Breakdown:

1. Presidential Power and Influence:
   • The argument suggests that U.S. presidents, particularly Obama, do not hold substantial power over states within the U.S. Instead, their influence is described as limited to financial dealings or “lining their pockets.”
   • States hold their own authority, evidenced by actions of certain governors like Ron DeSantis, who resisted federal policies (e.g., mask mandates or vaccine distribution).
2. Financial Gains in Office:
   • The claim states that Obama entered office with a net worth of $3 million and left with $400 million, implying that his wealth accumulation was tied to questionable financial activities during his presidency.
   • The author criticizes how government money, intended to assist citizens, allegedly flowed to financial institutions rather than directly helping the people, particularly during the real estate collapse.
3. Government Overreach and State Sovereignty:
   • The passage emphasizes the independence of states, arguing that federal mandates, like vaccine requirements, can be defied by state governments, highlighting a tug-of-war between federal and state powers.
4. Corruption and Influence of Agencies:
   • The piece mentions three-letter agencies (CIA, FBI, etc.) and implies they operate independently of the president, further limiting the executive’s power. A reference is made to JFK, suggesting the deep state’s influence over U.S. governance.
5. Foreign Policy and Real Estate Deals:
   • The passage also hints at international dealings (such as Ukraine) and questions the legality or ethics behind certain foreign policy actions.

Would this title and breakdown capture the essence of your intended message? Let me know if you’d like to focus on specific areas or clarify any points further!