TRANSCRIPT

DENNIS SPEED:  So, my name is Dennis Speed, and on behalf of the LaRouche Political Action Committee I want to welcome everybody here for our Dialogue with LaRouche on October 14, 2017.  Today is a very specific form of presentation.  I think everybody is now familiar with our dossier, or at least has had a chance to get a copy of it; you have had a chance to read it. Today, what we're going to do is to make sure you're all provided with the opportunity to first of all hear the update on what we have been working on on Mr. Robert Mueller; but also, get a report from you as to what you are doing to get this out and to distribute this.  Now it's not merely the dossier, as I think most people here know.  We have our leaflet which you see here [Fig. 1] "They've both been spied on, slandered, and called 'Russian agents'.  But we know the truth."  The leaflet has the two pictures, of course, of President Trump and Lyndon LaRouche. "The Political Establishment that fears both sent the same political assassin after both: Robert Mueller."  This leaflet we want to get out in hundreds of thousands of copies, including directly here in the metropolitan area.  We need the assistance of everyone to do that.  We also have what is called a palm card; these are small and intended to be given out in whatever ways make sense.  You'll notice on the back of this card by the way, after you get a chance to see it, that it has a scanning app there for people to go on and actually get and download the dossier.  The concept of the palm card and the leaflet is to drive people to the platform through which they can read the dossier.  We also want to have copies of the printed material available; but this is intended to go to groupings and individuals that can take action on what it is we're trying to accomplish.  Now that is, is we want Robert Mueller removed from his witch hunt.  But we want that done in such a way that his real controllers come to light; and that is British Intelligence and the British Empire.

A little later, after our presentation, I'll read to people a letter that some of you received when you came in; which is from the Congress of the United States, from Chuck Grassley, Chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary of the U.S. Senate, and from Bob Goodlatte, who is chairman of the Judiciary Committee on the side of the House of Representatives.  I'll just say that in the letter it says, "We respectfully request that one or both of the Judiciary Committees immediately convene a public and open hearing or series of hearings to bring Mr. Mueller and his team out of the shadows and into the public square."  So, we will read the text of that later, but in order to, let's say "help" the Congress do its job, and do a little bit more than that, we're going to now go right to our keynote speaker, who is the author of the special report and has worked with Lyndon LaRouche particularly on legal matters and others for years. Been one of the key defenders of Lyn in the course of his immoral and illegal prosecution.  So, when we have our presentation, after that we're going to ask all of you, any question you've got that you want to ask about this dossier and how we should deploy it; please go to the microphone and do so.  So, it's my pleasure to introduce somebody I've known for a long time.  She and I have a mutual friend who happens to be her husband Zeke; and I'm sure he's also somewhere in the vicinity.  He calls himself the Zeitgeist, but he's probably visiting with us in many different ways right now.  So, Barbara, please go ahead; welcome to the Manhattan Project.  Fire away!

BARBARA BOYD:  Hello, Manhattan!  So what I want to do is, I want to start this with sort of a short tour of the present world strategic situation.  By the end of it, I'm hoping that I will have provoked you to adopt shaping the next 100 years in the future; really creating a new renaissance as your present most necessary need, mission, your soul's equivalent of food and water.

Right now, that urgent and most noble mission centers on two things:  Defeating the coup which is now taking place against the President of the United States; and at the same time, getting the United States into a full collaborative relationship with China in its great One Belt, One Road project which can lift mankind to a humanly appropriate level of culture, physical well-being, and creativity really for the first time.

On the coup battlefront, you just heard from Dennis about a major development.  I'm happy to report that 19 members of Congress signed a letter yesterday asking both the House and Senate Judiciary Committees to hold hearings about the funds going to Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller, his conflicts, and his political bias on himself and among his team of attorneys. If you'll show slide 1, Ben, you can actually see the letter.  As Dennis said, you can get copies of it outside, and it's being distributed to you.

So, the Mueller dossier which we're now circulating has really drawn its first blood.  In addition, since we've been circulating the dossier over the past week, Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Chuck Grassley, and the House Intelligence Committee, have put a renewed focus on the "dodgy British dossier" delivered first to the Clinton campaign and also to U.S. intelligence; which has sparked the entire coup against the President.  A coup which actually was set into motion in 2014 — I'll come back to that; that's a very, very important point. It's critical.

With respect to the actual solutions to the mess we are in, President Trump will leave for a tour of Pacific nations, including most importantly China, on November 3rd; a little over two weeks from now.  Unlike Obama, Trump has signalled a willingness to collaborate with China and potentially to join the Belt and Road.  This would open the probability of Chinese investment and necessary infrastructure building right here in the United States.  It could open the door to thousands of productive jobs and the building of whole new cities, if this type of investment came into a new national bank like we have proposed; dedicated to the sole purpose of putting our nation on a new, modern infrastructure platform.  It is this potential, as yet unrealized, which is the reason for the insurrection against Trump.  If you go home with nothing else today, I hope you will understand that.

I can predict with absolute certainty that the voices of the insurrection, the movements of the coup, will become much more intense in the days preceding Trump's Asia trip.  Acting on behalf of the British and their allies in Washington and Wall Street, the agents of the coup — those who give orders to Special Counsel Robert Mueller — aim to wreck any possibility that the U.S. would join the Silk Road; and also any possibility of peaceful cooperation with Russia.  They need to preserve their ugly and genocidal post-World War II empire, which is now teetering on the edge of yet another financial collapse; a financial collapse which, if not preempted, would unleash untold chaos upon the world, and in all probability a world war from which mankind would never emerge.

While you may see on the financial front an apparent calm, the markets are up, etc., etc., behind closed doors, we're being told by everybody who knows anything about the situation that there's outright panic.  People recognize that this whole shebang is about ready to collapse, and they don't have a solution.  We do.

Now, because of the work we have already done, and the weakness of our enemies, these two prospects — stopping the coup and actually getting the United States into the One Belt, One Road project — are immediately achievable.  They're so close, if you really think about it, you can actually see victory on the horizon.  But we're also dealing with a very powerful and wounded beast capable of destroying all humanity in its death throes.  We will live in very dangerous times until this actual enemy, the way it thinks and operates, is actually so well known to you and the rest of the American citizenry that we can constantly exploit its vulnerabilities and defeat it.

We have to win this fight; we're not here to do the good as a part-time endeavor which gives us pleasure, even if we should fail.  We're not giving our salvation a "good college try".  We actually have to win.

Let's look at two different visions of the world as it stands right now.  I'd like Ben to put up the 2nd [Hurricane Harvey], 3rd [Hurricane Irma], 4th [Hurricane Maria], and 5th [California wildfires] and 6th [opioid epidemic] slides in sequence; starting with the Texas flooding [Figures 2-6].  These are all man-made disasters.  They are called by Washington's politicians who have adhered to the free market, free trade, small government, environmentalist, post-industrial brainwashing which the British, with their Wall Street friends, accomplished here after Franklin Roosevelt died.  To those who scoff at us, and say that the British Empire died years ago, there's a simple rejoinder.  "Yes, Virginia, there really is a British Empire." It is in the present American mind in the entire way we have been taught to think about reality.  Since Roosevelt's death, not one stitch of modern infrastructure based on building out our entire country, infrastructure envisioned as the platform for economic growth over a period of 50-100 years since, has happened in the United States.  There are no funds under reigning Washington and Wall Street axioms to actually rebuild from the devastation that just hit us; let alone to envision and build what a future economy is to look like.

Since the culture shock accomplished by the assassinations John F. Kennedy, Martin Luther King, and Bobby Kennedy, and the narcissistic Hollywood cultural revolution which followed, our nation has suffered systemic menticide; of which the daily toll of opiate deaths is but the most graphic example.  Cultural pessimism is right now killing more people daily than could any feared weapon of mass destruction.

Now, let's look at China.  Ben, if you could bring up the 7th slide [Fig. 7].  China is thinking big, like America used to. It has set goals to build a transportation and infrastructure grid for the entire world; especially in formerly British colonial and undeveloped areas.  It intends to explore space with other nations, particularly those who have suffered under the dictates of the IMF and World Bank and so-called "sustainable development" genocide.  The goal of such joint space missions is to stimulate the youth of these nations to take up science and space exploration and creative thinking as the appropriate realm of humankind.  China has set a goal of moving China and the entire world out of poverty in the shortest possible time.  This vision is proceeding with shovels in the ground right now all over the world; particularly in places like Africa, which the British and Wall Street had written off as a realm only useful for purposes of perpetual war and genocide and raw materials looting.

The Chinese optimism is infectious.  Which vision do you think is more compelling?  If Donald Trump is allowed to follow reason, that is, if the coup against him is stopped and he joins the United States to the Belt and Road, using Lyndon LaRouche's Four Laws for economic recovery in the United States as his guidepost, he will become — as Helga Zepp-LaRouche says — the greatest President in U.S. history.  At the same time, our long national nightmare will be over.  The dying Anglo-American system which has absolutely nothing but misery to offer anyone will be irrevocably defeated.

So now, having situated that, what's the immediate task?  As you probably, I'm the author of that dossier on Mueller. [Fig. 8] He's been deployed by the Anglo-Americans to take out the Trump Presidency.  We need really to saturate the entire United States with this dossier.  We want it be, as they say, "viral" among what I will call productive constituencies throughout the United States; the people who actually want to build things.  The actual base who voted for Donald Trump, or could potentially support him.  That is, police and fire, other trade unionists, machinists, engineers, small businessmen, farmers, scientists, mayors, governors; people who actually build things.  Students, young people.

In the dossier, we show who Robert Mueller is and who has deployed him to take down the President and why.  We want to use this dossier and our campaign around it to create a popular revolt against the coup.  We need to force our brain-dead Congress to end Russia-gate, end Mueller's witch hunt, and demand that this country be rebuilt in conjunction with China's Belt and Road project.

So, sort of for a short course on the dossier, I'm not going to go through it for everyone who's read it, but truth be told, I've been briefed that a lot of people up there have only read small portions of it.  So, I'm going to have to do a little bit of the presentation, and then you can ask questions later.

First, the Lyndon LaRouche story.  In 1986, Mueller, working out of the Boston U.S. Attorney's office, was a leading man in the conspiracy to actually assassinate LaRouche; first physically, and then legally.  I first encountered him when my apartment in Leesburg, Virginia was surrounded by FBI agents in the late morning hours of October 6, 1986.  We couldn't leave because my husband was part of Lyndon LaRouche's security contingent.  It was clear that if we left, he would be detained. The FBI agents in the cars below had his picture very prominently displayed on their dashboards.  During the day, close friends of mine were arrested for the bogus charge of obstruction of justice; not un-ironically the same charge Mueller is supposed to get Trump on.  That was based on an indictment coming out of the U.S. Attorney's office in Boston — Mueller's office.  My friends were ordered detained, jailed as a result of a bunch of lies told to a magistrate by a former Satanist who Mueller had hired; namely, U.S. Attorney John J E Markham II.  I kid you not when I say that he was a Satanist; he was a former member of the Process Church of the Final Judgment, the same church linked to the Son of Sam killings and the Manson murders.

So, my friends were detained for weeks under very harsh conditions.  This was to break them and to get them to turn against LaRouche.  At the same time as they were being arrested, officers armed with assault rifles and dressed in black ninja pajamas hovered outside the farm where LaRouche was staying in Leesburg.  They were waiting for a pre-planned pretext to "take out" LaRouche in a shoot-out with his security team.  Although it was obvious to us that day what was happening, we only were able to prove it some years later in 1994, when Deputy Sheriff Donald Moore, a key part of Robert Mueller's "Get LaRouche" taskforce, confessed the plans to kill LaRouche to an FBI informant. LaRouche's life was only saved that day when his associates telegrammed President Ronald Reagan; seeking his intervention. That intervention thankfully came.

The prosecution which Mueller led against LaRouche in Boston fell apart in a Boston court room when an honest Federal Judge — Robert Keaton — ordered a search of the offices of Vice President George HW Bush, and ordered up all sorts of classified files documenting how the intelligence community had set up the LaRouche prosecution.  Judge Keaton found that Robert Mueller and his team had engaged in "systemic and institutional prosecutorial misconduct".  A new case against LaRouche was quickly filed in Alexandria, Virginia before a very corrupt judge — Albert V Bryan, Jr.  LaRouche was convicted of two conspiracies.  One because the IRS said it couldn't figure out his taxes; and the second based on political loans which could not be repaid because the government bankrupted the companies which received the loans.

This is all set forth in all its shocking detail in the dossier.  In between the Trump and LaRouche cases, Robert Mueller was a legal hit man for the Bush family and their British sponsors.  He covered up George HW Bush's financing of the Contras by illegally assassinating Manuel Noriega, who knew all about the Contras and cocaine.  He covered up other dirty drug and terrorism financing schemes and their oligarchical European friends, letting the banks BCCI and BNL off the hook.  Most significantly, he covered up the Saudi and British role in 9/11. He "aggressively deceived" — and that's a quote from former Senator Bob Graham — the Congressional committee investigating the 9/11 attacks.  He terrorized and prosecuted the wrong man for the 9/11 anthrax murders, and played a central role in creating our current unconstitutional surveillance state.  Along the way, he terrorized and prosecuted the group at the NSA led by Bill Binney, who actually had a surveillance system which could isolate and spot terrorists without destroying our Constitution. He kept the FBI budget going at high levels by refusing to investigate actual state-sponsored terrorism, and instead focussing on psychologically damaged domestic "lone wolves" who the FBI profiled and then entrapped in convoluted terrorist plots.

Yet Washington and the national news media call this guy an "unbiased straight shooter", a "monk-like conveyor of truth and justice", and always photographs him in very, very serious poses like some medieval executioner tired and weighed down by his ultimate chore.  If you look at slide 8, you'll see the dour Mueller.  Wednesday's Washington Post put this a little bit more accurately by calling Mueller "the guardian of the Deep State, the mythic anti-Trump, out to punish the President for violating the ethos of the institutional order based on the edicts of" — get this, this is actually in the Washington Post Editorial page column — "none other than Emmanuel Kant." According to Post Editorial Board member Quinta Juraisic[ph], Trump "breached the honorable institutional order" when he fired FBI Director James Comey.

So what do LaRouche and Trump have in common that the same thug was sent out to take them both out?  In LaRouche's case, he went directly to war against the British Empire and threatened its very existence; and the British came after him.  In 1982, the British government sent a letter to the FBI demanding that LaRouche be prosecuted.  At the time, LaRouche was serving as a back channel for the Reagan administration in negotiations with the Russians to jointly develop the Strategic Defense Initiative — a defensive system against nuclear weapons — which LaRouche had promoted and designed as both a war avoidance policy and a scientific advancement policy which had great potentials for economic development throughout the world.  Our slogan at the time was "Beam the Bomb; Feed Africa!"  He was working with the developing sector, particularly India's Indira Gandhi and Mexico's Lopez-Portillo, to end the system of Anglo-American debt slavery and secure real physical economic development for these economies.

LaRouche's "Operation Juarez" in 1982, at the height of the Latin American debt crisis, threatened the very existence of the City of London and Wall Street.  LaRouche was also systematically exposing the horrible role of British Intelligence and the national security policies of the United States in financing drugs.  He had allies in the intelligence community and law enforcement who were fighting with him against these British networks.  As we detail in the pamphlet, the FBI, CIA, and George HW Bush's networks in the Reagan administration acted on London's request; beginning a six-year war against LaRouche with orchestrated — and by 1986 almost daily — demonization of LaRouche in the controlled national news media.  Again, we lay all this out in great excruciating detail in the pamphlet.  As many now recognize is effectively now getting "LaRouched" as they say.

OK.  So, now let's talk about the coup.  You can't really understand it unless you adopt the methods of investigation which we have long employed.  First and foremost, you have to understand the mind of the criminal, the coup plotter; how his or her mind works from their very own perspective.  Motive is key here.  You can't understand what's going on by going to the internet, arranging facts, alleging conspiracies, and finding support for your theories based on what you like politically.  Go back and read Edgar Allan Poe's "Purloined Letter" and you'll see what I mean.  Second, you have to understand history and what moves historical forces and dynamics.  Schiller's history of the Thirty Years' War will cure you of the bad mental habits which our modern instant gratification siloed society have bred.  If you know history, you will focus at every single turn by looking at what the British are saying and doing.  If you only look at this from the standpoint of what you can learn in the United States based on U.S. information, you will never understand the actual motives for the coup against the President, or why the British have so obviously involved themselves in it, beginning as early as 2014.

The moving forces in history actually, when Donald Trump entered the fray for President were two:  The first was China's proposition made in 2013 and in motion every day since, to ally with Russia, India, and the developing world; now some 110 nations overall — the great majority of humanity — to build a New Paradigm of relationships among nations based on a perspective of what the world should look like in the next 100 years.  What do we want the future to be?  Can't we end poverty? Can we have actual human development throughout the world?  Can't we explore space and discover whole new realms of existence? China says, wisely, let's have nation-states collaborate on these common aims for the future, rather than being manipulated based on our differences into endless perpetual wars.  The second force in history was the dying trans-Atlantic system of monetarist institutions trying to prop up their empire by continuing to loot raw materials and subjecting whole populations to endless wars and abject poverty.  Both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton were devotees of this system.  Both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama rejected the Chinese offer to join the New Paradigm; seeing it as an existential geopolitical threat to the United States.  They were prepared to go to war, if necessary, to stop China's progress; and they began that war — its first step — in 2014 with the coup they staged in Ukraine, right on Russia's borders. At the same time, they began a process of isolation and military surrounding of China.

Trump interrupted all of that.  First, he indicated a willingness to get along with Russia.  That historically has been the cause of war for the British.  Then, he indicated a willingness to explore joining the U.S. to the New Silk Road. Once again, the British imperialists and their neo-cons or neo-liberal fans here in the United States went completely nuts. The problem the President has is that the full array of methods of the color revolution are being used against him. Psychological warfare; black propaganda; all of the things which we see when the United States stages a coup in foreign countries are now in action, in motion, inside this country itself.  Trump is being provoked and portrayed at every turn as the heart of all evil that ever existed.  If he reacts to these provocations, provocation after provocation, he can't win; because what happens is, you become fixed and predictable in your reactions for this enemy.  You have to figure out how to outflank them.  For example, we posed for Trump in the pamphlet, why not open the file on the British and the Saudis and Robert Mueller's cover-up of 9/11?  If you did that, and fully exposed that file, you would pretty much end this entire charade.  Why not join the New Silk Road in deals which benefit the United States and others?  If people could actually understand this, the popular support for President Trump would be overwhelming.

You also can't be on the defensive legally.  You can't be reacting all the time to all the things that are put out against you, or reacting all the time to each little tidbit which Mueller drops into the press.  You have to change to going on the offensive politically.  We lay out in the pamphlet seven crimes which have been committed against the President and the American people in the course of this coup.  We are demanding that these crimes be investigated and aggressively prosecuted.  In the dossier, we show that the actual interventions into our elections were by the British, and to a lesser extent the Ukrainians, and other NATO agencies on behalf of Hillary Clinton and against Donald Trump.  An intervention which began with loud cries for Trump's head in 2015 by British Intelligence, because Trump was "soft" on Russia; in cahoots with Russia.  This was the same fake claim they used against LaRouche to set off the endless black counterintelligence operations against him.  The British intervention included the warning by British Intelligence that the Democratic National Committee had been hacked by the Russians; a fake claim which was made first in 2015, not June of 2016 when the Democrat Committee came out and said they were hacked.

So, any of the crimes Robert Mueller is charging against Russian interference in our elections should actually be investigated and charged against these countries — to wit, the British and the Ukrainians and other NATO countries like Estonia and their agents — and let's see who holds a better hand.

Crime two is the false report to the FBI and other government agencies that the Democratic National Committee and John Podesta had been hacked by the Russians.  The Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity, who many of you have had the opportunity to hear from directly, have demonstrated that this is a complete hoax and a false report.  It is a crime to make false reports of criminal activity.

Crime number three is the clear entrapment attempt in June at Trump Towers.  An attempt to lure the campaign into receiving alleged official Russian scoops on Hillary Clinton's alleged misdeeds.  This was a clearly legally unprecedented U.S. intelligence entrapment attempt against an American Presidential campaign using the official powers of government.

Crime number four was the blackmail attempt and extortion attempt against the President by John Brennan, James Clapper, James Comey, and others in January via the fake British dossier authored by British Intelligence agent Christopher Steele, and the entire proceeding effort by high officials in the Obama administration including the President himself, to foment an ongoing coup against the incoming President using official United States intelligence agencies and agents to do that.

Crime number five involves James Clapper and James Comey lying to the Congress that the President's campaign was "not wiretapped", when in fact, it was.  We recently have seen that the wiretaps of Paul Manafort, who was Trump's campaign manager during that critical time, were actually fully operational at that point; and Paul Manafort has an apartment in Trump Tower.

Crime number six involves the campaign of illegal leaks of classified information involving the President's conversations and those of his associates in order to undermine him in the first days of his Presidency and before that.

Crime number seven involves James Comey's various attempts to entrap the President from January onward, into obstructing justice; a process which only ended when President Trump fired Comey.

Now let's look at the political terrain and our own position in it.  You can understand an awful lot of what is going on with Donald Trump if you step back and realize that he is the first independent ever to be elected President of the United States. He is outside the control of established political mechanisms, political control mechanisms.  The Republican Party — his adopted party for purposes of election — at least in its Washington, D.C. genre, is totally rotten.  It is more of a threat to him than the seemingly mad Democrats suffering from a plague of McCarthyite Russia hysteria which may very well destroy the Democratic Party.  After all, the people of the United States want answers, not fake news.

The salvation for the Democrats, if there is one, lies in cooperating with Trump to actually rebuild the economy, particularly now with the country seemingly being devoured by what I will call manmade disasters.  In the Republican Party, there are the so-called establishment Republicans who are all spawns of the Bush family, the Kochs, and similar British ideological Neanderthals.  They hate Trump for the reason that he threatens their very existence.  You have the Tea Party, which was long ago taken over at the top by Libertarians or devotees of the British-controlled Austrian school of economics of Von Mises, Von Hayek, and Milton Friedman — that spawn of the British-controlled operation from Europe called the Mont Pelerin Society.  You have a lot of Tea Party members who genuinely want to change the country, but they're trapped by this ideological construct.

Then you have Steve Bannon, Sebastian Gorka, and the so-called "nationalists".  Bannon, not coincidentally, just called for an all-out war against the Belt and Road and China. He says he wants to make this war against China the center of his election campaigns for 2018, and unseat present Republicans based on their alleged softness towards China.  He has not targetted sleaze ball Ted Cruz, although he says he's going to unseat every other Republican.  For those who don't know it, Bannon originally worked for Ted Cruz, not Donald Trump, and he is the sole and major employee of a very strange Wall Street family known as the Mercers.  I'm working now on Bannon's profile, and I believe it will come out that he is a British-spawned operative out to wreck the Trump Presidency by aligning it with the reckless synthetic ideology based on the old British ideas of race-based populism and Samuel Huntington's Clash of Civilizations geopolitics.

All of these compromised and frightened Washington creatures — the Democrats madly crying "Russia, Russia, Russia" as if braying at the Moon, the stinking rotten Republicans — can accomplish nothing for the country.  They don't have a plan. They are completely outflanked by China's initiative if Trump joins the New Silk Road.  They will move quickly if provided that powerful kick to their nether regions.  Further, Trump's actual base of support is not in any of these publicized Republican factions.  Last week on "60 Minutes", Brad Parscale, Trump's digital strategist, revealed the actual truth.  He said that Trump won the election by emphasizing building infrastructure and creating productive jobs.  Parscale spent millions and millions of dollars on behalf of Trump, flooding the formerly industrial Midwest with ads about building infrastructure.  That, of course, is precisely the answer which can be provided to the United States by joining China's New Silk Road.  These are exactly the producer populations targetted by the LaRouche Movement, and who have known us very well for many, many years.  By showing them that we can defeat the coup; by saturating them with the means to do it, and showing them why Trump is being persecuted; we set that great majority into political motion.

Let's go back to the first slides — slides 2 through 7. Again, who do you think holds the winning hand?  Let's take some questions.  [applause]

SPEED:  OK, so people can just go to the microphone right there in the center.  What I'll do while you're doing that is I'll just — are you ready?  If you're ready, let's just start. I'll do the reading of the letter a little bit later.  Actually, the letter is out at the table, and we've referred to it a couple of times.  So, basically, we will just, after the end of the meeting, talk about how we will add some more names to this Congressional letter by the distributions we're going to be doing.  So, we'll go right to questions.

Q 1:  Good afternoon.  My name is Jessica White, and I am from Brooklyn, New York.  I want to begin by first of all thanking you very much for being here, for your amazing presentation, and for this dossier that is being read — should have been read by all of us here.  I've read it.  And is being read by many people that we are dealing with in the street and also making sure that this dossier is getting to our Congressional leaders and community workers and community leaders.  Now, as you can see, I'm an African-American.  The thing that is difficult about my reaching out to people concerning this situation with Trump, is that unfortunately, Mr. Trump keeps doing some very crazy things.  What I'm about to say is that I am a very proud and long-time member of LaRouche, and I believe in everything that we're doing here.  It's just that I sometimes think that Mr. Trump is his own worst enemy.  This thing that he did the other day, or yesterday or the day before, with this executive order is not sitting well with a lot of people.  Because it seems that the impression is that he's going against the supplements that are keeping many poor people and working poor people with medical care and alive.  Now, we know the underlying things behind what's going on with Trump.  My question is, and then I still have one more thing to say and that's about Glass-Steagall.  It seems that instead of doing these executive orders and crazy stuff that he does, we need to focus him back onto his campaign promises.  Not about building a wall, or doing other things that seem to be angering people; but about his campaign promises as you said, of rebuilding infrastructure, getting jobs for people, building our nation again.  He seems to be kind of slipping away from that remembrance of that campaign promise.  So, my question is, what do you suggest?  I know what I'm going to do.  I'm going to refocus myself on Glass-Steagall and making sure that that gets past.  There's a meeting coming up with the union very soon, and I definitely intend to be there and rededicate myself to that. And maybe Mr. Trump will hear about some of these things.  But can you give us a little more insight into how to overcome some of the stuff that he's doing that presents him as his own worst enemy, and will help us stay focussed on what we need to stay focussed on and get him to do the right thing.

BOYD:  First, we have to stop the coup, OK?  If he's stuck, and he thinks his base of support, and the only people who are supporting him based on the drumbeat day in and day out and what have you, are the people who he made various promises to to get elected, then he's going to go to those people and try to keep them in his fold.  The way he probably figures it, if they're deserting me, what have I got here?  Again, come back to the fact that he's an independent, elected to be President of the United States.  That's a really big deal.  He doesn't have established power structures around him.  The campaign was sort of like, well, whoever walked in the door got a job or did something.  His intentions, I firmly believe, are based on what we say his intentions were during the campaign.  The problem is that you cannot sort of look at any of this and put it aside from the coup.  This is day in, day out. They attack his family, day in, day out.  They are profiling him, day in, day out.  They want to throw him out, day in, day out.

The second thing, in terms of the economic promises which we actually have, and which represent a way out, is first and foremost, if he joins the Silk Road, if he joins this New Paradigm, and we at the same time, organize around LaRouche's Four Laws as the solution to all of this; China could represent a vast way, a means to come in and actually create the investment needed for infrastructure.  Right now, neither the Democrats, anybody in the Black community, anybody in any community, they all think the same way:  We've got to have Wall Street, and we've got to have public-private partnerships, and we're all going to think small. We're not going to do what we say we need to do in terms of these giant, world-changing projects.

So, every Democrat who's right now got a beef with Trump over health care, you're not ever going to solve the health care problem in the United States via some kind of insurance mechanism, or some kind of other distributionist system; the only way health care ever worked in the United States is when we had a functioning economy.  Even if you had single-payer at this point — what do you still have?  You still have unregulated drug producers who are going out and making millions of dollars based on nothing. You still have Wall Street controlling the insurance companies totally.  You still have the drive-up of costs which is caused by all of that.  And what you really need, what we've been emphasizing in the briefing is that you have to go back to something called Hill-Burton, which actually said, for nation what we're going to do is we're going create health capacity throughout the nation sufficient to actually service the population.  You're not going to have doctors and hospitals making tons and tons of money, or people who do cancer drugs making tons and tons of money, and people trying to scrape by.

All he's done is a certain level of patchwork on a program which the insurance companies did get out of Obama and Pelosi, which was never appropriated by Congress, and which is now being sued about and probably, the plaintiffs in that lawsuit would have won the lawsuit because Congress didn't appropriate the money for it.  Obama did it by executive order to bail-out the insurance companies.

So, again, you have to think about the big picture, all the time when you're talking to people.  And in terms of the Black-White whole game that's being played, this has been played by Democrats and Republicans now for years.  What's been lost, from my viewpoint, — and I cannot claim to be in your shoes, but my husband is Black and I live that wonderful thing every day, OK — and the only way we come out of this mess, is as Martin Luther King said, "by a rising tide that lifts all boats":  We as an organization, when we were founded, we started out by opposing all of the community control stuff in New York City, all of the things of Black people taking over school boards, all of the Ford Foundation-funded stuff, and we said, "No, what's needed for everybody, is a genuine education for the future."  We supported the teachers in the New York teachers' strike — not a very popular stand for what was then considered to be a real leftist organization.  But the reason why we did that, is we said, unless everybody in all of what we called the class, the people who were actually being oppressed, got together, be that the underpaid worker, be that the welfare recipient, be that anybody else, go together and said, "what's actually good for everybody, that will lift the entire economy," you're not going to solve the problem.

And so that's really how I would approach it.  And it's the same thing I would tell Trump if I was talking to him today.

Q:  Hi Barbara, my name is Marcel, and thank you for a very wonderful and enlightening presentation.  Being out on the street and also talking to people about the current political crisis, people in the United States, and even I've found people from outside of the United States, seem to know, or at least have a sense of intuition; maybe if they don't have facts or ideas about it, they have an intuition, that the British are in the center of a lot of these things.  And so, it doesn't seem to me that it's something that is this secret, where the British, although they do use proxies to do all of their dirty work, they've done this for hundreds of years, and in fact, people I would think especially at the heads of governments like, not just America, but Russia, China, that are trying to do something revolutionary for mankind and are on the chopping block, in essence, if we lose this battle, definitely know this.

So my question is, although it is high risk, it also seems like it's something straightforward to do.  Why is it that the LaRouche organization seems to be the only organization, repeatedly, that's not only spoken openly, but demonstrated, proven, connected all the dots, to show that this is the working of the British Empire; and yet, Russia, China, and many other nations that have everything to gain by this, don't just come out and say "focus on the British, look at the British, it is the British."  Because then it would be akin, it seems to me, like the boy simply saying "The Emperor has no clothes," and you get that kind of transformation.

That's my question.  Thank you, Barbara.

BOYD:  I think the British do a pretty good job of putting out that we're just the lonely isle of Britain here, and there's lots and lots and lots of historical connections based on how the world strategic map has been played since Franklin Roosevelt's death.  Russia has really significant penetration by the British when it collapsed.  It had really significant penetration by the British before it collapsed.

But what has to be emphasized to people is that it's not just the way you think about some British spook walking around with a pipe and a kind of spooky look on his face and looking kind of old and grungy.  The issue really is methods of thinking: How long ago was it that the United States citizens actually said, "OK, I really understand Alexander Hamilton and, boy, have we ever been screwed in terms of how we're thinking about economics?  How did that happen?"  How many times have people actually referenced Abraham Lincoln, or Henry Carey, all of which we had to go back and rediscover, although it's right there in the history books, and say, OK, why is it people didn't bring these guys up?  And why isn't this the actual economic system of the United States?"

You've now got certain people, talking like Steve Bannon and others, about what they think is the "American System."  Their view of it, despite the fact that they use the words, is not the "American System."  The American System, as you've probably gone through around what you talked about around Columbus is something much more important, and it's based on European philosophical traditions.

So you have to get into epistemology, to begin to figure this out.  To begin to figure out what do you think about mankind?  What do you think humankind is about?  Are men and women like beasts?  Or are they like the divine spark, which exists in everyone, which is creativity?  And that's the real reason why this doesn't spread.  As long as you are thinking of mankind in some kind of other framework — I was looking at Mr. Bannon and I started to go back to Schiller's famous essay about Lycurgus and Solon.  If the idea of humanity is Spartan, and it is Spartan warrior cultures, versus what Schiller counterposes, the idea of mankind which is really what our American Revolution is all about, that mankind is really the artist, on the other side of the matter, with Solon, then those great cultural clashes are actually what block people from recognizing something which is tremendously obvious.

Take The Purloined Letter of Edgar Allan Poe.  If you know the story, what happens is that all of these detectives are looking for this letter, and they're thinking that the guy who wrote the letter which they're desperately trying to find is oh so clever, and would have hidden it in all these different places that are incredibly difficult to find, without really thinking it through, that if this guy is such a deception artist, why wouldn't he put the letter in plain sight?  Which is exactly what he did.  It was that thinking about, what's in the mind of the other person?  What's in the mind of the other culture?  When we started this movement, Lyndon LaRouche said: What I'd like everybody to do is think about what are the reigning paradigms culturally within the different parts of the world today?  How do they actually think about themselves and how do they think about themselves in the world?

He said the big disease of the United States is this thing called "individualism."  We believe that every thought we have springs completely from ourselves without any social reference point at all.  And if you go back and think about that, and think about how much it dominates how much you think about things.  You don't see the social dynamics of people around you, you don't see how things work.

And then you think about what was the best tradition in American society, it wasn't necessarily that at all — that was like the frontiersmen, the cowboys, all of this crazy mythological stuff we've gotten into.  And LaRouche said, the way you can actually reach another culture, is to learn the highpoints of that culture.  For Russia, go back and look at Pushkin; go back and look at the really decent figures in Russian culture, and you'll see that they suffer from the same types of drags on their culture which we do.  For years, and years, and years, post-World War II, they were completely infiltrated by the British; they adopted methods, even in their scientific courses — there's a very famous place called the Laxenburg International Association for Applied Systems Analysis not far from Vienna, which was used to try and penetrate all Soviet science, as a British operation.

Again, the question is how you think, because that's how the British think about conducting warfare.  That sort of explains it.  And it's not an easy solution.  You have to be able to look, like Helga is trying to do:  Let's look at how the Chinese think. Let's look at the best traditions in Chinese culture.  Let's actually promote them.  And, at the same time, we have to be aware of things which are not so good in that culture which are backward.  That's the idea.  And I hope, I've sort of answered your question in a roundabout way.  It's not an easy problem.

Q: [follow-up] A lot to think about.  Thank you, Barbara.

Q:  Hi Barbara, John Sigerson, here.  I'm reading this question from my wife, Renée, who unfortunately could not be here.

"It would be very helpful to hear your thoughts about the following:  As we unmask Robert Mueller, and dissect the ravings of Bannon, it really poses the question, do you, who have followed the tricks of these corrupted agencies in minute detail for decades, do you think our current work can open the question in the foreseeable future, of changing these so-called intelligence agencies?  Can we reform the Department of Justice, shut down the FBI, which should never have existed anyway, and create a system of intelligence-gathering and analysis for the Presidency that meets the standard of the new relationship between nations as it's being introduced by the Belt and Road Initiative?  Is it possible that the so-called 'Deep State' could be reduced by political effort, to being the shallow puddle its lack of principles suggests?

"What are the standards that an intelligence operation must meet to serve the nation?  Is such intelligence activity necessary?  And if so, what should they be doing? Lyndon LaRouche addressed these questions back during the Reagan years, but a lot has happened since then.  Your thoughts on the prospects for such an improvement coming out of our current effort would be greatly appreciated."

BOYD: Wow, that's a big one on my plate, there!  No, don't necessarily concur with Renée that we need to abolish the FBI.  I think we need to drastically change its functioning. A lot of people say that, but they don't really think about how much has evolved from the time when we had state police agencies handling everything.  We really do need some form of federal police agency.  The question is, what is it, and how does it function, and how does it operate?

I think it's very possible to reform all of these institutions, and a lot of it could be done through the power of the purse.  For example, right now, a very nasty section of our government, which used to be housed in the State Department, namely the National Endowment for Democracy, the NED, and all of these regime-change operations, are just sort of dying on the vine for lack of funding.  There's a big fight going on, because Tillerson and Trump aren't giving them any money.  And the bad guys in Congress are in a complete uproar about it.

I think if you could tune people into, essentially beginning to go back to, first of all, what's your method in terms of intelligence?  Let's think about what Bill Binney actually did: He had a whole idea about how you conduct surveillance, which was not based on creating an entire mess which you can never digest anyway, which is kind of like what Edgar Allan Poe called the "method of creeping and crawling," the Aristotelian method.  It really is a question, overall, in how you think about it — that's what Lyn was getting at.  How do you think about solving a crime?  How do you think about doing an investigation?  What's necessary for you to have, to do that? And a lot of times you think about, here we are with not very many resources, we don't have big machines which scoop up everything which all of these other people are thinking, but somehow, through Lyn's method of thinking, we've been able to figure things out.

And I think that's the center of the entire issue, is how do people think about doing these things, and to what end?  What are we trying to do? If we actually are not trying to be the world's policeman, if we're trying to figure out how to have relationships with nations based on the Treaty of Westphalia — which by the way, Steve Bannon hates and thinks is the worst time that ever happened in humanity;  if the way we're looking at things is, we really want to have relationships based on how I can benefit you and you can benefit me, that defines a whole different kind of intelligence.  It defines me saying, "This looks really weak to me in your society, how can I help you figure that out?  How can I help you resolve a critical problem for you?"  A lot of which gets subsumed by the types of things we're talking about.  What really are the common aims of mankind, which can transform everything at this point?

And I think that's where you start to change this entire apparatus.  Most of what's been built up is largely an administrative state, if you will.  It's got all kinds of nasty components to it. Eisenhower called it the "military-industrial complex," and he was quite correct in that.  You now add, in the most recent iteration of it, you kind of add all of the post 9/11 institutions which were built up around the area where we live which is actually kind of like something out of Orwell's 1984. And you begin to gradually say, "Do we really need that?  Why? Let's dismantle it."

But you've got to realize that half the economy of the United States at this point, to the extent that there's anything being produced, it's being produced in the defense sector.  So you have to tread a little bit carefully as you're making that transition.  You don't want to collapse all your R&D capacity which is where it is; you have to redirect that.  So it's a big task!

But I think if you're headed with the right paradigm of where are we going and how do we get there, I think it can be done very quickly.  It's like Roosevelt transformed the entirety of the government when he came in.

Q:  Hi, I'm J. and I have so appreciated your writings, you are one of so many excellent writers and activists.  First of all, I have to say that I wanted build a tad — well, big  —  on Jessica's first question.  I was so grateful that she raised the question that she did, because, as a White woman, who has liberal tendencies, in the sense of civil rights, and Bill of Rights, and such, and has been a Democrat all of my life, it has been something of a huge — I can't even find the word for it — my thinking and my capacity to understand humankind has changed immensely with the help of the LaRouche movement and thinkers and so on.

So the question that I come to, I'd like a little bit of a hint for a White woman, facing her friends, with confidence, when I go to the NAACP meeting this week, about LaRouche's position.

But the other question that I find, stymies me and I feel caught in the middle.  We, the United States has a history of isolationism.  During World War I and during World War II, that was the reason why it was so hard to go to war, right?  But now, more of us are internationalists because of TV and internet and so on, and I think one of the gifts that the LaRouches bring, obviously, is there can be peace in the world, not just in New York State or New York City, or the United States, or Puerto Rico — not to say that that's not important — but we can have peace and prosperity and so on.  But there's an in-between place where we're not defining — I need help, defining, when I talk to my dear friends, but it isn't just about the United States!  We are members of the world!

So, that's my question.  The "liminal space," Carl Jung would use that term, the "threshold space" between the United States versus the world outside of it.  That's my question.

BOYD:  I think I did a little bit of that in my last answer.

Q: [follow-up]  You certainly did.  You were approaching that.

BOYD:  Here's the thing.  I hear you asking two kinds of questions.  A little bit more about what Jessica was asking, in terms of the racial business.  In 1994, we did a conference, which I hope to soon get up on the website, and it was called "Palmerston's Zoo."  And in it, we essentially went through how the British used populism and racial identity as the means to launch completely phony political movements all over Europe. Basically creating, almost, political movements out of Astroturf. And the idea was essentially, is if you can get people going at it in terms of racial differences, then essentially, you've won the battle because they'll immediately start thinking small.

When I would go to the NAACP, I would ask them, what the heck have you guys done recently in terms of economic development?  What the heck have you guys actually talked about, in terms of our inner cities, which have sat stagnant for years? In terms of Democratic Party politics, why do you still honor Daniel Patrick Moynihan?  Who was, after all, the Democratic Party guru who instituted the idea of "benign neglect" of entire sectors of our population?

I would say, in terms  of your attacks on Trump, look at what Hillary did, also.  Look at what Bill Clinton did — think about all of these crazy things which they put across?  We had the 1996 Terrorism and Habeas Act, which Bill Clinton signed, which said there were certain types of Black folks which were completely irredeemable in society: They were called "predators." OK?  And he did that to win an election.

So, it's not Donald Trump, this is a problem within our society in terms of how we think about things.  And just like Martin Luther King said, and Andrew Young said in the wake of Charlottesville:  There's only one solution, and that's economic development, the tide which lifts all boats.  Martin Luther King attacked Black Nationalism.  Very few people realize and remember that.  That was the fight — he attacked Stokley Carmichael, he attacked the Nationalists and all the people who would play the game in terms of race.  And he said, "No, no, no: What we're doing here, is we're waging a fight on behalf of the entire country, for economic development."

So remember that when you talk to your friends in the NAACP: What have you done recently to really look at what Daniel Patrick Moynihan was talking about in terms of the Democratic Party. Really?  Are we in such a wonderful house that we can afford throw stones? Gimme a break — that's not true.

The second thing you're talking about is something which we're in the process of defining.  Internationalism, or globalism, as it has been talked about since Franklin Roosevelt's death, is really the system that has now fallen apart.  It is the system which has resulted in things — and people put the blame in the wrong place. American workers out there in the rust belt, they look at the fact that all of their jobs went to China. Trump didn't actually come up with this, out of his brain, suddenly — this is a prevalent idea out there in the industrial heartland:  "China stole our jobs."  What's not recognized was that that was part of a policy, by the people in Washington, D.C., and the Democratic Party, most specifically, which said: OK, the way we're going to get labor on the cheap is we're going to ship it overseas.  We're not going to pay our workers any more, they're too expensive.  That's a Wall Street policy, it's not a Donald Trump policy:  That's a Wall Street policy.  So people are attacking the wrong target.  The target is Wall Street.  The target is the people who control the politicians, who actually set this cheap-labor, post-industrial society idea into motion.

Suddenly we found ourselves, everybody told us, we're now a "service economy."  We're not an industrial economy any more, we're a service economy.  And very few people said at that point, what're you talking about?  And they didn't tell you "OK, we're going to close down all the plants, and we're going to ship out all the jobs, and essentially you guys are going to left to struggle for whatever you can pick up in a gig economy.  If you're 65 or 70 years old, go out there and drive an Uber car. That's what we got in store for you."

So it's that rage which confronts Trump the candidate, as he's talking to people and he's taking all this stuff in.  That's one level.  And when you talk about internationalism versus globalism, they're two different things:  What to us globalism means, is exactly what I was talking about:  How do we set up relationships between nation-states, not some crazy mass system like the European Union, which is completely controlled by the banks and the British; but relationships between nation-states in which we can actually develop relationships by which each economy tries and strives to benefit the other economy for purposes of mutual development?  How do we actually talk to other cultures, in a way which is not saying, "OK, we accept it if you want to be in a primitive state and impoverish your people." We have to encourage people that that's no good: What everybody across the world should be able to do, is think going to space, think about actually being an artist.  Like I said, the difference between Solon and Lycurgus, which everybody, if they get a chance, should go back and read at this point — Schiller's very famous essay The Legislation of Lycurgus and Solon [excerpted in https://www.schillerinstitute.org/transl/lycurgus_solon.html; the full translation in Friedrich Schiller Poet of Freedom, Vol. II, and think about the present situation in the United States from that standpoint.

I hope I answered your question somewhat.

Q: [follow-up]  It was very grounding.  Thank you, so much.

Q:  Hi Barbara, this is Elliot.  Your report first appeared on our website about two weeks ago, in which you outlined the basis to stop the coup.  Four or five days ago, Associated Press sent out a piece in media nationally, which indicated a fight within the White House, in Trump's circles, as to whether the approach which the administration, which Trump ought to be taking to this coup against him.  Firstly, I want to ask you to elaborate your thinking on that, on the double-sided battleground going on in that situation.

At the beginning of your remarks today, you emphasized that you could guarantee, you could be certain that this coup operation will intensify between now and Nov. 3rd.  That's I'd like you to elaborate a bit further.  And related to that, is the point you made about the task that we've got here is to make this material, this dossier-related material, to make this "go viral" amongst productive constituencies in the United States, in this same period, between now and early- to mid-November.

I would appreciate, I think this audience of organizers and activists and so on would appreciate your thinking on those matters.

BOYD:  OK, regarding the various leaks and counter-leaks and so forth going on around Trump's legal team, that's a mishegas, and I really don't think you can figure out what's going on, to tell you the God's honest truth.  I've been involved with lawyers enough to know that everybody involved as a lawyer plays a lot of games when they're facing this type of prosecution.  It could be that some of this stuff is being leaked by one of the Trump team against the other; it could be that some of the stuff is even being leaked by Mueller — you know, who knows who is leaking this stuff?  The leaks are unattributed.

Basically, the operating principle is psy-war.  On one side, what is going on, is it would appear, the lawyers want to give into Mueller, they don't want to fight him.  And they're going to make all these documents available and everything else, and why are they doing that?  Why aren't they out there fighting?

Well, that's really not the terrain you want to be fighting on.  Why should the President have to be the guy who constantly, himself, personally, at great jeopardy, when he's supposed to be doing all sorts of things, be the guy who's out there going head to head with Mueller.  That's crazy!  We don't want him to do that.  That's a fixed game. As Ramsey Clark once told me, "Stop putting your finger in the prosecutor's eye.  He's got more power than you."  [laughs]  That's good advice, in terms of this notion of the flank.

I don't know what all those leaks are about, and frankly, I know enough to say, it could be coming from anybody, and it's not particularly relevant.  Because the point here, is the thing we can control, the thing we can actually cause to happen, is that the United States population rises up on its hind legs and says, "OK, enough is enough. We're basically taking charge here and we're saying, we don't want to hear about Russia any more.  This is all BS and we know it.  We need to actually rebuild this country!"  Think about it!  We have two states, three states — California is on fire; who knows what's going to happen in terms of Puerto Rico; you've got total, complete devastation in several areas of this country, some of which of a kind we've never seen before.  We have to come up with a solution to that.  The President has to be free to think about that."

We've got to take it off his plate, in that framework!  It's silly for him to actually be putting himself in legal jeopardy, trying to fight this battle personally, as Donald Trump!  People who say, "Well, Donald Trump should come out and fire Robert Mueller."  That's the craziest thing that you could possibly do! That's playing into his game!  They want him to fire Mueller! They want him to cause a constitutional crisis!  They want to continued destabilization of these institutions.

The real problem is in the Congress.  The real problem here is in the Congress, and I say it over, and over, and over, again. And he realizes it, too.  Much of what he's doing at this point — you see the thing with DACA, you see the thing with whole health care thing, everything else, you see the thing with Iran. "I'm throwing it back to Congress.  You guys who have been sitting on your duffs, and essentially running a coup against me, you can go back there and you actually do some work, and you decide a policy.  And then it's going to be on you, it's not going to be on Donald Trump, what happens."  And shifting that in that way, is really smart for him.

Similarly with this particular fight.  It is completely unconstitutional.  We have a coup going on in the country.  We should be out there with our Paul Revere's ride, jumping up and down with everybody, saying "The British have come!  We have to kick 'em out!  And they've come in many, many ways, including in your own mind.  So let's take it upon ourselves to once, again, kick 'em out, and go back to the types of ideas which founded this country."

That's really my answer to the first thing.  It's not that Trump has go out and fire Mueller.  That plays into Mueller's hands, that's what he's trying to provoke.  That's why he goes after attacking the
family, that's why you see all this stuff. This week, now we're on a big binge about the 25th Amendment, and Trump should be worried that his cabinet is going to meet and they're going to decide that he's insane and unfit for office.

For people who get freaked out about what Trump does, put yourself in his shoes, for a moment, and look at what's coming at him, and think about the fact that, he doesn't have the type of institutional framework, from which anybody has actually been in that office, ever.  Other people come in with all sorts of advisors, all sorts of people around them.  He was in a shooting war with everybody in the political landscape, to obtain the Presidency.  And he did, precisely because people said, "We're sick of all of that, we want a complete change." Now, does he know where all that change is going?  Not unless we actually cause the movement which will make that happen.

I hope I've addressed at least a substantive part of your question.  In terms of its going viral, what we see — look at what happened:  You've got probably the entire Freedom Caucus, except for a few people on it, signing this letter [Fig. 1].  The reason for that, is, as the previous questioner said, people know this is a farce.  They know it's screwing up the country.  They know that nothing is happening here.  They know we have urgent things on our plate.  The thing I would emphasize, as Helga did today, is that  — think about it, you've got the entire financial system about ready to collapse again.  Unless Glass-Steagall is in place, and most certainly unless a National Bank is in place, all of which become possible in the context of the Belt and Road Initiative, that will just wipe everything out! Another collapse, in this situation, with this level of governmental chaos?  How're we going to solve that, folks?  That should be something that keeps you up at night — it most certainly does me.  Thinking about it, and thinking about how are we actually going to flank that.  What're we going to do?  How're we going to get Glass-Steagall in, at this point?

Everybody knows it among the elites.  But most people are sitting there watching the stock market, and saying, "Aw, it's pretty good!  It's going up." That's the way people think about the economy.  They don't think about, look at what just happened in Puerto Rico:  That could happen to any place in the United States at this point, because our infrastructure, to use a colloquial term, "sucks."  We really have no basis to begin to respond to natural events, even.

We have a basis in science, if we start thinking that way. If we start thinking about, how do we modify the weather, so that California isn't bunch of dry brush, ready to go up at the first spark. We could do all of that.  We've put it all out there.  But it's up to you guys there, the activists there, to actually, again — as I said at the beginning, I would like you walk out of this meeting today, with the same kind of perplexity if you will, that comes about you when you try and make this entire thing your mission.  Not some kind of effort that you do to feel good, or maybe you'll do a good deed, and we might fail.  But the question really is, no, we've got to win.  We really do.  There really isn't any other solution out there, except for us.  And I sort of want you guys to take that in, and really think that through, because it means changing your attitude a whole lot, so you don't spend half a day doing something good, and then go off and sort of space out for a while.

You've got to have this as your passion: Making it viral is precisely that. There's a lot of people who are going to jump on this ship, right now, because we're saying exactly what they've been thinking.  We just have to figure out all of the platforms and all of the means to actually make this more readily available to people. And we have to have the confidence,  — we have to number one, have read this thing enough so you understand it. And if there's anything you don't understand, please communicate to me, and let me know, and I'll try and make it clearer for you: Because you've got to be able to stand on your own two feet and go after people who sort of "don't get it" in terms of what's actually happening.  And convince them that they have to make this their fight, the way I'm convincing you that you've got to take your activity in this fight to a much different level.

So that's what I got. Anything else from you?

Q: [follow-up]  No, that's an appreciated answer.  Thank you.

SPEED:  I have something else, which is, the leaflet.  I believe everybody's seen it; maybe there's one or two people who I don't recognize who are here may not have seen.  The other side of the leaflet has two graphics:  It has Robert Mueller, and it has the burning World Trade Center. We're in New York City, which has over 8 million people, and there's a 17-million-person metropolitan area, so when we talk about the idea of having something "go viral," you're talking thereby about millions of people reading all or a portion of what it is that we have printed.  The point we're making is not that we're going to print millions of dossiers, but that it's available on the internet. So there are plenty of people, as people know, the majority of Americans today, get their news from their cell phone.  So that the way that they read things or the way they become acquainted with things, is they look at their phone, or they look at some other electronic device.

So we have this leaflet.  It's out at the table.  We have a lot of people here.  And of course, there is an idea that we can form teams and we can do certain things.  But there's a reason why I'm referencing 9/11 on Mueller.  There's a consequence in not winning, which we already know, because of what he and others did.  The value of what Mr. Binney said when he was here, in this room about four weeks ago, in specific was, that he didn't say, that 9/11 might have been prevented; he said, there was no way that 9/11 could not have been prevented had his system been in place.  And the reason was not because the system was not going to tell you exactly what was going on; the system simply allowed you to see the anomalies, the changes, the discontinuities. Suddenly, something else would be registered that you didn't otherwise know.

In New York City, we can — and we haven't discussed this; I don't know whether anybody has anything to say about it now.  It would be helpful, if not, we can always discuss it after the meeting breaks up, if you want.  But I want to bring to people's attention that in the next few weeks, Donald Trump will be going to China, and over the arc of the next three to four weeks, what we can do here, is alert literally millions of people — because one leaflet isn't read by one person, often, by our being out there, our being deployed to do this.

I'll also indicate that it's possible, there are some people we have been in touch with from the Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) and some people, who, as people know, Terry Strada with the 9/11 families, and there is a discussion about attempting perhaps to do something in New York, slightly larger than what we usually do, or in collaboration with our organization, to refocus on 9/11, and on the Saudis and on Mueller specifically.

I'm saying this, because as Barbara said, in what she just said, there are people that are prepared to act, but we are going to have to lead it. So, first of all, Barbara may have something to say; but if anybody has anything to say about the actual mobilization, that would be, I think where we ought to conclude in any case.  If anybody has anything, go to the microphone; we'll take one or two remarks, and then Barbara will do a summary.

Q: Barbara, how're you doing?  This is Joshua, I'm the director of Veterans for Trump PAC.  I'm actually very honored to stand next to a World War II veteran [Bill Monroe] right here. [applause] My grandfather served in the Army in the Pacific theater of war, and my cousin is actually Sir Admiral Ramsey, who was the admiral for D-Day.

I've heard a lot, I've shared, and I want to say for one, I appreciate your dossier here on Mueller.  We were calling out Mueller from Day One, as soon as it started happening.  Albeit he's a Marine; as a Navy veteran myself, we did call that out, and we're starting to share these things early on, and calling it out quite quickly.

I represent 600,000 veterans and their family members across the country, which represents also the backbone of the Trump movement in a lot of ways, from Day One.  I was Veteran Alpha, if you will, the first veteran to step forward and to start pulling together the strongest coalition since World War II that we've seen around a President, and embodied movements across the country where we were at the very ground level, initiating, whether it was ground troops if you will, working out there, knocking on doors, getting out the votes;  but also the veterans getting around the President now, and ensuring that there is support for him and his initiatives: Initially the VA, speaking about getting Secretary Shulkin in, we were right there encouraging that, a lot of other subsequent appointments.

I'd like to share that we really want to get behind on this initiative bigtime.  This needs to end, now! The wasting of government resources, the constant divided, how we see the manipulation of the government and how things are occurring against our President sickens us.  And I want to encourage, a way that we can, here, at ground level — as we were even speaking of Ground Zero — New York is also going to be another also battleground state, here, coming up soon.  And Vets for Trump is initiating across the country support on all veterans, to encourage the veteran voice to grow and to embolden, and to also allow our courage and the commitment that comes from the veteran community to step forward.  And I want to encourage that in the way that we can, in a collaborative way, to encourage this growth.  Because this needs to happen.

Now, I'd like to open up in conversation further on, but encourage other communications through digital means, because as you were sharing before, one of the things that we spearheaded — for anyone who supports NFL, we were actually one of the first ones to support the NFL boycott, and now we see what it is today. So we can get behind things and really make some measured steps that will change, and we want to encourage that.

BOYD:  Thanks a lot, I really appreciate it.  Let's work together on it.

Q: [follow-up]  I have shared our contact information, and we are in direct contact here.  So, we'll see where it goes.

BOYD:  Great, terrific.  Go for it.

SPEED:  OK, Barbara, I guess we take summary remarks from you at this point.

BOYD:  I think I'll go back to what Elliot was asking me about in terms of what we're talking about when we talk ng about a producer coalition. And the thing I would emphasize to people is that, we're in a real warfare at this point. All of the nasty things which were done against LaRouche, there's a very good column by Robert Parry today, talking about "psy-ops," which was taken over from the CIA, into the National Security Council during the Reagan Administration. And he points out that psy-ops is now the center of how the entire population is being manipulated by these British intelligence-related sources. [https://consortiumnews.com/2017/10/13/the-legacy-of-reagans- civilian-psyops/]

So you have to be very careful about how you actually think about the political terrain, and you have to really think about, what is it that we're saying, that's unique and different from anybody else, and what is it that we're saying which is actually going to solve the problem.

And when I talked about the producer coalition, what I meant by that is that, there are a lot of people which — I believe, based on what I already knew, but also what was confirmed on "60 Minutes" last week by Trump's digital guy; and what was just confirmed by our speaker here — the people who actually back Trump are not any of the people in the present Republican Party or even its so-called "nationalist wing."  They are the people who want to produce things in the United States, who want to produce for the future, who are engaged in the idea that being a productive human being and not some kind of service worker at McDonald's, is what this economy is truly all about.  And raising our overall standard of living for everyone is what our overall thrust and drive is all about.

So we really need to think about targetting the people who like to make things, the people who like to do things, the people who like to help other people, as our natural constituency and Trump's natural constituency, and base, whatever name they're putting on themselves at this point.  And that's I think, how this thing actually goes viral, in the same way that the Trump movement was very much an underground, viral movement. There's basically tale after story, after story, of people going out and making their own yard signs, because the campaign didn't provide them.  There's story after story after story of people standing up and saying, "I want America to be great for the future," not as some people, like Bannon and others say, we are glorifying the '50s,  or some notion of the past.

The idea is, let's make America truly great in the tradition of our founders, which is really what it's all about.  And I would like to end right there.

SPEED:  Very good.  [applause]  OK, that concludes our meeting, in only one sense:  Now, we're going to put everybody to work.  And I thank everybody for being with us today.