Is the US Headed for MORE WAR Under TRUMP? | Guest: Scott Horton
⇩FOLLOW OUR NEW CHANNEL ⇩
https://www.youtube.com/@AlmostSeriousTV
__
Over the past 75 years, the American Military Industrial Complex has expanded greatly.. with it's most ambitious venture being our proxy war against Russia by funding Ukraine. How and why did America end the cold war just to get back into another standoff with an even more powerful nuclear superpower?Show more Scott Horton joins us for this episode of Almost Serious where we discuss his most recent book. "Provoked", a book destined to be a seminal work in the antiwar movement.
⇩ SHOW SPONSORS⇩
➤ THE WELLNESS COMPANY: Be prepared for what is coming next! Order your MEDICAL EMERGENCY KIT ASAP at https://www.twc.health/ALMOSTSERIOUS and enter code SERIOUS for 10% off. The Wellness Company and their licensed doctors are medical professionals you can trust, and their medical emergency kits are the gold standard to keeping you safe! Again, that’s https://www.twc.health/ALMOSTSERIOUS, promo code SERIOUS.
➤ MyPillow: This past year has been one of the toughest for MyPillow, and we’re grateful for your support. To thank you, we’re offering wholesale prices on classic MyPillows! Get a standard MyPillow for just $14.98! Upgrade to a queen for $18.98 or a king for only $1 more. Body pillows are $29.98, and multi-use MyPillows are just $9.98. Visit MyPillow.com and use promo code ELIJAH or call 800-210-8491 with the same code. Plus, orders over $75 ship free! Don’t miss these incredible deals
__
⇩FOLLOW SCOTT HORTON ⇩
➤ https://www.x.com/scotthortonshow
➤ https://www.antiwar.com
__
➤BOOKINGS + BUSINESS INQUIRIES: [email protected]
#australia Show less
My name is E, and this is Almost Serious, a new concept with a familiar face where we're having one-on-one conversations about subjects that matter in a way that big tech probably won't have a problem with, but who the hell knows these days?
Because they have a problem with literally everything important that we want to talk about.
Now, by doing a show that's supposed to be able to be on YouTube, I thought, hmm, how can we risk it?
Well, let's talk to somebody who's not controversial, somebody who has no ideas that the government, the big tech, or the elites hate.
I'm talking about my guest today, Scott Horton.
Now, Scott Horton is a prolific writer, commentator, and podcast host known for his deep dives into U.S. foreign policy, particularly focusing on America's involvement in global conflicts.
He serves directly as the director of the Libertarian Institute, is the editorial director of anti-war.com.
The links in the description for that.
And the Scott Horton Show podcast, where he has conducted over 6,000 interviews since 2003.
Now, Horton's work is characterized by his critique of the U.S. military interventions and his advocacy for non-interventionism.
His latest book, known as Provoked: How Washington Started the New Cold War with Russia and the Catastrophe in Ukraine, delves into historical and geopolitical contexts that led to the current tensions between the U.S., Russia, and Ukraine.
His previous works include Enough Already, Time to End the War on Terrorism, and Fool's Errand: Time to End the War in Afghanistan.
Yeah, you know, what I like about you, though, and I continually tell people, is that you are not offensive.
You are actually, unironically, the book's called Provoked, but you are not provoking.
You essentially just tell the truth.
You happen to just say it often before it's popular to do so.
And when it's extremely risky to present the information from the Iraq war on, you've been on the money.
I got to ask you, do you have secret information or like, what is it that motivates you to actually share hard truths that probably financially aren't even incentivized?
When I first started reading anti-war.com, the head writer then and editorial director then was Justin Raimondo.
And my first impression of him was, how does this guy know all of his stuff?
And especially he lived out in San Francisco, and yet he's naming names of the guys in the Pentagon who are lying to war with Iraq.
And he just knew.
And the thing was, is just, you know, it's almost like if you just move to Mexico City to learn Spanish and just get completely immersed in it.
If you read antiwar.com every day, you're reading not just the news, but you're reading viewpoints by the people who are the very sharpest critics of American foreign policy, too.
So you're getting all the information that they are honing in on as well.
And then, you know, doing the interview show all those years and stuff is just my 10,000 hours, so to speak.
Yeah, I know we were talking before the show, and I thought it was funny because, you know, you've been so right about, you know, Iraq, Afghanistan being a disaster.
I mean, we almost pulled out of Afghanistan as badly as we went in, right?
It was almost as much of a rash, knee-jerk reaction.
And I know back in the day with the neocons when they were in power of the Republican Party, you know, they did what a lot of the woke do today, where like, if you presented truths that went against CIA narratives, you weren't just wrong.
You were like a bad person, right?
You were anti-American.
You were pro-terrorism.
And you see that today, right?
I mean, with your stances on, you know, the war in Gaza, it's not that you're just, you know, critical of a regime, critical of a country.
They say you're pro-terrorist, right?
You're a pro-Hamas.
You're a Hamas-sponsored supporter and that you are responsible for the October 7th or 11th or whatever day they're now making up and trying to make us remember in our minds.
But I'm going to ask you, you know, like with everything going on, what has been the most pushback as we get into your book, or what has been the most unpopular statement that you've held to that was true when you knew it and people ended up agreeing with you, you know, many years later or decades later?
But, you know, at the height of Iraq War II was the height of the mania that you're talking about, where it's, you know, it could be caricatured by Bill O'Reilly screaming, why do you hate America?
All this fighting for freedom and democracy of the Iraqi people, that's one thing.
But when you're dealing with anti-war.com, we actually know what we're talking about.
And so it's, you're not getting a bunch of, oh, you're just being mean to the Iraqis.
It's, listen, this is the agenda that you're really serving, whether your commanding officers even understand it or not.
This is what's really happening.
And then overall, by and large, I would say I would virtually always win.
They would always say, you know what?
You're really right and you really have a point.
And I think that's one of the real benefits of anti-war.com.
I mean, I got to tell you, 1999, because I didn't found the thing.
I came later on.
But when I first found that that URL is owned by Ron Paul libertarians, I just thought that was the most important thing in the world.
Because if they're just kind of leftist kind of commie, Marxoid some things who are just going to always be anti-American and always take the stance against what the U.S. is doing, sort of on principle's sake alone for that, then it's almost worthless.
Then you look at antiwar.com and these people are patriots.
These are Ron Paul guys.
These are George Washington guys who represent the old right and are trying to preserve free markets and prosperity and liberty for the American people.
So there's nothing anti-American about that.
It's fight the empire to save the republic.
That's what they've always been about.
And so that's why I fell in with them and how I know so much now.
So I'm kind of interested to pick your brain here because I know, I don't know if you were shocked, but when I saw the neocons flipped to Democrats, it was further evidence to me that, like I told people, these guys are not Republicans.
They're not Democrats.
They're a uniparty and what they want is war.
And I think that people don't understand that, like, you know, being anti-war was always painted as being some hippie, you know, yuppie thing.
It's like, oh, you know, the anti-war guys, the weed-smoking weirdos.
And maybe they do smoke weed.
A lot of people do today.
But I think what's kind of strange is like, we saw the flip before our very eyes.
These Bush Republicans like Cheney and there was quite a few of them out there that completely moved over and were like, we're going to support Kamala now because, you know, in the end, Trump doesn't want more war.
He doesn't want to support the expansion of the wars.
He wants to end the war in Ukraine.
Now, whether or not he wants to end the war in Gaza, I mean, it looks like maybe he does, but by escalating and then trying to, you know, maybe he's just giving open threats.
I don't know.
But like, what was your thoughts about that?
You know, seeing the neocons and the war machine move to Kamala.
And then how does that make sense with Trump then threatening Hamas and saying we're going to, you know, we're going to raise all hell?
I mean, is Trump really an anti-war president?
You know, because obviously the neocons and the war people aren't supporting him.
It's very confusing to someone like me from the outside looking in.
So put off the Trump thing for a second and start with the neocons.
They're Democrats in the first place.
That's what's so terrible about them.
The neoconservative movement, that's what it means.
Neoconservative doesn't just mean conservatives nowadays.
It's a specific sect of people who had been Trotskyite communists and Cold War kind of Truman Democrats who then moved to the right and became Reaganites.
And what had happened essentially was they were turned off by the new left hippies of the late Vietnam War era movement.
And those same hippies had opposed Israel in the 67 War.
And that was a big deal for these neoconservatives.
And so they're, you know, again, Justin Raimondo, my mentor at antiwar.com, wrote a book called Reclaiming the American Right, where he showed that really the entire post-World War II conservative movement had been infiltrated and really subverted by these neoconservatives from the very beginning.
William F. Buckley hired a bunch of ex-communists to write at the National Review.
And then you had Norman Podhoritz and Irving Kristol.
And then you had Albert Wollstetter and Leo Strauss at the University of Chicago.
And these are like the first generation.
Another one was Max Schockman.
And these guys then had their students who became the second and third generation of neocons, the people that we know as the men who lied us into war with Iraq working for Dick Cheney and George W. Bush in the early 2000s.
And they had had lower positions in the Reagan and Bush senior years, but then Dick Cheney put them throughout the National Security Council, his office, the State Department, and especially the Pentagon in the run-up to Iraq War II.
And then in the media, they're led, we're talking less than 100 men.
And so you had, what, like, I don't know, 35 of them or something in the administration.
And then the rest of them all write for the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal, and the National Review, and at that time, the Weekly Standard, which was led by Bill Kristol, Irving's son.
And so that's the faction.
You're right.
They are a cult of power, a cult of war power.
Why do they move to the right?
Because the left had given up on war.
Like I said, they were Truman Democrats, nuke them all, kill them all Democrats, Cold War Democrats.
When the Democrats became hippies, they moved to the right and became hawks.
But then when conservatives got Iraq war syndrome, and I don't mean Iraq war illness, but I mean like Vietnam syndrome, we've been used and abused and lost our son for nothing, and now we're jaded and don't want to do that anymore.
And started preaching America first.
Well, then you saw the neoconservatives move right back home to the Democratic Party to keep us at war, to keep the war party stranglehold on partisan politics.
So now Trump, what they hate and fear about Trump is that they don't completely own and control him.
He's too merciless.
He could change his mind.
He could do a thing.
He could fire their guy and hire somebody they don't like.
He could flip a policy at any time.
And so they want a Jeb Bush who's just going to be a clone and a puppet and do exactly what he's told.
And so it's, and then, and Donald Trump, he has his good points and his bad.
In a way, he's, he's kind of a cheap knockoff of Pat Buchanan.
But then again, if he's trying hard to mimic Pat Buchanan, we can settle for that because that means it is a break overall with the policy of globalism and the American empire.
And so even though he's you mentioned Palestine and the risk that he'll ultimately be really bad on Israel-Palestine, I think that's his worst spot.
But I think he's sincere in wanting to end the war in Ukraine and wanting to get along with Russia.
And for that matter, he said recently, we can get along with China too.
We already saw that he was willing to really go far beyond what Washington would tolerate in trying to make peace with North Korea the last time around.
So I'm not saying I believe in him, but I'm saying there is real reason to be optimistic that he wants to put this era of war behind us and get back to business.
And if not be free, at least be prosperous around here.
That's what's hard because, you know, on one hand, like I understand, right?
I have Jewish friends and I understand why they support Israel.
It's like it's a funny thing, right?
It's like I'm a white guy and I come out with a lot of pro-white statements and people accuse me of doing some sort of like ethno-nationalist, you know, white supremacy or something like that.
I go, no, I just want white people to have the same liberties to have their own homelands that Jewish people have to have what they believe is their homeland.
I mean, you believe in Zionism.
It's like, okay, well, I believe that white people have homelands in European countries.
I just don't think bringing in third world people is smart.
So I understand the ethno-nationalism.
I also understand the opposing side, too.
Like it's like, well, this is not their homeland.
Like they were kicked out, you know, by the by the Romans and that, you know, their nation fell.
And it's like, just like the United States, you know, whatever might have pushed out the indigenous people, those that were here before us.
And suddenly, you know, we made this America.
That was Palestine.
It was renamed.
The people live there peaceably.
And it's an occupied state, right?
I understand the battle there.
And I also think just because, you know, Israel has the ability to strategically hold, I'd say, militarily, you know, occupy the land, right?
That they are occupying successfully with U.S. backing and have formed this nation state.
You know, I don't think that justifies what happened in October to then indiscriminately bomb and kill children.
And I even joke sometimes on the show.
It's like, what's more American than bombing some brown people on their wedding day or whatever.
And it's kind of the sad part.
So when I hear Trump, you know, like talking about this, I only want to briefly touch on this.
And I want to get more into the Ukraine stuff and what's going on there.
You know, I told people I'm going to vote for Trump primarily because like there's a few things.
But one of the things are, I do think he's bad on his foreign policy.
I do think he's a little sold out by Adelson and some of this, you know, Israeli influence money.
But at the same time, I don't think he wants war.
I do think he's kind of a liberal.
He's kind of an old school Democrat.
He's not in the OCON.
And I don't see that.
And then when the neocons flipped on him, you know, I go, okay, well, that makes sense then.
That's what I thought was going to happen.
But then when he says, Hamas, watch out because all hell is going to break loose.
It makes me think a little fundamentally: okay, do you think that that's a threat of saying, because people know Trump's erratic and that, you know, I mean, he solemnly or whatever, he'll bomb you.
He will do it.
But we saw he didn't start new wars and new conflicts.
Well, we know now that they were in the middle of negotiations when he said that.
So that tweet was part of his negotiation to the peace deal.
Yeah, to put a spur under the saddle of all the people involved that he's serious.
He wants this thing done now.
And then, according to some of the reporting, and including by Arab sources, and I regret that I haven't read deeply enough into this, but there's a few reports that Trump's envoy really put the screws to Netanyahu and really forced this through.
There's a clip of Jeffrey Sachs, Professor Jeffrey Sachs from Harvard, or formerly, I don't know if he still is, but Professor Sachs, great anti-war guy, really middle line guy.
And it was just like this book and my last one together.
It's just a great interview where he talked about in specific, as far as the Middle East, that Israel is at the root of all this.
And not just that, but specifically Netanyahu is at the root of all this.
This is the clean break policy.
And this is why I talk about in my book enough already: that the whole point of Iraq War II was it was supposed to empower Israel.
And then it kind of backfired and empowered Iran instead.
So that necessitated the rest of our horrible terror war, including Barack Obama's dirty war in Syria, where they put us back on the side of the bin Ladenites just to spite the Shiites because that's who had benefited from Iraq War II.
So now, as you know, it's Netanyahu always at the forefront of leading the Hawks against Iran.
But who's the one who empowered Iran?
He's the one who empowered Iran by getting Bush senior, by getting Bush Jr. to invade Iraq in 2003 and overthrow secular Sunni.
They meant to empower the Shiites, but they stupidly believed that they would have total dominance over the Iraqi Shiite supermajority.
And then they would use them to lord it over Iran, to lord it over Hezbollah and southern Lebanon, et cetera, to break the power of Syria in the region.
But that didn't work.
It was completely stupid.
And that's the other thing about the neoconservatives is they're a cult of power, but they're also pretty empty suits.
And I famously debated Bill Crystal, and I think I did okay.
But what's really notable about the debate is that he had nothing, nothing.
And he just, it was like I was just debating absolutely nobody.
I could have been debating a hawkish high school kid about the role of America in the world for all that Bill Crystal brought to that.
When he's the ringleader of them all, he's one of the most influential of all the neoconservatives this whole time.
It reminds me of like Ben Shapiro a little bit, how he's like a debate pro, but he's always ducking interviews with he who shall not be named on YouTube.
And it's like, well, if this kid's such a weasel and you really think that, you know, a kid named Nick, that he's some sort of idiot, right?
And you mock him on your shows, why don't you just sit down for a conversation, school him?
And like, you know, I want to talk a little bit about that.
Like, obviously, this whole war conversation is what's interesting to me.
And I think that, you know, I even looked up, you know, YouTube's guidelines because I wanted to see, you know, what is it that they won't punish?
And they don't punish the academic discussion of things, you know, from a stand from a standpoint of discovery and understanding.
But it's funny that some of these topics, like, what would a tech company have interest in controlling conversations around wars?
And we know that they made policies, particularly about the Ukraine war and what you could do.
And one of the funny things was, was that you could literally call for the death and provoke and talk about murdering Russian citizens and Russia, but not Ukraine.
And as we talk about that, guys, I want to remind you that, you know, guidelines are changing a lot.
And I've been talking with you guys forever about getting off the grid, especially with the medical industrial complex, which is, of course, why I partnered with the wellness company, because I didn't have insurance for a long time, medical insurance.
And I found out when I did have it, there's massive deductibles.
They don't really cover a lot of things.
It's sort of like a scam.
And so sometimes you want to go get medication.
And when you go, you know, they're like trying to offer you alternate treatments.
We remember that from 2020 and beyond, they were trying to just give you whatever it is that they designed to make money off of you.
But a lot of times, while I don't think the abuse of antibiotics or anti-parasitics or anything is good, sometimes you do need to get antibiotics.
You get infections, you get diseases, and they are a wonderful development that has happened.
You guys know my backgrounds in molecular biology, genetic engineering, and it is a marvel and has saved so many lives.
That's why Dr. Peter McCaula, the most published cardio cardiologist in the United States, literally the most published, came together and formed this amazing company that is going to help you to stay well.
This brings you to a community of doctors who care about your health.
And you can also get the emergency kit, which you see right here, comes with a moxicillin, a ZPAC, azithromycin.
It also comes with ivermectin and other NSAIDs delivered straight to your door.
This is a product only available in the United States, but this allows you to cut through the hospitals, cut through the urgent care, and to have the medications on hand, plus getting expert advice on how to use them.
Now, I'm going to remind you for this.
This is an excellent gift to give a child who's in college, who doesn't have health care, or maybe their student health care isn't great.
These also can help fight against STDs and other types of things that sometimes young people might contract or you might contract.
But they're also to fight against infections, like the common cold, C19, and other types of illnesses like the flu, which can help bring down fevers.
So get your kit today right now at TWC.health slash almost serious.
Hey, look, when I was a kid, it was the first time I heard of the military industrial complex.
I bet I was 10 years old.
And it was a crazy conspiracy.
But what's weird about it is, you know who coined the phrase?
The two-term Republican president of the United States, Dwight David Eisenhower, who had been a five-star general, the leader of United Nations forces in Europe defeating the Nazis in World War II.
He's the one on his last day in office who said, Hey, by the way, I helped build this giant war machine.
Good luck, everybody else, in turning it off again.
And he's the one who coined the phrase military industrial complex.
And he wanted to add the term congressional to it as well, because the whole point being, obviously, corporations donate to politicians' campaigns to get them elected.
And then those politicians appropriate taxpayer money to buy weapon systems from those companies.
Same time, those same companies buy advertising in major media.
And then they infiltrate.
Now it's called just Nick Terse's book is just called The Complex because it's the military, industrial, scientific, Silicon Valley research, academic media, propaganda, comic book, everything complex.
Right.
Just, and there are probably a dozen great books on CIA and military infiltration of Hollywood and how they will rewrite scripts.
Apparently, Forrest Gump had a bunch of really great anti-war stuff in it.
They said, if you want our cooperation, we're cutting all of that out.
And there's a million examples of that where they just have this incredible influence in the top gun movies and things like that are essentially.
They let them use the equipment, which I thought is interesting.
Like the way that the military industrial complex will let real jets, real equipment that, you know, obviously movies don't have the budget to be, you know, leasing out this kind of equipment.
And so that means that the part where you go, yeah, you know, we sure love flying our jets, but my dad killed himself after what he went through in Iraq.
That part gets cut out or that would never be in the script.
Interesting.
That kind of thing.
So, or, you know, Vietnam references, whatever it is.
So, and then, and it's everywhere.
It's just like if you watch the Sunday morning news shows, it'll be sponsored by Northrop Grumman.
Well, are they selling stock?
Maybe, but not really.
What are they doing?
They're just blackmailing NBC, right?
They're making sure that NBC is dependent on Northrop Grumman.
And to put into perspective for people, they're in a hand-to-hand combat, right?
They have this is the GoPro footage.
And then I don't know if it was a Russian or a Ukrainian.
It was one of them.
I wasn't paying attention to that.
Was like, you know, okay, you won, you won.
He's saying, he goes, now let me die in peace.
Like, you are a good fighter.
Let me die in peace.
And he likes like a movie.
He like lays down and then a drone comes and drops a grenade on him and blows him up.
And I was like, well, that's pretty effed up.
And, you know, that's what's happening every day.
And so, you know, this war makes me angry and it elicits an angry response, not just to see that we're getting $770 to the Palisades victims, even if they're wealthy, or the same amount, you know, to the Maui fire victims.
And North Carolina is still a shoal, right?
It's still completely destroyed by the previous hurricanes, like Milton and whatnot.
But the fact that we know in the middle of that, we find $30 billion, $100 billion to give to Ukraine.
This is a very big problematic war, you know, domestically, economically, and also just the sheer human capital on both sides.
So when it comes with this conflict in Ukraine, can you break down the key actions or policies over the past few decades that you believe led to this war actually happening?
Because I've heard people say that, you know, we provoked it.
And I hear people say that, you know, Putin's a terrorist and he just invaded a sovereign country.
Well, it's a few things, but I'll try to be as bullet pointy as possible to get, you know, to carry us through the story.
Essentially, at the end of the last Cold War, the Bush Sr. administration decided that rather than bringing the empire home since the Soviet Union was gone, that they would continue to push their luck and expand American power and influence throughout the world, and particularly the NATO military alliance.
And this included the beginning of intervention in Bosnia as well, as part of the purpose of it was to establish a new need for NATO out of area or out of business.
As they said, since their enemy was gone, they needed a new one.
Bill Clinton came in.
He had the horrific, and this started under Bush Sr. as well, actually, was the horrific shock therapy economic policy, which was supposed to help them transform from communism to capitalism, but in fact, just transferred them to pure gangsterism and corruption and a horrible drop in the standard of living.
Imagine them abandoning communism for capitalism and things getting much worse and excess deaths getting up to five, six million people, standard of living and life expectancy just dropping through the floor because of the corruption and the gangsterism in the transition, which the Clinton administration really helped to aid and abet the whole time.
Then you had, of course, continued the real expansion of NATO.
The decisions were made under Bush Sr., but Bill Clinton began the NATO expansion and also did the war in Serbia as well as the war in Bosnia, both of which were at the expense of the Serbs, who are the Russians' ethnic and religious kin and longtime allies.
They were our allies in World War II, fighting the Nazis and saved 500 down American airmen, by the way.
Anyway, then Bush Jr. comes in.
He tears up the anti-ballistic missile treaty right away.
And he, and Bill Clinton actually started this in Albania, Croatia, and Serbia.
But this is the color-coded revolutions, which you may have heard of.
Bush Jr., pardon me, W. Bush, did the most prominent of them, the Rose Revolution in Georgia in 03, the Orange Revolution in Ukraine in 04, the Tulip Revolution in Kyrgyzstan in 05, the failed Denim Revolution in Belarus, and the Cedar Revolution in Lebanon in 05 as well.
People also may be familiar with in the Obama years, the Green Revolution in Iran.
And these are essentially coup d'états dressed up as revolutions, massive American support.
It's an overt action instead of a covert one.
They just pour in money to dissenting media and dissenting political groups to support their sides.
They're always attacking these sort of semi-democracies.
So they're making the transition to democracy.
Can't really overthrow a dictator this way.
But if it's a guy that you don't like, you just pretend that your side really won the election.
You got to believe our exit polls, not the vote results, and protest to spend 100 million Soros dollars on U.S. tax dollars until you can get the guy to agree to another round of elections or some kind of compromise to force your way.
And they've done this over and over again.
And this is always at the expense of the Russians and their friends.
And Bush, as part of tearing up the anti-ballistic missile treaty, that was part of the process of establishing anti-ballistic missile systems in Romania and Poland with the radars in the Czech Republic.
And this is a big deal because the Sparrow defensive missiles are fired from the Mark 41 missile launcher, MK-41 missile launcher, which is a dual-use launcher and it can host Tomahawk cruise missiles, which can be tipped with hydrogen bombs.
So this is a violation of the spirit of the Intermediate Nuclear Forces Treaty that kept short and medium-range missiles out of Europe, which Reagan had signed in 87 and Trump eventually tore up his last year in office last time around.
And then Obama comes in.
Oh, and I should say, last year of Bush, he announces, oh, well, first of all, in 04, he did another round of NATO expansion, nine countries, including the Baltic states and some of the Balkans and Central European nations.
And then in 2008, he could not get his allies in France and Germany to agree to what's called a membership action plan for Ukraine and Georgia.
But he insisted on announcing that one day they will have a membership action plan, which is basically the same thing as inviting them into the alliance without actually bringing them into the alliance, but putting Russia on notice that we're coming for these two very different countries.
Didn't Russia try to become NATO or join and we rejected them?
Why do we reject Russia but then accept Ukraine?
Considering in many ways, if we're talking about corruption or the criminal controls of the nations, there's really no diametric difference between the two.
So going back to the Bill Clinton years and the H.W. Bush years, I was raised on this.
Tell me if this is true for you as well.
That the lesson of the Versailles Treaty after World War I and its punitive restrictions against Germany helped lead to the rise of the Nazis.
Everybody acknowledged that.
They stripped all these German territories and put all these war reparations on them.
And then the Nazi Party was in part a rise in reaction to reclaim German lost glory, etc.
And then the lesson of that was don't do that.
So after World War II, America befriended and rebuilt our enemies, Germany and Japan.
And they've been part of the American Western system ever since then.
And so that's what you're supposed to do.
Not supposed to do like Versailles.
You're supposed to do like Truman and MacArthur and rebuild your and Eisenhower, rebuild your enemies and make them your friends.
But you see, the problem with Russia at the end of the Cold War, even though Bush Sr. and Bill Clinton said, yeah, we got to heed the lessons of Versailles, they didn't because they didn't occupy Russia.
They didn't really control Russia the way they controlled Germany and Japan, right?
We still have a massive military garrison in both of those countries.
They are under our thumb.
So we can rebuild and befriend them because they're essentially our satellite states.
And they have a degree of sovereignty, but they have a degree of not sovereignty as well.
It just wasn't the same case with Russia.
So if we're going to really rebuild them to strength, but they're going to be outside of our control, then we're taking a huge risk.
Now we can bring them into our alliance and that would maybe help give us more influence over them.
But at the same time, it would mean we would have to compromise with them.
They would have too much of a say.
Germany goes along with whatever America wants almost always.
So all this stuff that's going on then in Western Europe, right?
Like someone like me, who's more of like a foundational, I'm a nationalist, right?
I would say like in many ways.
My family was here before it was a country.
We fought in the revolution.
And I'm part of the sons of liberty or whatever, you know what I mean?
The family lineage.
So it's traceable.
We have the documents.
But, you know, when I look at that, I actually, my blood is tied to the soil, right?
Some people's blood is not tied to it.
Maybe they're not enough generations in.
You know, you see that very common here in the U.S. that they say we're multicultural.
And it's like, well, I don't know if it's good if, you know, if you're here, you shouldn't be like, you know, I'm a Cuban or I'm this.
Like either you're coming into America or you're not.
And you're either part of this country or you're not.
And we have a very new wave of immigrants in the West that are really not, they call it assimilation, but they're not even, they're not even showing any idea of wanting to be a part of the society or culture.
Like they're trying to transplant and transform the West.
And we're seeing the West lose its identity.
I went to New York and I could have been in any city in the world.
There was no, there was no Americans anywhere.
It's like everyone was foreign, so many languages being spoken.
And I hardly heard English.
Now, that being said, you know, maybe it makes sense for metropolitan, you know, New York.
But then it's like, wait, London is no longer white, right?
It's about 30% native Brit.
And, you know, I think the fastest growing religion is Islam.
And the most popular name in Ireland now is Muhammad.
Is this what America wants?
Or who wants that?
Because that's what it seems like when I hear Ukraine becoming West.
I watched it and they're like, well, so we can have gay parades.
I literally heard that.
It was like, you know, Ukraine has gay parades or why is Israel our ally?
Well, they are very gay.
It's like, is American interest that everyone's going to be gay and that every city is just multi-ethnic and racial and that countries can't have their own identity?
Because I'm really confused on who's doing all that and if that's us.
Modern American liberalism is just a mental disorder, dude.
I don't, I mean, I try so hard to be empathetic and put myself in other people's shoes, but when I try to be a liberal, I just get a splitting headache.
It just doesn't work.
I don't know how they can do it.
And that's on virtually every question.
I mean, for one thing, I mean, just on basic immigration, when you have waves of refugees from massive economic dislocations and violent wars, and that's totally different than people who just are moving somewhere because they want a better life, right?
This is like act of desperation.
So when you look at the massive refugee crisis of the second half of Obama there, this is, they were all the refugees.
They were from Afghanistan, Pakistan, Libya, Syria, Yemen, Iraq.
These countries sound familiar?
These are the countries that America and our European allies were bombing off the face of the earth.
So then, yeah, we had a massive refugee crisis from there.
At the end of the Obama years, or even in the middle of the Obama years, there's a massive refugee crisis at the border from Hondurans.
And particularly because of the loopholes in the law, they were sending children unaccompanied to the border.
And Hillary Clinton was like, well, we got to send them back and be tough.
But what does Hillary Clinton, Secretary Clinton, know about Honduras?
Oh, she rubber stamped, gave American approval for a right-wing coup against the government there and put install corrupt businessmen in alliance with drug dealers who ended up turning the country to absolute crime and chaos and caused the massive refugee crisis from Honduras.
Yeah.
And in fact, when that coup happened, Barack Obama was like, well, we don't approve of that.
The Organization of American States, we have rules against stuff like that, whatever.
And Hillary Clinton said, like, belay that order.
He's not the boss here I am.
And I say we back this coup.
And then he backed down and said, oh, well, whatever she says, right?
The same thing with the drug wars in Mexico.
George W. Bush essentially forced Vincente Fox to militarize the drug war.
We got a problem with these cartels.
So we want you to send your army after them.
Well, all that ended up happening, of course, was that the cartels all armed up to military strength themselves.
And then the major special forces squad that was sent to attack the drug cartels ended up taking over the business and became the Zeta cartel.
They had been the military anti-drug guys.
And they just said, wow, what a great business to be in.
Why be soldiers when we could be drug dealers?
And meanwhile, why is there even cocaine in Mexico?
They don't grow and produce cocaine, coca, and cocaine in Mexico.
All that's in South America.
But the U.S. intercepts all the air travel and sea travel.
So we force it across land.
So you have Mexico completely divided in warring factions.
Why?
Because Washington, D.C. tore it apart.
And then we go, well, there's too many Mexicans.
Well, stop destroying their country then.
It's the same thing everywhere.
And which, you know, the, what, 11 or 12 million illegal immigrants that Biden and his government let in over the past four years, which is incredible.
That's not just Mexican, you know, Honduran migrants from Hillary's foreign policy or even seasonal migration for Mexican workers.
A lot of that is, I don't know, I read that there's like, what, 100,000 Chinese nationals included in that and people from Central Asia.
unidentified
Yeah, people from that state, that's crazy from Tajikistan.
I mean, look, look, far be it from me to just presume people guilty, but when I hear illegal immigrants from Tajikistan, I think Sleeper Agent is ready to cause trouble.
That's not someone who just came here for a better life.
On the other hand, I should say, because it's just true and it's been my experience, that a lot of times in my whole lifetime, that immigrants oftentimes are more patriotic than regular Americans.
They're more hardworking.
They tend to be more religious and more conservative.
And they maybe love their home country, call themselves Italians or call themselves Cubans, but they have a real special love for American liberty.
They chose to make their home here for a better life for themselves and their family.
And as much as they love their country back home, they appreciate the liberty that they have here.
And, you know, my father-in-law, for example, is an immigrant.
He's the only guy on his block that flies an American flag all year round.
You know what I mean?
So I think, you know, there are a lot of people like that, but certainly there should be rules.
And, you know, there's a great article in the American Conservative magazine by Peter Van Buren, where he explains it's the law, the way the law is set up is what causes all these people to claim asylum because there's no other way really to get in.
And then, but so to do so, they end up once they at least pseudo or claim asylum, now they're allowed to be in the United States for a certain amount of time and then they disappear and all of these things that come from the crisis from that.
So of course, you know, central planning doesn't work really, no matter what you're talking about.
And the national government's control, its foreign policy and its immigration policy are part of that.
But as far as like, oh, we'll integrate the whole world under like the rainbow flag or whatever.
I mean, I think that's just center left liberal democratic opinion.
Like we have, we have people like that on that claim to be right-wing, right?
They're like, they're typically atheists and they are feeling politically homeless.
So they're taking advantage of the of the people on the right because the people on the right are sore losers.
And the fact that like we love washed up celebrities, it's like the, there's a joke, like the washed up celebrity to right-wing pipeline, right?
It's like, say you support Trump and all of a sudden it's like, this is Elizabeth McKinnon and she's a Trump supporter.
Like, who?
She was on episode three as a.
you know, extra in family matters or something like that.
And back in like 20 years ago, like, who?
It's like, she's speaking at the conference, Turning Points new conference.
Like, who is that?
Like, I'm, I, who even is that?
And then you go around here and we're so desperate to be accepted because we've been so rejected by the institutions that we like swallow up anyone who gives us a little bit of respect.
So then we end up getting muddied out and sort of washed out by these weird thinkers.
Some of the more obscure and sort of nonsensical pseudo-intellectuals out there.
And then he also does this conflation of words that's so hilarious.
Like he'll be like, here's the Nazis.
And it says awaken in German, which is also a version of woke, which means that they're into transgenderism.
And I'm like, look, I'm not going to become some apologist for them today, but we could talk about the books that they were burning and we could talk about Manfield and Hirschfeld and what was going on.
You know, they clearly were not pro-transgenderism.
You can say they were evil people and you hate them.
But, you know, then he goes out and says they were actually communists.
And you're like, okay, it's one thing to tell me that these are bad people and I'll listen to you and that's fine.
But to start just making stuff up to fit your needs, are these people mentally ill?
Like, are they trolling us or are they mentally ill?
Well, you know, it's a long-term trope on the right that the National Socialists, get it, socialists, they were just a kind of leftist.
And so all totalitarianism belongs on the left and freedom on the right.
But I just don't really see the political spectrum that way.
It's true that there was, you know, Strasser, especially, who was, you know, one of Hitler's right-hand men in founding the Nazi party, was more of like a worker organizer sort of socialist.
You know, I don't know if he exactly what he had in plans for the means of production, but there was a bit of socialism there.
But ultimately, you know, especially under Hitler himself, the Nazi party was really, and this is, I mean, look, it's all just categories, but this is how we define these terms, right?
So it's sort of just ridiculous to just throw the term away.
It's like if there's day and night, they are their opposite.
So Nazism really was in large part a reaction against communism.
I mean, that was, you know, I mentioned earlier why people tolerated the rise of the Nazis was part as to reclaim, you know, to get vengeance and reclaim their lost glory, what had happened to them after Versailles.
The other part of it was they were the ones beating the hell out of the communists in the street when there were big street fights and the communists were trying to take over.
It was the Nazis that were holding them at bay.
And so there were people in Germany who said, well, geez, at least they keep the communists out.
And that was, you know, so if anyone was going to be allies in German politics at the time, it was going to be the socialists and the communists and with the Nazis on the far other side.
You know, they're avowed enemies.
but it is funny it is he also made a list it's also true that look if he if if totalitarianism means the means of production and the police are one and the same thing right If you want to like oversimplify it a bit, there certainly are a lot of sames in communism and Nazism, right?
There's a lot of similarities between James Lindsay and Hitler.
You know what I mean?
I'm just saying, you know, if you really want to oversimplify it, they're both men and they both might have secret drug addictions and are a bit erratic and unpredictable.
In terms of intellect, I can tell you which one was probably smarter.
But I do think it was funny because we noticed lastly on that, like that's why these liberals have lost their mind.
They're trying to find a home somewhere.
But the truth is, is that they've destroyed America.
They've brought liberalism to the world and essentially destroyed the world.
And they're also like, they have no idea of identity or anything.
And he made this list on what the woke right was and what real conservatism was.
My producer pointed this out.
He said that the real conservatives are moral people.
And then his comparison and his little Venn diagram thing was that the woke right is demoralized by communism.
And he got the word to have morals and demoralized because he had the word moral in him.
He thought that they were like counter words, but you're demoralized as like a feeling and morals is like a standard or like some sort of a lifestyle.
So he got the word demoralized and moral confused.
Yeah, it was like, yeah, you just don't care about truth anymore or something.
You had electroshock therapy down of how you morals.
And we sat there and went, hey, this guy might be mentally ill.
And I think when I look at liberals, I feel bad for them because I think that it's a religion now.
And as we're exporting this, you know, with the war question, we're exporting this to the world.
And I know that, you know, obviously we talked about the color revolutions.
We talked about NATO expansion.
But I think that I want to talk a little more about liberalism.
But as we talk about that, guys, I just want to remind you that obviously, you know, it's very hard out there to continue to make a podcast, have these discussions.
And people like Scott, right?
He's smart.
He has a book and he's, you know, an author.
I'd say he has many books, maybe more books than there are countries in the world at this point.
Who even knows?
And his books are dense.
And he's found a way to support himself speaking the truth because people don't want him to speak the truth.
Make sure you pick up a copy of his book.
But also, when we have truth podcasts like this, we rely on you guys to support us, which is why, of course, we are also sponsored by My Pillow.
And guys, these are American-made products for an American company.
I use them at home.
And I want to remind you that it's not just American-made products.
They're very comfortable.
And we know Mike directly this show.
So he gave us a really good deal that if you use my promo code Elijah on the screen, ELIJAH at mypillow.com, you get their $50 pillows for only $14.98, which is great.
And then if you have a queen or a king size, it's only $18.98 and $19.98, respectively.
But also, if you're looking for a new pillow, this is a good gift.
I am not joking.
I don't know anyone that would really get mad, especially young guys.
You should probably buy your son or somebody a new pillow, but it's yellow and gross.
But you should be changing out your pillows frequently that you'd be surprised at the amount of dust and contamination that are on them, especially if you have your dog sleeping in your bed or if you sleep on your side and you drool.
Get these pillows and they also help you have a better night's sleep than I've ever had.
Plus, the company also has like slippers, which are usually like they're usually super expensive and they're on discount right now too.
They have robes, bath sheets.
It's all American-made stuff, high-quality material, and basically everything you need for your home.
So support a company.
Mike Lindell, he's a great guy.
He's, you know, he's come back from drug addiction, everything started this company, employs Americans, and really is trying to, you know, fight for it for what he believes is a better place in this world.
And stores have canceled their orders.
This is literally why they're on sale because they didn't want him to have money to help Trump win the last election.
I know it sounds really crazy, but I was like, hey, I don't really judge people on their politics like that.
I think that's disgusting and rude.
But I also want to support their company.
So support their company, support Americans, American products, and a better night's sleep and support this show.
But going to mypillow.com, promo code Elijah, or you can call 1-800-210-8491 as well.
Again, promo code Elijah for $1,515 for the pillow.
I'm here with Scott Horton.
We are going to kind of, this last segment here, discuss this idea.
I want to focus on that, the liberalism, right?
You know, some critics of your book say that your analysis and provoked of the world, the war, people accuse you of being anti-American.
And I think that there is an inextricably linked concept where people link American to being liberal.
Like, it's like you have to, and being liberal, also kind of being a push-like, it's like you kind of just have to obey the CIA and do what they say and go along with the national orders, or you're un-American.
Let everyone do what they want, let the American government do what they want, and just wave your flag on 4th of July and fall in line.
But I think it's interesting here that a lot of this stuff has, they see your book oversimplifies a complex situation, downplays Russian aggressive actions.
When we're talking about the totality of your book and the conflicts, we're told that Russia is the ultimate aggressor and that Russia and China are the problem.
And as to not put you in a box so you say, actually, America is the real racist.
It's like, who's really the real problem right now in terms of preventing global peace?
Which countries?
And how much are we skewed in what we're thinking, what we're told?
Right?
Is Russia a big player, little player?
Israel, big player, little player, the U.S., what's really going on to explain it to the average person of who's really provoking and causing the conflict that we're seeing that's continuing forever?
So, look, on the first thing, is I'm sorry, I'm just from the 1990s when all us patriots hated the government.
The government were Bill Clinton, the people who lied about everything and burnt the branch of idiots to death and called it a suicide and then covered it up when they could have stopped the Oklahoma City bombing, but then it happened right on their watch.
Then they blame the entire right wing for it.
When, in fact, it was their informants and friends who had done it.
And, of course, bombed Iraq for eight years straight, provoking, causing the September 11th attack, causing their own terrorist mercenaries to turn on the United States, kill 3,000 people, and kick off another 10 years of war.
So I've always considered, and I think anyone who's ever really, you know, read the Founding Fathers and really thinks about these issues at all understands patriotism means loving your country and your government ain't your country, right?
And particularly, never remind the institutions, the individual human men in charge of your government at any given time ain't your country.
Bill and Hillary Clinton and Al Gore and their administration.
That's not your country.
That's just who happened to be in power at that time.
And frankly, it wasn't so much a Democratic election as it was a coronation.
The boy from Hope, he was from Wall Street.
He was a made guy, Bill Clinton.
He had gone to Georgetown, had been to Oxford, as a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and good standing with all of his, you know, the American foreign policy and permanent Washington, D.C. establishment, who then brought him.
The American people were told, oh, yeah, no, the governor of Arkansas just ran for president and won because that's what voting is like in a democracy.
Yeah, right.
So that's the bottom, you know, basic discrepancy there as far as patriotism and blaming America.
Yes, I do blame our government because as everyone knows, right?
No matter who you are, no matter what generation you're from, no matter what part of the country you're from, everyone knows we're number one.
We're the superpower.
There's no other superpower.
And at the end of the Cold War, America was run by a bunch of Bushes and Clintons and McCain's and Bidens.
We never had Ron Paul up there.
We never had Pat Buchanan up there doing the right thing for the American people to protect our country.
We had Bushes and McCain's this whole time making these decisions for us.
And then what have they done?
They ruined everything.
You know, I debated Wesley Clark, who had opposed NATO expansion in the 1990s.
And I said, General, you were right the first time.
You said we shouldn't do this and we did this.
And it was a terrible mistake.
And he goes, no, I was wrong.
Bill Clinton was right to overrule me and expand NATO anyway.
He was, huh?
Well, we're at war right now.
So what does that tell you?
Obviously, he was wrong.
Wesley Clark was right the first time.
We should not be doing this.
It's an unnecessary provocation of the Russians.
And, you know, this is essentially forgive the Putin talking point.
He was, by the way, he did come in here and it was, it was really where there was like ruples like just coming out of his pockets.
And he's like, I don't want to show these, right?
That's what they always accuse you of.
If you say anything objective that might say that maybe Putin isn't the overt aggressor and isn't the anti-Christ, as you put that in a Protestant or WASPI terms, they accuse you of like being a Russian bot.
And look, the fact of the matter is, and just to address that, is look, he, I believe, unnecessarily escalated this war by 10,000% in 2022.
It was Barack Obama who started this war.
We'll be perfectly clear about that in the year 2014.
He and John Brennan started the war.
When Putin escalated in 2022, I think that was a massive mistake.
And as Tally Rand said about whatever it was, I forget.
It was worse than a crime.
It was a mistake.
It was a wrong thing to do.
Hundreds of thousands of people have been killed.
And ultimately, it'll be bad for Russia as it's bad for Ukraine.
So I'm not, you know, the book is not called justified.
The book is called Provoked.
And I don't think that he had no other choice but to do this.
But on the other hand, it's just adult of us to ask what is the other side of the story here, right?
I'm not asking for sympathy for Russia.
I'm asking for empathy.
Put yourself in their position, Elijah.
That's all, right?
And so what it is, essentially, is as Putin did say in his declaration of war, that we tried independence for Ukraine, but that wasn't good enough for America.
America was determined to run off with it.
America is determined to colonize it.
They couldn't just let it be a neutral country.
They had to try to make it one of their satellites, and that is intolerable.
And so, as he put it, I'm very roughly paraphrasing, the question was, are we going to do this now or do it later when it's harder?
So we're going to do it now when it's less difficult.
And in fact, I like citing this anecdote because I think it's just so telling.
And this is in the book.
There's a great journalist named Zach Dorfman who writes for Yahoo News or did three years ago.
And right at the dawn of the war, he wrote a series of articles for Yahoo News about the CIA in Ukraine.
And in one of them, he quotes the CIA officers who were in charge of receiving the weapons and distributing them to the Ukrainian government.
This is before the war, right before the war.
And the CIA officers told Dorfman, they said, listen, we told our bosses to tell the politicians to stop with the armed shipments.
These weapons are not deterring Russia.
They're provoking them.
And it makes sense, right?
You could see how somewhere up on Mount Olympus in the White House, they decided, oh, I know what we'll do.
We'll send in a bunch of weapons and that will send the message to Putin that you better not.
Okay, fine.
They decided that fine.
But on the ground, the CIA operations guys said, uh-uh-uh, bad calculation.
These weapons aren't deterring Putin.
They're making war more likely.
We should stop now.
But then you have the commander agent problem and all this, and they're not communicating well enough.
And so they continue the problem.
It was their words.
We're carefully calibrating the amount of weapons that we're pouring in to try to deter Putin from attacking.
It was like, hey, you know, we're going to, it was like the idea too of like, we're going to leave Afghanistan so that there will be peace in the region.
And it's like, well, you left billions of dollars of equipment and that equipment is going to be used to provoke more and more conflict.
So, you know, you guys are actually stupid.
Some may say they even left intentionally to be able to arm insurgents so that they could take down Syria.
What really happened was Trump's deal was to pull out on by May 1st, the beginning of fighting season, will be gone.
But when Biden came in, he delayed the withdrawal until September.
Well, the Taliban did not delay their takeover of the country, which went ahead on schedule, which in the terms of Vietnam, they wanted to have what was called a decent interval between the time we left and the North Vietnamese came and sacked Saigon and made a fool out of us, right?
Well, in this case, by delaying the withdrawal for four months at the Pentagon's insistence, by the way, by delaying the withdrawal, all that meant was we had all these soldiers and all this equipment and all these civilian, you know, State Department and other officials in the country who all needed to be evacuated in a hurry.
And on top of that, they couldn't say, we're leaving because we lost.
And if we're going to stay, we have to start the war all over again.
We have to send 50, 75,000 men and do a whole new escalation.
Otherwise, the Taliban are going to kick what's left of our occupation's ass.
So we have a ceasefire now.
If we want to stay, we're breaking the deal and going back to war.
They couldn't, and we'll lose it.
They couldn't admit that.
So what do they do?
They lied and they said, we're leaving because we won.
We're leaving because we did such a great job building up a 300,000 man army and with all this great military equipment, which they'll surely be able to use to hold off the Taliban.
And we build a great government in Kabul, which is a wonderful success and is sure to stand long after we leave.
And that was the lie upon which they said that they were leaving, that they had won rather than they had lost.
Like you can give a foreign people the U.S. documents.
You can give them the U.S. equipment, but there are some very distinct differences between people groups in the world and some things just are not going to work.
So, put yourself in their position now once they painted themselves into that corner.
Now, they can't take all that equipment away from the Afghan army because then, especially the Republican Hawks, the Rubios of the world and McCain's of the world are going to accuse them of being the cause of the fall of the army.
Well, of course, it fell.
You took all their equipment away, right?
When, in fact, if Biden to do the right thing, he would have had to tell the truth, which is we lost this war.
Bush lost this war.
Obama lost this war.
We lost this war, and we're leaving and we're taking all of our equipment with us.
But don't blame us for the fall of the Afghan National Army.
Trust me, it was gonna fall anyway.
So now we're taking and/or destroying all this equipment on our way out.
So they knew that's the only way they would have had just to.
I think he probably had a pretty good inkling that this Taliban was taking over the whole country, and there was nothing that we could do about it other than a massive escalation at that point.
And so they boxed themselves into that corner of leaving the country, leaving an Afghan army that was sure to dissolve, but holding all those weapons that then fell into the hands of the Taliban.
Considering that the fact that you'll probably have another book out at some point.
And you'll, well, I mean, you have a lot of other books, a lot of things.
We'd love to have you out here again because you've been a fantastic sit.
And, you know, I wish the show was longer, but we try to keep it at a pace for the people to be able to consume.
You know, I mean, I love the Joe Rogan four and a half hour sits, but for the average person, you know, 90 minutes is already capping where they can stick around.
To the people who are watching at home here, if you people want to support you, number one, tell us how we can get your book and also where we can follow you on social media.
Like, what's the best way to keep up with your insanely brilliant mind?
My name is E, and this has been almost serious because we talk about serious topics, but we can't be completely serious because sometimes life is a joke.
As I always say, life is a clown world, but we still have very serious and real consequences.
We live in an anarcho-tyrannical government where, you know, the electorate and the people who follow the laws are highly regulated and we're held to the high standards of the law, while criminal gangs organize, operate, and criminals walk around with impunity, it seems, in our cities.
It seems like we have a government to only enforce the law against those who probably need enforcement the least.
And yet, all of our problems get worse and worse and worse.
We hope to uncover more and more.
If you enjoy this show, please consider supporting directly our sponsors, which was, of course, My Pillow and The Wellness Company.
It's the easiest way to support.
And we appreciate you and our guests.
We want to support our guests.
So please click the link, get the book for someone who would love it if you're not a reader.
And if you are a reader, get ready to take notes and learn a lot about geopolitical conflicts, what's going on in the world, and how things became the way they are today.
This is really good because it'll give us a clue into what Trump will do.
Anyway, my guests, Scott, thank you so much for coming on.
I really appreciate it.
The rest of you guys have a great rest of the week, as always.
