Guerrilla Warfare In The GOP: House Erupts Over Budget Bust Up
House Speaker Kevin McCarthy is seeing another open revolt from his conservative and populist flank among House Republicans, with firebrands Matt Gaetz (R-FL) and Marjorie Taylor-Greene (R-GA) stomping their feet at the "compromise" 30 day stop-gap. Ron Paul has a solution to the dust-up, so watch the show! Also today: ammo is getting very expensive and NATO promises to Ukraine may suffer. Finally...Ron Paul discusses his new book, The Great Surreptitious Coup and tells you how you can get your own copy!
Get your copy of Ron Paul's LATEST BOOK - "The Surreptitious Coup" - as our "thank you" for your tax-deductible donation to the Ron Paul Institute. For $50 or more get an unsigned soft cover copy. For a donation of $100 or more get a hand-signed soft cover copy. For a donation of $150 or more get a hand-signed HARDCOVER copy of Dr. Paul's new book. How to get the book? Do nothing but make your contribution. We'll take it from there. We'll send the book automatically. There is a limited time and there are limited quantities!
Make your contribution at: http://ronpaulinstitute.org/support/
Hello, everybody, and thank you for tuning into the Liberty Report.
With us today, Daniel McAdams, our co-host.
Daniel, good to see you.
Good morning, Dr. Paul.
How are you this morning?
Doing fine, doing fine.
There's chaos in the streets, but we're going to take care of that.
I bet you wish you were back in D.C. duking it out with all these Republicans up there.
Yeah, and that was the place when you lived there.
You always bragged it was nice because you could always save money.
It cost of living was so cheap, yeah, dirt cheap.
That's what you were.
They told me, I'm glad I moved to Texas.
A little bit better conditions here.
But anyway, it's going to bother us all because we're not straightening things out.
But the political parties are busy.
Both of them are anxious to help themselves.
And they're talking about it, and the budget comes up.
But how many times, you know, do you think even the years you were there wasn't decades, but I bet you were three, four, five times we went through this budgetary stuff.
The charade of shutdowns.
And this pretense, because it's always a fake shutdown, but it's always scare the people, tell them their Social Security is going to end.
And once again, we're here.
And then there's infighting.
There's personality fights.
Who's going to benefit the Democrats or the Republicans?
But right now, we mentioned yesterday about some of the things that go along in the Democratic Party, and they're really split too.
Oh, yeah.
So they have a problem.
Today, we may mention that, but we're going to talk more about what's happening with the Republicans.
And you think, well, they're in charge of the house.
Who's really in charge of the house?
I think there are economic factors that are really in charge of things.
And even though they like to duck the issue and say, well, we were taught in college that deficits don't matter.
We were taught that the FBI, we were taught that the CIA and the FBI are very, very necessary.
And that the Federal Reserve is what gives us our prosperity and are good economic planners.
They've been taught that all along, but somehow another, things aren't working well.
You know, right now, superficially, as I was looking at this article, we're going to talk about the warfare in the Republican Party, is that there's one group that is not bashful about what their goals are, and that is chaos, street chaos, because they want to undermine the whole system.
Financial system, the moral system, the educational system.
That seems like they're doing pretty well, but it's hard to believe they do it on purpose.
But the evidence is there that there's a group now that are identified, and they're identified as Marxists, but not the old-fashioned Marxists.
They're cultural Marxists.
They're cultural, and they're more gentle.
And yet they have achieved a whole lot because if they were looking for chaos, who would have ever predicted within the last few years that San Francisco and Los Angeles and all the big cities would look like they look now?
And now I think that type of atmosphere has been a consequence of bad economic policy by Republicans and Democrats, university professors, and all the special interests and the lobbying groups, the military industrial colleagues.
We can find a lot of guilty people.
And now some people who are more have been more victimized, you know, the average person that's paying for the taxes, and that's the middle class and the poor.
And they'll say, what are you talking about?
Most of them, half of the country doesn't even pay income tax.
Yeah, but those people who don't pay taxes suffer the most from the inflation tax.
And that's not talked about.
So that's the other thing.
But the article I wanted to talk a little bit about to start off with, for us from Politico.
Have you noticed that we look at Politico and they have some people over there that produce what we consider pretty factual, you know, coming up.
A couple journalists.
Okay, but the headline caught my attention.
House GOP is open warfare over doomed spending plan.
Actually, they've had time and what's going on.
Why is it doomed?
Well, everybody knows it's doomed, and it's not going to go.
And it isn't because the Democrats aren't going to vote for it.
It's because the Republican caucus conference, they can't agree on it.
They're angling for power and position and special interest.
But the best thing that's sort of dividing the Republicans is a growing number have gotten a message from the people and said, we're in a mess.
You guys need to clean it up.
Now, one thing you could do is look at the excesses you're spending in Ukraine, unnecessary war and all this.
So that is good.
But that doesn't solve their problem, which is immediate.
So it's the bankruptcy that they're in the denial of because, yes, we've got to cut here and do all this stuff.
But philosophically, the leadership of both parties for decades, even the very good guys, don't have the purity of their beliefs that I think is necessary because they always have an exception.
You know, yeah, we'll cut back here and cut back here.
But, you know, it might all only be, yeah, we can cut back in Ukraine, but, you know, we need to spend more money in Taiwan.
So it's on and on.
So they're in a dilemma.
And I have a suggestion, which I'll offer out in a few minutes.
But how do you think this thing is panning out?
Well, let's look at some of the facts of the deal.
You can put up that first clip because this is the article from Politico.
House GOP in open warfare over doomed spending plan.
And here's the tail of the tape, Dr. Paul.
There's about 12 days left until shutdown, the end of the fiscal year on September 30th.
There are 15 Republicans apparently in hard opposition to a continuing resolution plan, a kick the can down the road plan.
That's difficult.
And it is a real challenge to Speaker McCarthy's speakership because you remember I had to go through 12 rounds of voting.
They finally agreed to a few things.
And one of them you and I were both pretty optimistic about, which is a separate vote for each of the appropriations bills.
Don't spend all your bickering and then put in a huge omnibus with things you couldn't even imagine thrown in there to be funded.
And then expect people, oh, we'll vote or we'll shut.
And that was the whole deal.
And they haven't done it.
And now they've got just a couple days left.
And they haven't gone through their basic work over the year.
And now they are trying to craft a 30-day continuing resolution.
Now, this is a collaboration between the Freedom Caucus, which is supposedly more conservative, and the more moderate or middle-of-the-road caucus to craft this 30-day kick the can down the road plan.
But they're selling it as something great, which is that we're going to cut across the board 8% in these 30 days.
But there's a catch.
Military spending and veteran spending, which is not as big a deal, are exempt from it.
So this is the plan.
It's not going over as well as they thought.
And in fact, Dr. Paul, even the House Freedom Caucus is bitterly split over.
Put the next one up because here's just a couple of things from the article.
Republicans began ripping apart their party's latest spending proposal on a conference call to their leaders.
The plan's two main defenders had to hang up the phone.
They had to leave.
So Dusty Johnson of the Centrists, Brian Donalds of the Conservatives thought they found a deal, but there is a catch if you go to the next one.
The radicals, I would say the populists, I don't know if I'd call them more conservative, but conservative populists are not in favor of Dr. Paul, and they're letting themselves be known.
More than a dozen Republicans, mostly Donald's colleagues in the Conservative Freedom Caucus, are publicly torching the spending plan he brokered with just a four-seat majority.
Speaker Kevin McCarthy can only afford to lose a handful of them, and he can't count on Democratic votes.
Beneath the surface, things are even worse for McCarthy this time around.
The faceplant by the two negotiators he'd empowered has exposed a full-on house Republican rebellion that's officially underway.
You know, I want to read the first sentence of this article because it tells me a whole lot.
The title was Ha COP is in Open Warfare.
But the paragraph, the first paragraph, one Republican summed up the situation neatly as leadership-empowered negotiators faceplanted with days to go before a shutdown.
See, it's this fear-mongering shutdown.
You know, what would be interesting is somebody really did an academic paper on how many shutdowns have there been in the last 30 years.
How many threats of shutdowns have been used in the media?
How many times has the talk of a shutdown actually ended up reducing spending?
And, you know, it just goes on and on, but it's used all the time that this is such a danger.
But if you look for somebody who ever said, you know what, the shutdown, I lost, you know, I lost my job.
I lost this.
I lost.
And it was just horrible, horrible.
Most of the time you read stories, well, I'm back to work and I got all my back pay.
Yes.
Oh, yeah.
So the shutdown, it might be just politicians looking for power rather than the average guy worrying about what does shutdown mean?
Does that mean that the government's not going to honor Treasury bills?
You know, if that were true, the markets would be going nuts right now.
If they said the bankruptcy is that we can't meet our payments and we can't pay you the interest.
Of course, that crisis has already passed because that happened in 1971 because we used up the amount of gold that was protecting the dollar and we said we can't afford it anymore.
So it was a declaration of bankruptcy and it's morphed into this deception into believing, well, that's old-fashioned.
That's anachronistic.
We don't follow the gold standard anymore.
So this is where we are today.
But the chaos, I'm surprised that not more chaos if they knew the truth and realize the truth because you just can't paper it over.
And it looks like with this intensive effort over the last couple months with the Republicans, it looks like the deficit's still going up significantly.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
Well, you're right about the whole threat of the shutdown.
It really is like Charlie Brown and Lucy.
The Republicans keep trying to kick that football, and Lucy knows what she's doing.
In this case, Lucy is none other than Rosa DeLoro of Connecticut.
You remember her.
And she's playing the exact role I'm sure she's played every time.
She's warning that Republicans are trying to shut down the government.
She says, less than two weeks away from a government shutdown, House Republicans are still more focused on introducing extreme funding bills that would cut funding to the National Institutes of Health, including funding for cancer research, defund the police, and increase resources to important allies like Ukraine and Israel than working on a bipartisan solution that could be enacted.
So that's the gauntlet thrown down.
The Republicans never have a good response to this at all.
They just kind of take it on the chin every single time and end up, remember, after a couple of weekends of staying up late and maybe drinking some wine or something, finally just, okay, you got me.
Well, I want to go home and signing it.
See, there's almost like an obsession on this because it's always closed with, well, we have to do it.
We have to do this.
Because we can't afford closing down the government.
Always closing down the government.
What if somebody was bold enough to get up and say, you know, why don't we just close it down and keep it closed until we find some money and be honest with the people?
Oh, that's unnecessary.
Well, for now, it's unnecessary because they're inflating the people into deception.
They're not solving the problems, but, you know, if the people are coming up short $1,000 a month, or the average person $1,000 short like they did in COVID, well, we'll send them $1,100.
And it was really $2,000 that they needed.
So it just adds fuel to the fire.
But they're obsessed with the only option we have.
If you do this, you're closing down the government.
But I think they should become close to being obsessed or very concerned about a principle.
And to me, the principle is what their oath of office said.
But they don't, every once in a while they mention it, but everybody knows they're Fivi.
Because if they really believe in the Constitution, we wouldn't have this garbage.
It wouldn't happen.
Matter of fact, we'd still be on the gold standard.
And the government couldn't print money.
And they say, yes, but look at how much prosperity we've had with lying to people about the monetary issue.
Yeah, it's all fake.
If you borrow a lot of money from a bank for a few years and they give you credit, you might think you're rich until the note is called.
And that's what happened in 1971.
The notes were called, and right now this is what's happening.
The activity, the issues that are happening right now, they're calling on the debt.
And that, they must talk about a little bit, but it doesn't make the headlines.
You know, the size of the debt is bewildering.
And that symbolizes so much of living beyond one's means.
And they're talking about cutting back.
If we still had a stash of cold, that we could live beyond our means, they wouldn't be doing this.
But right now, it's interesting because, like we mentioned, the most interesting thing is maybe some people are starting to think about maybe we spent too much in Ukraine.
Cutting Back on Debt00:05:27
No kidding.
Yeah.
Well, here's a good clip on that topic because here's Matt Gates on the floor.
And we've talked about there are many flaws with Matt Gates.
However, when he gets on the floor and attacks the stopgap 30-day CR, I think he makes some good points, even though some of them are inaccurate.
I will say that, by the way.
But let's have a listen, Dr. Paul.
You may want to put on your earpiece and listen to this one.
This is Gates discussing why he's not in favor of doing this 30-day stopgap CR.
Mr. Speaker, I'm not voting for a continuing resolution.
I'm not voting to continue the failure and the waste and the corruption and the election interference and in some cases the efforts that could lead this country into World War III.
I oppose the CR authored by my friend and colleague from Florida, Byron Donalds.
The Donald CR continues the Ukraine policy negotiated by Speaker Pelosi and Mitch McConnell in the omnibus that conservatives were against.
The Donald C.R is a permission slip for Jack Smith to continue his election interference as they are trying to gag the president, the former president of the United States, and the leading contender for the Republican nomination.
And the Donald C.R. abandons the principle that it is only a review of single subject spending bills that will save this country and allow us to tweeze through these programs and force these agencies to stand up and defend their budget.
My friends, we are approaching the days where we're facing $2 trillion annual deficits atop a $33 trillion debt.
This is unsustainable.
And just to continue things with some facial 8% cut over 30 days that will lead to no programmatic reform is an insult to the principles we fought for in January.
I yield back.
It was a powerful little one minute.
I think he was wrong about Jack Smith.
He'd still be funded in the cutdown.
But that's just details beside the point.
So he opposes it for this reason.
But when you and I were talking about it, about the CR proposed here, which is an 8% cut of this and that and the other for one month, you actually had a better proposal, I think.
So let's hear your proposal.
Yeah, and it'd be justified for somebody who might want to be done differently to criticize what I'm going to say.
But if nothing happens, I would think this would call attention to it.
And that is, look, if there's an individual that's having trouble paying their bills, they just freeze their bill, don't add any new money.
So if they just freeze the budget at it, don't increase anything, and all none of this funny talk about we have to keep up with the cost of inflation rate and we have to decide here and back.
So there'd be a lot of mistakes in there.
But if you freeze it, and then if they do nothing in 30 days, it's renewable.
And renewable.
And if you look at the numbers, because they're living in a world of deceit and they're living in a world where the money is always losing value, that the real cost of government goes down pretty subtly.
And that, I think, how can it be appealing to the average person on the street?
Are you the case?
We're not going to cut anything.
You don't have to cut.
You still get your salary.
And government's going to get their money, but they can't increase it.
And same as you had last year.
You lived with it last year, do it again.
And as time goes on, maybe they'd wake up and say, well, that's dreaming.
But I think it would make the point of just freezing isn't the worst idea in the world because it would be a significant cut, and they'd have to understand a little bit more about monetary policy.
And the thing is, it would defang the Democrats who are claiming only the Republicans want to shut down government.
They say, no, we're not shutting down government at all.
We're keeping it open, just the same as before.
So, I mean, I think I'm a little biased, but I think that's a pretty darn good plan that you have there.
So if only they were watching.
Kevin, are you watching us?
Kevin.
Matt.
Well, let's move on, I guess, because we are getting into the late hours.
And we want to just, if you can go ahead to the breakup Biden and Adams, we're going to move ahead a few clips because I added just too many.
I just wasn't sure how much we had to say about it.
You wanted to put this up, and I think it's a good point, Dr. Paul.
It's not just the Republicans who are having problems, having marital problems, the Democrats as well.
This is from Politico as well, the breakup.
Biden and Adams avoid each other in New York.
Now, he was going to be the real superstar, Adams was.
And it looks like when Biden's coming to town, he doesn't even want to stop in and say hi.
And Adams doesn't want Biden to come in and say hi.
So they've also got some serious problems over on their side.
Yeah, it really would fit into my argument.
There's no money and they're bankrupt and they won't admit it, even to the point where the Democrats are fighting among themselves most of the time, especially, you know, they have a Democratic president.
They have a Democratic mayor.
But I don't think the mayor has recanted.
I don't think he's apologized.
I don't think he said, I'm sorry, you know, we overdid it.
And how about the people who, what are they most annoyed about?
Is the invasion.
NATO's Defense Dilemma00:05:24
Yeah.
The invasion of people that invade and occupy property and steal from our taxpayers and steal from people who are getting some benefits and shifting it over there.
So that, I think it's, you know, evidence of a system that can't work.
They will continue to do this fighting, which is very, very good.
They're going to have to sort it out, but they better understand what the problem is.
They can't say, well, what was the argument the other day?
It was the governor.
It wasn't.
I guess the mayor didn't want to blame the president.
He says it wasn't Biden.
It was the governor of Texas.
He sent these people here.
Yeah, but we sent them all to Texas.
They were supposed to stay there.
But we wanted to set a good standard and show them how wonderful, how good we are.
And we wanted to take care of people who were looking for a new home.
Let them steal from the Texans.
Yeah, exactly.
Let them march in, take over.
Well, I guess it's good to see them all fighting each other, right?
Yeah, Aliske and Alice.
As long as they don't hurt each other.
Be nice.
Be nice.
So should we move on to the last one?
Because this is an important point that you always make.
There's a lot of talk about ending wars and negotiations.
But put up, go ahead and go to that next clip, the following clip, rising ammunition.
This is from our friends over at the Libertarian Institute.
Rising ammunition prices could interfere with Western plans to arm Ukraine.
And go to the next one.
Here is that article.
And this is the warning.
On Saturday, the chair of NATO's military committee, Dutch Admiral Rob Bauer, said, alliance members need to spend more on defense to account for rising prices.
Here's his quote.
Prices for equipment and ammunition are shooting up.
Right now we're paying more for exactly the same.
That means we cannot make sure that the increased defense spending actually leads to more security.
So in other words, Dr. Paul, the cost of Project Ukraine is getting higher, so more countries need to pony up.
Maybe they're mixed up on definitions because, you know, if they would spend more on a policy of non-interventionism and trade, that would be helping defense.
But here they're spending more on weaponry, driving the country into bankruptcy.
So that's hardly a way to bring about peace and prosperity.
But the defense, non-interventionist foreign policy, is a very strong defense position.
But it's when you spend all this money and you go, I don't know the number, but the numbers keep growing.
The number of coups that we've been involved in in the last 30 or 40 years, some big deals, and we're still at it.
The most recent big deal was participation in the coup in Ukraine.
What?
People say, what do you mean a coup?
Did we take over?
Yeah, we owned NATO, and NATO went in.
They did exactly what we wanted, and we moved right up to the border of Russia, and we had promised never to do that.
And that's what upset the Russians.
And people did it on purpose to upset the Russians because it would be good for the weapons industry.
But now they're running out of weapons.
They say, slow it up a little bit till we can catch up on the weapons.
Yeah.
You know, everyone made fun of Trump when Trump went over to Europe and said to NATO, you guys need to spend more money.
We can't be backing you guys up all the time.
Oh, what a buffoon, what a fool.
Well, this is exactly what NATO itself is saying.
We need to spend more money.
But here is the kicker, Dr. Paul.
Europe is not about to spend any more money.
Put on that next clip.
This is from Politico.
Germany U-turns on commitment to meet NATO spending target annually.
They promised, oh, yeah, yeah, we're going to meet that 2%.
I think we spend, what, 4.5% or so?
We're going to spend that 2% on GDP on defense.
And they said, no, just kidding.
They're not going to do it.
So the fact is, if they're going to continue with Project Ukraine, it's going to be on the backs of the American people.
They say if you subsidize something, you get more of.
So if we subsidize the Europeans by trying to make more money in the military-industrial complex, you know, we get more of this nonsense and the Europeans back off.
So the answer is very simple.
Just come home.
Maybe then let the Europeans decide whether or not they should have more defense and sending more weapons over there.
But you know, the industrialists, the military-industrial system, are very close-knit.
You know, the United Kingdom, the English weapons bill are very good friends with.
They're linked.
They're the same company a lot of times.
They're always sharing in the profits.
So that is a real tragedy because what they will do is if you don't go along with all this nonsense of national defense, national defense security, you don't want to defend a country, then you're unpatriotic.
And I would argue the case that because of me personally taking a position, guess what?
Higher Law vs. Man-Made Laws00:07:49
I've never laid awake at night worrying about the fact that I was unpatriotic.
I didn't have to do that because I consider the fact that what the policy that we have now is a challenge to morality.
It's a challenge to our Constitution.
It's a challenge to peace and challenges the budget, the monetary system.
Warmongering is not good for the health of the Republic.
Absolutely.
Well, if you don't mind me going to another segment, this is a little bit different.
If you can put on that next clip, I just want to take a couple of minutes.
This is you when you got your proof copy of your new book that's just out, published by the Ron Paul Institute, The Great Surreptitious Coup, Who Stole Western Civilization?
And I wanted to talk to you for a second about it because we're going to tell our viewers how they can get their very own copy and help this show and help the Ron Paul Institute at the same time.
So I'm curious.
I helped you edit the book, so I know it really well.
I can't believe that you packed so much into a little, you say, I only write little books.
That little book has about as much information as a massive book.
It's a sweeping view of history.
And I was, when I was reading it the many times I did, I was thinking, like, what was he doing when the spark hit him?
What was it that said, you know what?
I've got to write this stuff down.
And I'm curious.
I'm honestly curious about when did you first feel like I've got a theme?
I've got to go with it.
Well, I've thought about the issue of war for a long time, and it was really started when I became aware of the stupidity of World War II, knowing that while we were bombing Germany and we had prisoners there that were members of our family, at nighttime we prayed for our relatives in Germany, but we were doing the bombing.
This doesn't make any sense whatsoever.
So that got me fascinated, but I wasn't totally enamored with that subject as the reason that I'm running for Congress because of the Vietnam War.
You know, I was still struggling there just to get my medical education because I was drafted out of my residency.
So I got more excited, I told so many people, that I think the money issue is the big thing to issue, and that's what destroys our governments and our communities.
But the whole thing is I heard so many people, a lot of people in the libertarian circles talked about the cultural conditions going on.
And they would ask, I didn't create that question, who stole Western civilization, but I started looking at it that way, and then seeing more and more of this cultural Marxism stuff and what's going on in our schools and this polygenderism when you see ethical doctors doing by mastectomies on 14-year-old girls without parental condition, there's something happening to our civilization.
So that was the reason I was interested in doing that.
But then again, I've been fascinated with the history of coups.
The one big coup that I talked about a lot in the campaign was the one where we went in and participated with the British to take over their oil supplies, the Iranian oil supply.
And that has lingered and bothered us for a long time.
And just the other day, an innocent person, very nice, conservative, he says, oh, isn't this terrible how we're giving away our taxpayers' money to the Iranians?
And I looked down and I says, that's their money.
We stole it from them.
So it's the whole issue of what happened to, because when you ask the question, what happens to Western civilization, you're asking the question, what has happened to our republic?
Because you can't separate the two.
Western civilization is bigger than the United States.
But Western civilization was really built in the period of the Enlightenment.
And it was, you know, Thomas Jefferson, along with Locke, who was a teacher indirectly.
Locke didn't live at the same time as Charles as did Jefferson.
But that to me was so fascinating about it.
And then all of a sudden I got very interested in history, even though it's not history.
And I don't, you know, I don't brag, I just wrote a big book.
I wrote a little pamphlet and I finally talked myself into accepting it because some people come up and say, well, don't worry about it.
Size isn't the definition of what is important.
So I hope somebody will find something important there.
Because, you know, in doing this, if you're trying to present something in broad sense, everybody knows about, but maybe just expanding on it.
And I think I sort of had fun.
And I think in the process, I sort of learned something.
Well, I certainly did.
I mean, I think if I could boil it down, you're talking about this sort of age-old struggle between those who believe in some sort of higher power and those who believe there is no truth.
You know, the nihilists versus those who believe that.
Yeah, and I've been, you know, this fascinated me to look at history.
And that principle has been around a long, long time.
It was understood by the Sumerian law, which came before the Ten Commandments.
And they recognized that there was a, whatever you want to call it, spiritual higher level.
And this to me is people do know the right and wrong.
And I think that has climaxed to here in the weeks and decades here in this country because there are some people that, you know, when you look at those streets, last night I was watching a clip that just made me ill.
There were some teenagers, but there was one confrontation where a lady clerk was beating up teenagers.
Not like this, just they're pounding away.
That means there is something wrong with a person understanding right and wrong.
And I think that is really important because, you know, we have we have our constitution reasonably well written, but it's not relevant if the people are that are supposed to be defending it are immoral.
You know, if we weren't supposed to start wars and we're supposed to have honest money and we don't do it, they're not obeying.
A lot of people say I call it a higher law, but most people like to use the word natural law.
Yeah.
There's a natural law of knowing right and wrong.
And one thing is, there's a battle going on.
And if you can get rid of these jerks that believe in natural higher law, then we get to write the law.
And who's been writing the law?
But the conflict is it's not like nobody believes in the higher law, but the people who endorse the higher law, they're smaller in numbers and they don't.
And the other side, the nihilists are the ones that got control of the propaganda machine and the government and all the, you know, whether it's the media, movie making, the whole works, they have control of it, the university system.
And it's a real contest.
And I think that's where the real war is going on.
It's between people who believe in a higher law and the people who are nihilists because they literally are like Marx.
He says, you can't know the truth.
It's therefore there is no truth.
Dr. Paul's New Book Offer00:02:05
We.
You know, that was said frequently by the Soviets, that we are the law.
We believe in the law, but we write the law.
And that's it.
It's the final moral law by dictators who don't believe in a higher law effort, higher law.
Exactly.
Well, from Sumeria to JFK to a hope for the future, I'm not going to do a spoiler alert, but there's a lot packed into that little book.
And, you know, we do, we've got to pay the bills around here, but we want to give you something to say thank you for helping us continue this show and continue the Ron Paul Institute.
We just had a great conference a couple of weeks ago bringing together some of the best thinkers and speakers, some of the best people.
So we're going to offer this book, Dr. Paul's new book, The Great Surreptitious Coup, as a thank you for anyone in a limited amount of time and a limited amount of copies that we have.
But for a $50 donation, we will give you a soft cover copy of the book as a thank you.
But if you want one hand signed by Dr. Paul for a $100 or more dollar donation, a hand signed softcover, and for the first time, we have hardcover books.
It's going to last forever for $150 tax deductible to the extent of the law, contribution to the Ron Paul Institute, a hardcover signed by Ron Paul, his new book.
It's going to make a great Christmas gift.
So I will put details in the description here, and we'll be talking about it as we go a bit more.
But help the Ron Paul Institute get a great book for yourself, for your family members, for your friends.
You're going to enjoy this one.
So, thanks to you, Dr. Paul, and I'm over and out.
Very good.
You want to close this out?
Of course, I want to thank our viewers for being so loyal to our program because we never knew exactly what would transition our program and our desires after I left Congress.
But I've been very happy that there's a lot of you that are still very interested in pursuing this issue of liberty, and that's what we continue to do.
I appreciate very much all the support we have received.