All Episodes
Previous Next
Feb. 5, 2025 - Ron Paul Liberty Report
33:27
Wait...We're Taking Over Gaza?

Sitting next to a beaming Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu, President Trump announced that the US would be clearing all Palestinians off their land in Gaza, that US troops would move in, and that the US would rebuild it for Israelis to take over once finished. This is making America great again? Also today: the US government subsidized pro-Biden media to the tune of millions of dollars!

|

Time Text
Netanyahu's Shocking Revelation 00:14:09
Hello, everybody, and thank you for tuning in to the Liberty Report.
With us today, we have Daniel McAdams, our co-host.
Daniel, good to see you.
Good morning, Dr. Paul.
How are you this morning?
How's the world doing?
Not good.
I am not going to visit the Middle East this week or two.
Yeah, that's definitely.
And yet, I understand there's pretty property there.
You know, the other day we talked about this, and Trump brought it up, and I recognized and remembered that he was a real estate guy, and he was talking very favorably of this property.
But it's advanced to the next stage, you know, and some people are a little bit upset about this.
And he's talking about a significant change in the territory.
Who's going to own this territory?
Who's going to rebuild it?
Unfortunately, from what I see so far, there's been a hint that the administration would not be hesitant to use troops there to make Gaza and settle the war on his terms.
And it's also the people there seem to be losing control of their own land, which has been going on for a long time.
So there's been fighting over there for years, hundreds of years, if nothing.
But, you know, and it looks like Trump did not, he was not bashful about even sending troops over there.
And yet, I keep saying, well, he does have a point that major new wars didn't break out, you know, during his last administration.
But the way I look at that, significant dedication to a change foreign policy toward non-intervention, you know, the statistics and the methods might have changed a little bit, but there's still that intervention.
And now we're in a position where we can throw our weight around, which we have forever, because I believe that we operate within an empire, and that's part of the problem.
There's a lot of problems in the Middle East, but like you and I have talked, you know, who contributed to that?
How did it happen?
There was a lot of bombs dropped.
Who paid for it?
Were the American people guilty?
Not directly, but indirectly.
You know, they were complacent and allowed money to go over there and commit these crimes.
How about Ukraine?
Same thing.
There's a lot of fighting going on.
Who participated in the coup 2014?
It was the United States government that participated.
So this is, you know, what you see and hear on the television, this is going to shock you.
You don't think you're going to get the full picture from the television.
And right now, it looks like, you know, there's a lot of people who are very happy with this.
You know, it's grandiose.
Cleaning up the mess.
Too many people killed.
And we want to clean it up and make it a nice place to live.
And we'll rebuild it.
I wonder if they're going to have condos.
I wonder if they'll be treated as well as our illegal immigrants when they come back, so to speak.
But anyway, it is a mess.
I think it's a bigger time bomb than it's ever been.
And the markets are reacting that way, too.
It is.
Even yesterday, the markets were as nervous about that because yesterday they were worried about tariffs.
Today they're worried about this getting out of hand.
And unfortunately, it can spread.
My one superficial concern immediately was this, what are the Saudis going to do?
And a few other countries there.
Are they going to say, yeah, good, we'll loan you some airplanes?
And we'll take a couple million here and there.
So this is a mess, and it wasn't caused by non-intervention that we didn't intervene enough.
It's because we have an intervention's foreign policy.
And immediately people, what will they say?
You guys are isolationists.
You don't want to do anything.
And we want to clean up the mess.
Well, I hope they do.
I hope they stop all the wars.
And I hope we become good friends and trade partners with everybody there.
But the United States giving up on their official position of a two-state answer is a big deal.
And now it's only a one-state.
It's very clear that is the goal.
And I think a meeting that occurred yesterday was verifying that.
Yeah, Netanyahu came to town.
I think it's very significant that he's the first foreign leader to come to town.
Anyone watching the press conference, he looks like the cat who ate the canary.
He has that grin on his face.
But I think, you know, I watched it happen when the press conference happened last night when Trump gave his speech, which, by the way, uncharacteristically, he read from a sheet rather than speaking extemporaneously.
But the world of X was shocked.
And this is not just people who are critical of the government of Israel's behavior, but a lot of pro-Israeli people were shocked about this, about what Trump said.
And I think it also gives a hint, Dr. Paul, as to what Trump's envoy might have told the Israelis just before the inauguration to get a ceasefire.
Hey, listen, guys, go along with this.
Let's have a ceasefire.
I'll look good coming into office.
And when the smoke clears, you guys can have Gaza.
No big deal.
Now, that's speculation, but a lot of people were making that speculation.
But let's actually listen to it from the President's own mouth.
I've got a couple of video clips.
The first is a shorter one, and the second is a longer one to give you an indication as to exactly what he did say last night with Netanyahu by his side.
If we can cue up that first video here, like it's taking a little bit of a time to load.
Hopefully this will come.
The U.S. will take over the Gaza Strip, and we will do a job with it too.
We'll own it and be responsible for dismantling all of the dangerous unexploded bombs and other weapons on the site, level the site and get rid of the destroyed buildings, level it out, create an economic development that will supply unlimited numbers of jobs and housing for the people of the area.
Do a real job, do something different.
Just can't go back.
If you go back, it's going to end up the same way it has for 100 years.
Now, it's interesting that first, but you can cut it out now.
I'm going to do the second one.
But it's interesting that he did read from that.
Those were not his words, and you could tell because he stumbled over them.
We will take it over.
We will own it, which is something strange in international relations.
But let's listen.
Now, that was a formal aspect of part of the press conference.
Let's listen when he and Netanyahu were chatting by the fire, and he takes a couple of questions from their journalists who, before we start, who, by the way, sounded shocked themselves at hearing this.
Would Palestinians have the right to return to Gaza if they left while the rebuilding was happening?
It would be my hope that we could do something really nice, really good, where they wouldn't want to return.
Why would they want to return?
The place has been hell.
It's been one of the meanest, one of the meanest, toughest places on earth.
And right now, I've seen every picture from every angle, better than if I were there.
And nobody can live there.
You can't live there.
So if we can build, if we can build them through massive amounts of money supplied by other people, very rich nations, and they're willing to supply it.
If we can build something for them in one of the countries, and it could be Jordan, it could be Egypt, it could be other countries, and you could build four or five or six areas.
It doesn't have to be one area.
But you take certain areas and you build really good quality housing, like a beautiful town, like someplace where they can live and not die.
Because Gaza is a guarantee that they're going to end up dying.
The same thing's going to happen again.
It's happened over and over again.
And it's going to happen again as sure as you're standing there, Peter.
So I hope that we could do something where they wouldn't want to go back.
Who would want to go back?
They've experienced nothing but death and destruction.
Pause it there.
And here he is sitting next to the person who actually caused that death and destruction.
It's just amazing to see the look on Netanyahu's face, that grin.
He can't believe what's happening to him.
Can't believe that the U.S. is going to go in there and do the ethnic cleansing and give it back to him.
But it's just bizarre because it's acting like a bomb, you know, just there was a natural disaster and everyone died.
And, you know, he's sitting next to the guy who killed them all.
Yeah, I was thinking natural disaster.
He was talking as if this was a hurricane on the Gulf Coast.
Yeah, yeah.
How are we going to help people?
Get him out of there, yeah.
No, that is not encouraging.
And certainly I think this Netanyahu being baffled is very significant because it seems like he has to reassess everything.
But that whole thing might backfire and might be what Netanyahu is thinking.
Yeah, this is great, but maybe it's a little too much too fast.
Maybe it's a little too much for the American people.
And maybe it's a little and too much for the Committee of Government Efficiency.
Because he admits that we're going to be involved.
And he doesn't say, yeah, well, the troops are coming.
We're not sending 10,000 troops to the Mexican border like the Mexican government is.
But it's going to cost us money, there is no doubt.
And ultimately, you know, it's going to be very hard for me to say, victory is here.
The budget has shrunk.
And there's less debt.
And we're paying it off.
And we're starting off where it's the easiest way to, easiest place to cut, I've argued over the years.
Cut it out of this foreign aid stuff.
But I think the sentiment for that has grown.
I think we're better off there.
I think the American people have caught up with that idea that why are we in Ukraine?
That didn't happen when we were in Iraq and Afghanistan.
It took 20 years for the American people to wake up to what was happening.
So I think there's an awakening.
And so often I would kid with you and say, you'd point out, this is bad news, this is bad.
I said, oh, no, it could be good news.
It'll wake more people up.
This is not true.
I think it could happen with this.
Maybe there'll be, and I think you even alluded to that, that maybe people were surprised here that are supposed to be cutting back.
Yeah, absolutely.
You know, I just wonder maybe if Trump is misreading the room, i.e. misreading the country, because you remember a couple of weeks ago we cited that poll saying that 53% of all Americans think that the U.S. is giving too much military aid to Israel.
So America is going one way on our relationship with Israel.
And Trump seems to be going so far in the other direction.
You're right.
I mean, that's a good point.
Netanyahu looks surprised.
Like, what?
Not so fast.
Not so fast because he's no dummy.
He's evil, but he's not a dummy.
He probably realizes this could be Trump's Vietnam.
Putting a bunch of American troops right in the heart of the Middle East, surrounded by Arab Muslim countries who don't want them there.
This could be a nightmare.
And I think you're, that's a very good point.
He may not realize what a nightmare this is.
Well, you know, for decades now, they've had this debate about what is the solution for the Middle East with the Palestinians, the Arab nations, and Israel.
And it's been divided by basically two groups.
And that would be one group would say there should be two states.
The Palestinians, you know, they've lived there a couple years now, and they have claimed to some property.
And the others say, no, it's one state.
This sounds like a one-state solution.
And it isn't going to be by them voting down and say, oh, that sounds good.
We'll get a truck and we'll get a U-Haul.
We're leaving.
Where do we go?
And so, and I think the big thing on there that can control, and in the 70s, the country did actually control a lot of the problems we had, and that is Saudi Arabia.
They're not as predictable as we think.
And we think we have bought, we'll take care of you no matter what.
You just sell us the oil and use the dollars to do it.
And just think of the difference between the ability and the desire to use our dollars being diminished every day.
And I think that's why, even though early today the markets were rocky, and it might be just the beginning of a rocky time with the markets if this doesn't get cleaned up or clarified.
Yeah.
I think that's a great point.
And I think we talk about Saudi Arabia.
Trump doesn't realize maybe, perhaps, that the world has changed significantly since Trump 1.0, when he was able to get the Saudis together and say, hey, you know, let's make this Abrahamic Accord, et cetera, et cetera.
Since then, the Saudis have made peace with Iran with the help of China.
And nobody would have ever thought that could have happened in the world.
This is a different Middle East.
Now, he thinks he's going to be able to bully the Saudis, and maybe he will.
But certainly things have changed significantly since then.
And I think maybe he's not being served well.
Let's go over a couple of clips on this just to kind of get them out of the way.
Now, this first one is from Zero Hedge.
And this is Trump.
Palestinians would love to leave Gaza.
U.S. could take it over, Trump proclaims.
I don't know which Palestinian told him that they would be happy to leave their homeland that they've had for thousands of years.
Why We Left Gaza 00:08:46
I don't know who he's talking to that says that.
My guess is they don't want to leave.
Nobody wants to forcibly be put out from their homeland.
Go to the next one.
Trump stoked further controversy by claiming the Palestinians would love to leave Gaza.
Comments have already been condemned by many pundits as tantamount to an ethnic cleansing campaign.
Arab leaders, too, have blasted any plan which would see a mass exodus or removal for Palestinians.
Now, it's not because the neighbors, Dr. Paul, give a hoot about the Palestinians, because they really don't.
But they know, for example, Jordan and Egypt, no, a mass influx of Palestinians from Gaza into Egypt and into Jordan would be a political catastrophe for the strong-armed leaders of both of those countries.
You will have riots and violence in the street and probably the overthrow of both of those governments.
So it's really self-preservation rather than a concern for the Palestinians having a homeland that puts them in opposition.
And I don't think that's going to change.
Yeah, I don't think those attitudes are going to change.
And I think you made a point that is very significant, too.
Who's the enemy?
And you mentioned Iran, China.
Russia's involved in that.
The currencies are involved in all that.
The British.
And the whole effort is quite a bit different.
I don't think they've ever faced it because it's been reversed before when we've had these conversations throughout most of my lifetime when we were worrying about what's happening.
Was always communism.
The Russian communists said that we had to worry about.
So this is a different battle.
But it just is baffling to be hearing this in such a casual manner.
So today, timing is going to be difficult.
We might say, oh, this doesn't make sense.
The American people will wake up.
Well, what happened when we were trying to stop that war in Iraq?
The American people were with us initially.
But the people who were controlling the media, they propagandized, and we got washed out of there.
People say, oh, no, we have to go.
They're going to attack.
They have nukes coming and they have airplanes.
They're about to bomb New York City.
So they won that.
I think some of the information coming out now, the credibility, what they've heard from the propaganda.
But the big challenge is, even I, who are sympathetic to what Trump and his friends are trying to do, we're a bit nervous about it.
Is it going to be a lot different if we're looking for the other thing?
Now, there have been times in our history, like under the Eisenhower administration, this activity went on, but they didn't invade countries.
You know, what they did, they used coups, you know, and that started in Iran.
And here, here we were using a coup in the most recent time, you know, in Ukraine.
So this is ongoing, but the alignments are different.
And in our alignment, I see the biggest challenge to us is how long can we go with assuming everybody's going to love us or fear us, we'll be the strongest military power, and we will have total control of the world currency.
And there's a big difference if we lose, even just further lose.
We're losing steam there too.
Our dollar's going down.
And that'll make a big difference.
And some of that is totally unpredictable, but on timing.
But it should be well known and ingrained in the souls of anybody thinking that if you just print money and pass it out, that something will happen to the value of it.
And that's what's coming.
Yeah, absolutely.
I mean, I think this is a bad move by Trump.
I think people, you know, even people, I mean, we want Trump to succeed because we want America to succeed.
But people realize this is a bad move.
And he said he won't rule out sending in the U.S. troops.
That was part of the press conference as well.
So the idea of American troops there.
So what if the Palestinians, we saw them just return to northern Gaza, we saw thousands, tens, hundreds of thousands of them returning to their homes, trying to restart their lives.
What is Trump and the U.S. military going to do if they say, no, we don't want to leave?
Are they going to kill them?
Are they going to force them into boxcars?
I mean, we've had a history of forcing people out of their homelands.
It never really ends well.
So I think that's a question he has not seen.
You know, in a way, the left and right are in agreement about rebuilding Gaza.
Because the conservatives, if Trump is representing that position, we're going to rebuild it and we're going to own it.
But the left, they'll rebuild it.
Death doesn't matter to them.
So often over the years, we have bombed countries and participated.
Then we rebuild it, not necessarily by claiming total ownership.
So this is a little bit different, but nobody's been so bold.
Maybe Trump deserves credit for being up front with us on exactly what he plans to do.
But, you know, when it came to terrorists, nobody knows exactly what's going to happen there.
Are those just threats to get a better position in negotiations?
Or are these real threats?
And what happens?
Because the countries are starting to retaliate already, and it's sort of at the beginning of all this stuff going on in trade.
Well, I did clip a couple of reactions from people that we follow.
But first now, skip those next to you and go to the War Monitor ex post, because this is also from the press conference.
A reporter asked Trump, what would happen if Egypt and Jordan told him no?
They won't tell me no.
I want to remove all the residents of Gaza, he responded.
It will happen.
Pretty chilling.
Pretty chilling.
So Michael Tracy, we talk about Michael a lot.
He's an astute observer, and he's someone who is sort of a cynic.
And if we can go to that next clip, I just want to run through these really quickly.
He makes a good point.
For the record, George W. Bush never proposed anything remotely this extreme regarding Israel and Palestine.
Bush was the first president to publicly support the creation of a Palestinian state.
So way more radical than George W. Bush.
Go to the next one.
Here's someone we know, Dr. Paul.
This is someone called Senator Rand Paul.
And he makes a very good point.
He says, the pursuit for peace should be that of the Israelis and the Palestinians.
I thought we voted for America first.
We have no business contemplating yet another occupation to doom our treasure and spill our soldiers' blood.
Very, very well put, Senator Paul.
Now, Glenn Greenwald is next.
He's someone who we respect very much.
He says, do Republicans now think American voters cast their 2024 ballots so that their kids would be deployed in a war in the Middle East to fight the Palestinians in Gaza, force them to leave and give the land to Israel and Jared Kushner?
Good question.
And I'll just do one more, sir, two more actually.
Justin Amash, whose family lives there, he said, if the United States deploys troops to forcibly remove Muslims and Christians, people forget that, Dr. Paul.
A lot of Christians live there.
To forcibly remove Muslims and Christians like my cousins from Gaza, then not only will the U.S. be mired in another reckless occupation, but it will also be guilty of the crime of ethnic cleansing.
No American of good conscience should stand for this.
And then one final is our old friend Tom Woods, who makes a very good point.
He's talking about, he's commenting on Trump saying we're going to take over the Gaza Strip.
Tom Woods said, hey, Elon Musk, I found something for Doge to cut, which is a very good point.
Now skip the next one and go to the final one.
This is the Times of Israel.
And they're reporting that this is actually Kushner's plan, the president's son-in-law's plan to take over Gaza, which should surprise no one, Dr. Paul, because he said, remember, a few months ago, very controversially, he said, that's some pretty nice land you got over there.
We'd like to build some condos.
So funny but not funny.
This is, hopefully the message will return to Trump loud and clear that this is a really, really dumb idea.
Those statements were so, so well put.
Spending Scandal Unveiled 00:06:59
And I think it should be a twofer, you know, because it gives the opportunity if people wake up and realize what's going on, what do we do?
We're changing bad, quitting bad policy where people die.
You know, it's really a mess out there.
And it's decreasing spending.
You mean you get both?
More peace and less spending?
What's going to happen to all that money?
Well, maybe the American people, whether it's in the form of purchasing power or even keeping more of their Federal Reserve notes, I don't know why it's not a no-brainer that they didn't do that.
I think a lot of people that listen to the program that we have and the philosophy, I think they're a lot with us at the same time.
You're dreaming too much.
It's not going to happen.
So take what you can get.
But there are so many times that some of these proposals that cut spending, and we might mention one of those today, it's really a wonderful thing of the efforts.
But this seems that they're at each other.
We're still doing it, do it down.
I thought it was statewide.
It was pretty cool.
Yeah, absolutely.
Well, the second one, we probably should shorten it because there's a lot to do on the first one.
But this is another scandal.
It relates to what we've been talking about, USAID.
This is separate, but a related scandal.
If you go to the next one, this is a Zero Hedge article.
It's all over X Now 2.
Politico and the New York Times have been propped up by millions of dollars from the U.S. government.
And how is this happening?
Well, go to the next clip.
According to government spending tracker website, usaspending.gov, Politico, which, as we remember, laundered the Hunter Biden 51 intelligence officers propaganda during the 2020 election, received up to 27 million, and by some counts, $32 million from various government agencies during the Biden years.
Now go to the next one.
Here are the receipts.
We do indeed appear to be funneling large sums of tax money to Politico so that some bureaucrats can read left-wing journalists complain about Republicans.
These are two purchase orders.
One is for a half a million and one is for almost a million.
That's just the tip of the iceberg, Dr. Paul.
The fact is that these publications that were friendly to the Biden administration received millions of dollars, I would almost say money laundering, millions of dollars in subsidies from the U.S. government.
They are shook because now they're talking about explaining it.
Oh, this is a technical thing.
Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.
It's a technical thing.
The checks will come.
We'll just talk to them and find out where they are.
A technical error.
Well, there's a error, but it's error in policy that's really giving us the trouble.
And in a world where truly independent media outlets, like the Liberty Report, where we struggle for financing, places like Zero Heads that don't take government money, they struggle to pay the bills.
They struggle to tell the truth.
And here you have an outlet like Politico, which we do read.
It does provide some good information, although we know that it's biased.
Here you have Politico.
All of a sudden they're getting millions of dollars from the government, and they write nice things about the government when it's Biden in charge.
And how unfair is that to everyone else?
How immoral is that?
And illegal is that?
You know, we shouldn't have a state-run media.
And we did get a lot of attention like a lot of other people by just closing down and getting rid of it.
And I think that's what the Committee for Efficiency is talking about.
But if that happens, if we're able to get rid of it, which sometimes how they get rid of it, they change names, they put it in someplace else.
But if they could get rid of it, you know, for all their shortcomings, you know, it'd be a big deal because if you did that whole thing, it would involve foreign policy, too.
Just think of how much money goes overseas through this.
I'd like to see the connection on how they get the credit and pass out and guarantee things through the Federal Reserve System and a way they can protect other countries and subsidize them and bail people out.
So it's a big deal.
So there's a lot of good stuff, and I hope the momentum keeps going in the right direction.
But this has been, it is being talked about a lot, and I hope it gets a full discussion.
Absolutely.
Well, I want to play one more audio clip, and I just can't resist it, Dr. Paul, because this is a follow-up from what we were talking about yesterday about USAID using our money to propagandize, propagandize us in favor of policies that the Biden administration wanted.
Now, this is this, it's a video clip.
And remember all those celebrities that went and met with Zelensky when the war started.
You know, you had all these dopey ones like Sean Penn, da-da-da-da-da, coming in there.
And Americans say, hey, wow, all of the important people are going over there.
Well, this is something interesting.
Put on this clip and let's play this whole, that final video, and then I'll close out.
But this is really something incredible.
You're not going to believe this, Dr. Paul.
USAID sponsored American celebrity visits to Ukraine after Russia's full-scale invasion began.
Angelina Jolie, $20 million.
Sean Penn, $5 million.
Jean-Claude Van Damme, a million and a half dollars.
Orlando Bloom, $8 million.
Ben Stiller, $4 million.
This was done to increase Zelensky's popularity among foreign audiences, particularly in the United States.
the involvement of celebrities made it easier to coordinate funding programs for ukraine during the conflict usa id used our money to propagandize us in favor of the war If that's not a scandal, I don't know what it is.
Do you think that challenges the First Amendment in any way?
Yeah, it should.
It destroys it.
Yeah, absolutely.
You know, it's all bought propaganda.
And it's so slick.
It's so sneaky and so nasty.
It's so immoral.
It's so unconstitutional.
Otherwise, it's a pretty good program, accomplishing evil.
Yeah, literally, heads should roll over that.
And hopefully Musk and the people around him, they seem like very smart people.
They will start looking at this.
And as you say, some laws had to have been broken.
But I'm going to finish up, Dr. Paul, and ask you to put on that very last photo.
And you'll be seeing this quite a bit over the next few weeks because we're very, very happy to announce again our spring conference down here in sunny Lake Jackson at the beautiful Dow Academic Center at Brazil's Port College here on the Gulf of America.
But we're going to talk about America in the age of Trump 2.0.
We've got a great lineup of speakers.
I just confirmed two more speakers last night.
Voluntary Solutions Needed 00:02:40
I will tell our people on our show tomorrow.
I'm going to send out an update to our subscribers at the Ron Paul Institute tonight where I will reveal those two excellent speakers.
People are going to be excited when they hear who's coming.
They're really going to be excited when they hear who's coming down here to Lake Jackson.
It's going to be a great event.
You know, a lot of people, when they hear us talk about freedom and liberty and non-intervention, they say, it's so complicated.
It's so big.
How can we comprehend all this?
And I really don't see it as complicated because I narrow it down because all I seek is to promote the message that says that all associations, person to person, state to state, businesses and all, and consumers, everything, all the associations and interrelationships should be voluntary.
Both sides say, yeah, we'll do this.
And if we had that, and the other one is that you can't ever use, if it's voluntary, you can't ever initiate aggression.
You say, you will do it.
And sometimes I think our country is not exactly falling that principle that so often we threaten indirectly, directly, and whatever.
But I think the issue of liberty and understanding and what has to be done, you could say, well, you know, if that still doesn't satisfy them, you know, read the Constitution.
That gives a few hints on how we could have a freer society and one with more peace and prosperity.
But in the meantime, you know, anything that we do, it ought to be voluntary.
Most people realize that's the way a family life should work.
Voluntarism getting along and encouraging people, and also that people should not be aggressive.
They should say, I'm going to, even in verbally saying, you know, I'm going to kill you if you don't do what I tell you.
And if they sound serious.
So it is the act of aggression and it's the act of volunteerism.
If we knew and studied that, believe me, I'm convinced that we would have a lot more peace and prosperity in the world rather than what's going on now, as has been going on for at least all my life and maybe all of history to some degree.
But that doesn't diminish my desire to still work in that direction.
Because if you don't commit to working in the direction of honesty and what's happening, then you have to accept the notion, well, what's the use?
We don't have to, we'll give up on that.
And therefore, we don't even believe it's achievable.
And they become nihilistic and they can do anything they want.
Involuntarism is okay.
And using force is okay.
Commitment to Honesty 00:00:41
And so it's a contest, as far as I'm concerned, something that's been around for a long time.
And if we could address that in a more simplistic way, I believe we could achieve a lot more.
I want to thank everybody for tuning in today to the Liberty Report.
I'm back soon.
That's good.
I always find that one final after that.
Export Selection