All Episodes
Previous Next
Sept. 29, 2021 - Ron Paul Liberty Report
37:06
Pompeo: 'No Apologies' For Alleged Plan To Kill Assange

Former Secretary of State and CIA Director Mike Pompeo has responded to a recent Yahoo News investigation detailing Trump Administration plans to kidnap or kill Wikileaks founder Julian Assange that he makes "no apologies" for whatever measure his agency planned to take to safeguard "sensitive information." Also today: new public opinion data carries some bad news for President Biden.

|

Time Text
Pompeo And National Security Revelations 00:09:49
Hello, everybody, and thank you for tuning in to the Liberty Report.
With us today is Daniel McAdams, our co-host.
Daniel, good to see you.
Good morning, Dr. Paul.
How are you doing?
I'm doing fine, thank you.
So we have a few little items here today to go over.
I'm just wondering, I always like to look, well, which one is going to be really super positive?
The war has ended and we're living in peace and prosperity.
Can't find one of those, but we'll report things as we see it.
I want to start off with talking about one of my least favorite former head of the CIA.
I think that name is Pompeo or something like that.
We spent a little bit of time in Congress together, as I recall, but I didn't get to know him.
I had no need to.
But I'm not surprised that I wasn't very strong supporter of him when he was in the CIA.
And he is furious.
He's furious at Yahoo, I think it was.
They came out with a report that during the Trump administration and with Pompeo at the CIA, they made attempts to either kidnap or even assassinate Assange.
And I refreshed my memory on this, and he was indicted during the Trump administration, and that would have had to do with Pompeo and others.
So anyway, the story got out and made people unhappy.
And I thought, you know, at first I thought, you know, why does Trump do this thing?
This is horrible.
Because I had remembered him saying something about Assange being mistreated.
So I don't know what Trump's opinion was, but we do know that we've been critical of Trump's appointments.
He made appointments carelessly, and sometimes they didn't even represent Trump's views.
He certainly didn't represent a hardcore libertarian view either.
But this sparked a big, big debate, and Pompeo has answered back to this.
And he wanted to make a strong point that he was very proud of what they did.
And he never confessed and said they did it, but he didn't deny it.
And I think when you read what Pompeo said, they certainly did try.
That was the impression I got from what he said.
Because he has such a, his justification was he had a very strong desire to protect real national security.
I wonder what unreal national security is.
I think most of the time the word national security is used carelessly and casually to justify doing something that is not in our own interests, even though they're pretending the world will come apart and somebody's going to bomb us the next day if we don't go along with it.
But they call it national security because then that neutralizes anybody who would say anything because he'd be unpatriotic.
And so that sort of narrows things down to what opposition can say and have a debate over.
And if that's the case, that's what they were making the effort to do to show this was a proper function.
It was necessary.
Pompeo was not bashful about this.
But from the very early on of my getting involved in politics, I became very, very leery of the CIA.
And certainly over the years, it's gotten a greater concern because I think a CIA as the outfit that's involved in assassinations.
And I think that if you just look at even the ordinary news, you could find a lot of instances that the CIA was involved and nobody's arguing yes or no.
And here, even on this one, there's no denial that they were involved in this, but it was for national security, so we're supposed to forget it.
Yeah, well, this was a follow-up to an investigative piece that Yahoo News did, I think, last week.
And it reported that, reportedly, there were discussions within the Trump administration back in 2017.
What are we going to do about Julian Assange?
What are we going to do about him?
And was brought up in the context of those discussions.
Maybe we should kidnap him.
Maybe we should assassinate him.
Apparently, I mean, a lot of it reads like something out of a spy novel, makes you wonder about some of the imaginations of those that may have leaked this.
But the idea maybe to smash into a Russian embassy car in Ecuador if they needed to do that sounds pretty wild.
But whatever the case, the real reason why this is our number one story today is because of Pompeo's reaction.
Now, remember, we and probably the vast majority of the world, like 90% of the world, consider Assange to be a journalist, a publisher and a journalist.
And that's what journalists do.
Well, Pompeo was asked about this report, and he said, I make no apologies about this report.
He didn't say it's true or false, but he makes no apologies.
And then, of course, he talks about we have to work diligently to make sure we're able to protect this important sense of information, whether it was the cyber actors in Russia or the Chinese military or anyone else.
So he brings it in the context, again, of this false, this false, absolutely disproven, of course, the basis of the RussiaGate scam.
Again, he's promoting it, which is that somehow Russia hacked the DNC service, which we know is not true because the head of the organization hired to look into it, hired by Hillary to look into it, said we had no proof that the Russians hacked.
There was no proof at all.
See, we happen to endorse the principle that journalists and whistleblowers are very, very helpful to us.
Because to me, what they're doing is revealing the truth.
Now, what is the enemy of dictators and tyrants is the truth.
They can't survive without it.
And they're very paranoid about this.
So they don't even say, well, you know, and be wishy-washy on the answer.
Boy, they come down and say that this guy's a scoundrel.
We don't want to hear anything about it because they really fear telling the truth.
And there's some polling and things going on in recent months and recent years and recent decades.
The American people, you know, are catching on to a lot of this.
That when somebody tells the truth, they're going to be in big trouble.
And sometimes you go to jail if you're a whistleblower.
Sometimes you go to jail for this.
So this is not good.
But I think it has to have some political significance.
Sadly, don't think this will hurt Trump politically.
It might fit into it from the frustration I have is the indecisiveness of, well, yeah, he was a pretty nice guy.
Maybe he's been mistreated.
At the same time, you know, he went along with the Pompeos.
It says volumes about the values that the U.S. government pretends to uphold, claims to uphold, and the actual values that it does uphold.
Because can you imagine if it was Putin and they said, well, we uncovered a plan from Putin to assassinate a journalist, an opposition journalist who was bringing up the dirt on Putin.
And Putin came out and said, yeah, I make no apologies.
I was trying to kill the guy.
He was taking the state secrets away.
So the idea, we proclaim that we have this great respect for journalism and opposition journalism.
The reality is, behind closed doors, the plan is you've got to kill this guy because he's showing the crimes that the CIA has committed in our names and with our money.
Right.
Want to go on to the next thing, unless you have another point you want to make there.
But, you know, this is on regular TV a lot, and they're making the point.
And there is a division now in the Democratic Party more than I would have expected, you know, because they were very unified before the election because they didn't care who they were electing.
And maybe that's why we have our current president.
They did not care because the hatred was all directed toward Trump.
But right now, the Democrats are fairly well split.
They're arguing pretty strenuously over the budget.
And they're even involved in foreign policy and how the Afghan war didn't end and who's to blame.
So that's going on.
But this is reflected in the polls, the conventional polls, the public polls, and it shows that Biden's in bad shape.
So sometimes I don't think any of this stuff on the major news networks is it comes by because it's true and there seems to be a strategy.
And I just wonder what the strategy is long term on what they expect to do in this next few years, who's going to be the president, who's going to be the vice president, and what's going on.
Why Trust Is Waning 00:15:08
But there's no doubt that the American people don't trust Biden.
But we might say we could get some pretty good statistics, if they were honestly done, of the decrease in trust with the American people over decades, because it certainly has gone down a whole lot.
Yeah.
Well, we wanted to look at some poll numbers because poll numbers are always very interesting.
And in fact, let's look at this first clip that we have.
Of course, there is a lot of editorializing in this title.
Anyone who studied or is familiar with the craft of journalism would see that.
However, let's read it.
This is CNBC.
Unvaccinated Americans falsely say the need for booster shots proves COVID vaccines don't work, Kaiser survey shows.
Now, anyone writing a normal headline would just say unvaccinated Americans say the need for booster shots proves COVID vaccines don't work because that's what the survey was.
But there was an editorialization that, but it doesn't matter because the important part of this is not about whether they work or don't work.
It's about the attitudes of Americans that we're trying to discuss in this segment.
And let's look at this next one because here is from that survey.
And what it shows us is something incredible, which is the huge divide in opinion between those are vaccinated and those who are unvaccinated, their perception.
Now the question is, which comes closer to your view about the news that some people might need boosters?
The first one, it shows the vaccines are not working as well as promised.
And that among the unvaccinated, 71% said the need for boosters shows that there's something wrong with the vaccine.
Those who are vaccinated, only 19%, you know, one in five say that that shows that there's a problem.
The second question, well, that shows that the scientists are continuing to find ways to make them more effective.
Now, that was very popular among vaccinated.
78% agreed with that sentiment, and only, again, 22% of the unvaccinated thought that that meant that they're working hard to make them more effective.
So you see, Dr. Paul, almost a mirror image between vaccinated and unvaccinated, their attitudes, their views about what the booster shots mean.
But there's also another division, and it's the political divisions, conservative Republicans, and liberal Democrats, that goes to show not so much that they have deep thinking people on both sides and they're making these decisions.
It just means that the propaganda machine works to a degree, and they appeal to certain groups, and they were able to convince those on the left side that you need government to solve all the problems.
If you're a conservative or a libertarian, that means you despise government and you don't like people and you would allow people to die and this sort of thing.
And you silly folks, you even want to quit fighting wars overseas for 20 years at a clip because there's no purpose in it.
They won't accept that.
But no, I think that the polling is important and does show some, but it has a lot to do with propagandizing too.
Yes, it does.
Well, here's the second set of polls that we were looking at today that were fascinating.
And it explains a lot, actually, and the trends are not looking good for Biden in his attempt to control the narrative on COVID.
Let's look at that next one.
This is an Ipsos-Axios poll on Americans' trust in Biden.
And it's fascinating because Americans' trust in Joe Biden to provide them with accurate information on COVID is on the decline, according to the latest Axios-Ipsos coronavirus index.
Fewer than half, this is of all Americans, not vaccinated, not Republicans, fewer than half of all Americans now say they trust the president.
That's a 13 percentage point decline.
And let's look at this next one.
Now here's the graph that will show you.
The next clip here is the graph from this same article.
Trust in Biden to provide accurate information on COVID declines.
This is from January.
The total was 58%.
A solid majority believe that he provides accurate info.
And now the recent 24 to 27 September poll, that has slipped down to 45%.
Again, that's Republicans, Democrats, and Independents who now do not believe that Biden is providing the right information.
And you scratch your head a little, Dr. Paul, and wonder why.
Well, here's a couple of clips that might kind of make you wonder if what the administration is saying in reality might be at odds with each other.
Let's look at this next one.
This is from Fortune magazine this morning.
Harvard Business School, top business school in the country, they've decided to move their schooling and move their lessons back online after a surge in breakthrough COVID-19 cases.
Last thing, Dr. Paul, is the paragraph explaining it.
If we can put that next one on.
And this is maybe why people are kind of stopping and not trusting as much.
And we talked about it yesterday.
They have a problem.
It's being very difficult for the administration to explain this to people.
But here's Harvard as an example.
96% of their employees and 95% of the students were vaccinated.
That's a much higher rate than the U.S. adult population, which is currently just at 64%.
But they said here as the spokesperson for the Harvard Business School, quote, in recent days we've seen a steady rise in breakthrough infections among our student population despite high vaccination rates and frequent testing.
So they put it all back online.
That might be why Americans are saying something is not making sense here.
Well, I think the opposition to a more sensible approach and a voluntary approach would be the number of people who are catching on in regular media.
They don't have to read internet's remote and people who are into conspiracies and all.
They say, well, if everybody has to be vaccinated, you just make some points.
They're not doing much better.
But the whole thing is, if they worked at all, why is it that the enemy is the unvaccinated, and they don't want to even get near them?
Stay away from me.
You're dangerous.
So it doesn't work.
But they have to have somebody to blame.
They can't blame themselves.
And they're not giving up on the vaccinations.
And I think you made the point yesterday.
You put a few dollar signs out there that people make money on this thing.
So they're not going to walk away soon.
But it does seem strange that you see this evidence doing one thing.
Then all of a sudden, they do the opposite thing.
But on the long run, though, I'm still remaining optimistic that more and more people are going to wake up.
And I think more and more people now say, why do I have to get vaccinated?
You're vaccinated.
You should be protected.
But it seems like the evidence, but even citing this evidence sometimes is risky too because they might claim that we kowtow to some type of a cult.
And of course, I think we talked about a cult yesterday and explained what that was all about.
Well, I think the real issue is messaging.
We're both scratching our head because that poll, that second question is that, you know, having a booster just shows that scientists are adjusting things to reality and they're coming up with new ways of dealing with some unexpected things.
I think most people would accept that because we know the science is not settled, you know, that things do change.
And I think that would be something that would be more accepted by the American people if the White House said, look, here's the situation.
Yeah, those first two shots are great.
However, you know, there are some changes.
There's a variant, whatever.
We've made some adjustments and now here's what we're doing.
But they haven't even done that.
They haven't even explained, if I got two shots, why do I have to have a third one of the same thing?
So the messaging is just really weird.
And I think they're starting to lose some of the population on this very, very weird and bad messaging on it.
Well, we shouldn't have to worry too much about that because we have the internet to help us out.
I remember how excited I was when I just started to try to understand what's going on with all this internet stuff.
Then I found out there's a lot of information out there and a lot of useful information, a lot of opinions made.
And it looks to me like there'd be some great discussions going on.
But today we see a headline that is sort of not promoting voluntarism.
They're saying, you know, if you don't obey the rules, you can get in trouble.
And this headline comes from the Washington Post.
Okay, Washington Post says YouTube is banning prominent users and blocking all people who do anything about, they come across as being anti-vaccine.
Well, have you met very many people who are just blatantly anti-vaccine?
I mean, some people are anti-alcohol.
Our president is one quality he has, I think.
He's anti-alcohol because he had a bad experience with it and his family.
So I'm sure there are some people who say all vaccines are bad, but I don't think we've had people on, nor do we take that position.
We take the position that if you pretend to live in a free society, you should at least give us token support for the idea that things become voluntary, that the way you live, the way you live with friendships and where you work and what you do, and what kind of friends you have, who you marry, and who's your sexual partner, is all voluntary.
Both sides agree.
What a wonderful world could that be, you know, if everything was voluntary.
But no, here is something that could be solved by voluntarism and say, well, fine.
There's a lot of people who think the vaccines are good and they may have their arguments or they may be watching more television than we do and they have their side.
But can you imagine if anybody came along and the lineups were a little different and just say, well, if you state that vaccines are not perfect and then get taken off the air or something, they're not going to allow it to happen.
But right now, if you're not vaxed, then it comes down and you can be dismissed from distributing that information on the internet.
But my big complaint is social networks are not independent, they're not free enterprise, and they're not journalists, and there's an underlying reason for doing that.
And I think of the collusion of social networks and the collection of data and statistics are very much shared between social media and also with the government.
Yeah.
Well, let's put up that clip.
And this is from the Washington Post.
And I'm sure they're thrilled about it.
They're thrilled about this news.
YouTube is banning prominent anti-vaccine activists and blocking all anti-vaccine content.
As you say, Dr. Paul, that is very subjective.
If you go down here, say YouTube is taking down several channels associated with high-profile anti-vaccine activists, including Joseph Mercola and Robert F. Kennedy Jr., two people who we know and we know are not anti-vaccine activists at all, but they are people who are giving information.
They both claim that they're not, but they're actually just being erased from the debate.
You can no longer be on YouTube if you question anything.
And it sends a very chilling signal.
And in fact, I have some bad news in my closing about this as well, but it sends a chilling, chilling message to people about debate.
And you can imagine if there was YouTube way back earlier in the last century, YouTube is banning any account that questions the safety and efficacy of the frontal lobotomy because that was settled signal.
Or anyone who questions the safety and efficiency of thalidomide for pregnant women.
I mean, that's what's happening.
Science is all about debate.
That's what it should be.
The Soviets tried to end debate because they believed, and you've written about this in a book that's come, they believe they have settled science.
Science now only goes according to Marxist theory.
Well, they were proven very wrong.
And so by doing this, it sends, I think, a very, very chilling signal.
And I have to say, Dr. Paul, and this is something that we have not announced yet, but for the first time ever, we have decided to not put the videos from our Washington conference on YouTube.
And it's not because anything was wrong or anything was bad, but it's because of the atmosphere that's developed there where debate is no longer welcome.
And we have for the first time, and I'll tell our viewers this, we have entered into a deal with Odyssey to let them have a limited exclusive on the videos from the Ron Paul Institute Washington Conference.
You can find them on Odyssey at Ron Paul.
And the first two videos are up for people to watch.
And I hate to say that because YouTube has been very good to us up until recently.
And we haven't done anything bad.
We've been very good, but it's a very sad state of affairs.
Well, it personally bothers me, and it should bother everybody, because what they're saying is that we live in a society, there's a pretense that we live in a free society, and we have our traditions.
But really, the attack is on liberty.
You know, voluntarism is liberty.
People can run their lives as they see fit as long as they reject the notion of using force.
So we recognize that.
We do not believe that we should use force to impose our will on other people.
But anytime somebody is successful with ideas that contradicts the authorities that are using force, boy, that's bad.
And that's why they come down hard on this.
And you get punished for this.
And the bigger the government is, the longer the authoritarian has been in charge.
And the worse it gets because the country gets less moral and more bankrupt.
Suspended Without Warning 00:03:56
And they have to have more power in order to sustain it.
So all they have to do, if you have an inflation problem, all they can say, put more money.
If there's a spending problem, just look at what they're doing in Washington right now.
Just spend more money.
That's going to solve the problem.
It's always more, more, more.
And then anybody who disagrees, you know, you're roadblocking this.
And here we want to help the people.
So they don't think it in terms of the principle of personal liberty.
And I think that's where so much goes wrong.
And that's why I give the founders a lot of credit.
They had some principles that they were working hard to put into the Constitution.
And most people have recognized that it's not a perfect document.
But that was the goal.
It was so much different than what is happening in Washington right now and how people can get blackballed and say, we don't want to hear from you.
If you do that, we take you off the air.
Yeah, you disappear.
Well, unfortunately, that leads to my closing, which is not great news.
And if we can put up that next clip, we don't use the Ron Paul Institute YouTube account very much because most of our work is done with the Liberty Report.
But the Institute had its own YouTube account, and we did put, I'll go back one, please.
Here we go.
So I went on yesterday.
I had not uploaded anything onto our YouTube channel in at least a year or more.
But I was going to upload something from our student seminar, and I got this message.
Hi, Ron Paul Institute.
We reviewed your content and found severe or repeated violations of our community guidelines.
Because of this, we have removed your channel from YouTube.
Then it says, we're sorry, this is upsetting news, but we want to make it safe for everyone, and you can learn more here, and you can appeal it.
So I did submit an appeal.
Let's look at the next one.
This is my appeal because I went through and I said there must have been some warnings.
Maybe I'm not checking enough.
I went back two or three years and there was not a single warning or a single flagged video.
And so I wrote back and said, we've received no warnings whatsoever of any violations on any video on this channel and all of a sudden it's removed.
You don't point to a single video that violates your policy.
I can only guess this has been an error.
Please check and reinstate this channel as soon as possible or point to us the violations that warranted the removal.
We didn't even have a single warning, much less any strikes on the channel.
And so here's what they wrote back.
Here's the next one.
They said, we've received your appeal and we'll get back to you as soon as possible.
Then a little bit later they said, thanks for your appeal.
We've decided to keep your account suspended based on our community guidelines and standards.
And I replied in saying, well, what was the problem?
Which ones were they?
And let's look at the last one.
I hit reply and said, well, what was it?
Nope.
Address not found.
You can't appeal the appeal.
Suspended without warning, without providing a single bit of evidence of how we broke their rules.
Nevertheless, everything is gone, including, I'm sad to say, the video of the opening, the very opening of the Ron Paul Institute, where we had Jimmy Duncan, we had Walter Jones, all completely gone.
No warning, no anything.
And I would just appeal to people out there if there's someone else that has an idea about what we can do, because obviously we cannot get through to YouTube.
We can't get any help.
We can't get any response.
And we're just gone.
You know, this could be settled in a free market, and it would be through contracts.
What do they agree to?
What do they sign up to?
Then there's also the principle of the implied contract, you know, that when you do it, when you join an organization, something, the implication is that they're not going to give it to your enemies or your competitors and pass it around.
Reasons for Leaving 00:07:58
It's just so bad.
But they're ruthless with this.
And unfortunately, it has to be dealt with because there's legislation that's being proposed.
And sometimes I read it, and I see some that's too broad for me.
They just say, thou shalt not ever say anything.
It can't be that way.
They have to have some rules about it.
But the rules now are designed by social media, which is a partner of the government.
And they share this information.
So that's where I have a problem.
I would just want to mention a couple little things here as I close.
One thing is the United States, you know, they're still working hard on the vaccine passport.
They still strongly believe in this.
But there's different countries have different passports, and I guess a passport is a passport, isn't it?
I mean, national passports have been working that way.
But the Russians have a passport.
Oh, well, that's different.
You know, you can't trust those Russians.
So we don't want them competing with, we have several companies that have invested a lot of taxpayers' money in them making a lot of profit over here.
And you can't have somebody saying, well, I want to travel to the United States or whatever with a Russian passport.
But it's an easy solution.
U.S. to exclude travelers vaccinated with Russia's Spundik 5, despite distribution to 70 countries.
It sounds like a pretty popular vaccine.
Why don't they have a little scientific investigation and let the people decide and say, well, which one's working best?
Which ones has the most side effects?
And make a decision.
No, the politicians will make the decision and protect some special interests.
The other little thing is related to things that we've talked about before is once again, firing people.
You know, if you don't have the vaccination, the blackmail thing.
You do this, this, and the government's not doing it.
The government doesn't tell you all these mandates.
What we do is we tell the businessman who's dependent on the government, and they're denied entry into the government process, the banking system, and the bailouts and that sort of thing.
So, the business people have joined as one of the reasons why we have business people that are so much involved with cultural Marxism.
But the hospital system, the medical profession, has been involved with government for a long, long time, much more so since the government pays about 80% of all the bills when you add up Medicare and Medicaid and all these things.
But the North Carolina hospital system just fired the largest number at one time, 175.
They committed a serious crime, though.
They weren't vaccinated.
And they had a personal preference.
They had other reasons too.
In a way, if they can get out of it with a religious preference desire, so be it.
But that's sort of sad.
Why isn't it automatic that you can make up your own mind and make your own decision, what you put in your body without coming up with this little bit of excuse?
You can do this, you can be excused from that.
But it's never done on the principle.
You're a right to deny this and refuse it.
But anyway, with the concession of those principles, what I think long term are very, very dangerous.
But, you know, and the hospitals are hurting.
They've already short of workers.
People have left for a lot of different reasons.
So the medical care conditions are going down.
So in New York, I know this is happening, but this was in North Carolina.
So what do they do?
They have these problems.
They don't have enough people there.
And people are worried about the vaccine.
Well, let's fire a bunch of people.
Well, when there's crime in the streets and they're shooting and killing and robbing wholesale, and the police are, if they interfere, they may get a greater penalty than the bad guys are getting.
So they go in.
Well, how do you solve these cities?
Well, go to Chicago, check how they do it.
Well, what we need to do is get rid of the police.
Obviously, it's the police's fault.
So they want to fire the police.
And this is something that really doesn't make a heck of a lot of sense.
And the United Airlines, they got rid of the biggest number of any group now, hundreds.
Hundreds.
And you'd think the TSA, I would say that we didn't do a good job.
I spoke against the institutionalizing the TSA, believing long-term it would be a disaster.
And that's been around.
Now it's expanding.
And people, you know, are fighting on airplanes.
And it's just horrible what's going on.
And so, well, maybe they need a few more helpers.
And they're quitting.
Fire them.
Fire them.
It's just the people who are unvaccinated.
They've caused all this trouble.
And it just goes on.
I would predict that long term, and long term now is about a month away.
Long term, this nonsense is going to help drive our economy shattering downward because the seeds have already been planted by excessive spending, excessive printing amount, the deficits run up by our governments, and also what the Federal Reserve does.
That's all been in place.
There is absolutely going to be a correction for all the mistakes made for many, many years, and you could argue even for decades.
And so that is a problem that's there.
And then we're going to add all this on.
We've come up with a reaction to COVID, which is a bit Excessive because they made it illegal to have a voluntary approach to taking care of people's health.
That was sort of assumed for hundreds of years in this country that the people were responsible for their health care.
Anyway, more people now are waking up to this, and there's the demonstrations, the resistance they're growing, and people are saying enough is enough.
And they're out standing, confronting the people, confronting school boards and city officials, and because of the failure of the system.
And that's why the polls aren't looking good for those people who have supported these issues.
And I know it'd be easy to say, well, it's all Biden's fault, but I don't see it quite that way.
Biden's not much of an individual who's going to solve our problem.
But I tell you what, it's a much bigger problem than Biden.
He's the ultimate conclusion of the principle of interventionism: that the government should intervene in our lives, in medicine, in schools, and the whole works.
And then eventually things quit working.
And unfortunately, people cry a lot and say, you know, we could solve this problem if we had more bipartisanship.
Forget it.
Some of these problems came about, or I would think most of these problems came about, because subtly and somewhere along the way, there's been way too much cooperation with the sacrifice of our liberties.
But we hope to participate in trying to change that and make sure that the people can have a chance to once again live in peace and prosperity, and that's what we're all about.
Thank you for tuning in today to the Liberty Report.
Export Selection