U.S. ‘Technically Bankrupt Already’, Becoming Banana Republic (Uncut) 03-04-2025

When people recognize that trillions of dollars have gone to things that have no real bearing to improve America for Americans, listen, this is what it’s going to come down to. And if enough people don’t want to be bothered with that, then we’re going to have the end result of a true banana republic. We’re on our way.

And quite frankly, we have a very short period of time to try to put a stem to it. I don’t think we’re going to turn it around and become great anytime soon. I think it’s going to take a generation or more.

The U.S. could go bankrupt. That is the latest warning from Elon Musk. We’ll talk about why and what’s next for markets, commodities, and those run up in gold.

Will it continue? Peter Granich joins us today. He is the president of Peter Granich & Co. And it’s a great pleasure to have you back, Peter.

Welcome back to the show. Good to see you as always. Always a pleasure to be with you, David.

I’d like to start with the gold rally, this run up close to $3,000. Not quite. It’s been hovering around 2,800 to 2,900 for a number of days now, if not weeks.

If and when we get to $3,000, that would be a monumental round number that would equate to a 50 percent rally since the beginning of 2024. Let’s talk about what happened because gold’s been flying under the radar of the mainstream news, Peter, as you know, and a 50 percent increase has beaten the S&P 500 over the same period. What happened? What’s been happening? And then we can talk about the future.

Sure. So let’s first start and keep in mind that it’s actually outperformed stocks and bonds for the whole new millennium. But in recent times, it has received attention because it’s made some unusual percentage gains last year and the start of this year, uncommon for it.

It’s normally a slow but steady preserver of wealth item. But for capital appreciation, it’s really done well that it’s outperformed the S&P 500 as well. There are a lot of reasons, but there were two or three main ones.

The first and most important one was that central banks around the world, outside of North America, became huge buyers of gold for several years. Quantities that some say, if you take what’s not being reported, it’s off the charts. The second thing that was happening simultaneously with that is that several countries, 34 exactly, began to repatriate the gold that they’ve had held by both the London and the U.S. Reserve.

And that alone, combined with a shift on where physical markets were trading, aided the ability to get over what has always been a handicap to the gold price. And that was the paper market, both out of London and New York. And by going to Asia primarily, where people have a much more interest and fondness for the physical ownership, that was the main reason.

But in recent days, up until a couple of days ago at least, a new phenomenon hit the gold market, and that was the highly unusual amount of gold being transferred out of London and suspecting at the same time, with Trump and his group speaking about potentially or hinting at some usage of gold in a new way of hopefully monetizing it, and also bringing to bear something that the conspiracy people have spoken for as long as I’ve been in the business, which is 41 years, David. There was always somebody speculating, is there gold still at the Fort Knox? So all those combinations happened while, until last week, while the U.S. was net sellers based on the GLD and based on reports on physical markets in the U.S. This has not been something that U.S. investors have participated in until most recently, when last week we saw a very large increase in demand in the GLD. Interesting.

Let’s just take a look at the gold price chart, and then we can talk about what you’re doing as an investor. So I understand you’ve been involved in the gold space and the commodity space for many decades, but this move that we’ve seen in recent years, the magnitude and the duration of the move is not typical of the gold market, as you know. Basically, from the beginning of the trough in 2022 all the way up to the current price, I’m not even talking about $3,000, that’s a 74% move.

With something like gold, gold in particular, when gold’s moved up 74%, 75% in the span of two years and two months, basically, what do you do with that information? Do you short it? Do you leave it alone? Or do you think this is the beginning of an even larger rally? Well, first of all, it is a move that I have stated in recent days is in need of a consolidation and even a corrective phase. That longer chart that you had just updated pointed to almost a look of a parabolic move, and you don’t like to see that. And I guess most troublesome to me is before we record it, Barron’s today, for the first time, wrote a bullish article on gold, and some of us who’ve been at it a long time consider that a contrarian indicator.

But nevertheless, it has moved quite strongly. It has done what some people who were trying to say it was dead, a relic, or whatever, a few years ago, and that you should look at something else. It’s done what it’s supposed to do, while that item has not done what it’s supposed to do, even though there’s still a group of people suggesting it eventually will.

So I think other than a corrective and a consolidation phase, the move is far from over. And the very fact that the banks have done this transfer of gold in such large quantities strongly, strongly suggests that there’s something afoot that’s not yet ready for the public domain, but is being worked on behind the scenes. And that has to be the eventual usage of gold to somehow restructure the world debt, which is so much out of hand, not just here in the United States, but around the world.

And that is something that some of us for decades have urged that at the end of the day, that was only going to be one of the ways that you could actually do it. So we’re going to learn a lot more in the coming days and weeks, David. And whether or not we go over 3,000 is not as important.

In fact, it’d be best that we don’t now and build a base under it, because I think if we continue from this point straight through 3,000, it won’t have a sustainability to stay above it. And that would create disenchantment that wouldn’t be deserving. So I’m quite happy with what it’s done.

I’m happy that we’re having a corrective phase, but I do think we still have much higher prices over if you’re still investing for months and years ahead of us. Before we continue with the video, I’d like to tell you about the precious metal sector. Now gold, as you know, hit record highs.

So the question on everybody’s minds is what should we be following and tracking in relation to gold? Well, I’m here to tell you that Stellar Gold is a name to watch. Stellar is a leading gold developer with two cornerstone gold projects in Canada, the Tower Gold Project in the prolific Timmins Mining Camp and the Colomac Gold Project in the Northwest Territories. The company has a massive global mineral resource estimate, one of the largest in Canada for a gold developer.

It’s a young and ambitious management team with a track record of success, is aggressively advancing its projects and is determined to unlock significant value. If you’re looking for a team who is as enthusiastic about gold’s future as you are, then check out stllrgold.com slash David Lin in the link down below or scan the QR code here where David Lin viewers can sign up for their macro gold newsletter to get inside knowledge and updates for free. I’m talking about the bullion versus the GDXJ.

So does the price movement of the stocks, the mining stocks, have they moved in such a way that would entice you as an investor to still look into it right now or do you think maybe they’re overvalued? Well, the key word you used there, David, was under the radar and it is still one of the most unowned sector in all the 500 and some sectors in the S&P 500. And at a time when the gold producers themselves, the majors, are hitting record free cash flow. And what we’ve seen and what we expected is now playing out before our eyes.

It was my belief, and I’m not alone in this, a few that follow this industry like I do, that this would lead to a large scale increase in mergers and acquisitions because their stock price is so high and they’re making so much excess cash. And what we saw a few days ago, two companies in Canada proposed emerging that, if successful, will make it the second largest gold producer in Canada. And one of the other things that’s positive for that, David, is and why I think there’s still a lot of life left for the mining sector is we’re basically seeing a flattening of earnings growth in the U.S. market.

Even the most bullish forecasters for the stock market are not expecting a major bump up in earnings. One of the few sectors that are going to report over the next few quarters just dramatically increase better earnings are going to be the gold producers. And therefore, I think that will be what will attract the occasional person that may or may not look at this market like I do, will find it attractive.

And that’s why I still think there’s a lot of legs left in it. And if I’m correct, it’ll filter down to the smaller, more riskier section of the market and you put up the XJ there. And that’s what’s been missing and needed in order to get that sector of the market moving aggressively to the upside.

What sectors within the mining industry do you prefer right now, the juniors or the seniors? Well, I’m betting on the juniors because they’re so undervalued. Some of the majors have had great moves and I believe they’ll continue. Agneau Eagle has been a phenomenal player.

What I think you have to understand is that it’s a sector that normally doesn’t get played simply because gold itself is not on the eyes and ears of the general financial service industry. But because things are turning down in other areas, including the crypto market, it’s now going to be at least having an ear that it might have not had otherwise at a time when earnings are just going off the charts on the producers. So you still have to basically believe that the majors are going to lead the way.

But some of the juniors now are selling so cheap that they have in-ground resources still being valued at only between $10 to $40 an ounce. And we have gold well above $2,800. So those type of companies have the opportunity to grow exponentially, triple-digit in terms of their share price.

Okay. And the seniors, just talking about the seniors now, cashflow-wise, they must be doing spectacularly with gold over $3,000 or just under $3,000, around $3,000. Are you anticipating inflation to catch up and eat into their margins or do you think that margin expansion is just, you know, a definite outcome at this point for the seniors? Well, we’re actually seeing net costs actually declining and suddenly while the earnings are increasing, that’s what’s making them so attractive.

I think the thing that you have to also recognize is that it is getting national news now. The maneuver by Trump the other day, just saying he’s not putting a tariff on copper, but he’s forming a group to look at it, is bringing to the forefront to the average person to understand what a great shortage America basically has for critical metals. And a lot of metals that are, even the names are hard to pronounce, that are very thinly traded and not where the regular retail is going to run into.

But I think the important thing to understand is that the attitude of this administration and also hopefully a change that’s coming in Canada soon will allow a much more aggressiveness that the mining industry needs to take advantage and to meet some of the needs that a lot of mainstream analysts say great shortages are going to abound for a lot of different metals, not just the copper but others. Well, let’s turn to, by the way, I’m just looking at some, I know that these stocks aren’t necessarily indicative of the entire gold mining industry, but if you take a look at, let’s say, Newmont Mining underperformed gold over the last five years, over the last one year, it’s done about the same. If you take a look at Barrick, for example, one of the largest gold miners in the world, over the last one year, it’s underperformed gold by a lot.

They’ve had some problems of their own. So, you know, the argument that just because gold’s at $3,000 and the seniors are necessarily doing well, I think that’s company specific. I mean, can you comment on this? Well, it is company specific.

You have to pick the two that have done the least better than all of them. You can look at a company like Agneau Eagle and some of the more second year producers, they’re off the charts. But at the same time, Barrick and Newmont now would become even more attractive because they’ve seen the turn.

They’re lowering their costs and they’re increasing their profits. And so they have time to make up for it. You never say it’s a throw at a dot scenario.

And that’s why you would like to take something that owns a bunch of them versus trying to be specific. But I still think they have so much more upside. And then the junior market is just right.

It finally has all the conditions necessary for itself to have its own bull market. And we’re starting to see that because if you look at the GDXJ, you can see that it’s clearly, you wanna bring that chart up, you can look at it. It is starting to outperform and it’s of course starting to look a lot better than it did a couple of years ago.

Yeah, that’s absolutely. So let’s take a look at the GDXJ now. I’m just gonna flip it over to the scale.

You can see how well it’s performed as a percentage scale. So yeah, it’s about 13 and a half percent since the beginning of January, which is considerably, well, 3% more than gold. So you are right, it started to outperform.

And like I showed you earlier, over the last 12 months, it’s up 55% versus gold’s 42%. So good performances for both, but the GDXJ started to do a little bit better. What about silver? Are you as optimistic about silver as you are on gold, Peter? Well, I get the silver bugs mad at me when I say this, but I have to say it because we have not reached the number in order for me not to say it anymore.

Silver remains like kissing your sister compared to the other two metals that we just spoke about. It still has a whale of a problem of getting above key resistance in 35, 36 area. I think you own it, but I still believe you own twice as much gold than you do silver until such time that silver can take out those numbers and start to show some relative strength.

And it will probably outperform gold when we get in the mature stage of whatever this run is gonna be. But I don’t think we’re there yet. Let’s flip over to some economic news now.

If we take a look at what I referenced at the beginning of the interview, which is Elon Musk commenting on the debt problem. Take a look at this. Here with the Doge team is to help address the enormous deficit.

We simply cannot sustain a country two trillion dollar deficits. The interest rates, just the interest on the national debt now exceeds the defense department spending. We spent a lot on the defense department, but we’re spending like over a trillion dollars on interest.

If this continues, the country will go become de facto bankrupt. It’s not an optional thing. It is an essential thing.

All right, we’ve talked about this, you and I before, debt and deficit, but now prominent figures are talking about this at the White House. De facto bankrupt, is he right? Well, I was gonna hope you say another prominent figure, but yeah, he’s a little bit more important than I am. No question about that.

But he is stating what I have stated for quite some time, and that is that we cannot continue to have the debt and deficits growing at the level that they’ve had and sustain it without basically going into bankruptcy. We’re probably technically bankrupt already because if we start to put in the amount of monies that are expected to be paid out for Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, there’s no way we’re in a position to pay those in the future unless we keep creating higher and higher deficits and printing money that we don’t have. So he’s very, very right in it.

He’s hit a core that has been spoken about by different people for almost three decades, but it’s become so acute now. Listen, the Congressional Budget Office stated in early 2024 that they expect us to be at 54 trillion in total national debt before the year 2020, I’m sorry, 2032. So we’re seven years away now.

Even if we just get to 50 trillion and we put a 5% interest on it, David, that’s 2.5 trillion in interest expense. The best this country’s ever did was two years ago as a country just under 5 trillion in revenue. So even if you get that bumped up to say even 6 trillion, which would be a lot to increase that much revenue in that short of time, we still be looking almost half of all our money going to just to pay the national interest.

So he’s absolutely right. And what’s really concerning to me about it, David, is the people that we’d expect to be in charge, who have been in charge, who are earning salaries between two to 300,000 a year are somehow making 20 to 50 to $70 million in a lifetime of being in Congress. I don’t think they’ve had their best interest in this.

And this is one of the reasons we’re at this point. And even with the proposal now of cutting government waste, and even if it’s all accepted by people, which I think people are gonna put up a big fight, we still are not getting to a positive cashflow. We haven’t had a balanced budget, David, since the Clinton administration.

And that was a quasi balanced budget. I tell you this, David, we could solve this very easy. Congress won’t do it, but it will solve it.

And that is past the constitutional amendment that we have to have a balanced budget. See, you and I cannot live without somehow someday balancing our budgets. If we don’t, we go bankrupt.

And that’s where the country is now. So to answer your question is, he’s very, very correct. He is someone that understands that.

I think he’s there with good intentions. I know people don’t like him because who is he to be saying this and doing this? But look in just a short period of time, a month, the waste that has already been demonstrated, and I don’t even think we’ve begun to get to the core. So yeah, it’s now or never, David.

We cannot afford to be having this conversation two to four years from now, and nothing was really done about this. Do you like the approach provided by the Department of Government Efficiency and the Trump administration, which is to cut spending in the way that they are, all over social media and over the news, people are commenting about how they don’t like cutting federal workers. Obviously, people are angry if they’re working in the federal government.

Elon Musk is universally bashed across the board for basically just cutting people out of the workforce in the first month, 100 days of Trump’s administration. That’s been one of his priorities. And so he showed up to the CPAC meeting with a giant chainsaw, alluding to the fact that he wants to cut a bunch of stuff.

Can you comment on whether or not this is the right approach? Does it make a difference to the deficit ultimately? Would you do it any other way? Well, let me go back. Let me go a little reverse to answer your question. So we have an Office of Budget Management.

We’ve had 74 inspector generals overseeing all these different divisions within our government. And yet, despite all of that, we found absolutely trillions of dollars being spent in horrific ways that no real taxpayer would want to be seen. And we would have not discovered that, I don’t think, A, if the election was different, and or if he was not in there looking at this stuff and pulling a Band-Aid off to see how deep the cut really is.

So the question will be is, is it fair to wholesale dismiss people? No, if people have been working and they’ve been good, and if you wanna have layoffs, that’s when you have to work out some sort of buyout programs and things that they’ve done. But listen, most of the growth in the United States has come only two ways, through government spending, which was employing more and more people, and engaging immigrants. The average American workforce has gone nowhere as fast.

And people have kind of come to a conclusion that someday you can only grow so big without affording to keep paying for that. And we’ve been paying for it, but continuously borrowing more and more money. And I just think people got used to something, and nobody likes it when a party’s over.

No one likes to hear last round. If they’re in the bar that late, they don’t wanna hear that it’s the last round, but we’re at the last round. If we don’t do something and do something aggressively, as he’s suggesting, there won’t be another round.

Let’s take a look at what’s been going on here. The Department of DOJ has been asking government employees to reply to an email stating exactly what they do. If they don’t reply to this email, they’re gonna be laid off.

I think there’s some back and forth with legal departments as to whether or not they have to do this. But anyway, this is the latest news as of two days ago. The Trump administration has instructed agencies to work with DOJ team leads to identify targets for mass layoffs as part of restructuring plans due on March 13th, a memo showed on Wednesday.

The memo published by the Federal Human Resources Agency, known as the Office of Personnel Management and the Office of Management and Budget, urges agencies to eliminate duplicate roles and necessary management layers and non-critical jobs while automating routine tasks. It seems to me like they’re trying to run the federal government like a private enterprise. Well, maybe it’s time.

Maybe it’s time, David. It’s completely out of control. And I don’t think it’s unfair to ask an employee, what’d you do last week? What have you done? Just tell me five things that were done.

If you can’t, then what are we paying you for? Listen, it is so out of control and if people would understand how much government waste that there’s been, you would think that when people recognize that trillions of dollars have gone to things that have no real bearing to improve America for Americans, listen, this is what it’s gonna come down to. And if enough people don’t wanna be bothered with that, then we’re gonna have the end result of a true banana republic. We’re on our way.

And quite frankly, we have a very short period of time to try to put a stem to it. I don’t think we’re gonna turn it around and become great anytime soon. I think it’s gonna take a generation or more.

But if we don’t do it, same thing with Canada, there’s not that many more years of affordability to allow this to stay in the manner that it stayed. They’re actually thinking of increasing spending in certain areas like defense. This is a GOP, we’ll take a listen to what Thomas Massey has to say here.

Can you just talk to us? Are you still, you know, is there anything? They convinced me in there. I’m a no. Is there anything? Look what, let me, their own numbers.

If the Republican plan passes under the rosiest assumptions, which aren’t even true. We’re gonna add $328 billion to the deficit this year. We’re gonna add $295 billion to the deficit the year after that.

And $242 billion to the deficit after that under the rosiest assumptions. Why would I vote for that? So are you solidly a no? Like I mentioned earlier, you know, cutting government workers is one thing, but they’re adding spending in other areas too. So per Massey’s point, the deficit’s going to probably, according to his projections and other people’s projections, it’s going to actually widen.

So what needs to be done to actually decrease the deficit? So I don’t know that gentleman personally. I don’t know how long he’s been in Congress, but from both sides of the aisle, assuming that they’ve been there at least four years or more, they’ve all partaken in dramatic rises in deficits, spending that wasn’t supposed to happen to begin with. Let’s not forget that we have this, and we’re gonna go through it again in a few days, the debt ceiling that for a hundred and some odd times, I forgot the number already, that we’re not supposed to spend more than we make in Congress.

And yet they always do these continuing resolutions, pass all this pork and both sides are guilty of it. And I bet if I did some homework, I’d find even in his own district, he had that in all. Listen, the bottom line is this.

There’s gonna be an argument that you have to let certain things grow because you need them, defense, certain other items. My personal opinion is so when somebody hears that, they say, oh, he must be a Trumpster. Well, I’m on the other side against Trump because I think tariffs are the wrong choice on how he’s going about to handle certain things at all.

The big thing is, again, and I’ll just say it, and you know I’ve said this for the last several years, America has entered its worst ever political, social, and economic environment. Some people think that changed because of who was elected. I just think at best, he may slow it down and maybe make some inroad some places, but we’ve been living way beyond our means for decades, and there’s no quick fixes in this.

So pain and anguish across the board is gonna need to be felt in order to get the House right again, and it’s not gonna be fixed in one administration. It’s gonna be a generation or longer. What happens to the economy if the deficit widens? And per Elon Musk’s point earlier in the interview you played this clip, the interest payments on debt continues to increase as well.

So to me, the economy is a lot worse than what some people suspected, and part of that is during the Biden administration, two key things were played around with, employment numbers and reporting certain types of statistics that people based on whether or not businesses are doing well or not, that’s being unwound now. We saw that recently. I think the economy is a lot weaker than what the general consensus is, and if I’m correct about that, one of the things that is gonna happen out of all of this, if we go through with these layoffs and all whether justifiably or not, it will add to the pressure to the economy to the downside.

And I can just tell you there’s gonna come a point, and that’s one of the other reasons that people have been bullish on gold. There’s gonna come a point where people are gonna want higher interest rates in order to keep lending to us if we keep spending more than we make. So whether or not economies are strong or weak are not gonna be the driver eventually to the bond market, but whether or not people start to suspect whether we can pay back this debt, and that’s one of the big concerns that I and some other well-known Wall Street mavericks are speaking about now.

And we have a very short window to work on this. And I’ll just tell you this, I think Trump is not an, I don’t think he’s a person that’s gonna look to save money. I think he’s a believer that if he spends it and what he thinks is wisely, that we make enough, much more money than we would have, and that could help pay the debt.

But his history as a business person and debt suggests that the debt’s gonna get worse with him at the helm than get less. Okay, interesting. Let’s take a look at this other piece of news.

Another interesting development with the Trump administration. This one coming out of Ukraine, as you know, a couple of weeks ago, members of the government were negotiating with the government of Ukraine about potentially taking their minerals deposit, their heavy minerals, or heavy earth’s minerals deposit as back pay for the billions of dollars that the Biden administration has sent to them over the last couple of years. Zelensky initially rejected this proposal, but now they seem to have reached some sort of deal.

U.S. and Ukraine prepared to sign minerals deal. So both the U.S. and Ukraine touted a proposed deal over mineral resources as important, but the most contentious element, military support to Ukraine, and other details have yet to be negotiated. This agreement can have a major success or quietly pass by, said Zelensky, signaling that the proposed framework required more work.

They, yeah, will this have any impact whatsoever on the critical minerals and commodity space overall? So here’s a critical paragraph here. Zelensky himself proposed a mineral deal in the autumn of 2024, sensing that Trump, who has criticized U.S. support for Kiev as a zero-sum drain on U.S. resources, would be more amenable to continuing support if he saw some return on U.S. investment. The original idea was to float the U.S. cooperation with the U.S. on developing $10 trillion to $12 trillion in critical minerals and rare earth elements.

So they’re basically selling critical minerals for U.S. support. What do you make of this? Is this gonna have an impact on the commodities landscape? Well, first of all, there are so many details to work out, including the security arrangement for that, especially since where they’re considering a lot of these minerals to be are in lands now that Russia has come into. And I don’t think Russia’s walking away from that.

Okay, they’re gonna be in the same need. The second of all is this is years away from having any impact on the commodities market. It will take many, many years to develop that and bring it to the market.

What I do think it points to, and what’s most important at this point to look at it, is those of us who keep arguing about how bad critical minerals the scenario has come for many of the Western world, this is proof of it, that we’re even considering doing something like this at all. So I don’t think it has any negative impact to commodities. I actually think it hopefully enlightens people to how badly critical minerals are needed here in the U.S. and hopefully expedites some of the delays that the Biden administration imposed on developments of our own mineral resources.

Many people feel that Trump is much more open to it, especially in places like Alaska. And we’ve seen a lot of the companies up there have gotten a boost in their share price because of that. Would you be a buyer of critical minerals right now? U.S. antimony, for example, up a lot over the last year or so.

It’s up 172% since November 2024. That’s counting the big drop that it’s had in the last couple of weeks. Antimony is one of the minerals that China has banned in recent months.

It’s critical for the production of ammunition, among other defense industry needs. It’s also used in other industrial applications. China has also banned germanium among other critical minerals.

So with the fact that China is imposing restrictions on exporting of critical minerals and the fact that they’re critical minerals per name, what would you do as an investor? Would you stay out or would you look into this? Well, I think you have to make a part of it. I’m too long in the tooth of a career and age to start becoming a real expert in these specific ones, especially ones that I still have trouble spelling and announcing. But I do think it is gonna play a role.

And so if there’s expertise out there, people that show that they’ve demonstrated an understanding of this or funds that acquire these things on a larger scale, that would be certainly something that I would look at. Great talk. I’ll just end on this fun question.

Ahead of the Fort Knox audit, do you think there’s gold in Fort Knox? I don’t see any advantageous. I tried thinking this out, David, and also that if they went there and before they could show it to the press, like I don’t think they’re gonna do what Geraldo Rivera did, like they did with Capone’s mine and just do this all live that they find out the same time we do. I don’t think it’s in the best interest.

I think if it ever came about that there’s forgery of a significance, meaning that either metal’s sitting there or not real gold, it’s something else, or a lot less than’s been reported, I don’t think that’s in the best interest. But I do think knowing how Trump thinks that if that’s the case, it plays to show that, well, you better start listening to me because the people that you used to listen to got us to this point. But I just don’t know.

I just can’t imagine the powers that be wanting that to be shown. I just think it takes the last veil of transparency that might have existed with our government and it’d be gone if the gold is not there at all. Well, we’ll see what happens.

Thanks very much, Peter. Where can we follow you? Mostly on my X page. I also have a YouTube channel and then there’s petergranich.com. Yeah, excellent pages.

We’ll put the links down below, so make sure to follow Peter there. Good to see you again, Peter. I’m glad to reconnect with you after a couple months and we’ll speak again soon.

Thank you, David, as always. God bless. And thank you for watching.

Don’t forget to like and subscribe.