All Episodes
Previous Next
March 16, 2018 - Health Ranger - Mike Adams
36:11
DUMPED ON TRUMP: Obama just left the new Prez $20 TRILLION in debt
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Watching President Donald J. Trump be sworn in as our 45th president last Friday, for me it was transformative.
It's really changed my outlook on our world, at least the society part of it, the civilization part of it.
For the first time in my adult life, I actually have a sense of hope and optimism about the future of our country.
I haven't felt that ever.
Not, not, not ever.
Since the time I became aware of politics, which was really in college, but I wasn't deeply involved in it at all.
And I watched the Clinton administration and the Bushes and then the Obama regime.
I watched all that and...
It really wasn't until the Obama, well, I guess the George W. Bush administration that I became aware of how corrupt and criminal government could be.
And we saw how George Bush exploited the 9-11 tragedy to put in place a police state, a surveillance state, the Patriot Act.
and ratchet up the surveillance of our own citizens while the NSA lied to people and conducted warrantless searches and violated the Fourth Amendment across the board.
And then when Obama came into office, he added insult to injury by deliberately subverting the culture of America while systematically destroying America's economy, job base, trust in police, job base, trust in police, for example, and many other institutions that Obama sought to systematically destroy.
And he did a good job, in his mind, of achieving many of those types of destruction.
But now that Donald J. Trump is president, it's the first time that I see that America has a chance at moving forward.
And it's been transformative in the sense that I now see that the enemy of the people is not government itself.
Instead, and this is very important, this is a big awakening for me personally.
I have not seen this until now.
The enemy is not government itself.
The enemy is collectivism and liberalism projected through government.
It is statism, really, or collectivism, statism, or what you might call fascism.
I mean, fascism really is just a deep belief in the authority of the state and in the ability of the state to solve humanity's problems.
And it is these things projected through government that are the source of evil in our society.
And by evil, what I mean is oppression of freedoms, destruction of liberty, the coercive confiscation of productivity from workers, taxpayers.
The taking of land, Bureau of Land Management now, has taken over, on behalf of the federal government, almost 90% of the state of Nevada.
Did you know that?
90% of that state now has been seized by the federal government, and much of it under Obama and Harry Reid, by the way.
It is the statism or collectivism or fascism that is the real danger.
Not government itself.
I see that proper government, which means limited government, Has, or can have, an important role to play in society.
For example, national defense is an obvious one, but I mean also just having a court system where there is due process, where people can seek justice under the law.
A court system that can enforce contract law, for example, tort law and criminal law.
These things are necessary for a civil society, and there has to be some kind of structure that adjudicates those cases through the system.
I also believe, by the way, I believe in some common sense regulatory structure for manufacturers and corporations because I think that environmental protection is important.
And although the EPA has vastly abused its power and probably needs to be completely gutted, that would be a good thing.
We do need some basic rules so that corporations don't just dump everything into the rivers, you know, and costs shift environmental destruction and environmental cleanup costs to the taxpayers so that they can have a greater profit in dirty manufacturing.
Corporations will pollute if you allow them to do so.
So you have to have sort of a referee that fines corporations or even arrests corporate leaders if they engage in pollution or serious environmental destruction.
So I see that there are important roles.
There needs to be a referee in these kinds of institutions, such as the court system, like I said, or law enforcement, or environmental regulation.
And also, by the way, in banking and finance, we have to have a regulatory structure like the Glass-Steagall Act that has since been repealed.
And then after it was repealed, it allowed banking institutions to engage in derivatives bets so that they basically put all the deposit money of customers at risk through these crazy investment schemes, pyramid Ponzi schemes that the banking system is engaged in.
That's insane.
And so there has to be some kind of regulatory environment for banks, finance institutions, hedge funds, and so on.
In fact, we need more of that right now because we've had too little regulation in that area.
So I found that with Trump becoming president, I disagree with some of my friends who might say that there should be, well I don't know how many friends I have who say this, but some, a few do, they would say maybe there should be no government and that everything could be sort of user fee based.
And they make some good arguments in certain areas, like we really don't need government to build roads or even to build schools.
But I disagree with him on this issue of setting the playing field.
I think we need some kind of referee system, again, for environmental regulation or financial system regulation.
Or, you know, even just like the FCC, how do you regulate the electromagnetic bandwidth so that we have FM stations and AM stations and CB and 2.4 gigahertz point-to-point radios and so on?
You've got to have a referee.
To say, you know, these frequencies are going to be used for this and these other frequencies are for emergency 911 use and, you know, first responders and paramedics and police and what have you.
So we've got to have some basic ground rules and there has to be someone to enforce that.
Nevertheless, that being said, That can be done with a very, very small government.
Maybe one tenth of the size of government that we have today.
So the real problem that I see is that we have government that's vastly too large.
And Donald Trump is the first president to come along in a very long time who has made it part of his mission, I mean, from day one, to start drastically cutting government spending and the size of government.
And it reminds me of a very important goal that we should all strive for, and that is we should seek to maximize unemployment among bureaucrats.
In other words, it is a misallocation of capital and resources in a society to have a very large bloated government that keeps expanding government waste money.
Government workers are wasteful, and they're not very clever, and they're not very efficient.
And so we would actually be better off as a society to cut a lot out of government, like I would say half.
Fire one out of two government employees across the board in every department, in every sector.
I'm talking about the federal government here.
I'm not talking about your local town hall little county staff.
I'm talking about federal government.
Cut one out of every two employees.
Make them temporarily unemployed.
It will actually be good for the economy in the long term as those people seek out new jobs in the private sector where there is productivity rather than confiscation and coercion and tyranny.
So you see, when government becomes large, you have a bureaucracy class of people who all they know how to do is live as parasites off the system.
All they do is collect a government salary and government benefits, and they sit around pushing paper and usually making very bad decisions about resource allocation.
And it's very wasteful for a society where someone in the private sector could usually make decisions about how to allocate or invest resources in a far more efficient manner.
And that person, if they do a great job with it, they might actually become wealthy themselves because that's the financial reward for doing well with limited resources.
They could actually build bridges as a private company And save a lot of money versus the government building bridges, and they could still walk away with a nice hefty profit themselves, an honest profit.
And so we shouldn't deny them that profit.
We should actually applaud them.
If they're going to save us money on building a bridge, do it for less, do it more efficiently, maybe with improved safety standards, or improved durability, or an improved warranty, and they walk away putting a million dollars in their pocket as honest profit, we should applaud that.
And you see, collectivism has a problem with that.
Collectivism or statism doesn't want anyone to succeed.
They want the government to allocate all the resources in the name of equality.
They would take that million dollars instead and chop it up into a bunch of little pieces.
And first, the global elite, the bureaucrat class, would skim 30% off the top, and then they'd take the $700K that's left over, chop that up, and hand it out to voters who didn't earn it.
And then the voters would get the free handouts from those politicians and they would learn to vote for more people like that because they want, well, more handouts.
And so when you're giving resources to people who don't earn them, all that does is breed more waste, more inefficiency, more stupidity, and a bigger bureaucracy.
The government should not be in the business of taking money from certain groups of people and then skimming off the top of it for their bonuses and salaries and awards they always give each other.
And then handing out what's left to other people.
This wealth redistribution, as it's called, is a grave mistake, and it's not something that actually moves society forward.
And I always find it interesting that people who believe in big government often call themselves progressives, but they are opposed to real progress because it's not progress.
To confiscate money from people and hand it out to other people who didn't earn it.
That's actually moving us backwards.
That's the de-evolution of society.
It's anti-progress.
Moving forward would mean we would have more people getting off the government dole and learning to be self-reliant.
Let's say investing in their own education, starting a business, or providing a service to another business, an existing business, or finding new innovative ways or more efficient ways to do things, and then being compensated by the free market in a way that would give them far more long-term abundance and wealth and resources than a government could ever hand out to them through entitlements.
So the best way to shrink government is actually to get it out of the business of taking money from people and giving it to other people.
Because if you look at the government budget today, over 50% of the budget, by far, is entitlements, which is really taking money from people and handing out to other people.
And by the way, some of that equation, Social Security, for example, is taking money from you and then promising to hand it back to you in the future.
But that's not really what happens.
They're taking it from you today and handing it out to somebody else today that they had previously made promises to.
And that's called, in finance, a Ponzi scheme.
And all Ponzi schemes fail.
What we're ultimately going to find is that even when the government is in the business of taking money from certain groups of people and handing it out to other groups of people, that they ultimately completely fail to do that job because there's going to be a day that the musical chairs of debt stops cold.
And all the people that are owed IOUs from the government through Social Security and Medicare or federal pension programs, they're going to be told, sorry, Charlie, we ain't got no more cash.
Because that's the way this is all going.
That's where it's going to ultimately end up.
So shrinking the size of government actually is making money and retirement safer for people.
Because the larger government gets, the bigger the failure is going to be when the government runs out of money.
Does that make sense?
In other words, you have this giant massive beast of government running your life and running your finances and running your savings and running your retirement and running your pensions and running your food stamp program and all that.
When that government fails, as it will because we're based on a fiat currency system, That failure is going to be so large and so catastrophic that the nation itself may not survive.
Whereas if you had a small government and you had more distribution of power to states via states' rights and the Tenth Amendment, and you had more citizens being more self-reliant, higher employment, higher education, more jobs, more entrepreneurism, more home gardening, for God's sake, then if the government failed, it wouldn't be that big of a deal.
Not as many people would be affected.
People still have their own savings.
They have their own investments.
They have their own businesses or their own jobs, their own salaries, even their own local food supply, for that matter.
So big government is a danger to us all.
And that's why it's shocking to me when I saw some of the protesters on Inauguration Day who were protesting Donald Trump and they were marching down the street and they were screaming that they were opposed to fascism.
And I was like, yeah, that's why we voted for Trump.
Because we don't like fascism.
Fascism is big government, colluding with corporations, taking over every sector of society.
That's what Democrats are, right?
That's what Hillary Clinton would have been.
That's what even Bernie Sanders would have been in many ways.
He's a socialist.
Socialists believe in centralized economic power and decision-making from a central source to distribute wealth and resources and make central planning decisions on resource allocation throughout a society.
That's what Bernie Sanders believes in.
And so the people marching on the streets were marching...
Their slogans were in complete contradiction to what they thought they were doing.
If they're against fascism, they should have been shouting, make America great again, because Trump is the anti-fascist.
Trump is against collectivism.
He's against big government.
He's against wasteful spending.
He's against the confiscatory coercion of a government that's so bloated it has to keep extracting more and more money from the population via tax farms, which just means a nation's boundaries is a tax farm.
They're just extracting taxes from the productive workers.
And Donald Trump, one of the very first things that he's doing now is slashing government, which means, again, he's the anti-fascist.
He wants smaller government, less dangerous government, government that can't control as much of your life.
And if he were really, really successful, then maybe he could slash it by 50%.
Or if he were incredibly successful, slash it by 90%.
Seriously, we could all get by just fine with a federal government that's only one-tenth its current size and budget and personnel count.
Now, I'm excluding the military from that because I do believe in strong national defense because we live in a crazy world.
So I'm talking about the non-military part of government.
I happen to believe that the best way to achieve peace in a crazy world filled with crazy communists, which are extreme leftists, like communist China, is to, in fact, have lots of nuclear submarines, lots of aircraft carriers, lots of new technology, and have a state of readiness in a military sense that basically tells your enemy, don't screw with us.
So I believe in defensive military spending.
I'm not a proponent of running around all these countries and dropping bombs all over the place.
That's what Obama did.
And that's what Bush did.
And that's what Clinton did.
I mean, let's face it, this has been going on for a long time.
Every time there was a scandal involving Clinton's sexual escapades or another woman coming forward and saying she was sexually assaulted or raped by Bill Clinton, he would just drop bombs somewhere else and then CNN would just cut to that, look, we're dropping bombs on brown people!
That was CNN during most of the 1990s.
Basically just distractive bombing coverage.
Every time that Bill's DNA showed up on a piece of clothing owned by someone else.
So, yet, if you exclude government, I mean, military, from government, the rest of it, at the federal level, could be slashed across the board.
I mean, seriously, do we really need the CDC now?
Seriously.
I mean, do we need the FDA as it exists today?
It's basically the marketing arm, the monopoly enforcement arm of Big Pharma.
Do we really need the USDA as it's operated today as basically just a front for Monsanto and the biotech industry?
Do we really need the EPA as it's being run today?
Bunch of science fraud, climate change, globalism, and basically excusing all the pesticides and herbicides that are damaging the environment.
The EPA looks the other way and says, ah, they're safe, they're fine.
Since when has the EPA or the FDA or the CDC or the USDA ever done anything in the interests of the people?
I think we could cut all four of those departments completely and start new ones from the ground up with some independent, honest scientists who were sworn to represent the interests of the people.
And I know some people who can run those departments, those new departments, who would actually tell the truth and conduct real science and represent the interests of the people.
So, I don't expect Trump...
To be able to achieve all those cuts.
I'm not saying that he's the guy who can get rid of the EPA and the FDA and the CDC or the ATF, DEA. Let me just go down the list, right?
There's a lot of them that could go.
BLM. But at least Donald Trump is the first one to take a hatchet to the federal budget and start chopping around the edges, you know?
He's going to trim the federal budget.
He's going to reduce the size of government.
At least that's his intention.
And no one has ever done that.
Not a Republican, not a Democrat, certainly not Obama.
He doubled the national debt during his eight years.
Literally doubled it, racking up as much debt as all the other presidents combined in the history of America.
That's how much Obama added to the debt.
Obama considered it to be an achievement that he got almost 50 million people on food stamps.
In the minds of statists and collectivists, that's an achievement.
That's why they're sick.
That's why they're wrong.
Because in the minds of reasonable, normal, rational people like Donald Trump or myself, we would consider it an achievement if we got like 25 million people off food stamps so that they didn't need food stamps anymore because they had better jobs and they had better incomes and they could afford their own food.
Ideally, we'd want to live in a nation where we don't have anybody on food stamps, although that's not realistic.
We'll always have some people on a starvation situation where they need some help, but that's not what food stamps are being used for today anyway.
They're using them to buy soda and Oreo cookies and Pop-Tarts and garbage products, just enriching the food companies and the soda companies and the Walmarts of the world.
So, The goals of collectivism are the opposite of the goals of reasonable, rational people.
And that's why collectivism is the enemy of America.
It is the enemy of reason.
It is the enemy of abundance.
It is the enemy of civilization, really, if you think about it.
Collectivism has as its goals more and more people dependent on a nanny state big government that hands out everything they need to survive.
Whereas economic conservatism wants no one to be dependent on the state, wants people to be able to think independently and act independently, and to be able to survive on their own two feet and actually do well and actually have the opportunity to achieve and succeed and do really well for themselves in every way that matters, professionally or financially.
Love and marriage and recreation.
All the things that might matter to people.
Gaining, expanding knowledge, pursuing research and discoveries.
All these things.
So that's the key difference, and that's why I now have some hope for the country's future for the first time in a long time, because we no longer have a collectivist in the White House.
We have someone who, for the first time, sees as his goal shrinking the size of government, reducing dependence on government, and getting more people back on their own two feet Through free market forces of abundance and education,
reducing tax burden, reducing, in essence, the amount of productivity that a government confiscates from you and your family, and creating a better playing field where you have more opportunity to do well for yourself by lowering taxes on small business.
So small businesses can hire more people.
They can create more jobs.
They can actually afford Americans for the first time because Obamacare made it almost unaffordable to hire American workers.
So with Obamacare going out the window, we can now, all of us small business owners, we can expand more, create more jobs, create more high-paying salaries, move people up the economic food chain, so to speak, so that people are taking home more money and then investing it in the things that matter to them, so that people are taking home more money and then which partially would be homes and cars and things that help other companies sell more products as well.
So this is how you move the economy forward.
And Trump gets that, and he's the first person in a very long time to get that.
Now finally, I know that Donald Trump isn't perfect, and the Republican Congress does have some tendencies that concern me on issues like GMOs and Monsanto and pesticides and so on.
But I'm also a realist.
I understand that you can't have the perfect person that you want in the White House, unless you want to run yourself, Which is basically suicide.
You'd have to be almost crazy beyond belief to try to take on that kind of role.
And even when you get there, you're not a dictator.
You don't have total power, total control.
So even Donald Trump, if he wanted to, let's say, regulate genetically modified crops or ban toxic herbicides like glyphosate, He would have to get that done through a legislative body that consists of members of Congress who are routinely bribed and lobbied by the biotech industry and the pharmaceutical industry and the chemical industry and so on.
So the ability of one person, no matter what their intentions, to be able to pull off that kind of a Change in the regulatory body of a government is very, very difficult to achieve.
So we've got to have some sort of realistic expectations.
Is that really possible in this system?
I'm not sure.
But we're going to keep pushing in that direction, of course.
Through good science.
You know, we want to expose the pesticides and the herbicides that are in the foods.
And we want to document and discuss the causality between consumption of these herbicides and various diseases, such as cancer.
Glyphosate is a probable carcinogen, according to numerous scientific bodies around the world.
So, let's continue that research.
Let's get industry out of that research.
Let's get lobbyists out of Washington as much as we can.
And by the way, we should pass term limits.
That's one way to sort of clean the system or drain the swamp, as Trump would say.
And let's restore representative government.
Where we have real people from your communities who go to Washington for a limited period of time, four years or six years, and do their jobs, and then they're gone from Washington and they come back home back to their communities.
What is dangerous to a society is a permanent class of bureaucrats, people like Harry Reid or Senator Chuck Schumer, or, I mean, you know, just go down the whole history of the Senate, basically.
And these perma-class bureaucrats on both sides of the aisle are a real danger to society because they're completely out of touch with the communities that they claim to represent.
And many of them have never had an honest day's work in their lives.
But somehow they've become extremely wealthy while serving in the Senate, even though Senate salaries are very, very low.
How does that work?
The answer is because they're corrupt.
They're criminals.
A lot of them ought to actually be arrested and indicted for corruption and bribery and so on.
Maybe we'll see some of that.
I don't know.
But the real long-term answer is to pass term limits so that we eliminate that permanent class of bureaucrats.
And finally, have a more of a temporary station kind of setup, where real people go to Washington for a short period of time, they do their jobs, they come back home to their communities, hopefully with their pride, their integrity, their honesty still intact, if that's even possible.
So to wrap up, I have a sense of optimism and I hope to see things move forward.
I don't expect everything to go our direction.
I don't expect Donald Trump to be able to wave a magic wand and solve every problem imaginable.
I'm a realist.
I've seen this world for long enough to know that change is hard to do.
At that level, there's so much momentum in the bureaucracy.
Much of the system is trying to destroy Donald Trump.
He's still got to fight many, many battles.
Really, his work has only just begun.
And they're going to try to kill him, too.
At the same time, they're going to try to literally assassinate or execute this president.
So there's a lot that still has to happen.
And frankly, Donald Trump needs our help.
And so I'd like to appeal to you...
To join me in doing what you can do to help make America great again.
And it's simple things like buying American wherever you can.
Buy American-made products.
I've really made an effort to do that more in my own business and in my own life.
And right now we're also sourcing many American-made products to potentially offer through the Health Ranger store, by the way.
Because I really want to support American workers.
Another thing that you can do is if you're, well, you can support the milestones or the goals that Donald Trump is trying to achieve.
You can support it at a local level.
So support lowering the corporate tax rate so that we can all create more jobs.
Support the repatriation of overseas money so that all of these trillions of dollars that wealthy corporations have stashed overseas can come back onshore to the United States to be used as investments for more infrastructure, more manufacturing, more companies, more R&D, and so on.
Support these issues.
Support national security.
Support Strengthening the borders so that we have legal immigration, not illegal immigration.
Support community policing so that police can do their jobs without being accused of being racist every time they arrest someone who isn't white.
You know what I mean?
It's ridiculous.
Just let cops do their jobs, you know?
There's so many issues that we need widespread support to help make America great again, because one man in Washington can't do it all.
It's like JFK. What he said, ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country.
And that kind of patriotism and that kind of passion for making America great again is what I think is going to drive this country forward.
And I really share that.
And I'm going to do my best.
I've already laid out a 10-point plan for how I'm going to help make America great again.
And I'd like to invite you to think about your personal plan.
How are you going to contribute to this as well?
How can you keep more money in the U.S. economy when you're making purchase decisions?
How can you punish those politically who are running for office, who are trying to recreate a fascist state, who are proponents of collectivism and statism, and bigger government that's only going to become more and more dangerous to us all?
So vote for smaller government.
Vote for a gold standard.
Vote to audit the Fed.
Vote to disassemble the surveillance state as it's spying on American citizens.
Vote for liberty, vote for freedom, vote for the Second Amendment.
Vote for all the things that really matter to keep this a relatively free republic.
We live in a world of tyranny, a world that has lived through a history of kings and tyrants and totalitarians.
Most people who have ever lived in the history of the world lived and died as subjects of systems of enslavement.
Very few people ever in the history of our world have lived the kind of freedom that you and I enjoy every day.
And so we must make it our mission to defend that freedom diligently, with passion, with divine purpose even.
The freedom for me to be able to just tell you these things, to even be critical of a president, is a freedom that most people have never had in their lifetimes throughout the history of the world.
Just imagine that.
And so these are freedoms that are worth defending.
And I believe that Donald Trump is going to work diligently to defend these freedoms, whereas Hillary Clinton would have systematically destroyed the freedoms.
And we know that Barack Hussein Obama also systematically and deliberately destroyed many, many freedoms and violated freedoms and exploited, well, actually ran many criminal operations like Eric Holder, Operation Fast and Furious, gun-running operation to try to destroy your Second Amendment freedoms.
And CNN destroying, just abusing free speech by running fake news all the time, fabricating totally fake news and using it to try to attack the Trump administration or to try to attack independent media and so on.
So do your part.
I'll do my part.
Trump is going to do his part.
And perhaps, together, we can make America better.
I was going to say great again, wasn't I? But that's been overused.
We can move America in the right direction.
That's all I'm saying.
So don't be a hater of Trump just because he's running a big, bloated, bureaucratic, corrupt government.
He just got there.
And he's got the right intention.
Let's give him some support as he tries to, again, take a hatchet to the federal budget and start trimming off the waste and the fraud and the fat of the system.
It's going to take him some time.
It's going to take him a long time.
And there may be many, many Americans who are going to hate Donald Trump during this time because he's cutting out them as part of the waste of the federal government.
Again, one of our goals should be to really have a high unemployment rate among former bureaucrats in the short term and push them out into the private sector, make them go get real jobs that produce something instead of living as parasites off the system.
That's a good thing.
But it's going to create a lot of hate in the short term, so be prepared for that.
I'm willing to give Trump four years.
And I hope to give him eight.
But I'm willing to give him four years to see what he can do.
If he's pissing everybody off for the next two or three years, I'm fine with that as long as government is shrinking.
And he's cutting budgets and he's cutting bureaucrats across the board.
People are angry and setting fires in the streets of D.C. You know, so be it.
This is what needs to be done.
And by the end of his first term, I think America is going to be much better off than it is today.
And that's how Trump plans to make America great again.
He could sure use our help.
Check out more news on Donald Trump and his administration at trump.news.
That's one of my many websites.
We also have whitehouse.news.
And if you want to find the news that's censored everywhere else, Then go to censored.news.
It's a mobile-friendly site.
Bring it up on your mobile device.
It brings you headlines from other news websites, such as Breitbart, Zero Hedge, and so on, throughout the day in near real time.
So the headlines are refreshed in near real time all throughout the day.
Check out censored.news to get all of that.
Thank you for listening.
This is Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, for healthrangereport.com.
Click subscribe to stay plugged in to the Health Ranger Report.
If you'd like to help support this video and other videos like this, visit HealthRangerStore.com, where everything we sell is laboratory tested for heavy metals and more.
You'll find superfoods, storable survival foods, nutritional supplements, and a full line of synthetic chemical-free body soaps, shampoos, and oral care products.
▲
Export Selection