Dave Smith characterizes the first impeachment hearing as a "circus" driven by "Trump derangement syndrome," arguing critics ignore Obama's weaponization of al-Qaeda and Clinton's regime changes. He contends the inquiry targets Trump versus the "deep state," citing Chuck Schumer's warnings and Scott Horton's analysis of NATO expansion violations. Challenging the quid pro quo narrative, Smith notes Ambassador Sondland's testimony contradicts claims of a clear aid-investigation link, suggesting an attempted extortion that failed. Comparing the effort to a turf war between intelligence agencies and anti-war figures like Trump and Tulsi Gabbard, he dismisses the case as political suppression while criticizing Libertarian Party hypocrisy regarding Maj Ture. Ultimately, Smith frames the impeachment not as constitutional duty but as an empire suppressing dissent against endless wars. [Automatically generated summary]
Transcriber: nvidia/parakeet-tdt-0.6b-v2, sat-12l-sm, and large-v3-turbo
|
Time
Text
Heshy Socks Season 4 Arrive00:01:21
Fill her up.
You are listening to the Gash Digital Network.
Hey guys, today's show is brought to you by Heshy Sox.
Heshy season 4 socks have officially arrived.
The brand new collection has been released today, and they are incredible.
New styles, new colors, new amazing feel.
For those of you who are new to the podcast, why would you want to buy Heshy socks?
They're the best socks you will ever own in your life.
If you're tired of your feet hurting in your dress shoes after a long day of work, put on a pair of Heshi socks.
The problem is solved.
Your feet are going to feel great.
Most fashion and dress socks are expensive.
They're poorly constructed and they provide zero protection.
Not Heshy socks.
Heshy socks are cushioned in the heel, foot, and toe.
They have arch support in the center so your feet don't slosh around in your shoes.
They're made with high-end, breathable Pima cotton and are antimicrobial, so they kill the stink.
So your feet are going to feel great.
They're going to smell great.
Best of all, they're designed to stay up.
So there's no more pulling on your socks all day long.
Anyway, go to Heshisocks.com.
That's H-E-S-H-Isocks.com.
Enter the promo code problem30, and you're going to save 30% off your entire order of fashion, basic, or ankle socks.
That's Heshisocks.com.
The promo code is problem30 for 30% off.
Heshissocks.com, the best thing to ever happen to you.
Deep State Accusations Explained00:14:16
All right, let's start the show.
We need to roll back the state.
We spy on all of our own citizens.
Our prisons are flooded with nonviolent drug offenders.
If you want to know who America's next enemy is, look at who we're funding right now.
Every single one of these problems are a result of government being way too big.
You're listening to part of the problem on the Gas Digital Network.
Here's your host.
Games to it.
What's up, everybody?
Welcome to a brand new episode of Part of the Problem.
Thank you for joining us.
I am flying solo for this episode.
Of course, we did our one-on-one with the great Gene Epstein on Monday.
Robbie the Fire Bernstein is out today.
Non-AIDS related issues, but I'm sure the AIDS aren't helping.
So it's just me.
It's just me in here for this episode.
And I figured we would spend this episode talking about today's hearing up on Capitol Hill that was the first of the Trump impeachment inquiry hearings.
And if you missed it, don't worry about it.
You didn't miss anything.
It was, god damn it, what a circus.
What a fucking clown show this whole thing is.
And so I got a few clips from what happened today.
It's more obvious to me than ever how ridiculous this whole impeachment thing is.
And I would think it would be normal.
It would be obvious to most normal people.
But Trump derangement syndrome is a motherfucker.
And people who are afflicted with it cannot see anything other than, well, abuse of power and Trump did something wrong.
You know, I was thinking about as I as I as I tend to do when I talk about these things, it's hard to discuss them, you know, to be precise without framing the way you have to look at these things to some degree.
And I know sometimes that seems almost like a little bit misleading.
Like people will be like, oh, well, you're trying to lead into your narrative of this whole thing.
But you got to understand that everybody has their own narrative.
Everyone has their own framing of the way they see this issue.
And when the one that's popular or the one that's out there is so off, sometimes It's necessary to recapture the narrative.
I was, which I almost never do anymore, but I was arguing a little bit on Facebook the other day.
My daughter fell asleep on me in a rocking chair.
So I was pinned under an 11-month-old baby with nothing but my cell phone in my hand.
And I started getting into it on Facebook and there are like these, there was some like left libertarian group and people were talking about how obviously, you know, Donald Trump tried to extort foreign power and this is an abuse of power and corruption.
And, you know, like it's anybody's crazy to not think that this whole process is legitimate or something along those lines.
And, you know, there's something that you get accused of.
So let me start.
I'll start with this.
A little rant on whataboutism.
Have you guys heard of this term before?
What aboutism?
It's, God, I hate it.
I really hate the term.
I hate the arguments that follow from the term.
And I also just hate the term, what aboutism?
Stop saying that.
If you ever say it, take it out of your vocabulary.
Say it in a different way.
You sound like a goddamn 16-year-old chick.
And you go, that's whataboutism?
Whataboutary?
Or whatever the fuck they say.
Almost every time I hear this term used, it is used to invalidate what was a very good point that someone was just presented with.
And then they just say, what aboutism?
And that's supposed to take away your point.
It's basically, in practice, it's an attack on historical context.
Like if you go, oh my God, Donald Trump is separating families at the border.
And you go, yeah, but Obama did all this stuff on immigration.
They're like, oh, what about ism?
And it's like, okay, look, it is true that it would be some form of a logical fallacy if you used the fact that somebody else did something to, you know, to like say that you're okay doing it.
So in other words, if I were to, if somebody was on trial for murder and you were to say, well, lots of people commit murder and get away with it.
Okay, that would not be an argument that that person should get away with it.
They still committed murder and they should still be in trouble for it, right?
So if you're using in that strict narrow sense, then yes, it would be a logical fallacy.
But that's almost never what anybody's pointing out.
If somebody says, look, at the heart of Trump derangement syndrome, at the heart of people who hate Donald Trump so much, and I know even as I use that term, it's something that a lot of Trump supporters like to use.
But I'm sorry, I use it because they're goddamn right about it.
And every one of you knows this.
There are people who hate Donald Trump with such a passion that you have to stop and think to yourself, what the fuck is going on here?
There's something about this guy personally that makes you hate him that much.
Now, I certainly hate Donald Trump for lots of reasons.
I know a lot of people who listen to this show do, but we can kind of articulate those reasons.
It's not just that there's something about him personally that makes me like, oh my God, he's the most evil man in history.
And that, by the way, what I just said, he's the most evil man in history.
He's the worst president ever, all of these things.
That's why what you call whataboutism is important to be inserted into the conversation.
Because with so much of the Donald Trump hatred, if it's not explicitly said, then it is definitely implicitly present is the idea that what Donald Trump's doing is so much worse than what previous presidents have done.
And that's why it's important to insert into the conversation some historical, you know, information, some historical context to say, well, I mean, yeah, what Donald Trump's doing might be really shitty, but just so you know, Obama and George W. Bush did it, in many cases, far worse things than what he did.
And it's like, yeah, I'm sorry.
You can't just pretend that Donald Trump, because really what you're doing, if you act like Donald Trump is this unique evil and what the media will straight up tell you, right?
Like when we played that Brooke Baldwin quote, it's like he's betrayed the sacred honor of the Oval Office.
So they're basically saying like everybody was doing pretty good until Donald Trump.
And if you say that, then you're basically just all you're doing is giving cover to the previous war criminals.
And there's no need to do that.
We can walk and chew gum at the same time.
And so if Donald Trump is doing a hundred terrible things that I'd be all on board with him being impeached for, yet the deep state is clearly going after him for something that is pretty par for the course for all presidents that you know they would never go after Obama or Bush or Clinton or the next guy if it's just an establishment hack for, then yeah, it's kind of worth pointing out.
And you can dismiss that and say it's whataboutism, but really you're not at all responding to the argument.
You're not like taking on any of these points.
So anyway, I know that, you know, people will accuse, at least I've been accused in the past of committing whataboutism.
But as all of you guys listening know, I'm not committing the logical fallacy.
I'm not saying Donald Trump should be let off for any of his crimes against humanity because of Obama's or because of George W. Bush's.
I'm just saying they're all criminals.
And those of you who are acting like this is such a unique thing are missing that point.
And also those of you who are acting like this thing that he's being impeached over or this thing that the impeachment inquiry is proceeding over is anything.
I mean, this is so nothing.
It's so nothing.
I can't even believe.
I can't even believe.
You know, if you remember back when the Mueller investigation first started, when the special prosecutor was first assigned, I said my prediction was they won't get anything on Russia collusion, but they'll bring him down for some other bullshit.
Now, it's turned out that more or less that's coming true, but it's not happening the way I thought.
I mean, I was right about the Russia collusion stuff, but I thought, I just kind of figured, well, you know, they get one of these fucking pit bulls, these special prosecutors on you.
They're going to go through everything you've ever done and they'll find some crime that Donald Trump has committed.
Turns out they didn't.
They got nothing out of the special prosecution.
And now what they're going with is this.
I can't believe this is all that they came up with.
I mean, the guy was like, he's clearly a sleazy New York billionaire real estate developer.
I figured there would be something you could dig up on this guy, but they've got nothing on him in the way that I thought that they might.
So anyway, it's, you know, again, as I was saying before, it's not to excuse the really bad things that Donald Trump's doing.
And there's plenty of them.
But it's like what you're talking about here is the deep state versus Donald Trump.
And that was made very clear in today's hearing.
And, you know, just to say that, you know, if you're critical of the deep state, that doesn't mean you're in support of Donald Trump.
You have to be able to walk and chew gum here.
You can be both those things.
Like, you know, that old saying, which I'm not particularly fond of, but the enemy of my enemy is my friend.
That's bullshit, okay?
I mean, it may be true under very specific strategic circumstances, but that's not just like a true statement in general.
The enemy of my enemy is my friend.
Like, you could hate the Crips.
It doesn't make you pro-blood.
You know what I mean?
Like, you could be like, no, both of these groups are like criminals.
I don't like either of them.
But if the Crips are like killing a whole bunch of people in your neighborhood and you're like, man, I fucking hate these Crips.
Someone just went, oh, so obviously you're pro-bloods then.
It's like, well, no, that would be really stupid.
If you don't like Adolf Hitler, that doesn't mean you like Joseph Stalin.
Just because someone's the enemy of your enemy does not make them your friends.
You could have multiple enemies and those enemies could be fighting each other.
And in fact, criminal organizations, gangs, tend to fight each other.
Doesn't mean you're pro-gang either way.
Again, you know, you could go through these examples forever.
If you don't like the Sunnis, doesn't mean you love the Shiites.
If you don't like, whatever, this is just almost too stupid to continue with.
But that's, you know, I, as I said previously, I would be very happy to see Donald Trump impeached for the illegal, immoral, borderline war of genocide that he's been helping the Saudis conduct in Yemen.
But I don't want to see him impeached for this.
I just don't think there's anything from the libertarian, anti-war, pro, you know, humanity point of view.
I don't think there's anything to be gained from this.
And I just don't understand why, you know, why any of these left libertarians even would see this as like their issue.
Like who, what, what is it that you're hoping for?
And this is why I call it Trump derangement syndrome.
Like, what, so Donald Trump gets impeached and what?
What do you think that does?
It gets you President Mike Pence?
Gets you President Mike Pence and then what?
Hands the election to what, Elizabeth Warren?
So she can work on her $52 trillion Medicare for all plan?
I thought even a left libertarian would have some problems with, you know, doubling the size of government, but whatever.
You know, it's like, and the idea, which I did mention in a previous podcast, but the idea that, you know, the like the Nick Sarwalk idea that, well, this is an abuse of power.
And if someone's impeached for an abuse of power, then it'll make future presidents more likely to not want to abuse power is just so childish and sophomoric and not thought through.
I mean, what?
Like, no, if he was impeached for war crimes in Yemen, yes, then it might make future presidents worry about committing war crimes because they feel like, ooh, we could be impeached for that too.
Better yet, tried criminally for that.
Okay.
That would be something.
But if you're just at war with the CIA and then all of a sudden some fucking CIA agent decides to come out and fucking like ruin you and then you get impeached for that, the only chilling effect that it would have is future presidents would be like, I better not cross the CIA, which already might be one of the big takeaways from the Trump presidency.
So again, just because you hate the bloods doesn't mean you like the Crips.
Talking about historical context is good.
And just because I think that we shouldn't be on board with a deep state coup of an elected president doesn't mean I like the job that that elected president is doing.
All seems like fairly simple stuff to me, but I guess it's worth restating.
Cash Call Mortgage Sponsorship00:06:57
All right, guys, let's take a quick second and thank our sponsor for today's show, which is Cash Call Mortgage.
Cash Call Mortgage helps make this show possible.
And if you're a homeowner, they've got great news for you.
If you bought a home more than a year ago, chances are you have equity in your home.
And with the help of Cash Call Mortgage, that equity can mean cash in your pocket.
If you have an interest rate higher than 2.99%, they may be able to lower your monthly mortgage payments and get you the cash you need for upcoming holidays, remodel your home, or just to keep some cash in your pocket.
So check out Cash Call Mortgage.
It's a direct lender and they can close your refi in as little as 20 days with no upfront deposit.
If you qualify, they'll even pay your closing costs.
For a free quote and to see if you qualify, visit cashcallmortgage.com backslash problem.
Again, that's cashcallmortgage.com backslash problem, impact mortgage corp dba, cash call mortgage, n M L S I D 128231, equal housing lender, not licensed in all states, including New York, offer not available in Washington.
All right, let's get back into the show.
So before we even get into today's hearing, because I know whenever I talk about this, and we played this clip once before on the show, but I think it's worth playing one more time because I'm going to control the narrative on my own goddamn podcast.
So when I say the deep state has been at war with Donald Trump, don't take my word for it.
We can take the word of the highest-ranking Democratic senator, Chuck Schumer, a guy who's been around for quite a while.
Don't forget, before Trump even took office, in January of 2017, when he was on the Rachel Maddow show, and he had a great moment of honesty.
He's in the middle of his talking points about Donald Trump, just saying all the normal things you say.
Well, you can't be president by tweet.
You know, just the stuff you would say about Donald Trump before he actually got in.
And then Rachel Maddow shows him a tweet impromptu and he has a moment of honesty, one of the few Chuck Schumer moments of honesty ever recorded.
Let's play that.
Campaign is a hard ripe guy.
He campaigned as this populist, sometimes with very bad and racist and bigotry.
Talking points.
And then him just out there tweeting.
Talking points.
It's not going to work.
And we have an opportunity.
As the Chinese say, danger is opportunity.
So I am, I was distraught right after the election, but I'm now actually invigorated by the challenge and our ability to succeed in this challenge.
Let me ask you, I don't know if you have seen this.
I don't want to blindside you with this.
This is the latest statement, latest tweet, as you were just saying.
The president-elect's latest unsolicited pronouncement on the intelligence community.
This was his tweet just a little while ago tonight.
You see the scare quotes there?
The intelligence briefing on so-called Russian hacking was delayed until Friday.
Perhaps more time needed to build a case.
Very strange.
We're actually told intelligence sources tell NBC News since this tweet has been posted that actually this intelligence briefing for the president-elect was always planned for Friday.
It hasn't been delayed.
But he's taking these shots, this antagonism, this taunting to the intelligence community.
You take on the intelligence community.
They have six ways from Sunday at getting back at you.
So even for a practical, supposedly hard-nosed businessman, he's being really dumb to do this.
What do you think the intelligence community would do if they were moving?
I don't know, but from what I am told, they are very.
Well, from what I am told, they are very upset, by the way, was the end of that quote.
So there you go.
I know it's crazy conspiracy to say it's the deep state trying to unseat a Democratic, a Democratically elected president.
Of course, if you say it's the intelligence community trying to do it, then you're right in line with the most powerful Democratic senator in the country.
But it's not the deep states.
This isn't like some conspiracy.
It's just a community of spies and unelected bureaucrats.
It's not like the deep state.
It's just real great guys at the CIA.
Love that term, the intelligence community.
They're just all living on a commune out there, you know?
Just fucking taking care of each other's cats, lending a cup of sugar every now and then.
Just a nice community of folks who happen to, you know, start wars sometimes.
But they're a good community of folks.
Well, here in the podcast community, we're not really buying that bullshit.
But this is, so this is what it is.
Now, they have seven ways from Sunday to get back at you.
What exactly would that be?
Chuck Dreamer says, I don't know.
I don't know, but I know they could fucking ruin you.
Like, what is he invoking there?
Is he invoking some fucking, you know, convertible trip through Dallas?
Or is he just talking about the fact that they'll start investigating you, stick a special counsel on you, and then have a whistleblower who will come forward and get these fucking, you know, collude with the Democrats into getting an impeachment inquiry opened up.
Who knows?
Who knows?
The other thing that you have to kind of understand is the whole dynamic of what's been going on with Donald Trump.
It's not just some random coincidence that what he was accused of doing for so long was colluding with the Russians, that Donald Trump was a Russian asset.
That wasn't just, you know, they could have made a million different claims about Donald Trump.
They went with that one and they went with that one for a reason.
And of course, they've kind of moved away from the whole, you know, Russia collusion thing.
You don't hear about that on the television anymore because there turned out to be nothing there.
And it's really remarkable.
One of the most remarkable stories of the year is how seamlessly they just left that narrative behind.
It's like everyone knows, like in 2017, 2018, you turned on CNN.
You could not watch it for more than 10 minutes without hearing Trump-Russia collusion.
And now you turn it on, you just don't hear it.
And they never even really pivoted from that.
They just went, yeah, I think we were right about everything.
Now we're going to drop that forever.
No apology.
No, we got that wrong.
Just moving on.
You know, pretty big claim to sitting president as the puppet of a foreign power.
Okay.
But what you kind of have to understand is that America has been pretty much in a Cold War or some type of, you know, not a hot direct conflict war, but some type of stealth war against the Russians since 1945.
That has never stopped.
Scott Horton just gave a speech at the Ron Paul Symposium.
It was like a Mises Institute event in Houston, I believe, somewhere in Texas.
Oh, no, I guess it was in Lake Jackson or whatever, a little outside of Houston in Texas.
And he gave a speech about this.
If you haven't heard it, you can find it up on YouTube.
You gave a really phenomenal talk.
But he talked a bit about the post-Cold War history of the U.S.-Russian foreign relations.
Industrial Revolution History00:06:28
And it's really like you realize after a while, there really is no post-Cold War.
I mean, the Soviet Union fell, but America continued its aggressive policies.
Look, after America and most Americans wanted no part of World War I.
Okay, the first world war.
And, you know, Woodrow Wilson, unfortunately, was in the White House, and he's pretty much the worst president in the history of the country.
And he got us into this war.
And America had, you know, look, we had built up something in economic power in this country that had really never been seen before in the world.
And I know this triggers a lot of like left-wingers and socialists because you're supposed to think of everything that happened in the 19th century as being the worst, you know, thing that ever happened.
Like if any like left-winger, if you bring up the 19th century, if you bring up the Industrial Revolution, what are you supposed to talk about?
You're supposed to talk about brutal working conditions, child labor, all of these things.
But really, if you look at it with any, if you play a little whataboutism and have any historical context in mind, the 19th century was a really amazing time and particularly in America.
Not compared to 2019, you know, I wouldn't want to give up my fucking, you know, smartphone and big screen TV and air conditioning and all of this and go back.
But if you compared it to the centuries before it, pretty incredible.
And not just like compare it to the, you know, 18th century or the 16th century or the 14th century, just all of them, you know?
If you were like charting human history and you were just like kind of keeping a loose eye on all of it, the 19th century is when you would go, holy shit, what happened here?
What the fuck happened here?
All of the sudden, you had, at least in Western countries, or not all of them certainly, but in England and particularly in the United States of America, you have some pretty incredible phenomenon.
You had the abolition of slavery across the West.
This was a big deal for humanity.
This was like something that had existed for pretty much, you know, I mean, with peaks and valleys, from the time of recorded history to that time, you had slavery.
That was just like the way human societies worked.
And then largely across the West, slavery was abolished.
And you had the Industrial Revolution.
Both of those things happened in the 1900s.
Excuse me, in the 1800s, in the 19th century.
Pretty incredible stuff.
Now, what you had in America, far from a perfect libertarian society, and obviously there are like, it's not that, you know, there weren't poor working conditions and there wasn't child labor, but there were always poor working conditions and child labor for all of human history.
Like the only reason we even think of those things as being like undesirable is because, you know, it's like talking about retirement.
Like there was never a concept of retirement.
You know, it's like, oh, people, you know, people in the 1600s couldn't retire.
Like, of course not.
If you were able to, if you were able-bodied, you worked.
And that was that.
There was never even a thought of the idea that you would spend the last 20 years of your life hanging out, enjoying your golden years or whatever.
But so in this time period, right, I think it's worth appreciating that from the end of the Civil War.
So from 1865 to say 1910, take that period, right?
So you've got basically a 45, 50 year period, right, after the Civil War, where what you had was the biggest experiment in free markets in human history.
Okay.
So obviously not everything's perfect.
You're still, no matter, but think about it this way, right?
If you were to go to 1865, America.
So the Civil War just ended.
You know, the nation's been destroyed.
I mean, the bloodiest war still to this date, even with population, you know, growing so much, it's still the bloodiest war in American history.
What, six, 700,000 people die?
You know, villages are burned down.
Cities are destroyed.
You know, brutal.
There's nothing.
There's, you know, if you went back there from today, things are going to be really bad by today's standards, no matter what.
And you could have implement socialism or capitalism or any economic system you could think of.
It's not going to be really great, you know?
But here's what we did in this country, all right?
What you had was, and try to even imagine having this degree of a free market.
By the way, I did not anticipate going off on any of this rant, but it's happening.
So buckle up.
So here's what we had, right?
You had a country with no income tax.
You had a country with no central bank.
You had a federal government that spending was basically non-existent.
I forget what it is, but it was like 2% of the national income.
It was like nothing.
Like the federal spending by today's standards basically didn't exist.
The regulatory state didn't exist.
This is before, there was no, you know, like government intervention of the economy on any big scale.
It was basically as close to an experiment in free markets as you could get.
You wanted to work, work.
You want to start a business?
Start a business.
Start doing it.
Really, about as close, certainly at the time, the closest to a laissez-faire free market economy that you could think of.
And what was produced was the greatest economic machine in the history of the world.
There's never been anything like it before or since.
America was the strongest economy.
And we, you know, we certainly intervened in South America a lot.
There was a military-industrial complex even back then, but we didn't typically get involved in European wars.
They got involved in some of ours, but we didn't typically go to Europe to start fighting.
That was like the old country.
This is what everyone had tried to get away from by coming to America.
Untucked Shirts and Economies00:04:04
Great movie.
So in World War I, as World War I started, there was no popular support for getting involved in World War I.
It was like, who cares?
There's these monarchies, these fucking kings fighting each other in Europe.
We came over here, you know, we fought a revolution to avoid the tyranny of a king, right?
We're going to go fight for some king in Europe now?
Makes no sense.
But Woodrow Wilson was able to propagandize the country into getting involved.
We got involved late in World War I and really drastically changed the course of that war because Germany was doing quite well before we got involved.
And we jumped into that war.
We were fresh.
All these other armies were tired.
They were worn thin.
Their economies were really taking the hit.
And we jumped in, this economic superpower at the time, jumped in, came in late and fucking and led to a huge victory.
And then, of course, we, you know, without that, it's kind of unavoidable that you could see the Treaty of Versailles being forced through, that, you know, the idea that a war that Germany was doing pretty well in would end in, you know, this total, complete surrender and taking full responsibility for all the costs of the entire war.
It was really just, you know, a very unfair situation that we put the German people in, but we did that.
And there were some unintended consequences of World War I, like, you know, just some small little things like the rise of the Soviets and the Nazis, which didn't help the 20th century out too much.
Both fairly bad.
All right, let's thank our sponsor for today's show, which is the great company, Untuck It.
I love these shirts.
If you catch my cable news appearances, I'm quite often wearing one of these untuck-it shirts.
I'm not a suit and tie guy, but when I go on news shows, I like to look a little bit presentable.
So I don't really like tucking in my shirt to my pants.
But the problem is most shirts out there don't look good untucked.
They're way too long.
They just don't, they don't feel right.
They don't look right because they're not designed to be worn that way.
That's where Untuck It came in.
They made shirts that are designed to be worn untucked.
So you look great while you're wearing them.
The holiday season's almost here.
You know what that means.
You got to buy gifts.
There's no better gift to buy than untuck it shirts.
They work for everybody.
The shirts always fall just the right length.
Like I said before, no matter the size of the person you're buying for, you look casual and sharp at the same time.
So whether you're shopping for the perfect holiday gift or just trying to craft a smart, relaxed style of your own, untuck it is the way to go.
Visit untuckit.com.
And if you use the promo code problem, they're going to give you 20% off at checkout.
That's untuckit, u-n-t-u-c-k-i-t.com.
And the promo code is problem for 20% off.
Guys, like I said before, I love these shirts.
More than 50 fit combinations.
It's super easy to order them online.
You find your size.
You can send it back if you don't like the way it fits.
Once you find your size, they have a huge selection.
You just shop for them.
They send them right to you.
You know they're going to fit perfectly.
Again, it's untuckit.com, promo code problem for 20% off.
All right, let's get back into the show.
Okay.
So then after World War I, the Nazis rise up, you know, fast forward into World War II, which in many ways is a continuation of the same war.
But so America, again, gets involved late and again is on the victorious side.
Absolutely destroy Germany and Japan and destroy them in a way that I mean, like truly, brutally destroy these countries, slaughter their citizens, you know, fucking beat them to, again, the point of surrender.
And something really changed in this whole, in this whole, you know, two World War time period.
I mean, these are wars that the world had never seen before.
Hunter Biden Ukraine Scandal00:13:09
And a lot of that is because we had never built up economies so strong that you could have military forces this strong.
You had the strongest economies and, you know, at the time, the most advanced, you know, weapons of war ever.
I mean, the Second World War ends with nukes being dropped.
And this is really where America never looks back or even pretends to.
And it's like, no, Okay.
The British Empire fell.
All of these old monarchs of Europe fell.
And we're the fucking superpower now.
We dropped the fucking nukes on Japan.
We got these new weapons of war.
We're better than any of these other armies.
The Soviets did win World War II, but they took substantially more losses than we did.
I mean, not only did they fight their, did they fight some of the fight on their own soil, but they also took substantially more losses than we did.
They were also communists, and so their economy was a paper dragon, whereas we actually did have this, you know, quasi-free market foundation.
So we had genuinely a strong economy, and they did not.
So we were the power.
But from then on, it was very clear that it was like, oh, okay, now we're involved in a battle for world domination.
I mean, even today, look, they may not say that today, but they pretty much, you know, in the same sense that Chuck Schumer didn't say the deep state is trying to overthrow Donald Trump.
But if you listen to what he's saying, he's basically saying that.
I mean, they don't say that we're the world empire and that we're here to dominate the world, but they basically say that.
I mean, it's not like any of them claim we're supposed to be a city on a hill, the shining city on a hill or any of that bullshit anymore.
They'll say things like, when America doesn't lead, it's a worse world.
You know, lead equals dominate.
Like if we don't run the world, then someone else might and it might be worse.
They're basically justifying the fact that we run the fucking show.
And the and we pretty much did.
You know, we won the Cold War against the Soviet Union, right?
I mean, they collapsed and we didn't.
And when the Soviet Union collapsed, of course, I mean, you know, there was a heavy price to pay, like, particularly in like places like Vietnam and, you know, Afghanistan and all the, like, they paid the price for the Cold War.
And, you know, some of our people did too.
Because, you know, if we had to help some Nicaraguan fucking, you know, Coke dealers ship their Coke into the fucking inner cities of America, and then the, you know, the CIA helps them ship in the Coke, and then the DEA turns around and locks their fucking kids up for 10, 20, 30 years at a time.
Hey, you know, that's just the price of fighting a cold war that we never needed to fight.
Anyway, so when the Soviet Union falls, and this is the part that Scott Horton talked about in his speech, I highly recommend people go check it out.
But everything that's happened post the Soviet Union collapse has been America aggressing against Russia.
You know, it's funny, they talk about how they attacked our democracy, they interfered in our election, but everything we've done since then has been provoking the Soviets.
So George H.W. Bush was the president when the Soviet Union collapsed, and he promised them that if they removed their presence in Germany and they allowed Germany to reunify, that we would not move NATO to the East at all.
That was the promise.
And we completely went back on that promise.
Now NATO's right up against their doorstep.
Okay?
So we've been the ones provoking them.
We've been interfering through the Clinton wars and Kosovo and we've been interfering in Russian affairs.
Certainly we would see it that way, right?
Like if Russia just, if we had a friendly government in Mexico and Russia came and overthrew that government and then put fucking weapons right up against our border, we might feel like that's a little bit of an aggressive move.
Anyway, so just to keep that clear, it's like the fact that this all this narrative was about Russian interference and Russia collusion.
And now that the country that's being involved in this is another former Soviet country, this isn't all coincidence.
This is all very interrelated.
And again, to just play a little bit about the whataboutism of the last two administrations, listen, I've said before, I don't think this so-called scandal of Donald Trump asking the Ukrainians to look into the origins of the Trump-Russia collusion and to investigate the Bidens.
This scandal, I said, of the last two presidents, three presidents, it's probably not in the top 100,000 scandals.
Like there's so many things that are fucking worse than this.
Like, I don't know.
Obama politicizing the IRS is worse than this.
Forget like going with all the big ones that I talk about all the time, like, you know, him supporting, you know, funding and weaponizing al-Qaeda or him starting all of these wars unconstitutionally, violating the War Powers Act, you know, signing into law the right to detain American citizens, putting American citizens on kill lists, killing American citizens.
Forget all the big ones, like the really big ones.
Fast and Furious is a bigger scandal than this.
Like all the ones that they'll actually talk about on Fox News.
Those ones are bigger scandals than any of fucking this shit.
But this isn't even close to the biggest scandal involving Ukraine, involving Ukraine, where Obama had basically a regime change against a fucking elected government and sided with actual Nazis.
Go Google John McCain Nazi picture and see pictures of John McCain with Nazis.
Yeah, that's right.
That was Ukraine also.
That's the country that we were siding with because they were basically at war with Russia.
I mean, I don't know if you call it a full-out war or just like military conflicts, but there's like, you know, thousands of people died.
And Ukraine's always been a horribly corrupt government.
Of course, they had this new leader come to power, and Donald Trump wanted to see if they could form a good relationship.
And certainly, I don't deny at all that Donald Trump, it seems pretty clear, he did want them to investigate the origins of The investigation into Donald Trump, the origins of the steel dossier and the whole Trump-Russia collusion stuff.
And also, I think he wanted them to look into Joe Biden and Hunter Biden.
Of course, as you know, it's not just that there's this obvious, possibly legal, but obvious corruption and quid pro quo, if you want to use that term, between Hunter Biden working on this Ukrainian energy company.
And, you know, obviously it's one more blatant example of buying influence.
But this is all going on while, you know, in 2014, I think it was, while Obama was, you know, was going in there and overthrowing their government and using actual Nazis to do it.
So while this is all going on, Hunter Biden is getting paid, you know, hundreds of thousands of dollars from this company, which he had no experience or qualifications to be on the board of.
So yeah, there's something there.
Now, did Trump want to look into them for political reasons?
Quite possibly.
But, you know, to act like that's a bigger scandal than siding with Nazis and getting involved in, you know, in provoking a nuclear armed power, I just, I don't see it.
I don't see that being the case.
Anyway, all just stuff, I think, to keep in mind as you look into this into the impeachment inquiry.
And it's not just like that I'm trying to lead you down a path.
I'm just saying if you don't like know anything about the history of this stuff, and there's people who know it far better than me, but if you don't know anything about this stuff, you're going to be lost.
And then you become a useful idiot.
Then you do these things where it's like, oh, like Donald Trump, it's just government corruption.
Thank God the CIA is there to fucking handle this shit.
So now the identity of the whistleblower seems to have been revealed.
It's been published in a few different publications.
And it seems like a guy who had some connections with Joe Biden.
Now, of course, the star witness today, I'm blanking on his name, but he was the former Ukrainian ambassador.
He was also another guy who served under George W. Bush and under Barack Obama.
So that's who they have as their star witness in this first hearing today.
So anyway, the whole thing is a goddamn clown show.
But so I guess let's move on.
Let's play a couple clips and we could go through them.
I forget what order I put these in, but let's just play from left to right.
Let's go with the first one.
Here, pull it up before you start playing it so I can just take a look and then set it up.
All right.
That doesn't give me any info.
Whatever.
Let's play it.
Are and always have been conditionality placed on our sovereign loan guarantees for Ukraine.
Conditions include anti-corruption reforms as well as meeting larger stability goals and social safety nets.
The International Monetary Fund does the same thing.
Congress and the executive branch work together to put conditionality on some security assistance in the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative.
Regarding my testimony today, I will do my best to answer your questions.
Questions that will involve issues, conversations, and documents that span a number of years.
Are and always have been conditional.
All right.
So there you have the former deputy assistant at the Secretary of State.
What he's basically saying, I mean, without saying the word, is that quid pro quo is how this always works.
I don't know if the Democrat, that's exactly what the Democrats wanted to hear, but that's what he's saying.
He's saying there's always conditions placed on foreign aid.
And the conditions are anti-corruption is one of the main ones.
So would it really be that crazy for Donald Trump to put one of the conditions on that?
Well, we want, I think this was corrupt.
I want you to get to the bottom of that.
Doesn't seem to bode too well.
They've just got some major problems.
There's some major, major problems in the story that the Democrats are trying to tell you.
And I've pointed these out before, but it's the story they want to tell you is that Donald Trump, he wanted them to investigate a political rival, and he said he was going to withhold military aid unless they investigated that political rival.
Now, there's lots of problems with this story, but the biggest one is that he didn't.
This is the biggest problem.
I mean, he withheld the aid for a little bit and then relinquished it, and he never got the investigation.
So even what they're accusing him of isn't doing this.
It's their claiming that he tried.
You know, it's kind of, it reminds me back when they were saying he obstructed justice for thinking about firing Mueller.
And then they'd be like, well, he told someone he was going to fire Mueller and they talked him out of it.
It's like, so wouldn't that be talking him out of obstructing justice?
So they're like, well, that's an obstructive act in itself to think about doing it.
You know, that's a tough sell.
That's going to be a tough sell.
So anyway, that was interesting that that got inserted into the record.
All right, let's go to the next clip.
Several of the things that you just mentioned.
In 2016, candidate Trump had made a statement saying that it was possible that he would allow Crimea to go back to Russia.
He expressed that he expressed the sentiment or the opinion that it was possible that Crimea wanted to go back to Russia.
What I can tell you, Ms. Nunes, is that that sentiment is amazingly inflammatory to all Ukrainians.
So I think, so I can understand that.
Are you aware during the, I believe it was the 2012 election when at the time, President Obama leaned over on a hot mic to the then Russian president and said that he'd have to wait till after the election.
Was that inflammatory to the Ukrainians also?
I don't know, sir.
Ridge Wallet Superior Method00:02:57
It's just great.
So I just love that Devin Nunes response.
And it's like, look, I know you could go, whataboutism?
I already hear the whataboutism claims.
But it's like, no, look, first of all, who the fuck cares what's inflammatory to the Ukrainians?
Like, why the hell is that?
That's the standard of how Americans set foreign policy?
Well, I bet if he said Crimea should never go back to the Russians, then that would be inflammatory toward the Russians.
There's really no way to inflame people in that situation.
I bet all those people talking about protecting the Kurds, you know, two weeks ago, I bet that was inflammatory to the Turks.
But, you know, like the point is, it's not what about ism, like in the sense that it's like, it's like, oh, so it doesn't matter because someone else did it.
The point is that you only seem to be picking out this one example, and now we're going to blast a president for being inflammatory to a foreign power.
Okay.
Well, yeah, you're always going to be inflammatory to one side when you're making decisions on any of this.
And by the way, Crimea going back to Russia is not a ridiculous thing for a presidential candidate to say.
My God, someone running for president actually thought they could influence policy.
Insane.
You should know it's the deep state that does that.
All right, guys, let's take a quick second and thank our sponsor for today's show, which is the Ridge Wallet.
The Ridge wallet is incredible.
It was great when I got this thing.
And if you're tired of that old wallet that your grandma or your ex-girlfriend got you for Christmas, that throws your back out of alignment, that has, you know, you have receipts from 1987 in there for some god-awful reason.
You ever do that like once or twice a year?
You go through your wallet and you're like, why am I even keeping these things there?
Why do I have this huge brick in my back pocket?
The Ridge wallet is awesome.
It's the wallet I'm using.
It's sleek.
It's cool looking.
It keeps your credit cards and your money right there.
It doesn't mess up your back.
You don't feel like you're sitting on top of a brick anymore.
It has 30,000 five-star reviews for one simple reason.
It's a better way to carry your cash and cards than the traditional wallet.
And it's also just way cooler.
If you take a look at this thing, it just looks awesome.
There's a lifetime warranty if you love it and free returns if you don't.
It comes in titanium, carbon fiber, aluminum, and over a dozen different styles and colors.
Like I said, you got to check this thing out.
It's just, it's really cool looking.
It'll revolutionize your wallet experience.
So go to ridge.com/slash problem.
That's R-I-D-G-E dot com/slash problem.
And use the promo code problem, and you'll get 10% off your order.
Like I said, I love this product.
I know Lewis and Jay also got one.
They love it.
Everybody around Gas is using them because they're just, they're awesome.
It's a far superior method to the wallet.
Once you have one of these things, you're like, I don't know why this didn't come into my life sooner.
So once again, go to ridge.com/slash problem.
Use the promo code problem for 10% off and get yourself a Ridge wallet or pick one up for a loved one for the holidays.
All right, let's get back into the show.
Extortion and Abuse of Power00:15:20
Okay, let's go to the next clip.
And once again, there is no linkage of security assistance dollars to an investigation of Barisma or the Biden's.
Three meetings with the president of Ukraine, the new president, and no linkage.
That's accurate?
Ms. Jordan, it's certainly accurate on the first two, first two meetings, because to my knowledge, the Ukrainians were not aware of the hold on assistance until the 29th of August.
So the political article.
Okay, so pause it right there.
Just so we're all clear with what's being said here, because I think this is actually really important to getting down to the heart of what's going on here.
So there's a period of time, I believe it's 52 days.
I might be off about that, but this is the period of time where the military aid to Ukraine is being held up.
Okay?
So the military aid to Ukraine is being held, and there's this period.
And this guy, the ambassador, who's the Democrats' star witness right now, he met with the Ukrainians three times during this period where the military aid was being held up.
And he says, he makes it clear that when he says there was no linkage, meaning that it was never in any of these meetings expressed to the Ukrainians that the reason this military aid is being held up is because of these investigations that Donald Trump wants you to conduct.
That was never expressed to them.
Now, if this is some type of extortion, as they're trying to present it as, wouldn't the person being extorted need to know what the terms are?
Now, not only does he say that, he goes, oh, no, no, no.
The first two, in the first two meetings, they didn't even know the military aid was being held up.
So not only did they not know what they were being extorted for, they didn't even know they were being extorted.
Doesn't seem to fit with the narrative that extortion is happening here at all.
So it's like if you were like accusing someone of kidnapping someone and holding them for ransom and you were like, okay, you met with them three times during this period that you had kidnapped their uncle and you were like, did you ever talk about your demands for ransom?
And they're like, no, no, no, that never came up.
And then actually, the first two times I met them, they didn't even know we kidnapped their uncle.
So that kind of fucks with the whole narrative that you kidnapped their uncle to extort ransom out of them, right?
Because kind of kidnapping ransom 101 is you inform the person that you've done the kidnapping and you let them know your demands for ransom.
If you don't have those things, it's kind of hard to complete this.
Now, this is the Democrat star witness saying this, okay?
And of course, Jim Jordan, who's a goddamn shark, is grilling him.
So let's play the rest of this clip.
The third meeting that you mentioned with the senators, Senator Murphy and Senator Johnson, there was discussion of the security systems, but there was not discussion of linkage.
Three meetings face-to-face with President Zelensky, no linkage.
Yet, in your deposition, you said this, and you said it again the first hour of the majority.
My clear understanding was security assistance money would not come until President Zelensky committed to pursue the investigation.
My clear understanding was they weren't going to get the money until President Zelensky committed to pursue the investigations.
Now, with all due respect, Ambassador, your clear understanding was obviously wrong because it didn't happen.
President Zelensky didn't announce he was going to investigate Burisma or the Bidens.
He didn't do a press conference and say, I'm going to investigate the Bidens.
We're going to investigate Burisma.
He didn't tweet about it.
And you just told the ranking member he didn't do the CN interview and announce he's going to investigate Burisma or the Bidens.
So three face-to-face meetings, it doesn't come up.
No linkage whatsoever.
President Zelensky doesn't announce it before the aid is released on the 11th.
And yet you said you have a clear understanding that those two things were going to happen.
The money was going to get released, but not until there was an investigation.
And that, in fact, didn't happen.
So what I'm wondering is, where did you get this clear understanding?
As I testified, Ms. Jordan, this came from Ambassador Sondland.
Well, can you hold one second, Ambassador?
I'm going to bring you a piece of paper from Ambassador Sondland's statement.
Very good.
And you can take a look at this.
Go ahead, though.
I'm going to let you finish.
So, Ms. Jordan, should I read this?
No, no, I just want you to have it because I'm going to read it.
Oh, very good.
Very good.
Yeah, but I wanted you to go ahead and finish.
You said, Ambassador, you got this from Ambassador Sondland.
That is correct.
So basically, he says that other people told him that this is what Donald Trump wanted.
And I don't necessarily deny that this is what Donald Trump wanted.
But if you can see there's a big problem for the Democrat narrative that Donald Trump extorted another country or that he abused his power or that there was a quid pro quo.
And this is an inconvenient fact, but nobody who's pro-impeachment can get around this because this is a fact and it's a pretty big one.
Okay?
There was no abuse of power.
There was no extortion.
There was no quid pro quo.
All you can really say is that there was an attempted abuse of power, an attempted extortion, an attempted quid pro quo.
And when I say quid pro quo, I mean in the in the sense that they're using it for not in the general sense because that's what every deal is.
But he didn't withhold military aid and get them to investigate the Bidens.
At worst, the best you can say is he wanted to do that and it didn't work out.
And you don't even really have that much evidence that that's what he wanted to do.
Your evidence is that in a phone call with the Ukrainians, he said, hey, I think this Joe Biden thing is pretty corrupt.
Maybe you guys should look into that.
Now, are you really going to sit here and tell me for all the things, when I said the 100,000 different scandals, for all the scandals we could rattle off, all the ones we could rattle off, and I mean, it's just not even hard.
It's so easy.
Like George W. Bush instituted torture and lied us into a war.
You know, that we went through all the Obama ones.
And there's just so many.
But you're saying calling a foreign power and going, hey, this looks shady to me.
I'd really like you to look into that.
That's the impeachable offense.
Now, for the people who are out there like, well, you know, any corruption in government is bad.
It's like, really?
That's the president.
That's the precedent that we want to set, that that's what you get impeached for while all this other shit is going on.
And by the way, when Ron Paul was in that House of Representatives and he was there during the Bill Clinton impeachment, and they asked him about his impeachment, about what he thought about the impeachment, what he said was, and it was a great fucking quote.
Actually, Brian, see if you could pull that up real quick.
Just go, Ron Paul Bill Clinton impeachment.
See what we come up with, because I'd almost rather just play the quote from him directly than say it.
But if we can't find it, I'll just say it.
But just Ron Paul Bill Clinton impeachment.
Let me see on the screen what video, what comes up from that.
Yeah, that one up at the top.
Is there a shorter version?
Hold on, hold on.
Go up a little bit.
Let me see.
Ron Paul on why Bill Clinton should have been impeached.
Yeah, let's play that one.
Play that one right there.
And it's from the Scott Horton show, of course.
Well, and the page isn't loading very well, of course.
God damn it, Scott.
Yeah, play that one there.
This is fine.
On December 16th, 1998, President Clinton, only one day before an impeachment vote was set to come before Congress.
Wait, hold on, go back.
I want to actually read that to them.
One day before an impeachment vote was set to come before Congress launches a four-day bombing campaign on the already blockaded and starving nation of Iraq.
All right, let's play.
Hundreds of civilians are killed in the campaign.
This only four months after bombing a medicine factory in the Sudan and civilian targets in Afghanistan.
The same day Congressman Ron Paul is asked his opinion on the appeachment proceedings and Iraq.
He calls for the impeachment, albeit for very different reasons.
I have a prepared statement for tomorrow.
And in that statement, I talk about a much more serious act that the president committed than anything that we've generally talked about.
And that was the illegal bombing of Sudan in Afghanistan.
$200 million were spent for that without congressional approval.
Not only is it annoying, I think it's illegal.
I think it's unconstitutional.
I think it's an act of war.
And I think it's much worse than anything that we have considered under the impeachment.
There's been a lot of talk about the Constitution in the last several weeks, in the last several months.
A lot of people holding up the Constitution.
But I'd like them to read the Constitution, everybody here in this Congress, to read the Constitution of the Latin committing acts of war.
This to me is an outrage, and we shouldn't be participating in it.
We should not permit our president to do this.
There's no threat.
We're going to do more harm by doing this.
Congressman, if Congress were given an opportunity to vote on whether we should bomb Iraq, would you go along with that as long as it went through the procedures?
No, I would strongly oppose it because they're not a threat to our national security.
Iraq has a third-rate army.
They have no ability to wage war.
Our policies are deliberately destroying the country.
They can't feed their children.
They're not allowed to have medication.
There was a story in today's paper where one of our private charity groups was being fined because they were trying to get medicines in to the Iraqi people.
So for us to unleash bombs on Iraq at this particular time to kill more innocent people for narrow political reasons, no, there is absolutely no need to cause more bombing because of a very overall flawed foreign policy.
How are you going to vote on impeachment?
I'll vote for impeachment.
For all four articles.
Yes, unenthusiastically because I think the charges are way too mild and not touching the issues that I would like to touch.
I mean, that's what we should be addressing.
But I wish the Congress would address the unconstitutionality of presidents waging war.
That to me is a lot more serious than Monica Lewinsky, let me tell you.
It has nothing to do with national security.
Matter of fact, our national security is more jeopardized by permitting this to happen because we're liable to start a war.
We're liable to have our military men killed.
We're liable to have more attacks on us by terrorists.
Wow.
So, goddammit, that motherfucker is just right about everything, huh?
Look at him predicting we're liable to have more attacks on us by terrorists back in the mid-90s.
Pretty good track record that guy has.
So anyway, my only point there is just to anyone who's like a libertarian or a left libertarian or anyone, if you're for the impeachment, fine.
But at least talk about it that way.
At least go like, man, I really wish we were impeaching him for the children.
Like if Justin Amash said that, I would just go, whatever, no problem.
I mean, there's obviously other elements to this why personally, like I would not, I think it's actually pretty dangerous to support the impeachment because, you know, it's obviously part of what Chuck Schumer was talking about with this deep state attempted coup.
And that's a really bad precedent to set.
But I would get it if Justin Amash went, hey, man, look, I think we should be impeaching Donald Trump for the children he's starving to death in Yemen.
So I'll unenthusiastically vote yes for this.
But like, come on, man, this is like, let's talk about what really matters.
You want to go through like a constitutional process?
How about the fact that the Constitution says Congress declares the wars?
How about that?
So anyway, if anyone wanted to take that tone, I got no problems with you.
You know, we might gripe about little details here and there, but like, whatever.
You'd be on the right path, more or less.
But you see where, like, this is, and this is what was so great about Ron Paul.
And this is why I spend so much time talking about how great he was on this show and have done it for years and years and will continue to, is that he would take this opportunity to talk about what really matters.
There's always, that is the rule of politics 101, right?
You respond to the question you want it, not to the question they're asking.
So if they go, how are you going to, you know, vote on this impeachment hearing?
You'll go, well, let me tell you what we should be impeaching them about.
And then you just make it all about fucking killing babies in fucking third world countries.
And then you're talking about the shit that we should be fucking talking about.
It's that simple.
So anyway, there's major, major problems with the whole impeachment narrative.
I got to say that this fucking Adam Schiff guy who's running the show, who of course, you know, famously said, you know, it's so funny, man, just like it's so transparent if you just can have an attention span of more than 30 seconds.
But the guy who said that he had seen evidence that Donald Trump was involved in a conspiracy with the Russians.
Well, he's not saying that so much these days, but now he's just saying Donald Trump needs to be appealed for this.
He's also just fucking crazy.
Like he's got the crazy eyes.
If you ever look at him, these wide, fucking weird, yes, my next witness we will call it's really strange guy.
And he even said today that he had no idea who the identity of the whistleblower was, which is such bullshit.
Such obvious bullshit.
Just such a fucking blatant liar.
And that's the guy who's fucking leading this whole thing.
So, you know, I just thought there were a lot of problems and there was nothing, to me, at least, there was no moment of this whole thing that was like, oh, well, this is, they did expose this or they did get him.
And again, like I said, I, you know, I've said many times, you know, I'll call him as I see him on this.
You know, and impeachment really is just what they want to vote for.
If the Congress ends up voting to impeach Donald Trump, then he gets impeached.
They vote to remove him.
He gets removed.
That's, you know, I don't know what these fucking criminals will fucking vote for.
But this whole thing to me, it's like, let's look at what's really going on here, man.
Like, let's look about what's, let's look at what's really happening.
And in the same way that they called Donald Trump a Russian agent, just look at the way they call Tulsi Gabbard a Russian asset.
You know, it's like, this is, this is just the smear technique because what it's all about, what it's really all about is what's been going on since 1945, okay?
Join the Libertarian Party00:13:57
Is that we're the world empire.
And Russia was the last ones trying to be a world empire.
So they're the fucking threat.
They're the other ones with a big nuclear arsenal.
They're the other ones who have gone out and tried to take over the world, right?
I mean, they made it all the way through halfway through Europe.
They controlled half of Germany for decades.
Okay?
So they're the fucking threat here.
That's the fucking, that's what all the wars in the Middle East are about.
It's what all the wars in Eastern Europe are about.
It's all about the fact that we're trying to run the fucking world and they see Russia as a threat to that, right?
So what's Donald Trump's real crime here?
What's his real crime?
Like I've said before, even if you hate Donald Trump, entertain the thought that the CIA doesn't hate him for the same reasons you hate him.
You might hate him because he's like mean to Mexicans or Muslims or you think he's a bad guy or whatever or any other number of reasons.
So the reasons I hate him for, because, you know, he's continuing all these fucking wars or the spending is going through the roof or, you know, like the trade war, any of this other shit.
Fine.
Hate him away for that.
But understand, walk and chew gum.
The CIA doesn't hate him for the same reasons you do.
Now, what is his great crime?
Why does he get labeled a Russian asset and Tulsi Gabbard gets labeled a Russian asset?
What do they really have in common?
What's their great crime?
Well, here's Donald Trump's great crime.
Okay.
He doesn't seem to love the American empire.
He doesn't seem to celebrate the idea that we should be this empire, that we should be fighting every one of these wars.
And he even threatened to withhold military aid from Ukraine.
Now, who would that help?
This is a country that's been involved in a war with Russia.
So what happens if you withhold military aid from them?
Well, that might give Russia an advantage.
See, this is like, this is what it's all about.
It's all about this, is that Donald Trump's like, well, maybe Crimea should be a part of Russia.
I don't know.
I mean, it's right on their border and they speak Russian and they identify with Russia and it seems like a lot of them want to be a part of Russia.
Maybe they should be a part of Russia.
Well, that's not allowed.
You can't say that Russia should maybe expand a little bit, even if it was just, you know, you're talking about with Crimea, it's like a fucking, you know, it's like a city right over the border in Mexico.
Let's say there was a city right over the border in Mexico and they all spoke English and identified as America.
And you're like, I don't know, maybe they should just be a part of America.
They said, maybe the Dominican Republic should just be like a part of America.
I mean, Puerto Rico is already whatever, right?
Well, you're not allowed to say shit like that with Russia because they're not allowed to expand because we run the world, not them.
That's what this shit is all about.
And, you know, so that's Donald Trump's great crime.
That and the fact that they don't think they can control him.
They still seem to feel like he's just a little bit too wild.
Says what's on his mind.
And what's Tulsi's fucking crime?
Well, she's not pro-war enough.
She questions these wars.
And how the fuck else do you maintain a world empire except fighting people who don't want to be ruled by you?
That's the way you do it.
So Tulsi Gabbard commits the ultimate sin of saying, well, let's question all these wars.
I mean, none of them seem to be working out for us because they are working out for us if the us is the military-industrial complex.
If the us is the American people, then fuck no, they're not.
They're the ones that got to go.
They're the ones that got to fucking send their children to go get their legs blown off and foot the bill.
That's not much of a deal.
But if you're fucking, you know, Lockheed Martin or Raytheon or some shit like that, it's working out quite well for you.
So that's what this shit is all about.
And that's why I'd say, even if you do think this was an abuse of power to some degree, you know, by Donald Trump, just be careful who you're siding with, you know?
It's like if there's a big turf war between the Bloods and the Crips, and I'm just focused on like how the Bloods are really bad, and you're like, you know, the Bloods did some fucked up shit, so we got to support the Crips.
It's like, well, can't we take a look at them too?
Oh, it turns out they might be an even bigger threat.
They're also really bad.
So make no mistake about it.
I mean, if you side with this impeachment, you're siding with the CIA.
You're siding with the people who have been calling Trump guilty of treason for all the wrong reasons.
For all the wrong reasons.
The ones who celebrate the worst things that he does and attack him for the few good things that he does.
That's what you're dealing with here.
But if you are going to support the impeachment, at least, you know, support it the way Ron Paul supported the Bill Clinton impeachment.
At least insert our narrative or a narrative that fucking matters into the conversation.
All right.
I guess those are my thoughts on the first day of the impeachment inquiry hearings.
Looking forward to more of this fucking clown show.
I'll watch it so you guys don't have to.
But if you want to, if you got six free hours during your day, go ahead.
Turn it on.
I did want to, just before we wrap this baby up, I wanted to talk a little bit about the Libertarian Party, Maj Ture, some of the drama that's been going on there.
I know not all you guys who listen follow the LP that closely or know what's happening.
So Maj, you know, he was a guest on this show.
He was on Michael Malice's show as well.
And he was running for city council in Philly.
He's a guy who's become very, very popular in the Libertarian Party.
And he, you know, he lost his race in Philly, which look, I mean, obviously, Maj is a young guy.
He's running on a third party in a Democratic city.
And all of these things, you know, if you're if you're involved in libertarian politics or just in libertarianism in general or in any type of radical, you know, anti-status quo movement, it's these things are, you know, they're long shots.
That doesn't mean they're not worth trying.
But, you know, you're, you're going in at it at a disadvantage.
And Maj has been a guy who's been doing something really cool and really unique.
He's an interesting, an interesting dude.
You know, he founded Black Guns Matter, and he goes into the hood and tells these guys why they should all support gun rights and basically be libertarians.
And that is something that, you know, let's just say the Libertarian Party doesn't exactly have a deep bench of people who are doing that.
They have Maj, and that's it, as far as I can tell.
So anyway, he got into a whole, after he lost his race, it seems like some of the establishment people in the party tried to really fuck with him, and they rescinded.
He was going to go speak at the Libertarian National Convention.
And his invitation was rescinded.
And from what I understand, I spoke to Michael Heiss on the phone briefly the other day, who's the head of the Mises caucus.
Of course, also a former guest on the show.
Not the king of the Mises caucus, but he is the head.
And so anyway, I guess he was kind of explaining to me what happened there.
So it was this guy, Daniel Hayes, who I've never heard of before because I'm just not that up on the inner workings of the Libertarian Party.
And I don't really give a shit about that.
I focus on the big picture and the philosophy and how the party can be used to promote the philosophy is really all I care about.
And truthfully speaking, if Nick Sarwak hadn't embarrassed himself and started attacking all these fucking people who are really great in the liberty movement, I never would have known of him.
And probably most of you guys listening wouldn't have either.
Most of you guys wouldn't know who he is if I hadn't debated him.
But anyway, so he basically disinvited him, this guy, Daniel Hayes.
And it's really just, you know, it's the reasons that they did it, I guess, were something like, I guess Maj like called some people like gay or something like that when he was like making fun of them.
And he was, that he joked around in one video with Hotep Jesus that he was, that they were black, white nationalists, like trolling people.
And it was just the lamest thing ever.
And it's really funny, man.
Like it's like, this is the thing that, and this is what me and Michael Heist were talking about on the phone the other day, where it's like these people in the LP, and this is true in politics in general.
It's like they want diversity in quotes.
I've said this for a long time.
It's like they want the skin color, but they don't want any of your culture that might come along with that.
Like they don't want any of that shit.
So they want to brag about how they have black people, but then they also want to be like, he said something homophobic once.
And it's like, huh?
How many people in the hood have you ever hung out with in your life that you're really like, oh my God, they said something homophobic once, like, which, by the way, is a stupid term anyway.
Anyway, it's fucking sucks.
It looks like Maj might be leaving the party.
I'm not sure if he's decided that he's doing that yet or not.
I hope he doesn't.
I hope he sticks around and tries to, you know, join, you know, which he already is, but be a part of the righteous cause and take this fucking bitch over because that's the better play here.
That is absolutely the better play.
But it just, it just fucking bugs me.
It's like the same thing with Nicholas Sarwak, with guys like Daniel Hayes.
It's like these fucking dorks who like, they don't fucking accomplish anything.
They don't inspire anybody.
So they race to these party, you know, positions that nobody else really wants, which is, you know, just the reality of the situation.
It's like no one else wants this shit.
If I wanted either one of their jobs, I would go take either one of their jobs.
It would be quite easy to do, but I just don't want to do it.
I do something way cooler and I think it has a better impact.
But they're not fucking inspiring anybody.
They don't have followers.
I mean, this motherfucker Daniel Hayes has a couple hundred Twitter followers.
It's like no one knows who he is.
But then he's going to decide, this guy, Maj Ture, who's inspiring tens of thousands of people, that he's no good because he said a no-no word at one point.
And anyway, as you could imagine, my take on it is just, you know, disgust.
And this is what we need to fucking just either rise above or just rid the party of these people.
Because the truth is that I think that the Libertarian Party has a real big opportunity coming up.
And I'll say this one more time, which was my pitch to join the Libertarian Party.
And I'll be even a little bit more forceful than I was last time because there's been some new developments where now we actually have Jacob Hornberger running for president on the Libertarian Party, like a really good, principled, hardcore libertarian who knows his shit and will not compromise.
We've kind of got that guy that was more or less what we were looking for.
And, you know, look, you can, you can say like, I'm sure you can find areas about him that aren't perfect or things that, you know, like he could do better.
But, you know, I mean, that's, that's true for everybody.
If you're just looking at anybody, you know, if you were looking at Ron Paul, you could certainly be like, well, I don't know if he's like the best public speaker.
I don't know if he's the best this or that.
Or if you were looking at Trump or you were looking at any of these guys, there's problems you could find.
That doesn't mean they can't be successful.
And he's really, really great on so many issues.
And he's got so many good things going for him.
And then it kind of feels to me like this might be the right time for the Liberty movement to get going again.
It just feels that way to me.
And, you know, Scott Horton just joined the LP for the first time in his life.
And that kind of like signals something to me.
Like, Scott Horton may not have the biggest audience.
He doesn't have nearly as big an audience as he should, but he's a real thought leader in the liberty movement.
And I just think that like, look, man, like I said before, it's like, if we wanted to do this, if people, you know, if half of my audience were to were to join the Libertarian Party, we own that party.
We become a super majority in that party.
Half the audience of this show, a third of the audience joins.
We're a super majority in the party.
If all of us were to join the fucking party, like I have already, we just, we do whatever we want with it.
And if people are willing to go out and become delegates and join their local parties and all this shit, we could really get something going here that could be pretty fucking cool.
Pretty fucking cool.
Easily get Jacob Hornberger the nomination.
Really, really have like the libertarian voice being inserted because you know what?
As retarded as this fucking impeachment is, as crazy as this deep state coup against Donald Trump is, Donald Trump really ain't getting it done.
And he's not going to fucking save the fucking country from the coming disaster.
The fiscal disaster, the monetary disaster, the disaster from all these wars waging on, you know, it's like there's real problems here.
And I just think it's like rather than leaving the party, I think I really hope Maj doesn't leave the party.
And he goes, now, you know what?
We're actually, this is the very beginning of something really big here potentially happening with the party.
And let's fucking give it a shot.
Why not?
Let's fucking try to get this thing going again.
Either way, I'm always going to do what I do.
I'm going to sit here in front of this microphone and call him like I see him.
Give you guys the fucking big picture.
Be the most consistent motherfucker you know.
Reviving the Political Party00:00:34
That's what I'll be doing.
So anyway, thanks for listening, guys.
And we'll be back on Friday with Robbie the Fire Bernstein with a brand new episode.
But don't forget, I will be, there's still a few tickets available.
I'll be at the Paley Center on November 25th doing a panel with like David Cross and Liz Winstead and some comedians about like the power of comedy to persuade politics or something like that.
So I need some of you guys to come out to this shit.