George Carlin: You Don’t Need a Formal Conpiracy

Comment: "There is no national conspiracy to buy elections and control America."

George Carlin: "You don't need a formal conspiracy, right? When interests converge, these people went to the same universities and fraternities are the same directors. They're in the same country clubs. They have like interest. They don't need to call a meeting. They know what's good for them. They're getting it. And there used to be seven oil companies. There are now three. It will soon be two. The things that matter in this country have been reduced. In choice. There are two political parties, there are a handful of insurance companies. There are about six or seven information [companies] but if you want a bagel, there are 23 flavors, because you have the illusion. You have the illusion of choice."

https://x.com/LightOnLiberty/status/2005792249175822799

Continue ReadingGeorge Carlin: You Don’t Need a Formal Conpiracy

Getting the Facts Straight First

On all topics we need to get the facts straight before we can have any meaningful conversations. Joe Rogan brings up two examples regarding immigration.

1. FAR more people were deported under Obama than under Trump I and II. Look it up or see the link in the comments.

2. Hillary Clinton position on illegal immigration in 2008: Re people in the US illegally,

If they've committed a crime, deport them, no questions asked. They're gone. If they are working and law abiding, we should say, "Here are the conditions for you staying: You have to pay a stiff fine because you came here illegally. You have to pay back taxes and you have to try to learn English. And you have to wait in line."

What changed after Hillary Clinton took this strong stand that would convince her to reverse her stand? And for most elected Democrats and their supporters, what changed? What changed that would reverse their positions on warmongering, censorship, immigration, COVID mandates, experimental transgender medical interventions and the "need" for primary school teachers to confuse their students about whether they are boys or girls? How is it possible that so many people would flip their positions without a massive revelation of new facts to justify the flip? I suspect that the mechanism is social contagion (of the type discussed by Abigail Shrier), but what was the driver of the contagion? I suspected it is the highly coordinated actions by NGOs, many of whom were financed through the federal government (though USAID). The evidence is starting to pour out, starting with the Twitter Files

Here are Grok's numbers of deportations under Trump and Obama:

During Barack Obama's presidency (2009-2017), the U.S. government carried out approximately 3 million formal removals (deportations) of noncitizens. This figure refers specifically to removals, which involve a formal court order and often carry long-term consequences like bars to reentry, as defined by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Some sources cite higher totals for Obama (around 5.3 million) when including voluntary returns at the border in addition to formal removals.

During Donald Trump's first term (2017-2021), approximately 1.2 million noncitizens were formally removed. Other estimates put this at around 2.1 million when including returns.

As of late August 2025 (about seven months into Trump's second term), Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) had deported nearly 200,000 people. When including actions by U.S. Customs and Border Protection, the Coast Guard, and self-deportations, the total rises to nearly 350,000 deportations since January 2025. By September 2025, this number would likely be slightly higher but still far below Obama's totals.

Overall, far more illegal immigrants were deported under Obama than under Trump's second term to date (or even his first term).

Rogan's conclusion, we are being subjected to a "massive concentrated psyop."

Grok on PsyOp:

A psyop, short for psychological operation, refers to planned activities designed to influence the perceptions, emotions, attitudes, and behaviors of targeted audiences, often through the dissemination of information, propaganda, or other non-violent means. In a military context, psyops are used by armed forces—such as the U.S. Army's Psychological Operations (PSYOP) units—to convey selected messages that support strategic objectives, like persuading enemies to surrender or building support among allies. This can involve tactics such as leaflet drops, broadcasts, social media campaigns, or cultural engagements to shape opinions without direct combat.

The term is closely related to psychological warfare (sometimes called PSYWAR), which encompasses broader efforts to demoralize opponents or rally support using misinformation, rumors, or symbolic actions. Outside of official military use, "psyop" is sometimes invoked colloquially or in conspiracy theories to describe perceived manipulative campaigns by governments, media, or other entities, though this is more informal slang than a formal definition.

Also see Robert Malone's new book, Psywar.

Continue ReadingGetting the Facts Straight First

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?