Who is in Charge?

Patrick Bet-David:

"We think the President is the most powerful person in the world—but the real power lies with Larry Fink."

BlackRock’s CEO controls $10 TRILLION in assets, dictating corporate behavior through ESG—a system so corrupt that even Elon Musk called the "S in ESG Satanic."

Why? Because when Philip Morris gets a higher ESG score than Tesla, something is deeply broken.

The Goal? Control. Not just money—these elites already have billions. They want to reshape society by forcing companies to comply with their ideology.

The Mindset? Look at George Soros, who admitted: "I fancied myself as some kind of God... I carried messianic fantasies."

The Scary Reality:

- BlackRock, Vanguard, & State Street control 90% of S&P 500 companies.

- ESG is a weapon—punish dissenters, reward loyalists.

- Politicians come and go… but these financiers stay forever.

I am haunted by the thoughts that:

The national politicians repeatedly make promises to make life better for the citizens, but they break those promises. These same politician aren't using their independent judgment. They appear to be controlled. This goes on and one, with zero hope that it will change. As George Carlin stated. "It's a big club and you ain't in it."

For clarification, I asked Grok whether it's true that BlackRock, Vanguard and State Street "control" 90$ of the S&P 500 companies. Grok:

No, it is not true that BlackRock, Vanguard, and State Street control 90% of S&P 500 companies. The claim likely stems from misunderstandings or exaggerations about their influence as major asset managers. Here's a breakdown based on available data:

- **Ownership Stakes**: BlackRock, Vanguard, and State Street, often called the "Big Three," are among the largest shareholders in many S&P 500 companies due to their management of index funds and ETFs, such as those tracking the S&P 500. Research from 2017 indicates they collectively constitute the largest shareholder in about 88% of S&P 500 firms, but their individual stakes in these companies are typically less than 10% each. For example, Vanguard might hold around 8-9%, BlackRock 6-7%, and State Street 3-4% in companies like Apple or Microsoft. Their combined ownership in the S&P 500 is estimated to be around 15-20%, not 90%.[](https://www.cnbc.com/2023/10/23/vanguard-blackrock-state-street-dont-own-major-us-corporations.html)[](https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/business-and-politics/article/hidden-power-of-the-big-three-passive-index-funds-reconcentration-of-corporate-ownership-and-new-financial-risk/30AD689509AAD62F5B677E916C28C4B6)[](https://www.flagshipfinancialtn.com/blog/do-vanguard-blackrock-and-state-street-run-the-world)

- **Assets Under Management**: As of recent data, BlackRock manages around $10 trillion, Vanguard about $10.4 trillion, and State Street approximately $4 trillion in assets. While their combined $24 trillion is significant, it represents investments on behalf of clients (e.g., pension funds, individual investors), not direct ownership. The total market capitalization of the S&P 500 is roughly $50 trillion (as of 2025), so their managed assets are substantial but don’t equate to controlling 90% of the index.[](https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/12/opinion/vanguard-power-blackrock-state-street.html)[](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Vanguard_Group)

- **Voting Power**: The Big Three exert influence through proxy voting, as they vote on behalf of their clients’ shares. This gives them significant sway in corporate governance, but they don’t "control" companies in the sense of dictating operations. Their voting is often coordinated through centralized governance departments, and they tend to support management in about 90% of votes, which some argue limits competition or innovation, but it’s not outright control.[](https://blackrockvanguardwatch.com/)[](https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/business-and-politics/article/hidden-power-of-the-big-three-passive-index-funds-reconcentration-of-corporate-ownership-and-new-financial-risk/30AD689509AAD62F5B677E916C28C4B6)[](https://theconversation.com/these-three-firms-own-corporate-america-77072)

- **Misinformation**: Claims like the 90% figure often appear in social media or commentary, such as by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. or Vivek Ramaswamy, but these are not supported by data. For instance, RFK Jr.’s claim that they own 89% of the S&P 500 has been debunked as confusing beneficial ownership (holding shares for clients) with direct control.[](https://www.quora.com/RFK-said-that-BlackRock-StateStreet-and-Vanguard-own-89-of-the-S-P-500-Is-that-true)[](https://finance.yahoo.com/news/already-own-89-p-500-113144903.html)

- **Context on Influence**: While their concentration raises concerns about market power—potentially reducing competition or amplifying their influence on issues like ESG (environmental, social, governance)—they don’t own or control 90% of the S&P 500. Critics like Bernie Sanders highlight their dominance, noting they’re major shareholders in 95% of S&P 500 firms, but this refers to shareholding, not total control.[](https://www.etfstream.com/articles/bernie-sanders-blackrock-vanguard-and-state-street-oligarchy-threatens-democracy)

In summary, BlackRock, Vanguard, and State Street are major players with significant stakes and voting power in the S&P 500, but the 90% control claim is a gross exaggeration. Their combined influence is closer to 15-20% of the index’s shares, driven by passive investing trends, not a monolithic grip on corporate America. Always dig into primary data like SEC filings or academic studies for clarity, as public narratives can inflate these figures for effect.[

Continue ReadingWho is in Charge?

Obama’s Interference with Trump’s Presidency

As a person who voted for Obama, Clinton and Biden I am horrified to learn of the deep corruption of Obama et al, including Obama's weaponization of the U.S. security state coordinated with the willing assistance of the lapdog corporate media. The DNC has no respect for the electoral process (e.g., what they did to Bernie in 2016, the dropout of moderate candidates and the continuing campaign of Elizabeth Warren to assist Biden in the 2020 primaries, the lies about Biden's fitness and most recently, the anointment of Kamala Harris without a vote). And don't forget the Hunter Biden Laptop lies by the DNC allied U.S. security state. What we are now learning about Obama's exit strategy from office--it appears to be an intentional and potentially criminal disenfranchisement of those who voted for Trump--is icing on the cake.

Matt Taibbi, author of an article that connects the dots: "In Brutal Document Release, the Russia Hoax is Finally Exposed: Official claim that Putin "aspired" to help Trump was based on four pieces of evidence, all bogus, even "ridiculous," according to long-suppressed report just released by DNI Tulsi Gabbard."

It was worse than we thought.

The January 6, 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment concluding that Russian President Vladimir Putin “developed a clear preference” for Donald Trump and “aspired to help his chances of victory” is revealed in a report released this morning by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard to have been based on four pieces of evidence. One was the Steele Dossier. The surprise is that the other three were even less credible, each included over objections of the report’s CIA authors.

Continue ReadingObama’s Interference with Trump’s Presidency

It’s Time for NPR to Earn Its Own Funding With Respectable Reporting

I don't want to forced to fund NPR any more than want to be forced to fund Fox News. Uri Berliner served as the senior business editor at NPR from 1999 until his resignation in April 2024. What follows is an excerpt from his article, "Happy Independence Day, NPR." Anyone who has been paying attention knows that he not exaggerating the far-left slide of NPR:

Once fairly evenly divided between liberals, moderates, and conservatives, NPR’s news audience shifted sharply to the left. And by 2023, liberals outnumbered conservatives more than six to one. True to the tote bag cliché, NPR became an accessory for Whole Foods shoppers. Which is sad, because in another era, NPR, and public radio more broadly, developed some of the most creative and entertaining programming anywhere, from Car Talk to This American Life, Planet Money, Radiolab and A Prairie Home Companion.

Thanks in part to this ideological transformation, NPR botched major stories—and damaged its bond with the American people.

To name a couple of prominent examples: It repeatedly insisted that the lab leak theory of Covid had been debunked and it refused to cover Hunter Biden’s laptop. NPR’s reporting on the most contentious issues of the day—climate change, youth gender medicine, and the war in Gaza—leaned on moralizing and emotional certitude more than on rigorous factual analysis.

Embracing the mantras of the Great Awokening, NPR became a caricature of itself with headlines like these:

Microfeminism: The Next Big Thing in Fighting the Patriarchy

Which Skin Color Emoji Should You Use? The Answer Can Be More Complex than You Think

Black Women’s Groups Find Health and Healing on Hikes, But Sometimes Racism, Too

Bringing Diversity to Maine’s Nearly All-White Lobster Fleet

Diet Culture Can Hurt Kids. This Author Advises Parents to Reclaim the Word ‘Fat’

These Drag Artists Know How to Turn Climate Activism into a Joyful Blowout

Continue ReadingIt’s Time for NPR to Earn Its Own Funding With Respectable Reporting

Eric Weinstein’s Proposal for Recreating a Moderate Left

Eric Weinstein's proposal for a moderate left:

Make markets somewhat fairer for working families."

"Protect nature! Up to a point!"

"Welcome, to a managable number of actual refugees."

"Make Trans accepted and EXCEEDINGLY rare."

"Manage M1 but do not print your way out of debt."

"Accept Gays and Lesbians...but don't promote kink. Also...after LG the whole alphabet thing can change into something else entirely if you go out far enough."

"A little Spanish can be useful! But learn English."

"Vaccines are a great idea, but need to be watched like a hawk."

"Let's be more empathic without sticking it to men, the rich, Christians or people of European descent."

"Let's acknowledge our problematic history and also take pride in how awesome we became in so many ways."

"Let's be tolerant as a rule of thumb, but not of the intolerant."

"Let's house the homeless, and not confuse them for the drug-addicted and souls suffering from mental illness"

"Love who you want! But for god sakes, have kids and raise them to be normalish."

"Racism *remains* a problem...but much much less than it used to be!! Let's take our wins people. Great job!"

"White Christian European men did a lot of bad things...just like everyone else. The problem was that they were so good at doing things that they did bad things at scale. And MAN did they pull off miracle after miracle. Hats off to our founding fathers. Warts and all!!"

"Let's acknowledge that markets do not work perfectly people as their zealous supporters claim!! But damn...what an amazing idea for lifting people out of squalor!!"

"Worship almost however you wish to worship. But don't be a murderous or intolerant lunatic about it. Just chill bro."

"Don't use mean language when you can avoid it. But don't be a pussy or go around being a killjoy-nanny-policeman either when you can avoid it. Use judgement."

"Your identity deserves to be celebrated! Briefly. Because it is interesting...but not that interesting. Everyone has one."

https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1940000994500518350

Continue ReadingEric Weinstein’s Proposal for Recreating a Moderate Left

Whitney Webb: What to Do About the Puppetmaster

Whitney Webb argues that the general public is unaware of the power structure of oligarch networks and their connection to the national security state. She argues that the CIA, created by Wall Street bankers with ties to organized crime, has historically served corporate interests. She calls for individuals to disengage from big tech companies, which are heavily interconnected with intelligence agencies and have unsavory associations. She advocates for independence from these systems to avoid being controlled by them, emphasizing the need for personal responsibility and action rather than relying on the political system. Transcript of Whitney Webb:

What I attempt to do. I mean, basically, at the end of the day, this into these entities and this power structure had been successful because people have not really been aware of what, what's been going on, and how interconnected a lot of these oligarch networks ultimately are, and how connected they are to our national security state. Because a lot of people, you know, if we're just talking about, back to my point earlier, talking about Mossad, talking about the CIA, who does the CIA work for? Who does Mossad work for?

In the case of the CIA, it's very clear that it was created by Wall Street bankers who entered into questionable alliances with organized crime, and bankers and organized crime are both ultimately interested in expanding their their rackets and is making as much money as possible. And so eventually you have certain economic networks and court you know, the this, these, these alliances dominated what is now corporate America, the multinational corporation that's who the CIA has throughout most of its history, conducted coups on behalf of so we have to go a level up if we really want to know what's going on and Look beyond CIA and Mossad and see, you know, who's really, at least at the scale up a key part of the power structure that's really running the show, because, you know, it's important for them that the public doesn't really look that high up, because then it just seems like We can't really do anything about it, but I think people ultimately can.

What I've argued a lot for a long time is that people need to try and extricate themselves from the biggest iteration of what this mob is today, which is really big tech, which is, again, connected to a lot of it. Connect a lot of these CEOs connected to figures like Epstein or other questionable associations, and also almost all of the big Silicon Valley companies today have their have origins or funding tied to the CIA or to DARPA or to entities like that and that.

We should boycott them as much as possible, and not use their services as much as possible, and not be dependent on these entities. Because if we're dependent then, you know, they can do whatever they want to us. Yeah, and so you know the best way to not give up is to work to be as independent of those systems as possible. Because if we're dependent on them you're basically a slave to these people at the end of the day, which is what I think most Americans do not want.

There's a lot of efforts being made to sort of keep people in in the box of where they think, Oh, well, if I vote for this party or this politician and this candidate, I don't have to do anything to ensure my independence from the system. I can remain dependent on the system and hope that politician XYZ will magically, you know, save the day and fix the country and, you know, ends this ruling power of 80 plus years of, you know, intelligence and organized crime. Yeah, I think it's really something that has to be sort of done on an individual level, and people need to take individual responsibility if they don't want to be part of the system, particularly as we move into this increasingly digital future that these very small handful of companies are going to completely control.

In sum, here is what we can do:

  • Boycott and avoid using services from big tech companies that have ties to the CIA and DARPA.

  • Encourage others to become more independent from the current power structure and not be dependent on the system.

  • Raise awareness about the interconnected nature of oligarch networks, intelligence agencies, and multinational corporations.

Who is Whitney Webb?  According to Grok:

[More . . . ]

Continue ReadingWhitney Webb: What to Do About the Puppetmaster