The Deep State – Fact or Fiction?

Jason Samir Santiago

They say the real power isn’t with the presidents, prime ministers, or politicians—but with the families and institutions that have controlled the world for generations.

Skylar Quill

Okay, wait, hold up. Are we talking, like, shadowy men in suits plotting in secret bunkers, or are we dipping into lizard people territory here?

Jason Samir Santiago

Neither. Well, maybe both? The idea of a 'Deep State'... it's kind of this umbrella term that means different things to different people.

Skylar Quill

Right. It’s kind of a choose-your-own-conspiracy adventure. For some, it’s shadow elites, pulling political strings. For others, it’s secret societies, hidden in plain sight. And for a few, well, it’s lizard people—

Jason Samir Santiago

Skylar—

Skylar Quill

Okay, okay, but you get what I’m saying.

Jason Samir Santiago

Absolutely. At its core, though, the Deep State is often painted as a hidden power structure operating independently of elected governments. Some say it’s the true machine behind, well, everything.

Skylar Quill

But here’s the real question: Is any of this legit, or is it just... paranoia on steroids? I mean, what even counts as evidence for something that’s, by definition, supposed to stay hidden?

Jason Samir Santiago

Exactly. That’s exactly what we’re diving into today. This episode, we’re peeling back the layers to see if there’s any real substance to the Deep State.

Skylar Quill

And I assume, slight spoiler alert, we’re not solving this one in the next hour, are we?

Jason Samir Santiago

Definitely not. But we will try to make sense of it—piece by piece.

Skylar Quill

Alright, so to start making sense of this, here’s what I’m curious about: this whole Deep State idea—how far back does it actually go? Like, are we talking ancient secret societies, or is it more a modern thing that gained traction as trust in politicians started to waver?

Jason Samir Santiago

It's older than most people realize. The concept itself, though not always called the "Deep State," has roots in the idea that power can exist beyond just the surface of elected officials. You could trace it back to the post-Enlightenment era when central banking systems and corporate monopolies started influencing nations in really tangible ways.

Skylar Quill

Right, so these aren’t just shadowy basement meetings. We're talking about people and institutions with actual leverage—money, resources, influence.

Jason Samir Santiago

Exactly. Think about the 20th century: intelligence agencies were becoming more sophisticated, corporations were wielding more global power, and banking families like the Rothschilds were—

Skylar Quill

Oh, the Rothschilds. Those guys are like the Deep State poster family. You bring up their name, and everybody’s antenna just shoot straight up.

Jason Samir Santiago

They’re definitely one of the most frequently mentioned names. Alongside a few others, like Rockefeller, J.P. Morgan—legendary industrialists and financiers. A lot of these families and organizations are tied to early secret alliances, systems of control, or even global policy shaping.

Skylar Quill

Okay, but here’s the thing. Are we saying these groups just... sit around a conference table and decide the future? Like, they order a round of espressos and hash out world domination?

Jason Samir Santiago

Well, not quite. It’s not necessarily as... theatrical as that. The Deep State idea argues that there’s a network of influence—whether it’s deliberate or just an inevitable product of power structures. It’s about consistent, behind-the-scenes control over policies and resources that impact the public.

Skylar Quill

And this control, if it exists, comes from what? Money? Weapons? Politicians on speed dial?

Jason Samir Santiago

All of the above. Power here is multilayered—it’s economic, political, informational. Corporate lobbies influencing legislation, banking families shaping economies, intelligence agencies strategically destabilizing regions...

Skylar Quill

Right, because nothing says power trip like engineering a coup via diplomacy, or, you know, not-so-diplomatic methods.

Jason Samir Santiago

For sure, there are documented cases where governments were overthrown or manipulated with backing from powerful institutions. That’s the historical foundation of the Deep State idea—who’s acting, and more importantly, why?

Skylar Quill

And that’s where it gets murky. The connections between money, politics, and covert operations blur so much that what’s real and what’s theory start to look the same, don’t they?

Jason Samir Santiago

Exactly. This is where it shifts from history to speculation—when we try to figure out where the influence ends and the conspiracy begins.

Skylar Quill

So, taking it back for a second—before Rockefeller came onto the scene, are we talking about medicine as some mix of home remedies, herbal cures, and old-school mysticism?

Jason Samir Santiago

Not magic exactly, but yeah, medical practices were largely holistic. It was all about balancing the body and looking at health as a whole system. Things like herbal medicine and homeopathy were pretty mainstream, even respected in their time.

Skylar Quill

Which sounds nice and all, but probably didn’t do much if you had, like, appendicitis.

Jason Samir Santiago

Fair point. It wasn’t perfect. Modern medicine, as we know it, has clear advantages. And sorry for this shameless plug but if you would like to hear about side effects and modern medicine check out my other podcast "Effects on the Side". But here’s the twist—things really shifted around the early 20th century. And a big reason for that shift? The Flexner Report of 1910, funded by people like Rockefeller and Carnegie.

Skylar Quill

Oh, here we go. So these guys funded a report, and what, it just rewired the entire medical system?

Jason Samir Santiago

Pretty much. The Flexner Report reshaped medical education in America. It standardized practices, which sounds great at first glance. But it also pushed out things like homeopathy and anything that wasn’t rooted in their version of "scientific" medicine—medicine reliant on pharmaceuticals and cutting-edge research of the time.

Skylar Quill

And just to clarify, "scientific" in this case meant treatments that conveniently lined up with their interests, right?

Jason Samir Santiago

Exactly. Rockefeller saw medicine as an opportunity. He essentially took control of the medical field, funding universities and research that aligned with his pharmaceutical investments. It was strategic. By reshaping medicine, he also created a market for his products.

Skylar Quill

So, the birth of Big Pharma, huh? Medicine went from herbal teas to billion-dollar drugs, fast.

Jason Samir Santiago

Exactly. And this is where critics argue that it wasn’t just about advancing science—it was about control. Medical schools trained doctors to prioritize pharmaceuticals over other treatments. The institutions Rockefeller funded still shape medical education to this day.

Skylar Quill

Okay, but here’s the kicker. If they controlled medicine back then, does that mean they still control public health policies today? I mean, we’re talking pandemics, vaccines, global health crises...

Jason Samir Santiago

That’s the question, isn’t it? If a small group held the keys to public health a hundred years ago, how much of that influence carries over? And who’s benefitting now?

Skylar Quill

Right. It makes you wonder how far the ripples from those early power moves go. Because if these families were looking to cement control, medicine’s kind of the perfect place to start.

Skylar Quill

So, thinking about how the Rockefellers crafted control in medicine, it makes you wonder—what about other institutions? The CIA, the FBI—how intertwined are they with these elite power networks?

Jason Samir Santiago

Oh, they’re definitely in the same orbit. When you dig into history, you find plenty of overlaps—covert alliances, funding networks, even straight-up cooperation between Wall Street and intelligence operations.

Skylar Quill

Like give me an example. This feels like James Bond territory, minus the martinis.

Jason Samir Santiago

Well, one of the most notorious examples dates back to World War II. The Office of Strategic Services—kind of a precursor to the CIA—actively recruited from Wall Street. They wanted bankers, lawyers, and executives who understood global financial systems.

Skylar Quill

Right, because nothing screams "covert ops" like a guy who knows the finer details of stock dividends.

Jason Samir Santiago

Well, yes. But it didn’t stop after the war. Post-OSS, the CIA maintained those links. Think about it—who has the resources, the reach, and the discretion? It’s powerful people with something to gain, and they work with intelligence agencies to protect or expand their influence.

Skylar Quill

And what about modern times? Are we still talking financial elites pulling the strings here? Or has it shifted into, like, tech titans calling the shots?

Jason Samir Santiago

It’s probably both. If you control money, data, or information, you’ve got a seat at the table. But the financial world still plays a huge role. For instance, think about the ties between major bank executives and national security councils.

Skylar Quill

And I’m guessing this isn’t just about profit. It’s about power, right?

Jason Samir Santiago

Exactly. Profits are part of it, but controlling financial systems allows leverage over governments, trade, even war economies. And, yeah, if you follow the money, it often leads to these networks of influence.

Skylar Quill

Okay, so here’s where it gets messy. Let’s talk blackmail. Epstein-level messy. These so-called elites don’t just share power—they hold it over each other, right?

Jason Samir Santiago

That’s the idea. Blackmail has been a documented tactic for decades. Intelligence agencies, or even private networks, gather compromising material—on politicians, CEOs, whoever—to control them. Epstein’s name comes up a lot because his case is one of the most publicized examples of this dynamic.

Skylar Quill

Yeah, but Epstein’s operation? That wasn’t even subtle. Private jets, island getaways... It practically screamed, "Don’t ask questions."

Jason Samir Santiago

And that’s the thing. Most of it wasn’t supposed to come to light. Yet, when it did, it raised the question—how deep does this go? If his network was part of a larger system, then how many others are still operating under the radar?

Skylar Quill

Right. And more importantly, who’s orchestrating it? Because if intelligence agencies are involved—or even aware—then it’s not just blackmail. It’s control on a completely different scale.

Jason Samir Santiago

Exactly. It’s the overlap of government, private interest, and covert operations—they’re all connected by these invisible threads, which brings us back to the broader question of independence versus orchestration.

Skylar Quill

Makes you wonder if we’re all just unwitting players in their game. I mean, if blackmail and influence are this rampant, are we really free from their reach?

Jason Samir Santiago

That’s the crux, isn’t it? This isn’t just a story about individuals—it’s about systems built to perpetuate secrecy and control. Any semblance of transparency feels like a carefully curated illusion.

Skylar Quill

So if covert systems and influence networks run this deep, where do groups like the Council on Foreign Relations, Bilderberg, or Trilateral Commission fit in? They sound straight out of a spy novel, right?

Jason Samir Santiago

It does. But these groups aren’t fictional. They’ve got real members, real meetings, and a lot of theories about what goes on behind those closed doors.

Skylar Quill

Right, but here's the thing. Are they just, like, fancy clubs for the ultra-connected, or are they—what's the phrase—steering the ship?

Jason Samir Santiago

That’s the big question. Their stated goals are usually about fostering global cooperation, discussing policy, or advancing economic interests. But critics argue they’re not just discussing—they’re deciding.

Skylar Quill

And let's not forget the World Economic Forum. Klaus Schwab’s "Great Reset" sounds, uh, more like a villain’s master plan than a think tank’s agenda.

Jason Samir Santiago

It absolutely fuels speculation. The Great Reset proposes restructuring economies, society, even governance around sustainable development and technology. It sounds noble in theory, but it is just a way to consolidate control.

Skylar Quill

Control over what, though? Governments? Global markets? People's lives?

Jason Samir Santiago

Potentially all of them. The criticism is that it’s less about cooperation and more about centralized power. Things like the rise of Central Bank Digital Currency feed right into this idea. It’s a currency tied directly to central banks, sometimes by design, with built-in tracking and control mechanisms.

Skylar Quill

Right, so, let’s say you step out of line. Suddenly, that digital wallet of yours isn’t usable, your transactions blocked, and—poof—you’re financially erased. It sounds dystopian, doesn’t it?

Jason Samir Santiago

It does. And we’re already seeing early versions of this happen. Governments piloting these systems argue they offer efficiency and transparency. Critics warn they open the door to unprecedented levels of surveillance.

Skylar Quill

And if these organizations are influencing national governments—or worse, bypassing them entirely—then who’s holding them accountable?

Jason Samir Santiago

Exactly. That’s where the scrutiny comes in. These groups aren’t elected, and yet their decisions can echo globally. It raises the question of whether this is pragmatic international cooperation or a new form of oligarchy.

Skylar Quill

Which brings us to the heart of it—are these groups the architects of the future, or just bureaucratic middlemen with a really good PR team?

Skylar Quill

But hey, what if all this talk about shadowy influence and power plays isn’t as sinister as it sounds? Could it just be an overcomplicated case of bureaucrats doing what bureaucrats do best—tying everything up in red tape?

Jason Samir Santiago

That’s definitely one argument. Bureaucracies are designed to be slow and complex, right? To prevent rash decisions. But to some critics, that same complexity looks like a hidden agenda.

Skylar Quill

Right, or it just looks like Karen in Accounting lost the memo again. I mean, not everything has to be a conspiracy, does it?

Jason Samir Santiago

True, but consider this: The opacity of bureaucracies can create suspicion. People see an impenetrable system, and, well, it’s easy to imagine secrets lurking behind the scenes.

Skylar Quill

Okay, I’ll give you that. But then there’s the other piece—what if it’s not the system? What if it’s just... rich people doing what rich people do best: protecting their cash flow?

Jason Samir Santiago

That’s another popular theory. Instead of a centralized "Deep State," it’s more like a loose network of elites acting in their own interests—lobbying, funding campaigns, influencing policies, all to keep the status quo working for them.

Skylar Quill

So, basically the Monopoly board, but with real-world stakes? Buy the railroads, get into banking, and suddenly you’ve got politicians on speed dial.

Jason Samir Santiago

Exactly. And that’s part of the critique: If these people already have wealth and influence, do they really need some secret underground society to consolidate power? Or is it just... business as usual?

Skylar Quill

And yet, here’s where I’m stuck. If these power plays aren’t centralized, what do we make of the media’s role in all this?

Jason Samir Santiago

Mmm, the media is polarizing. On one hand, it’s crucial for transparency and accountability. On the other, some argue that corporate ownership and political alignment can lead to bias—or even complicity.

Skylar Quill

Like, "ignorance is bliss" complicity? Or are we talking more willful denial because it’s inconvenient to dig deeper?

Jason Samir Santiago

A bit of both, honestly. Sometimes it’s easier to dismiss something as fringe rather than do a full investigation. And if there’s enough self-interest involved—like keeping a funding partner happy—then yeah, the media might turn a blind eye.

Skylar Quill

So, here’s the dilemma: If we’re saying the "Deep State" is just bureaucracy, or wealthy people with influence, or even biased media coverage... does that make it less sinister? Or more so, because now it’s hiding in plain sight?

Jason Samir Santiago

That’s the tricky part. The more "normal" it seems, the harder it is to pinpoint. You could argue that this ambiguity itself is what gives the Deep State idea so much staying power. It’s a term that can flex to fit almost any narrative.

Jason Samir Santiago

So, after all that back-and-forth, maybe the real question isn’t whether the Deep State is real, but whether its power lies in being a label we use to frame the way influence quietly shapes the world.

Skylar Quill

I mean, it kinda feels like the answer is yes and no at the same time, doesn’t it? Like Schrödinger’s conspiracy—real and imagined, depending on how you look at it.

Jason Samir Santiago

Right. We’ve seen evidence of shadowy networks of influence, historical power moves, and systemic secrecy. But proving a singular, unified "Deep State"? That’s where the speculation outruns the facts.

Skylar Quill

Yeah, and let’s be real—most people don’t have the bandwidth to untangle all these layers. We’re busy enough just trying to, you know, pay bills and remember to water the plants.

Jason Samir Santiago

Exactly. And that’s part of the challenge, isn’t it? The systems, if they exist, thrive on complexity. The more intricate they are, the harder it is for the average person to question, let alone understand, the mechanisms at play.

Skylar Quill

Which is why we need to stay curious. Like, whether you think the Deep State is real or just bureaucratic noise, asking questions and seeking answers—that’s the real exercise here.

Jason Samir Santiago

Completely agree. Critical thinking is key. Stop and ask, "Who benefits?" whenever you’re reading a headline, listening to a politician, or even scrolling social media.

Skylar Quill

Yeah, but also, don’t forget: sometimes the simplest explanation is the right one. Not every shadow is a monster lurking in the dark. Sometimes it’s just, you know, the neighbor’s cat.

Jason Samir Santiago

Fair point. But whether it’s a monster or a cat, we all have to decide for ourselves what’s real and what’s noise. And that’s the takeaway here—stay informed, question narratives, but don’t let paranoia take the wheel.

Skylar Quill

Oh, and while we’re on the topic of staying curious, do your research. Dig into the history, the players, the decisions. Who knows—you might uncover something we missed.

Jason Samir Santiago

And while you’re digging, don’t forget to subscribe to the podcast. Hit that five-star rating, share it with others... you know, the usual drill.

Skylar Quill

Right. We promise not to pull any mysterious strings—just solid, maybe slightly obsessive, storytelling.

Jason Samir Santiago

And speaking of control—next week, we’re diving into The Surveillance State. Just how much does the government really know about you? From data tracking to high-tech surveillance, we’ll explore how deep it goes.

Skylar Quill

Spoiler alert: The answer might make you wanna throw your smartphone into the nearest river. See you then!

Jason Samir Santiago

On that note, we’re signing off for today. Thanks for listening, and we’ll catch you next time on *Exposed and Unfiltered*.