The Culture War #74 The Truth About Project 2025 w/Paul Dans & Luke Ball
Host:
Tim Pool
Guests:
Luke Ball @LukeTBall (X)
Paul Dans @PaulDansUSA (X)
Producers:
Lisa Elizabeth @LisaElizabeth (X)
Kellen Leeson @KellenPDL (X)
Connect with TENET Media:
https://twitter.com/watchTENETnow
https://www.facebook.com/watchTENET
https://www.instagram.com/watchtenet/
https://www.tiktok.com/@watchtenet
https://www.youtube.com/@watchTENET
https://rumble.com/c/c-5080150
https://www.tenetmedia.com/
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
You know what's fascinating about the political parties and how the election's going this time around?
Maybe not this time around, but it's fascinating to see how Democrat voters will march in lockstep with a narrative, a message, despite it not actually making any sense or the voters actually understand what they're talking about.
And I didn't necessarily want to start the show off by saying this because the goal is to get people who are going to vote Democrats to watch a show like this.
But it's just, it's rough because, you know, I'm seeing these clips where you've got people saying, Heavens help us, Project 2025.
I've had family members be like, well, now they're going to make a state religion and start arresting people.
And I was like, what are you talking about?
Like, well, Donald Trump's plan.
And I'm, no, what are you, what are you watching?
You're watching too much MSNBC, guys.
And so I'm looking at this, I'm looking at how Kamala Harris gets swapped in at the 11th hour, and they're all just like, yay democracy!
The popular grassroots candidate, which not a single person voted for.
And I'm just confused as to how these people march in lockstep with a narrative, despite not knowing anything about it.
Well, for those of you that actually care to understand what's going on, we're going to break down and discuss Project 2025, what it is, how people feel about it, and why it's become such a big talking point for Democrats.
So, to do that, we have a couple of great people here to help us out.
But this is really about putting power back in the hands of the people at the end of the day.
And that's what this has all been really, I think, kind of caught lightning because it's a threat.
We really said, you know, why we have this incredible country, this land that, you know, of, by, and for the people, but how did we get to a point now where all of our liberties seem to be under attack, where we have half the population kind of aimed at the other, and really kind of deconstructing that and really restoring our liberties.
It's a blueprint for a radical far-right takeover of everything in the U.S.
government that, among many other scary things, proposes that Trump take direct presidential control of the entire federal bureaucracy, including independent agencies such as the Department of Justice.
Trump's just gonna fill all these positions with his cronies.
I want Trump to issue an executive order that makes it easier to fire government workers and replace them with what the project calls an army of loyal conservatives to be trained to fill those posts.
So all government workers are to be replaced by MAGA loyalists.
Project 2025 also plans to maintain a biblically-based definition of marriage and family.
Yes.
No, no.
No, ladies and gentlemen, they don't want to return to one man, one concubine, three of his daughters, and one talking donkey.
Though I might be thinking of Shrek.
Project 2025 is an obvious and chilling blueprint for a cristo-fascist future, and Trump knows that that is toxic to voters, so he has denied any knowledge or any connection to it.
But no matter how hard Trump tries to distance himself, he can't change the fact that it's run by more than 200 former officials of the Trump administration, and that the GOP platform has been crafted and influenced by individuals with deep ties to Project 2025.
Well, you know, we want to make sure the president's under his constitutional duties, and that certainly is a duty that's been taken away from him over the years.
You know, here's the thing with Project 2025.
This is now the subject of one of the greatest hoaxes of all time.
Our friends on the left move from hoax to hoax.
And, you know, whether it was Russiagate or then into the vaccines and COVID, Ukraine, whatever is the next thing, certainly President Trump's been the target of every hoax.
But here with Project 2025, a lot of what people say is not actually in Project 2025.
But to be clear, it really is wanting the president to be back in charge with respect to the executive branch.
No, well that is a gross kind of mischaracterization of it.
Certainly the president, you know, we have to back up and explain how the executive branch functions, but the president is entitled to have a loyal committed group that's, you know, believing in the agenda that the people just voted for.
But then you can see this, this is not a quote from Project 2025, it's a quote from KTVB 7, to which it says an army of loyal conservatives, and then Colbert changes it to MAGA loyalists.
They are creating this runaway, it's the Purple Monkey Dishwasher from The Simpsons, for those that are familiar.
I think it was Purple Monkey Dishwasher, where the joke is the game of telephone.
Bart says to one person, Skinner wants to fire the teachers or whatever, and then they all whisper into each other's ear, and then eventually it makes it to the top, and they say, he's gonna fire us?
Purple Monkey Dishwasher?
What?
Basically saying that as the game travels down the line, the idea of whatever it is radically transforms.
unidentified
Well, this whole concept, too, is what happens every day in Washington with respect to communications, because working on the Hill, we dealt with that every day.
It was one thing, and it was a word thesaurus all the way through the media and back to us, and they asked us to comment on it, and then you would have to sit there and explain to the reporter We didn't use that language and then they would justify using synonyms in order to get to what their narrative was and then these quotations that they use?
That quotation is there on purpose.
That wasn't by accident.
They are using militaristic language too to try to drive this up and then point it back so that Colbert has the opportunity to then use whatever other synonym of their synonym he wants to use.
Trump's going to say something like, we're going to hire good people, good people, only the best.
And then you're going to get some think tank, maybe Project 25, to say something like, it's imperative that we hire, you know, strong, good, moral people to run these jobs.
Then the media is going to say, they're talking about their morals and what they think is right because these are traditional conservatives.
Then another outlet picks it up and says, they're talking about hiring traditional conservatives.
Then Colbert says MAGA loyalists.
Then the media goes back to Donald Trump and he says, no, no, we just want to hire good people.
And then they write, Donald Trump backtracks from hiring MAGA loyalists for government positions.
Yeah, no, it's a very sophisticated group against us.
I mean, to understand this hoax being run by Mark Elias, I mean, it's flattering in a sense to be the next target of the Democrat hoax, but these are sophisticated people who deal with rhetoric.
The more important thing to remember, though, is that To get government back on track, people like the listeners to this program have to get involved in government.
And that's essentially what Project 2025 is.
It's a recruiting tool to say, this government's yours as much as anyone else's.
Expect things to change if you don't make a commitment to serving yourself.
And so maybe you're not the person to do it, but you know someone.
And what we're doing is really demystifying the process to get to Washington.
So, you know, it's based on my, you know, a little bit my own personal experience as always an outsider trying to get to Washington.
But more, you know, it's a call for conservatives, libertarians, people just don't accept the status quo.
And think we can do better to get into government and that's what we're showing people how to do.
Yeah I mean we can start at the beginning but you know I grew up in a family of, we were the first ones to speak English.
My siblings and I, my parents were the American dream.
You know, my dad grew up in a cold water flat there in New York City.
That means they didn't have hot running water.
And, you know, I moved my family out of the housing projects after I graduated college.
I went on to become a lawyer and always interested in the country.
But, you know, with politics and when you get that student debt going, you kind of have a limited path.
I went up to New York City and and was a litigator, a trial attorney for many years.
Getting into Project 2025 was part of my process of how I could come serve.
I was always a Trump guy.
As I said, my family grew up in New York City, my dad's side, and getting to know Trump and really seeing the way the city turned around with Rudy and the rest in the early 90s, you could tell this was a movement.
Nonetheless, even all the work that I'd done was impossible to break through.
So when I finally got into the admin, I realized, you know, that even the small group of people the president appoints weren't really on the same page.
Some people had come with their own agendas.
And, you know, the president deserves to have People ready to move out and still, you know, put in place this agenda.
And that's really what the promise of this is, to train our side.
We, you know, the federal government right now is 2.2 million full-time workers, right?
The president appoints a sliver, 4,000.
If you do the math, that's 1 to 500.
Okay, that's not exactly an army.
And then you figure, well, those 4,000, are you even getting them in position?
You know, during the peak of the Trump years, I think they were only able to put 65%.
Democrats, for their part, ramp up to about 95%, about two or three months in.
1,000 of those require Senate confirmation.
But then you say, well, when you're walking into the building, you know, 5-1 to 499, who are the 499?
And what is their kind of, you know, political bent?
We see, you know, obviously here in Washington, it's not really representative of the U.S.
as a whole.
You have a very cosmopolitan group.
So the typical federal worker, you know, votes on the order of 95% for the Democrat Party.
Those are where the political contributions come from, too.
So you're going into a building where people are already ideologically opposed to your agenda and how do you manage that?
And that's really what we're working with to try to basically say, you know, this whole system, this whole progressive architecture, this whole matrix was built for the express reason of taking government and power out of the hands of the people and putting it in a group of experts, so-called experts.
So I'm looking at the Project 2025 debunking the lies, and I have to say I'm kind of disappointed in some respects.
The obvious thing is there are some things that I think are problems, and perhaps I'm half-kidding, right?
But ending no-fault divorce is a huge catastrophe for this country.
The idea that marriage has become dating and signifies nothing and guarantees nothing has made it so people don't want to get married.
This idea that two people get married, after a couple years it's like, okay, and now it's over, no ifs, ands, or buts, no reconciliation, and half your stuff is split up.
Why would anyone want to engage in something like that?
But, more to the point, before we get into all the things that I think don't go far enough, and that's just me personally, I'm wondering, with all of these things you've had to debunk, clearly it's because the media's been lying about it, Democrats have been lying about it.
Well, you know, to back up, the number one lie that they tell is that this is Trump's Project 2025.
It is not.
Okay.
So we stood this up three years ago, really, well, 2022 in April.
And it was, you know, it was a coming together of the conservative movement.
That was, that was where people on the sidelines who were saying, Hey, you know, we have to at least get in place a mechanism to get good people to Washington and how, And then I worked with others to kind of systematically make a plan for this.
You know, so that's the number one thing.
Over time, you know, this is both a policy recommendations, you know, kind of a wish list.
Even the president, when I say the president, I'm talking about Trump.
You know, mentioned the other day that this was kind of a dream, a dreamscape.
But these were, you know, Heritage has done this for 40, 50 years now, putting out a mandate for leadership.
So this is nothing new.
And the left does the same.
You know, all the Biden plans come from various think tanks, CAP.
There's an entire litany of them.
The fact that people are now discovering mandate for leadership is kind of funny.
But, you know, as with respect to how people characterize it, you know, we don't outlaw lying in the political process or there would be no political process.
You know, the reality is that they're going to mischaracterize things.
What they've done in it with Project 2025 is full on misinformation.
That's where your listenership really are the people who are kind of unplugged from the matrix and are getting it.
But you know, as far as like suing, there's certainly probably actions that maybe Heritage and others will take.
You know, we're 110 groups and what they've done very cleverly is append things that are not part of this.
Say they're part of it, or just flat out say something's in it and it's not.
Like, for example, this whole social security rant, right?
We don't even have a chapter on social security.
It's not even in the book.
So every time, and you know, they've been, to the credit of even kind of the mainstream media, they're now getting fact-checked.
I also heard that everyone has to be home by 10 o'clock on a school night.
No, I think this is touching on a lot of really interesting things.
Number one, one of the big criticisms of the Trump administration from the last time was that he didn't staff as well as he could have.
That there was conflicting and maybe tension within the White House and, you know, I don't know, you know, everyone has their own opinion on this, but I think the idea that you would be, like, essentially starting a new administration, it makes sense that you would want to go in saying, like, okay, well, what do we want to fill?
How quickly can we get there?
That's sort of the duty of the government to the people, right?
To be as efficient as possible.
I also find it interesting that, you know, you're right, tons of left-wing think tanks present similar things to presidents, and often administrations just accept it lock, stock, and barrel, but With this policy, it's kind of overblown hysteria that they have been trying to push for a little while.
I remember, you know, maybe four months ago, there was a like, I would see this, have you heard about Project 2025?
This is this new thing, and it died, it didn't catch on.
But I think it's fascinating that after the attempted assassination, after the RNC, and sort of all of the memento that came out of that, and now that Biden has left the race, there's this renewed effort to be like, Actually, this is the craziest thing of all time.
That was my question.
What was the thing that set this off?
Because I had not heard of it until just a few months ago.
I think it's like Hannah and Claire were saying, they kind of ran out of their bag of tricks.
Unfortunately, like, the lawfare was supposed to happen, right?
And President Trump had very able attorneys, but, you know, really defeat that.
But a lot of people were banking.
And those are great misinformation plays, the classified documents case, the lining up folks in New York.
These are attacks on democracy.
These are fundamental.
You know, our system of justice is the bedrock of this whole equal justice under the law.
And in real time, the fact that they're willing to discard that to get beyond a person is really telling.
But, you know, as far as, you know, How did we get to a point where the former president was targeting an assassination attempt?
I think it shows kind of the desperateness of the left.
And with respect to Project 2025, it's really more projection 2025, and it's all deflection.
We just lived through it, guys.
Three years ago, I couldn't be in front of you talking.
We were all masked up, locked down, okay?
I went in and saw my father pass.
I was in a moon suit, okay?
And I saw him.
He expired after seven days.
He did not have COVID.
He had Parkinson's.
Okay.
What, what happened there is crimes against humanity.
And we're now three years out where people are now projecting about this phony Trump, the authoritarian, look what we have lived through people.
And what do you think four years more of this crowd could bring us?
So, um, so much of it is, is unfortunately, you know, political take, but I think we have to come together and really say, look, this, this inflation is killing us.
This, um, That is a strike on social security.
Forget cutting it.
It's not worth anything anymore if you go and your English muffins cost twice as much.
I think what's interesting about Project 2025, first and foremost, people are insane and believe nonsensical, insane things about it.
I don't think it goes far enough in many areas, looking at your debunking the lies.
And we can go through some of this.
Terminate the Constitution, it says, yet nobody, nobody ever expected that to be real life.
I don't know why, who in their right, but this is, they've been saying it.
They say Donald Trump wants to get rid of the Constitution, and I'm just like, what are you talking, what, what, that's the stupidest thing I've ever heard.
False.
There's a lot of these things I agree with in terms of they're lying about what you're advocating for, like who's advocating for getting rid of checks and balances.
Now, I'll ask you some questions here.
Banning African-American and gender studies in all level of education.
False.
I certainly think the lie that Project 2025 or that anybody supporting Trump would call for the banning of all of these things at all level is extreme.
However, I do think that we should not have racialized and sexualized education for minors in lower, younger educational levels.
So I'm curious what your thoughts are on that one.
The best way to figure out what's in Project 2025 is read the book.
Again, the book was a menu-driven suggestions to the next president.
President Trump has come forward with his agenda.
That's the only thing that really matters, the Agenda 47.
But to the extent you're interested, the book's online, project2025.org.
And we are unapologetic about rooting out Kind of that CRT root and branch from the federal government.
This is a very pernicious, you know, theory that has actually been infused all over the federal government and the contracting class.
Not only is there 2.2 million federal full-time workers, there's a penumbra of maybe 18, up to 15 or 18 million federal contractors.
And they're controlled through government grants and contracts.
Those CRT and the various DEI mechanisms are pumped in and made obligatory on various government contracting...
entities which number in the millions of people.
So yeah, going over it, I would say we're aligned with Project 47, rather Agenda 47 speaks to this directly, but we are very, very much declaring an entity.
Well, one thing I find worrying, it says, eliminate federal agencies like the FDA, EPA, NOAA, and more, False.
And my concern is, while I'm not as 100% on the elimination of those agencies as many others, my concern is you wouldn't be in favor of eliminating, say, like the FBI or the ATF or some of these other agencies.
I'm half kidding.
What I mean to say is, I don't think Project 2025 goes as far as many on the right would actually wish it would in certain areas, right?
So, There's a bunch of people, most the Libertarians, the Mises Caucus guys, and a lot of Republicans would be like, well, we want those agencies eliminated.
There's too much government.
Why are they in control of these things?
But you write on the site, it's actually not even in your mandates, in the mandate.
In fact, it says NOAA would just transfer functions to other agencies, the private sector, states, and territories.
But what is the Project 2025 position on these three-letter agencies and bureaucracy?
Well, no, I mean, look, what we are is 110 groups coming together, right?
So this is a crowdsourced project.
The policy book, again, that was written two years ago.
And at that point, it was really to get people back together on the same page, you know, literally in the same room.
You know, with respect to how far we go, that's ultimately the President's.
But certainly there are advocates on our side who want full defunding.
You know, there are elements of these agencies that have to be preserved, but they've been abused so badly.
The reality with the IAC, and I'm talking more in my personal capacity here, is that, you know, this is, they're off the charts.
And this is because they've grown up Unpolitically accountable.
This is the notion of the independent agency that we strike out at.
Here, you know, under our Constitution we have three branches.
The legislative, the executive, judicial.
Over time, the last 100 years, there's been a fourth illicit branch.
This is what we call the administrative state.
This is built by progressives.
Some of the titling is independent agency.
You say independent of whom, ultimately, is the question, and it's independent of you, the listener.
That is, those folks don't have to necessarily answer to the president.
and the president doesn't get to appoint the employees.
So who are they listening to?
Well, that's the deep state.
Those are the various interest groups, the big money, big everything, big law firms, but also the media cartel.
And so the first step in this process is awakening everyone and saying, look, this isn't even constitutionally ordained.
This was built by progressives who really ultimately think the government should be run by a small cadre of people who are smarter than the rest of us.
And that leaves out the wisdom of the common man and all that's come before him or her.
And this is really the promise for Project 2025.
So how do you get into this massive reformation of getting government back on track?
It all starts with a recognition that things have to be accountable, things have to be open, and the IC is one of the worst.
I myself am not an expert on the education, but certainly the irony of the Department of Education When it was stood up in 1977, the first mandate for leadership that came out in 1980 called for the abolition of it.
So this is kind of a process over the last 50 years where even people on the right have allowed it to grow.
Education should be fundamentally local.
It should be fundamentally up to the parent.
And that is really a great As a father of four, I went to public schools K-12.
You know, the educators and they really think of the kids as their own.
So, you know, it takes a village crowd.
As a father of four, you know, I went to public schools, K through 12.
I went on to MIT graduate and undergraduate.
And, you know, public schools were great for me.
And the fact that they can't be great for my kids really upsets us, that we have to deprogram our kids from eating bugs or whatever nonsense are being piped in.
I think there's a challenge I see in the educational portion.
And so, uh, shutting down the Department of Education, true, and I would agree with that.
It also says, use public taxpayer money for private religious schools, true.
And I also agree with what it says here.
Basically, or literally, Americans are able to use taxpayer money to choose where they shop for groceries, obtain housing, obtain higher education.
Religious schools often outperform public schools, and families should have the choice to send their children to these schools.
Yeah, if you can get welfare benefits, EBT benefits, and you're allowed to go buy candy bars with it, and you are, then certainly if you're getting school funding for your child, you should be able to choose if you want to go to a religious or non-religious school.
But here's the challenge, ultimately, that I see.
It says, teach Christian religious beliefs in public schools.
False.
Project 2025's mandate for leadership advocates for all educational opportunities and for parental rights in education.
The challenge I see with this is that our nation, our constitution, our rule of law is deeply rooted in Christian moral tradition.
And schools don't teach that.
What they end up teaching children is this very, I guess, granular, rudimentary understanding of, here's how a social studies class, and you're a little kid, and here's how the government works, here's how the courts work, here's a legislative branch.
And what they exclude from this is that Along with every other system of governance around the world, their belief system and their moral structures are rooted in their faith system.
And so you can see this in the dominant religions of the area and then how they react, things that they believe.
You'll notice...
Most people notice we have a Fourth Amendment, we have a Fifth Amendment, we have the Sixth.
We have this presumption of innocence, and it's something that I like to bring up because I think it's the easiest example of the Christian moral tradition in American legal framework, and that is the story of Sodom and Gomorrah.
If there's but one righteous person, you know, God will not destroy this town, is the fundamental basis for If it is better that one hundred guilty persons escape than one innocent person suffer, Blackstone's formulation of course was ten, Benjamin Franklin said one hundred, and that is the underpinning of why we have the Bill of Rights, the constitutional protections in law, that we are going to put the burden on the government and the prosecutors in the state to prove you did something wrong.
Now in public schools they'll tell you that.
They'll say, we think that it's better, or they'll tell you, the government must have the burden of proof on the government, not you as an individual.
And if you were, as a young child, to ask, why?
They can't tell you.
They don't know, or they would have to say, well, it's in the Bible.
Now you've got a problem in public schools because you can't teach Christianity and you've got to keep these things out of it.
And I'm not saying that schools should be teaching kids to be Christian, but there is a fundamental disconnect here where a teacher is going to say, our society deems this to be right and true that we treat criminal defendants in this way.
And I'm not going to tell you why, because I'd get in trouble.
unidentified
Yeah.
Well, we didn't get rid of religion in the classroom.
We just swapped it out.
There was a void that was created.
Any worldview is a faith in religion, even atheists and agnostics.
They are believing in something.
There is no reason on earth that if you do not believe in a revealed law or a natural law, any sort of law in society, that we should have order in the classroom.
Why would it not be just dog-eat-dog world to claw over each other?
Well, you must be respectful.
Why?
Well, there is no standard that we're adhering back to, and that's when you start to dig away at the moral decay of our country.
We're like, why are we heading in this particular direction?
It is because you can justify anything that you do in a society when you have no moral foundation or law.
And when you take prayer and the scriptures out of schools, you are taking law out of schools.
I'm not even an advocate necessarily of putting Ten Commandments in our schools right now, because if the child looks at the Ten Commandments and asks the teacher, why are those on the wall?
The teacher would have to say, well, the government said we had to put them up on the wall.
They're not anything that we need to adhere to or listen to.
The conundrum I see is, I didn't learn this until I was in my late 20s, the origin of the 4th, 5th, and 6th Amendments.
And really, all of them pertaining to individual rights, especially as it pertains to courts.
And I was reading about the Bill of Rights 10 or so years ago, and there were originally 17 articles, and I said, how did we get from 17 to 10?
And I'm like, why didn't my schools get into the nitty-gritty of all these things?
We learned at the surface level, the Bill of Rights, the Constitution, the Revolution, all surface level stuff.
And all I was ever told was, in the United States, the presumption of innocence, the burden of proof on the government, etc.
And then I start reading it.
And it's rooted in the story of Blackstone.
Blackstone's formulation is, it is better that ten guilty persons escape than one innocent person suffer.
The idea around this, as it originates in the Bible, the story of Sodom and Gomorrah, and as it pertains to a system of governance, what they thought, people like Blackstone and the Founding Fathers, was that if a society tells its population, even if you are righteous, you will be punished, Then there is no incentive to be righteous.
People will simply try to hide their misdeeds and benefit themselves.
But if the system of governance says, we will do everything in our power to make sure you are protected if you are innocent, then there is the incentive among the population to be righteous and to try and, you know, to do your best because you know that you're not likely to be punished for things you didn't do wrong.
Now you come into schools and the challenge we have is you have the left wanting to eliminate religion from schools, and I'm not saying schools should be telling kids to be Christian, but if now we're at this period where over the past several decades you can't even explain the story of Sodom and Gomorrah to children so they can understand how Blackstone formulated this, or I mean even go back to the Magna Carta and things like that,
You're chopping off the root of the moral framework of our society, and I think it's not surprising, in the least bit, where we are today with an amoral, far-leftist group of people who think there is no truth but power, and they have now begun to push a political ideology of, if we can lie, cheat, and steal, then we should be able to have it.
A might-makes-right mentality, which is predominantly the left.
Yeah, I have a number of thoughts, and, you know, it's very pressing what you're saying.
With, how do you get to this point?
You talked about arriving at your late twenties, you know, but you also were kind of saying while you were upset at school, the reality is you learned, you know, you are the captain of your ship.
You are the master of your own destiny.
You had to go out and procure this information.
The state, we have to stop thinking about the state or the school is supplying us this.
And so once you guys and the listeners went out and spent the time thinking about it, you got to, The reality is the people who came before us were really smart folks who committed this stuff down.
We're so busy in modern life that we don't take the time to really think in a contemplative manner.
With getting to those answers, it's not just the school.
The root system has been taken up.
Family order.
In my particular case, I was blessed to have great parents who had these religious ideals.
But more who could answer these questions if I would say, Dad, why is that the way?
Like, why do we have this?
Because that's kind of the parenting role.
When we, you know, in our book, again, this is not President Trump, so I'll keep saying that this whole time.
But this, you know, this was conservatives saying, how are we going to restore this country?
We're coming up on our 250th birthday.
We said there were four conservative promises.
And when I initially laid out the book, the first one was deconstruct the administrative state.
The second one was restore the family as the centerpiece of American life.
You know, Dr. Roberts and the team, when he added it, he put it as number one.
So we do think family and attention to kids is really central to this.
unidentified
But I think progressives hate that, right?
They don't like families and they don't like history and that's basically what you all have referenced.
I mean, you mentioned earlier that the Department of Education, you know, was created in the 1970s, and this is something I think a lot of, you know, left-wing people and maybe a lot of voters who aren't that involved in politics generally forget.
Like, these are institutions we created.
It's not like George Washington sat down and was like, First Amendment, also Department of Education, right?
We have created these, and often when departments collapse, fail, or society changes, we don't need them anymore, we get rid of them.
I'm thinking of the Department of Home Economics.
That was a huge part of American life for a long time.
I think Jack Posobiec hits the nail on the head with the hammer when he says Pizza Hut nationalism.
I think there is a trend among progressives, they hate children, and I mean that both as a visceral but also in a pragmatic way in that the ideology of the left has disdain for the idea of children.
They write articles all day every day saying, don't have kids, it's bad.
It'll ruin your life, you're not going to have fun, you should be clubbing!
Did you see that story of the woman who has eight kids, lives on a farm, and she was saying something to the effect, I think Mary Morgan was posting about this, that she sacrificed being a ballerina, which was her dream, to be in New York, to live on a farm, and have a family, and now they're successful famous YouTubers with eight kids, and all of these progressives are like, she should be clubbing!
She should.
She has eight kids.
She's like smiling and happy and successful.
unidentified
This is Valeria Farm.
They have a crazy successful business.
Mentality is carpe diem.
If you do not experience enjoyment in your life right now, you are doing something wrong.
The delayed gratification is totally out the window.
My mentality when I first came to Capitol Hill was climb the ladder, get the next job title, and do whatever it takes to try to get, I guess, the six-figure salary, the great job, the cool-looking business card with the nice little eagle at the top of it.
And now that I've gotten married, my mentality has so drastically shifted that I don't—I would not recognize myself from where I was five and six years ago, because I don't want to spend as much time at work anymore.
I want to spend more time at home.
We're planning for the future.
The fulfillment is found in family and in faith.
We're, you know, we're dabbling and getting—we got chickens, I just mentioned the other day, and we're just like— Excellent.
It's good to walk outside and remember like there's more to life than just social media and the things going on in the news and like I didn't I was out feeding the chickens when I found out Joe Biden had dropped out and I said oh okay and I went back to feeding the chickens because you know what I couldn't do anything about it and I if I tried to involve my my mental health and all of that then I would just go completely nuts.
I've made this joke quite a bit and it's it's a half joke but I'm saying like I don't know anyone could be depressed And own chickens at the same time, right?
If you're feeling down, you just go watch them.
And they're hilarious, dumb little things.
They'll walk and then just crap right where they're standing.
And they've got little funny little faces.
But I did end up seeing this meme post that went viral where a guy was talking about how he was depressed.
And then his neighbors bought chickens.
And he's not depressed anymore.
He's like, I wake up and hear him yelling and I laugh.
And then I look out the window and I see him bobbing their little heads and it makes me laugh.
And he's like, I don't know what it is about him.
unidentified
I'll tell you, it is the realization that we are the exact same thing to somebody greater than us.
It is like we're looking down and they're so concerned with chasing the moth or chasing the worm or fighting over that grape and it's like we're doing the same thing just on a like five times bigger level and someone else is watching us thinking the exact same thing and it just allows us to be like, you know what?
Humans succeeded in these tribes, in these small villages, by adopting certain practices.
And not everyone does.
Not every society has dogs in the same way that the Europeans had dogs, but many do.
And I think the reality is There is something ingrained in humanity that is good for us that we are getting rid of.
And now you've got, outside of that, the joking idea of like chickens make you laugh or whatever, because they are silly, but there's a lot of animals that make you laugh and people enjoy to have.
People, you see the videos online of people with cows and the cow's resting its head on the farmer's leg and he's patting it on the head or whatever.
I think humans, for tens of thousands of years, are living in this particular way.
Why do you want to be home with your family and your kids?
Well, because that's what we did.
You had a homestead, you had a small garden farm, you did a little bit of hunting, and you were with your family all the time.
Your kids grew up with you.
And then with industrialization, now you have in big cities, they're living in concrete blocks, there's no grass or trees really anywhere.
I mean, there's parks in isolated places.
But they've separated themselves completely from the human experience.
Getting back to the folks before us had it right, they talk about life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
The pursuit of happiness, what is that?
That's this not only enjoying life, but You know, being closer to nature, being able to pursue your God, your religion, being in family, this is really the good life that conservatives strive for.
And government is interjecting itself in the way of that.
So that's why we're always restraining government.
That's why we want a smaller government, to allow you to go back.
And you know, I'm sensing, recalling 11th grade English here, but they talked about the alienation of man from man, alienation of man from nature.
When you pick up these phones, this is alienation.
I'm a Generation X guy, but the generations after me that grew up completely on the web, you've been denied a great ability to interact with people, but also suffer a little bit and have things go wrong and build up.
and esteem from that.
So I think to the extent that we can put these things down, that we can focus on other things.
And you know, it's an evolution.
Look, when I went up to New York City as an attorney, I wasn't squared away with getting, raising a family.
I actually met a ballerina who went up and became famous.
And now, you know, we didn't quite crank out eight kids, but we have four.
But, you know, it took a period of time.
It took a little bit of evolution and growing, but all these societal pressures on you are directing you in the other way.
And what they've done with government is reinforce that.
So you have progressives, like, putting in policies that are very anti-family.
And what we're suggesting, and I think it's in Agenda 47, really is like a focus on, you know, allowing people to live the good life and really, you know, making this much more family-friendly as a country.
unidentified
I think for, in the modern era, in your marriage, so maybe you can answer this, the hardest things that I think a lot of, you know, Millennials, maybe Gen Z as they get a little older, it's going from having zero kids to having one because we live in, you know, a pretty nice time, right?
Like, you can have an income and, you know, under Biden it's a lot harder, but, like, you can kind of be more flexible.
You have freedom and, you know, when you have children you have to sacrifice.
Your resources are spent differently.
I think So much of the culture around having children is the narrative that comes from mainstream media and from a lot of like social media influence is that it's it's the end of everything and it's going to drain you of all these things and there's no reward in it and we just know that's fundamentally not true.
If having a family was a bad thing our civilization would have died out a long time ago.
I only say on my own personal thing, I was like, always putting it off.
I'm like, when I get a little bit more saved up, when we move out of this apartment, we'll get it done.
And it's quite the opposite.
When you actually commit to it earlier on, you've cleared an entire, you have a great support system.
You know, this is where the religion that, like, two become one, you are now a stronger body.
And, you know, all these other things that maybe seem like the biggest thing are extraneous, running around to the club or whatever you're going to do.
So I'm not telling everyone to run out and get married on this, but, you know, you have to go commit to being in a relationship, I think is very important.
But also, you know, making sure if it's one that's worth pursuing.
unidentified
If it isn't, you shouldn't spend people, your other person's time. - One of the great crises of our generation is a lack of purpose.
You have a family, you have a relationship, you have kids, you have an obligation to your family, your kids, you have to work, you have to succeed.
But now you've got a generation, after several generations now, well you've got millennials and Gen Z and now Gen Alpha coming up, where they have no purpose.
And I think Gen Z, I'm particularly worried about.
Millennials are a hybrid generation, spending half their lives without the internet, and half their lives with the internet.
For me, you know, with the internet coming into play less popularly, but still active in the late 80s, and then really picking up in the early 90s, I grew up with the internet my whole life.
But most millennials, probably around the time they were in their teenage years, they started getting online, getting cable internet and having access to this stuff, and that changed the experience of life.
Especially now with Amazon and online ordering.
You've just completely isolated yourself from every- you don't go to the store anymore.
You- there's no impulse buying.
Uh, specialty shops are all shutting down because people will just be like, if I want a thing, I'll buy it online.
How do I find out about it?
Instagram tells me I like it.
So it used to be you'd walk into, you know, a grocery store or whatever and you'd be like, I've- dragon fruit?
I'll grab one of these and see if the family likes it.
Now you're never gonna see these things unless the internet tells you you want to see them.
So younger people are growing up in this reality, completely isolated from each other.
And we are actually starting to see this phenomenon where young people don't know how to interact in real life with each other.
There was a viral video of a young woman who was in her early 20s, attractive, saying she can't get a relationship, she can't find a boyfriend, she's laughing, and it's like a weird...
Joking nervous laugh of going like, I have no idea how to meet anybody.
Yeah, I work with a lot of younger people in the generation.
And I always joke like, you need to go home and watch some 80s movies.
Because this is, maybe the 80s was the last generation where we didn't have it, the pizza hut.
But, you know, so much of, you know, those life lessons involve kind of, like I say, you know, trying things out, failing, succeeding, but at least having free will.
And this device is directing you how to think, and it's getting smarter and smarter and smarter.
So you know to the extent you can disconnect that that's great, and you have to just be disciplined about it But you know I do have a lot of empathy I don't know what it would have been like for me had I not had These great set of parents and this ability to be curious as a kid And really delve into and take apart a car and garden and learn how to do all these other things.
Do Morse code.
Swim in the ocean.
All these kind of things you have to just get out and take a risk.
Go on a vacation by yourself.
Force you to meet somebody.
unidentified
It used to be that the kid had no option but to go outside and learn and play and experience nature and get out and dig with your hands.
And now it's become incumbent upon the parents to say, go outside and put down those devices.
And it's that generation that grew up with the internet, but maybe didn't see what all of the ramifications of it were.
But I watch kids all the time when the parents try to take away the iPad at the airport or somewhere, they are completely and totally glued to it.
And if they aren't glued to it, then they start screaming and hollering and crying.
And that is a major behavioral issue.
So like, if they can't continually have entertainment, 24-7, from the moment they wake up to the moment that they lay down, that child will make the life of the parent absolutely miserable, and they will not shut up until they get that hit of dopamine, that flashy light screen.
And then when they get into the real world, and they actually have to do a job or not have that 24-7 entertainment, they don't know how to function.
Yeah, well, I do think when it comes to like the pro-Hamas protesters, There's a good portion that have no idea what they're talking about, but a lot of them won't tell you because they don't want to admit it.
Whereas this lady has literally no idea what she's talking about, and she's just like, I don't know, I heard from the TV that Trump was bad.
unidentified
See, it's funny because she's like, the federal government is taking away our rights, which is currently Joe Biden!
And she's not coming out being like, we need to elect a libertarian!
I mean, she's immediately like, it's happening now, but it's actually only bad if Trump is the one on top of the pyramid.
I feel like, you know, we're talking about Project 2025, which It's remarkable how it's not anywhere near where many libertarians and Trump supporters would want to be.
It's fairly moderate in a lot of areas, fairly libertarian in a lot of areas, and the media is claiming that it's like, step one when Trump gets elected is force women to wear red gowns and little bonnets and then have babies.
None of this is reality.
So I think of this This is fantastically done by Newsbusters, and if anyone, all you gotta do is this, when you go see Family, don't say anything, don't argue, just watch this video, and then play the video, and then, here you go, that's the world you live in.
Yeah, this is what I think they call the Mockingbird Media, and they talk around 4am, talking points go out, and it's just pure disinformation, I mean, don't believe your own lying eyes.
And, you know, it's sad that that's really what they've done now with Project 2025.
Again, nothing to do with Trump, but they want to tell you it's Trump's.
Here, you know, with Kamala Harris, though, this is the number one issue, the mass migration, this uncontrolled border, and she was in charge of it, okay?
She was in charge of the number of invasion of 15 million illegals, and whether, you know, You know, obviously she was at Border Czar, and the problem persists now.
Did she jump in and solve a problem?
If she weren't initially given this responsibility, why didn't she take it over?
What was the idea there?
But everyone has to acknowledge that the problem grew up under the Biden-Harris administration, and she's got to own it.
So her track record— She's not, right?
No, she doesn't.
She wants to run from it, and they want to help her run from it, but she can't.
unidentified
That should be the biggest concern for voters right now that like we're what four days into the Kamala Harris campaign for the presidency and she has already said well I'm not responsible for that I mean would you really want four years of someone saying oh well I never did that just lying outright and also not acknowledging that they failed the American people?
Because I agree with you.
Illegal immigration has been a problem in America for a long time, but it was particularly acute under the Biden administration because they took away policies installed by Trump that really tried to change the destruction of our border security.
And I think that's this weird line that Kamala Harris is now going to try and walk, which is saying, well, when you like what Biden did, I get credit for it, and when you don't like it, even though I was the Borders are and all of left-wing media referred to me as that, that wasn't me.
In fact, that never happened and everything is fine.
And I just don't see how, you know, voters don't become disenfranchised with the narrative spin from the media.
You can't like Kamala Harris, she's not honest, but also you can't look at the media and say that they are reliable, especially when they are literally contradicting themselves, let alone when they criticize something they obviously don't like, like Project 2025.
I think that's a component of why they're allowing the border to remain open.
Because there's not enough people to sustain social security.
I think we pulled the numbers up and you need something like, what is it?
You need like three to four people to sustain one social security recipient.
And with fertility at 1.8 or whatever, 1.7, we're looking at 20 years, Social Security just done, collapsed completely.
They're saying that by, I think, 2032 it starts to crumble.
By 2037 it's completely insolvent and unsalvageable.
Unless they dramatically increase taxes on younger people.
But eventually that becomes impossible.
So what do they do?
They open up the borders and go, oh gee, oh no, oh look at all these people that are coming in, oh heavens.
And they're hoping to use them as a new tax base to fund a crumbling system.
unidentified
When I talk to my friends about things like this and social security, mainly in the context of my parents relying on it, because that's their only retirement right now.
And I've not begun to think about that until just recently.
We're operating like it's not going to be around.
whenever we get old enough.
We consider it like a tax that we're never going to see again.
We just pay it and it's gone.
Our parents are relying on it.
They paid into it their entire life.
So we just think our parents hopefully can take advantage of it before it collapses.
But to us, we're just putting 10% or however much it is every single time we get our paycheck.
And it's just part of our federal taxes that we'll never get as a refund and that we'll never see again.
It has been a band-aid on an industrialization bullet wound that we have just kept kicking the can down the road.
This idea that the state will take care of you when you're older is... All of these things enable the destruction of the family.
And the reason why family breaks up, the idea that you kick your kids out when they're 18, like all of these things are products of industrialization that have been seriously damaging to humanity and to our moral frameworks, etc.
I mean, I see, you know, We are down the road right now.
The people who built this country are relying on social security and they have every right to it.
They paid into it and I think President Trump's been very clear that he is not going to touch it and if anything we're going to, you know, his administration really wants to protect it.
Social Security though, you know, as a long-term thing, families do build Social Security.
These are the mechanisms over time, intergenerational, taking care of your parents, taking care of parents, grandparents, taking care of kids.
Those were a long-term structure and you're right that by building this progressive band-aid to it, they were able to deconstruct these institutions that for millennia had basically supported, we were always a safety net.
But you know, let's be clear, who is attacking Social Security?
That's Kamala Harris.
Well, it's Kamala Harris, too.
And the big spending, like I said, inflation is the number one thing.
And this profligate spending that they just put in place over the last four years has ballooned the national debt to like $35 trillion.
Well, who pays for that?
You guys pay for that every month when you get your credit card statement and the interest rates where it is.
That's because we're spending over a trillion dollars a year just paying the debt.
On the debt service on this national national debt, and that's because you know so much of this this big fiscal stimulus has been directed towards things that are erratic.
They don't produce kind of into like various green energy scams or whatever other sort of handouts to big business that they've done with with the Biden administration.
So, you know, Social Security, you know, President Trump, I think, has been extremely clear on that, but let's look at who's really at fault with putting that in jeopardy, and that's our friends.
Well, I think we're an addicted society, we have a drug, and that drug is extracting 12.4% from the younger generation to fund the older generation, which has
Basically just ripped apart the foundational structure of family and this idea in the past was you wanted to have a family, everybody wanted to have a family, it was a part of your life and there was a necessity to having family and through the state we have created artificial means by which we can disrupt the necessity of family to the point now where we are addicted to the government
Printing money and siphoning money from the younger generation into an older generation, but to a substantially greater degree than ever before, than it ever needed to be.
And it's not sustainable.
They're going to have to increase the rate, or they're going to have to flood this country with people who are going to pay these bills because there's no family anymore.
Why is there no family?
Why aren't people having kids?
Because there was no reason to have kids.
Because people were like, well, if I get older, the government will give me money.
It'll give me money from somebody else, making me the responsibility of somebody else.
The idea that an irresponsible individual, and I'm not saying Social Security recipients are all irresponsible, I'm saying the idea that we would guarantee to irresponsible people only guarantees more irresponsible people.
Certainly, I'm not opposed to government benefits.
The idea that you might lose your job.
It's not your fault.
The company might go out of business.
What do we do?
No, that's not a good thing.
So we have unemployment benefits.
I'm not completely opposed to any of that, but we're still looking at, well, what would happen if you lost your job before industrialization, before the progressive modernization?
You'd go to family and you'd say, I need to stay with you in the back or whatever and I'll do work and then we'd figure things out.
Now it's, I'm gonna go ask the government for money so they can pay my bills, and so someone else who doesn't know me, I become a burden on all of them.
What we're looking at right now is millennial generation and Gen Z paying into a system they will never get to utilize.
They're going to give a portion of their money away.
It's a weight on businesses who pay half of this, 6.2, and the individual who pays 6.2, unless you're self-employed, now you're paying 12.4, and you're going to get nothing for it.
It's completely broken.
And the issue now is, politically, nobody wants to say what needs to be said, and it's an unsustainable system that probably needs to be overhauled in some way.
No, because the issue is older people vote, and they vote more than anybody else, and you'll never win an election because they do vote.
It's a perverse incentive to the destruction of our familial system and our economic system.
I don't know what the solution is, because certainly turning off social security would be bad for a lot of people, but it's not sustainable.
Yeah, I mean, part of the solution is the chickens approach, right?
You gotta, like, look at building your own family.
But we all came from families.
We can go back, you know, if you're a single person and you got no plans this weekend, why don't you reach out to one of your family members?
See if you can lend a hand.
You restart restoring these bonds that you have.
And building, and you know, you're going to get the wisdom.
Like, look, I remember when my 96-year-old great-grandmother, this woman who had no more than sixth grade education, she was a cleaning lady, came to live with us.
And, you know, she spoke broken English.
But those are the kind of experiences, you know, you take with you.
And really enrich your life.
So I think, you know, we do need, we're going to be old one day, getting this compassion to work.
Maybe it's just helping a neighbor, but you never know where these roads are going to lead.
This is going to be a contact you make outside of your phone.
So I'd say let's stop looking at government to solve it and start working on ourselves a little bit.
And that's one route.
But, you know, long term, look, Nothing government does is going to be better than the private marketplace.
Now, the unrestrained private marketplace can spiral out of control.
And, you know, again, here, like, I came from labor.
I'm the only, you know, my whole family were factory workers.
They went off and they fought, you know, behind enemy lines in World War Two.
There's a movie coming out this summer about the Murmansk run.
That was my grandfather on the on those engine rooms in the Liberty ships.
These were heroic people who came back and built the country.
And they did not depend on these social welfare systems.
But over time, they couldn't help when the factory left.
So it's going to be a graduation of how do we get back to a richer country.
And when I mean richer, not just wealthier, but more sustainable.
But it's all going to be when you realize it's on you.
And you have to start making these steps.
Part of that is coming to work in the federal government and stop some of this direction of government.
unidentified
There has to be a generational mindset because I noticed with my grandparents, they saved everything.
And I did not understand that until I understood they had gone through the depression and they had seen the impact that it had on their family and their friends and it was a survival mentality.
For me, You know my family went through the 2008 recession and my dad lost his job and I remember sitting in the parking lot of Walmart while my mom made a phone call to make sure that if we spent money purchasing a backpack for my school supplies that we wouldn't overdraw the bank account and that really impressed upon me and I didn't realize until a few years ago but this like mentality of okay I'm gonna start a small business I'm gonna do this on the side I don't necessarily need the money but I'm trying to
financially prepare for my family and ensure that we're never put in that position again because the government would fail over and over and over.
Big banks and businesses would fail us over and over and over.
No one is looking out for you.
You're just lumped into this collective mentality of the American people that a lot of people can siphon off of if you're the federal government or if you're big banks and that's why it comes down to the individual.
No one is gonna, like, you get your chickens, get your goats, whatever the heck you have to get, because at the end of the day, you are reliant upon yourself, and if the government or the banks or the jobs or whatever fails you, it is totally up to you, and you have to shift.
I just go back into, you know, 1768 and I'd go to a lot of these leaders of the colonies and, you know, because this is, you know, very much the revolutionary period.
There's a lot of tumultuous circumstances.
And I'd like to ask them, I have a proposed system for you.
What if half of all of your money went to the government?
And what do you think they'd say?
It's laughably absurd.
I said, no, no, no, hold on, hold on.
Then the government will give everyone who doesn't have a job, has children but is not married, and people of a certain age will get portions of that money.
They'd look at you like a psychopath.
That's insanity.
That system would never work.
It's fascinating to me that many people know the welfare system around single parenthood perpetuates single parenthood.
It creates a process by which it is possible for it to exist.
It enables it.
The same thing is true of Social Security and everything else.
I understand the idea of benefits in an emergency, but the benefits themselves will create the circumstance by which the crisis could exist.
And then the system will eventually implode on itself.
The challenge we have is...
I'll start with Election Day.
Any election system that requires you to vote on a day where you have to work will favor the unemployed.
The unemployed are going to vote to take your money because that's just a mathematical pressure.
It doesn't matter if they're good, bad people.
It doesn't matter if they're entitled or not.
It means that they're unemployed and they're in need of food and they're going to do whatever they have to do to get it.
And I respect a human trying to survive.
So they're unemployed.
They go vote.
We see this all the time with the far left.
They have no problem whatsoever protesting.
They have no jobs.
They have no family.
So it's a pressure system that favors those who are the least responsible.
The same is true across the board.
When it comes to voting, elections overwhelmingly favor older people because they vote.
Good for them for voting.
But they're going to vote for their own benefit, even to the detriment of greater society, which results in this, I guess they're calling gerontocracy.
And you get young people who are greatly upset that basically everybody in Congress is over 60.
The only thing anyone cares about is the lives of people who aren't having families, who are on the back end of their lives.
And we need to be focusing on children.
And where are we at now?
It's fascinating to me when I look at Pizza Hut today versus Pizza Hut 20 years ago.
Pizza Hut today, and I'm again, shout out to Jack Posobiec who really exemplified this in a very simple explanation, analogy.
Pizza Huts have become sterile, 200 square foot strip mall stores to walk in, pick up a pizza, and walk out.
When they used to be sit-down restaurants with salad bars.
Why?
Because the restaurant said, who's our customer?
Families.
There are no families anymore.
So now who's our customer?
20-year-old unemployed on welfare who's going to order a pizza on Friday, or college students, or a 30-year-old bachelor living in a studio apartment is going to order a pizza.
Not the family.
And it's not intentional.
It's that, hey, our business doesn't survive utilizing all of this space.
So they sell their buildings, downsized to a single kitchen with carry-out and delivery, and that's what the business becomes.
Now we're looking at this problem where, I was talking to someone recently about this, and they said, well, it's too expensive to have kids.
And I said, the only reason it's expensive to have kids is because there's no market around having kids.
If, the way I explained it on IRL a couple days ago, we want to sell for cast brew coffee, cold brew cans of coffee.
We can't afford $50 million in pre-orders and manufacturing plants and all that stuff, and we don't have the sale, we don't have the volume to sell that many.
So we have a fixed cost of, let's just do random numbers, let's say our fixed cost is $1,000 per month.
And we can purchase X amount of cans, we have Y amount of customers.
That means we need to sell each can, and this is the actual number, about $5 per can.
No one's going to want to buy a $5 can of coffee, that's ridiculous.
You can get it for $3, the Starbucks can.
Why are they able to sell it at Starbucks for $3?
If their fixed cost is $1,000 a week, and they sell 20 million cans, with one cent profit margin, they're covering their fixed costs.
This is the same thing for children.
The less people have kids, the more expensive diapers become, the more expensive baby food becomes, because they have to increase the cost to cover their fixed cost because they don't have the volume anymore because no one's having kids.
Then it becomes harder and harder to have kids, so less people have kids, and the system implodes on itself.
Ultimately, I think in 20 years, 20 to 40 years, this country becomes extremely conservative and very religious, because only those who are having kids are going to perpetuate the future of this nation, and only those who have an internal mission towards having family for whatever reason are going to have kids, meaning they're willing to sacrifice and spend the money to have the kids.
So, ultimately, I see welfare systems crumbling and collapsing, and no one cares, and I see liberal and progressive ideology evaporating just off of natural selection.
unidentified
Somebody needs to propose a bill that would take the entire universal tax rate back to what it was when King George III was taxing the colonies.
There's a list of grievance in the Declaration of Independence that go well beyond just taxes, but it was the conflict around lack of representation and the taxes.
The Founding Fathers completely understood that the Crown was paying a lot of money for our defense when it came to trade and all that stuff, but we had no say in what they were doing with defense and with spending.
This resulted in conflict, which resulted in intolerable acts, which resulted in the seizure of weapons, which resulted in shootouts, which resulted in, you know what?
We're done.
We ain't doing this no more.
So ultimately I see that as something that is likely to happen in some way to this country.
But I think it could be gradual and simple.
Conservatives have more kids than liberals.
We are seeing this reflected in the voter base, because in the past 20 years this has been true.
Gen Z now is slightly more conservative in some areas than millennials, which is the first time in a hundred years this happened.
And what's likely going to happen is that conservatives want to have kids, conservatives want to protect their kids, and liberals say having kids are bad.
Well, here again, Small business, the taxation levels, what cranking up taxes do is they suppress the ability to be an entrepreneur like you, going out and doing this stuff.
You know, my wife's built a business as well, and we've been through this.
There's ups and downs, there's risk, but you have to work your way through it.
And they make it more and more difficult to the point where, you know, the big business, the people, even the pizza huts are going to only limit their offerings.
If we had much more robust marketplaces, invisible hand, people would say, you know what, there is a marketplace for people doing this.
And so it's really, you know, what is deregulatory, but also wanting to spur individual business.
And that's ultimately what allows this family to also propagate.
But keeping things local, you know, going in and incentivizing small business and essentially lowering taxes.
Because no one knows better how to spend the money than your own family.
You know, we don't need another associate dean for DEI.
You know, I was looking at my own alma mater.
They almost have a one-to-one at MIT now.
They hire one dean for almost every student.
It's insane.
The increase in the headcount of faculty staff mirrors the increase in the student body.
Yeah, and that's a private university with a huge endowment.
But, you know, you look at what the local school system is and the various layers of administrator on top of administrator that they have.
That's money that's supposed to be for this very reason to helping kids or families.
Put that back in the hands of the family.
unidentified
Yeah, I think that the administrative bloat phenomenon isn't limited to the federal government.
I think you do see this in universities.
I think you see it, you know, in a lot of places.
I mean, I know I've worked for businesses that seem to have 100 managers and you don't know what any of them do.
But, you know, the problem, I think, you know, similar to what we're saying, like people don't Believe in the importance of family or they're discouraged from pursuing it.
I also think there's a level of trained complacency in American culture today like to have entrepreneurs who are wanting to start businesses, you know, it takes a certain personality type and right now there's a lot of expectation.
Well, I'm going to be taxed and you know, nothing is affordable.
I'm never going to be able to do anything and there's this sort of backing down they think You know, if you reached out to George Washington, he would be shocked that this is the way people live their lives.
I think there is a shift in mentality that is really deep that we are going to have a hard time overcoming.
Not that it's not possible, but that idea that, like, you have to wait for things to happen to you or you have to comply with You know, the federal government's decision to ruin your life or to run it a certain way isn't how we started, and it discourages people from trying to challenge the status quo.
That's what I really think Project 2025's biggest fear is for Democrats, right?
Like, they have an expectation that the federal government is the central beating heart of the American institution, and that's not true.
And so the idea that anything would challenge the status quo is just abhorrent to them.
You know, with Bloat and the federal government, look at it.
Right now, the federal government is, the office buildings are 70-80% vacant, right?
The federal worker in Washington makes about $130,000.
That's the median, okay?
Half of them are above it.
So, here they're coming into work three days a month, okay?
A month.
They're all working remote.
And there's, you know, basically we're seeing that some of the laptops aren't even turned on.
So the level of inefficiency in the government, what's happened is that there's been no accountability.
And right now, some of the main people driving the anti-Project 2025, or really anti-Trump stuff, is civil servants or their unions, really.
So a lot of this are people who want to perpetuate an inefficient system.
Again, you know, it's not just getting the federal government kind of out of our lives so we can prosper, but it's, like you say, it's extended towards state, local, various, you know, from hospital systems to educational universities.
This is part of the progressive build-out.
And we have a class of people that are not producing, but are taking a lot.
And to the extent that we can use taxes to really lower that, lower that number, but infuse the people to take the risk.
Like part of life is going out and seizing it.
And that's why people talk.
I mean, Pasobek talks about it, like getting off these bad foods, these oils, all these things that are that have been fed into us, processed foods that take away your ability to really kind of be sharp and and drugs and alcohol and the whole like.
getting more physical, appreciating your body, putting it into better shape.
unidentified
You know, you'll start, you know performing better I want to go back to something you said earlier in this conversation, which is that, you know, part of the initiative that you're working on was just to get people who are interested in making a difference or, you know, have strong values to the federal government because it's not always clear.
And maybe Luke can talk about this because I know he has experience.
Like, there are a lot of ambitious young people who would like to make a change, you know, at the federal level.
How do we shift to opening that door for people?
I mean, was it difficult for you to end up on the Hill?
It wasn't difficult, but you had to go into it with the mentality that you're not going to be at the top at day one.
I would, I remember my first internship, which anybody that asks, like, how do I get involved in politics?
You have to go and intern and you have to be willing to do the absolute bare minimum so that you can be trusted in the small things and be given the larger things.
And that's the entry point into anything in politics and government, any sort of position like that.
It was like, I had nothing to do so I started organizing the drawers organizing the cabinets and doing like the small things and slowly working up.
The problem that we have on Capitol Hill right now is that too many people are getting burnt out and too many good people are leaving.
They're starting to recognize that this town sucks and the amount of output that I'm getting for the return Is not worth it.
And when I went into Capitol Hill, that was all that I wanted to do.
I wanted to get to Congress.
I wanted to climb the ladder.
I said that a little bit earlier.
My entire identity was wrapped up in my job title.
And so I started out interning for Matt Gaetz and I worked up and I was his communications director.
And then I suddenly and the media loved it.
They latched onto it very heavily.
I had to depart and It crushed me.
I crumbled from that for a little bit because I realized my entire identity was tied up in work.
So when we're training on Capitol Hill, when we're doing stuff with these different organizations and the Conservative Partnership Institute, which is a great group in Washington that helps train these staffers because they realize they have no support structure, no infrastructure in this town where they literally are not part of this town.
They are just someone who is showing up and going into battle every day.
I say that you have to ground yourself Find your identity and something beside your business card and your job title because otherwise you are going to collapse It might not be today.
It might not be in two years It might be ten years from now, but when that is yanked out from underneath you You're going to completely crumble for me The foundation is my faith and I tell people if you don't have that foundation and faith or family or some bedrock Apart from this shifting town in washington.
You will fall apart because it's the lobbyists.
It's the special interest It's the blackmail.
It's all of this stuff and you'll get caught up in it whether you want to or not It's how it drags you in.
So if you have this kind of North Star in Washington of why you're there, what you're doing, what you're doing, and frankly, I view it as a mission field, then you have a purpose for why you're there.
Instead of just going up for fame or power or money, which is what most people chase, and it's kind of like the NBA.
You might play basketball in high school, but you're not going to end up being in the NBA sometimes.
Sometimes you just have to show up and give it 110%, and at the end of the day, you're serving in an environment that desperately needs good young people.
Hannah and Luke, Hannah-Claire, you're asking how people can get involved in government.
So there, you know, Luke is telling you about the political nature.
That's a really smaller group.
But, you know, there is, like I said, 2.2 million jobs out there and they hire, right?
This is USAjobs.gov.
And so there are routes for conservatives and libertarians to get into the system.
And that's, you know, again, the president appoints typically 4,000.
So it's really the 2.2 million underneath that you can be aiming for.
Here's the great conceit is that we no longer have, you know, this was built out over time, right?
The progressive era idea was to take away cronyism.
with the Teapot Dome scandal and Tammany Hall and the like.
So they stood up what was supposed to be a class of experts that were apolitical and they did this through merit selection.
There was a test, a civil service exam.
Today, there is no civil service exam.
So right now when the Pendleton Act started in 1888, 10% of the jobs were supposed to be consecrated to these merit systems.
Today, 99.7% of the jobs are.
And the reality is that they have no way, the president has no way to monitor them.
Now, conservatives can head for those 99.7% jobs and that's a way to actually start taking back the country is getting into the federal workforce.
But we also have to understand that we have to let those 4,000 really politically manage the rest.
And that's really part of Project 2025, is getting people who are interested in coming to serve the next conservative president understand the game plan, because they built this system, and it's rough and tumble when you walk into that building.
unidentified
If I could play devil's advocate for a second, the Democrats are using Project 2025 every single day as a talking point to rile up their base.
Trump has distanced himself from it and the campaign has distanced himself from it.
From an organizational and PR standpoint, how do you win the message and where do you go from here?
What absolutely is not Trump's you know that this was stood up ahead of time for any for any conservative president and it's always just been an offering like eventually when the president gets elected we will make offerings of policy suggestions as well as personnel.
So, how do you get away from it?
The reality is you have to focus on what President Trump's putting out.
That's the Agenda 47.
Those are the policies.
And a lot, like he says, he doesn't care for in the book.
Look, we wrote the book.
I don't agree with what's in the book.
A lot of people don't agree with what's in the book.
It was a crowdsourced mechanism from two years ago.
But the book's not relevant anymore.
What is relevant are what they're committing to on the campaign trail.
The left, to be sure though, we have to understand, is terrified.
Because with the book in part, and what our program really suggests, is we put up the source code for the deep state.
We have said this is how you're going to make the change.
And they're kind of terrified that we went at this proposition that it's a government of experts.
And we're like, you mean the experts who are in the building, you know, 10% of the time, those experts that are making all this money and actually not performing, you know?
And the reality is that they are imposing a value system that is contrary to the vast majority of Americans.
So I will buy project2025.org from you guys, and then I will make a website where Project 2025 is just all these liberal pipe-dream policies, and then when they keep talking about it, these liberals will be like, I'm gonna Google this, they're gonna be like, hey, this looks really great!
It's gonna be like, you know what, progressive taxes, tax the rich, ooh, get them.
unidentified
Yeah, if you looked at what the actual left is proposing in camp, they're talking about, you know, We'll just have it be like, Project 2025 is about saving puppies.
I think that the misinformation campaign will collapse on itself.
At the end of the day, American people want a vision for the future, right?
They want to know.
That's what MAGA means.
It's like, make it great.
And that's what one of the candidates is talking about, a vision that we can all share in the bounty of this country.
And have the safety and the promises that were, you know, why did so many people die before us?
Helmut's sacrifice, the people who lost their loved ones.
We are the beneficiaries of the debt we can never repay.
But like with the left, this scaremongering is all they have.
And it's built on a fundamental deceit that this is like what their opposition even wants to put in place.
My expectation is that people see through this that you know like whatever people aren't buying it because they can't buy anything under Joe Biden you know it's like go to the grocery store and that's gonna quickly disabuse you of what Project 2025 is when you're trading off between rent and food.
unidentified
Well and so many people I mean I think often the criticism from independents and conservatives themselves is that you know Republicans who have any field of influence whether it's in government or you know in in Washington DC Uh, don't, don't do enough with it.
And so I understand, like, people may have criticisms of Project 2025.
Maybe they don't like certain policies, whatever.
But, uh, you know, you've said this multiple times tonight.
Like, it's, it's not actually coming from the Trump campaign.
It's independent.
And also, isn't it good that at least somebody is trying to suggest something?
Progressives do this all the time.
I mean, like, I could go to Tim and be like, Tim, here is my Project 2025 for this company.
You build a skyscraper of studios and we don't work on Fridays and I specifically get a coffee budget.
But it doesn't mean he's going to do any of it.
I mean, I think that's, That's the problem here.
There's this hysteria that's been whipped up that it's actually, you know, this is the new government when really every organization political out there, no matter where you fall on the spectrum, is going to look to potentially who's going to take over the executive branch and say like, hey, these are things that are important to us and we hope you would consider it.
I mean, that's not actually as crazy as they're making it sound.
Should we just make Kamala Agenda and then write all the stuff we think she's gonna do?
Well, someone's gonna make Defog's gay.
unidentified
She's gonna close Chick-fil-A on Saturdays.
The major Republican angle from this point forward, once the Kamala honeymoon phase is over, that the media has given her, is going back and trying to present to the American people all of the left-wing radical things that she said she would do when she was trying to outflank all of the other Democrats in the 2020 primary election.
and accepting the mantle of the most progressive senator in the United States.
And she said, yeah, well, you know, I've been given that or whatever.
And she doesn't reject it.
She accepts it totally.
The whole borders are thing is going to be another angle.
But all of the other policies she proposed, reducing red meat consumption, passing a Green New Deal, literally saying that she would get rid of the filibuster to pass the Green New Deal, These radical energy policies saying that, well, we just need to train all of the folks working in the energy sector for the jobs of the future.
All of these completely out of touch things.
And honestly, I have seen some people say, why isn't the right attacking her harder on this just yet?
Well, we don't Want all of that to get mixed up in the noise of the Kamala just locked up the nomination and understanding there's going to be a boost from the DNC probably when they have their convention historically they go up a few points.
Let that die down a little bit and then for the last two to three months just drive hard in ads and targets to redefine Who Kamala Harris is, because people know who Donald Trump is, they know of Kamala Harris.
They don't know all of the things that she has said in the past or stood for.
So she might get a little bit of an edge in the polls initially, a little bump, but once that messaging, that targeted messaging around the time when all of the ballots go out and the early voting starts, a few weeks prior to that, the American people have a very short memory.
And you could probably attest to this too, sometimes perception is more important than reality in politics when it comes to the messaging debate.
And so when you start to see this whole conglomerate of American electorate turn out to vote and the perception starts to turn into, oh well I'm starting to look into what the reality is, that changes the polls too when people go and do the research for themselves and see what the policies are from the left versus the right and that dictates what they go in and vote with.
I can't go out and have a cheeseburger on Sunday now because of Kamala Harris?
unidentified
She's gonna take your cheeseburgers.
If you can link the phrase, anytime that somebody is throwing the 2025, you can throw back whatever phrase you can come up with to say, well, go look at what Kamala wants to do.
On record, on TV, saying that she wants to get rid of cheeseburgers and reduce red meat consumption.
And then just kind of the whole list of things that she is on video, on audio admitting to.
And frankly, I'm sure she was probably dissatisfied with the way Joe Biden was doing his stuff because it wasn't far left enough.
It wasn't as progressive enough.
And that is going to be an issue for her with these middle-of-the-road and independent voters when they go into the voting booth.
If they redefine and allow this, like for MAGA Inc.
to sink these tens and probably hundreds of millions of dollars in negative ads against her, she's not been scrutinized.
They have directed, the Biden campaign has spent like $130 million they cannot get back.
Kamala has not taken any incoming scrutiny at all because she was not at the top of the ticket in terms of paid media advertising spent against her and promoting Trump against her.
Let that sink in for a little bit and I think you'll start to see the divide coming back.
So the funny thing is, everyone on the right is like, LOL, that's right, liberals do that.
It's very obvious sarcasm.
And then the left is like, wow, Tim's so dumb, he thinks she's Hitler.
And this is—it exemplifies quite a bit.
They can't tell the difference between—and this has been the case for a long time.
This is why woke humor is non-existent.
They can't understand what a joke is.
They lack the capability to understand complex ideas and socialization.
They'll stand there, and you'll go, Project 2025, and they'll go, whoa.
And then we played that video.
So I played the video.
The lady comes in and says, read Project 2025.
And you know she didn't read it.
This is the thing.
We've got a stack of books here.
We've got conservatives coming here.
They write books all day, every day.
And we read the news all day, every day.
And then someone's going to be like, did you hear about Donald Trump saying that Nazis were fine people?
And then conservatives are like, oh, I watched that press conference.
He didn't say that.
unidentified
One of the greatest examples was when Trump was indicted the first time and somebody went out in front of Trump Tower and started sticking microphones in faces of New Yorkers.
And they said, what do you think of the Trump indictment?
And one guy in particular said he is He has committed so many felonies and he is somebody who needs to be put in jail.
And he brain malfunctioned and melted down and got a blue screen and he just walked away.
That's as far as they'll get.
That's as far as they, because they have been told without proof and they don't retain their argument.
And when they cannot, Justify their argument, they will either shut down and walk away, or label.
Because if you label, and you know, this is preaching to the choir, but if you can label somebody something, then you can write off ever having to debate them.
I think it's fair to say you can go and find conservatives who would say Joe Biden committed crimes and when you say which crimes they might give you one or two things, which is I'd be willing to bet that it's probably like 60/40.
You go to your running mill Trump supporter and say what crime did Joe Biden commit and they'd be like that thing about showering with his daughter probably freaked me out.
They might not be able to give you the hard specifics on a bunch of detailed crimes.
So you're not going to get from the average person left or right any kind of detailed comment you would get from a high politico.
But I think it's fair to say, because we talked about doing a game show.
I want to do a game show that's political trivia.
The idea is, we ask a question, you got liberal team, conservative team, they write down the answer, and then at the same time they reveal their answer and you see, you know, you earn points and you can win money.
I'd be willing to bet on every episode for the right.
I don't care.
Farmer conservative guy down the street with a big FJB sign is gonna beat your average college student, you know, liberal.
Yeah, I mean, a little bit to Luke's point is like, they've obviously demagogued what, you know, Trump would be and they made this whole thing up, this hoax about Project 2025.
But you know, and that will go away.
The reality is that we really should be examining where she's going, but we know where she's going.
And we can't forget that, you know, The censorship regime.
I feel like that's one of the number one things they're going to crank down on.
The fact that we're here in West Virginia having a free speech debate and talking amongst ourselves is like, should be celebrated.
But this is the sort of stuff they want off the air.
They want off Twitter.
They were shutting this down.
And look, Remember, more people died under COVID under Biden than Trump, even though he was in the center of it.
Why?
Because anybody who talked about hydroxy or any other alternative take on it was deplatformed.
And we already know the viciousness.
That's millions of people dying because of their regime.
What do you get with Kamala unchanged?
And that's really going to be the scary thing.
She has to own what went wrong with the Biden administration.
And we have to be able to say, look, you think you have a hard time with inflation now?
Really start taking things out of your grocery basket, because that's how it's going to go.
You can't afford stuff.
And you are not going to be able to have a car.
They don't want you to have a car.
Why?
Because car insurance is through the roof.
Have you looked at your car insurance recently?
This is how they take things away from you.
unidentified
Yeah.
I think that Americans aren't, I mean she never, Kamala Harris never had high likability ratings.
Yeah, favoritism during her time as vice president.
There was a reason that she didn't really pose that serious of a threat to the Biden campaign in 2020 that she had to drop out when she did.
I mean, you know, even Joe Biden was able to spin being Obama's vice president into kind of an Internet meme.
Right.
Like, you know, there are a lot of people who are like, oh, they're best friends.
They have friendship bracelets.
He likes ice cream.
Like, it's not that they thought anything of his policies, but for a lot of younger people, they didn't know enough about his longtime stance in the Senate.
They didn't know enough about his history.
And he sort of became this, like, nice grandpa.
Right.
And then when he had to save us from Donald Trump or whatever, you know, he was OK.
He wasn't amazing.
He wasn't great.
Then he picked Kamala Harris as his like nod to the progressive branch of his party saying like I am a bridge candidate and look this is the kind of person I think could be my second in command and it's it's very much like political theater and political posturing but the Biden administration has done nothing to endear you know traditional Democrats more independent leaning Democrats and I don't know that Kamala Harris can really right that ship before the election.
Part of the problem is like You have a hard time putting your thumb on anything she did do.
Well, she was vice president.
Why wasn't she out there leading on foreign policy?
Here's the scary thing.
We're talking about domestic politics.
The rest of the world is watching us, right?
And they're waiting to pounce.
And they see weakness in Joe Biden.
What do they see with her?
I mean, missiles coming inbound, someone was explaining the other day, that that's about like a six to ten minute window where you have to have a really serious decision making.
And so you're putting that nuclear football in the hands of, you know, kind of the cackler in chief.
Cackler in chief.
But it's a worrisome thing that, like, She didn't she's shirking responsibility when she was VP and and she didn't get trained up and and right now you know their their fires started all over the place with the Middle East with you know in the South Pacific and and Obviously in Ukraine, and it's like, is she any person you think can bring peace together?
What evidence is it that she could lead on any sort of foreign platform?
unidentified
I think this Hamas-Israel conflict is going to crop up in a way that the Democrats do not expect for the November elections.
Because you already saw Joe Biden start to capitulate to these protesters who would jump up at the rallies.
He would say things like, they have a point, or we need to listen to them.
And it was because the polls were saying that the young progressive voters are not going to turn out for Joe.
In fact, they're going to stay home and go in a different direction to either pull votes away or just not turn out at all.
And you've seen in the youth vote in that party, the lack of enthusiasm for Kamala Harris and Joe Biden from 2020, I believe it was somewhere in the range of like 30% difference of whether or not they would show up and turn out for a Democrat candidate under Joe Biden and Kamala Harris down ballot in addition to the presidential candidate to where it's 3 and 4% now.
Their enthusiasm has dropped sharply.
So there is a split in the Democrat Party.
The narrative that they're going to try to say over the next few weeks is that the Democrats are united because they're all coalescing behind Kamala Harris.
Well, the delegates might be united, but the voter base is not.
In fact, it's starkly divided among age groups.
That's why you saw all of the college-age protesters on these campuses.
They come and sit under these liberal professors and their highly malleable kids who just listen and say, like, we're looking for a cause and apparently this is oppression so we're going to turn out and we're going to yell against it and rage against it.
These professors have been doing this for decades.
But now it's just cropping up because now the parents are sending their kids back and you've got this larger Look at Wednesday with Union Station.
I'm talking about them suppressing the media right now.
of Israel and the Democrat voter base that does support Israel is actually very strong in the moderate wing, but the moderates and the left wing younger progressives are going to deeply split and that could manifest itself in just this group not turning out.
I'm talking about them suppressing the media right now.
I didn't learn about it until after the fact that somebody was showing a video later on.
And granted, I was busy that day, but... I think I saw it from Tina Media.
They were burning American flags walking out of Union Station.
They hoisted... A stolen flag.
They hoisted the Palestinian flag there, and that's right next to the capital of the United States, and you know... They tried breaching the Capitol complex.
Yeah, it was a riot, and Even, I walked out of the Union Station yesterday, the Biden administration hadn't put up new American flags.
Like, it was disgraceful.
But the rest of America is not seeing this.
But certainly, as people go back to school, you're right, there's going to be an accentuation of these kind of tensions.
And what you see, you know, with this kind of, they're trying to talk out of both sides of their mouth, Because they have two key constituencies there, and it's very... trying to appease one with, you know, it's really... what they're saying about Israel is terrible.
You know, that they're not supportive of Israel, and these have been our key allies.
Now Donald Trump has said you should go to jail for a year if you're burning the flag, and there's two bits of context to this.
The contextual, the contemporary context around what Trump is talking about is a mob that stole a flag from public property and destroyed it in public.
And in that context, they should all get probably more than a year.
Make two or three maybe for the destruction of federal property, starting a fire in public, very dangerous.
As for whether, you know, in my opinion of burning the American flag, as long as you own it, I don't care what you do in your own backyard in your barbecue grill, but you can't set a fire in a public street.
So, they're all coming out and they're attacking Trump because he said you shouldn't be allowed to do this and it's just like, have you considered the context around even if they own the flag, they're setting fires in public?
No, what happened with J6 and the Fed's erection, the fact this is getting back to your reform of the DOJ and the FBI, they've consecrated all this weaponization of government onto one side and gone after it.
Meanwhile, you look for a parallel with any sort of enforcement action on the left and it's bailing people out of jail, quite the opposite.
So this is really, we're at a major crossroads where, you know, getting back to equal justice under the law is going to be the key to all this.
And right now with, you know, 2020, we remember what that was like.
And Kamala was the supporter of the whole thing, you know?
unidentified
So what would your biggest, like, if you could have a top three wishlist for the next Trump administration, what are three things you would like to see happen?
I think the first thing is to concentrate on good people.
Personnel is policy, right?
You're not going to get all that the electorate wants and votes for unless you have people who are dedicated to doing this.
And there's very competent people in government, very good people in the civil service.
but they need to be managed effectively.
So we need to have people who are listening, who are ready to kind of do this work, and it's going to be a sacrifice.
Believe me, you go and serve in the federal government, it's not like you walk in as a MAGA Republican to the C-suite, right?
You're not getting a boost out of your career for doing this stuff, if you're there for the right reasons.
So I think, you know, a kind of emphasis on that.
I think peace around the world, you know, that is key.
Really, the America First foreign policy, we're not isolationist, but as you know, I think President Trump's been the first to really shake up the blob and say, no, this kind of endless foreign war thing, this is not helping us.
We're having crumbling infrastructure.
Our country's falling apart.
We've spent trillions and trillions above on this adventurism.
So I kind of hope to see that curbed.
And then really, you know, getting domestic inflation under control, cutting federal government and beginning to purpose it in the right direction.
Like, this is going to be many decades to kind of restore some fiscal responsibility and getting the money back in the pockets of the American taxpayer.
But that has to start directionally.
And how do you do that?
It's by making commitments to, like, making things more efficient with the discretionary spending.
So, having kind of the resolution to get that done in the right way, I think is really important.
unidentified
Luke, do you have any wishes for the Trump administration?
What would you like to see happen?
I would love to see a cleaning out of the deep state and these bureaucrats like we have never seen before because they were the ones who thwarted an enormous amount of stuff that was Proposed by the first Trump administration.
And these were just career bureaucrats that were there.
And why do they want him to stay as far away from Washington as they possibly can?
It is because they know they're going to lose their jobs.
They're going to lose their power.
They're probably not reached tenure quite yet.
They're not going to be getting all these retirement packages that they want.
So if we can get in there and make sure that we don't have people who are in these organizations like the FBI texting back and forth to one another, don't worry, we'll stop him.
It blows my mind how the left can justify whatever they want to justify in their minds and just say that we are the arbiters of democracy, and therefore we know better and can supersede the will of the American people.
If they can blind themselves into saying that we are the only thing standing in between our republic and decline, then we can justify any action that we take, and that means Having these rogue FBI agents or having these prosecutors or like Andy McCabe leaking to the mainstream media in order to get his political agenda accomplished, compiling the Steele dossier funded by Hillary Clinton to use it as a justification to get a FISA warrant to spy on an opposing campaign, all of this stuff
Is this deep state warfare that we're talking about and if we can get rid of that and get some of these organizations either Abolished or back to their original missions that they should be doing in the first place then we can actually start to see throughout the rest of the United States a Revitalization of what the country is actually about because until we do that we're not going to get back to this standard of the documents that we were talking about earlier and the The initial foundation of just like, where did these documents even come from?
Why were they so concerned about an overreaching government is because these rogue actors would go and violate the Constitution.
If we can get rid of some of these people who are in these positions of power, we're going to be able to actually start to make significant change in the government like we've never seen before.
And I was talking about this with Social Security, and it's not a popular thing, but fortunately I'm not running for office, so I don't need to pretend to panic.
I'm not gonna run for office, but I'm gonna tell you, it is systems like this that are plaguing us.
The bureaucracy is an addiction.
There's all these arguments, oh, we got too many federal employees, we can't just fire them, it's bad for the economy, they need the jobs.
We have created a mechanism by which people are addicted, and we can never get rid of it.
The way I like to explain it, we got a wound on our arm in the United States a long time ago, and we decided we're going to put a bandage over it.
Then, after a little while, we looked at it and said, it smells bad and looks awful.
Let's put a bandage over it.
Then we looked at it later and it was festering and rotten.
We said, let's put a bandage over it.
No, you have to take off the bandage, and that is ending those programs, cleaning out the wound, and then perhaps reapplying a bandage, or realizing the wound has been healed.
But we've created an addiction system in these bureaucracies, and nobody wants to pull the plug and take the hard steps.
The reason why Trump gets such a tremendous pushback is not just because he opposes war, which was trying to bring peace, but it's because he's outright telling people in government he's going to eliminate their jobs.
So now all of a sudden these people are like, okay, well we're in government now, can we lie, cheat, and steal to keep our jobs?
And that's what they're doing.
unidentified
Yeah.
The federal government is one of the greatest arbiters of...
I don't even know how to explain this, but essentially going into an organization and saying, like, I'm going to clean you out should sometimes just get members of that organization don't want to go along with the leadership to depart.
But that's not the case in Washington.
You have to go in there and actually fire them because they think they can just hide.
That's how our government is structured.
So many of these people are just hiding.
In these mundane job titles who have these responsibilities that they probably couldn't define to their friends or even post on a LinkedIn profile, who have this sort of authority that they can go out and just go against whatever the Constitution has said because they have been layered under a layer of bureaucracy in the federal government.
Yeah, I mean this is where we talk about the Schedule F, and really it's not all the jobs, the 2.2 million are policy determinative, but there's a great strata at the top that are currently occupied by in the main career federal employees, but they are making You know, positive decisions about which way to institute a program.
And if those decisions are being made contrary to what the president just got elected to do, then that's a disjunct.
That's actually anti-democratic.
So the idea is to align those people in the sense that they're going to take political direction.
And if they aren't, then they should be removable.
Like, this is really what all the rest of us live every day when we come into work.
We could come into work one day and be out, you know, that afternoon.
But that's accountability.
But, you know, when you have these core jobs where the people, like you say, are going to wait out their political supervisor or just going to find a way to slow roll or subvert it, then that system has to be
unidentified
And I'll just give a quick example from Congress, because the incentive structure there in Washington is that you go in at the very bottom, you work your way up, you're a staffer, you capitulate to lobbyists by giving these meetings to your boss with these lobbyists and special interest groups, you maintain relationships with the people over at the lobbying firm over on K Street, and then when you're tired of Congress or you've burned out a little bit, then you go over to K Street and you become part of that swamp, and you start to advocate for those special interests.
If you don't give access to your boss, if you don't Listen to their legislation that they have or advocate for it.
You are not getting a career in Washington post-Congress.
You end up either burning out and going back home or finding something that doesn't pay very well.
The incentive structure is oriented towards ensuring that the staff and the members who come to Washington and are part of that group that say they're going to change the swamp Then have no alternative except to go get lumped into the swamp, because that's the only direction that you're supposed to go in your career.
You go over and you work off of Capitol Hill, and you go straight over to the K Street afterwards, either with public affairs or a lobbying group.
Yeah, now that's the hope for Project 2025, to bring people from outside the swamp to drain it.
And you're eventually going to have to go back home to your farm, if you will.
But, you know, you have to come in and look at this as service of the country.
The same way, you know, your family members maybe marched off to fight abroad, or, you know, people sacrificed, this is the sort of time where you have to come serve.
If you're looking for meaning in life, this is a great way to find it.
It's not going to be easy, you're going to get knocked around, but I can promise you it's going to ultimately be one of the most rewarding, so... Isn't it a... Sorry, go ahead.
And I think the challenge is with government in general, all governments will always function this way.
Thomas Jefferson was a little extreme when he said the Tree of Liberty must be watered with the blood of tyrants, and I think it was sometime after he said he shouldn't have said that.
He regretted saying it.
Everyone always gives you the first bit of that.
But I do think it's fair to say that the idea that we have to do a clean house, and a clean house means we fire, it means we vote out incumbents.
This has to be... I wish they put this in the Constitution.
Every 65-70 years, there's got to be a dramatic reduction in spending, like a mandatory overhaul and reformation of some sort, going back to the roots of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, and then, you know, basically cleaning out the bloat.
I wonder if they did not foresee what the bloat would become in this country with government.
I mean, there is a mechanism for amending the Constitution, the balanced budget amendment.
Has been bantered around, but you know, that's part of the problem is that amendment is so fought and difficult right now.
But look, you know, it's like at least getting back to, and this is where judges are very important, that the judges are going to say what the law is and not what it should be, that there is a cadre of activist judges.
And, you know, we've seen very positive things come out of the last administration.
With kind of the judiciary reform.
But everyone's got to keep their eye on the ball.
What could happen in another four years?
They lose it when they talk about the Supreme Court.
But we also have to be very protective of really the federal judiciary as well.
Because they're the last backdrop to preserving our liberties.
And if you have the wrong sort of person in place, it's a problem.
Make sure you subscribe to Tenet Media, the channel you're watching right now, and share the show with your friends if you really do like it.
We do the show every Friday at 10 a.m., and sometimes we do debates, but it's always about just—we try to line up conversations that are relevant to the culture we're in at the time.
So definitely check us out next Friday, but we'll be back tonight at 8 p.m.
at youtube.com slash TimCastIRL.
unidentified
thanks for hanging out and we'll see you all then you you you
- The packer with doorruller to dugnaden. - Yeah.
Have you seen how big they are?
Yes.
I don't understand how we're going to get them in the car.
