The Great Convergence: Elections, Dollar Demise, War, and More

The Great Convergence: Elections, Dollar Demise, War, and More

Oct. 18, 2024

Host: Hon. Sam Rohrer

Guest(s): Leo Hohmann

Note: This transcript is taken from a Stand in the Gap Today program aired on 10/18/24. To listen to the podcast, click HERE.

Disclaimer: While reasonable efforts have been made to provide an accurate transcription, the following is a representation of a mechanical transcription and as such, may not be a word for word transcript. Please listen to the audio version for any questions concerning the following dialogue.

Sam Rohrer:       Well, hello and welcome to this special Friday edition of Stand In the Gap Today. Often as you know, Dr. Isaac Crockett is with me, or I’m with him. We change up Friday sometimes, but pray for him as he’s traveling overseas this entire week and won’t be back until next week, but in a very hot spot of the world. And the all I’ll say at this point, and we’ll give some update perhaps next week as to what he’s doing right now, but many of the a PN team members are travel and God’s put us in very interesting positions. And so anyways, I just mentioned that, pray for him if you would. Increasingly though the world is moving faster and faster, it seems toward World War, right? Aren’t you all kind of weary of that? I am. People try to create fear. They try to incite that, but on the other hand, the Bible does talk about the days in which we live that there would be rumors of war and war.

Sam Rohrer:       And so we understand that this will happen, but nonetheless, conflict, no matter how you look at it, is erupting around the globe. At the same time, the entire world is anticipating the upcoming US November election because as they perceive, as goes America so follows the world. I just came back from Africa and it’s very clear the people over there and many places around the world, they watch what’s happening here as closely as we are. And in some cases they know more about what’s happening here because oftentimes they listen to the news that actually reports the news. But there’s one phrase that I’ve often heard, and it’s rightly said, when America sneezes, the world catches a cold. So the world is watching what’s taking place here in America, and while Americans are fixated on who will win on November 5th, some thinking that, well, if Trump wins, then we’ll have peace.

Sam Rohrer:       Or if Harris wins we’ll have war, and I believe that’s a rather simplistic view. I don’t think that’s the case at all. We may have a difficult time regardless of who is elected, but obviously other changes are there, but observers are looking at these things. Now, today on Standing a Gap today, I’ve asked Leo Hohmann author, researcher, and independent investigative journalist, also the author of the 2017 book, Stealth Invasion, to join me again for a conversation surrounding this larger picture of what’s happening and the undeniable linkages, I think between a number of large events such as, well the one this increasing drumbeat to War, war and the November elections. Those are two, but there’s more than that. The title I’ve chosen to frame our conversations today is this, the Great Convergence: Elections, Dollar Demise, War and more. And so with that, just lay that on the ground there. Welcome to the program today, right now, Leo Hohmann. Leo, thanks for being back with me. You are a busy man. Your pen must be flying most of the day as you’re turning out articles, but glad to have you with me.

Leo Hohmann:   Yeah, thank you Sam. Good to be with you,

Sam Rohrer:       Leo. As normal, I just want everybody to know you produce some of the best analysis of, I would say, the most important issues of our day, but you do it with a perspective that is both honest and reflective of the knowledge of scripture and in the fear of God. That is in fact a very unique combination, but it’s why our listeners like to have you on. When you and I communicated a day or two ago regard to this program, you mentioned to me and you’ve written about it, that what appears to be the case is that the Biden administration, it has a lust for war, it seems. Here’s my first question. I agree with that. There does seem to be a lust for war, although I think it may go in fact beyond this administration, but in your opinion, and based on in your investigative research, what evidence can you cite that would lead you to the conclusion that there is indeed an organized or disorganized, but at least a concerted push to global war?

Leo Hohmann:   Well, the evidence is so overwhelming, Sam, that it’s almost hard to get a handle on all of it. But let me just give a summary. Starting back in April of 2022, this was just a couple of months after Russia moved an element of its troops into Ukraine for what they called a special military operation. And the whole history that came before February, 2022, which was never reported in the mainstream media, involved Ukrainian attacks on Russian speaking Ukrainians in that eastern part of Ukraine. And so this was the reason along with Russia’s innate fear of Ukraine joining NATO, which they were on a path to do this is what caused Putin to say he’d had enough and he was going to move into Ukraine and try to settle a few scores. So I think now just two months after he sent his troops in, there was a treaty on the table, a peace treaty that both Putin and Zelensky, the leader of Ukraine, were very amenable to signing.

Leo Hohmann:   A lot of the details had been worked out to stop the war, just needed them to sign on the dotted line and they looked like they were ready to do it. The United States sends Boris Johnson, former UK Prime Minister over to talk to Zelensky and tell him not to sign the document. Do not make peace with Russia. We’ll keep supporting you. We’ll keep funding your war efforts. Just keep on fighting. Okay? So that’s the biggest piece of evidence in my opinion. But since then so much has happened so many weapons and every other month it’s a new type of weapon, a more sophisticated weapon from the tanks to the fighter, jet fighter F 16 fighter jets being sent over there. And then the consideration now for the long range missiles that we’ve sent. First we said we wouldn’t send them long range missiles, but then we did.

Leo Hohmann:   And now the debate is over whether to allow them to aim and shoot those long range missiles into Russia proper deep inside of Russia. Lindsey Graham has been coming on the record at least twice now, saying we’re not funding Ukraine’s war with Russia for anything other than we want those resources, and we don’t want Russia to have them. Okay? So it’s not about democracy and freedom like the mass media is telling us this is a war about resources and the unlimited funding is another big piece of evidence. Biden just approved another $430 million yesterday to be sent over to Ukraine. At the same time, they tell us that FEMA is broke and cannot help the desperate Americans in Western North Carolina who are three weeks now without power. Their homes have been swept away. Many of them have lost loved ones. They’re hungry, they’re thirsty, but we have no money for them, Sam, but we’ve got another 430 million to send to Ukraine to fight Russia.

Sam Rohrer:       This

Leo Hohmann:   To me sounds like a lust for war.

Sam Rohrer:       It does indeed. And when I come back, Leo, I’m going to ask you the logical next question, all right. Who is pushing for war and why? You talk about Lindsey Graham saying it’s resources, okay, that’s his opinion. It may be, but is it broader than a few in the Biden administration? Want to answer that question and then we’ll go into a new directive from Pentagon. Ladies and gentlemen, you must stay tuned. You’ve got to hear what they have just directed. Alright, Leo, let’s go back. Let’s complete that last thought in the other section there in the first segment about the push for war. You gave the evidence and you gave, I didn’t know what you were going to give you gave some really good points of evidence, but broaden it a little bit. What mentality maybe that way or, but are there groups of people who have you identified are really behind this? I’m calling it lust for war?

Leo Hohmann:   Yeah, I think it’s ingrained in what some people would call the administrative state, the federal bureaucracy, the DOD, the Department of state. Anthony Blinken is the current Secretary of State. He comes from a long line of Secretary of States who come up through the council on foreign relations, which is a globalist pro-war America, not America first, I should say type of mentality where the United States is the policeman of the world and the United States defines through the United Nations and other global bodies. What countries get loans or grants or whatever. And if they run afoul of the rules of this post World War II liberal world order as they call it, then the United States can use its monetary muscle, the US dollar to punish them, or they can then roll out the US military as they’ve done like against Saddam Hussein and Iraq and Libya, the Syrian regime, just one country after another who we are always told that their reason we’re fighting is for freedom.

Leo Hohmann:   But that is, if you look at the facts, really not the case. The reason we roll out our military is because a regime has run afoul of our economic world order rules. Like Saddam wanted to sell oil in local currencies, not just the US dollar. So he ran afoul of the established world order, which is dominated by the United States, and he paid for it with his wife. This is the type of mentality that’s ingrained in what some people call the administrative state, the shadow government, the military industrial complex. It runs through the council on foreign relations, the Trilateral commission and organizations like that. The international affairs of the UK is tightly tied in with those of Washington as the sort of leader of this world order. But now you see nations sort of rising up against that and wanting what they call a multipolar world. And so there’s going to be friction and war as a result.

Sam Rohrer:       Alright, I think that’s great. That’s a great review and let’s hold that. We may come back to part of that ladies and gentlemen in the next segment. But let’s move on to this. You wrote an article here just recently about an amazing, well, it’s a directive that’s occurred and I mentioned that, but when I think about it, I want to put it in context. It seems to me that going back to actually 2020 Covid emergency, something happened at that point, in my opinion, where that ability to declare an emergency, it did actually truthfully suspend the constitution. It opened the federal printing presses and there was a formal weaponization of federal agencies, including the DOJ and more. Now, there were unlawful practices, Leo, in my opinion, that were happening obviously prior to 2020, but this emergency declaration permitted, I’m calling it the greatest consolidation of unlawful executive branch dictates of anything that I know about because a lot of things happened that have not yet gone back to normal and I don’t think they ever will. But one of those has to do with, there’s a law in place, it goes back 140 some years, 46 years, where it prevents military placement, the placement of our federal troops in the civilian areas. It’s called Posse.

Sam Rohrer:       But something happened just a few days ago from the Pentagon that seems to turn this upside down. And you wrote in an article, sadly, and I think you were the only one that I’ve seen to have done it, but now you’re telling me some others have. But you said this quote, Pentagon issues federal directive allowing military to use lethal force against Americans. And according to this Pentagon issued federal directive, what do they say? What’s the stated reason for this directive? Sure. It seems like it came out of the blue unexpectedly.

Leo Hohmann:   Yeah, this is federal directors 52 40 0.01. It was originally issued by the US Department of Defense in 2016, Sam, but now they have reissued it and the reason that they reissued it is because they’ve added new language to it. The whole reason for it to begin with was to outline the US military intelligence components to be involved with civilian law enforcement agencies. And the original one talked a lot about that and how they outlining the limits and the constructs within which they must stay in their dealings with local, state, and federal law enforcement. But now they’ve reissued it and they’ve added all new language where it’s not just about trading information and helping in that way, but now they’re authorizing themselves to use force and all the way up to lethal force against American citizens in a so-called emergency situation, which they say could involve civilian disturbances, civil disturbances, excuse me. Civil disturbances is a very vague term, which concerns me very much and not just local and state law enforcement could request the US military to come in and use lethal force, but even the FBI, federal law enforcement could invite the US military to come in and use lethal force against American citizens as this federal directive is now currently written.

Sam Rohrer:       Okay. That’s very

Leo Hohmann:   Concerning.

Sam Rohrer:       Leo, do they give any reason in what they have issued as to the why or is it just the what?

Leo Hohmann:   It’s pretty much just the what,

Sam Rohrer:       As

Leo Hohmann:   Far as I can tell. Also talk about even using drones, Sam against American population centers.

Sam Rohrer:       Well, ladies and gentlemen, that ought to concern you. This is a big deal, but you go on, let me just pursue it a little bit further because in the same article you say this, you say quote in the meantime, one month before a tense presidential election, the US Department of Defense has authorized the US military. What we’re talking about here, defense intelligence components, which is, I don’t know what that means for sure to use lethal force. I think I know what that means against American citizens if requested by state or local law enforcement in an emergency situation. And now you say the FBI has the ability to call them in. Very scary. But in reality, here’s the question. The fact that the Pentagon issued this directive, now, as you said, just a month before the election, whatever generally we hear out of the federal government has never been the truth when it comes to things like this or at least the full truth. So here’s my question, based on your investigations, what is the real reason for this direction? In other words, let’s go to the why. They said the what, why, why do you think this is now?

Leo Hohmann:   I think they’re preparing the battlefield for a future civil war condition. If you look at a comment that was very much related to this from back in February of this year by Congressman Jamie Raskin, very powerful liberal congressman, he said that if Donald Trump is elected, that there’s a movement in Congress to refuse to certify that election and that they know that by doing this it will cause civil uprising, civil unrest. And what he said, this is his words, not mine, civil war conditions and that they would then need to call Marshall Law to quell the uprising. So that was just in February of this year, and now the US Government Department of Defense comes out with this federal directive authorizing the use of lethal force against Americans and the timing of it just a few weeks before this very contentious election, that tells me that perhaps our government is preparing for a Donald Trump victory on November 5th, in which Congress would now refuse to certify or some other extra controversial action would be taken that would sort of fan the flames or light the spark, should I say, of civil war in this country. Because I cannot understand for the life of me, Sam, why else we would see a federal directive like this come out just a few weeks before this highly, highly explosively contentious election where we know neither side is likely to accept the outcome because that’s the narrative that’s been laid over the last two elections.

Leo Hohmann:   Neither side has each side that has lost the last two presidential elections has claimed that it was rigged. And I think that’s going to intensify even more with this election.

Sam Rohrer:       I think that’s a real possibility. Ladies and gentlemen, remember, when it comes through a matter of politics and law, the passage law, there aren’t any accidents, there’s no coincidences, there’s a timing, there’s a reason for it, some speculation as to why right now. But what Leo just said is not his idea. Those are statements from many, many people. So we put that on the table when we come back, we’re going to look at another converging event and this has to do with the US dollar. Well, before we go into the second half of this program, just a reminder, I’m talking today about entitled this program with Leo Homan, the Great Convergence Elections Dollar Demise War and More. We’ve talked about a part of that. We’re going to move into the discussion on the dollar here next. But for those of you who are interested in having access or nowhere to go to either sign up as a subscriber of Leo’s or to find other things that he has, he’s got a couple of websites. I think the preferred one he’s mentioned before is Leo Hohmann substack.com. Is that correct, Leo? Is that a good one?

Leo Hohmann:   Yeah, I’m more frequently posting there now.

Sam Rohrer:       Okay. Leo hohmann.substack.com. And Hohmann has two Ns on it. H-O-H-M-A-N-N. So I just want to say that upfront. Alright, Leo, another development, and we’re looking at this because when you and I first talked before we consolidated this theme here for today, you came back with a response was that there are so many pieces moving all at once. And that’s been my sense as well. So that’s why I calling this the convergence. But another development that factors into this converging of unrelated but very related events of our day is the meeting of the Bricks nation next week in Russia where Russian president Putin, according to the information, will welcome the full current, they say nine members, but I think there’s 10, I don’t know, I found some little confusion on that. But 10 members of the nations, it stands for bricks. Brics was started out as Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa.

Sam Rohrer:       It’s now grown, but about 20 other nations at this point have applied for membership in this group. Now, the significance of this meeting is that according to, and I’m going to read this ladies, gentlemen from Reuters new service just yesterday, they said this quote, Russia is seeking to convince the Brex countries, this group of nations to build an alternative platform for international payments. Not saying it here, but it would be a counter to what’s called the SWIFT system for those involved in finances, but to build an alternative platform for international payments that would be immune to Western sanctions when it hosts the group’s leaders at a summit next week and they go on to say, president Vladimir Putin is keen to build up bricks, which has expanded to include Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, and the United Arab Emirates in addition to the original Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa.

Sam Rohrer:       And he’s saying is doing this as a powerful counterweight to the west in global politics and trade. Alright, Leo, I thought that was a helpful way to say that, but I’ve done a lot of research on this meeting some people in the economic category. I’ve been saying for a long time if this group ever did what they’ve put together for they would effectively dump the US dollar as the world reserve currency. And with any alternative, if the US dollar is not the only thing that the world economics is linked to, it will change the balance of power dramatically impact for the negative our economy here, but accomplish what Putin is saying, get the US off the back of the west, which they have chafed under for a long time because the US has tended to use our dollars to make people follow our will, which is what you talked about earlier. So here’s the question. What are your thoughts about this meeting as an element in this greater convergence? How to what degree do you perceive this to be an important element to put on the table here in our discussion?

Leo Hohmann:   Well, this bricks group of nations has been around for quite a number of years and it was just kind of out there lying out there sort of dormant, not really doing all that much until the Russia, Ukraine War broke out in February, 2022. And the United States immediately slapped Russia with some of the most significant hard hitting economic sanctions ever placed on a country in the history of the world. And it was literally freezing their bank accounts, seizing their assets. The US and Europe combined had hundreds of billions of dollars in Russian assets that were frozen. And now they’re saying they’re going to use the interest off of those assets to fund Ukraine’s military to fight Russia. So think about that, A country that is one day country in good standing in the international community and can do business here, there and yonder all over the world.

Leo Hohmann:   And then the next day because of a border war that broke out between it and its neighbor, Ukraine is treated like an economic pariah and the leader of the country is called a war criminal Putin. And so what happened was Putin, along with China, mobilized these Brix nations and got them thinking about how to avoid some of these disastrous economic sanctions in the future. And lo and behold, that was a message that really, really appealed to a lot of countries who are afraid of running afoul of this US, UK, EU led world order. And so now the bricks countries are seriously expanding. They’re seriously talking about creating a new global currency that would be backed by gold or some other hard assets. And you got the dollar which is shaping and literally about to implode. I don’t think it’ll happen overnight, but gradually losing its power and it’s worth around the world as these countries join bricks and say, we no longer need this dollar. And that is going to lead, as you said, to some economic hardship here at home among American families because the one reason we have a high standard of living is in this country is because our dollar has been the world reserve courtesy. And that’s about to end, I would say gradually over the next year, you will see the dollar losing more and more value, Sam. And with it we’ll go our standard of living.

Sam Rohrer:       And we know because there’s been talk about it again and we’re not having a financial discussion, but the Federal Reserve is talking about central bank digital currencies. There is a discussion of digital currencies overall around the world getting rid of cash. There seems to be a need for something, some event to trigger this, whether that’s called a reset, what is called a reset, that’s what they’re calling it, reset some kind of a monetary reset. Most people think that it’s tied in with this kind of a change to the dollar. Any comments on that before we go to another theme?

Leo Hohmann:   You make a great point there. We’ve got this central bank digital currency out there waiting in the wings, which makes you wonder if perhaps it isn’t intentional that the us, because on the surface it would look like a very stupid policy that the United States engaged in to hit one of the world’s most powerful countries, Russia with such powerful sanctions, knowing that there will be a backlash and empower these bricks countries to expand and create a new currency of their own. Why would the United States do that? Well, maybe they want the dollar to meet its demise after all of these years. Maybe the international bankers have milked the dollar for everything that it’s worth and they’re ready to move on to a new system based on digital, based on blockchain and based on a system that will give them more control over who spends what where, and give them ability to have a social credit scoring system like China where they can punish people for buying the wrong things, having the wrong lifestyle. Stuff like meat, dairy. They’re saying this is bad for the environment. Well, how could they keep track and punish people for buying too much meat or dairy? All they need is a digital monetary system, A-C-B-D-C, Sam. And so maybe they’re not going to be all that heartbroken that the US paper dollar is about to implode.

Sam Rohrer:       Well, you lay that out and of course ladies and gentlemen, that takes us to the PROPHETICAL part as we’ve talked about much is that a global currency of some type link to global governance, not the United States has to happen. What the antichrist is going somehow is going to be able to control a system that is global. So there has to be a change with the dollar as we know it based on that. But we’re laying these things on the table just because these are elements, events that are occurring all driving towards the weakening of our dollar, but the United States has to be weakened, our constitution has to be eliminated and there has to be a removal from dominance and dependence on the US dollar in order for a global system to come forward. So is this the time? It might just be, but all of these things are on the table and they’re converging and it is interesting.

Sam Rohrer:       So many of these things are happening at the same time. When we come back here in just a little bit, we’re going to talk a little bit about response. I’m going to ask Leo another question that will tie into control that the United Nations wants and even Kamala Harris wants to control it. And that is our speech, what we say and information. And I’ll share an event with you right now that was just approved by the FCC. That probably will shock you, at least it should hardly anybody’s reported on it, but we’ll talk about it in the next segment. We’ll be back in just a little bit. Okay, Leo, before we go into me asking you, as we often do in this last segment, okay, now what do we do in light of all of this, I wanted to bring up one other thing that I mentioned in the last segment and get your response from it.

Sam Rohrer:       In segment two when we’re talking about the directive from the Pentagon about putting troops on the ground. I think you had tied that into some comments from Kamala that made that decision a bit more interesting, but had to do with communications and speech. We’ve talked a lot on this program about the attempt to control speech. We saw that in 2020 during Covid, probably the most egregious effort to control speech and to identify and to eliminate or to silence information or comments that those in charge didn’t like. But here it is. It’s just before the election. And just as strange as about a month before the election, we have this directive out of the Pentagon. Another thing began to happen, and I was tracking at a few weeks ago, now it’s official and that is this, the FCC, the Federal Communications Commission, that entity that oversees radio like what we’re on in TV has just approved the sale of 200 radio stations, 200 radio stations.

Sam Rohrer:       I think it’s the second largest radio network perhaps in the country. Some are saying in an expedited move, normally an application to buy stations takes months and years and there’s hearings and all that kind of thing, but not this time. Nope, not this time. This sale will take effect, I believe this week giving two weeks or more or whatever before the election, theoretically potentially able to alter the programming and potentially influencing those listeners. Now, who made application for these stations and who did the FCC give approval to? You guessed it ladies and gentlemen. George Soros, George Soros, Leo, do you have any comment on that, on what that might mean to our First Amendment?

Leo Hohmann:   Well, it’s just a continuation of a broader trend, not just with radio stations, but with the entire legacy media, newspapers, television stations consolidating into large conglomerates that are all on board colluding to the point of even colluding with the United States federal government to put forth what they consider acceptable narratives on key issues such as vaccines, election integrity, war and peace, the pro-life movement. These are all things that if you go against the narrative, you’re considered a spreader of misinformation, disinformation or what they even call now mal information. What mal information is, is actually true facts that cannot be refuted. But you’re using those facts, you’re putting those facts out, and what they say is you are creating, you’re inciting people to rebel against the government. We can’t have true facts because it might wake people up and make them not want to comply with tyrannical government edicts.

Leo Hohmann:   We can’t have that. And so this has been going on in the legacy media. We see it going on in social media. The internet, when it started some 25 years or whatever ago, was a place where everyone was championing the ability to put their opinions out there onto what they called the worldwide web. And there would be no censorship. This was a new thing for the world because so many different governments of so many different countries, they’re always trying to censor people and silence dissidents. You don’t go along with the prominent government establishment narrative. You get silenced. While the internet was a big thing, and I’m doing that, but over the years we’ve gradually seen all of this consolidation in the internet world. Well, and now you’re basically seeing all information being filtered through a few large social media companies who are in collusion with the government. Joe Biden’s, first Press secretary, Jen Psaki, actually admitted a couple of years ago that we are in daily. The White House, she said is in daily and week or weekly contact with all the major social media platforms and trying to influence what information they allow on there and what information they don’t. So the trend is the same, whether it’s legacy media, social media, and these big internet platforms.

Sam Rohrer:       And one other connection here, the United Nations Pac for the Future that they voted on back in September happened to use those very words of malformation misinformation and the need for that global body to limit and filter speech worldwide. That disagreed with government. That’s an interesting connection too, isn’t it?

Leo Hohmann:   Yeah. This is very much not just an American thing. This is a global trend of governments colluding, basically big government colluding with big corporations to take control of information and have total information dominance over all these, across all of these platforms. And the EU is just passed this new law called the Information Services Act, where they’re going to essentially ban certain information that they don’t like from being communicated to the masses. Canada has been doing very similar things now the United, here in the United States, we’ve seen top level politicians like Hillary Clinton and John Carey coming out recently and saying, you know what? This first amendment we have is a problem. This First Amendment is a hindrance to us getting our agenda through on climate change and these other issues. That’s another big key issue, by the way, climate change. You’re not allowed to refute it. So they’re coming right out in the open now and saying that they want to somehow water down the First Amendment so that we, America can be like all these other nations and start banning certain types of speech.

Sam Rohrer:       Ladies and gentlemen, just be aware, again, we’re putting these things on the table because there are so many elements converging at one time. Conclude here, Leo, again, one of your articles, I’m not sure which one we were writing about, these things we’re talking about, and you said kind of in conclusion, pray for peace while preparing for war. And we started talking about this lust for war that many have. You also said in one of them we’ve been warned, which what we’re doing right now, telling people, expand upon that a little bit. Recommendation, prepare how. What are you doing?

Leo Hohmann:   First of all, prepare your mind. Do not be naive and do not think that just because America has not been invaded in our lifetimes or has not seen civil war since the 1860s, that it can’t happen again because I think we’re closer right now to those types of scenarios than we have been in many, many generations. People do not realize how close we are to World War III with Russia, China, North Korea, around the Middle East is heating up. China just did a practice blockade surrounding Taiwan. North Korea is blowing up bridges and roads that connect it with South Korea. All of these things pretend to more wars and rumors of wars on the horizon, and we see no real effort at diplomacy to settle any of these political flashpoints, these geopolitical flashpoints. So I am counting on war coming and I’m preparing my mind for that. First of all, do not have a weak mind because it will destroy you. And also, of course, spiritually and physically are just as important to prepare for.

Sam Rohrer:       They are indeed, Leo Homan. We’re at the end. Thank you so much for being with us again, ladies and gentlemen, his website, leo homan.substack.com, and let us leave by saying this. These things are things that we must know. Let us not be perplexed. Make sure our relationship with the Lord is intact. Trust in him. He is our refuge. Always.