Investigative journalist, author and 24-year Russian military counterintelligence veteran, Daniel Estulin joins Alex Jones to to discuss the collapse of the current world order and how, for the first time in 1,000 years, we are flying completely blind and we have no economic model. The model was to kill us but they failed.

I always look forward to what Daniel Estulin has to say and he is absolutely lit in this latest interview on InfoWars.

###

Daniel Estulin: If Trump goes through with his plans, it would wipe out those elite who are behind [the] Clintons and the Bidens. In other words, the Wall Streets, the hedge funds, the speculative financial interests, they would remain alive – although things happen – but they would lose their resources they previously had, which is what? The little machine that prints money that you and I don’t have.

But why Trump? And why do the elite see him as such a danger to their rules-based order? Because you see, America and the world in general, they need to be perceived not as a kind of united front, but as a, let’s call it, matryoshka, nesting doll, hiding at least three Americas.

So the first layer is the America of Wall Street, Washington’s bureaucracy, Chicago, Hollywood, Silicon Valley. It’s America’s 1%. And then there’s the second America, the post-industrial or the Corporate America. It stands for production and transnational companies born out of the Second Industrial Revolution. And Trump became their voice. These are the “Deplorables”, as Hillary Clinton called them.

And that said, Trump would never have won the elections in 2016, and I don’t think he has a chance to win it this year, if the third America did not support him or does not support him. And this is the high-tech America, as you mentioned earlier. It’s the America of knowledge, of brain workers, of new technology, of IT that has emerged over the past 40 years.

And so on the global stage, Donald Trump has become a kind of a symbol and a mouthpiece for those forces that are not ready to sacrifice America for global schemes; and will forego them for the sake of America-First ideology.

And this vision represents a radical change in the balance of force of this global arena. And consequently, it represents a change of the direction in which mankind – not only the United States – but mankind is going, because it’s an issue of universal concern.

And that’s why the fight is not only between the Democrats and the Republicans, but all those who represent collective interests of nation-states on the one hand, and these global parasitical financiers [on the other hand]. And so we’re witnessing actors in a process where the world is literally entering a new era.

It’s an era marked by this struggle for national liberation of societies, separated by state boundaries and also customs, against the common enemy, which is this all-destroying dominance of this global ruling class against the background of looming social collapse, as a result of what aggression of liberally-minded global profiteers – and in that case, I repeat, the Trumps and the Xi Jinpings and the Putins and the Orbáns and the Ficos, they stand on the same side, not because they’re buddies. Okay, that’s what the mainstream media wants you to believe.

“Fico is a stooge of Putin.” “Trump is a stooge of Putin, because Putin has info on him that will benefit Putin against him.” No, that’s not the case. They represent a wing against which they need to band together, because the other side is very powerful.

It’s the global financial liberal banking financiers. It’s the Satanist wing. And so, the idea in the United States right now is, either, as Trump wants to do, you save the United States at the expense of those global financial liberal banking financiers, or if they win, they will destroy the United States from within. And again, the Democrats, the Republicans, it’s not a different thing. That’s the same thing. Okay, they’re all the same thing.

Trump is different.

Okay, but doesn’t matter. We’re talking about the Bushes, we’re talking about, it makes no difference to Clintons. They all represent global liberal banking financiers. The idea that they have is you destroy the United States to save their global liberal system.

And people like the Rockefellers and company, they’re not American as much as they have the United States Passport. They’re Globalists. And they’re in the United States, they’re in New York, because that’s where the money is.

I think that one of the key reasons why Trump won in 2016 is because of you. And I think that’s one of the key reasons why you are de-platformed and hated so much by so many of these global, liberal banking financiers, because you’re the cause, quote unquote, okay, the culprit for, in great part for having Donald Trump win –

ALEX JONES: Well, just to interrupt, they say that and believe that. And when I’ve been in these law firm meetings with top Democrat Party lawyers, they shake with hatred. And I’m like, so yes, they actually believe I did that. I didn’t.

My show was a focal point for guests and callers and people to come together. And when they went to the RNC and a third of the people wearing my shirts, yes, that’s when they blamed me. And credit’s great. I don’t care about it, but it’s dangerous credit. I don’t think it was me, but it was the show that was the catalyst, reaching 30, 40 million a day at that time that did do it. I didn’t mean to interrupt, please continue.

DANIEL ESTULIN: No, absolutely. I mean, you’re too kind. But the thing is, I mean, you played a key role in having, and even Trump himself, I think on more than one occasion back in 2016, he even said it for himself. He told me that in person.

So the question again of the mid-1960s is still very current: What do we do? We have, you know, this Biblical crisis looming that will turn, you know, this entire world to mush. You’ll have revolutions, all kinds of stuff. So what do we do?

Science and development for the 99% of the population. No. For the elite. Yes. And that’s where transhumanism comes in. CRISPR technologies, 5G, 6G, et cetera, et cetera. And again, progress is good for humanity and bad for the elite, because it makes us, the people, richer. And the elite need to do the opposite.

Pay attention. The first half of the 20th century, Alex, was a riot of inventions and discoveries. And then if you kind of look, what have we discovered in the second half of the 20th century? Cell phone, internet, personal computer. And all of these things are directly related to control over human beings. And then, at the height of the 1960s, we have Tavistock Institute, it was given the task to kill a cultural optimism.

And so the Western elite made a very simple decision. They began literally to stop scientific progress, technological progress, the elements that would improve the lives of people per square kilometer of space against nature. But to do this, it was necessary to justify why they’re reducing progress. And then…

ALEX JONES: And that was my question. I mean, that’s my question. Why would they want to kill progress and kill the general public having wealth?

DANIEL ESTULIN: Because if we have wealth, we’re stronger together. We don’t need them anymore. They need us to be dependent on them.

And the first report of the Club of Rome, as you know, proposed the concept of “Zero Growth”. But the only way you can take advantage of the Zero Growth is if the Soviet bloc also participated. And so the Soviet Union was invited to participate in these environmentalist projects as a Club of Rome. And so together, they work together for those people who think that they’re opposite ideologies. No, they work together.

Because, for the Soviet Union to the West, the idea of progress was bad, because then it would give people freedom that they didn’t want them to have. And then, look what happened in the 1960s and 1970s? The apex of capitalism and then systemic anti-capitalism, which was the Soviet Union; stagnation, technical stagnation, scientific stagnation, industrial progress.

Each of these things were reduced in its own way. But where the capitalist system had room to maneuver, because it was more advanced, the Soviet system did not. And that’s why it collapsed when it did.

And so what we’re seeing right now, but now – and I’ve talked about this before – you cannot have one system without the other. They need each other and they’re mutually inclusive. And so the Soviet Union collapsed.

And again, I talked about this metaphorical train that came back in 1991 to a station called the Soviet Union. That train is coming today to the station that says the United States of America.

And unfortunately, the result for the United States is going to be exactly the same as for the Soviet Union: Collapse, dismantling of the country. Once there was this country called the Soviet Union made up of 15 republics. Now it’s all of these different countries fighting each other.

And so this year, the Bilderberg conference, they’re going to be talking about this. Because again, I want to remind you, back in 1991, many people in the West and also in the former Soviet Union thought that the demise of the Soviet Union was a blessing. You have this new era of planetary capitalism – this was beginning in Fukuyama wrote back in 1992, his famous book, ‘The End of History’.

So what he wanted to say was that this was an “Age of Liberals” was coming. It should have been clear to people who understood the political economy of capitalism, that the destruction of the Soviet Union was the beginning of the end of the capitalist system. OK, when you’re talking about systemically, it’s just a question of how long it would take. And now we’re seeing it.

ALEX JONES: Exactly, when you get rid of the opposition to it, it’s not because you’ve defeated it, it’s because you’ve now prepared the West to merge with that, which was which was the Carnegie plan since the ’20s.

DANIEL ESTULIN: In the ’20s, exactly. So they decided it was necessary to create two centers that would face each other, OK, as they’re fighting, you know, like wrestling, for example. And so they needed time to carry out their plan. And the plan was, what do we do now?

And the plan was 16 years: eight years, Barack Obama; eight years, Hillary Clinton. OK, but again, but Clinton lost. And in the 16 years, the plan was they would solve the problem of the end of the economic model and the end of infinite expansion, which cannot exist, obviously, on our own finite planet.

And the answer to the problem was really simple, was brilliant from the perspective of the ruling elite, the creation of, on the one hand, Transpacific Community and Transatlantic Community. And these two communities, as the Soviet Union and the United States, they would fight each other. But because both groups were represented by the same group of people behind them at a supranational level, it was a brilliant idea.

But that plan failed. Why? Because Trump won in 2016, in great part thanks to Alex Jones. What did he just say? He said there’s a storm coming.

[A full transcript of this amazing interview appears beneath the video linked below].

 

###

FULL TRANSCRIPT

ALEX JONES: All right, I’m very excited about this hour’s interview, and the only problem is we should have tried to book him for two hours, but hopefully he’ll come back again soon. It’s been a few years since he was on. That’s too long.

He’ll come back on next month. We’ll have him for two hours. He is a worldwide bestseller in languages all over the world, and he has lived all over the world. And I remember interviewing him 20 years ago. I remember going to Bilderberg events and covering it with him and him explaining, “They’re taking over society, AI takeover, they’re going to take over the human body,” and he was just hammering it. And I knew that was their plan, but I didn’t know 10 percent of what Daniel Estulin did on that central subject.

He’s a huge part of my film, ‘EndGame Blueprint for Global Enslavement’. You can find all his books and more @EstulinVz on X. Estulin is E-S-T-U-L-I-N, Estulin, Estulin, and then capital V-Z on X. And he joins us now to talk about the incredible developments in our world. He can go wherever he wants.

I’m not the old Alex, that I constantly interrupt, but I’m sure I’ll have some points I want to raise. But all I will say up front, because I want to know his view on this: We are seeing record numbers, other than what we saw right before they released COVID four years ago, four and a half years ago, record numbers, thousands of prominent CEOs, heads of major banks exiting or announcing their exits. We have Klaus Schwab we know being removed. They wanted to remove him in Davos this year, but he refused and said, “I’ll be here at 100.” Well, he’s gone now. We are seeing massive movements.

We have Melinda Gates leaving the foundation last week. I mean, I tried to cover it yesterday. We covered at least 50 major Globalists leaving yesterday with Dr Kirk Elliott. So I’m going to ask him that up front, and then where he thinks the world is today, and then to go into any direction he wants, because, he’s got so much knowledge.

Daniel, I wish that you weren’t so right, but man, you have been just dead on. They say Alex Jones is next decade’s news today. Well, you have certainly in many levels surpassed that. I’m just giving credit where it’s due. You’re one of our best brains that’s pro-human out there. So thank you for all you do.

DANIEL ESTULIN: Alex, thanks so much for having me. You and I have been friends for, the first time you interviewed me was back in, if I’m not mistaken, in 2007, when my book on the Bilderbergers came out.

And I’ve been on your show and off and on for almost 20 years. So I’m very grateful for the opportunity to actually have such an important platform to be able to reach people and explain to them things that otherwise they’re not going to be able to see through the mainstream media.

It’s a very interesting question. When you and I talked, I should say, your producer and I discussed today’s interview. And the idea was to look at some of the exit plans, as you call it, for the elite. And I want to call attention, draw your attention to the fact that we’ve seen a lot of people being killed or there’s been attempts on their lives.

And obviously, the last two cases, we can talk about the Slovak Prime Minister, Robert Fico, we can talk about the death of Raisi. And the assassination attempt on Robert Fico is naturally associated with his position on Ukraine. They say that Fico was shot by a 71-year-old retiree who bears little resemblance to a lone gunman.

Now, if you look at things conceptually, in other words, from a much higher vantage point, so if the assassination attempt is political, then either it’s a signal to the entire Eurosceptic community before the upcoming European elections, where the fate of individuals such as Ursula von der Leyen is decided, and also hundreds of billions of US dollars are at stake, Alex, or for Fico himself.

Now, Slovakia is not in a position to exert global influence on me. It’s a pipsqueak country. And so assassination has always been, well, let’s say, an extremely comfortable argument. And needless to say, it would have been easier to remove the unwanted Fico in a kind of a Maidano-Color Revolution. And so the motive for the assassination attempt must be extremely convincing and very, very urgent, Alex. And needless to say, it hasn’t come to light, but it will.

And so if the West, the West, the collective West, with its “Rules-Based Order”, okay, going back to the end of World War II, so this collective West now prefers to kill political undesirables without wasting time on the Maidans, on buying them off, on scaling them off, on showing the files or photographs of their pedophilic events, then life on the planet will soon become very, very interesting, Alex. And so to put it in context, the collective Fico is not a victim of the struggle between the West and Russia, as many think.

Fico is a victim of the internal struggle between political forces in Europe, more specifically between the two, let’s say, main coalitions: the coalition of The Collection represented by Fico, himself and Viktor Orbán of Hungary, which focuses on ordinary democracy, in other words, on the fact that governments must express the interests of the citizens, the preservation of national European cultural identity as well, which is very important, religion, and also Christianity.

And the second coalition, the other side, which is the Postmodern Globalist Coalition, let’s call it the “Liberal Coalition”, although this will not be accurate. This coalition proclaims itself to be liberal, but its fundamental values contradict classical liberalism, and so we can call it “ultra-liberal”, but this word has not yet become, let’s say, a generally recognized term, and there’s still no precise definition of the ideology that was born from classical liberalism.

ALEX JONES: I mean, isn’t it really just transhumanism? Haven’t they just turned into their final form, transhumanism?

DANIEL ESTULIN: Well, eventually, transhumanism, posthumanism, the final form is going to be posthumanism, but the guy who shot Fico is not a Ukrainian Nazi, but a liberal gone crazy, a Soros clone. And so the conscience of these people, I’m not talking about Fico, I’m also talking about the people who want to kill Donald Trump in the United States, who want to kill Putin, want to kill other leaders, is under terrible radiation of this incessant propaganda. They begin to spew this hatred, and we’ve seen this in the United States, the Trump syndrome towards anyone who has the opposite political views.

So a liberal who is against the freedom of others to have a different opinion is a direct contradiction to the idea of liberalism. This is something that Tucker Carlson was talking about a few weeks ago, but these people are no longer able to understand this, because they’re really on the verge of madness. And again, we’ve seen this in the United States, where all these people, you know, screaming at the top of the lungs when Trump was elected back in 2016.

And so the entire world propaganda of this world authorities is raising such crazy people. And so the sign of this madness is a symptom of mental illness. And we have already millions of these people the world over. So the idea, again, to go back to the initial question, the idea, again, that the Rules-Based Order is on its deathbed, okay, which means that a new order needs to be created, and a lot of people are going to be killed.

And the liberals understand. In other words, the liberal banking financiers, the financiers in the United States, who focus on the United States, they understand that if they lose the elections, they’re going to be killed, they’re going to be imprisoned, which is why it’s again, it’s all bets are off. It’s a free-for-all. They have no choice but to win, because if they lose, they’re gone, like physically gone.

ALEX JONES: I want to elaborate on that key point, that you’re saying that there’s a clash of civilizations. There’s an article out called “The Revenge of the Normies” that kind of quantifies that in a populist way. It’s not too sophisticated, but it gets the basics.

The Globalists have their post-human world, their scientific takeover plan to secure their power, give themselves life extension. But that all rested on destroying the old order and the public not knowing that the Globalists were the ones destroying us. But now, because they’ve been exposed and Bill Gates and Klaus Schwab and King Charles and others are so hated, they understand now that they’re going to get the blame for what they’ve engineered and their bunkers aren’t going to protect them.

So, that old order is rolling forward with all its funding and BlackRock and central bank power, but it’s running into more opposition every moment. So the question is, what, with the rules-based new world order dying, what will be its replacement and what will be the power struggle over its collapse? And that’s going to be a very, very dangerous period of time. Speak to that and tell us what you think is going to probably come out of that, or what the different scenarios could be, Daniel Estulin.

DANIEL ESTULIN: Well, you see, it’s a very complicated question. It’s a very good question. I’m glad you asked. And again, we can bring it back to the American elections. Because, again, big-time politics and big-time economy, they always go together, Alex, and many countries’ elections are no longer a purely domestic or political affair, because they’ve acquired literally an economic dimension as well.

And it’s particularly true for a country like the United States. And so that said, it’s easy to see why someone like Donald Trump is literally 90% inevitable as a kind of reaction to the US foreign policy – and probably also domestic policy, because today the lines between domestic and foreign policy are pretty blurred. And so, if you look at national sovereignty, it has been increasingly replaced by corporate sovereignty.

You’ve mentioned BlackRock. You’ve mentioned Vanguard Group. We’re talking about One-World company-limited corporations that have a lot more power than any government on the planet. So if you go back to 1648 – I don’t want to go too far back in history, because people get bored – but let’s call it Global 1.0. And that Global 1.0, which goes back to Westphalia up until the end of the 1960s, we had nation-states with all of its, you know, prerogatives.

And then in 1968, at the Bilderberg Conference, they discussed a totally new concept: the idea of One-World company-limited corporations that have more power than any government on the planet. And so out of that came out, again, we’re seeing these corporations, the BlackRocks, the Vanguard Groups. And then after that, we’re coming into a new stage, where globalization is dead. And the initial phase of the death of globalization was COVID.

Everything was shut down. And we’re seeing regionalization of global economies. And in fact, Brexit and BRICS, we’ve talked about this, way back, like a few years ago, you and I. Brexit and BRICS were two initial attempts to regionalize the global economies.

In other words, anyway, so the national sovereignty has been, again, replaced by corporate sovereignty. And so initially, this was nurtured by the state, major transnational companies, global financial corporations, international online communities. They literally become strong enough to pursue an independent policy, and in some cases, even dictate the needs and opportunities of entire countries, including the United States.

And so these, let’s call them non-state actors, they literally now shape the global agenda. China, which is the rival to the United States, has been transformed into this economic giant, thanks to neoliberal globalization. And it’s now pushing for a geopolitical redivision of the world.

In other words, regionalization. And so what we’re seeing, Alex, today on the global stage is as much geography as it is about politics. And so, this New Order is being created where literally, geography and money are proving to be the ultimate trump cards, because geography becomes the governing economic decision-making factor.

And geography is literally giving us our first major political tectonic fault lines. And the war is on for ever-depleting natural resources, not to mention water, not to mention food, in the age of this global population explosion. So as you mentioned earlier, we’re talking about trans-evolution.

We have 8 billion people on the planet, or if the Elite don’t need that many people, they’re destroying the Middle Class. There’s going to be the sliver of the Upper Class and everybody else. But the problem with everybody else is we all need to eat. I don’t know about you, but I eat about three times a day, sometimes four. I can skip a meal, I may not even eat for one day, but I cannot not eat for two weeks. Neither can you or anyone else.

So the idea is, if in this ever depleting natural resources and the deaths of food, scarcity of water, they don’t need so many people who are hungry, because hungry people tend to get irritable. And so we know what’s happening in the Middle East. You have secular regimes that are being replaced by these, let’s call it, anti-modernity forces.

And so, the choice of this Controlled Chaos, which is what we’re seeing right now, Controlled Chaos, as a foreign policy strategy by the US Democratic Party, played a major role in destroying these secular regimes the world over and also contributing to, let’s call it, barbarization of vast territories. We’ve seen this all over the world. And historically, if you kind of look at the United States, there have been two main cycles in the United States.

You have the period of expansionism, usually represented by the Democrats, whether it’s Woodrow Wilson, FDR, Harry Truman, JFK. And then, it was followed by inward-looking policies with the Republicans at the helm, with the exception of George Bush Jr.

And so, Trump’s election in 2016 was, in fact, a response to the expansionist policies. They need to get some breathing space and focus on the domestic agenda. And so the America-First, so to make a leap forward to be, let’s say, a beacon for the rest of the world, as Trump often said. So because America needs a break, it needs to refocus. It needs to regroup its energies. It needs to realign its resources. And the bigger question is, when will those inevitable changes be enforced or take place?

ALEX JONES: Absolutely. So let me throw a few questions here and go back to things you were just saying that we can focus in on, because it’s very important.

If you read the Globalist-owned admissions, they’re quite honest about all of this. They admit they’re losing power. They admit they’re running in to more opposition and they admit they don’t know what to do, because China, in the last 10 years broke away from them. Russia’s been breaking away for 20 years successfully. And as those examples spread, they tried to squeeze harder.

And it was Zbigniew Brzezinski said, what, 12 years ago in Canada, dead now, but he’s one of their top brains. He said it was easy to propagandize a million people 20 years ago, because now it’s easier to kill them. “We’re not going to be able to convince people we’re going to lose. We’ve got to start killing everybody.”

And so then, the question is, how do they camouflage the wiping-out and the killing of the spoiled people in the West, then replacing them with Third-World populations in the interim, before they move to pure robotics? I mean, that’s their stated operation. And now, I think it’s clear, we’re no longer living in beta testing of Agenda 21, we’re now in Agenda 2030 and beyond and the global collapse, cutting off the food, the energy has already been initiated and I really don’t even see it being reversible unless Trump got a global coalition together.

And so you talk about the “Barbarization of the world”. They admit, as you’ve written in your books, they want to move to a city-state. So they claim “globalization” to get the world under control. They collapse things and then only have certain regions they control that are wealthy within the original nation-states themselves, kind of like they told us they would do in the 1970s in ‘Rollerball’, where there’s no more nations, but there are basically capital cities that are corporate cities within the system and we’re moving back to the city-state.

DANIEL ESTULIN: Alex, you’ve nailed it. So we’ve gone from Global 1.0, that’s globalism, to regionalization of global economies, and finally city-states, as we had in the Middle Ages.

You also said something else, which is very poignant. You talked about innovation and technology. Any innovation and technology has a direct impact internationally, but the prevalence of the paying capacity over production factors will definitely speed up the process of the world’s regionalization. It’s a kind of a fencing-off from globalization, as a way of restricting access to competitors. And so, the trend for building such exclusive corporate economic zones has been there for a long time.

Bilderberg first discussed it back in 1968, the idea of One World company limited. But why Trump and why do the elite see him in such a danger to their Rules-Based order? Because you see, America and the world in general, they need to be perceived, not as a kind of united front, but as a, let’s call it matryoshka, nesting doll, hiding at least three Americas.

So the first layer is the America of Wall Street, Washington’s bureaucracy, Chicago, Hollywood, Silicon Valley. It’s America’s 1%. America of the printing press, hedge funds, insurance companies, and so on and so forth. What do they sell? They sell nothing. They sell air. It’s an America that lends to others, and it was represented by Hillary Clinton and now by Joe Biden. Before that, by Obama, the Clintons.

And so the real world economy, including the service sector, accounts for about $80 trillion, more or less, while the global financial sector, that’s an $800 trillion. So 80, that’s the real economy, that’s 10%. And the rest of it is nothing, air.

And if you have derivatives of about two and a half quadrillion dollars, that’s two and a half plus 15 zeros of this financially-engineered fraud and so in the future, somebody will have to pay the price for these transgressions. The Clinton crowd, they hope it won’t be them. Clintons, the collective Clintons. And so if the Democrats lose the elections, I repeat, if they lose the elections this November, they will be jailed and a lot of them will be killed. Because this is a war for keeps.

But how do you pass the buck, Alex, without writing off one’s responsibilities? That’s the fight worth fighting for.

This is 1% is engaged in that fight to the death. And then there’s the second America, the post-industrial or the corporate America. It stands for production and transnational companies, born out of the Second Industrial Revolution and Trump became their voice. These are the “Deplorables”, as Hillary Clinton called them.

But most importantly for us, it’s a marriage of industrialists, on the one hand and the energy and the oil in the military sectors with the services and also construction industries. And that said, Trump would never have won the elections in 2016 and I don’t think he has a chance to win it this year if the third America did not support him or does not support him.

And this is the high-tech America, as you mentioned earlier. It’s the America of knowledge, of brain workers, of new technology, of IT, that has emerged over the past 40 years.

And so on the global stage, Donald Trump has become a kind of a symbol and a mouthpiece for those forces that are not ready to sacrifice America for global schemes and will forego them for the sake of America-First ideology. And this vision represents a radical change in the balance of force of this global arena. And consequently, it represents a change of the direction in which mankind, not only the United States, but mankind is going, because it’s an  issue of universal concern. And that’s why the fight is not only between the Democrats and the Republicans, but all those who represent collective interests of nation-states on the one hand, and these global parasitical financiers.

And so we’re witnessing actors in a process where the world is literally entering a new era. It’s an era marked by this struggle for national liberation of societies, separated by state boundaries and also customs against the common enemy, which is this all-destroying dominance of this global ruling class against the background of looming social collapse as a result of aggression of liberally-minded global profiteers.

And in that case, I repeat, the Trumps and the Xi Jinpings and the Putins and the Orbáns and the Ficos, they stand on the same side, not because they’re buddies. That’s what the mainstream media wants you to believe. “Fico is a stooge of Putin”. “Trump is a stooge of Putin, because Putin has info on him that will benefit Putin against him.” And, no, that’s not the case. They represent a wing against which they need to band together, because the other side is very powerful. It’s the global financial liberal banking financiers. It’s the Satanist wing.

And so the idea in the United States right now is, or, as Trump wants to do, you save the United States at the expense of those global financial liberal banking financiers – or if they win, they will destroy the United States from within. And again, the Democrats, the Republicans, it’s not a different thing. That’s the same thing. Okay? They’re all the same thing.

Trump is different.

But doesn’t matter if we’re talking about the Bushes, we’re talking about, it makes no difference; the Clintons, they all represent a global liberal banking financiers. The idea that they have is you destroy the United States to save their global liberal system. And people like the Rockefellers and company, they’re not American as much as they have the United States Passport. They’re Globalists. And they’re in the United States, they’re in New York, because that’s where the money is.

ALEX JONES: That’s right. And to them, they think it’s dumb. They don’t care about a country or its people. They don’t care about any country or any people. They’re going to build city-states and then have their armored rural redoubts and bunkers. And they literally have set up a system to play us off against each other, divide and conquer.

And then there’s the fourth America, the average hardworking poor people that they’ve Balkanized using race and religion and sex that are waking up that they’ve been screwed and realizing Trump is actually for them because he’s not selling out the industrial system of America.

Let’s come back with Daniel Estulin and get his predictions of what’s going to happen with this election and so much more. We’ll also talk about his books that you need to get. Daniel Estulin is one of the most informed people in the world on the subject of the New World Order.

[STATION BREAK]

ALEX JONES: Well, Daniel Estulin is the real deal. He does his research and I knew what he was saying and I don’t think he remembers– I interviewed him way before I met him at Bilderberg in 2007 – I’ve been interviewing Estulin for years before that. I don’t blame him for not remembering but I do! And I remember him talking about all of this; the transhumanism and the plan to take over our bodies, all of it. He’s agreed to stay 15 minutes into the next hour before the guest host takes over. So I’m going to reserve some of that time to ask my questions, but I want him to continue to go where he wants because it’s really informative.

Because I struggle with Trump. He’s far from perfect. I know Trump well. We’ve had our own share of arguments. I’ll leave it at that, because I’m not going to kiss his ass. And he doesn’t care if I kiss his ass. He will tell you what he thinks. And the Trump behind the scenes is kind of the same Trump, but he’s even more focused, more serious, and is really smart. And he is not out to get people. He really believes in prosperity. He believes we should have strong nation-states. He wants peace. He thinks war is dumb. He has a weak spot that he believes in any technology and that’s why he was for ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine, but also anything Fauci pushed. He said, “Sure, try it all.” And he has that Right to Try Law.

That sounds good on the surface. Let people even do fatal treatments if they have a disease that could kill them. But he won’t admit when he’s wrong.

But he’s definitely got the Satanic globalists, as Daniel said, angry at him and threatened by him, because they want to deindustrialize the West and Trump’s not going to go along with that. And so I think it’s really – I don’t want to say an endorsement from Daniel Estulin – but this guy doesn’t play games.

He’s not political on a side. When Daniel tells you that Trump really has the new world order after him, it’s 100% true. Because we open the phones up, and I get this a lot. Trump, I’d say, is popular with 80% of our audience, but 20% thinks I’m selling out because I’m supporting Trump and he’s not perfect. Well, I’m a critic of Trump to his face about Warp Speed and the rest of it. But that said, would you rather Joe Biden?

I mean, take Elon Musk. He’s not perfect, but he’s definitely promoting Trump. He’s definitely promoting Free Speech, because he says the Globalists are going to destroy civilization and collapse things. And they’re going to kill themselves in this attempt for their plan. Their plan has failed. They may keep pushing it and it’s going to get everybody killed. I think that’s really the consensus.

So is Trump perfect? Is Elon perfect? No, but they do have children and they are pro-human and they don’t want to blow the planet up. So, comparing that to the Rothschild Satanists, that are completely disconnected from humanity, it’s the question of do I get in a lifeboat or do I jump into the freezing ocean?

Going along with the New World Order is jumping into freezing water. I’m going to die in 60 seconds of hypothermia. Trump is getting in a lifeboat. And if I saw a better boat, I’d go with it. And I don’t put all my eggs in his basket. I don’t know if I’m putting words in your mouth, Daniel Estulin, bestselling author, researcher. We’ll talk about your books, if you want to bring them up. They’re amazing. The one on transhumanism is incredible. But do you think I stated that accurately or am I misrepresenting what you said?

DANIEL ESTULIN: Absolutely accurate. Alex, let’s not beat around the bush. I think that one of the key reasons why Trump won in 2016 is because of you. And I think that’s one of the key reasons why you are de-platformed and hated so much by so many of these global liberal banking financiers, because you’re the cause, quote, unquote, OK, the culprit for in great part for having Donald Trump.

ALEX JONES: Well, just to interrupt, they say that and believe that. And when I’ve been in these law firm meetings with top Democrat Party lawyers, they shake with hatred. And I’m like, “So, yes, they actually believe I did that.”

I didn’t. My show was a focal point for guests and callers and people to come together. And when they went to the RNC and a third of people were wearing my shirts. Yes, that’s when they blamed me. And credit’s great. I don’t care about it, but it’s dangerous credit. I don’t think it was me, but it was the show that was the catalyst, reaching 30, 40 million a day at that time, that did do it. I didn’t mean to interrupt. Please continue.

DANIEL ESTULIN: No, absolutely. I mean, it’s you’re too kind. But the thing is, I mean, you played a key role in having that. And even Trump himself, I think, on more than one occasion back in 2016, even said so himself.

ALEX JONES: He told me that in person.

DANIEL ESTULIN: Yeah. Well, he said it also publicly. So you see, beginning in 1981, the growth of global economy, I guess in one way or another, to explain to people exactly where are we, in essence, was driven by redistribution of US dollars printed by the Federal Reserve and then passed through the Federal Reserve System. And that process is controlled by the International Monetary Fund, World Trade Organization, and other Globalist Bretton Woods institutions.

For all this talk about the Bretton Woods system being abolished back in 1971, this is not true. You have the International Monetary Fund. You have the World Bank. You have World Trade Organization. And these are all Bretton Wood- created institutions. The system is alive, albeit, needless to say, wearing a different mask.

And so on the whole, Alex, everybody understood that money-printing required assets to back surplus money. And so, in the 1980s, the role of assets was played by, well, let’s say, various newly-emerging derivatives. And then in the 1990s, and the beginning of the 2000s, those were the assets that appeared as a result of what? Of the dissolution of the Soviet Union.

I propose, the United States had two approaches, at the time. The first approach implied using assets taken from the USSR to cover debts accumulated in the 1980s and then start from scratch. And that was the approach of the George Bush Sr administration.

There was another approach to embezzle everything, to steal everything, to rape everything, and make good use of those assets. And that was done by the Clinton administration and what became known as the “Rape of Russia” period in the early to mid-1990s. And for that reason, people who emerged in Russia as affiliates or affiliated units of the Clinton team, the entire financial and economic structure of today’s Russia is considered ideological thieves.

So what we’re seeing right now in Russia, and that’s something that mainstream media will never tell you, is that the war in Ukraine is not only between, you know, to recover, not only lost territories, but the identity of the nation state, but also to destroy and dismantle what was done, to run it back, what was taken away in the 1990s, to destroy this liberal banking financier structure which today controls Russia.

And so things were rolling, you know, chugging along smoothly, but beginning in the 2000s, it became clear that there were no assets left. And so, the United States government decided to do what? To bring money back, by what? By these completely fictitious assets, which became known as “subprime mortgages”. And in 2008, well, we know what happened, the system collapsed.

And so today, we’re at the gates of this worldwide economic default and dismantling of the system, itself. The only difference is Clinton – talking about Hillary Clinton – when she ran in 2016, she would have pushed us into world war, which would probably have meant the end of humanity as we know it.

ALEX JONES: By the way, she said that, the quotes are not, she said, “I will go to war with Iran, I will go to war with Russia, without any proviso around it.” Why was she making such a megalomaniac statement?

DANIEL ESTULIN: If you have a global $4 quadrillion debt, Alex, if you add all these bubbles, that’s about a $4 quadrillion debt. And the only way you can write off this enormous unpayable debt of 4 and 15 zeros, in case people are wondering how many zeros that is, is through force majeure. Now, force majeure could be what? It could be, I don’t know, Godzilla, okay, coming out of the ocean. It could be aliens coming from space, could be meteorite.

ALEX JONES: For those that don’t know Latin, that means an “Act of God”.

DANIEL ESTULIN: Exactly, okay? Or it could be a thermonuclear war to write off these debts and responsibilities and start from scratch. And so with Clinton and Biden, it doesn’t matter which one, the system of quantitative easing, in other words, printing of unlimited amounts of cash, would have continued for another six to eight, you know, maybe 10 months. And during that time, the oil prices, the markets, they would have risen on the strength of the emissions and eventually, you know, sometime down the line, this money would have returned to the American markets, thus causing enormous inflation above the current mega, galactic inflation rate, don’t believe at all that it’s 2 or 3%.

Anybody who goes to the store knows how much things cost, how much they were six months ago, a year or two years ago. Or if you go to McDonald’s, I saw the other day, the price, I don’t go to McDonald’s but I saw the prices from what it was like four years ago, it was like a 400% increase in the price of a burger, or French fries.

Okay, now the end result, it doesn’t matter if it’s with Trump or with Clinton, it doesn’t change. But the approach is different. So Donald Trump represents another scenario, that saw the printing press put in idle mode by Barack Obama back in 2014. And so it puts American interests first, focuses on doing what on improving the economy and getting rid of this huge debt. So how will Trump take care of the debt? He’s not talking about the finances right now. They’re not talking about the financial model or talking about the economic program.

Now on paper, because that’s the question I would ask him, Mr. President, how are you going to take care of the debt? Now on paper, Alex, it’s quite simple, raise the cost of borrowing and write it off as a part of the bankruptcy procedure, because it will be impossible to service the snowball debt. And then the United States economy will start to breathe again, it will however bring about the collapse of those banks who keep that debt on their balance sheets as their main assets.

Now to put it differently, the way that people understand –

ALEX JONES: They collapse or we collapse.

DANIEL ESTULIN: Exactly. Trump’s plans are an attempt to save the United States economy, at the expense of the banks and the system, itself. And that’s why they despise him. While the Clintons, the Bidens and everybody else would have sought to bail out the banks at the expense of the US economy.

ALEX JONES: And that’s why, as soon as Biden got in, everything started tanking because they shifted from the people to them again.

DANIEL ESTULIN: Absolutely. So in other words, the plans of Trump and Clinton – or rather by the forces behind them – are mutually exclusive. Again, furthermore, if Trump goes through with his plans, it would wipe out those elite who are behind Clintons and the Bidens.

In other words, the Wall Streets, the hedge fund, the speculative financial interests, they would remain alive – although things happen, but they would lose the resources they previously had – which is what? The little machine that prints money that you and I don’t have.

And so, Clinton’s plan or Biden’s plan would endanger those forces. In other words, the US economy’s real sector, that brought Donald Trump to power in 2016 and that will probably bring back Trump to power in 2024.

ALEX JONES: So it’s the real economy versus the fraudulent economy.

DANIEL ESTULIN: Exactly. And so if Biden wins the re-election, his actions would undoubtedly include easing monetary policies and restarting the printing press. And Trump, he believes that there’s a need to recover the national sovereignty and national economy that the United States has lost.

Because again, before the crisis, 70% of debt belonged to the financial sector. Now it’s amounted to 35. So in any case, if the funds rate is zero, the capital does not reproduce. It’s simple. It’s like two plus two is four. And that’s why the rate should be raised. But then again, this cannot be done, okay, with so much debt.

So what should be done? If we speak about raising rates, we need to make corporations and households go bankrupt. And this way you can write off the debt.

And the problem with the global economic crisis, Alex, stems from the issue of demand, as it was supported by just printing more money. Because again, a war – big war, not some tiny, piddly little war between Israel and Palestine – no, a big, global thermonuclear war can decrease demand. In other words, deepen the crisis.

ALEX JONES: Well, that was my next question. Why do they want war? And what are you predicting they’re going to pull, the globalist?

DANIEL ESTULIN: Well, they want war, because they need to write off debts and responsibilities. Because when they had their First World War and then they had their Second World War, you have the biggest, you know, jump as far as production is concerned, because you destroy, then you rebuild. Okay, that’s the magnificent period between the mid-1940s and the early-1970s.

But right now, you know, getting into the Third World War, or Fourth World War, because Third World War was the Cold War. It’s kind of dangerous, because you have all these countries like North Korea, Pakistan, etc, etc, maybe Iran, who have their nuclear weapons, you just never know what’s going to happen, okay. And so the idea is, again, you need a force majeure, but they’re afraid of the consequences. So they’re seeing how far they can push Russia.

And if they’re willing – because again, we would have this thermonuclear war already – the only question for the West, collective West, is will Russia use thermonuclear weapons?

And so from Trump’s point of view, the simple economic logic is as follows: If we raise the Fed rates, it will cause mass bankruptcy and the United States bankruptcy, okay. For all our international audience is not aimed at paying off the debt to creditors, but at maintaining the business.

So if the rate is raised, transnational financial institutions will start collapsing and disappearing. And if the rate rises, okay, for the dollar will not be a good investment tool. The only way to compensate other countries will be to create regional investment currencies. And that’s why, okay, going back to what you said earlier, we’ve gone from nation-states, that’s Global 1.0, okay, countries, etc, etc, with their currencies to regionalization of global economies.

And to regionalize a global economy, Alex, what we need is, okay, a group of countries between 300 and 500 million people and so you have, for example, Canada, United States and Mexico, that’s 500 million people, that’ll be like a dollar region,

ALEX JONES: Which they said they would do, as you said, that that was the Trilateral plan of the ’70s was “Power Blocks”, regional blocks. Exactly, exactly. That’s what I was about to say.

DANIEL ESTULIN: Exactly. That’s it. And so, the transnational companies and banks, they understand this, which is why the bankers and the financiers, what they did is, way back in 2011, they tried to take away the issue of global currency away from the United States and put it into the hands of what “central bank of central banks”, in other words, Bank for International Settlements.

In other words, it would be a supranational institution that would have the exclusive right to print this global currency, okay, and the United States dollar would remain a national currency, and its issue would be limited by the amounts set by the central bank of central banks.

And it was actually decided at the G8 meeting at the time G20 meeting to set up this, under the international auspices of the International Monetary Fund. But then came the Strauss-Kahn scandal, remember that? No? And the whole thing just disappeared from the media.

For those who don’t remember, Strauss-Kahn was General Director of the International Monetary Fund. There was this criminal case against him relating to these allegations that he allegedly sexually assaulted and attempted to rape some maid in a hotel in New York in 2011. Then the charges, of course, were dismissed at the request of the prosecution because, well, they said that the maid, whatever her name was, she had little credibility.

It was all orchestrated and planned by the elite. It was a message from the Obama administration, “Don’t screw with our currency.” Okay, and so they left it alone. But the idea wasn’t hasn’t changed. As you said, you’ve gone from nation-states where everybody has their currency to regionalization of global economies.

Okay, so we got from global, and now it’s regional. And as you said, from regional, later on down the line, we’re going to go to nation-states as we had in the past in the in the Middle Ages. It’s absolutely the plan of the globalists, absolutely.

ALEX JONES: So let me pick your brain on this. And I know this is going to some of the same people. When I knew you 20 years ago, I didn’t have Kissinger invite me to New York. I didn’t get to meet with billionaires and people that go to Bilderberg.

But I’ve since, off-record, because they’re not talking about crime, so I can wear a journalist hat and have a private meeting with people. They agree things are out of control, the old system’s going down, and that they just made money in it, and we’re going along with it. But they don’t support it. They asked me about an alternate system or what we think we should do with the populist movement.

I know Elon Musk is publicly trying to get control of the populist movement. Try to build a Plan B, because if we just have the Globalist system failing, but there’s not a new plan for the West, then it’s kind of the old plan just operates by autopilot. So I know you’ve got a lot of amazing contacts in the security agencies in Europe, and in Canada, and in Russia. I know you’re really a trusted guy, and a guy that has a lot of really powerful contacts.

What are you hearing from people, regardless of what group they are quote affiliated with, about where they see things going? Because the establishment recognizes they’re in deep trouble, and anybody with real money who’s seen in the power structure now is in danger, because they’re all being seen as being New World Order. They’re all looking for ways to signal that they’re not with the dying system to extricate themselves. And I’m the type of guy that says, hey, if you’re not a pedophile and not a Satanist, but you worked with them, you want to join us. That’s what victory looks like. Come over, we’ll forgive you. We’ll give you amnesty. But then that’s only one part of it. The question is, what do they do with the money? Like Elon, speak to that incredibly important question – complex obviously – and then what you think of Elon.

DANIEL ESTULIN: Well, let’s start with Elon Musk. I mean, I have a lot of questions about Elon Musk. I’m not exactly sure who is behind him. He makes a lot of interesting observations at the same time, very contradictory observations. So I’m not exactly, I don’t know, Alex. I mean, I’d love to find out.

ALEX JONES: He’s very contradictory. You know, there’s a lot of stuff out there.

DANIEL ESTULIN: You know, I could say the same thing about Tucker Carlson. I mean, I think Tucker Carlson is great. This is exactly what we need. But I also have a lot of questions. They’re not bad questions. I’m not saying anything bad about Tucker Carlson. I think he’s wonderful. But there’s a lot of questions that I have that I’m not sure what they are.

Now, to answer your other question, I’m not sure it’s a good answer. The problem is, and it’s a scary thing to say, is that they have no model. Okay? They have no model. And you can tell me about the CBDCs and they can tell me, you know, the Bitcoin and the cryptos. It’s not a model. Okay? They don’t have a model for the first time in history, Alex. For the first time in history!

If you look over the past 2,000 years, I’ve explained it many times before. Like, what we see right now, globally, has only happened twice in the last 2,000 years. The first time, between the 4th and the 6th centuries, when the old Roman Empire collapsed and feudalism came about, about 200 years later.

And then 1,000 years after that, between the 16th and the 17th centuries, when feudalism disappeared and capitalism, as we know it today, it doesn’t matter whether you take it, you know, 1694, the point of…

ALEX JONES: We’re at the end of an era. There’s a lot of scrambling. We’re at the end of an era.

DANIEL ESTULIN: And so this is, you know, that model of capitalism, as we know, is on its deathbed. Okay? Because the whole idea of limitless expansion doesn’t exist on a planet Earth, because it’s a limited space. You can expand, but you need to expand at the expense of something.

And so the Soviet Union and the United States each had its own economic area. The West controls 60% of the global economy. The Soviet Union satellites 40%. When the Soviet Union collapsed, modern capitalism literally took over that 40%. And it did it in 17 years, because it’s a very dynamic, vibrant system.

But between 1991 and 2007 – but in 2007, what happened? What happened is what we saw in 2008. Okay? Because you expanded to the limits of a model. And so, what we saw was the beginning of the end. And so the metaphorical patient went to the hospital, because, you know, it had a sore throat and then 14 years later, that metaphorical patient is on its deathbed, because there’s no model to define this world or what this is going to look like.

ALEX JONES: And that’s exactly what the Globalists I’ve met with – or former Globalists – said is, what do you think the model should be?

DANIEL ESTULIN: So let me tell you this. Okay, so let’s look at it from a higher vantage point. So, what happened is that between, as I said earlier, between 1940s, mid-1940s, after the war, and mid-1960s, you know, everyone was rebuilding Europe, the United States, Russia, etc., etc.

But in the mid-1960s, progress began to falter. But a new world was no longer possible, because of nuclear weapons. And so in the mid-1960s, the world elite was faced with a key question: “What do we do now?” I know people don’t ask these questions, but the elites certainly do, because they plan like way ahead. Okay?

And so capitalism at the time had already exhausted its economic dynamics, at the end of the 19th century. And the exhaustion of the non-capitalist zones, which was 1991, as I said earlier, meant the suffocation and relatively rapid death of capitalism, or rather its dismantling.

And so in this sense, globalization literally was what was brought an end, not only to the Soviet Union, to systemic anti-capitalism, but also to capitalism as a system, and in a very symptomatic way, you know, in other words, the dialectic is what?

Globalization is, to a large extent, a product of the activities of the conspiracy system. Now, let’s think about what we would do if we were the elite. Okay? A lot of the times, when I give conferences, I work in, you know, in small groups and people have to decide and, you know, put themselves the head of the elite and decide what they would do.

So if we’re the elite, we’re faced with the limits of growth within a particular economic model. It’s also the problem of the Soviet Union looming over us, in other words, the West, forcing us to share the profits with the Working Class, the Middle Class, because otherwise, well, people will start voting for Left-Wing parties, as we saw in Europe in the 1960s and 1970s. So the West, the elite, are stuck in a kind of Globalist, in a kind of a sticky situation in the mid-1960s. So capitalism and stagnation, war is impossible.

So what are we going to do to avoid an economic collapse or crisis? They’re asking themselves in all of these Bilderberg meetings. So what’s happening now? Deindustrialization, Zero Growth, Greta Thunberg’s Global Warming, Renewable Energy, all of that started back in the 1960s.

ALEX JONES: Daniel, stay there. We’ve got to start the next hour. If you’re going to stay 15 more minutes, let’s come right back after a two-minute break, and then it’s a five-minute segment, a 10-minute segment.

We’re going to get into this key point, because this is it. The old systems are coming to an end. It’s admitted. Why would they then try to destroy infrastructure? You would suck that infrastructure into a new system. You wouldn’t destroy the infrastructure. You’d use it to build a new one. So that’s what’s really crazy. And that’s why the globalists are nuts. It’s because they’re going to get the blame. They’re not going to get away with this. We’ll be right back.

[STATION BREAK]

All right, Drew Hernandez takes over in about 15 minutes, but Daniel Estulin is here. He just reminded me, Bilderberg kicks off in a week, so he’s going to be live with us again in a week to cover that here at InfoWars.

All right, Daniel, you got cut off by the break. You’re bringing up the end of the global system. They don’t know what to do.

DANIEL ESTULIN: So the question again of the mid-1960s is still very current. “What do we do?” We have this Biblical crisis looming that will turn this entire world to mush.

You’ll have revolutions and all kinds of stuff. So what do we do? Science and development for the 99% of the population? No. For the elite, yes. And that’s where transhumanism comes in, CRISPR technologies, 5G, 6G, et cetera, et cetera. And again, progress is good for humanity and bad for the elite because it makes us, the people, richer. And the elite need to do the opposite.

Pay attention. The first half of the 20th century, Alex, was a riot of inventions and discoveries. And then, if you kind of look, what have we discovered in the second half of the 20th century? Cell phone, internet, personal computer. And all of these things are directly related to control over human beings.

And then, at the height of the 1960s, we have Tavistock Institutewas given the task to kill a cultural optimism. And so the Western elite made a very simpledecision. They began literally to stop scientific progress, technological progress, the elements that would improve the lives of people for a square kilometer of space against nature. But to do this, it was necessary to justify why they’re reducing progress. And then-  

ALEX JONES: And that was my question. I mean, sorry to interrupt, but that’s my question. Why would they want to kill progress and kill the general public having wealth?

DANIEL ESTULIN: Because if we have wealth, we’re stronger together. We don’t need them anymore. They need us to be dependent on them. And so, in the 1960s, the Environmentalist Movement was born. Environmentalism is an ideology. Environmentalism as an ideology, Alex, implies the reduction of the world population to one billion people. I mean, you have a documentary on it.

Ecology is an ideology that equates human beings with all these other biological species. In other words, if a human steps on a spider or an ant, that spider has the same rights as a human being. We know that to be true. Michelle Obama is promoting that.

And then, you have the Green Movement, which again was designed to curb industrial growth. And then you have, of course, the so-called Club of Rome was created. And the first report of the Club of Rome, as you know, proposed the concept of Zero Growth. But the only way you can take advantage of the zero growth is if the Soviet Bloc also participated. And so the Soviet Union was invited to participate in these environmentalist projects at a club of Rome. And so together they work together for those people who think that they’re opposite ideologies.

No, they work together, because for the Soviet Union to the West, the idea of progress was bad, because then it would give people freedom that they didn’t want them to have. And then look what happened in the 1960s and 1970s. The apex of capitalism and then systemic anti-capitalism, which was the Soviet Union, stagnation, technical stagnation, scientific stagnation, industrial progress.

Each of these things were reduced in its own way. But where the capitalist system had room to maneuver, because it was more advanced, the Soviet system did not. And that’s why it collapsed when it did.

And so what we’re seeing right now – but now, and I’ve talked about this before – you cannot have one system without the other. They need each other and they’re mutually inclusive. And so the Soviet Union collapsed. And again, I talked about this metaphorical train that came back in 1991 to a station called the Soviet Union. That train is coming today to the station that says the United States of America.

And unfortunately, the result for the United States is going to be exactly the same as for the Soviet Union: Collapse, dismantling of the country. Once there was thiscountry called the Soviet Union made up of 15 republics. Now it’s all of these different countries fighting each other.

And in the United States, we’re coming to the period of the Civil War. And you and I, Alex, talked about the Civil War in the United States back in 2017, before Ray Dalios, before all these other people. We’re now talking about the Civil War in America. We talked about this like seven years ago, you and I on your show. Seven years ago, we discussed when just when Trump was elected. I remember the interview.

ALEX JONES: Let’s come back with how they won a Civil War. What you hear is coming up in Bilderberg, final segment, Daniel. And you name the date next week or when Bilderberg or after Bilderberg, you name it. We need to get you on the show more, Daniel Estulin. We’ll also talk about your books for folks that want to find out about those. Talk about next level. Look at all the private jets that go to Bilderberg, look at the private jets that go to Davos, but they want you to be poor.

[STATION BREAK]

All right, Bilderberg, which didn’t exist, they said decades ago, but Daniel Estulin, myself, Jim Tucker before has proved it exists. Now, global government’s out in the open. Remember, oh, global government doesn’t exist. Now it’s in the open. So they’re in a lot of trouble finishing up any other key points. Bilderberg coming up. You were talking about how we’ve been warning the globalists want to try to have a civil unrest that they call a “civil war”. We talked about it many, many years ago, talked about it eight, nine years ago, seven years ago.

Give us now kind of your quick predictions or not even predictions, the direction we’re going and what we should be looking out for. Bestselling author Daniel Estulin.

DANIEL ESTULIN: Well, again, what we’re seeing right now is the problem, biggest problem is no one has a model or the language, I should say, a language to explain what’s coming. By language, I don’t mean English or French or Russian or Chinese or German.

The language of the economy to explain what’s coming around the bend. Nobody really knows. And so this year, the Bilderberg conference, they’re going to be talking about this, because, again, I want to remind you, back in 1991, many people in the West and also in the former Soviet Union thought that the demise of the Soviet Union was a blessing.

You have this new era of planetary capitalism was beginning. And Fukuyama, wrote back in 1992, his famous book, The End of History. So what he wanted to say was that this was an “Age of Liberals” was coming. It should have been clear to people who understood the political economy of capitalism, that the destruction of the Soviet Union was the beginning of the end of the capitalist system.

OK, when you’re talking about systemically, it’s just a question of how long it would take. And now we’re seeing

ALEX JONES: Exactly. When you get rid of the opposition to it, it’s not because you’ve defeated it, it’s because you’ve now prepared the West to merge with that, which was the Carnegie plan since the ’20s, since the ’20s.

DANIEL ESTULIN: Exactly. So they decided it was necessary to create two centers that would face each other, OK, as they’re fighting, you know, like wrestling, for example. And so they needed time to carry out their plan. The plan was, “What do we do now?”

And the plan was 16 years, eight years, Barack Obama, eight years, Hillary Clinton. OK, but again, but Clinton lost. And in the 16 years, the plan was they would solve the problem of the end of the economic model and the end of infinite expansion, which cannot exist, obviously, on a finite planet.

And the answer to the problem was really simple, was brilliant, from the perspective of the ruling elite, the creation of, on the one hand, trans-Pacific community and trans-Atlantic community. And these two communities, as the Soviet Union and the United States, they would fight each other but because both groups were represented by the same group of people behind them at a supranational level, it was a brilliant idea.

But their plan failed. Why? Because Trump won in 2016 in great part, thanks to Alex Jones. And Trump represented a completely different ruling class. And so Trump was never an isolationist or a nationalist. He’s not. He’s a Globalist. But he’s not an ultra-uber-Globalist.

And the difference between these uber-Globalists and Globalists, Globalists believe that the state should remain, but it should be controlled by the structures like International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, etc. But the state must remain. And that’s what Trump is saying. And therefore, the industry must remain. The middle class that feeds this segment must remain.

And on the other hand, the uber-Globalists, the Schwabs, is a classic example. And Schwab is not a head of these uber-Globalists, he’s a talking head. And the people behind him think that the state is obsolete, should no longer exist. And that’s what we’re talking about.

ALEX JONES: And that’s why Schwab has a Lenin bust in his office, the withering away of the state. By the way, this just happened. Another one bites the dust. Morgan Stanley’s James Gorman stepping down as Executive Chairman at the end of the year. What is coming? Dr. Kirk Elliott was asking you to respond to this. How to beat financial meltdown with all of these big guys dropping like flies? I mean, this is pretty concerning, Daniel.

DANIEL ESTULIN: We talked about this earlier in our interview, in the beginning. We talked about the fact is that if the global liberal elite loses the elections, they’re going to kill them. Literally, it’s life and death. I’m not promoting violence. I’m not promoting death. I’m saying that there’s no other way out.

It’s one or the other. Trump and his people, they saw what happened in 2016. They understand that these people will stop at nothing to remain in power, which is why they have no choice but to get rid of them. You can jail them and you can kill them. There’s no other way.

And so they need to create a parallel structure, Alex, on the intelligence level and every level. Because, again, if you look at the intelligence community, if you look at the bureaucracy, they’re all the representatives in the United States, allegedly. The bureaucrats are apolitical. They’re not apolitical. They’re all working for the same mechanism, the same structure that’s been feeding them for the past how many decades.

ALEX JONES: But more and more, they see that there’ll be nowhere to spend their money as it destroys society. So that’s causing a crisis. In closing, you name the day next week or whenever you want to come on to cover Bilderberg or one next week.

DANIEL ESTULIN: Bilderberg starts on Thursday. Maybe on Friday, we’ll have a better idea of what’s going on. So on Friday, the 31st of May, we’ll have first ideas of exactly what these people are talking about. But if I very quickly made just people aware they can come and see my webpage and everything else we do.

ALEX JONES: Talk about it. Most people sit up front. Talk about your books, your website. Tell people everything about Daniel Estulin.

DANIEL ESTULIN: My US publisher, God bless him, his name is Chris Milligan, Trine Day Press out of Oregon, Trine Day Press. And this is one of my books, ‘The Shadow Masters: How Governments and their Intelligence Agencies Are Working with International Drug Dealers and Terrorists for Mutual Benefit and Profit,’ Trine Day Press.

That’s my U.S. publisher right there, Trine Day Press out of Oregon. And my webpage is www.estulin.media. And we do a lot of subscription base, as well for the people. We have very active social media, as well. There’s a lot of stuff on the page. We do webinars. We do weekly conceptual intelligence review. We do interviews that you could never do publicly, because they eliminate our channel immediately. And so if you guys want to support us, estulin.media.

Alex, this is a critical time for humanity. And I can’t think of anyone else in the United States I’d love to work with more than you. Okay. There’s just simply not enough voices out there have the projection that you have.

ALEX JONES: Well, I appreciate the time. We skipped over because of the break. Civil war. You got interrupted. A few minutes on that.

DANIEL ESTULIN: Well, the civil war, again, the problem with the civil war is that it’s absolutely coming, because the differences between the two extremes is so great that there’s no other way. There’s no way you can sit down and solve the unsolvable issues between the two extremes, the Left and the Right.

So, they’re going to have to go to war and then they’re going to have to sit down because obviously, the Republicans are going to win. The Americans, the Patriots are going to win because they have guns and they know how to use them. Okay. And so the country is going to be split into several countries. Maybe Texas is going to be one country. The Deplorable states are going to be another country.

ALEX JONES: So you really think the US is going to break up? What’s the timeline?

DANIEL ESTULIN: Well, you know, back in 2002, the Russian intelligence was looking at about a 25-year period. So we’re looking at about by the year 2030. Absolutely is going to happen.

ALEX JONES: That’s right. When I interviewed you for ‘Endgame’, you said that. We put the full interview out, but I never put it in the film. You were saying that in 2006 in Canada.

DANIEL ESTULIN: During the Bilderberg conference. Well, the thing is, again, the problem is that people are saying it’s not going to happen. I want to remind you there was this big country called the Soviet Union. Okay. “The Evil Empire”, Ronald Reagan called it. Where is it now? It doesn’t exist.

Literally overnight, you went to bed in a country called the Soviet Union and you woke up in another country. If you’re going to tell me this can’t happen in the United States, absolutely, it can happen in the United States. Tell me what’s, you know, is there anything, any similarity between California, the West Coast of the United States and Texas? Or the deplorable states of Florida? Is there any common ground that these states have? None. Zero. They’re going to have to go to war to decide, which means that the country is going to break up.

ALEX JONES: Does Trump being reelected interrupt that? It happens later or does it happen now?

DANIEL ESTULIN: I think, you know, what should have happened, Alex, again, I’m not promoting war, is when Trump lost or his elections were stolen back in 2020. Okay. Instead of meekly sitting there and saying, “Well, let’s just, you know, take it easy.” With a flag in hand, you should have said, “Let’s go for it! Barricades! It’s us against them!”

And about two years later, by 2022, the United States would have come out at the end of that civil war. Still number one in many of the areas, still leading the world. Okay. But because that didn’t happen, it exacerbated the problem and the differences between the two extremes. And now the United States is a lot worse. So the sooner that the civil war happens, the better it is for the United States.

ALEX JONES: Boy, that’s a, that’s a, that’s a statement. I really respect you. Alright. Thank you, Daniel Estulin. Talk to you soon.

DANIEL ESTULIN: Take care. God bless you, Alex. Bye.