EU Army to confront Russia. US generals fired. Bondi out, Kash next? UK coalition will open Hormuz

Ну так значит, проблема-то не в том, что нужно просто требовать

оторана, нужно боевые действия прекратить, и тогда

восстановится режим пролива, который полной мере

опирается на конвенцию о морском праве 1982 года,

который в мирное время определяет все нормы с удохотства.

Президент Trump had the guts to go do something about Iran.

Nobody else has been able to do that before.

I mean, we talked about it during Trump 1,

and we never were able to pull the trigger on, he has done that.

He's sort of like the alpha male of all the world leaders.

Give him credit for doing that, and I would take control of those islands.

You can do it.

That is not a hard thing to do.

This is my video update on this Friday afternoon,

April 3rd, coming to you from Lima, Seoul, Cyprus.

Let's talk about some news.

And let's start things off with a post from Demetri Medvedev,

where he is talking about this split between Trump and NATO,

and in my video update from a couple of days ago,

I called this split theater.

Something did not feel right with the statements from Trump,

from the Trump administration, including Marco Rubio,

talking about how the United States may pull out of NATO,

and yesterday my video update.

I mentioned how it's going to be very difficult,

if not impossible for the United States to pull out of NATO,

and why would the United States pull out of NATO?

NATO is the United States.

NATO is the US is club.

Why would the United States pull out of the club that created the club

that controls the alliance that it uses to manage its empire in Europe?

NATO and the European Union are critical for the United States,

because they use NATO and they use the EU to manage their empire

throughout Europe, and to try and grow their empire,

to grow their empire into Ukraine,

to further grow it into Eurasia.

So why would the United States leave NATO?

It's not going to happen.

So why all the talk about Trump being disappointed with NATO

and perhaps pulling the US out of NATO well?

Medvedev may have provided the answer.

So I'm going to read you what Medvedev said,

quite a long post, but I'll read you the important part

from Medvedev's statement, one second,

from the Mietri Medvedev.

Of course, neither Trump nor America will withdraw from NATO.

There's no point in it, and Congress won't allow it.

Trump's rhetoric is just a stunt.

However, symbolic actions like reducing the size of the American contingents

or refusing to deploy something are possible,

but that's not the point here.

It's obvious that there are strong contradictions within the alliance,

which have been exacerbated by the Iranian campaign

and European politicians, especially in Brussels,

are seriously considering creating a full-fledged military component

within the EU.

And this changes the world picture.

Until now, our rhetoric about membership in the European Union

has been restrained and calm towards all neighbors,

even towards the vandalist Ukraine.

Join if you want, but now everything should change.

The EU is no longer an economic union.

It could quickly turn into a full-fledged

and extremely hostile military alliance against Russia.

In some ways worse than NATO.

It will be a disgusting mob of rabid European parasites,

and their task will be to earn political capital

and, of course, money by fanning Rousseffopik hysteria.

So Mietvedev's point is that this split,

this, what does he call it, this stunt?

I call it theater.

He calls it a stunt.

This stunt of some sort of a split between the United States

and NATO is really all about pushing the creation of an EU army,

which is something the globalists have wanted for a very long time.

But the argument against an EU army was always the duplication of NATO.

Why should we invest in an EU army when we have NATO?

Well, now you can make the argument

that the United States may pull out of NATO,

listen to what Trump is saying.

There is now a risk that the United States may pull out of NATO.

So we need to create an EU army now.

Now we have to invest into an EU army

in order to protect ourselves from the possibility

that the Trump administration will ditch NATO.

Never going to happen, but that's now the argument

that you can make to certain factions in Europe

that were arguing against an EU army

because you already had NATO there.

And so that's what Mietvedev is getting at.

You're not only going to have NATO,

but now you're going to have a push to create an EU army

and the EU army may be even nastier, more rocophobic, more aggressive than NATO.

So you're not seeing a fracture of NATO.

What you're seeing is a duplication of NATO, right?

You're seeing a duplication of NATO

and everyone is playing their part.

Trump is reading his script, he's playing his part.

I'm disappointed with NATO.

Rubio is saying the same thing.

What is NATO done for us?

Stamer, Macron?

Brute, they're all reading their scripts.

They're all playing their part

because the end goal is to create this EU army.

You create this EU army, this splinter of NATO

and you duplicate or double the weapon sales,

you double the profits of the MIC companies,

you double the bureaucracy, just double it, just double everything.

The MIC always wins, they always come out ahead.

So that's Mietvedev's post,

providing his thoughts on the stunt as he calls it.

That is unfolding between Trump and NATO.

And you know, if you look at it from a business perspective,

NATO's goal, its mission was to grow, right?

The more NATO grows, the more it makes money.

The more countries it swallows up, the more it makes money.

The more it could dig into the country's budgets

and it could extract revenue through the GDP percentage

and the weapons sales in NATO.

That's how NATO ran its business.

And so the plan was for NATO to grow via Ukraine.

It would grow through Ukraine, it would swallow up Ukraine.

And when it captured Ukraine, it would open the door for NATO

to continue to grow to the Caucasus, to Eurasia.

But that all fell apart with Russia and with Putin.

They prevented NATO's growth.

And so NATO, as a consolation prize, I guess you could say,

they came out with the narrative that you see we're still growing

because we got Finland and Sweden.

But everyone understood that Finland and Sweden were always a part of NATO.

It just wasn't official. So they made it official.

And they said, well, we got Finland and Sweden and to NATO.

Okay, well, they were always part of NATO.

Now they're official members fine.

But the NATO can't grow anymore.

And so they're trying to grow NATO's revenue

with the 5% GDP, kind of working, kind of not working.

We're seeing the problems there.

And so as a business, NATO's kind of stuck, right?

Kind of stuck as a business.

So what do you do?

If you can't grow anymore, if you can't expand, what do you do?

Well, you duplicate, you replicate, you copy paste.

That's what you do.

And that's what they're doing.

And so everyone is playing their parts.

Trump is playing his parts.

The European leaders are playing their parts.

And so they're going to make a push for an EU army.

That is exactly what they are going to do.

This is what I posted on X.

Trump, NATO, Rao, his theater, Trump is playing his parts.

Brutte plays his role, Macron, Stamer, et cetera.

The Trump NATO fracture is actually an MIC NATO duplication.

Trump's role is to place doubt in NATO,

show disappointment in the alliance and create alarm in Europe.

EU political factions, once upon a time, argued there was no need for an EU army

because it would duplicate NATO.

The narrative has now been flipped, given Trump's statement, the EU is forced

to take security into its own hands to duplicate NATO.

Double the weapons, double the bureaucracy, double the MIC sales,

and further militarize Europe.

High energy costs to produce weapons are no longer a political

or a budgetary restraint, but an accepted reality.

That's the other part to this NATO-US Rao is that you now have,

because of the higher energy costs,

you now have the excuse to manufacture weapons in Europe,

even though it's going to be very expensive and very costly.

The argument that you can make is that we're living in a new reality now

because of the closing of the Strait of Hormuz.

And the rise in energy costs and the shortage in energy,

everything's going to be expensive.

And that also includes manufacturing weapons.

So if there was any, if there was ever any political pushback

with regards to manufacturing weapons in Europe,

maybe there were political pushback, maybe there was budgetary pushback

in certain EU member states, it's too expensive for us

to be manufacturing weapons.

Well, that's all gone now because the new reality is that

we are going to be living in a high-cost energy Europe.

This is from the Financial Times.

Europe must prepare for long-lasting energy shock, EU warrants.

So that's my vet if I think he's spot on.

I've been talking about this over the past couple of days as well.

And I think that explains the whole narrative about Trump's disappointment

with NATO.

The MIC always wins, always wins, always comes out on top.

The MIC.

So the UK chaired a video call of 40 plus nations,

much of the collective west, without the United States

and various GCC countries.

And they talked about the opening of the Strait of Hormuz.

The coalition of Hormuz without the United States.

And so I also talked about this a couple of days ago

that this is going to be what Stomer is going to take up

when it comes to the Middle East.

He is going to work the diplomacy end of things

and he's going to try and put together a coalition

to work on getting the Strait of Hormuz open.

And that is what we got.

We got the first video call shared by the UK

where all of these countries discussed opening the Strait of Hormuz.

And what was the conclusion?

The conclusion was, and this sounds very, very familiar, everybody.

If you've been watching this channel that other Iran over many years

where we've been reporting on Project Ukraine,

then this is going to sound very, very familiar.

The results of this call was that this coalition will open

the Strait of Hormuz.

They will be there to safeguard maritime trade

and the ships that move through the Strait of Hormuz.

Once there is a ceasefire, does that not sound familiar?

Does that not sound familiar?

First, we get a ceasefire and then Europe, the collective west,

these 40 countries will be at the Strait of Hormuz to take over.

But first, there has to be a ceasefire.

And they also agreed that in order to push for a ceasefire,

to push Iran towards a ceasefire because Iran is at fault.

So they're going to push Iran towards a ceasefire by applying,

take a guess.

Take a wild guess by applying sanctions, pressure.

This sounds so familiar.

The same exact playbook as Project Ukraine.

Europe opt for policing Hormuz, but only if the fighting stops.

Donald Trump's demands for NATO allies to take the lead on Hormuz

loom over 41 nation-call organized by the UK.

First, you have to have a ceasefire, then we'll put boots on the ground.

And that'll be the peacekeeping force.

And we're going to apply pressure on Russia so that they agree to a ceasefire

in the form of additional sanctions, sanctions package number 19,

sanctions package number 20, sanctions package 21, and blah, blah.

Just copy and paste Ukraine and apply it to Iran and Hormuz.

So now we're starting to see what's the other part of the collective West.

You have the U.S., then you have the other countries of the collective West,

including the GCC countries, what they've been tasked to do.

The U.S. has been tasked to be the muscle, the military muscle,

and the other countries are going to work on the sanctions part of things.

And of course, they will be there when there is a ceasefire,

when a ceasefire is agreed on.

They will be there to take control of the straight of Hormuz.

So the price of Brent, the real world price of Brent, is now at $140.

It is searching, it is going up.

And then we got the news of Hegseth firing a whole bunch of military officials,

including the Army Chief of Staff, Randy George.

He has been fired by Hegseth. Hegseth also fired General David Hadne and William Green Jr.

I have read reports which claim that Hegseth fired a total of 12 military officials

and a whole lot of generals, and the Army General, the Chief of Staff,

the most important person, one of the most important people in the U.S. military,

if not the most important person, in the Army,

someone that you would have to have his buy-in, his OK for some sort of a ground invasion, right?

And so you're in the middle of a war and you fire this general,

the Army Chief of Staff in the middle of a war,

you fire 11 other military officials, top-level high-ranking military officials

in the middle of a war, what is going on?

Were these Army officials corrupt?

Were they not obeying the orders of the commander and chief?

What is happening? Why did Hegseth, a TV talk show host, fire these generals,

could it be that this Army General and people close to him,

did not agree with the invasion plan that is being put together by Hegseth and the Pentagon?

Could that be what is going on? And so they had to get rid of them.

That would be my guess.

You have an Army General who is saying these invasion plans, whatever they may be,

whether it's Carg Island, whether it's the Straits of Formus,

whether it's this A-Team, BA, Barakis,

uranium extraction, paratrooper blow-up, a mountain plan that I talked about yesterday in my video update.

It's all crazy. It's all crazy. It's all very dangerous.

We're not going to sacrifice our men, our soldiers,

to these crazy military plans.

And so Hegseth said, you know what? Then you've got to go.

That would be my guess as to what's going on, but it is not a good sign

when you're in the middle of a war and you're firing 12 military officials,

including the Army General Chief of Staff.

That is not a good sign at all.

That is not winning. That does not look like winning.

And my understanding is that the person that has replaced General Randy George

is one of Pete Hegseth's buddies, one of his military advisors,

who's very close to Hegseth. Yes, man.

But yes, man, is replacing the Army General Chief of Staff.

Not a good development.

So CNN is reporting that US intelligence assesses Iran

maintain significant missile launching capability, sources say.

So CNN, they are reporting that roughly half of Iran's missile launchers

are still intact and thousands and thousands of drones as well.

So we've gone from 90% of the missile launchers have been obliterated

to 85% to 80% to 75% to 70%.

And Reuters about three, four days ago talked about how one-third

of the missiles, missile launchers, they've been destroyed.

The other third, it said, the article said, we're missing.

The other third was underground.

Now we are getting reports of half of the missile launchers are still intact.

Not one-third of the missile launchers are still good, but now it's half.

And this is talking about missile launchers, roughly half of Iran's missile launchers.

They are still very much poised to wreck absolute havoc throughout the entire region.

One of the sources said of Iran.

The U.S. intelligence assessment total may include launchers

that are currently inaccessible, such as those buried underground by strikes,

but not destroyed.

So you have a whole lot of weapons which are underground

that the United States cannot get to.

The U.S. military cannot get to these weapons by air.

Perhaps they will try to get to these weapons with boots on the ground.

And perhaps the Army General said, not under my command,

am I going to accept such a batshit crazy idea.

So Higgs said, you're fired.

You are fired.

You know who else was fired?

Yesterday, Pambandhi, she was fired.

Rumor has it that she was very upset with Trump.

She was arguing with Trump to not fire her, begging Trump.

Please do not fire me.

But she got fired.

She is no longer a trainee general,

but she will be appointed to a new position,

Trump in his true social post.

He praised Pambandhi for the work that she has done

and for her service as a trainee general.

He talked about how much he likes Pambandhi.

Pambandhi loves her, respects her, whatever.

He admires her.

She did a great job.

Like her, like her, a lot.

And he said that she's going to go into the private sectors,

what he said.

But there are rumors saying that she's going to get

a different position in the Trump administration.

It won't be a private sector position.

We'll see where Pambandhi ends up.

I am 1,000% positive that wherever Pambandhi ends up,

it will be a very, very good position.

It is super windy.

Let's see how the mic holds up.

Very windy today.

But job well done for Pambandhi.

That's what the Trump administration and the ruling globalist elite class

is saying, job well done, Pambandhi, you covered up the Epstein files.

It was a bit bumpy, a bit rocky,

because you were talking about how you had the files,

that you didn't have the files, so you screwed up a couple of times.

And we got a lot of criticism over it.

But you did not cave, and you held your ground,

and you did not really, really release the good stuff.

And no arrests, I don't think we've seen any arrests

or any indictments or anything.

So she'll get a good position.

She'll get a good position and good timing

to get rid of Pambandhi.

You're in the middle of a war.

And there won't be so much attention to this dismissal,

which is really not a dismissal.

She'll just get a different position.

Somewhere else, but good time to usher out Pambandhi.

And then when you get rid of Pambandhi,

you're bringing in the deputy attorney general, Todd Blanche.

Todd Blanche, yeah.

He's going to now be the acting attorney general.

So I imagine there's going to be no confirmation hearing

or anything like that, that would be my guess.

And that's how you cover up the whole Epstein thing, right?

You remove the most controversial figure,

standing in the way of the Epstein files in Pambandhi.

You do it at a time when the United States is at war.

And you move in the deputy attorney general

to take her place.

Who was the guy that sat down with Galein Maxwell?

Then he took Galein Maxwell out of the high security prison

and he moved her into the country club prison.

That's the guy now that will be the acting attorney general.

So this is how you start to make the whole Epstein controversy kind of fade away.

And there are reports that Caspatel may be next.

This is according to the Atlantic and also Reuters,

exit of Trump officials, including FBI director Patel under discussion.

So the other controversial figure,

when it comes to the Epstein files and other things,

but Caspatel, very incompetent FBI director, very controversial director.

You start to usher him out now that you have the war with Iran.

Move out Caspatel.

And there are also reports.

This one coming from the Guardian,

which claim that Tulsi Gabbard may also be on her way out.

And the reason for Tulsi Gabbard being dismissed by the US president

is because of her resistance to the continued war with Iran and the escalation with Iran.

I've also read reports which claim that Trump is happy with Tulsi Gabbard

and he's happy with the intel that he gets from Tulsi Gabbard.

A bit of conflicting reports, but the Guardian is saying that Tulsi Gabbard could be next.

So Time Magazine, they had an article with the title,

where's the exits?

And it has Trump, the cover of Time Magazine,

and it has Trump looking at a map.

And there you can see Iran.

Iran right there on the map, where's the exit?

Trump looks for a way out of the Iran War.

I don't think he's looking for a way out.

The Iran War, and if he was looking for a way out of the Iran War,

they're not going to let him get out of the Iran War,

but the Trump is checking out the map.

How do I get out of Iran?

Let me consult the map.

That'll lead me to an exit.

Trump is looking for a way to end the war in Iran

while still declaring victory he wants to avoid a prolonged conflict,

but also achieve key goals like preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons,

allies like Netanyahu, who favor continuing the fight.

This is from the Time Magazine article.

The Time Magazine article also claims that Susie Wiles,

she had to intervene in Trump's military briefings

because the Pentagon was presenting a picture to Trump videos

of what's happening with the war

that presented a very rosy picture of the conflict

and the US military winning big and destroying all kinds of targets

and dismantling and obliterating Iran.

And according to this report, Susie Wiles saw this as inaccurate

and misleading for the President of the United States.

He was not getting the correct picture of what was happening,

not only with the war, but he was not being briefed on the polling data,

the public sentiment, what's happening with allies,

the economic situation, the state of foremost,

he was getting a completely inaccurate picture from the Pentagon

and claims that Susie Wiles intervened,

and she's now trying to get Trump the real information

as to what is happening with the war.

If you want to believe that, I don't believe that.

But the reports are that that advance was the one person

in the administration who was very much against the war with Iran,

very resistant to going to war with Iran.

And he was supposed to connect with the former foreign minister

Karazai, I talked about this yesterday,

and the plan was that advance was going to establish communication

with Karazai, and step by step,

they were going to work towards some sort of a meeting

and an understanding to get to a negotiated settlement to the war.

And then Karazai got attacked, and he has been wounded.

His house was attacked, and I believe some of his family members

actually died in this attack.

And so he was the guy that was going to be the first step

to connect with Vance.

He was going to establish the first connection, the direct connection

with Vance and the United States,

was going to lead over time to establishing proper negotiations

and a proper exit out of the war.

And as I reported yesterday, my video updates,

he was targeted for assassination.

He made it, he's wounded, he made it, but still.

The negotiators are still coming under attack.

And of course the reports are that, or the narrative,

is that Israel, they're the ones that went after Karazai

because they don't want any kind of exit from the war.

But whoever went after Karazai, whether it was Israel,

whether it was the United States or a certain branch

of the Trump administration, it's the United States.

Ultimately, it's the United States that is going after Karazai

and trying to take him out.

So what I think is going on here, I think that Vance

is being strung along.

That's what I think is happening.

I think he's being strung along.

I think Iran is still being strung along,

that there's a possibility of some sort of a peace.

I hope I'm wrong about this.

But because the reports from time and other sources

that are reporting on what's happening behind the scenes

at the White House, they're claiming that Vance

is very resistant towards the war.

He was resistant towards the war, and he remains resistant towards the war,

even though publicly he's supporting Trump.

I think that the inner circle of Trump, the Lindsey Grams

and all of these people, pitexeth, all of these guys,

they're saying, you know what?

Let's set Vance off into this direction of negotiating with Iran

and then Iran said, okay, if it's the Vice President,

maybe you guys are serious.

So here's our former Foreign Minister,

who's a very seasoned, well-established diplomat,

and we can try to establish bilateral relations, bilateral talks,

and they take out the former, they try to take out the former Foreign Minister,

and they ruin it for any kind of exits through Vance,

but they keep Vance busy.

They strung them along, they keep them occupied,

they keep them busy, so he's not trying to meddle

in their continued plans for escalation

and for some sort of an invasion.

That's what I think is happening here.

I think Trump is, Trump administration is stringing Vance along

and they're still trying to string Iran along

and to take out whatever high-level officials and negotiators

Iran puts up.

So Bloomberg is reporting that Trump plans to shift the U.S.

to a war-focused economy by 2027.

I'm not sure if they're talking about a war economy,

war-focused economy.

A war economy is one thing.

A war-focused economy may be something a bit different

than it is coming from Bloomberg,

and I have no trust whatsoever in Bloomberg.

I've been burned many, many times by Bloomberg,

and they're reporting with Project Ukraine,

but I thought I would throw this story out there.

You know, Trump did say the other day

before he gave his speech on Iran,

he didn't mention that the United States,

very hazy, huh?

Still see some shifts.

Some of the shadow fleet is out there.

Trump did say that the U.S. can't spend money on daycare

and health insurance, Medicare, Medicaid,

can't spend money on all of these things

because the U.S. is fighting a war.

He did say that, right?

That's what he said.

We're fighting a war.

You can't expect us to pay for the health and for the families

and the daycare of American citizens.

We can't pay for that stuff. We're fighting a war.

So it was an interesting statement that he made a couple of days ago.

And now you have the Bloomberg article,

which says that by 2027,

you're going to be looking at a war-focused economy.

A war-focused economy ends.

I believe today, either today or tomorrow,

the military budgets of 1.5 trillion dollars

is going to be approved.

Trump will unveil a 1.5 trillion defense budget request

for the next fiscal year according to Reuters.

I don't know if he's going to present this to Congress

or if this is going to be approved over the next couple of days by Congress,

but it's official.

1.5 trillion dollars, military budget.

I would say that is war-focused.

Just that amount alone is a war-focused economy,

1.5 trillion dollars.

That is very much war-focused.

As this we're talking about, the war,

the US military, they hit a very important bridge in Iran yesterday.

My understanding is that this bridge was still under construction,

but the United States decided to hit it.

Trump posted about it on true social.

He was very happy about the bridge being destroyed.

Trump is very excited with his war porn.

And let me read you what he said.

Let me read you what he said on true social.

The biggest bridge in Iran comes tumbling down,

never to be used again, much more to follow.

The bridge is to make a deal before it's too late.

And there is nothing left of what still could become a great country,

President Donald J. Trump.

Trump also posted on true social, our military,

the greatest and most powerful by far anywhere in the world,

hasn't even started destroying what's left in Iran.

Bridge is next, then electric power plants,

new regime leadership knows what has to be done

and has to be done fast.

President Donald's Donald J. Trump talks about the new leadership.

No one even knows what he's talking about when he mentions the new leadership.

But there is Trump talking about destroying a bridge.

And next, you're going to be seeing power plants, electric power plants.

And all of this is being blown up as per Trump's true social post

in order to force Iran to capitulate.

Now this bridge was not a military target.

It was still under construction.

And the US military decided to demolish it, to blow it up.

And they realized what they did.

The Trump administration, their lawyers,

they realized that what they did is a war crime.

Absolutely. And so what did they do?

They immediately went to Axios,

who has a desk in the White House.

Their favorites, media outlets.

And they told Barack Ravid a US official tells me the bridge was attacked

because it was used by the Iranian armed forces to try and secretly move missiles.

They missile parts from Tehran to launch sites in Western Iran

and forgiving logistical support for Iranian military Tehran.

So what they did when they realized that this could be a big issue

going after a bridge and having the president post on social media

that he is hitting civilian targets in order to terrorize the Iranian population

into capitulation.

They realized what had happened.

And so they went immediately to Axios

and they came up with the narrative that this bridge was a military target

because it was transporting weapons.

Erin Mata, he posted a reply to Axios by saying the bridge was not open

because it's still under construction.

War propaganda has never been so lazy.

Spot on from Erin Mata.

How could it be transporting missiles and weapons

if it was under construction this bridge?

That would not make it a military target if it was under construction.

So Iran is going to retaliate now to this.

And they've already put out a list of possible targets,

bridges in the surrounding area in the GCC countries,

bridges in Saudi Arabia, bridges in Kuwait, in Jordan and the UAE.

And they've posted this on social media,

a list of possible targets in retaliation for the U.S. strike on the bridge.

And if the Trump administration goes after power plants,

what you're going to see is you're going to see Iran retaliate

by hitting power plants in the GCC countries.

That's going to be the retaliation.

And God forbid, God help us if we get to desalination facilities.

I mean, it's already going to be bad.

Once they're going after the bridges, once they move on to power plants,

and then they move on to desalination,

it's going to be horrific for everyone in the region.

But this is the escalation that continues to take place.

Iran also, they hit yesterday, they claim they hit the Oracle data center,

and they claim that the tech companies are military targets.

I talked about this a couple of days ago.

They claim that the tech companies are providing military information

and assistance to the United States and Israel to go after Iranian leadership,

to go Microsoft Google, a Palantir.

Okay, Palantir is an obvious one.

But yeah, so they've designated them as military targets

and they hit one of the data centers in Dubai.

This is what the IRGC claims.

So that's what's going on with the war.

In summary, continued escalation.

Don't listen to the words.

Look at the actions.

And the actions are pointing in one direction, escalation, escalation,

and possible invasion.

Let's hope not.

But that's how it looks.

Let's do a clown world and we can wrap up today's Friday video.

If you haven't subscribed to this channel, subscribe to this channel.

Maybe you can give this video a like.

Maybe comment down below.

And I think on the mobile device, you have something called a hype.

You can hype up the video.

I haven't seen it on my mobile device, this hype button.

But if it helps, you can click the hype button as well.

And let's do a clown world.

We can wrap it up for today.

I wonder how the audio is going to turn out.

So we'll start with Black Obleon Ver.

How you didn't think I would record a video without the Black Obleon Ver.

Come on.

Hey, Patoliac.

Alex would never record a video without mentioning me.

No, Mr. President, he never would.

I know, he wouldn't.

All right.

So, Black Obleon Ver, he is saying that he can help open the straight-off hormones.

That's right.

He is offering to help open the straight-off hormones.

That's how that's the clown world.

He is saying that you crave that he can help open the straight-off hormones.

But it's going to cost money.

I am not going to do it for free.

Right, Patoliac?

No, Mr. President.

We should definitely charge a lot of money to open the straight-off hormones.

Yes, I think I should charge a lot of money.

So that's the first clown world.

All right.

This clown world is pretty interesting.

Pretty interesting clown world.

This one.

EU nations forced to pay for Van der Leyen's coof deal.

Belgium Court has ordered Poland and Romania to buy 2.2 billion worth of vaccine,

vaccines from Pfizer and BioNTech.

So the EU, Ursula, we know what Ursula did during the whole pandemic, right?

We all know collective purchasing of jabs.

And they would be distributed to EU nations.

But the EU would be in charge of collectively buying and purchasing everything.

They would handle all of it.

And then they would distribute it to the EU nations.

And the EU nations would then pay the EU or the pharmaceutical companies back, right?

And Poland and Romania, they ended up not needing all of the jabs that Ursula had ordered on their behalf.

And so they went to court because the pharma companies they want to get paid for a whole lot of jabs that Poland and Romania are saying,

yeah, we didn't need all of these jabs.

So why should we pay for something that we didn't need and we're never going to use?

And so they went to courts, Belgium court, and take a wild guess, which way the Belgium court ruled.

Take a wild wild guess, of course they ruled in favor of big pharma.

Under the ruling Poland would have to buy Pfizer vaccines worth 1.3 billion while Romania would have to purchase shots worth 600 million.

Warsaw said it would pursue all legal remedies available to it to amend this ruling and defend its interests.

Bucharest stated that the requested sum amounts to the equivalent of a regional hospital in Romania and also vowed to appeal the decision.

Yeah, you could, you could build a hospital, you could build a couple of hospitals, but no, no, no.

First, you got to give the money to pharma because of Ursula's purchasing fund.

Their fund, that's what she's good at, is creating the funds.

I wonder if Poland and Romania asked the court if they could track down Ursula's text messages with pharma,

the ones that she conveniently lost, misplaced, erased, deleted.

Can we find those messages? No, those messages can't find them.

Don't exist, lost, lost somewhere in the ether, in the interwebs, in the cloud.

Yeah, Poland, Romania.

Welcome to the European Union, this is the European Union.

What a tragedy, what a tragedy, but what did I start out my video by saying the MIC always wins?

Big pharma always wins, always wins.

That's the world we live in, that's the video, thederand.locals.com.

We are on X, we're on Rumble, we're on Telegram, we're also on Substack.

Check out the derand shop, pick up some merch, got a hoodie, got a long sleeve.

And I've got to go, take care everybody.

And I've got to go, take care everybody.