Wednesday, February 18, 2026

 November 1978. Downtown Denver. A line of women stretches around the city block, some clutching envelopes, others gripping checkbooks, a few carrying cash they'd hidden at home for years.
They weren't there for a sale or a concert. They were there to open bank accounts. At a bank that finally treated them like adults.
Just four years earlier, American women had won the legal right to get credit cards without a man's signature. The Equal Credit Opportunity Act of 1974 said banks couldn't discriminate anymore. But laws on paper don't rewrite institutional culture overnight.
Walk into most banks in the late 1970s, and you'd find the same old attitudes wearing new masks. A woman's salary? Supplemental income. A female business owner seeking a loan? Too risky. A divorced woman trying to rebuild? Suspicious.
The system had been forced to let women in. But it sure as hell wasn't rolling out the welcome mat.
So eight Colorado women stopped waiting for invitations. Carol Green. Judi Wagner. LaRae Orullian. Wendy Davis. Gail Schoettler. Joy Burns. Beverly Martinez. Edna Mosely. Each committed $1,000 of their own earnings as seed money. Together, they rallied investors and raised $2 million to do something unprecedented in the West.
They opened The Women's Bank. Not a lending circle or a feminist fundraiser. A fully chartered, federally insured commercial bank. The first women-owned bank west of the Mississippi.
The founders figured maybe a few dozen curious customers would show up on opening day. Instead, women flooded in by the hundreds. By closing time, they'd deposited over one million dollars.
One million. In one day.
These weren't just transactions. They were declarations. Every deposit said: I trust you to see me as I am. Every new account meant: I'm done asking permission to control my own money.
The Women's Bank went on to finance businesses that male bankers had dismissed. It offered financial education. It proved that a bank centered on women's economic reality wasn't charity work. It was smart business.
Gail Schoettler later became Colorado's Lieutenant Governor. The bank eventually merged with larger institutions, as community banks did. But the message had already spread. Women across the country saw what was possible when you stop asking for a seat at the table and build your own institution instead.
Today, when a woman signs for a mortgage or launches a business without a male cosigner, she's standing on ground those eight women broke open. They didn't just start a bank. They proved that women's economic power was never the problem. Access was. And access could be seized, not granted.

Jeffrey Epstein didn’t build influence the traditional way.
He built it through proximity to power.
Jeffrey Epstein surrounded himself with presidents, royalty, billionaires, banking dynasties, tech founders, and Ivy League elites. Whether through philanthropy, financial introductions, advisory roles, or social networking — he embedded himself in rooms that shape global decisions.
Let’s talk about the circles.
The Rothschild Connection
Court documents revealed that Epstein had professional contact with Evelyn de Rothschild, a senior figure in the historic Rothschild banking family. Financial records indicated Epstein provided advice regarding charitable and financial matters. While no criminal collaboration was publicly established, the association itself raised eyebrows given the Rothschilds’ long-standing influence in global finance.
The Rockefeller Orbit
The Rockefeller name has been synonymous with American power for over a century. While there is no verified evidence Epstein held formal roles inside Rockefeller institutions, he moved in overlapping elite policy and financial circles influenced by figures like David Rockefeller. Epstein strategically placed himself around institutions, universities, and economic think tanks tied to legacy wealth networks.
Presidential Ties
Epstein’s name appeared in connection with Bill Clinton, including documented flights on Epstein’s private jet. Clinton has stated he knew Epstein socially and was unaware of criminal conduct at the time. The optics of a former U.S. president associating with Epstein fueled massive public scrutiny.
Royalty
One of the most publicized associations was with Prince Andrew. Civil litigation and media coverage brought global attention to their relationship. Prince Andrew has denied wrongdoing but stepped back from public royal duties following the controversy.
Wall Street & Billionaires
Epstein cultivated relationships with hedge fund managers, CEOs, and financiers. Among those reported to have met or associated with him was Leon Black, co-founder of Apollo Global Management, who later acknowledged paying Epstein substantial sums for financial advice.
Technology & Philanthropy Circles
Epstein also pursued relationships in Silicon Valley and academia. Reports documented meetings with Bill Gates after Epstein had already faced legal trouble. Gates later stated it was a mistake to have met with him.
Academic & Scientific Elites
Epstein donated to and courted researchers at elite institutions, including Harvard and MIT. He connected himself to high-profile intellectuals like Lawrence Summers, former U.S. Treasury Secretary and Harvard president. Again — associations acknowledged, wrongdoing denied by those involved.
Here’s what makes this network so striking:
It wasn’t one industry.
It wasn’t one political party.
It wasn’t one country.
Finance.
Politics.
Royalty.
Science.
Technology.
Legacy banking families.
Epstein operated at the intersection of influence.
Some associations were brief.
Some were professional.
Some were social.
Some were controversial.
But the pattern is undeniable: he gained access to some of the most powerful individuals and institutions on Earth.
And that raises the question people still debate today:
How does one man secure entry into so many elite circles across so many sectors?
That part — is what continues to fascinate the public.

 The claim isn’t really that Trump “killed globalism” overnight.
It’s that the model we’ve been living under for the last 30 years is breaking and Trump accelerated the break instead of trying to manage it quietly.
Globalization promised cheaper goods, endless growth, and stability. What it delivered for a lot of people was wage stagnation, hollowed-out industries, dependency on fragile supply chains, and decision-making that moved further away from voters and closer to institutions most people never voted for.
That tension has been building for decades.
Trade tariffs aren’t just economic policy. They’re leverage. They’re a signal that the U.S. is willing to absorb short-term pain to regain control over production, borders, and decision-making. You don’t have to agree with the strategy to understand the message: national interests are back on the table.
When leaders like Keir Starmer say “the world as we knew it is gone,” they’re not being dramatic. They’re acknowledging that the assumptions of the post-Cold War era open borders, frictionless trade, global governance are no longer politically sustainable.
The deeper conflict isn’t left vs right.
It’s global coordination vs national sovereignty.
You can’t maximize all three at once:
Globalization
National sovereignty
Democratic accountability
Something has to give.
Trump’s election represented voters choosing sovereignty and democratic control over global integration. Not because globalism is evil, but because it stopped serving large parts of the population.
The idea of a “post-national” world isn’t a conspiracy. It’s been openly discussed for years by political leaders, economists, and global institutions. The argument was that shared global problems required shared global solutions. The problem is that those solutions often bypassed voters entirely.
That creates backlash not because people are stupid or fearful, but because people don’t like losing agency over their own countries.
What we’re likely moving toward isn’t a utopia or a dystopia. It’s something older and messier: regional power blocs.
The U.S. will prioritize its hemisphere.
China will dominate Asia unless checked.
Russia will try to control its near borders.
Europe will struggle to unify or fracture into competing centers.
The Middle East will remain contested.
Africa will continue to be a prize rather than a player unless that changes internally.
This shift brings instability, market shocks, and conflict risk but it also reflects reality. The hyper-globalized world was always more fragile than it looked.
The real question isn’t whether globalism is ending.
It’s whether nations can reassert control without sliding into authoritarianism, and whether leaders can act decisively without severing cooperation entirely.
History doesn’t move in straight lines. It oscillates.
Right now, the pendulum is swinging back toward borders, power, and responsibility because too many people felt those things had disappeared.
What comes next won’t be clean.
But pretending the old system still works won’t save it either.

One of the biggest tricks of our time
was teaching people to fear the wrong things.
We were told to fear different races and cultures,
instead of fearing hatred.
We were told to fear equality,
instead of the systems that hold women back.
We were told to fear democracy,
instead of the hunger for control.
We were told to fear newcomers,
instead of those who gain power without consent.
We were told to fear the poor,
instead of the greed that keeps wealth locked away.
We were told to fear empathy,
instead of cruelty.
This is how confusion begins.
When people start fearing kindness
more than injustice,
they have been misled.
Remember this:
The real danger is not diversity.
The real danger is division.
And those who benefit
are rarely the ones we are told to blame.
Stay aware.
Stay steady.
And don’t let anyone control what you fear.

 

The “unsinkable” ship… the most advanced vessel ever built… sinks on its first voyage after barely grazing an iceberg.
But look at who was on board.
Three of the loudest wealthy opponents of a central banking system:
• John Jacob Astor
• Benjamin Guggenheim
• Isidor Strauss
All dead.
Now look at who was supposed to be on board…
J.P. Morgan owner of the Titanic’s parent company.
He cancels at the last minute.
Not sick.
Not delayed.
He stays in Europe… reportedly meeting powerful banking families.
Coincidence?
Because what happened after the Titanic matters more than the ship itself.
One year later — 1913
The Federal Reserve Act passes.
No elite resistance.
No financial opposition.
No voices powerful enough left to stop it.
And the ship itself?
• Not enough lifeboats
• No proper evacuation drills
• Confusing distress signals
• Crew unprepared
• Ice warnings ignored
• Breaks apart after one impact
The world’s safest ship… designed to fail in the worst possible way.
Then the narrative gets controlled.
Newspapers tied to banking interests push romance stories, hero stories, tragedy stories anything but investigation.
People remember violins playing.
Not questions.
Because if the Titanic was just a disaster… history ends in 1912.
But if it was a removal of opposition…
History begins in 1913.
Sometimes empires aren’t built by wars.
Sometimes they’re built by eliminating the men who could stop them all in one night… in the middle of the Atlantic




 

Peter Thiel, JD Vance, Pam Bondi and their not yet housebroken pet, the Beast of Revelation, are the subject of my new Substack article. After the excerpt please, if you are so inclined, follow the link below to the full piece. While on this dismal platform: Please help thwart Facebook’s algorithms of post annihilation by tickling the reaction function, commenting, and sharing. In solidarity and craft, Phil. Excerpt:
I had a friend since high school, an individual for whom the 1960s counterculture term, Jesus freak, would have been applicable. In those reefer-reeking, muscle car-deafening days Bill evinced the role of A lank-of-hair, love-you-neighbor sort of Christian. He and I had gone our individual ways over the span of decades. But, in recent years, we reestablished contact.
In the years since, his born again proclivities had drifted – then careened – rightward and authoritarian. His Episcopal Church domination had lapsed into schism between a liberal and conservative approach to Doctrine. Somewhere along the lines, he had donned the psychical mantle of a Christian Zionist thus he regarded me, a Jewish person, as somehow bearing a crucial element, expedited in the Final Days, that will summon Lord Jesus to appear in and then descent from the clouds and begin the redemption of thIs sin-sullied world.
In the days following the Oct 7 Israeli/Hamas hostilities, he became particularly solicitous, even to the paranoia-plangent point of offering his home as a place of refuge when (vaguely defined) forces would initiate US-style Nuremberg Laws against Jewish Americans. When I informed him that Jews were in zero danger from the US government, instead, due to the conflation of Zionism and Judaism, we posed a far greater danger to ourselves, he seemed dumbfounded, and even more so, and even to the point of taking offense, when, I posited, the role of Righteous Gentile should be fulfilled by shielding and sheltering the people that the US government terms as illegal. Withal, I requested he consider this verse from Scripture:
“When a foreigner resides among you in your land, do not mistreat them. The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the Lord your God”. – Leviticus 19:33-34.
Bill, for all intents and purposes, simply could not wrap his scripture beholden mind around the notion that said verse was applicable to the “ the least among us” in present day terms:
And the King will answer them, ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers, you did it to me.’ – Matthew 25:40
There was an obtuseness to the point of protective prickliness was evinced by my good news bearing friend if I pressed the subject matter. Then, as Israel’s genocidal war against the Palestinian people raged on and the coming xenophobia-rancid rise of MAGA 2, our friendship, at least from his part, became untenable and Bill outright ghosted me.
In a direct manner, I had not attempted to confront him with the obvious: The Christian conservative evangelical system of belief is so radically antithetical to the gospel of Jesus Christ that an argument could be made that he and his brethren, in a collective manner, display the spirit of The Antichrist.
If the often metaphorically abstruse aspects of The Gospels can be applied, in clear terms to contemporary situations, this much should be obvious: the least among us in the form of so-called illegal immigrants should not be imprisoned within ICE detention centers and the tech billionaire’s will to dominate the earth violates the admonitions of Scripture, both Old and New Testament. Indeed, the oceanic phenomenon of the Age Of Information has engendered the rise of A Beast (of sorts) in the form of megalomania as evinced by Peter Thiel et. al. For example, Thiel’s obsession with the lurid imagery of The Antichrist should be regarded as classic projection. In short, every accusation the libertarian true believer Thiel asserts in regard to the Antichrist’s lust for global domination should be regarded as an inadvertent confession of intent.
(Please continue reading at Substack.)
(Phil Rockstroh's Substack is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.)

 


 

BREAKING: Shocking new FBI document accuses Trump of raping a woman with Epstein who was later found dead in suspicious circumstances!
A horrifying new release from the Epstein files makes some incredibly disturbing allegations against the President of the United States, Donald Trump, and his former “best friend” Jeffrey Epstein, the notorious pedophile.
The FBI document reads:
“As [REDACTED] talked about his time meeting Donald Trump, [REDACTED] immediately [REDACTED] demeanor went ‘stone cold’ as [REDACTED] stated ‘he raped me.’[REDACTED] said ‘wha’ as [REDACTED] replied ‘Donald J. Trump had raped her along with Jeffrey Epstein.’ [REDACTED] noted some girl with a funny name ‘took me into a fancy hotel or building, that’s how it happened.’
The woman with the “funny name” we can only assume was Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein’s girlfriend and chief sex trafficker.
But it gets worse.
“[REDACTED] advised [REDACTED] to call the police regarding the incident as [REDACTED] stated ‘I can’t they will kill me.’ On Christmas Day, [REDACTED] contacted [REDACTED] stated she had in fact called the police about what they had talked about. [REDACTED] told [REDACTED] she had ‘done good.’ [REDACTED] did not hear from [REDACTED] or [REDACTED] until 01/10/2000.”
“[REDACTED] reached out to [REDACTED] stating [REDACTED] was dead and noted she was found with her head ‘blown off’ in Kiefer, OK. Officers on the scene and [REDACTED] stated there was no way it was a suicide. Coroner stated it was a suicide. [REDACTED] later stated [REDACTED] committed suicide because [REDACTED] had gotten cocaine from a Mexican drug cartel. [REDACTED] feels the murder is a cover for Ghislaine.”
This information appears to come from a tip to the FBI made on October 27th, 2020, during the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell. The trickle of damning accusations and evidence against Trump is becoming a flood, and there is enough smoke here that it is very obvious that the depths of Donald Trump’s crimes go far, far deeper than we previously considered.
A full and exhaustive investigation should be the next Congress’ first priority.