter misses or you need another fall guy. 

I think that it's very possible there was multiple people that day that were on the. So how much do you personally care about the I mean, I care in the general sense that I don't like what the CIA was orchestrating and what they were trying to do at the time, especially with they were trying to push for war. They didn't like his challenging of the banking system and what was going on. 

So not that JFK was a good guy. JFK, he was put there because they thought he was easy to push over because he was a philanderer, he was a cheater. And so there was this blackmail on him. So it was just the usual, like, yeah, we got blackmail on this guy. He's know we don't have to worry about him. But then he's out here trying know, keep Vietnam from happening and now he's got to go. 

It was pretty sophisticated. That's some pretty high level stuff going on there. And of course, the Secret Service agent in the video being called off the car. So obviously, I mean, literally being told, hey, come off. And he's like, what? Really confused? Why am I being called off the back of this car right before he gets shot? So it's very clear that it was a high level orchestration to have that. 

Do you think that that's the reason why they haven't released all of the documentation and footage? And do you think it's ever coming out, all of it, or do you think it's going to be locked away forever? From my understanding, the government only tries to let things out when they want to rub it in our faces, and they think no one's going to do anything about it. So I think the fact they haven't released it kind of makes it so that they think they can't rub it in our faces, yet they think that it would be enough to really cause problems, though. 

I think that's probably why, yeah. In your mind, what do you think would happen theoretically, if someone leaked it and it was like, okay, you got us. Those are the official records. And sure enough, the government determined that the government took out JFK. Do you think that anything would change or would that just be like another bullet pointed pop quiz? You'd have to worry about if you're in 8th grade. 

I think that the main thing that we're seeing in terms of political power shifts is secession and nullification. And already there's been a lot of movement on that among the states in various ways, whether it's sanctuary cities, legalizing cannabis, having Texas having a suppressor law where they nullify the ATF. I think that when you have enough of these events put together, you can get a coalition of governors who might come together and be like, okay, we're going to do this and we're going to stop it. 

It's possible. So I think that's possibly the greatest threat the federal government really faces, I think generally is the real battle between the people who want power, right? The people who are like, okay, you know what, we need to work together the smaller tyrants to stop the bigger tyrants, because we could be the next one killed, kind of thing. You know what I mean? If they're that concerned, I think that's a real situation that can come from that. 

And that's been something that's happened many times in, know, civil wars and secession and know, that's just a fact of history. So that could be a real catalyst, I think, potentially, especially with everything that's happened with the Shutdowns, Lockdowns and Epstein at this point, that'd be real big. I got another favorite list. Can you name your top three favorite ATF agents? Yeah, I'm just kidding. But I'm curious about the ATF because I go to all different forums. 

One of my favorite ones is, like, liberal gun owners, which gives you an idea of what really hard people that would consider the sound of blue, but they also are pro Second Amendment. I guess they're like the ultimate FUD. But then you've also got a lot of, I guess, right wingers conservatives, and they're like, yeah, my governor is going to make this legal to carry in the whole state, you don't need a permit and all this other stuff. 

But it also doesn't seem like anyone has ever really been pushing back against the ATF, not even the NRA, maybe the Goa is it gun Owners of America. They had a few things that were going up against, especially like the pistol brace was one of the most recent ones, right? And the pistol brace, to me, almost feels like this game of slash, rubbing your face in it, where it's like, let's see how much authority the ATF can assert over the rest of the country and who doesn't push back against it. 

And right after that happened, there were some people proclaiming, like, oh, we're actually glad this happened because now we can make an argument for common use, and if we can make a common use argument and overturn the pistol brace, and then it was like, well, then we'll get suppressors back too. And it's like, whoa, guys, hold on. I can't remember for the life of me any time that there's been progress on the Second Amendment side. 

If anything, it's just always seceding to compromises but never getting anything in return. And one of those things in return is that you don't have to pay $300 to get a tax stamp to get a suppressor to protect your hearing, because suppressors aren't really used by ninjas that assassinate your family in the middle of the night undetected and then sneak out through like an air vent. So long winded question, but is the ATF, is there any chance that it slowly goes away or is it only getting stronger? There's a big chance that it gets mostly neutered or goes away. 

So the three court cases that have been leading up this time that are really promising in this direction are heller, McDonald, and bruin. Heller was that individual right to bear arms out of Washington DC. Then McDonald incorporated that rule against the states, meaning that everyone, not just people in federal territories or DC. Have that right to bear arms. And then bruin, which is a case striking down new York's permit system, was basically saying that these may issue things can't stand. 

And they talked about a history and textual analysis about certain regulations. You have to find evidence way back in the day to say that this regulation was used back in the 17 hundreds or early 18 hundreds for it to apply today. That's what's supposed to be at least in terms of the case and the interpretation. And now the big organization that's been suing a lot over these is farms policy coalition. 

So big ups to them, love them. What are the names again? Farmers policy, firearms policy coalition. Policy coalition, yeah, FPC. So definitely join them if everybody's watching you, haven't they're? Great. So they were suing over the pistol rule, and they got a temporary injunction against them in the fifth circuit. They're also suing over the 80% lower rule, and they're doing a crazy amount of amazing work. They're kicking butt. 

So goa is good too. I just personally love FPC because I just love how they have they're very radical and principled in their branding and their language. There's no compromise whatsoever. They're amazing. What's the deal with the NRA? Do you think it's just because they just have made so much money and has too many revolving politicians coming in and out, or do you think they actually stand for anything? I mean the know, I'll be fair to them and say they've done some good things over the years. 

There's definitely been times they neglected the heller McDonald cases. Actually, alan gura had to take them up because NRA wouldn't take them. But generally speaking though, they've been compromising on rights time and again, and they claim they don't, but it's just not true. They haven't been as radical as they need to be. And because of that, a lot of people in today's world and the next generation, the young generation of gun owners have really kind of just washed up their hands of NRA and have gone on to Goa and FPC especially. 

So the Know is like the target of the Democrats and the gun control advocates because that's their punching bag they've had for a long time. But by the time they figure it out that the NRA is not even really the future, it's really FPC, and then maybe Know, it's going to be too late for them because the cases that have come through are very strong. And the textual interpretation from the Supreme Court is really suggesting that a lot of the things that they're going for that is the gun control lobby, it's just not going to stand because the common use thing you're talking about is true. 

The common use language was used, and the AR platform is the most commonly used platform in America. Yeah, but it's really scary, though. It's like a really scary platform. Oh, the gun? Yeah. Oh, I don't think it's scary. Really scary. You ever seen one in person? Man, follow my legs here. I was like, okay. Yeah, exactly. It's an awesome platform. It's an awesome platform because the ergonomics of it, the adaptability of it, it's very easy to shoot. 

Even a pregnant woman was able to take out some bad guys with it. So its popularity is actually kind of a blessing at this point because now there is nothing to go from past that right, because if you say common use, how can you go past the most commonly used platform in America? You know what mean? Like, you can't say that's not allowed because that is the top, that is it. 

That is the number. Kind of basically we're just waiting for that to come through because once that gets to the Supreme Court, I think all assault weapons bans are going to be destroyed. And then gorsuch. He made a comment. I forgot in what form and when it was in the past few years, saying that the ATF was basically hinting at that they were basically making up laws. So they're supposed to be a rulemaking body and they're not supposed to make laws. 

But he's basically saying the ATF is acting like Congress. He hints it at the fact that they're out of control. So I think that we have a very sweet but simple majority that would probably strike down most of what the ATF has ruled on of late, and maybe even the F of ATF, potentially. I mean, if they're willing to go that far, that'd be pretty cool. And what's the caliber that rules all other calibers? Did you already mention it? Is it two, two, three? Is it five, five, six? What is it for a handgun? Ammunition. 

I think nine millimeter does the job. It's got pretty good footpound force. You can easily have a lot of those rounds in a lot of your standard capacity mags. So you're easily getting 15 plus rounds in a mag, no problem. 15? Whoa. Not in California. Sir. Watch out, man. I don't even think you're allowed to hint at that. That might actually be a crime. It might be. They arrest you immediately. 

Like, the SWAT team comes in your studio. You were making the threats that you might have, like, one in the chamber and ten in the clip. Yeah, right. But yeah, the two, two, three or a little more powerful, five, five, six, they're the same kind of diameter. There just a little more powder in the five, five, six. They're generally good workaround calibers. It's actually not typically even that strong enough for bigger game. 

Like, you don't typically use 56223 for bigger game. You'd be looking at something like 36 or something like that. Well, that was actually a trick question. The correct answer was 50 action express, and you failed horribly. I'm sorry. With the golden cheetah stripes on it, too. I thought you were going to say four bore or something. That was so we're coming to 90 minutes here. I want to give you another opportunity. 

First, please plug not just your voluntariest comic series, which is amazing, and everyone should check out the voluntarities comic. And if you like project blue beam, you probably do. If you're listening to this, check out the volunteers comic series. But you've also written a book, and I believe you've got another one coming out soon, right? And tell us about that. I've got a copy behind me. Our good friend chikal or igor did the artwork for the COVID of it, which is one of the artists that ripa stole away from me. 

I'll never forget. Ripa has created a supervillain. He doesn't know yet because I'm so small down on the list, but one day I'm going to get like, lex luthor on his ass, I swear, for taking it's. Like, igor is great. I love him. And yeah, he did work on that. He did a little few things for volunteers as well. So I don't blame Eric for taking know, I'm like, I'm sad, but I blame awesome. 

I mean for you. Eric. Eric. July. But yeah, it's been awesome. It's really been awesome to be able to work with so many talented people on all these creative stuff. And as you mentioned, the covers here that I have for my nonfiction books, these are the first two out that I have right now, which is libertarian volunteerism vision for libertarian future. And then I got the right one. 

Okay. And then I have a third one coming out probably at the beginning next year because I got so many products otherwise going on because that was loud. So as I think I talked with you about last time voluntarius went through a remaster. So my comic series, I had many struggles over the years finally getting to my primary design that I wanted to have because the company I first was working with went defunct. 

And then I had different artists, and I was like, okay, this is frustrating. And as you know yourself, working with comic artists, keeping someone on a project is always a challenge. Talking about, dude, it's been smooth sailing for the last ten years. I haven't hit a single bump. Single bump. Not a single one. Not at all. When you know what you're doing, everything just falls into place. If you join my patreon, I'll give you some tips. 

You'll never run into any problem ever again. Not a single one. Basically, I was like, okay, it's time to remaster. So I did it. I successfully did it. And we actually just finished it the other day. Just finished the last page lettered. The last page myself on what amounts to a nearly 200 page masterpiece. Trade paperback. Yeah. So it's pretty beefy. So I'm so proud of it. I'm super excited for this. 

And I'm finally at a point where when I have this, I'm going to be fully bought into it and no longer ashamed. Because I had a little shame before where I was like, oh, my gosh, I have a changed up artist midway, and the first artwork is not as up to par. I was ashamed. I'm no longer ashamed. Ten episodes or ten issues? Because you said 200 pages, so it is technically six issues. 

But in order to fix things, my first comic was 24 pages. I'd expand it to 50 to fit all the dialogue. And then the second one, it's 24 pages. I expanded to 38, so now everything is beautiful. The pacing is gorgeous. The artwork is overall solid and has good continuity. I did the letters, so it's not terrible, and I got to fix things along the way. So we're doing a review this week and through the weekend on it, and then we're submitting it for printing, and the covers are all redone. 

And for the trade paperback, it's a wraparound cover, so it's an artwork that goes from front to back. It's gorgeous. So I am just so honored that we were able to do this. And honestly, I feel just really special that we got to this point because it was ten years in the making. Five years of prototyping, essentially, and future verse prototyping, then saying, okay, we're going to start the canon, and you were there for it. 

And I even tried to plug paranoid American. I was looking at the other day on my second campaign. It's still there. You can see it there. Get a signed comic from you. Unfortunately, nobody bought the perk. I tried to plug it at the time, but more people, of course, have gotten onto your story since then. You're just starting then, too, so just like me. Yeah. And I realized, too, that for the first ten years, I just had my head down working on comics and not doing any promotion. 

Like, I didn't talk to anyone outside of my little bubble. So now I've got, like, ten years worth of product to start. Hustling out there is great. That actually is so much better because and that's something I learned over the years is that the hardest part. If you're just starting raw, like, oh, here's my first campaign, I'm just going to go, well, now people are going to have to wait. 

So if you actually are just starting a promotion when there's a lore to dive into, that is the most ideal situation you can be in. If you have something that people can sink their teeth into right off the bat, that's the best time to actually do the big promotion. Because if all you have is, oh, here's my first issue for my kickstarter, and you're like, and we'll be up with the next one next year, if you're lucky. 

Yeah, issue two comes out in four years. Exactly. It's rough. So the fact that you have so many things for someone as a fan to just dive into once they discover, that makes way more sense to me for you to put your energy into promoting what you've already developed, you're in the right spot. And I love your stuff. I read it and I feel inspired by it. I take a look at the concepts you talk about and especially the conspiracy stuff, and I often think about how I have that in my own world, too, because I love when we talked about this before. 

You have the conspiracy stuff with a little touch on Liberty. I had to touch on Liberty superheroes and little Easter eggs of conspiracy. So you got that nice little balance there. But your work is just this great wealth of knowledge, and it makes it exciting and fun because thank you, sir. This is about you and your comic. Just stop that. Well, I'm just trying to be real because I've looked at this stuff raw. 

Like you you read the books, you look at the old manuscripts from the 18 hundreds and the 19 hundreds, and you go back even further, and it's not exciting. You're just having to read through long books or just old news stories and stuff like that. Are you saying the creature from Jekyll Island couldn't come out and be like a blockbuster? Right. I mean, maybe if you did it right. 

Someone did do it right, though, for the animated version. If you've seen the American dream. Yeah, you're absolutely right. They did do that one right. And that guy actually went to my undergrad, and I know he went to California to be a producer, and I think he spent $300,000 to make that animated short pretty. Now he's making videos for the upcoming Podesta campaign. He could be. I don't know. 

He's been dark since that time. He was very active back then, 2008, 2010, arena, but not anymore. And what's the best place for people to get your volunteers? Are you going to do any diamond distribution or is it going to be directly to readers through your website or how are you going to go about it? So with my remaster, things will still just be up on Indie Planet, although they've been really on the backlog. 

So I'm kind of frustrated with them right now. But they'll have print on demand. There digital. It's going to be on Amazon digital as well. So like on, you know, US, that's where it's print on demand and sometimes digital on also. It'll be on Amazon as well. When you just search on, there the Voluntariest and then we'll print copies here and there. If I'm going to table at conventions or if I'm doing a campaign, then the ones that I fulfill, of course, I'm printing and shipping. 

Are there any conventions that you have your eye on? It's not a comic convention, but the next convention I probably will table at is the Libertarian Party of Florida convention. The LPF in January. But I am getting with this remaster and another project, a secret project I'll show you later that is coming out for next year. I'm going to be wanting to table a lot in 2024. This is the comic you're working on for the World Health Organization, isn't it? You told me about that. 

Yeah. I'm basically teaching people how to properly get their 10th booster. But I'm going to be looking for opportunities in 2024 like crazy. I'm not sure how much it'll be on the comic book convention side. I would love to do Tampa Bay, Comic Con or MetroCon if possible. That would be great. I got to feel it, you know? I might even create my own, you know what I mean? We were just talking about that before, right? About making maybe an indie creator one even. 

I like the idea, man. I think that's where we need to be headed. And honestly, I'm kind of with the same mindset of you. I would probably rather go to Cryptid conventions and Liberty conventions and stuff and hawk the comics because I think it would be much easier to sell. And I guess I don't mean easy in, like a convenience way, but it would be an easier sell for someone that's, like liberty minded to then buy a Liberty type of a comic book or a Liberty style book. 

Or like a free speech kind of comic versus going to the comic convention and being like, buy my book about conspiracy theories and not that superhero over there. And not that big bosom chick over there. You can stand out more bosom chicks if you had big bosom chicks on your conspiracies. I actually do. It's funny you mentioned that. I've got a new Illuminati series coming out that is just like adults only. 

Because for a few of the distributors I was working with, they're like, man, if you made some adults only would it would here I'm at I'm part of the Hollywood elite. I'm going to have to let you take the cake on that one. You grind that out. Oh, no, we've got Alistair Crowley's dick on, like, a big splash page in the back of one of them. So everyone can look forward to that. 

I mean, everyone needs to learn about these things and what's really going on. So I'm glad you're reaching people in all positions, in all rooms of the house, in all no crevices unexplored. Right? All right, man. Well, thanks again for coming by. And where can people find you on social media right now? If you look yeah, Jackvloydloid. com, that is my new personal website. I do still have thevallcomic. 

com one, but Jackvloy. com is popping and I'm getting ready to do bigger things with that. So it kind of links to a lot of the other things I do. So check that out there. All right, right on, man. Thanks again for stopping by. And just a reminder that total paranoia is total consciousness. That's from, I think, the Book of John. I don't remember which verse, but right. 

Introducing the paranoid American Homunculus owner's manual. Dive into the arcane, into the hidden corners of the occult. This isn't just a comic, it's a hidden tome of supernatural power. All original artwork illustrating the groundbreaking research of Juan Ayala, one of the only living homunculologists of our time. Learn how to summon your own homunculus. An enigma wrapped in the fabric of reality itself. Their power at your fingertips, their existence, your secret. 

Explore the mysteries of the Aristotelian, the spiritual, the Paracelsian, the crowlean homunculus. Ancient knowledge lost to time, now unearthed in this forbidden tale. This comic book holds truths not meant for the light of day. Knowledge that was buried, feared and shunned. Are you ready to uncover the hidden? The paranoid American homunculus owner's manual. Not for the faint of heart. Available now from paranoid American. Get your copy@tjojp. com or paranoidamerican. 

com today. .