"I Trust Putin More Than Zelenskyy" - Exiled Zelenskyy Top Insider Oleksii Arestovych TELLS ALL | PBD Podcast | Ep. 524

Patrick Bet-David sits down with Oleksii Arestovych for an exclusive interview about the Ukraine war, President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, and the powerful outside forces shaping the conflict. In this riveting conversation, Arestovych unveils secrets and reveals truths never before shared with an English-speaking audience. ---- 📕 PBD'S BOOK "THE ACADEMY": ⁠⁠⁠https://bit.ly/41rtEV4⁠⁠ https://bit.ly/41rtEV4 💳 VT MERCH GIFTCARDS: ⁠⁠https://bit.ly/3P28SnM⁠⁠ https://bit.ly/3P28SnM 🧥THE NEW VT SWEATSHIRTS & HOODIES: ⁠⁠https://bit.ly/4f5fnAM⁠⁠ https://bit.ly/4f5fnAM 🧢 PURCHASE THE NEW VT HATS: ⁠⁠https://bit.ly/3ZFAPrH⁠⁠ https://bit.ly/3ZFAPrH 📰 VTNEWS. AI: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://bit.ly/3OExClZ⁠⁠ https://bit.ly/3OExClZ 🎙️ FOLLOW THE PODCAST ON SPOTIFY: ⁠⁠⁠⁠https://bit.ly/4g57zR2⁠⁠ https://bit.ly/4g57zR2 🎙️ FOLLOW THE PODCAST ON ITUNES: ⁠⁠⁠⁠https://bit.ly/4g1bXAh⁠⁠ https://bit.ly/4g1bXAh 🎙️ FOLLOW THE PODCAST ON ALL PLATFORMS: ⁠⁠https://bit.ly/4eXQl6A⁠⁠ https://bit.ly/4eXQl6A 📱 CONNECT ON MINNECT: ⁠⁠⁠⁠https://bit.ly/4ikyEkC⁠⁠ https://bit.ly/4ikyEkC 👔 BET-DAVID CONSULTING: ⁠⁠⁠⁠https://bit.ly/3ZjWhB7⁠⁠ https://bit.ly/3ZjWhB7 🎓 VALUETAINMENT UNIVERSITY: ⁠⁠⁠⁠https://bit.ly/3BfA5Qw⁠⁠ https://bit.ly/3BfA5Qw 📺 JOIN THE CHANNEL: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://bit.ly/4g5C6Or⁠⁠ https://bit.ly/4g5C6Or 💬 TEXT US: Text “PODCAST” to 310-340-1132 to get the latest updates in real-time! ABOUT US: Patrick Bet-David is the founder and CEO of Valuetainment Media. He is the author of the #1 Wall Street Journal Bestseller “Your Next Five Moves” (Simon & Schuster) and a father of 2 boys and 2 girls. He currently resides in Ft. Lauderdale, Florida.

Speaker names marked ? are inferred from speaking time and the show’s known hosts — they are not voice-verified.

• 0:00Speaker 00

  This episode is brought to you by Indeed. You're ready to level up your business, but the pressure to find the right person to make that happen is intense. Indeed sponsored jobs can help carry the load. It boosts your job post to help it reach quality talent fast. Cut through the chaos with Indeed sponsored jobs. Get a $75 sponsored job credit at indeed.com/podcast. Terms and conditions apply. Hiring now? Then this is a job for Indeed sponsored jobs.

• 0:31Speaker 01

  With Quicken, your finances can stop feeling so complicated. You save, you invest, you keep an eye on spending. But what next? Quicken helps you put the whole picture together and make sense of your options. Connect accounts from more than 14,000 financial institutions and see how all the different pieces of your financial life fit together. Quicken, know what to do next. See how at quicken.com.

• 0:59Speaker 02

  Even now, I have to be watching my words very carefully and select my words just so not to damage the country.

• 1:06Patrick Bet-David?

  This is a very important question for you to answer. Do you directly or indirectly know that he's gotten paid from all the money that other countries have given to him?

• 1:15Speaker 02

  The level of corruption is off the charts. Catastrophic. Zelensky is an extremely authoritarian and strict person. Everybody played him like the owner of this puppet, but it's all the opposite.

• 1:27Patrick Bet-David?

  You know what they're gonna do in your country if you go out there and you talk like this? You think they're gonna let somebody like you win?

• 1:33Speaker 02

  I think I will win.

• 1:34Patrick Bet-David?

  Really?

• 1:35Speaker 02

  Yes.

• 1:35Patrick Bet-David?

  Really? Who do you trust more? Zelensky or Putin?

• 1:42Speaker 02

  Putin.

• 1:42Patrick Bet-David?

  You trust Putin more? Why is that?

• 1:46Speaker 02

  Because the enemy is a better teacher.

• 1:52Patrick Bet-David?

  So imagine all the conflicts going on right now between Ukraine and Russia. And you, let's just say your name is Alexei Arestovych. And you are Zelensky's top advisor. Your background is military intelligence, right? And you're in there and you're making all of these predictions and you keep getting right on when Putin's gonna invade Ukraine over and over. Everybody's like, why does this guy get these things right? You're on the inside. Then all of a sudden, there's a big falling out between the two of you, Zelensky and Arestovych. And then suddenly you are in exile because you have two, three criminal prosecutions that's going on with you, investigations that's going on with you. You leave Ukraine, September of 2023. Now, this is somebody that you are considered as a number two candidate for being a president

• 2:35Patrick Bet-David?

  that you can potentially take over Zelensky's job. While that's going on, he came in here, we did a two hour podcast together. The things we discussed was mind boggling. And I asked him a question, I said, so how much time have you spent with Zelensky? He says, weeks, hundreds of hours. I said, great. How different is he from the one we see on stage versus the one he is behind closed doors? His answer will shock you. I asked him about the visit that Boris Johnson had, three visits Boris Johnson from UK comes to Kiev. And they're talking about, hey, we'd like to prevent the war and stop, stop the war. And Boris is saying no. And then we went through the sequencing of Boris Johnson coming here.

• 3:18Patrick Bet-David?

  He's in the meetings while these negotiations are taking place and Boris is making that recommendation. And then he leaves his timeline of stepping out in September, then Liz Truss coming in as a prime minister for one month, September, October, Nord Stream pipeline happens. Then I asked him the question of who he thought it was behind it. You have to hear the answer here. His breakdown and analysis on Putin was very unique. You're going to be enamored by the way he broke down Putin's strategies and what Putin is doing. But all in all, this is not somebody that Zelensky likes. This is not somebody that Zelensky trusts. I even asked the question of how many people that are in Zelensky's camp right now that

• 4:01Patrick Bet-David?

  trust him, that are in communication with him, specifically when I asked the question about corruption and the amount of money, how much of that money flowed to Zelensky? This is a tell all conversation here with probably the most qualified person to speak on the topic of Zelensky. With that being said, enjoy this two hour sit down with Alexei Arestovych.

• 4:50Patrick Bet-David?

  Okay, so we got an interesting interview here right now and it's very timed well because just three to four hours ago Putin made an announcement in an interview that we'll play for you here in a minute that he's agreed to be willing to compromise with Trump on the Ukraine war and for us we've been going back and forth about wanting to do an interview with my guest today and that is Oleksii Arestovych. Let me kind of properly introduce him to you so you know who he is. He has been in exile from Ukraine. I think the last time he was there was September of 2023. I'll be very technical. He'll correct me if I'm off on any of this stuff. I think there's three criminal prosecutions that he's going

• 5:30Patrick Bet-David?

  through. He has not gone back since then. He was the former top advisor to Zelensky and then there was a falling out and even at one point a lot of the people who are following the Ukraine-Russia-NATO relationship, he was accurately predicting the fact that in February or 2022 Putin will be invading Russia, Ukraine and a lot of people were like, "Why would you say something like this in 2019?" And he got it accurate. He got it right. So a lot of people are watching his prediction and the things that he was saying. And so finally with his background, military intelligence, strategy, everything that he's doing, we agreed to do this interview together here. As we're doing this, the audience that's

• 6:12Patrick Bet-David?

  watching this, he will be speaking in Russian. There will be a translator. You will hear the translator in English. I will be going back and forth with the question. The interview is also being uploaded in Russian on our Valuetainment Russian channel. So if somebody wants to watch this right now and they just want to watch it in Russian, we're going to put the link below on the YouTube channel that will take us to our Valuetainment Russian channel if you just want to listen to this whole thing in Russian. Having said that, Oleks, it's great to have you here on the podcast. Nice to meet you. Likewise. So a few things when we're talking about this. One, your background for the audience doesn't know is specific to Ukraine, Zelensky and Russia, if you don't mind sharing that with the audience.

• 6:53Speaker 02

  In 1998, I finished the same military school as the general Zaluzhny. We know each other since that time, we're friends since the military school. Then I was serving in the Ukrainian military intelligence specializing on the military and political analysis. Within that framework, when I retired in 2005, I predicted while analyzing the situation and predicted that Russia will invade Crimea. I described it, and there's a video of that in the internet from 2008 where I described how they will invade Crimea. And that's actually how they did it, the literally same stages and same steps as I had described then.

• 7:34Speaker 02

  There was a video in 2015, 18, 19 where I was predicted the war will break out. Since 2014, I was participating in the Second Maidan and military operations in the east and I became famous as a military commentator, military reviewer. When Zelensky came to power, I criticized him very sharply because of his approach towards war and towards stopping the war and so forth, so harsh that one time they invited me over to talk. I was especially critical of the informational coverage of the Minsk process. And I received a call from their office and they invited me to a meeting in the Minsk process. And when it finished, they said, "What's your opinion? What do you think that the informational policy should be?" I described it, what I would do, and they offered me to become an advisor and speaker

• 8:19Speaker 02

  of the Ukrainian group in the Minsk process. Parallel, there was the Norman process happening. And about three weeks after that, I met with Yermak and he offered for me to become the advisor to the office. And I was an advisor on strategical communication in the Arab national defense. In that capacity, I went through the Minsk process, the Norman process. Yes, yes, to Zelensky's office. When the war began, I became the main speaker, one of the three main speakers. The first was Zelensky and Podolak was second, and I was the speaker on the military issues. Then it happened that there was an explosive growth and popularity and influence. I became the second most popular person in Ukraine and I took part in the Stambul process where I was also the head of the military subgroup.

• 9:03Speaker 02

  In the talks with Russia, there were four subgroups: the economic, political, cultural, and I was the head of the military subgroup.

• 9:09Patrick Bet-David?

  At this time when this is happening, is your relationship with Zelensky good? Are you guys spending time together? There's a good relationship. He trusts you, you trust him? Or is there instability? Is there friction between you, the two of you guys?

• 9:22Speaker 02

  I never really was. I was always a black sheep. I've never was a member of his team. More likely, it was just their method to draw near the people who are criticizing them in order to disarm them. Then, in the middle of March 2022, half a month after the beginning of the war, it became evident that I was ranking second most popular person in the country. Him or his people around him began undertaking systematic action against my popularity. They started a campaign that continues until today to portray that Arestovych is the concentration of all things evil in Ukraine. Moreover, considering that I'm expressing direct political ambitions, this campaign is growing more fierce every day.

• 10:02Patrick Bet-David?

  So, so could that be that you were a threat? Because the fear was your ambitions were you were building your own identity because you eventually wanted to be the president? And that could be threatening to a guy like Zelensky where they want to get rid of you? Is that a fair assessment or no?

• 10:18Speaker 02

  Yes. It's like when two narcissists found themselves in the same den and it has become too tight for both of them.

• 10:24Patrick Bet-David?

  And you would say you're one of the narcissists? You're comfortable saying?

• 10:27Speaker 02

  They, they call me that way. I don't consider myself to be one. I've been studying psychology for many years as an amateur, but nonetheless. And so I know what narcissist is, the definition, and it was just sort of a joke.

• 10:41Patrick Bet-David?

  So, so, and I appreciate that, you know, what you're saying. But for me, I think that you need a little bit of it to be a president. Because to think you can lead a country, you have to think very highly of yourself. I don't think there's anything wrong with that.

• 10:53Patrick Bet-David?

  But, but going back to it, so when, what caused the relationship to get to a point that you had to leave the country and be in exile? What led to that event?

• 11:04Speaker 02

  Look, in 2000...

• 11:07Speaker 02

  The steps were as follows: It began in March 2022, then later in July of 2022, I was given an interview to a very famous Ukrainian journalist, Dvintury Gordon. I openly stated there, he asked me if I was going to run for president and I said yes. And since then it was clear that the set of problems standing before Ukraine resonates with me and I understood that this is my life goal to help Ukraine to resolve these issues. I have my own views on those things and after that, there was a totally crazy campaign that was set in motion against me, inspired particularly by people surrounding Zelensky, not only by them but also other political opponents. The systems began working against me. Then a Russian missile hits a residential building in Dnipro, which is the second city in Ukraine, by size, actually third after Kharkiv. This happened in January 2023.

• 11:50Speaker 02

  And in an interview, I had a daily show with a Russian oppositioner, Mark Viggen, 500,000 people would watch it every time, every day. 500,000 people, it was very popular. And on that show, live, I was very tired and I misspoke when they asked me about whether it was possible to intercept the missile and I said that in my opinion, I think it was a Russian missile. But only after it was intercepted by our defense system, only after that it in turn hit the residential building. So when I misspoke, it was used in a huge campaign against me and they actually suggested that I-

• 12:22Patrick Bet-David?

  What year is this? What year?

• 12:24Speaker 02

  This was January 14, 2023.

• 12:27Patrick Bet-David?

  Oh, so this is, you're in war, January 14-

• 12:29Speaker 02

  One year after the beginning of the war. They used this against me and Yermak and Zelensky suggested to resign, leave the office. At that point, it was already clear that we differ on a whole range of issues, in particular one of them is the fate of the Russian church in Ukraine, or the Ukrainian church of the Russian patriarchy. While being an advisor, I publicly spoke out in his defense, also on some other issues. And so, to be honest, I was happy to leave because the totality of contradictions between me and their position was critical in size by then. But since I was phenomenally popular in Ukraine and beyond its borders, I had a lot of invitations to all kinds of international conferences on security. And they were not able not to send me there.

• 13:14Speaker 02

  I would regularly travel, go there, represent Ukraine, in my particular opinion. And then in September 2023, while I was in the US, our visits coincided, my visit and President Zelensky's. And in one of the programs, I was asked to comment on his visit and I assessed it as extremely unsuccessful. I changed my rhetoric and predicted-

• 13:34Speaker 02

  All of the troubles that we now have because during NATO summit in Vilnius in June 2023 and during that visit in those statements, I saw all the problems that we have now. And I was warned and American professional will not name the person not to return to Ukraine. I left. I already had my return ticket to Ukraine, so I left. I said, this cannot be how I'm the second most popular person in the country who and how would do that and so forth. Moreover, I myself come from intelligence services background that I know when it's a real threat and when it's not, I did not take it seriously, though he repeated it three times, do not return, and he said that he will not repeat again. I did not fly back

• 14:19Speaker 02

  thinking that the dust will settle in a couple weeks or months, and I was planning to go back by winter. I wanted to get the return tickets again. I was making plans. My family stayed back in Ukraine and so forth, but every time it was delayed farther and farther, and every time it was growing worse and worse, and I'm still a political immigrant after a year and a half already, I cannot return back to Ukraine. They opened three criminal cases against me, not directly, but still, to be exact, two criminal cases, and until now, they're still trying to open a third one, to be completely exact. I have a school, a philosophy and psychology where I teach with more than 60,000 students from 60 countries. And right after that interview, they began pressuring the administration of the school.

• 15:00Speaker 02

  They hacked everyone's phone, installed wiretaps in their homes and cars. There was a demonstrative surveillance set up after the lady who is to be the school's administrator, and she was on the eight months of pregnancy. So that was the story. The security service came to my house undercover right after the interview, but overall, then, even then, it didn't stop me. I wanted to go back calmly, but I was seriously warned from here from the American side that I should not go for now, and this for now continues until today and is being delayed farther and farther.

• 15:30Patrick Bet-David?

  Got it. So the story you're talking about in January 2017, this is when the Dnipro remarks, right?

• 15:38Speaker 02

  Yes.

• 15:39Patrick Bet-David?

  You were asked to resign, that you know, I think you made a resign after stating that the Russian KH-22 missile that killed 44 people in Dnipro may have been shot down by Ukrainian air defenses. This fundamental error, as Aristo Vich called it, sparked widespread anger in Ukraine, anger in Ukraine, where parliamentary signed a petition for this missile. Is this the story that you're talking about?

• 16:02Speaker 02

  Yes, yes, yes.

• 16:02Patrick Bet-David?

  So, and I think later on you came in, you publicly wrote and you gave your sincere apologies to the victims and the relatives and residents of Dnipro and everyone who was deeply hurt by the comments that you made. So that was a follow-up with you and Zelensky?

• 16:16Speaker 02

  I publicly apologized, even though until now, honestly, it was just a gesture of politeness and condolences for the deceased because there were no formal basis to apologize. If you watched the video attentively, I said that this version still needs to be verified and verified over again. I misspoke and I will explain what just happened. Every time when I do my show, I was also trying to train the people that watch me to process information correctly. So I would usually present several versions saying, look, there's a Ukrainian version, there's a Russian version.

• 16:47Patrick Bet-David?

  Is this live when you're doing it?

• 16:48Speaker 02

  Yes, yes, it's a live, live show, yes.

• 16:51Patrick Bet-David?

  Okay, so anybody can see it?

• 16:53Speaker 02

  Yes, absolutely. You can watch it. And I was so tired that day, I had trialed back from the field and I was exhausted and my tongue simply wouldn't turn to speak through each version. Moreover, my co-host interrupted me and said, yes, I think it was our intercepting rocket that hit the Russian missile, which in turn hit their residential building. But I said that this needs to be verified and verified over again. That's all I had strength to do. Then I went to sleep and the morning I woke up and there is this huge scandal and it was blown up by the participation of the Russian media and the media from our fifth president Poroshenko and then who is now in opposition and as well the networks of our president's office, as strange as it may be, their social channels and all the rest. So it was a big and fiery story.

• 17:39Patrick Bet-David?

  So for you, because one of the things you pride yourself in your intro was the amount of times you got predictions right, okay? 2014, 2008, 2019, hey, this is what's gonna be happening. When this happened and you made a comment like this in this era that was made, did that hurt your credibility at all? Did people say, "Yeah, you know what? I thought I can trust him, but no, I think he's just trying to do this because he wants to undermine Zelensky and he wants to one day be office." His ambitions are getting in the way. Did it kind of, was it viewed that way by certain people?

• 18:12Speaker 02

  Many smart people understand this, but you need to realize the atmosphere in Ukraine. The people, most of them carry an emotional trauma from the war. It's very severe and it does not let them think freely. Moreover, they're under an onslaught of huge amounts of propaganda from different directions, from the Russia's side, from the Ukrainian side, so they're not free in their judgment. Other than that, there's another aspect. My way of speaking is very provoking, narcissistic, as they say. It triggers and provokes a lot of people. I predicted this in March 2022, at the height of my popularity, when I was crazy popular with people, would not go to bed without hearing me, they would not wake up without me, military people would listen to me, from generals to housewives, everybody would listen

• 18:56Speaker 02

  to me, everybody would listen to me before going to bed and so forth. So they asked me, "How is this all going to end?" And I said that they will call me a traitor. This is on video. And how did I know? Because it always happens in therapy and I was providing some sort of therapy for the nation.

• 19:07Patrick Bet-David?

  You're saying this while you're in Ukraine?

• 19:09Speaker 02

  Yes, yes, yes. I said this at the height of my popularity. It was the third day, third week rather, after the beginning of the war. And I said that they will, in the end, call me a traitor, because it always happens when people put their hopes on someone and then the life happens and their hopes don't come to pass and the person they place their hope upon becomes the worst person in the world. It's a known phenomenon in therapy and I was able to foresee it. Today, people, their attitudes towards me are very harsh and emotional. Figuratively, many people defy me, carry me on their arms and consider me a Messiah and Savior. And there are people who hate me and consider that I'm the concentration of evil and everything, of the worst things that could happen with Ukraine. Yes.

• 19:49Patrick Bet-David?

  If you were to put total amount of hours you've spent around Zelensky, where you're around him, not phone calls, physically around him, how many total hours have you spent with Zelensky?

• 20:00Speaker 02

  Well, in the past, you see the politicians, they trade in audience, always. That's the main currency that a politician handles. So any audience is carefully protected. I would see Zelensky several times during the period from 2020 through 2022, including the times when I would stay in the office along with him and Yermak resolving a list of specific military issues. For example, appointing Zaluzhny as a commander in chief. I did that. It was my project to appoint Zaluzhny as the commander in chief. And since this was a complex process, a closed-door process, we were discussing this topic in detail several times. When the war began, I was in the immediate proximity, I'm just trying to be precise, I was in the immediate proximity with Zelensky.

• 20:45Patrick Bet-David?

  How many hours would you say?

• 20:47Speaker 02

  It would be weeks, weeks, yes, hundreds of hours.

• 20:50Patrick Bet-David?

  Okay. So you've spent enough time around him to see how he is. How different is he behind closed doors as a leader than he is the way we see him on stage when he's begging for money or raising for money or, you know, pleading for everybody around the world to want to support him? Is he the same person behind closed doors as he is on the big screen?

• 21:15Speaker 02

  It's two different people.

• 21:17Patrick Bet-David?

  Really?

• 21:17Speaker 02

  Yes, of course. On the screen, he plays the role of this unbreakable leader, like made of iron. In life, he carries himself in a much softer way in personal conversations. He attentively listens to everyone's opinion, but nonetheless, he takes decisions himself later on behind closed doors when everyone leaves.

• 21:34Patrick Bet-David?

  So, you know, for us, you know, Americans or people around the world who are not directly in there, who don't know his story, we see the videos of him dancing. We see the videos of him being an actor. We see the videos of him going from being a teacher in a show to being a, accidentally he becomes a president, right? For you, being from there, that's lived there, to the average person, how did Zelensky get his popularity and how did he eventually get to a point of becoming a president in Ukraine?

• 22:04Speaker 02

  It was a huge protest against the old political system that was in action since 1991 through 2012. And during the time he was elected, it was the third Maidan, but it was an electoral Maidan, voters Maidan. People were not so much voting for him, even though a good amount of people voted for him, as much as they were voting against Poroshenko and the old system. They wanted to elect a wild card Joker person who is not from the system, and they got one.

• 22:29Patrick Bet-David?

  1991, he's 13 years old, right? This is when the negotiations taking place. I'm thinking you're talking about the Budapest memorandum, the whole, you know, conversation that's happening. Hey, if you return, if you give us the 1700 nuclear warheads, you know, we will give you protection, that's what we'll do. And then from that moment on, I'm more interested in Zelensky. So were the puppet masters looking to see somebody that they can use? And Zelensky was perfect for the puppet masters? Is that who he was perfect for because he was an image, he was famous?

• 23:05Speaker 02

  No. There are two main legends around Zelensky's name. The first is that he's someone's puppet, that Kolomoysky, for example, one of Ukrainian oligarchs. And the second one is that really Yermak runs everything and Zelensky is his puppet, but it's not so. Zelensky is an extraordinarily harsh and authoritarian person. He controls everything and Yermak, when he says that he's just Zelensky's manager, it's true. He's not exaggerating their places and issues where they do not let Yermak in, where he decides single-handedly, and the list of all those topics is not so short. And Kolomoysky is currently in jail. Everybody was portraying him as the owner of the puppet, but you see, they were pushing this legend, but you see how it all turned out to be.

• 23:47Patrick Bet-David?

  Well, that's complimentary for you to say that because, you know, if...

• 23:53Patrick Bet-David?

  One would think you would say, no, he doesn't know what he's doing. He got lucky. He's done the job because other people are using him and all this other stuff. You're saying no. He actually knows exactly what he's doing and how he got into that position. Absolutely. Oh, really? Wow. Okay. So who is Zelensky to you? You know, when, when, you know, seeing, you know, raising capital, raising money, hey, give me more money here and all this other stuff. Is Zelensky, in America, we were divided. A lot of people were all about, hey, Putin's a bad guy. Russia's horrible. He's a, he's an evil empire. He's a modern day Hitler. He's whatever, you know, we just got to make sure this guy, we got to take him down and we got to protect Ukraine. And everybody was wearing the Ukraine flag. You know, pin here. Everybody on their Twitter profile, their pictures,

• 24:37Patrick Bet-David?

  Instagram shirts, jackets. It doesn't matter who you were. Everybody had the Ukraine pin. A lot of people. And a lot of people fell for it, right? And what, what a noble man Zelensky is, you know, person of the year. He's amazing. He's doing all these great things.

• 24:52Patrick Bet-David?

  But that's the image a lot of people had and gradually his popularity around the world has declined. It's not what it was a year and a half ago. It's not what it was two years ago. But from your perspective, who's Zelensky to you?

• 25:06Speaker 02

  For me, Zelensky is a person that when life threw challenges at him, they were beyond his competency.

• 25:15Speaker 02

  Meaning if perhaps he was a president during peaceful time, perhaps he could manage. But when his life confronted him with war, huge challenges, first COVID, then the war, he could not handle it. He simply was not able to understand and resolve the problems posed before him. Moreover, from my point of view, this is a person who de facto deceived his voters. He promised them one thing and practically did not fulfill, not a single, not a single election promise, especially those key issues.

• 25:44Speaker 02

  Ukraine has about 25% of desperate nationalists, who in their extreme nationalism rolled down to chauvinism, especially with the war trauma. 73% of voters voted for Zelensky, practically the entire remainder. We're talking 25 and 73. And to them, he promised a wider multicultural project, where people who speak in Russian, for example, and Russian culture is an organic part of Ukrainian culture. And so, this is why they voted for him, because he said that he will not allow to split Ukrainians based on the language they speak and what church they go to. But he did not do any of that. He did everything to the opposite. Poroshenko, at his time, announced his famous concept stating:

• 26:28Speaker 02

  "Army, language, Ukrainian language, and faith." And he consolidated around 25% of voters around himself, and the rest voted against that. In the result, Zelensky's administration, it turned out that he supported that very same project. And today, Ukraine is facing a serious violation of constitution, and he himself is supposed to be the guarantor of constitution. Human rights violations, brutal violations, persecution of the church, etc. And I began criticizing that when I was still his advisor, advisor to his office. Because for me, my personal motivation is very close toward a religious one. For me, the issue of conscience, honor, precision are key issues, the issue of truth.

• 27:12Speaker 02

  And I'm not able to stay silent, and even now, I'm not silent, because he, with all of this negative attitudes with what he does, he's the head. He's the president and the head of our country that's at war, that is at war with a superior opponent. So in my rhetoric and my critique, and I'm being officially in political opposition to him, I must, at all times, carefully choose my words to make a distinction between the office of the president of Ukraine and Volodymyr Zelensky as a person. I'm trying not to damage the president of Ukraine, rather to hit particularly Zelensky himself. And this may have a negative appearance, as if I'm waging a personal war within him. That's not true. It's not the case. I'm criticizing him as a political leader that is making mistakes, in my opinion,

• 27:55Speaker 02

  including strategical mistakes on the inside and the outside, refraining from waging war as a matter of principle. But oftentimes, such reputation may get created, and at all times, even now, I have to carefully select my words as a matter of principle, so as not to damage the country.

• 28:12Speaker 02

  And it's not easy.

• 28:15Patrick Bet-David?

  I can only imagine, and I'm assuming that's why you chose to speak in your native language, because you do speak English.

• 28:22Speaker 04

  I speak English and I could provide this interview on the English.

• 28:25Patrick Bet-David?

  Because you know the technicalities of words.

• 28:26Speaker 04

  But I have to be specified, very specified.

• 28:29Patrick Bet-David?

  I totally respect that.

• 28:30Speaker 04

  Accurate.

• 28:30Patrick Bet-David?

  I get it, specifically in this position that you're in. Yeah, I mean, when you think about, when I look at the numbers, when he won in 2019, 73.22%, and he said, "I promise I will never let you down," right? His words that he talked about. Now, transitioning into where we are today, okay? So let's go to Putin, in your eyes. When you, when you break down the history of what's happened between Putin and Ukraine and Russia and the history, but I'll even give you a timeline here in a minute, and when you see it, I'm sure you recognize the timeline. You're very critical of Zelensky, very, based on what you're saying. What is your impression of Putin?

• 29:12Patrick Bet-David?

  You know, when you think about what he's doing with the war, with the way he's handling it, with the fact that, you know, US put sanctions on him two years ago. I think it's been a little bit, little bit over two years that he's had the sanctions. It's affected the economy, the inflation, what they're going through. But what do you think about what Putin did with the first actions? Your impression of him?

• 29:33Speaker 02

  Putin, he single-handedly took several decisions, single-handed decisions that are directly against, directed against my country, and not only. The first is that he, when he took away Crimea in 2014, then the whole activity in Donbass and full-scale war that began in 2022. He is the leader of a country who single-handedly took a decision to go with military aggression against Ukraine, and I qualify him as such, no less, no more. That's officially. Unofficially, I have my particular opinion about him as a person and political leader and how he came to that life. Better said, to those decisions. I openly state that, which does not add to my popularity among many Ukrainians, because I have my own view of things, and if you wish, I can share this with you, but it will

• 30:17Speaker 02

  take three to five minutes, it's a long text.

• 30:19Patrick Bet-David?

  I would love to hear it. I want to hear it.

• 30:21Speaker 02

  From my point of view, Putin, upon completing the Leningrad University and working in the West, and he comes from political intelligence background, he is the most pro-Western Russian politician until now.

• 30:35Speaker 02

  His mindset. In his mindset, he is the most pro-Western politician. Let's recall his coming to power. His first proposition to the West was to accept Russia into NATO. Then he offered to make Russian missile defense system as part of the Western American missile defense system. He is the first leader who called George Bush after 9/11 and offered his help. He organized a stopover base for the US and NATO in Volga. It is the same person who today is saying no to NATO bases in Ukraine. And Americans during their campaign in Afghanistan were using Russian territory in their stopover bases in Russia.

• 31:17Speaker 02

  It took a long time before he switched to anti-Western quarters. I can even name you the stages of that process. In the beginning, he started fighting with those whom he considered Russia's internal enemies. Those are the oligarchs like Berzovsky, Kusensky, TV channels, etc. So he began taking action as a KGB officer who is used to oppress internal opposition. He got in trouble with the West, particularly with the soft power side NGO structures that were bringing Western influence, especially the influence that Democrat globalists were introducing through the means like USAID and Soros Fund, etc. He understood that this is the soft power that is directed against him, but he purposefully set up Russia as a non-ideological state.

• 32:02Speaker 02

  He said "economy". From my point of view, Putin is a leader who is a right-wing liberal conservative type, something like Cecil Rhodes or Stalypin in Russia in the end of the 19th century, a statesman and a right-wing liberal, free economy, and so forth, so forth. But he has a KGB officer inside him, and he has some traumatizing experience back from Saint Petersburg times when he was Subchak's assistant, who was Saint Petersburg mayor at that time. And as they say, he was intensely interacting with criminal structures, and it left a definite mark on him. So these are the three sources that formed his personality. He was asking to join the West with all his might, but then the revolution takes place. Let's say in 2002.

• 32:44Speaker 02

  When Ukraine officially under President Kuchma is taking the decision to join NATO. With the background of Chechen campaign and Russia blaming the West for meddling and supporting Chechen Magia heads, he took it extremely painfully. Then the revolution in Georgia happens and Caucasus, which is a key area for him, he takes it as a Western, particularly American expansion right in Russia's underbelly. To put it that way, then, the first Maidan in Ukraine, the orange Maidan, 2004, he takes it as a Western intelligence agencies, in particular American agencies, directed against Russian influence. Then, some time passes, and in 2007, it's his famous Münchens speech, where he says,

• 33:27Speaker 02

  declares that he's now enemies with the West. It took him seven years to get to that point, and they begin planning a definite large-scale special operation against Ukraine. It comprised an entire spectrum of attacks, economic, political, cultural, etc., etc., but they were still not talking about a military decision. Then comes the events in Georgia, 2008. Then, on that background, Ukraine is emphatically brings the question before NATO and the collective West about accepting Ukraine into NATO. Bukhara summit in 2010, and the American president of the time says that we accept Ukraine into NATO, but Merkel and the leaders of Germany and France categorically refuse. And Putin understands that this is an issue that he can never be at peace with, that

• 34:10Speaker 02

  from Ukrainian territory and with Ukraine's help, there would be a systemic threat to Russia's security, at least how he sees it. We can, we can argue how reasonable this is, but I'm just describing the way he sees that. Then, the key event was an attempt of Maidan in Russia. It was the Balotna Square, spearheaded by Navalny and other leaders of opposition in 2012, and that scared Putin to death. He understood that this colorful revolution, as the West's method of action, as they took it, is already inside Russia. Then he turned Russia into an ideological state in order to create an ideology of Russian peace as a software for Russia's expansion. And back then, the decision was taken to take away Crimea, and it went on further.

• 34:54Speaker 02

  From Putin's point of view, he's carrying out a defense war. I think... If we talk psychologically, he holds a deadly grudge against the West because he always wanted to them to like him, always wanted to be part of them. He was accepted into G8 and kicked out of G8 from that big 8, and he's still angry and he's trying to prove it to the West with this whole war that they need to consider him and that Russia has real interests that he's honestly defending. This is his mindset and this is his logic, from what I understand. People blame him for supposedly wanting to rebuild the Soviet Union. I don't think so, rather he wants to revenge for the Soviet Union's defeat. It's the motivation and from his point, the West broke the agreement.

• 35:38Speaker 02

  They're based on the fact that when Gorbachev brought the troops out from Germany, he was promised that the West will not expand, NATO will not expand eastward, but there were five waves of expansion and he was bearing with that still, but when they touched the former SSR countries, Georgia, Moldova, Ukraine, he took it as an intrusion into his area of responsibility. It's the logic of a person who's like in St. Petersburg in the 90s, who took over a marketplace, as we say, so we agreed that this is going to be your territory of influence, this is going to be mine, then you intrude into my territory of influence and there must be some response. So from his point of view, he's waging a defense warfare. From his point of view, he has the moral superiority in what he's doing and he sincerely believes in what he's doing and at the same time, he finds himself in a very difficult position.

• 36:23Speaker 02

  And it's been three and a half years that I'm in big politics and I continue learning every day. I'm trying to understand what's happening and new things open up to me every day. My experience has convinced me that the average person thinks that politicians lie when they come to the microphone. But all the experience convinces me that politicians tell pure truth 99% of the time. And when he says that we're not fighting with Ukraine, nor with Ukrainian people, but rather with the Nazi government that took over Ukraine, and Ukrainians are brothers and sisters, as he confirmed today at the conference, he's telling the pure truth. He's truly thinking that way. So it's a complex character with regards to Ukraine and the world with a complex motivation and I tried to express it with maximum precision and the way I understand it,

• 37:07Speaker 02

  laying down his foundational motives and the way he's looking at the world.

• 37:10Patrick Bet-David?

  Do you think Putin lies 99% of the time?

• 37:14Speaker 02

  No. I think he tells the truth 99% of the time. When he speaks about key issues. What he mentioned today about 80 kilograms of meat per person per year in Russia. There's a big question where he got those numbers from. But as to his positions, for example, in his interview with Tucker, when he does this long historical, he says what he thinks.

• 37:37Patrick Bet-David?

  Yeah, so, okay. So, let me ask you, when you say, um, he wanted to have a good relationship. He makes the phone call, "Hey, we're willing to entertain being part of NATO." And then, "Okay, let me go check with the people, you know, Clinton, Bush, whoever it is. Hey, we're gonna check on the coming, you know, I'm so not right now, maybe later on we do. What do you mean, you don't want me to be a part of NATO?" And then, "Hey, 9/11, support. I don't like what this happened here, whatever you need, I defend it. I'm not for terrorism and all that stuff." He's kind of putting his foot down. But when you say, "He wanted to be pro-West," and then now it's against West. Well, the West is who? Who let him down? If you were to give names of people that you think, uh,

• 38:20Patrick Bet-David?

  independently, because the West can have nine leaders. Six of them were good with Putin, but three didn't keep a promise to Putin. Who are the specific people that you think that Putin said, "Yeah, I don't trust this guy, it's out"? Is it the entire system of the West he doesn't trust with how we are? Or is it certain individuals that got him to this point?

• 38:39Speaker 02

  For him, main point of orientation is the United States of America and any of their leaders. Why? Because he's measuring the real weight and he sincerely believes that he's stronger than any Western state except the United States. He's stronger than France, Britain, Germany, not to mention Italy and the Baltic countries. And the strategy consists of to create a situation when he can have a two-sided relationship with any Western country, bypassing over national structures like NATO and the US. Because together, all the countries of the West are stronger than Putin, but he's stronger than any country separate except the United States. So he's orienting only against the US. For him, Ukraine is a proxy power of the US. And so he's trying to speak over the head and come and negotiate.

• 39:24Speaker 02

  Because, again, he repeated today, he's not gonna talk to Zelensky. For him, the US is the focus of his grudge, attraction, and recognition. It's a very Russian way of thinking. I don't know if you can understand it.

• 39:36Patrick Bet-David?

  But why, though? But why? Is it a person? Because United States...

• 39:42Patrick Bet-David?

  Is can be five different things under five different presidents, right? So when you say United States, who which specific president, which leader, which regime? When you say the West?

• 39:53Speaker 02

  Putin lived through four US presidents and during this whole time he has been the president. And today we know that, for example, the administration, I always underscore that you cannot say United States collectively, the West.

• 40:07Patrick Bet-David?

  Exactly what I'm saying, yeah, right.

• 40:09Speaker 02

  Because the administration of Trump's administration and Biden's administration is are two different types of West and two different worldviews and systems of motivation. And he understands this, moreover, he's trying to play with it, but he's working with the given. He's a professional intelligence officer. He's has been taught to work with the given. If it's Biden, he works with Biden. If it's Trump, he works with Trump. But he sincerely believes that a country has objective interest independently from the last name of their leader, the size and the geographical location and real geopolitical interest. And he's always trying to appeal to that. So notice his style is real politics. He's always talking about real politics, real interests, and he's offering to act and within those parameters and framework on the television.

• 40:54Speaker 02

  He what did he achieve in this? And this where he achieved a great success. You remember the debates of Kamala Harris and Trump? There was a very curious moment in there. President Trump says that to Kamala that you failed in your negotiations, your talks with Russia. If it had been me, the war would not have started. It's a very free paraphrasing of what took place. So she's losing it for a second. And then she says, in a very free paraphrasing as well, she responds, why do we even have to speak to people like Putin and the rest of them? And that's the thing that Putin always feels and it and it touches him very painfully.

• 41:35Speaker 02

  And he demands he wants for others to speak to him on the same level, like equals. So his interview with Tucker is his attempt to prove why he they need to talk to him as an equal. And he's talking about a multipolarized world. Not just United States who had usurped the power and were telling everybody else how to live. So in this war, he's posing as the representative of the global south. He tried to put China, India and BRICS and the Arab world on his side. So he's showing them like I'm the person who is capable to stand against the West. This new colonism that they're promoting. So he's discussing those terms for you. I'm the defense against that.

• 42:19Speaker 02

  And the summit in Kazan, when his political isolation was torn apart and tens of world leaders joined him. So that's the culmination of this war of 2022. He is showing that I managed to be this ram from the global south and to force the West to face this new political reality where the world is not single polar anymore. And it doesn't matter who the president of the US is, even though things changed after Trump.

• 42:50Patrick Bet-David?

  Yeah, so to me, I just, I just had Rob pull up a report to see when's the last time President Biden spoke to Putin. The fact that President Biden haven't spoken to Putin since February 12th of 2022. That's almost three years. That doesn't make any sense to me. That doesn't make any sense to me that you don't speak to him. But let me, let me go back to understanding the profile of Putin. So he's made comments where it's like, look, these presidents in America, they don't run America. They're going to come four, eight years, they're gone, four, eight years, they're gone, four, eight years, they're gone. Where, you know, I'm going to give you my impression of what you're saying. Tell me if this is exactly where you are. How long has Xi been in power, Rob? Can you type in how long Xi has been in power?

• 43:34Patrick Bet-David?

  China, Xi, how long has he been in power? You know, what is the timeline? Since what year? Okay, he has been in power since 2013. That's 11 years. 11 years allows you to know and read how to negotiate and do business with this person, China. Easier to know the person. Good, bad, ugly, doesn't matter if they're a criminal or good person. But at least you see patterns of consistency with 11 years. Do you think a part of a

• 44:04Patrick Bet-David?

  You know, his lack of trust comes from, hey, you know, they sit there and they negotiate with them. And Ukraine says, "I'm willing to give up these warheads to you guys in return for protection." So they give up the 1,700 warheads, you know, the whatever, the nuclear warheads that they had. You know which story I'm talking about. And then while they're doing this, Russia says, "I'm willing to negotiate with you guys as long as you guys don't come east." And you have the meeting where James Baker, at the time, US Secretary of State, this is under Bush. You got, I think it's Reagan or, I think it's under Bush. Then German Chancellor Helmut Kohl and Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher,

• 44:46Patrick Bet-David?

  they make verbal assurances to Mikhail Gorbachev, February 1990, "We're not gonna go west." Okay. And then Baker famously told Gorbachev that NATO would not move one inch eastward beyond Germany, right? Okay. So now Putin's watching all this stuff happen, then he comes into power, and then he's trying to find a way to improve the relationship with West. And then he realizes, "They don't keep the promise, NATO doesn't keep the promise, I can't trust you guys." Do you think that's the part where he's like, "West, whatever they say, don't believe it, because in four years it could change." Their promise today is not a 30-year promise, their promise today is maybe a four-year promise. Do you think that's how he looks at the West?

• 45:28Speaker 02

  From his point of view, the West looks like people that promise for the period, leaders who promise for the period of time while they're in power. So it fits.

• 45:39Patrick Bet-David?

  You're right.

• 45:40Speaker 02

  Four years, to put it this way roughly, he's in power, he can promise for four years. And then every time you need to deal with new people, many times imposing positions because the opposition comes to power, and he needs to renegotiate from zero every time, every time having those problems. And I think he tried to resolve the problem on a key level. He showed that in order to defend Russian interests, he's ready to use military force, and you can't not consider that.

• 46:11Speaker 02

  Other than that, in his eyes, Putin's dammery system was destroyed, which had been created after Second World War and now we need to build a new collective security system in Europe or the whole world. This is one of the key things. He mentions one of the key things that I myself talk about, but in his opinion, the West does not want to pose the question this way. So he said today that the West is playing one-sidedly to oppress. "I'm offering a collective system of security, but you're oppressing us. You don't want to consider us. This is not equal relationships. We're not par."

• 46:42Patrick Bet-David?

  Who do you think you trust more? Do you think you trust US more or do you think you trust China more?

• 46:47Speaker 02

  I don't think that he poses the question that way. I think he only trusts, believes in himself and Russia themselves. Look, by the fact, sheer fact of their size and the border with China and the nuclear power, even though they're allies, they're containing and restraining China in a certain measure. When SSR lost the Cold War and Kissinger traveled to get Nixon in 1975 and this triangle of SSR, USA, China had been resolved not in USSR favor, China and US ended up being allies. Today, the question is posed the same way in this battle of United States and China, which is a key thing for Americans

• 47:29Speaker 02

  and China. Where is going to be Russia? This is something I always say inside Ukraine. When you want Russia to be, what are the national, extreme nationalists are demanding, that the Russia needs to fall down, that the West needs to destroy, take away their nuclear warheads. And I always ask, do you think the West needs a broken Russia or do they need Russia as a factor that restrains China? And Putin clearly understands what he's trading with. He's trading with his position in relation to China. He is letting them understand that if things go really bad with the West, I'm going to go and join China. You're going to have to deal with the joint potential of China and Russia. And if not, I'm ready to stay neutral and contain this,

• 48:14Speaker 02

  play this role of containing China. So this is one of the key arguments in the negotiations.

• 48:19Patrick Bet-David?

  But I'm asking a question a different way. The way I'm asking a question is, you know, who do you trust more? Do you trust your enemies more or do you trust your friends more? I trust my enemies a lot. Why? I trust the fact that my enemies are doing whatever they can to kill me and put me out of business.

• 48:34Speaker 02

  Let me quote the Bible here. There's a good phrase in the Bible. "My enemy, why did you betray me? Why did you leave me?" And it's clearly saying that the enemy, it's this character, subject, that is most honest towards you. More honest than your friends, especially in the politics.

• 48:58Patrick Bet-David?

  I believe you, and I'm fully with it. I fully subscribe to that. So the reason why I asked the trust question is, you know, does he trust the fact that US will not keep their promises? Does he trust the fact that, you know, China? That's why I'm asking a question. Maybe let me ask you the question here for you, because you're at a position right now where a story just came out saying Ukraine to hold this, came up a month and a half ago, two months ago. Ukraine to hold elections immediately after war. Zelensky, chief of staff says, I'm sure you've seen this. And when that happens, you know, I think you may be going back for you to run for office, because, you know, folks want you to run for president, and that's an aspiration that you have as well,

• 49:39Patrick Bet-David?

  that you think you can do a better job than Zelensky can. From your perspective, and I know this is going to be an interesting answer you'll give. I'm assuming, I kind of have an idea what the answer is, but I'm, again, curious to know what you'll say. Who do you trust more on what they're going to be doing? Zelensky or Putin?

• 49:59Speaker 00

  This episode is brought to you by Indeed. You're ready to level up your business, but the pressure to find the right person to make that happen is intense. Indeed sponsored jobs can help carry the load. It boosts your job post to help it reach quality talent fast. Cut through the chaos with Indeed sponsored jobs. Get a $75 sponsored job credit at indeed.com/podcast. Terms and conditions apply. Hiring now? Then this is a job for Indeed sponsored jobs.

• 50:33Speaker 04

  Putin.

• 50:34Patrick Bet-David?

  You trust Putin more? Why is that?

• 50:37Speaker 02

  Because the enemy is the best teacher.

• 50:42Speaker 02

  Putin is my opponent.

• 50:46Speaker 02

  And it's an honest battle. But internal politic is always dirty. And usually, your best friends are the ones who betray you.

• 50:57Patrick Bet-David?

  Have you ever spoken to Putin?

• 50:59Speaker 02

  No, never spoke with him. We have incompatible ranks.

• 51:03Patrick Bet-David?

  You've never been, you guys have not spent time together?

• 51:06Speaker 02

  No.

• 51:06Patrick Bet-David?

  Okay, got it.

• 51:07Speaker 02

  Never.

• 51:08Patrick Bet-David?

  Well, I'd be curious to know what that looks like. But by the way, going back to

• 51:13Patrick Bet-David?

  what we're talking about with the war, okay? War starts. It's been chaotic, tragic, lives, reporting, numbers. You're on the inside. We'll watch the news. The news will tell us, you know, 198,000 Russian soldiers have been killed and 550,000 have been wounded since the beginning of the war. And we'll hear these numbers gets bigger and bigger and bigger. And then reports will come for Ukraine. And say, you know, we've only lost 31,000 soldiers, that number today as of December is 43,000 soldiers. But this is what the media is reporting us, and we have to believe it. What is the real number?

• 51:53Speaker 02

  I think that the real numbers, according to my evaluation of killed and missing in action in our condition, what that means killed and missing, it's around 150,000, more or less. And about 400, 500,000 of injured. And Russian losses are three times as large, I think, of killed and injured, but we need to understand the next issue, our relation ratio of killed and injured is better. Ukraine has a very good military medicine, so for one killed, we have five, six injured. In Russia, it's one to two, one to three. They have a very poor field medicine, and since they are attacking for them, they have a larger problem evacuating than us. And so they're losing in that ratio between

• 52:38Speaker 02

  injured and dead. So many people die right there in the field. So they could have 350 people killed and only about 600, 700 people injured. And not the way it was supposed to be, 1.5 million if it, if the ratio would be as in developed armies in the world, like in Ukrainian army.

• 52:56Patrick Bet-David?

  Do you remember the story that came out that said, you know, Ukraine dug up 2 million graves because of what's going on with war and all this stuff? Do you remember this story or no?

• 53:06Speaker 04

  2 million graves?

• 53:07Patrick Bet-David?

  Yeah, the story came out that Ukraine had built out multiple places to be able to bury a lot of lives. And so that reporting speculated some people to say, whoa, you know, maybe, you know, Ukraine's lost more people and, and, you know, we don't know about it. You're saying Ukraine's probably lost only 150 to 400 and maybe, you know, Russia's lost 450,000 to 1 and 1/2 million people injured.

• 53:37Speaker 02

  I think it depends how you counted. Their very specific place in this whole thing is losing the people who were drafted from the occupied territories. Yes. So there's a specific place. So this is the loss of people that were drafted from our occupied territories, Donbass, Crimea, and now it's even Zaporozhye and Kherson regions. And people who died, being Ukrainian citizens died, being part of the Russian army attacking us. So what did Putin do? He forced Ukrainian citizens to fight against other Ukrainian citizens, drafting them from those DNR and LNR. From there, about 70, 80,000 people died. How do we count those? Is this a loss on the Russian side, Ukrainian side, or a

• 54:18Speaker 02

  separate category? It's a big question. It's not a small amount. It could be up to 100,000 people. So this is why the general correlation, it's 1, 2, 3. And Kellogg, one of the representatives from Trump.

• 54:30Patrick Bet-David?

  How is that possible? How is that possible? For the average person, how is a smaller country like Ukraine able to kill three times the amount of people to a powerful country with the second most nuclear warhead? Some, on some numbers, they're first. You know, how are they able to do that to a nation as big as Russia?

• 54:50Speaker 02

  That's a typical ratio on the battlefield between the attacking and

• 54:57Speaker 02

  Retreating, or better said attacking and defending sides. We are defending everybody who is attacking, usually carries more losses. For them to not carry more losses, they need to have a radical technical advantage, but they don't have that. Moreover, in some...

• 55:10Patrick Bet-David?

  Three times the amount, so three times.

• 55:11Speaker 02

  Yes, you look, there are battles when it's one to ten, one to fifteen. That's on average, only comes to one to three, one to five, I would say, more or less.

• 55:22Patrick Bet-David?

  Got it, okay. So, you know, when you're watching, I don't know if you saw what Putin said earlier today. Rob, if you don't mind pulling up the clip, just three hours before you got here, Putin was being interviewed, and he's being asked a question about his willingness to negotiate with Trump for the Ukraine war. And if you want to kind of get one side of the mic on, you can hear what he has to say, if you want to put that on. Rob, if you want to play this clip, here's Putin. Go for it.

• 55:50Speaker 05

  What do I offer to the president-elect Trump when we meet? First of all, I don't know when we will meet, because he doesn't say anything about it. I haven't spoken to him for more than four years, and I am ready for it, of course, at any time. And I will be ready for a meeting if he wants it. Politics is the art of compromise. And we have always said that we are ready for both negotiations and compromises. It is just that the opposite side, in the literal and figurative sense of the word, refused to negotiate. And we are always ready for this.

• 56:33Speaker 05

  The result of these negotiations is always compromise.

• 56:37Patrick Bet-David?

  Do you believe him?

• 56:38Speaker 02

  Yes.

• 56:39Patrick Bet-David?

  Okay.

• 56:40Speaker 02

  He demonstrates a consistent position since March 2022, since Istanbul negotiations. And you notice today, he said that the basis for us is the Istanbul talks and the real position on the soil, on the ground, and we are ready for compromises. Putin is a very complex person, but he has two remarkable qualities, real or figurative. In parentheses, he perfectly...

• 57:07Speaker 02

  ...maintains the same line that he announced and in the eyes of everyone in Europe, everybody he deals with, he stated clear goals and he showed that he can achieve them by force, but he has not changed the goals. He consistently says the same thing. Istanbul talks, we're ready to talk and etc. It's more Ukraine more likely here that looks like an unpredictable partner that from one side is showing itself as a victim, as a suffering side. From the other side Putin, it's making us to look like we are constantly refusing to negotiate. This is what happened today. So he's building a perfect trap. See the first step, he says

• 57:49Speaker 02

  we're ready to talk. Step number two, he says I'm ready to compete with the West over Kiev and try Arashnik, which is the mass destruction weapon and let the Western air defense try to protect them from that. And number three, he says I'm not going to talk to Zelensky. Oh, he's not a legitimate leader. If he will be re-elected and I'll talk to him. So this is a slap in the face to Zelensky. It's like a red rag. So when Putin says he's not legitimate, how is the West hearing this? Zelensky is a horse who's not even going to participate in the race. Why would we even bet on it? So he receives this emotional trauma, plus this Arashnik, this threat to Kiev, and they react very sharply. And it's just street

• 58:34Speaker 02

  cussing and swearing him and your Mark, publishing this, posting this outside of any political relations, even between countries in war, just cursing, swearing. And now Putin says and shows this to this world and says, I'm for peace, I'm ready to go for a compromise, but these people, you can't even talk to them, you can't be negotiating with them. And this is how we look in the eyes of the whole world because with this whole offer and this provocation, how did we react? Saying bad words, calling him names, which liquidate any possibility of normal talks, even thinking about it, even just a ceasefire. This is why Putin has a very clear position. He took it in the spring of last year. It was corrected since 2022, Zelensky is not a legitimate leader.

• 59:19Speaker 02

  He's over his time. He does not represent the people of Ukraine. We're ready to talk, but for this, we need compromises. And the people in power who are legitimately there, and he has not changed position since then. Since that time, we called him names, got to intrude into Kursk Oblast, and we did many times things that undermine Ukraine's image as the country that really desires peace. Now, the Prime Minister of Hungary spoke twice about the Christmas truce and exchanging prisoners of war. And our government very harshly reacted to that, saying, "Nobody authorized Orban to do that." So for Zelensky and his emotional heat, I don't know if he noticed this,

• 1:00:01Speaker 02

  but they are painting him as the only public political figure who is against stopping the war. And I am warning them publicly through my direct statements. And I'm sure that they are watching me in Zelensky's office. "Look what they're doing to you. They are constantly putting you in a position of people who are against stopping the war, and you're the victim's side." Putin, on your background, begins looking like an adequate, reasonable person who is offering peace, of course, on his own conditions and achieving what he wants, his goals. But this is a very dangerous road, and he is outplaying us.

• 1:00:34Patrick Bet-David?

  You're gonna think I'm crazy when I tell you this, but the last 13 and a half years, I've been working on my first fiction book to write, ever. Fiction book to write. And while I finished this book a year ago, I got the strangest phone call about one of the characters in the book, where the guy wanted to meet with me, and he read the book. And afterwards, he's like, "Wait a minute. Am I the villain in the book?" This is a story about a character named Asher, who is half Armenian, half Assyrian, whose father was involved in the Iranian revolution, linked to Savak, working with the Shah, that they escape, and he gets recruited to a secret society. Well, when you go to the secret society, it's been around for a couple thousand years. They've developed some of the craziest leaders of all time. And they test you.

• 1:01:18Patrick Bet-David?

  There's unique tests that they have at the society, where they test to see your emotional, mental toughness. One of the tests that they have is very rigorous. It's purely mental. Of course, there's a physical. Physical one, but one is mental and emotional. If you're Armenian, if you're Syrian, if you're Persian, this is a book. You're gonna be reading and saying, holy moly, this the kind of stuff you talk about in here? Yes. If you're somebody that's fascinated by history, this is a book for you. Characters, there's a technology that this society, secret society builds. Where you go into a vault, I won't spoil it for you, when you go down. They have a technology where you get to sit down and watch and have a three, four hour conversation with Tupac. You can set up a debate between Karl Marx and Ayn Rand. Karl Marx is in the book, who wrote Communist Manifesto.

• 1:02:03Patrick Bet-David?

  Ayn Rand, who wrote Atlas Shrugged, is in the book. Marilyn Monroe explains the concept of seduction and sex in the book. When you read the book, it's about development of the next leaders in the world and how they do it. And how they've been doing it for many years. And it's also about how to prevent the end of civilization. And how this organization goes about doing it. So, I've never written a parenting book before, but if I ever wrote a parenting book, this is the closest thing to it because it's all mindset, a lot of crazy stories. Again, thirteen and a half years, trust me, I told myself, I will not publish this book. Until I sell my insurance company and I'm fully disconnected from it. Where it's no longer my responsibility a hundred percent. When you read this, if you're a creative person, if you like fiction books, if you

• 1:02:47Patrick Bet-David?

  enjoyed Atlas Shrugged, or if you enjoy Divergent, if you like books like that. I think you can enjoy reading this book. It's the creative side. Business books is very easy. Here's how you do it, here's how this works. This is very creative. If you haven't placed your order yet, now you can order it on Simon and Schuster, Amazon. I'm gonna put the link up below somewhere here, maybe even in my profile. Go order the book and read it. I sincerely, I've never written a book where I can't wait to read your reviews. To see what you think about this book. So, I'm going on this wild journey and we have some plans with this book here. If you support the things that I work on, I would appreciate you going to reading the book. Order the book on Amazon and then post a review.

• 1:03:31Patrick Bet-David?

  So, how do you think it's gonna end? Do you think, let's just say the negotiation does take place. Trump gets in, they're having a meeting, it's just no question about it. They're gonna have a visit, he's gonna go over there and have to sit down the conversation. When they do, what do you think will happen with the territory and regions? You think Putin is gonna get what he wants?

• 1:03:49Speaker 02

  I think that the real terms for talks, it would be freezing it on the line of fire that exists today. Putin will not go to talks with Zelensky, I think. That's 100%. He's not gonna go only if Zelensky is re-elected again. Because Putin is a lawyer and he has this lawyer-y thinking. He always prefers to achieve, to be reduced to writing an agreement, signed by, but signed by who? If he considers Zelensky as illegitimate. See, Trump, he pushes forward like a bulldozer in a good sense of this word. I think he'll have enough strength and influence to do a double-tomato for Russia and Ukraine and force him to stop the fire. But stopping the fire doesn't mean peace.

• 1:04:31Speaker 02

  And Putin will stop the fire, but he will not, he will talk about some agreements only with the next legitimate president of Ukraine, which the people will choose. And before that, there will be no peaceful agreement. So, President Trump, he can stop the war, as he said, but achieving a peaceful agreement is the next very difficult task. And we still don't know how the first is gonna end up working out with the elections in Ukraine, what it's going to bring and how it's gonna end. I say that the question is on creating a new system of collective security in Eastern Europe with participation of Russia, Belarus, considering their position, which can compensate and replace my system, which is destroyed.

• 1:05:14Speaker 02

  Without, if we don't consider the interests of Russia, Belarus and Ukraine, it's not gonna work. We can stop firing, but it will not, we will not be able to resolve the problem in its core.

• 1:05:28Speaker 02

  Will be able, Trump, Putin and new leader of Ukraine, stop this war in the, in the root? That's a real challenge. It's not gonna be easy to achieve. But seizing the fire, it's possible, yes.

• 1:05:39Patrick Bet-David?

  Yeah. Yeah, you know, Putin's called Zelensky a legitimate leader, heading a neo-Nazi regime. His words on what he called Zelensky. For you, with where you're at right now, how many of Zelensky's leaders, camps on the inside, call you and speak to you and tell you things that undermine Zelensky? Are you in communication with any of his leaders that reach out to you directly?

• 1:06:10Speaker 02

  Let me put it this way. I have fullness of information of what is happening in Ukraine in the most, most tight circles, to put it this way.

• 1:06:19Patrick Bet-David?

  But these are people that currently would be part of his administration?

• 1:06:24Speaker 02

  I have fullness of information.

• 1:06:27Patrick Bet-David?

  It doesn't answer the question. So then.

• 1:06:29Speaker 02

  I need to be very sensitive because I don't want to.

• 1:06:31Patrick Bet-David?

  I totally get it.

• 1:06:34Patrick Bet-David?

  I'm not looking for a name, but I totally, but I totally get it. So because there's a difference between directly and indirectly. Right?

• 1:06:41Speaker 02

  If you want this type of an answer, I have an answer. It's information from Zelensky's closest circle. This is the maximum precision I can give you in an answer.

• 1:06:50Patrick Bet-David?

  I'm not going to ask any more than that. That's all I'm looking for. So it is directly. It's not somebody tells somebody.

• 1:06:55Speaker 02

  If you use those terms directly, indirectly, I'll speak directly.

• 1:06:59Patrick Bet-David?

  Directly, okay, good. Right. Specifically, so that's, so that's good now. So if it's directly, you're hearing it from him. So in this context, if this thing was to accelerate and let's just say war, you know, they compromise. Trump goes there, they're done, they're good to go, the war is done. How soon will you be returning to run for president?

• 1:07:22Speaker 02

  Well, the mood in Ukraine is such that there will be immediately a whole set of key issues that are impossible to resolve without elections, stopping the martial law, mobilization, opening the borders, because we're a country with closed borders and very many families have been split for three years. Every third, fourth Ukrainian person is outside the country. Many times husbands haven't seen their wives and children for many years. This is why it cannot be resolved without elections. And I think within a month or two, there will be a question brought up about stopping martial law and going into the peaceful state.

• 1:07:59Patrick Bet-David?

  Okay. So next question for you is, you know, I had some friends that were there who are friends, friendly with some of the military leaders. Okay. And story comes out, it's all over the place. I'm sure you've seen it as well. On the money that's being given with the level of corruption. Okay. A lot of money's gone there, okay? And you'll hear stories, okay? Aid given to Ukraine. Mortar shell scandal. January 2024, this year, a year ago. Ukraine's Security Service, SBU, uncovered a corruption scheme in nearly 100,000 mortar shells amounting to $40 million. The scheme involved senior officials from the Ministry of Defence and an arms supplier

• 1:08:42Patrick Bet-David?

  with funds transferred abroad without any shells being delivered. That's one. Two, embezzlement of logistics officers. In November of 2024, the SBU exposed a corruption scheme of two Ukrainian army logistics officers. They defrauded a state of 27.3 million, approximately $700,000, through a network of shell companies diverting funds meant for military use. Three, agrarian and economical ministry officials. In August of 2023, about 16 months ago, the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine, NABU, uncovered a $1.6 million embezzlement scheme involving the First Deputy Minister of Agrarian Policy and Food and a former deputy minister. They were charged with the power abuse

• 1:09:25Patrick Bet-David?

  and embezzling state fund designated for humanitarian aid. Military catering scandal. Earlier in 2023, there were reports about inflated prices for food meant for Ukrainian troops, leading to the resignation of junior defence minister. The scandal involved buying goods like eggs and potatoes at well above market rates, suggesting a kickback system was in place. Last one, procurement fraud. In January of 2023, another high-profile case involved the dismissal of Asylus Luzinski. A deputy infrastructure minister was caught allegedly receiving a $400,000 bribe for rigging procurement tenders for equipment like generators. Do you believe Zelensky has gotten any of the money that's been given to Ukraine?

• 1:10:10Speaker 02

  Whether he personally received corrupt money, to clarify the question?

• 1:10:16Patrick Bet-David?

  So, for example, somebody can work for my company, and they can be my, I don't know, executive assistant, let's just say. And with my contacts, they can have one company that is going to be a hundred thousand dollar job I do, that they're my contact. They can go find another person, and they'll do hundred and twenty thousand dollars, but the twenty thousand dollars more, they'll say, pay it to my wife. So the paper trail is not to them. Do you think there was any corruption?

• 1:10:48Speaker 02

  Let me formulate this this way. Most of the cases that you were naming are happening in the realm of national defense and security, which is the direct area of responsibility of our President Zelensky as the commander in chief, according to the laws and constitution of Ukraine. This is his direct area of responsibility. He carries full responsibility for everything that happens then, especially in a country that is in a, instead of war.

• 1:11:10Patrick Bet-David?

  Because I'm asking a specific question, so let me restate my question. Let me restate my question. This is a very important question for you to answer. And, and if you answer it in a way, you know, it's, it's catastrophic for him, right? Do you know the answer? You don't have to answer it if you don't want to. Do you know the answer whether money ended up flowing to him through shell account or other people? Were people on the inside have said, you know, Alexei, listen, everybody here knows how much money this guy is making. Every time we give him forty billion, twenty billion, ten billion, five billion. There are so many other accounts, shell accounts, that he has money that's going to overseas and all this other stuff. Do you directly or indirectly know that he's gotten paid from all the money that other countries have given to him?

• 1:11:54Speaker 02

  I'm answered with maximum precision. I do not have information that he received money from corruption scandals, but I can tell you for sure that the level of corruption is off the charts. Catastrophic.

• 1:12:10Patrick Bet-David?

  With him or with his people?

• 1:12:13Speaker 02

  And people surrounding him in the zone that he's responsible for.

• 1:12:17Patrick Bet-David?

  Does that benefit him or it benefits his people?

• 1:12:19Speaker 02

  At a minimum, it benefits the people who are surrounding him.

• 1:12:22Patrick Bet-David?

  Okay, but that's not benefiting him?

• 1:12:24Speaker 02

  I do not have such information. But he carries full responsibility for what is happening in his area of responsibility for the level of corruption that is happening there and the measures that he's undertaking to, to put it mildly, I find them unsatisfactory.

• 1:12:43Patrick Bet-David?

  Okay, uh, let me go another thing here. When you think about your country, Ukraine, natural resources, plenty. It's a beautiful place, a lot of incredible natural resources that a lot of people are interested in, that they want. Russia, when you think about the number one country in the world in natural resources, it's Rus- Russia, seventy-five trillion dollars of natural resources. Lot of these big companies wanna get into Russia, right? Uh, there's a concept called Economic Hitman. I don't know if you're familiar with this author. He was a guy that wrote a book on Economic Hitman. He comes to your country, he says, "I'm gonna bring some companies and they're gonna spend, invest ten billion dollars in your country." When they do, that's what he used to do. This man right here, John Perkins, was an Economic Hitman. He would go to different countries and he would

• 1:13:28Patrick Bet-David?

  tell them, "We're gonna come here, we're gonna do this, we're gonna put ten billion dollars into your country. If you don't, we're gonna do something to you." And on the back end, sometimes they pay these people, right? Story comes out on rebuilding Ukraine, right? Rob, if you can pull up the story. Rebuilding Ukraine, four hundred billion dollars, I think it's Chase and I wanna say BlackRock, uh, uh, four hundred billion dollars. Uh, is this the one? Zelensky BlackRock announced new investment initiative to rebuild Ukraine and can you do Ctrl F four hundred to see if it goes to it? There you go. Ukraine established a program to attract up to four hundred billion

• 1:14:09Patrick Bet-David?

  dollars in foreign investments to target various areas of the economy from clean energy to defense to natural resources. Zelensky believes this is the greatest opportunity in Europe since World War II. Do you think?

• 1:14:23Patrick Bet-David?

  The motive of others, not Zelensky. Let's set his motive aside. Do you think there's a motive of others to have war? Because now they can raise money and come in and build infrastructure and make more money. Do you think there's profit as a motive to have this war and continue the war?

• 1:14:42Speaker 02

  From whose side? Our side, Ukrainian side? Or US side?

• 1:14:46Patrick Bet-David?

  Not from his side. From, not even the American side. From the, from the banking and the financial sector.

• 1:14:52Speaker 02

  I don't think that they arranged the war. But they're definitely use its results, that's for sure.

• 1:14:59Patrick Bet-David?

  Got it, okay. So then that's, that's still a, your position is more noble. They didn't promote the war, but if it happens, hey, guys, let's capitalize. We're gonna go make a bunch of money.

• 1:15:08Speaker 02

  So why not, of course, why not?

• 1:15:10Patrick Bet-David?

  Okay, I got you. Okay, so that's interesting that you're saying that. That's good to know for us. Now, I heard a story that in 2022 Boris Johnson, if I'm not mistaken, came there. And there was a conversation that there was a 90% chance of a peace deal. But Boris Johnson influenced Zelensky to not reach a peace deal with Putin and Russia because the West would not support the type of peace deal. Is this a true story with Boris Johnson and Zelensky?

• 1:15:35Speaker 02

  I was a participant of the negotiations group. On March 29 in Istanbul, we signed an agreement. We come back to Ukraine on April 1st. And 1st, 2nd April, the 2nd, I believe, the Bucha tragedy is discovered. Then on April 9th, there was supposed to be a meeting of Putin and Zelensky, at which time the ceasefire was supposed to take place and open talks. Johnson came either the 4th or the 3rd, I don't remember exactly. I'd need to check on that date. And Arhamia, the, the head of the parliamentary majority of the ruling party, Zelensky's party, directly in an interview said that, yes, Johnson was the person who said, continue the war. That's his words.

• 1:16:21Speaker 02

  I do not know why he said that. Probably wanted to shift the responsibility over to the West. We have a tendency to do that. But I was not present at the meeting with Johnson. I did not receive information from Johnson. I don't have any direct testimony, people who could testify to that. One thing I can say, that the talks within Istanbul Forum had continued until May 17, meaning another month and a half after that, they still were discussing them. And Ramstein, for example, was only on April 26, when the first coalition met for the first time by the Minister of Defense of the US, Austin, who brought armament for Ukraine. What exactly happened? If you're interested, I can tell you what I think.

• 1:17:03Patrick Bet-David?

  Because I'm looking at the timeline here. February 1st, 2022, Johnson travels to Kiev.

• 1:17:09Speaker 02

  Yeah, he came on the 9th, when there was supposed to be a meeting between Zelensky and Putin. It was planned, and it was disrupted by the Bucha crisis.

• 1:17:17Patrick Bet-David?

  Well, why, why, why do you do this? What's the reasoning to?

• 1:17:21Speaker 02

  I think it was not only Johnson doing this. I think there were corresponding signals from Biden's administration. I don't know, but I think so, because Johnson, as an argument, wouldn't be enough. The main orientation is obviously, of course, the position of the American country. For us, it was most probably something along the lines of, okay, Putin is losing the war, his invasion has been thwarted, we're going to help you out, so you continue fighting and get to a better position to negotiate, get a better place for negotiation, more leverage. I don't know, I'm guessing. So it's not only just Joe Johnson, but the fact that Britain, in this conflict, is following, pursuing their own interests?

• 1:18:01Speaker 02

  I'm sure they do, 101%, and these interests, actually, many times are, go against the American interest, it seems to me. Why we listen to that? I don't know. It's a big question. For me, separate question. I think that we truly thwarted his invasion, and the Russians were really lost and confused in those talks. They were going to big concessions, and plus the emotional trauma from the Bucha, and it was a big mistake strategically to continue the war. Huge mistake on the Ukrainian side. What happened exactly? I'm just here in the realm of suppositions, assumptions, when I'm answering this to you.

• 1:18:40Patrick Bet-David?

  Yeah, so I'm going through a timeline right now. Okay. So, right here, February 20, February 1st, 2022, they meet. The biggest security crisis Europe has ever faced. Okay, great. April 9, 2022, a surprise visit. Johnson meets with Zelensky to demonstrate solidarity while the conflict's taking place. During the meeting, he pledged to continue assistance militarily, including 120 armored vehicles, new anti-shield missiles, as well as an additional 500 million dollars from World Bank leading to Ukraine. June 17, 2022, Johnson returns to Kiev to meet with Zelensky for a third time, where he announced a major training program for Ukrainian forces aiming to have training up to 10,000 soldiers every 120 days. This initiative was intended to bolster Ukraine's defense capabilities.

• 1:19:21Patrick Bet-David?

  Okay, great. Then, September 6th of 2022, he steps down. Boris Johnson, if you want to pull up when he steps down, Rob, that's September 6th, 2022. The date is what I have here. Okay? So, when he steps down, if you just type in, Rob, all you have to type in is when did Boris Johnson step down? Right, there you go. September 6th, 2022. No problem. So, he's out of the picture. Then, you have Liz Truss, okay? Liz Truss comes in during this time, and I'm so curious to know what you're gonna say because I'm trying to find a timeline here. Liz Truss, when Nord Stream pipeline took place, can you type in when Nord Stream pipeline happened, Rob?

• 1:20:03Patrick Bet-David?

  If you just type in Nord Stream pipeline, uh, event, Nord Stream pipeline event happened when? Okay, so this is getting very interesting for me. Very, very interesting. When did Boris step down? September 6th, 2022. When does Nord Stream pipeline happen? September 26th, 2022, three weeks later. Okay? Who do they blame? Russia. What does she text? It's done. Okay, then, Wall Street Journal comes out with this article, if you want to pull this up, and Americans are like sitting there saying, you know, uh, uh, you know, and by the way, for the audience that's watching this, you can pull up and who Liz Truss is, so they know who Liz Truss is.

• 1:20:47Patrick Bet-David?

  Uh, Rob, if you can just Google and see who Liz Truss is, so we can explain to everybody who Liz Truss is and to audience tracking. So, she was the British politician who served as Prime Minister of UK for one month. Literally, folks, one month, September to October 2022. So, then she texts, "It's done." Then Wall Street Journal comes out with this article September 28th. "We're supposed to believe a drunken evening, a rented yacht, the real story of the Nord Stream pipeline sabotage, a private businessman funded the shoestring operation which was overseen by top general, President Zelensky approved the plan, then tried to unsuccessfully call it off, but it was too late."

• 1:21:30Patrick Bet-David?

  Are we really supposed to believe this story? Or is there another story you have to tell us what really happened here?

• 1:21:35Speaker 02

  I have deep sympathy towards Britain, British people, British culture. I've been brought up, and that my family has been brought up on British literature. But, all I know about Great Britain, 20-plus years of political military analysis, it shows that their historical goal is not to allow a union between Russian continental Europe, especially Germany. Their whole history of external politic of United Kingdom shows that their main goal is not to allow the union between Germany and Russia. I do not know who exploded the Nord Stream now, officially, unofficially, Ukraine is

• 1:22:18Speaker 02

  blamed, there is an investigation done by Germany, Russians, Putin says that there's some Anglo-Saxon did it. I do not know anything about Britain's role, perhaps, in that explosion and sabotage, but I do know that this event could not be outside of Britain's interest, even if the Great Britain did not inspire it or conspired it, or got involved. Remember that Great Britain before that created a whole block of northern countries, Sweden, Finland, Denmark, Netherlands, friends of Ukraine, and their main interest was to restrain Russia and the Baltic Sea and the Baltic theater. What really took place there is one of the biggest and most interesting questions in

• 1:23:02Speaker 02

  this war that still needs to be investigated, but I don't have even the least of data and suspicions of what happened there. I do not know at all.

• 1:23:11Patrick Bet-David?

  You don't? Nizhnyo. Nizhnyo, okay. All right, I know what Nizhnyo is, so... Okay, maybe let me ask you another question on this. What chance do you think it was Russia?

• 1:23:28Patrick Bet-David?

  Behind Nord Stream pipeline.

• 1:23:29Speaker 02

  That Russia themselves exploded that?

• 1:23:32Patrick Bet-David?

  Yes.

• 1:23:33Speaker 02

  I think that's nonexistent. There would be the last people interested in that.

• 1:23:37Patrick Bet-David?

  Okay, zero. Okay, no problem. What percentage, speculation, purely speculating, that, you know, Ukraine was behind it?

• 1:23:49Speaker 02

  Well, I would allow that it could be Ukraine, 20%.

• 1:23:53Patrick Bet-David?

  Okay. How about US influencing UK?

• 1:23:58Speaker 02

  I think that, let's put it this way, NATO state, 80% that they're somehow this way or the other are involved in this story. Obviously, it was not Germany, which is the least interested party.

• 1:24:15Patrick Bet-David?

  Okay, so will we ever find out?

• 1:24:20Speaker 02

  I think someday we will. But this could be in 70 years.

• 1:24:26Patrick Bet-David?

  Seventy?

• 1:24:27Speaker 02

  But these are the terms of declassifying documents, 70, 80 years.

• 1:24:34Patrick Bet-David?

  In seven or eight years or 70?

• 1:24:37Speaker 02

  Seventy.

• 1:24:39Patrick Bet-David?

  It's gonna be 116 years old.

• 1:24:41Speaker 02

  Yes, every country has terms for declassifying. It depends on the goodwill and what game they're playing.

• 1:24:50Patrick Bet-David?

  Yeah, for me, I'm interested to know, you know, what's going on there.

• 1:24:54Speaker 02

  It could be much earlier. It could be much earlier. Look, if they create a system of collective security in Europe, a new system, it can be only created by politicians with new vision and these politicians will be interested and definitely cut ties with the past. It means that they will be also interested in exposing to the maximum the truth about the past. And this can happen within a much shorter term than 70 years.

• 1:25:20Patrick Bet-David?

  If you've seen the clip with Tucker Carlson and Putin, you know Putin says that he believes it was US that was behind it. Have you seen that clip?

• 1:25:29Speaker 02

  When he said specifically, "America"? I heard that they were talking about Anglo-Saxon something, keeping in mind both Britain and the USA.

• 1:25:39Patrick Bet-David?

  Rob, can you pull up that clip? It could be, yes, it could be that it's both. But if you want to play this clip with Tucker and Putin.

• 1:25:50Speaker 06

  You for sure. I was busy that day. Nate, do you have... I did not blow up Nord Stream. Thank you, though.

• 1:26:05Speaker 04

  You personally may have an alibi, but the CIA has no such alibi.

• 1:26:10Speaker 06

  Did you have evidence that NATO or CIA did it?

• 1:26:20Speaker 04

  You know, I won't get into details, but people always say in such cases, "Look for someone who is interested." But in this case, we should not only look for someone who is interested, but also for someone who has capabilities. Because there may be many people interested, but not all of them are capable of sinking to the bottom of the Baltic Sea and carrying out this explosion. These two components should be connected: who is interested and who is capable of doing it.

• 1:26:49Speaker 06

  But I'm confused. I mean, that's the biggest act of industrial terrorism ever, and it's the largest emission of CO2 in history. Okay, so if you had evidence, and presumably given your security services or intel services, you would, that NATO, the US, CIA, the West did this, why wouldn't you present it and win a propaganda victory?

• 1:27:09Speaker 00

  This episode is brought to you by Indeed. You're ready to level up your business, but the pressure to find the right person to make that happen is intense. Indeed sponsored jobs can help carry the load. It boosts your job post to help it reach quality talent fast. Cut through the chaos with Indeed sponsored jobs. Get a $75 sponsored job credit at indeed.com/podcast. Terms and conditions apply. Hiring now? Then this is a job for Indeed sponsored jobs.

• 1:27:45Speaker 05

  In the war of propaganda, it is very difficult to defeat the United States. Because the United States controls all the world's media and many European media. The ultimate beneficiary of the biggest European media are American financial institutions.

• 1:28:01Speaker 02

  I have a different explanation. Because these are actions against the main member of the Union, of the ES. Who is going to announce it, even if it was a victory?

• 1:28:17Patrick Bet-David?

  Who's going to finance it then?

• 1:28:20Speaker 02

  I have no idea. No, no, announce it. Tucker was asking Putin, why this is the largest act of terrorism? Why is nobody claiming it is their victory? And Putin explaining, because it's all controlled by the media. And I'm saying, because it's an action against the largest member of the NATO. So nobody's going to announce it, even if it actually took place.

• 1:28:40Patrick Bet-David?

  Yeah, I get that. I mean, it's catastrophic whoever does. And whoever does, two, three countries are going to be tied. So there's going to be two, three criminals, maybe more. And the level of credibility being lost. They will protect that and use propaganda to blame somebody else. And that game is a very, very effective game play, like he said in there, on what he believes is going on. But that was a big event, when you think about Nord Stream pipeline. But okay, so let's go to now. Okay, let's go to now with Putin, Ukraine, with the current climate that we have today itself. Trump coming in, temperatures being lower.

• 1:29:23Patrick Bet-David?

  The world's getting a little bit, you know, confident that this guy's coming in. Canada, Justin Trudeau, everybody wants to be on the good side of Trump. Do you think the climate around the world is going to be getting calmer because of President Trump winning?

• 1:29:40Speaker 02

  Of course. He came as a person who wants to break down the global system with a big S, which had been built, let's put it this way, by globalists. Behind whom stands the neo-Marxist school of political thought, cultural transkism and permanent revolution, all of that, things against which the right-wing America is standing and Trump and me personally. And these structures are very strong. They have been built over dozens of years and after 1991, they've been absolutely winners since that time. And to overcome that, which is to go the Trump's way for himself, is going to be very uneasy, hot and bright.

• 1:30:25Patrick Bet-David?

  Okay, so let's just say you go back to Ukraine, all right? And you campaign for presidency. What's your vision? What are you selling to the people?

• 1:30:36Speaker 02

  Three things.

• 1:30:39Speaker 02

  First, in external policy, creating a system of collective security in Europe, Eastern Europe, considering real interest of Belarus, Russia and Ukraine and all the countries in order so that the war between Russia and Ukraine could not repeat itself. Whichever means of arbitrage, new means to be invented, but there cannot be a war between Ukraine and Russia. There's 10 million citizens of Ukraine and Russia have direct relatives across the border, every fourth Ukrainian. This is not a normal situation. There are ways to resolve the problem between us without a war, not to allow a next war to break out. Within Ukraine inside, it would be changing the project from a nationalistic to a worldwide

• 1:31:24Speaker 02

  state with wide views, where the people's human rights are defended, their rights to go to the church they want, to speak the language they want, so that there is no persecution against people based on ethnical religious, which unfortunately is not happening in Ukraine currently, basically, so that the constitution is being followed in Ukraine. And the third, it would be new industrialization of Ukraine and a change in direction of their development. We did a huge mistake. In 1991, we began as a major industrial power in Europe. And today, we are an agrarian state with a very small sliver of services, with a destroyed economy by the war and our own actions.

• 1:32:04Speaker 02

  And I think we need to bid on a better technological scientific process, switching on to a new technological implementation in clusters and sectors. We can, I want an industrial rebirth, renaissance. I call my whole project Ukraine's renaissance, and we need to bring it up from the ashes, destroyed by the war, but it's been even more destroyed by our corruption. And the battle with corruption is subject number one.

• 1:32:35Patrick Bet-David?

  Would you pursue a relationship with NATO? Or would your campaign be to not have any interest and wanted to join NATO?

• 1:32:44Speaker 02

  No, I think that Ukraine needs to remain as a neutral country. Because one of the main reasons of this war with Russia was our desire and aspiration to join NATO officially and flirting with NATO, who would be always promising and not even intending to ever receive us, but forever just irritating Putin. According to the Articles of Independence Declaration of Independence of Ukraine, we are a neutral country and we were recognized in 1991 as a neutral state. As soon as we stopped being, or better said, wanted to stop being a neutral country, it brought up a whole chain of consequences internationally. And I believe we need to be a part of the collective West mentally. Maybe perhaps not a very developed country. We still need to learn a lot of things,

• 1:33:28Speaker 02

  but we need to have a special relationship with Europe, NATO, the United States. But we cannot join because at this stage, it means a third war with Russia, which we will not be able to bear.

• 1:33:41Patrick Bet-David?

  Okay, so what makes you think that NATO and the West would want a candidate like you? Why would they want somebody like you?

• 1:33:51Speaker 02

  Because for us, the price of joining NATO is the war with Russia. And for NATO, the price of receiving Ukraine is the war with Russia.

• 1:33:58Patrick Bet-David?

  But you remember what they did. I mean, think about the, what they did to Putin when Putin had all these NGOs of people being funded to protest outside. You know what they're gonna do in your country if you go out there and you talk like this? You think they're gonna let somebody like you win? And saying you have no interest of being with NATO?

• 1:34:18Speaker 02

  Yes, I think we will win. I will win.

• 1:34:21Patrick Bet-David?

  Really?

• 1:34:21Speaker 04

  Done.

• 1:34:22Speaker 02

  Yes.

• 1:34:23Patrick Bet-David?

  Who, who will want you? Think about world leaders. Who would want a leader like you being, replacing Zelensky? Would the West want you?

• 1:34:34Speaker 02

  I do not know.

• 1:34:35Patrick Bet-David?

  Would Russia want you?

• 1:34:37Speaker 02

  Possibly for Russia, I would be one of the most comfortable negotiator. Because I'm the only Ukrainian politic who says that Russia has some real interest as a country. Regardless of the last name of their president, Putin Navalny Ivanov. I recognize them, I'm a real politic. Russia as a state, regardless of who the president is, has real interests and you cannot not consider them. We have 3,000 kilometers of land and sea border that we share. We're neighbors, we were part of the same state, we grew up from the same roots and we are predestined to live together. We need normal relationship with Russia, normal, that are regulated so that the war cannot repeat.

• 1:35:20Speaker 02

  And the key irritant for Russia is joining NATO. And it doesn't matter if it's Putin or any other president, it doesn't matter the last name of their leader. It's Russia's interest. And moreover, I know for sure that NATO does not even intend to receive us. They're just teasing us about receiving, but they will never let us join. It has been confirmed with the leaders.

• 1:35:42Patrick Bet-David?

  You don't think so?

• 1:35:42Speaker 02

  Absolutely.

• 1:35:44Patrick Bet-David?

  They talked about it last year, 2023, in July, that they wanted to accelerate your membership to NATO.

• 1:35:49Speaker 02

  Yes. And in this year, they many times, multiple times confirmed at highest levels that someday, sometime, Ukraine will join, but not now. You see, NATO and United States has a status, there are five countries with that status, a special close member, but not in NATO. It's Israel, South Korea, Australia, Jordan, and one other country. We can receive that status, but the basis of regional security is the main thing. First of all, requiring good relationship with all the neighbors. Russia, Belarus, who went too far and we got a full-scale war, we need to re-establish, recover these relationships, at least some

• 1:36:32Speaker 02

  level of relationship, including Russia. And without considering their real interests, it's impossible to do, because the real interest of Ukraine is having good relationships with all the neighbors.

• 1:36:41Patrick Bet-David?

  Who else would want you?

• 1:36:46Speaker 02

  Who, from the outside leaders?

• 1:36:48Patrick Bet-David?

  Outside of Ukraine, external.

• 1:36:50Speaker 02

  Look, I don't know how they're gonna react to my program, to my offer, what other political leaders are gonna say, and political powers altogether, but I have a very clear proposal. We cannot allow a war in Europe, and we need to create a system that will allow to resolve current disagreements without a war. I think, that's my offer, I think it's reasonable.

• 1:37:14Patrick Bet-David?

  Okay. How are you gonna manage the NGOs that are gonna do propaganda and talk about how you're a Putin puppet, and, because that's what they're gonna say?

• 1:37:23Speaker 02

  Yes, they're saying this now already.

• 1:37:25Patrick Bet-David?

  I know, but how are you gonna handle those NGOs? How are you gonna handle those people that, the people that are funding protesting propaganda to paint a picture of who you are?

• 1:37:35Speaker 02

  After my victory, or before, during the campaigning?

• 1:37:39Patrick Bet-David?

  Pre, while you're campaigning.

• 1:37:41Speaker 02

  I will be maximum honest and precise. And Ukrainian nation will decide. I have a clear message to the Ukrainian nation. Ukraine is a failed state. And the problems that the war revealed have been accumulated since 1991. Because from the beginning, we went on a false, wrong path. Self destruction of our economy and culture. And the real result in this war is showing that the entire system is corrupt. It's rotten, it doesn't work, and we need to change the entire system. And I'm going, coming with this proposal to change that. And this, I'm similar to President Trump. My messages are similar to his, that the system is no good. And it needs to be fundamentally changed. We need to overcome the deep state and corrupt forces. That's my offer.

• 1:38:26Speaker 02

  Now, if the people will vote for me and elect me, they will decide.

• 1:38:32Patrick Bet-David?

  What do you think about Victoria Nuland?

• 1:38:34Speaker 02

  I think that this is one of the leading officers in Biden's administration, representative of Democrat globalist.

• 1:38:43Patrick Bet-David?

  Is she good for the country of Ukraine?

• 1:38:46Speaker 02

  She played her specific role.

• 1:38:50Speaker 02

  And that role was involving, I don't know if it was her task or not, but overall, the task of these people was to make a trap out of Ukraine for Putin. Like second Afghanistan for Russia.

• 1:39:03Speaker 02

  And we got in trouble with this trap for getting our own real interest. And we could have avoided getting in trouble.

• 1:39:09Patrick Bet-David?

  You got, you got a lot of, um, um,

• 1:39:14Patrick Bet-David?

  moving parts that you have to go through and maneuver through.

• 1:39:19Patrick Bet-David?

  Who, who would be some of the biggest people in Ukraine that is widely respected by others that would come out and say, we need Alexei as our president? Would the military be on your side? Would the economy be on your side? Would business people be on your side? Who, what sect would be out there saying, we're for Alexei?

• 1:39:41Speaker 02

  I have direct support from the side of the business, middle business, large business. I have enough support among the military. I'm a Ukrainian officer, lieutenant colonel in Ukrainian army, two and a half years on the frontline and overall. And I have enough support. I'm a volunteer who brings and gathers a lot of support and help for the Ukrainian army and I have a significant support among the people and it's difficult to measure that at this time. I think that you understand that right now it's just a general understanding, but once the presidential candidates will be registered, this is always a becomes a specific choice. The value of the program you're announcing, the value of your team, the value of every

• 1:40:26Speaker 02

  word you say after the official registration, it's not just people from your country or people from other countries listen to you that combines both of your questions. So for now it's just people looking overall at the situation, but over there it's going to be a real battle of statements, programs. I can tell you that for now I have sufficient supporters in all of the spheres of life of Ukraine. I can tell you I'm in direct contact with them.

• 1:40:52Patrick Bet-David?

  You're for sure very popular. I mean, your online following is in the millions. People listen to you and every time you're putting a live, millions of views, half a million, 2.2 million, 1.2 million. But I couldn't find anything in English. The only thing I saw in English was one you did 11 months ago with somebody, I don't know who it was. And how many English podcasts have you done? Is it, is it, is it just one that you've done?

• 1:41:18Speaker 04

  When the war has begun, I was made at about 30 English podcasts every day, the first, first 100 days.

• 1:41:26Patrick Bet-David?

  Yourself or did you go on other people's shows?

• 1:41:28Speaker 04

  By myself, no, no, it's just, just other people's shows. I, I spoke with CNN, with Fox News, and you can find it, my, just switching on the air.

• 1:41:37Patrick Bet-David?

  And I know you did, you did something with Lex Friedman, because I think like that would be the one.

• 1:41:41Speaker 04

  Yes, yes, two, two times.

• 1:41:43Patrick Bet-David?

  Two times, but neither one of them went live?

• 1:41:45Speaker 04

  No, but no one.

• 1:41:46Patrick Bet-David?

  What, what happened there?

• 1:41:47Speaker 04

  I don't know, we have to ask Lex.

• 1:41:48Patrick Bet-David?

  Okay, got it, okay. Because I know, you know, he's a true believer of what's going on there and Lex is a guy that wants peace and, you know, he's, he's coming from a place of, you can tell he's coming from a genuine, I don't know him, we, we don't have a relationship. But is your plan, because when I watch what Milley did...

• 1:42:15Patrick Bet-David?

  Argentina, socialist, they don't want Millet, libertarian, he's crazy, kissing girls, doing all this stuff, his campaign was very weird, loud, afuera, all this stuff that he's doing, yeah, exactly, right? Bukele, young guy, coming up, bitcoin, crypto, all this stuff, there was things that were different, right? So, you know, even if you go to Viktor Orban, there's a lot of them that we can go through, you know, Maloney from Italy, or all these things that we're talking about. Victor from Hungary. Where would you put yourself politically? Are you a conservative? Are you a libertarian? Are you, as a person, your background, faith, theology, things that you've studied, where

• 1:43:00Patrick Bet-David?

  would you put yourself politically?

• 1:43:01Speaker 04

  Yeah, I am a more of a right centrist.

• 1:43:07Patrick Bet-David?

  Right centrist?

• 1:43:08Speaker 04

  Right centrist, yes.

• 1:43:09Patrick Bet-David?

  Economically, you're a capitalist?

• 1:43:10Speaker 04

  Yes, absolutely, yes.

• 1:43:11Patrick Bet-David?

  Absolutely.

• 1:43:12Speaker 04

  I'm a conservative by that mindset.

• 1:43:14Patrick Bet-David?

  Okay, and then woke, completely anti-woke, nothing with you is woke? You're not gonna try to turn...

• 1:43:20Speaker 04

  Absolutely not, I completely understand what they people, who is the people are, and what is the ideology inside they are, they use. I'm against them.

• 1:43:29Patrick Bet-David?

  Well, one thing, one thing that I will say is, I really enjoyed talking to you, one thing that I will say is, Millet made us be interested in Argentina. Bukele made us be interested in El Salvador. Viktor Orban made us be interested in Hungary, right? And they did a phenomenal job of us being interested in some of these regions. I think if you, the fact that you're creating content right now is phenomenal, but the people that are listening to you are your people that are listening to you. I think if there's more outer people that are also supporting you, we had Dominic Targinsky

• 1:44:10Patrick Bet-David?

  on, from Poland, okay, he was a Polish parliament, I think, and then he was also part of NATO or UN, he was part of UN as well, if I'm not mistaken, member of the European Parliament, EU, member of the European Parliament, and he was a Polish politician. We had him on, did an interview, 25 million views, all the clips combined, and then we had him on our election night, when he was there. Everybody wants him to be the president of Poland now. You know, they want him to run in March, April, because this guy is like, so the exposure to English-speaking audiences got people more interested in supporting him, saying, here's the guy, and that's kind of helping as well. So for you, where you're going, you know, I'd be curious to know if you're going to

• 1:44:55Patrick Bet-David?

  take that route and be doing more of these types of conversations, especially at a time like this, because let's just say this does come to an end when Trump and them meet, and there is peace. Let's say then you're comfortable to go back, and you start campaigning, and you're speaking openly all over the place. Momentum rises, saying, here's somebody that can be the next president there. That could make for a very interesting story.

• 1:45:23Speaker 00

  This episode is brought to you by Indeed. You're ready to level up your business, but the pressure to find the right person to make that happen is intense. Indeed-sponsored jobs can help carry the load. It boosts your job post to help it reach quality talent fast. Cut through the chaos with Indeed-sponsored jobs. Get a $75 sponsored job credit at indeed.com/podcast. Terms and conditions apply. Hiring now? Then this is a job for Indeed-sponsored jobs.

• 1:45:54Speaker 02

  Yes, that can be. Look, for Ukraine, exposure before English-speaking audiences, more over United States, is one of the key things, because the very existence of Ukraine depends on 80% from the help that America gives. Not a single Ukrainian can be indifferent toward American audience and their points of view of Americans onto what happens in Ukraine. The person who is represented here, of course, receives a very strong shoulder of support, but the very fact of having an interview for the English-speaking audience, American audience. With regards to the two main points, I want to say the same thing. I'm intending to be a president for all Ukrainians and not just for my supporters.

• 1:46:36Speaker 02

  So people who maintain opposing ideologies will still be under protection, their rights will be defended, they will have a right to voice. There must be freedom of speech, there must be battle of arguments and not just suppressing one of the sides. That's a key. And the second point, I'm not a liberal like Malay, but I am supporter of maximum freedom in economics. Ukraine is now on one hundred sixteenth or maybe one hundred twenty-third place according to Freedom for Economy. It's a shame. Russia, we call them totalitarian authoritarian state, is on one hundred and ninth place. So they have a higher ranking than us. So my goal is to liberalize to the maximum the economy

• 1:47:18Speaker 02

  and allow people to make money, give them freedom of speech and defend their freedoms and rights and expand them. So I'm encouraged by the example of Malay and the leaders you named, but I have my own view on things. And it's my approach is rather more American. Maximum private and corporate rights have to be given to the maximum to the people. And the state needs to dictate the main guidelines, fighting corruption, maintaining those guidelines for the society and economy. And external policy will be the strategic development of the country and relationships with the neighbors. That's my view. The state needs to be shrunk down, the whole government needs to be shrunk down. They should not own anything. It's, that belongs to the private people.

• 1:48:04Speaker 02

  And they should not meadow directly into the ideological war, rather to create an atmosphere where some people cannot oppress others using organizations, government agencies, foreign partners, influences and help from abroad, but having, but provide for their true freedom of speech that we never had in Ukraine. And when the true battle of arguments ideologies begins, that will provide for the true development of the country, regardless of who the leader is. My goal is to create a system of rules. And I believe that the quality of a politician is defined by his ability to provide continuity. Imagine I'm lucky and I get re-elected, I have ten years. So the goal for these ten years is to place foundations that cannot be rolled back,

• 1:48:48Speaker 02

  even if my opponents come to power afterwards, to create mechanisms in the country that will hold for the future free economy and freedom and protected. This is a set of tasks. It will be difficult to achieve, but this is exactly what I am aiming to do.

• 1:49:02Patrick Bet-David?

  I'm excited to see what you do next. And I'm glad we made this work. I really enjoyed the conversation we had. For the audience watching this, we're gonna put the link below to all the channels and everything that you have so they can go out there and find you. And remember, this is also translated in Russian. If anybody wants to watch it, the link will also be below. Lexi, appreciate you for coming on. This was fantastic. Thank you so much. Thank you, everybody. You're gonna think I'm crazy when I tell you this, but the last thirteen and a half years, I've been working on my first fiction book to write, ever. Fiction book to write. And while I finished this book a year ago, I got the strangest phone call about one of the characters in a book where the guy wanted to meet with me and he read the book. And afterwards, it's like, wait a minute, am I the villain in the book?

• 1:49:46Patrick Bet-David?

  This is a story about a character named Asher, who is half Armenian, half Assyrian, whose father was involved in the Iranian revolution, linked to Savak, working with the Shah, that they escape and he gets recruited to a secret society. Well, when you go to the secret society, it's been around for a couple thousand years, they've developed some of the craziest leaders of all time. And they test you. There's unique tests that they have at this society where they test to see your emotional, mental toughness. One of the tests that they have is very rigorous. It's purely mental. Of course, there's a physical one, but one is mental and emotional. If you're Armenian, if you're Assyrian, if you're Persian, this is a book you're gonna be reading and saying, holy moly, this the kind of stuff you talk about in here? Yes.

• 1:50:30Patrick Bet-David?

  If you're somebody that's fascinated by history, this is a book for you. Characters, there's a technology that this society, secret society builds, where you go into a vault, I won't spoil it for you, when you go down, they have a technology where you get to sit down and watch and have a three, four hour conversation with Tupac. You can set up a debate between Karl Marx and Ayn Rand. Karl Marx is in the book, who wrote Communist Manifesto. Ayn Rand, who wrote Atlas Shrugged, is in the book. Marilyn Monroe explains the concept of seduction and sex in the book. When you read the book, it's about development of the next leaders in the world and how they do it and how they've been doing it for many years. And it's also about how to prevent the

• 1:51:12Patrick Bet-David?

  End of civilization and how this organization goes about doing it. So I've never written a parenting book before, but if I ever wrote a parenting book, this is the closest thing to it because it's all mindset, a lot of crazy stories. Again, thirteen and a half years, trust me, I told myself I will not publish this book until I sell my insurance company and I'm fully disconnected from it, where it's no longer my responsibility a hundred percent. When you read this, if you're a creative person, if you like fiction books, if you enjoyed Atlas Shrugged, or if you enjoy Divergent, if you like books like that, I think you can enjoy reading this book. It's the creative side. Business books is very easy. Here's how you do it, here's how this works. This is very creative.

• 1:51:53Patrick Bet-David?

  If you haven't placed your order yet, now you can order it on Simon and Schuster, Amazon. I'm gonna put the link up below somewhere here, maybe even in my profile. Go order the book and read it. I sincerely, I've never written a book where I can't wait to read your reviews, to see what you think about this book. So I'm going on this wild journey and we have some plans with this book here. If you support the things that I work on, I would appreciate you going and reading the book, order the book on Amazon and then post a review.