The Astrology Podcast
Transcript of Episode 90, titled:
With Chris Brennan and astrologer Patrick Watson
Episode originally released on September 29, 2016
Note: This is a transcript of a spoken word podcast. If possible, we encourage you to listen to the audio or video version, since they include inflections that may not translate well when written out. Our transcripts are created by human transcribers, and the text may contain errors and differences from the spoken audio. If you find any errors then please send them to us by email: email@example.com
Transcribed by Mary Sharon
Transcription released June 21, 2021
Copyright © 2021 TheAstrologyPodcast.com
CHRIS BRENNAN: Hi, my name is Chris Brennan and you’re listening to The Astrology Podcast. This episode was recorded on Wednesday, September 28th, 2016 starting at 9:58 p.m. in Denver, Colorado, and this is the 90th episode of the show. For more information about how to subscribe to the podcast and help support the production of future episodes by becoming a patron, please visit theastrologypodcast.com/subscribe. In this episode, I’m going to be talking with Patrick Watson about the 2016 US presidential election and specifically the topic of birth data related to the candidates and different issues connected with that, especially in relation to the birth time of Hillary Clinton. So, Patrick, welcome back to the show.
PATRICK WATSON: Thank you very much. Thanks for having me.
CB: All right. It’s been about I think four years I think since we did our 2012 podcast on that election [Patrick laughs] and time flies.
PW: Yeah, definitely.
CB: All right. So, you’ve been writing a series of articles on the election. Sorry, before we get to that, I guess I should do the announcements so really quickly since this is episode 90 and spin four episodes since we did our last drawing. This is actually the episode for the drawing for September. So, for patrons of the show and people who donate on the $5 and $10 tiers through our website through our page on Patreon, they automatically get entered into a drawing in order to win a prize at the end of each month. So, the two prizes this month, the prize for the $5 tier is free access to my online course on electional astrology for one lucky winner on the $5 tier and the winner of that is Patreon Cindy Letourneau. So, congratulations, you just won a free pass to my online course on electional astrology. So just send me an email once you hear this episode and I’ll give you all the information about how to access that. Let’s see. And then the other surprise that we’re giving away this month is a free pass to my primary course the one that I have spent the most time focusing on and developing over the past 10 years which is on Hellenistic astrology and many of the techniques that that Patrick and I use that we’ll be applying to the presidential election during the course of this episode are taught in that course. So, the patron on the $10 tier who won the free access to that course is Dorje Christian. So, go ahead and give me an email at some point to let me know when you’d like to collect your prize and I’ll give you your login information for that.
So yeah, thanks everybody for being a patron and thank you, especially to those two listeners and everybody who supports the show on the $5 and $10 and frankly, on every tier. It’s been amazing. It’s been a year since we launched the Patreon campaign, a year and a few months, and it’s been going really well and allows me to do more shows like this one.
All right. So, announcements out of the way, let’s jump into the main topic and this is a topic that you and I, I think, have been passionate about for many years. We wrote a blog that culminated in the 2012 presidential election where we predicted that Obama would win and we actually issued that prediction in April of 2012. But right around the same time, we actually got contacted out of the blue by a reporter from ABC who asked us at the time she wanted to know if Hillary Clinton would run for the presidency in 2016, if we thought that that looked likely in her chart because there was a lot of speculation going around and some people were saying, “Yes, of course, she’ll run.” But other people were saying, “No, she very well may not.”
PW: And she herself was saying and insisting that she wasn’t.
CB: Right, she was very insistent at the time that she was not going to run. And so, this reporter who had been covering Hillary for a few years I think at that point while she was at the State Department asked us to look into it and so I’d been researching her birth time since at least 2006. I remember seriously starting to look into it by 2006 and I actually remember the first time I think that I was actually with Nick Dagan Best the first time I think that we pulled up her chart and took a look at the 8:00 a.m. time with Scorpio rising and just being really impressed by it because that chart from the perspective of a traditional, especially from the perspective of the Hellenistic astrologer is actually very eminent and very striking in this very interesting way that we’ll get into later. Go on.
PW: If you had no idea who she was or who this chart belonged to, you would still make many of the same kinds of statements about that person and you would be able to recognize that they were a person of great eminence. That’s what I think is interesting. It’s more or less as many so-called objective indicators of an eminent chart.
CB: Right, it just has them all over the place. And what was more interesting you and I realized at that point, because we were so focused on the US presidential election at that point and focused on Obama’s chart and Romney’s chart in 2012 that this was like a side thing, but we decided to pull it up. And I know you’d worked on it previously because you’d especially done a lot of work during the 2008 presidential during the primaries when she was competing against Obama in order to win the nomination for the Democrats.
PW: Yeah. At the time, before we had a proper time for Obama, I think I remember this back in my space thinking that Hillary was going to win because she was going to have a losing at the bond to Pisces, but that ended up coinciding with her rise to Secretary of State as opposed to a President. So, it was still a big positive development in her career, but it wasn’t the scenario [Patrick laughs] she was necessarily looking for at that time.
CB: Sure. Yeah. But when we looked at it in 2012 and we took the same techniques that we had just because we spent like a few weeks putting together the prediction for the 2012 election and the primary technique that we used was this Hellenistic timelord technique mentioned a million times on the podcast before called Zodiacal Releasing because what Zodiacal Releasing does is it’s very good about taking a person’s entire life and dividing it up into chapters and paragraphs as if the life was a book and you were able to divide it into these different chapters and then get a broad sense of what the quality of each chapter was like and whether the person enjoyed that chapter of their life or whether they found it more challenging. And it can do some weird things like show career transitions or even career peaks like periods in a person’s life, they’ll do their most important work or in which they’ll become eminent for some reason within whatever their chosen career field is and things like that. So, it’s this incredibly mind-blowing technique that can do things that most astrologers don’t even know are possible, things that somebody might assume that astrologers could do but when you get into astrology, it tends to be more about like psychology and like character analysis and things like that and so astrologers tend to scale back their expectations of what astrology is capable of.
But then, when you come across a technique like this, you actually realize that astrology can do some pretty crazy things. So that was the technique that we were applying to make our prediction for the 2012 presidential election that Obama would win. And when we took it and looked at it again seriously in the lead up to this interview with this reporter from ABC News, we were both really impressed that Hillary was actually in or she would be right in the middle of an eight-year peak period which was the highest peak period that she could hit in her entire career during this period that centered on the 2016 presidential election. Right, that was basically part of our conclusion.
PW: Right. Yeah, and she was in an angular period. The previous one she’d had was the one that she started from birth and that was the 25-year long Cancer period, and the loosing of the bond was to her Fortune 10th, and that was at the time that she got national attention for the commencement speech she made at her own graduation in which she rebuked a sitting senator who’d just spoken before her or had basically rallied her generation towards activism in politics. [Patrick laughs] A pretty big start, pretty promising start for a woman who even at that time, some people wondered if she might be the first female president. And that was during her last so-called angular period and compared to the other parts of her life where she wasn’t really in as much of a position to do much for herself like when she was married to Bill in the arch and soul First Lady years. That wasn’t necessarily a productive time for her and that time is encapsulated by the Leo period that she had at the time and then that girl was a bit better when she became First Lady and when she was a senator and Secretary of State but now, she’s ready turned to another angular period in her life and this is now when she is in full control and a presidential candidate and very, very close to potentially becoming the next president.
CB: Right. So, we did this full workup of her entire life chronology and we were really impressed using the ATM time which we’ll come back to later, just how well it seemed to line up with her past chronology and past periods of eminence going all the way back to like… What was it? It was like she became the hall monitor [Patrick laughs] or something in elementary school.
PW: So, the particular sub period that she is under and she’s in an Aquarius sub period influence.
CB: And we shouldn’t talk too much about the specifics. Literally, nobody writes the technique.
PW: Yeah, basically, this time of her life is related to other times that she’s had political successes and had significant political activity that she’s been involved in, so that’s how we base that prediction on that reason.
CB: Right, we kept seeing the same part of her chart being activated over and over again during periods of eminence and career advancement, even little tiny ones when she was like a little girl. So that gave us a really good feeling that we were onto something, we had the right time and at least confident enough that I went on to Fox News and like did this interview. So, we did the interview with ABC News reporter and then the next day, I get contacted by Fox News and they say, “We want you to come on for a live interview on Fox & Friends to talk about this. And for some reason, after debating it pretty extensively, I went ahead and went through with it and did this interview and went on Fox News and said, “Yes, Hillary does look like she will be running for president in 2016 and that Obama will win the 2012 presidential election.” And it’s this really funny, hilarious, weird interview because the Fox News reporter who interestingly became more prominent in the past few months due to the whole Fox News debacle, which is weird. What was her name again? Yeah, so I was actually interviewed by Gretchen Carlson and she actually throws [Chris laughs] in Zodiacal Releasing terminology and she’s asking me about so you said that Hillary was in an Aquarius period, or a Leo period or something like that.
PW: That was one of the most surreal moments of my entire life is watching Chris Brennan answer questions by Gretchen Carlson on Fox & Friends. Yeah, just totally surreal.
CB: Right. So that was really wild. Anyways, so that was like four years ago now, four and a half years ago, that was a culmination of a very weird period. And so, recently the other night, seeing Hillary in the first presidential debate with Donald Trump was really surreal because it was like the fruition of that prediction that we made four years ago. But the whole story actually with Hillary and Hillary’s birth data and trying to establish the correct chart for Hillary actually goes back 10 years since 2006 because in 2006, I first started looking at her chart because everybody started anticipating, we were halfway through President Bush’s second term and so the question was, who’s going to be president starting in 2008? And in early 2007, there was a conference, an NCGR conference in Baltimore that I went to. And maybe before I get there, so in 2006, the Astrodatabank for Hillary was already filled with entries of different astrologers claiming different times, but the two most prevalent times which is still the case today is there’s an 8:00 a.m. time which is the Scorpio rising chart and then there’s an 8:00 p.m. time which at exactly 8:00 p.m., it gives 29° Gemini rising or at 8:01, it’s already switched to 0° of Cancer rising. So basically, 8:00 a.m. is definitely Scorpio rising, 8:00 p.m. is either Gemini or Cancer rising.
And for us, I mean for Patrick and I, even a tiny switch as small as that of switching from 29 Gemini to 0° of Cancer, that’s actually a huge shift because using whole sign houses as we do, it changes all of the house placements of all of the planets potentially.
PW: Right. The planet that rules the Ascendant which is supposed to describe how one navigates through their life is totally different. Gemini rising Mercury would be the operative planet making someone well, mercurial or curious or adaptable, you know? But with Cancer rising, the Moon rules it, so you might be more sentimental, more reactive, instinctual. So, there’s some qualitative differences which come along with a tiny change like that in between the Ascendants. Has big repercussions.
CB: Sure, yeah. So, it makes major changes. It changes all the house rulers, changes the ruler of the Ascendant, it can change timing things like Zodiacal Releasing or annual perfections which are very sensitive to especially sign changes of the Ascendant. So, it’s a big deal to know what time a person is born because the predictive techniques that we’re using are predicated on knowing the correct birth time, at least roughly, and that’s not always the case for all astrologers. It’s like some astrologers use different techniques for predicting elections, like some astrologers use mundane techniques or electional techniques or horary or whatever that are not as tied into natal. But for me and I think for you as well to some extent, natal astrology is our primary thing because we have this crazy powerful technique called Zodiacal Releasing that can do these crazy things about predicting eminence and therefore, that’s our best access point for figuring out something like, who’s going to be president on January 20th of 2017?
So yeah. So, back in 2006-2007, there was already a lot of controversy surrounding Hillary’s birth time because we have no birth certificate and because there’s already conflicting reports for some reason. Some of the people were saying 8:00 a.m., some people were saying 8:00 p.m. and then there was a few scattered other reports like midnight or 2:18 in the morning and other things like that, but the two main ones were 8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m.
So, there was this conference in Baltimore that the NCGR put on in March of 2007 and I attended it. I think it gave like a lunch lecture or something there. And Nick Dagan Best and I, we attended a lecture by Shelley Ackerman that was supposed to be on the 2008 presidential election and specifically on the birth charts of the candidates. So, I was actually really excited to go to that because Shelley had become well known, or at least I knew of Shelley because one of her claims to fame was that she was the astrologer who got ahold of Bill Clinton’s birth time in 1991 or 1992 during the 1992 presidential election I think through contacting Bill Clinton’s mom or something like that. I’m not really clear on that, actually. Anyway, so the hope in going to this lecture was that she was going to have the inside scoop and would know more information than I did or that was publicly available about Hillary’s birth time, but we got there and there was nothing new. She just presented everything that everybody knew already from Astrodatabank in her presentation, which was useful if you hadn’t already researched or weren’t aware of those facts or hadn’t put them together. But since we had at that point, it didn’t necessarily present us with new information. That’s until there was at one point during the discussion of Hillary’s birth time and everybody is like throwing out different sources and different ideas, there was this woman, this old woman stood up towards the front of the room off to the left from where me and Nick were sitting and she very calmly and very confidently stood up and announced that Hillary was definitely born at 8:00 in the morning and that she had Scorpio rising and she didn’t say much else, but then she sat down. But it was interesting to me because the speaker Shelly and the room was silent and let her speak and seemed to treat her with like a certain amount of respect and I had no idea who she was.
So that was the main thing that I actually got from that lecture was just this woman mysteriously stands up and says very confidently that Hillary was definitely born at 8:00 a.m. And then what’s weird is the rest of the conference went on and I went off to do whatever else I did and then the conference came to an end a few days later and Nick and I were checking out of our hotel room with whoever else we were crashing with, and I was on my way out walking through the lobby and I ran into the woman who had stood up in Shelley’s lecture and I stopped her and I asked her, I was like, “How are you so certain that Hillary was born at 8:00 in the morning?” And I don’t remember like the precise wording of what she said, but she basically said something to the effect that Hillary was told something bad about Scorpio, the zodiacal sign Scorpio once, and she doesn’t want people to know that she was born with Scorpio rising or she doesn’t want to give people the accurate birth time. And this woman seemed to say something like she thought Hillary was deliberately putting out false times in order to throw people off. And I don’t remember the precise wording again, but she seemed to claim that she or somebody she knew had access to either the birth certificate or to something legitimate that confirmed that the time was definitely 8:00 in the morning. And I’m trying to think of what else, but those are really the main points. And so, I was like, that’s amazing because I thought that I just got the inside scoop and I asked her what her name was, and the woman said her name was Francis McEvoy. So, I would later come to find out that Francis McEvoy was actually a semi-prominent astrologer in the East Coast astrological community that she used to run the Boston NCGR group which is one of the largest local astrological organizations or chapters of the NCGR of the country. She was also an avid data collector. And since she lived in Massachusetts which is an open state, she had submitted like hundreds and hundreds of pieces of birth data to Astrodatabank over the years. So, go ahead.
PW: I was going to say, wasn’t she the source for Mitt Romney?
CB: Yeah, so she became the source for Mitt Romney which became important because even though he did not win the primaries in 2008, he later became the primary guy in 2012 for the Republicans. She was the source for a few other pieces of birth time. But it was actually not until later I think in 2007, like the end of 2007, I started to realize that there was problems where she had submitted other pieces of birth data. I think one of them was for John Edwards or someone like that, the politician, that later turned out to be incorrect where either she’d come up with a birth time that later turned out to be incorrect when another source was found or I think in one instance with like John Kerry or somebody, she must have been given what was an approximate birth time but then she turned it into Astrodatabank as an exact time presumably as a result of rectifying it to fit precisely what she thought the accurate birth time was.
PW: Right. When I asked John Kerry myself, he said sunrise with the strangest expression on his face. I just asked him if I could see his death or something. It was a great moment. Yeah, she probably got a similar source of them and then put an exact time on the sunrise.
CB: Yeah, that’s what I inferred later because I think then somebody else also got a source from John Kerry’s sister or something like that and she said sunrise and then we realized, oh, Francis must have gotten that as well, but then she submitted it not as around time but instead as an exact time that was like 20 or 30 minutes later or something like that. So, I started to have some questions about Francis’ methods and like previously taken for granted that she told me the truth when she said she had some direct access and knew for sure that Hillary was both giving out different times deliberately but that she was definitely born at 8:00 a.m. So, right about the time I started to figure that out, of course, Francis passed away and so I never actually got a chance to follow up on that and ask her what the deal was or to try to feel her out and get a sense for whether she was somebody that could be trusted, or whether she was telling the truth, or if I could get any other details. I never really got that opportunity because basically about the same time that I figured out that I needed to ask those sorts of follow up questions, I lost the last chance to.
So, I’m not sure if that brings us up to the present time, but basically, that’s part of the backdrop of this. The other part of the backdrop is about a year ago, I got contacted by a reporter who was interested in this story and had heard these rumors from the astrological community that there was this mystery surrounding Hillary Clinton’s birth time and that nobody knew what the correct time was and that there might be some intrigue surrounding it. And I worked with her a little bit and she did some amazing investigative reporting where she is going through the Astrodatabank list and contacting some of the people and trying to verify some of the statements, and what was surprising to me at the time was that a lot of them started falling apart. And this is problematic for me because we’d been using, of course, the 8:00 time for a while including back in 2012 when we issued the prediction that she would definitely run for the presidency. And one of the things that we always based that on or one of the things that we always thought we could rely on was an entry that’s been on Astrodatabank for a while where it says in an interview with the Chicago Sun-Times newspaper, according to her mother, she was born in time for breakfast or something to that effect. [Patrick laughs] Yeah, because it said in like 1992 interview, her mother said she was born in time for breakfast, in 1992 interview. Maybe we should bring that up so we’re not misquoting it.
PW: It said she found the article from 1993. That’s the one that seemed to address when Hillary was born, but it’s a little unclear. It’s not exact.
CB: Okay. Here it says in an article in horoscope magazine November 1998, Francis McAvoy, so again, it goes back to Francis McAvoy, “Mother states in an article to Chicago Sun-Times in 1992 that Hillary was “born in time for breakfast”. So, the problem that the reporter found a year ago is that she couldn’t find any interview with Hillary from 1992 with the Chicago Sun-Times with Hillary’s mother and anything that she did find didn’t say anything about being born in time for breakfast. What she did find though is an interview in the Chicago Sun-Times with Hillary’s mother from 1993 and it said something quite different. So, it says-
PW: Yes, it says that she had a 12-hour labor. So, she went to the hospital in the morning and she was born… It’s unclear if she’s saying she was born 12 hours after coming to the hospital or was in labor for 12 hours and then came to the hospital in the morning. So, [Patrick laughs] I mean one way you read it, it seems like she had to have been born maybe close to 8:00 p.m. if she went early in the morning if that was like 8:00 in the morning, so then that would seem to corroborate the 8:00 p.m. time. But then, if you read it the other way, [Patrick laughs] it seems like she went into labor for 12 hours and then went to the hospital in the morning and delivered the child, Hillary.
CB: Can you send me the link for that again. Okay. And also, just to clarify and emphasize the previous point in Astrodatabank and it’s one of the top entries that means it’s some of the earliest entries on Astrodatabank just above the one from Francis that says she was born in time for breakfast, it says Eileen Applegate quotes an article from the Chicago Sun-Times stating, “Her mother went in Edgewater Hospital after midnight and Hillary was born early on the morning of October 26th.” So that’s actually the statement that comes first. And then there’s the other statement by Francis from 1998 saying, “Hillary was born in time for breakfast.” So, these are like purportedly quoting a newspaper article from 1992 that we’ve never seen because we weren’t around in 1992, but we’re taking for granted that somebody is not going to fabricate an article like that and it seemed to provide us with an external piece of information that confirmed that what Francis had told me wasn’t just out of thin air that an 8:00 p.m. time is roughly early in the morning and is potentially in time for breakfast, whatever that means. So, what the reporter found though like a year ago is she said, “I can’t find any article from 1992. All I can find is this other early 1993 article and it actually says the exact opposite of that because it says the mother went into the hospital in the morning, but then Hillary was born 12 hours later.” Right, that’s basically what it says?
PW: Yeah. I mean, I think that’s what it appears to be on the first read, but I think that it’s a little unclear. I’m looking it up right now. Because one way you read it, it could be saying that the mother went into labor for 12 hours and then came to the hospital to deliver the child so that would indicate like a time in the morning as opposed to a time at night. The other thing that’s strange is that the [Patrick laughs] duration of the labor wouldn’t be something that was listed on the birth certificate that would have to have come from an interview with the mother presumably. So, it’s as little circumspect. Let’s see.
CB: Yeah. I mean, when I read it, the basic thing was that the first paragraph seemed to be something where if you were reading it casually or if you misread it, you could think that it meant in the morning, but then if you read the following sentence, it’s pretty clear that it says she was born in the evening. And the question then became, is this the original article that supposedly they’re citing from 1992 or was there another article that we just can’t find from 1992 that predated this and said something different? And that’s actually a mystery that I don’t know. We’ve never figured out. We assume at this point or are led to assume or are forced to assume that maybe they got the dating mixed up and it wasn’t a 1992 article. It was a 1993 article. But then that means they also misinterpreted the article and got the date wrong and that supposedly two different people did this because there’s two different entries in the Astrodatabank, one from someone named Eileen Applegate and then another from Francis.
PW: It’s almost like Hillary was born during a Mercury retrograde [Patrick laughs] square Saturn. Yeah, right, just station retrograde. So yeah, watch us finally get the birth certificate and there’s like a big smudge where the time is. Right. [Patrick laughs] We’ll be all like, yeah, forever lost.
CB: Yeah. I mean, so that was a big revelation last year was that the external evidence that we thought we had for the morning time wasn’t as good as we thought, then the reporter started just systematically going through the rest and like trying to verify some of the other ones that seem to verify the 8:00 a.m. time. One of them was Basil Farrington who in the Astrodatabank entry, it says he relates in January 2001, “A musician friend of mine played in the Democratic fundraiser for Al Gore in Manhattan this past summer. Afterwards, he got a chance to talk to Hillary. Knowing my ongoing love affair with astrological data because he’s a student of mine, he asked Hillary what time she was born and he says her exact words were, “I know it was very close to 8:00 a.m., four to five minutes before or after.” So that’s another one of those things were in the Astrodatabank entry, it always seemed like another really strong confirmation for the 8:00 a.m., time. But then when asked about this, Basil said that his friend had died, so he wasn’t even available for questioning to confirm that story. And then on top of it, when pressed on the issue, Basil seemed a little non-committal or not really fully willing to commit to it at this point and I didn’t really understand why. So that seemed to be a little bit iffy about trying to confirm that source as well so that source fell apart on us at the same time.
So, this kept happening. And then on top of that, while that was happening, I started asking around and doing some of my own investigations of my own and actually found out that there’s more astrologers than are even listed in the source notes or several people in the source notes who say that they asked Hillary her birth time and she replied that she was born at 8:00 p.m. But it turns out that there’s actually a few more astrologers in the community if you ask around to some of the more established astrologers who have asked Hillary her birth time in person which she said 8:00 p.m. One of them that I talked to is Joyce Levine, who’s the current chair of the NCGR, the current president of the NCGR. She asked Hillary this at a fundraiser at some point and Hillary said 8:00 p.m. and then there was another astrologer I forget who asked in the late 1990s at a book signing and Hillary said 8:00 p.m. then. And then to top all of that off a couple of years ago in June of 2014, I got an email from the bookstore down the street from me saying that Hillary was going to be there doing a book signing this weekend and so I got up early and went down there that day and got in line and stood in line for a couple of hours. And eventually after like a long line like I actually got up to the thing, got my book signed and very nervously and probably very suspiciously [Chris laughs] looking, I asked Hillary what time she was born and I don’t know how to describe it, she sat back or looked back like she was thinking about it and then she said I think 8:00 p.m. or she said I think 8:00 in the evening. I don’t know. Yeah, I think she said 8:00 in the evening. And then I said p.m. not incredulously but just to clarify and she said, “Yeah, I think so.” But it’s like she seemed very non-committal and not sure about it.
I mean, at the time, it was like I was so paranoid because Francis had said that Hillary was deliberately giving out false birth times and there was all these other birth times floating around where one of my goals was to attempt to see if I could even gauge what it was like when she said it because that was one of the things and talking to all these different people or when you’re reading the source notes in Astrodatabank that you really can’t get any sense of which is do the person look like they were genuine, or did they look like they’re saying it sarcastically, or [Chris laughs] did they look like they were faking it or lying, or what have you and I really wanted to know that, and so that was one of the reasons why I wanted to ask her myself.
PW: And what was your ultimate impression? Do you side more with the astrologers who believe that she is purposely misleading astrologers, or do you think that it’s probably an honest mistake and perhaps an innocuous detail to necessarily know yourself?
CB: I mean, I don’t know at this point because I don’t know her well enough in person or haven’t had enough interactions with her to know how she would usually respond to a question like that and so I know my impression at the time was this assumption where I felt like I’d confirmed that it was almost like she was telling me something where it was supposed to come off as if she didn’t know the answer, but she knew what she was going to say ahead of time.
PW: Well, it’s almost certain that she knew why you were asking. If she’s been asked this question this many times, she must know. She must have some idea when people ask that question like, oh, here’s another astrologer.
CB: Right. It’s like we’re talking about least a dozen times over the past two decades. I’m hesitant to like jump to because my immediate conclusion was just like, “Oh, yeah, she knew what she was going to say, but may not have necessarily given me the answer that was correct.” But it’s like, who knows? Because on the other hand, when we then later uncovered this Chicago Sun-Times article that said her mother may have gone into the hospital in the morning and then was born 12 hours later, she could be recalling something like that and thinking, “Yeah, I guess, according to that article, it said I was born in the evening so that must be correct.” And she could have never looked at her birth certificate anytime in the past like 30 or 40 years and actually seeing that it says 8:00 in the morning, hypothetically. There’s a lot of unknown questions, but the biggest thing at this point as of a year ago was that it turned out that Hillary had been pretty consistent about telling astrologers that she was born at 8:00 in the evening since at least the early to mid-90s and that continued through the 2000s and all the way up until the most recent person who’s asked her, which was me two years ago in 2014.
So, normally, we would just take that for granted, but then there’s this like broader question of, would a politician ever give out the wrong time deliberately? Is there any strategic or political value to not giving out your birth time, or what would cause a person to do that, or what have you? And that’s the question where some of the statements that Francis made came into play because I still don’t know if she actually had any valid reason for saying that or if that was just a suspicion on her part or something like that. One of the anecdotal things that I do think is funny that I always think about for some reason is that in the astrological community, it’s like every once in a while, I’ll run into an astrologer, it’s like most astrologers will put the birth chart on their shirts or get coffee mugs printed up with their birth chart or something or be really over the top about it, and especially like newer astrologers, it’s like the first thing they do.
PW: Right, especially T-shirts with the zodiac in the wrong order [Chris laughs] and the symbols upside down and missing. Yeah.
CB: Yeah. And students of astrology at conferences will come up and hand you their birth chart. It’s like an introduction sometimes. So, the times when that’s not true then sometimes stand out where every once in a while, it’s like you’ll run into an astrologer who you’ll say, what’s your rising sign, or you’ll say, where’s your Mercury placed, and they’ll be cagey about it or they’ll be hesitant and they’ll say, “I don’t share my birth data.” Or sometimes there’ll just be astrologers out there where their birth time is known because they don’t like to make that public. And what’s funny about this, and this is completely anecdotal and it’s completely almost subjective on some level, but what I found is weird is every time I’ve run into an astrologer who has that preference of keeping their birth data completely private and in the instances where I’ve later found out what their actual birth time was for one reason or another, and this has happened like four or five times, they all turned out to have Scorpio rising. [Patrick laughs] So I always thought that was really funny sort of parallel when it came to this birth data issue with Hillary because if the theoretical proposed time is correct at 8:00 in the morning, that would give her Scorpio rising and therefore it could potentially give her a motivation for not wanting her actual birth time to be out there to the same extent that some of these astrologers in the astrological community don’t want their birth data out there and won’t necessarily share it with you. So that’s obviously not something that you can like that I’m going to die, pledge my letter. [Patrick laughs] Right, right. But it’s like an additional data piece that goes into all of this whole complicated situation.
So, you’ve got those two issues with the 8:00 a.m. and the 8:00 p.m. time. and then you’ve got these other things like one of the entries further down in the Astrodatabank. It says, in February of 2008, Arlan Wise who is one of the founders of The Organization for Professional Astrologers, wrote to the ISAR using volume 477 the following: It says, I know this is hearsay, but my chiropractor has treated Bill and Hillary when they came here to Martha’s Vineyard. What’s her name? Arlan has lived on Martha’s Vineyard for 40 years or something like that. And it says when they came there in the summer, she told me, so the chiropractor told me she had a conversation with Hilary about how they have the same astrology, both Scorpios with Pisces Moons in Leo rising. And actually, it says in the same astrology, both Scorpio is with Pisces Moons in both Leo rising. And then she goes on and she says, “I haven’t seen a time that gives Hillary a Leo Ascendant, but that’s what she says she has. It definitely negates the 8:02 a.m. time and adds to the confusion.”
So, this is another one where it’s always have been there, but I didn’t know what to make of that. But last summer in June of 2015, I actually went to do an OPA Organization for Professional Astrologers training sort of intensive or retreat with their group and it was held at Arlan’s house in Martha’s Vineyard. So, we were walking around one day around the piers and I got a chance to ask Arlan about this and she was actually really serious or she seemed very earnest about it that this exchange with her chiropractor had actually taken place. And so-
PW: It’s also remarkable if it’s true that Hillary knows that Moon sign. I mean, that would show that Hillary has some interest in astrology. Most people wouldn’t know that unless they did have the time and were looking deeply into their natal chart.
CB: Right. Yeah, I mean, it would mean she would have some familiarity with astrology and with her birth chart placements and the Leo rising time would be approximately midnight, basically. If you cast a good midnight chart for Hillary, that would give her Leo rising or sometime after midnight, not too long after. So that was weird because then Arlan wasn’t just some crazy astrologer who you couldn’t trust, it’s like she seemed pretty genuine in what she was saying to whatever extent she was relaying some exchange that happened theoretically with her chiropractor. So that’s another one of those instances where it’s like, well, okay, is that a good indication that we need to take more seriously or if it was at all true that Hillary might be giving out false birth times, could that possibly be another instance, or what do we make of that? And there’s a bunch of little things like that when you’re dealing with this issue if you study this or if you read up on the Astrodatabank entry and everything else. So, does that bring us up to where we’re at today, basically? I’m trying to think if there’s any other background stuff that we haven’t gotten to.
PW: Yep, pretty much. Yeah, that’s like the whole saga so far.
CB: That’s the whole enchilada. Okay. So that brings us up until the very recent time. So, I decided I wanted to take this election off because the last election was pretty intense and pretty crazy and I spent several months just [Chris laughs] both writing articles and obsessing over the election, but also trying to focus on website security and how to deal with massive amounts of traffic on election day and all sorts of things like that and it was a big hassle so I wanted to avoid it this time and we didn’t keep writing on our blog, the political astrology blog @politicalastrologyblog.com, but actually you’ve been writing some articles and doing coverage of this election and doing some really great work and you actually got some pretty crucial birth data ahead of time just like you did in the 2012 election, right? [Patrick laughs] You’re kind of a streak with vice presidential candidates.
PW: Yeah, apparently, yeah. If you have a vice presidential candidate, you need the time for apparently, I’m the guy. Yeah, I just noticed in 2012, it looked like I just had a hunch that he’s probably going to pick Paul Ryan and it turns out he’s from an open state, so I went and got it ahead of time and I was right. [Patrick laughs] And then, this time privately, I was very suspicious about Newt Gingrich based on some of his releasing, but his birth time is also an issue. So, I didn’t do a very good prediction with that or I didn’t publish that, but that was privately what I was thinking might happen. But I also thought that Kane was probably going to be picked by Clinton and it turns out he was from an open state, so I figured I’d probably go and get that one ahead of time and turned out to be right. And as soon as I got those times, I published them as quickly as possible. I didn’t try to maximize publicity or play publicity games or pull PR stunts with them. I figured that this information is very important to astrologers all over the world who are looking at the United States’ elections and that’s why I put them out as soon as possible and that’s part of the reason why I was so upset by some of these [Patrick laughs] more recent developments regarding an announcement about Hillary’s birth time.
CB: Sure. And so, you got Hillary’s vice-presidential pick, it was like a month or something before this time?
PW: I forgot, maybe a couple of weeks or so. I forgot. I have to look back to see exactly how long before I got it but yeah, I did get it before.
CB: And then what’s the situation? So that means we’ve got Hillary’s vice president, we’ve got the questions surrounding Hillary’s birth time obviously which is our main focus. Pence, we have nothing on, so we have nothing on Trump’s vice-presidential pick and he was born in a closed state. And then Trump himself like last summer, I didn’t think we had a good time on but then it turned out that we did potentially have a birth certificate on Trump and that gave us an accurate birth time, right?
PW: Thanks to the birther conspiracy which he furthered and now randomly denies. [Patrick laughs]
CB: Right, birtherism is the best thing that’s happened to astrologers [Patrick laughs] in like 2000 years.
PW: Yeah, politics makes for strange bedfellows, I will say that. What a world it could be if presidential candidates were forced to disclose their birth certificates for no other reason than [Patrick laughs] to make the life of astrologers just a little bit easier.
CB: And like in 2012 where they had those, I never got one. I just need to find one, but they were printing mugs with Obama’s birth certificate on. It was like part of his official campaign. [Patrick laughs] That was basically the high point and I don’t think it’s ever going to get better than that for astrologers.
PW: Yeah. I’m not sure, but yeah. But luckily, Donald Trump did disclose his birth certificate.
CB: And it was reliable? Because that was the thing at first, it was like there’s three different versions and that seemed a little sketchy. I wasn’t sure what was going on there.
PW: Right. I mean, it says they cast a chat with Mars rising like that in Leo, [Patrick laughs] it just… Yeah, he had me at Mars.
CB: Sure. So, it’s 29° Leo rising with Mars at 29 Leo?
PW: Right. And yeah, while it’s very, very close to the end of Leo, I mean-
CB: Mars at 26 Leo and the Ascendant at 29 Leo?
PW: Right, the Ascendant at 29 Leo and that’s another case where I mean, while rectification is a risky exercise, many of you just want to compare Leo to Virgo. Leo being ruled by the Sun, Mercury ruling Virgo, which one do you think [Patrick laughs] is the character of Donald Trump more with the Sun conjunct Uranus as the ruler of his first and the thing he’s most known for and most appearing as is a similar figure. This guy’s obsessed with himself and so on and so forth. Definitely, he’s a far cry from the more practical and nerdy Virgo.
CB: Sure. And it’s also like a full Moon chart which is really interesting. It’s like almost exactly full Moon lunar eclipse in Sagittarius/Gemini. So, the Moon’s in Sagittarius and the Sun’s in Gemini. So that’s pretty interesting as well in terms of it just being somebody who was literally born on an eclipse really close to it. It’s only like an hour or two off from the exact eclipse and it’s right on the node, so it must have been a pretty close lunar eclipse as well.
PW: Right. Bill Clinton and George W. Bush I think that was the pre-natal lunar eclipse.
CB: Interesting. The one that occurred just before they were born? Okay. So, it’s like we’ve got Trump’s birth time, we’ve got Hillary’s vice president’s birth time, we don’t have Pence and then the final question is Hillary herself. So, in terms of my involvement, a year ago, I got an invitation from ISAR where they were planning their upcoming conference which was going to be in October of 2016 and late last summer, they sent out invitations and one of the invitations I got was to give a talk, but also to be on a presidential panel at the end of the conference. Since it was going to take place right before the US presidential election in November, they wanted to do a presidential panel like some of the ones that have happened at the past two United Astrology Conferences in 2012 and 2008. So usually, they do UAC every four years, but because the NCGR messed up UAC this time, ISAR decided to hold a conference in 2016 anyways or instead and so they decided to hold their own presidential panel.
So, I was on the last panel in 2012 and did pretty well, so they invited me to join this one and because I wasn’t otherwise issuing predictions for this election and didn’t plan to and was going to avoid it, I had a lot of trepidation about whether I should accept it, but I decided to say yes and hope and pray that some things were clarified with Hillary’s birth certificate over the course of the next 12 months because that was something I was in the process of researching and I started talking with the reporter and thought we were making some headway and that something might break, something might give. Yeah, so that brings us up pretty much the present time. And some developments have taken place basically in the past few days that have thrown, it’s not clear yet if they’ve completely thrown everything in disarray or if this is just like a little speed bump that’s going to disappear before too long. So, what’s the setup for that? I mean, I guess it’s basically just the announcement, right?
PW: Right. Recently, ISAR put out a press release saying, “Breaking news, Hillary Clinton’s birth time has been found.” So naturally, every astrologer who’s been following this issue to some degree is going to have their interest piqued. And then it says, “According to Astrologer Marc Penfield, both the Cook County and State of Illinois record division last week verified a time of birth as recorded for Hillary Rodham that took place on October 26th, 1947. If correct, it is not the commonly used birth times of approximately 8:00 a.m. or 8:00 p.m.” So, cue everyone loses their minds.
CB: Right, everyone freaks out. [Patrick laughs] And so, this is a Facebook post. They posted this on Facebook on Sunday, September 25th.
PW: But the more controversial part about this… That’s not actually the controversial part because I mean it’s going to be really, really cool if we actually get some closure on this. But I think the thing that upset people the most and I’m sure you might be able to speak to this, Chris, is the idea that Penfield would be announcing this at the end of the conference after all of the prediction panelists have already issued their predictions.
CB: Yeah. So, it’s like it goes on and it says Marc will be one of the people on the closing presidential election panel at the conference on October 16th and that he’ll reveal the Democratic contenders time of birth then as well as the process he went through to find this [Chris laughs] and it puts it in capital letters and says this key missing astrological link for forecasting the 2016 USA presidential election. And then it says so it’s just this really over the top announcements, it says, so now we have even more suspense building up to the most exciting astrological event of 2016. Hope to see you onsite in two and a half weeks. #isar2016 #astrology.
PW: And instead of suspense, it generated outrage and mass–
CB: Community outrage and complete ill will because everybody else was just totally pissed off that supposedly they finally got Hillary’s birth time which astrologers have been trying to get for like 20 25 years now, and they were gonna withhold it for a couple of more weeks until this panel at the end of this conference. So the–
PW: I wrote a post an open letter to Marc Penfield alleging that he’s kind of a jerk for [laughs]deciding to withhold this time until the end of the conference not only to the broader astrological community across the world but also to his fellow panelists. But recently since the pandemonium [unintelligible]
CB: Well, and hold on cuz we’ll get there.
PW: Oh, pardon me. Yeah, we’ll get there in a sec to the pandemonium.
CB: Yeah, so it’s like the community freaks out. And this announcement is universally met with scorn from just like, I don’t know, dozens of astrologers all over Facebook. And that, I can completely understand and relate to. But that’s actually not that bad. The other side of that coin was actually the fact that I’m on that panel, me and there was gonna be two panels. There was gonna be one panel at the end of the conference, and that’s the one that I’m on and that apparently Marc is on. And then there was gonna be one panel at the beginning of the conference that has international astrologers, and our friend Nick Dagan Best from Canada is gonna be on that. And there’s gonna be a few other astrologers from different parts of the world that are gonna be on that panel. So that panel is already gonna take place at the beginning of the conference, then we’re gonna have the second panel with US astrologers including myself and Lee Lehman and Nina Griffin and a few others. And then Marc, according to this announcement, is gonna unveil the actual birth time for Hillary on the panel. So, slight problem with that. And they’re organizing two separate panels. And what they’re basically saying with this announcement which they really appear to not realize the implications of that this organization that’s hosting this is aware of and knows Hillary’s birth time supposedly assuming that this was true which may not be, that they know Hillary’s exact birth time and that they’re gonna withhold that information from all of the panelists through the first panel all the way into the second panel so that even though at some point in the second panel we’re all gonna supposedly find out about it, we’re not gonna have gotten the birth information ahead of time so that we can actually do something with it or incorporate it into our predictions. So basically they sent out a big announcement saying, “We’re screwing over all of you who are on our panels so that personally you’ll have a less good chance of getting your prediction correct because you may be using false data or the wrong data.” since they’re claiming that this birth time that they’ve found matches neither the 8:00 a.m. time that’s widely used or the 8:00 p.m. time that’s the other time that’s widely used but it’s some other third time. So it’s gonna screw over all of us. But then more broadly, it’s gonna screw over the community. Because it means that all the astrologers if they do get it wrong because they were using the wrong data, then it’s gonna make all of us look like idiots because this organization thought it was a bright idea to withhold the data.
CB: So that’s the complete sort of shitstorm that has formed over the past few days.
PW: And so because of that shitstorm, Marc Penfield has now said that he’s going to release the data through an ISAR online newsletter–
CB: Well, and–
PW: –which should be due by this Monday.
CB: Well, and that took a lot cuz basically what happened is I freaked out and wrote an angry email to the president of ISAR who was responsible for this announcement who was Ray Merryman as well as all of the panelists on both panels basically making sure that all the panelists know what ISAR has just announced and that they’re screwing all of us essentially but also to, not demand, basically say, “If you don’t release this data ahead of time, I’m gonna walk cuz I’m not gonna go on to a panel where you’re purposely withholding the data from me until the last minute so that I can’t not only–” So it’s a situation where if it’s real data, it means it’s gonna be too late for me to work it into my slides cuz I’m supposed to have the charts sent in ahead of time. I was supposed to submit my PowerPoint slides that would contain the charts and the zodiac releasing periods and all the data I’m using. The due date for that was today September 28th. So not only is that not gonna be sort of available to me ahead of time, but, yeah, it’s not gonna be available to anybody. So I sent a sort of message trying to alert everybody to that and alert everybody to–and just telling them they needed to release it ahead of time, at the very least. If they were gonna keep up this publicity stunt and didn’t wanna release it publicly, then they should at least make it available to the other panelists so that it doesn’t screw over each of us personally and so that it doesn’t screw over the broader community by making astrology–
PW: But they wouldn’t wanna do that though because then that would give away the secret. In order to have the dramatic moment they want, they’d have to have Marc Penfield go first so that all of the other panels, all of their comments will make sense because they’re using this new birth time should it be actually a valid one.
CB: Right. And so I basically said, “I’m not doing the panel if you keep this up.” And initially they actually doubled down and they’re like, “Well, it’s Marc’s prerogative if he doesn’t wanna share the data until the day of the panel and blah blah blah.” And I actually kept up on them. And then like at least one or two other panelists basically were saying, “Yeah, we don’t wanna walk into this not having the birth data either. Obviously, that’s an incredibly stupid proposition or scenario for you to set up.”
PW: Oh, and also what’s kind of stupid about that is the idea that Marc Penfield owns the data. If this is an actual verified birth time, then they would have had to have someone who got around the law because Illinois is a closed state. So even if it was legitimate, it would be ill-gotten gains. And, I don’t know, I didn’t think it would make much sense to consider it his and therefore his decision personally when he’s going to release it cuz it doesn’t belong to him in the first place.
CB: Yeah. I understand to a certain extent in theory the data collector should have their name associated with it cuz it takes work to collect birth data sometimes.
PW: Yeah, what about Hillary’s right to privacy? And we didn’t exactly ask her if we’d get out of this. So at this point, it’s–
CB: Yeah, that’s a whole separate issue that we’ve sort of talked about before in terms of celebrity charts and the ethics of birth data collection and everything else. But just on its own terms, part of the issue is just–
PW: Well, I guess–
CB: I understand–
PW: Yes. Well, I guess I’m just saying it all contradicts the idea that Marc Penfield has a special ownership of it or something.
CB: Yeah. I think everyone generally, the community generally agrees that it’s kind of sketchy on his part too if he has actually found the real birth time to hold off for that long to reveal it. There’s something a little that doesn’t sit well with people about that at the very least. And then the moment that ISAR finds out about this and then decides to use it for marketing purposes and also decides–I found out about this announcement through Facebook through somebody sending me the link and saying, “Are you aware of this?” without them telling me about it. So they had no intention of sharing it with the other panelists and didn’t seem to be putting any pressure on Marc to share it until we started threatening to walk out or started complaining about it. So there’s just this whole issue that the extent that they were using it for marketing. It was already sketchy to a little bit that Marc wouldn’t share it with the other panelists or didn’t give us a heads up. But then once ISAR found out about it, they certainly did have some sort of if not moral, I don’t know, for research purposes, for the sake of the astrological community, for all sorts of other motivations to encourage him to share it with the rest of us. But that wasn’t their interest. They were more interested in using it as a marketing scheme. So, the community freaked out. They got a bunch of ill will and a bunch of shade thrown their way by [Patrick laughs] the Facebook community. The panelists started freaking out a little bit, mainly primarily me. Cuz none of the panelists really care because not–
PW: Not all for me. Right.
CB: Right. I guess like I’m using natal astrology primarily, so this is a big deal to me cuz my prediction on the panel is predicated on it. But some people are gonna be using mundane astrology. Some people might be using horary or electional or what have you. So it’s like this is not a big deal for everybody, which I understand. But there are several people on the panel who will be basing their predictions on the natal chart of the candidates and their vice presidential candidates. So it was kind of a big deal for them. We kept pushing. And then eventually at some point, Ray the ISAR president said that he talked Marc into or that Marc agreed to release it ahead of time and now they’re gonna put it out in an ISAR newsletter this weekend at some unspecified time this weekend in an ISAR newsletter. So, they’re still not releasing it to the panelists ahead of time. So we’re still kind of screwed because we’re two weeks out from when the conference starts today. I have to fly out there two weeks from today, and we’ll be at a faculty meet and greet about this time two weeks from now. But for some stupid reason, even though they got Marc to agree now to let them announce it ahead of time, they’re still not gonna give it to the panelists until this weekend. So we have to wait several more days and sort of drag out this whole process even more in some sort of misconceived attempt to promote the conference. So that’s the sort of practical setup or scenario of where we’re at with this. But there’s more sort of behind the scenes stuff [Patrick laughs] in terms of–
PW: Oh god.
CB: –the actual question of is the data even valid to begin with. And that’s when we get into this whole separate can of worms that you actually figured out and you’ve been working on for a couple of months now, right?
PW: Yeah. So, there were rumors floating around on Facebook that Penfield–This happened in early August. An astrologer posted in a group and said that Penfield had gotten a time, and that the time was 2:18 a.m. Now 2:18 a.m. is the same time that an astrologer called Zayin Cohen had submitted to ADB in 2005, and he claimed it’s from the birth certificate. So I decided to just ask around about this. And–
CB: So you inquiring about the Zayin time was explicitly based on the fact that you would come across somebody that was saying 2:18–
PW: 2:18, yes.
CB: –and saying that Marc Penfield was saying that that’s the correct time. And that was in early August.
PW: Right, because it made me think that maybe if Penfield did discover this time 2:18 a.m. that maybe he was getting it from the same source as Zayin. So I thought, “Well, I should just ask Zayin.” Cuz I couldn’t get ahold of Marc Penfield. I sent him an email, and he hadn’t responded. So I decided to contact Zayin and find out more information, and he claimed that it was from a birth certificate which he has. But he said a few really strange things. He said that it should actually be–Let’s see my conversation with him. He said that there was a misprint on it and that it’s not 2:18 a.m., that it’s actually 1:18 a.m. And apparently, at some point, he shared this with Noel Tyl who rectified it till 1:36 a.m. And he basically told me that he couldn’t show me the document in any way cuz it would be illegal, that would get people in trouble if he showed anyone the document. And I said, “Well, I’m not asking you to share it publicly. I’m just asking if I could vouch for you, I could validate what you’re saying.” I basically asked for some degree of evidence, and he goes snippy and bitchy and–
CB: Right. He got really hostile with you?
PW: Very hostile, and he blocked me. And I–
CB: Well, he said something like, “How dare you?” or what did he say?
PW: Right. He said some interesting things. He–
CB: If you don’t have it, that’s fine. But it’s like he–
PW: Yeah, I know. He’s like, “Of course, I know.” So I basically said, “If you could provide some evidence back of your claim, this would be really helpful because a lot of people have been going nuts about this for a few years now.” And he’s like, “Of course. I’ve been an astrologer since age 14. I started my business at age 18, and that’s 42 years ago. I’m one of the few astrologers with a diploma from the facility of astrological studies in the UK, and I know the law.” And I say, “You do not.” And, “Call Noel Tyl and see what he says. And I have zero to prove to you or anyone. Who do you think you are speaking to? I was an astrologer before you were born, young man. I’m 60 years old.”
CB: Right, like freaks out and goes on this whole tirade when you start asking–
PW: Asking for just–
CB: –a legitimate question which is just him claiming he has a copy of the birth certificate.
PW: Yeah, I only asked him for some evidence that he really did have the birth time. And he just basically said he got it through some connections he had as a lawyer or something that’s gonna get someone in trouble. And the problem with his story is that there is another astrologer
CB: Well, hold on a sec before we get there.
CB: So he had submitted that to Astrodatabank like 10 years ago cuz it’s been around since at least, people are saying like 2005 or something maybe. I think it goes back. I found a forum that was citing it since at least 2008, so at least since 2008 and probably as early as 2005. This guy Zayin Cohen, I hope that’s how you pronounce his name, it says in the Astrodatabank entry, it says, “The Astrodatabank website comments on her chart include an unverified claim from Zayin Cohen claiming to be quoting from a birth certificate saying, ‘I can say that I have the correct birth time 2:18 a.m. in Chicago, Illinois.'” Yeah, and that’s it. So he was claiming that it was from a birth certificate. He submitted it to Astrodatabank like at least 10 years ago as 2:18. And then when you email him and start–
PW: And then in August of 2016, he tells me it’s 1:18 a.m. And–
CB: Right, like an hour off. And did he actually say it to you or was it to the other guy Marc that–
PW: Yes. Yeah.
CB: –there’s a typo on Astrodatabank or something?
PW: So then he told another astrologer something completely different saying that actually should be 2:08.
CB: So he didn’t explain why it should be 1:18 to you, right?
PW: He said it was a misprint.
CB: So it was a misprint? Okay. So he claims to you that–And this has been up for like 10 years. So did he say that he–
PW: Guess not. Yeah. Yeah. [laughs] Apparently not.
CB: Sure, so it’s been like 10 years.
PW: But he didn’t even mention this to Mark either, to Mark Cullen.
CB: Sure. So what’s weird is that so you had that whole exchange with him like two months ago. And then right around the same time cuz Marc said it was also an August, so within a month or two or three months tops Mark Cullen from the UK who’s been compiling a really amazing synopsis or survey of all the different predictions that are being made for the US presidential election this year. He’s compiling that on on the Skyscript forum in one of their threads there. And so he contacts the same guy basically asking for the source of the birth time. And what time does he give Mark?
PW: That should be 2:08.
CB: So he tells Mark it should be–He says–
PW: So he told me it’s 1:18, and he told him it’s actually 2:08 instead of 2:18.
CB: And he says the same thing, that it was a typo.
CB: That it was a typo or that it was misreported on Astrodatabank and that he said something about he hasn’t had a chance to fix it or something like that which is just complete bullshit. [Patrick laughs] So it means that there’s this guy, there’s this whatever random astrologer who submitted a time 10 years ago that was probably rectified. Because usually when times are sort of made up out of thin air, it’s because you’ve got some astrologer who thinks so greatly of their astrological abilities that they think they can backform or divine the exact birth time based on whatever techniques they’re using that day and to figure out the precise birth time. And they put–
PW: Put in a Penfield.
CB: Right. Well, and we’ll get to that in a second. But so he probably hypothetically let’s say rectified this time 10 years ago, submits it to Astrodatabank as an exact time of 2:18 a.m. And then 10 years later he’s getting asked about this, and he gives out two different times to two separate astrologers. Presumably I’m guessing what’s happening is that he’s rectifying it and he’s still trying to settle on what he thinks the correct time is. And he’s changing it at different points or like adjusting his rectification. But whatever his motivation is, it’s obvious that he’s full of shit and that he’s given out three different versions of this same time and then gotten really defensive when at least one of you has pushed him on it and asked for his source since he’s claiming it’s from a birth certificate. And that’s the other thing, his original claim that it was 2:18 said that it was from a birth certificate. And so he wouldn’t change it after the fact to like 2:08 or to 1:18 If he wasn’t adjusting his rectification, if it wasn’t originally rectification. You don’t change a birth certificate time like that.
PW: So if Marc Penfield is reporting 2:18–And we don’t know that yet obviously until the announcement’s made, but–
CB: Well, and that’s what you originally found though in early August is that you found a guy who was saying that Marc Penfield was claiming–
PW: Penfield, yeah. So–
CB: –it was 2:18. And that’s why you started looking into Zayin Cohen.
PW: Right, right. So I think if that rumor from August is true that it is 2:18 a.m., then, I think we have to approach this with extreme caution because it’s clear that Zayin is seemingly making things up. And so–
CB: Right. So that’s what everyone thinks. It’s like everybody saw this announcement on the part of Marc Penfield or from ISAR saying Marc Penfield had the time. Other people had already seen the rumors that Marc Penfield was using the 2:18 time in August. And so the working theory by pretty much everybody at this point is that Marc Penfield saying it’s an exact 2:18 time. This Zayin guy’s been saying he has a birth certificate and it’s a 2:18 a.m. time for about 10 years now. That’s a little bit too coincidental. Therefore, Marc Penfield probably must be basing the time he’s giving off of this Zayin guy except what the working sort of theory is at this point is that Marc may be basing his time off of Zayin. But he may be trusting Zayin and Zayin’s claims that he had an exact birth certificate and not realizing that Zayin is going around giving different times to different astrologers.
CB: So that’s basically the working theory I think that most–I’ve seen this post on a few different forums at this point of what the assumption is, and it’s sort of our working assumption at this point cuz it’s too coincidental. Cuz it’s like we know on the one hand that Zayin is full of crap since he’s giving out different birth times. And then at the same time, it’s too coincidental for Marc to come up with this exact time same time as Zayin, I think, right?
PW: Right. Yeah, there’s no other way around it. And just the way that Zayin reacted to being pressed on providing evidence that he had the birth certificate, it’s hard to believe that someone wouldn’t ask for that if they had that. And I’ve had a few people ask me for the PDF of Tim Kaine’s chart, and I’ve been happy to show because it exists. [laughs]
PW: It’s real, as proof it’s 7:59. So, yeah, I think that’s what’s happening. And I think that this time is not going to solve the problem of the uncertainty surrounding Hillary’s birth time unfortunately.
CB: Right. And that’s the real issue at this point is–Well, there’s a bunch of issues. But one of the big questions that came up as soon as this announcement came out was aside from what’s the time that Penfield working with was, who’s Marc Penfield and how reliable is he. And he’s actually known to some extent as a data collector. And I remember seeing his name on a lot of Astrodatabank entries. But then it’s like when I talked to two different data collectors this week about how’s Penfield’s data collection cuz it’s like sometimes there’s really good data collectors that are really solid and really reliable. And then sometimes there’s other ones who are not reliable or who are sketchy or who submit a rectified birth time as if it came from the birth certificate or what have you. And the general report and sometimes public statements like Frank Clifford who was a data collector issued a public statement about Penfield basically saying that he had a pretty checkered history in data collection and that especially during his early career that he was actually accused by Lois Rodden of submitting sketchy times, that he would submit times and list them as a personal source as the source of the time but then they would turn out to be rectifications. So that was supposedly in his early career. And then later supposedly he got better and that he actually would sometimes go to like birth data registry places in California and read over the phone accurate birth times for certain people that they were trying to look up for Astrodatabank so that he actually did do some good work later on in his career especially in terms of some data for like mundane astrology and stuff like that. But so we have this issue where we have somebody that potentially had at least at one point sort of not very good practices potentially in his data collection, and now he’s claiming to have found the birth certificate or found the time. Actually, I should take that back cuz Ray Merriman actually backed down on that when he started getting pressure. And when I was pressing him to give the panelists the time he said, “Everybody stop freaking out. It’s not a birth certificate. So nobody knows for sure even once we release the data for sure what it is.” And seemingly he started backing off from the very strong claim that they made in the announcement to something more ambiguous while at the same time still claiming that there’s some sort of new evidence that’s been uncovered. So one of the questions that come up and that people are talking about is how reliable is Marc Penfield and why is he keeping this, how long has he known about this, how did he find out, what was his method, what was the source. And the big question when this is finally released is gonna be not just what’s the time, what’s the chart look like, and does it look like a plausible chart but also what was his actual source. How did he come about getting it, and how reliable does that sound? Or is this not actually a valid thing?
PW: Yeah. But we gotta find out in a few days, I suppose. A few more days. It’s just gonna take that long to type out a number. [laughs]
CB: Yeah, well–
PW: And a paragraph explaining it. Unfortunately, the way that this has been handled even if there is some sort of nugget of discovery here, what reason do people have to trust this? Or yeah, I think people should be very skeptical about this when this is released.
PW: Well, all of the reasons you just mentioned as well.
CB: Right, I think hopefully we’re all gonna be approaching it with a certain deal of skepticism. And that’s gonna be part of the processes then whatever his claim is, and what’s gonna be annoying is it’s gone from a few days–Like two or three days ago it was like Marc Penfield has the data and he’s only going to release it at the panel which he’ll be at in two weeks to suddenly now they’re saying Marc Penfield is sick and may not attend the panel. And I don’t know if that’s valid or if he is feeling that sort of backlash from this ill conceived announcement that went out that he then got a lot of flack from in addition to ISAR or–
PW: Let’s just put it this way. If you had gotten a time from someone that you thought was the right one but it turned out it was from Zayin Cohen which means that it was a shit time and then you managed to convince ISAR. Sorry, I call it ISAR. I didn’t realize people called it ISAR. I call it ISAR. [laughs]
CB: And that’s probably more effective. ISAR sounds a little–Yeah.
PW: It’s a presume that you had gotten a bad time from someone and you only realize that after intense criticism was levied upon this announcement in addition to these kind of rumors of the time that you got. And you realize that you had gotten yourself in too deep into something and you realize you had to get out, wouldn’t you try to find a way to get out? I guess what I’m saying here is that how would you tell that this isn’t what it looks like when someone is trying to get out of something that they got themselves too deep into?
CB: And that would be a legitimate point which I think anybody would back out or try to back out.
PW: It’s understandable, if that’s the case. I guess–
CB: And it’s like we have no idea cuz we don’t know this guy. And you attempted to contact him two months ago to initiate this conversation and inquire about the 2:18 time that was being attributed to him. But he didn’t respond, right?
PW: No. It’s possible he hadn’t checked it. Or maybe it was an email address he didn’t use anymore. But–
CB: Yeah. Well, I guess we’re assuming we have the right email address which we actually know 100%.
PW: Right. Yeah, maybe there were other reasons. But it was otherwise difficult to try to get a hold of him.
CB: Sure. So we don’t know. What sucks about this weekend is supposedly it’s gonna be announced, but it’s not gonna be an announcement coming from him even. It’s gonna be an announcement coming from the president of ISAR Ray Merriman who’s going to relay what Marc told him for some reason this weekend. So that’s gonna be a problem. I’m already anticipating that whatever is released this weekend probably is not gonna answer all the questions but instead maybe raise new ones.
PW: Basically, the only way this could possibly be any more fishy is if the time was fishy o clock like this is [Chris and Patrick laughs] this is just through and through. Everything about it is just seemingly not legit. And unfortunately, what we need is a legitimate time. And unfortunately, I think the only way that we’re ever gonna get to the bottom of this issue is if Hillary released the birth certificate. So short of Trump mounting a last minute Buffer campaign against Hillary Clinton which crazily isn’t–There isn’t a 0% chance of that happening with Trump. You never know. [laughs] We are probably not gonna know what this information is.
CB: Yeah. And what sucks the most about this for me is I was hoping we’d have this a little bit more clarified by this point. But if anything, it’s gotten more murky. And so this panel is still taking place in two weeks. So I’m actually met with the unenviable in the unenviable position of basically the situation for me is it still comes down to the two primary birth times of like 8:00 a.m. or 8:00 p.m. at this point unless something seriously impressive comes out this weekend from Marc Penfield. I’m guessing that nothing that impressive. I’m guessing he’s just drawing on the Zayin Cohen time and doesn’t realize that it’s fabricated. Assuming that that’s still the case, we’re still in the unenviable situation of having to pick between the 8:00 a.m. time and 8:00 p.m. time. And the problem there, the basic conundrum is that the 8:00 p.m. time has better or more more reliable evidence for it because that’s the only time that Hilary’s ever given, as far as we know, directly to astrologers in person. It’s the only time that’s documented in that Chicago Sun-Times article that we found from 1993.
PW: Its’s approaching a B rating. If we were to consider those as the only credible sources, that would be a B rating.
CB: So it’s like all of the actual external evidence for the most part or the majority of the evidence points to the 8:00 p.m. time. The problem I personally run into is the 8:00 p.m. time is the most impressive and most compelling chart to me from an astrological perspective both in just the natal chart itself as well as the timing periods. And that’s really the biggest issue that I run into at this point is, what do you do in that instance?
PW: Right, there are some plausible rationales which people have put forward for 8:00 p.m. Most notably, I think of Nick Dagan Best. He’s shown how the Mars retrograding from Cancer to Gemini have been these crucial periods for Hillary, and that would have gone over her ascendant. But my response to that as kind of an 8:00 a.m. advocate is that with Mars ruling the ascendant, all of the Mars retrogrades are gonna be more emphasized and important in her life. And those ones that go from Cancer to Gemini will also be hitting Bill’s midheaven. And those events that Nick has referenced have been ones that involved Bill Clinton, her marriage to Bill Clinton, Bill Clinton’s inauguration. So that’s sort of my response. But I think it’s not a terrible rationale. It’s not a bad way to look at that time. But as far as, yeah, kind of overall natal considerations, eminence, zodiacal releasing, the 8:00 a.m. time seems to–I could be wrong. I’d accept it totally if I’m wrong on it. And I’d have to obviously do some deep soul searching on that, but we may not get much confirmation anyway.
CB: Yeah. For me, the thing is if the 8:00 a.m. time is correct, then she has it. And she wins. If the 8:00 p.m. time charts are correct or most of the other ones that are proposed including 2: 18, it doesn’t look as compelling. It looks more iffy.
PW: Well, the other reason I think that it’s 8:00 a.m. versus 8:00 p.m. is the fact that it’s difficult to compare the transits between the ascendants of the 8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. times is because they’re both already conjunct planets. So it would be difficult to tell where that transit was to that planet versus the ascendant. But one interesting feature between the two charts is that the MC/IC axes have flipped almost exactly. So, five degrees Virgo is the midheaven at 8:00 a.m. And five degrees Pisces is the midheaven at 8:00 p.m. So presumably you could tell which one is which by seeing whether the transits to five Virgo or five Pisces are more relevant for her career. And so what I found over and over again is that the transits through Virgo to the five Virgo were definitely more relevant for her career. For example, Saturn transiting five Virgo. That was in late 2007 through to the summer of 2008. Saturn transited over five Virgo so that she had a Saturn transit to her midheaven when she lost to Barack Obama in the primary election. And this is something we’d expect from a Saturn transiting midheaven trying, testing a time of contraction of loss, a public loss. And then compare that to the 2016 primary or the primary fight with Bernie Sanders where she had Jupiter transiting through the sign of Virgo. And she had Jupiter conjunct midheaven in a few points. And that was a time when she had a victory in a primary. So at Jupiter, that’s something we might expect more with Jupiter. And Jupiter was also at five Virgo when she became president of her student government in college. And it was there when she gave birth to her daughter, Chelsea. And so I have laid this all out in my article Hillary Clinton’s real birth time where I look at all these different transits of these planets. And next up on January 20th, inauguration day coming right up. The north node will be at five Virgo. So, to me, that shows, again, a sort of more confirmation that with the eclipse point coming to her midheaven on the day that she gets inaugurated as president. I think that’s fairly fitting. It would make less sense if it was the south node on your midheaven if you had just won. The south notice has more negative connotations than the north node. So–
CB: Yeah, and there’s a bunch of stuff in the zodiac releasing [unintelligible]
PW: Right. Yeah. Yeah. True. So through both lenses through just conventional transits as well as some of these more esoteric time old procedures, the 8:00 a.m. time seems to be very convincing, I think.
CB: Yeah. And that’s basically what I’m planning on saying on the panel and have been planning for a while, but it’s an unfortunate position cuz you’re basically like Hillary–Well, Hillary–
PW: Have to argue against.
CB: Yeah, Hillary told me herself she was born at 8:00 p.m. I’m using the exact opposite time under the presumption that either she was wrong or she was giving out the exact opposite time. But based on that if I assume that she was either mistaken or not being straightforward about it, she wins the presidency and will be inaugurated in January. So that’s a weird position to be in, and I was hoping for some clarification about that. Cuz that’s why this is a wildcard that comes out of nowhere where this third supposed time comes out of nowhere and says that that’s the correct time. And that’s why it’s important for something like that to get settled and put out in the open very quickly and very cleanly and clearly so that we can rank, weigh in, gauge its accuracy and how reliable it seems. But instead it’s getting dragged out in this sort of ill conceived attempt to promote this conference.
PW: Well, at least we have Trump and Kaine’s data.
CB: Yeah, so those are reliable. And we can use those as alternate data points that are more stable in order to attempt to do the same thing, and it still seems to reaffirm the same conclusion at least in terms of the zodiac releasing to me with Trump because it shows him having a major career transition like a year after the election or a year after the inauguration. And it’s similar to the career transition that Obama’s having that starts a few months after he leaves office. And I don’t really see why Trump would be having that big of a sort of career transition a year later if he had actually won the presidency.
CB: But instead it’s more like a figuring out to do, where to go from here in retrospect after losing.
PW: Yeah, the other thing is that the major period of his cadent which at first glance we go, “Well, wait. How did he become a presidential candidate and reached this fame in his notoriety if he’s in a cadent major period?” But that cadent major period contains two of his trigons at the sect light. And when you encounter trigons at the sect lite, you don’t want a major period on zodiac releasing that raises your esteem in the world because there’s other planets that support the sect light, the Sun. His Sun is in Gemini. He was born during the day, so his trigons are Mercury, Saturn, and Jupiter. And he has Mercury and Saturn in the sign of Cancer, and that’s the sign of the cadent perfection. And so even just on that level Trump is in a cadent period where his capacity to act his will in the world is deflected away from him versus Hillary who was in a major angular period. It seems to suggest that she’s in a better position to have influence in the world whereas he’s kind of catching wind of something, but it may not take him anywhere. It’s cadent.
CB: Sure. Yeah. And his was impressive because he went into a level to a major peak period which really coincided with his rise and his sort of triumph over the past year, and it actually ended yearly on–It was the day the Republican National Convention started or the day that he accepted the–Which one was it?
PW: Yeah, something like that.
CB: Yeah, it’s like the timing was really spectacular in terms of that whole sort of peak period or the eight-month peak period leading into that.
PW: Well, also he’s currently in a Cancer major period. So he has a Mercury in Cancer. And so now he’s a Gemini on the sub periods. So that is activating the Mercury which is one of his trigon lords and is in the sign of Cancer, the major period. So this is like a really big focus time for him especially when he comes to the Sagittarius loosing of the bond at low level because then that’s contacting the lord of the major period on the lower levels, the Moon, the Sagittarius which was Cancer. And when he first entered the Cancer major period back in the early 2000s, it was right around the time that he started getting the idea to decide to start going to reality TV. It was the beginning of The Apprentice era of his career, and this is like the culmination of it. And after this loosing the bond, he kind of goes into a totally different part of his life that is totally disconnected from this Apprentice stuff and this reality show stuff and this political stuff in his campaign.
CB: Sure. So that career kind of starts in December of 2017.
PW: Right. So what we’re seeing now for Trump, this is like the beginning of something that started with The Apprentice. And it’s also his Fortune sixth which rules employees and stuff and public enemies. So naturally this show was called Apprentice, very sixth house type of subject. And his campaign has been so focused on proceeds, public enemies, foreign domestic whether they be Muslims or Mexicans or immigrants, what have you.
CB: Sure. Actually, that’s actually something Austin, Kelly, and I briefly started talking about in the forecast episode which is just it’s been amazing. It’s been a year now since we all did that Saturn in Sagittarius episode. And it’s been just really wild seeing some of those themes that were identified and especially some of the themes that you identified really coming to the forefront in the world. You have some of the stuff involving like immigration and discussion about foreigners. You have like the immigration that’s taking place in Europe, and then you’ve got Trump and some of the rhetoric in some of the things surrounding that. But then some of that I thought was really funny in connection with your article on that was some of the space travel stuff has really [unintelligible] well.
CB: Like you had space like–
PW: Major inverts, major bridges too far away. Right.
CB: So they just made that announcement about Mars attempts to sort of colonize or get people on Mars in like the next decade or something like that.
CB: Yeah. Anyways, completely unrelated but–
PW: But actually slightly related just because Saturn in Sagittarius will be hitting Trump’s Moon and opposing his Sun close to the January inauguration time, and it coincides with Kaine’s Saturn return. So on the one hand, you see this big bummer of a time for Trump. [laughs] Saturn on his Moon. But for for Kaine, it’s his perfected lord. It’s the ruler of his 10th, and he has Saturn returns to his natal Saturn in the 9th in Sagittarius. He becomes vice president.
CB: Right. And doesn’t Hillary go into like a 10th house perfection year right before election day?
PW: Yeah, yeah. So it’s–
CB: Yeah, 10th house perfection year. And then on inauguration day she has that weird repetition of in the zodiac releasing for its level one and level two repeating on level three and level four. And that comes up very rarely only on very important days that sometimes stand out in terms of the native’s entire life or entire life chronology. And one of the analogies I used for that is OJ Simpson. The day that he was acquitted had the same exact–Not the same exact placement but a similar repetition between level one and level two and level three and level four that sort of mirrors and magnifies things. So it’s like this day that stands out in sort of infamy in the person’s chronology, and it’s really weird seeing that show up exactly on inauguration day in Hillary’s chart using the 8:00 a.m. time.
PW: Yeah, what’s also kind of interesting is sometimes a period will kind of–It’s like a tsunami effect. Like, he kind of picks up steam as a subperiod is encountered in different contexts. So if Hillary, she got married to Bill under Leo-Libra with Venus rolling. And then she becomes first lady under Virgo-Libra. And now she’s in her Libra major period, and now she’s first woman president. So it’s kind of like this progression in her life that is followed by the subperiod and had to do with her Libra subperiods. And now that she’s actually in the major, we predict it’s like the ultimate expression of it which is to be Mrs. President [laughs] Miss President, Madam President.
CB: Sure, yeah. So that’s something I think I’m gonna go over at my ISAR lecture. So I guess we should start wrapping this up in saying we’re both gonna be at the ISAR conference in two weeks. We’re both gonna be giving talks there. What’s your talk?
PW: My talk is called Little Lots and Arabic Parts: Big differences between Similar Charts which might be the first ISAR topic to rhyme.
CB: Yeah, that sounds like a children’s story.
PW: Yeah, yeah. Basically it’s just about how you can use lots and zodiacal releasing to tease out subtle and substantial differences between various similar charts such as the chart of twins.
CB: Awesome. Excellent. And I will be doing something very similar in basically even election showing how to use zodiac releasing to predict periods of eminence in a person’s life including some presidential charts which will then lead into the presidential prediction and probably going through Hillary’s chart and showing why we feel like this chronology with the 8:00 a.m. time is so compelling and what it indicates if that is the correct chart versus the others. And then of course I’ll be doing the panel at the end of the conference, presumably, in which I’ll do like a very condensed version of that basically making them predict that prediction. Yes, so that’s gonna be awesome. So two weeks from now. This was great. I’m glad we got a chance to go through all this. Obviously, this is still a work in progress. And it’s like who knows what’s gonna happen this weekend. I don’t know if we’re gonna have to do a follow up at some point in order to cope with if our minds have been blown this weekend.
PW: Or but more likely just generally disappointed and just, yeah, depressed. [laughs]
CB: Yeah, basically explaining what the issues are or whatever and our process of going through that. But hopefully one of the things we talked about here that I think hopefully is clear for people as part of the process of how this can actually be much more involved and much more of a long term and detailed and like difficult thing finding birth data and verifying it and some of the things that you have to go through but also why it’s important to, I don’t know, have good structures in place in the astrological community. And I’m sure there’s also some broader discussion that is going to arise and needs to arise and that we probably need to have about this whole debacle that’s happened over the past week with ISAR and some of the things surrounding the ethics of releasing data versus withholding birth data or how you source or cite it or whether it’s ethical to put out a rectified time as if it’s a real one and all sorts of things like that.
CB: Yeah, so I guess we’ll save that for another show. All right. Well, where can people find out more? You’re gonna keep writing election articles. You’ve been doing a series on the debates, right?
PW: Yeah, I’m gonna keep up with the debates. I think my next political one is going to be, yeah, on Tim Kaine since we are gonna be seeing him go up against Pence on October 4th. So I’ll try to get that out pretty quickly, but that’s a chart I haven’t really talked about since the time I released it. But there’s very interesting features of his zodiac releasing that I think will definitely be illustrative with this election.
CB: Awesome. And where can people find out more information on that?
PW: Yeah, people can find out about that. You can read my articles at my website www.patrickwatsonastrologer.com. And you can also find me on Facebook facebook.com/ Patrick Watson Astrologer. And also find me on Twitter at @pwatsonastro. And if you like my blogs which seems like improbably seemingly quite a few people do, you can also support me on Patreon. I just launched a Patreon page. So if you type in Patrick Watson astrologer on Patreon, you should be able to find my page. And it’s also accessible from my website on any article.
CB: Awesome. Yeah, I think that’s great that you’ve launched that. You’ve developed quite a following over the course of the past years since you’ve really gotten back to blogging, and it’s great to see you be sort of supported by that so that you can continue to pump out more and more articles in the future.
PW: Yeah, I’d love to do it. It’s awesome for me, but apparently it’s awesome for other people too. So yeah. It’s very good for–
CB: Yeah, what you are doing has sort of community service with it to some extent as well to the extent you’re collecting, you got the vice president, potential vice president’s birth time and birth certificate before he was even announced. And that’s part of what you do as an astrologer and as a blogger.
PW: Yeah, I do try to support community efforts for significant birth times. And I’m always on the lookout for which birth times are accessible to the public. And so I do try to keep on top of that to some extent.
CB: Cool. All right. Well, yeah, everyone check out your website at patrickwatsonastrologer.com. Thanks everybody for listening and for supporting the podcast. Congratulations to the two winners of the giveaway this month. Starting in the next episode, the next four episodes from now, I’ll do another giveaway. I’m gonna try to talk to the NCGR and talk them into giving it a shot again to see if they wanna give away a free pass to their upcoming conference which is gonna be in February in Baltimore, but I’m still working that out. So we’ll see what the prize is gonna be and then we’ll make an announcement about it. In the meantime, if you’d like to support the show or if you’d like to be entered into the next giveaway, please become a patron. You can find out more information at theastrologypodcast.com/subscribe. Thanks for joining me tonight, Patrick.
PW: Thank you very much for having me. See you in California.
CB: All right. Yeah, see you in a couple weeks. And thanks everyone for listening.