All Episodes
Previous Next
June 11, 2025 - Ron Paul Liberty Report
34:22
Trump's Iran Roller Coaster Ride

President Trump told a reporter today that he is "no longer" confident of reaching a deal with Iran, and again threatened to bomb the country if a deal cannot be made. Are threats and endless moving goalposts helpful to a deal being reached? What might a deal look like? Also today: a year in jail for burning a US flag? Say it aint so, Mr. President.

|

Time Text
Confidence Games and Economic Pressures 00:14:23
Good morning, 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 this morning.
Good morning, Dr. Paul.
How are you this morning?
Good.
We have a couple things to talk about.
We do.
The problem still exists.
We must need more listeners or something, more spread of information.
Only they would tune in.
When are we going to influence Washington?
We need to text.
Well, subtly, there's a little bit here, a little bit there.
In some aspects, I think Washington philosophically behind the scenes type of thing, there are more people that have become known about what liberty is all about, even though the numbers are small.
So we don't get on the evening news.
But it's most important as we get the message out and convert more Americans that they live in a free society, things will be a lot better for peace and prosperity.
And that certainly is our goal.
But one of the things that we've talked about a lot, and I especially have talked about that, is the economy.
It was the issue of the monetary issue that motivated me to first speak out that surprisingly ended up with me having a seating in Congress.
But I heard something this morning that caught my attention dealing with economic understanding.
There was a pundit on there that was explaining to the people to make sure we understood that we shouldn't pass the tax bill, which means tax cuts.
He didn't like tax cuts because that will increase the deficits.
And beware, don't ever vote for tax cuts.
So in a short, superficial fashion, that is true.
You know, if all of a sudden there were no taxes and they kept this spending going, yes, the deficit is going to go up.
But that's not the point.
The point is, why are the deficits so high?
And if you want to cut, we should, no matter what, I'd always vote to cut the taxes, put more pressure on those people who are spending the money.
And in a way, that pressure build up.
And that's why we have Musk make a sincere effort to try to cut down on spending.
That is still in play, but less so it was in the last couple of months.
But this is a big issue on the spending because there's too many special interests and there's a dedication to pure democracy, get the majority together, gang up.
There are a bunch of people who have lobbying groups and they can easily get 51% demanding more spending.
And that's why the numbers are small.
But the people who can be galvanized with the military-industrial complex and the pharmaceutical industry and the various industry, educational industry goes on and on.
They can motivate people by scaring the living daylights out of them.
And they keep spending and they don't emphasize the point of spending.
Well, I think if you cut spending, there wouldn't be any question that taxes should get up.
Nevertheless, taxes should go down, put the pressure on the spenders, prove to them, as they did with USAID, that this spending is nutty.
It doesn't make any sense.
And therefore, we could lower taxes.
But we're not quite there yet, but we should continue to work on that.
But today we want to spend a little bit of time talking about what's going on with our president and what's he thinking about Iran.
You know, he got rid of a treaty.
One thing that we gave a little token support to was the previous president had a treaty.
Obama, yeah.
Obama had a treaty that, you know, at least it made an honest effort.
So what did Trump do with his advisors?
He got out of that, Which means that he thought treaties and all were just arbitrary, and he was a powerful man.
He can do that.
And that's the way he's looking at this now.
But today he announced that he's less confident about anything coming of this.
But I imagine that's a true statement.
But the question is, why?
Why is he less confident?
And why are we less excited about any real solution coming from this?
But there are reasons that these should be pursued, that we should encourage it, trying to sort it out, try to do it with a bit of an understanding about what international law is supposed to do and argue our case and maybe even point out who behind the scenes maybe have an influence.
I can't imagine, but you'd probably have a good opinion.
Guys like Pompeo and Bolton, but could they possibly have an influence with this administration?
So I think this is a very serious problem.
And there's some headlines here we'll read in a minute that aren't very encouraging about the character of the people that work in the administration.
Yeah, you know, I titled today's show Trump's Iran Roller Coaster Ride.
And it is a roller coaster ride and we watch it back and forth.
Will we, won't we, will we, won't we?
But I think almost after I sent it, I thought I wouldn't mind retitling it Trump's Iran Shell Game, because it's like one of those confidence games where they have a shell and the ball is in it.
And every time you try to guess where the ball is, they move it and it's somewhere else.
It almost seems that way.
And if you put that first clip, now this relates to what you were talking about, oil prices, but oil prices rise as Trump says he's less confident about nuclear talks with Iran.
Now, he said this in a recent interview.
If we can cue up that first video clip, we can hear the president, I think he was talking to the Washington Post.
You might want to grab your earpiece, Dr. Paul, and listen to the president in his own words talking about being less confident in the Iran deal.
Let's listen up.
Able to stop Iran from enriching its network?
I don't know.
I did think so.
And I'm getting more and more less confident about it.
They seem to be delaying it.
I think that's a shame.
But I'm less confident now than I would have been a couple of months ago.
Something happened to them, but I am much less confident of a deal being made.
And why is he less confident?
He said something happened to them.
Put on that next clip.
Something all of a sudden, it's sort of like his post the other day that Putin went crazy.
Something happened to Iran.
Well, what is it that happened to them?
Put on that war design.
Here we go.
Trump said he was no longer confident in reaching a deal with Iran because Tehran was not giving up uranium enrichment.
That has always been their position.
Nothing has happened.
Nothing has changed.
They've always said we have a legal right to peaceful enrichment of uranium.
Now, we can discuss the details on how that is observed and who observes it, but we will not give up that right.
So I don't know where he's coming from when he says this.
This involves, again, the principle of trying to have some type of a semblance of international law and an understanding.
Because I think we're in agreement in the treaty that we would not do this just arbitrarily and rely more on the inspectors.
But even our own inspectors haven't revealed any evidence that they're working on a nuclear weapon.
Our intelligence people either.
And the international investigators, same thing.
Yeah.
Well, so then after this, after he says, well, something happened, they're not making a deal with me.
They're adhering, they're actually being consistent in saying this is our red line, whereas the U.S. has been all over the place.
And it's actually partly because of what you said earlier.
You're wondering if people like Pompeo still had a lot of influence.
Well, they do.
The neocons, no, not exactly Pompeo, because he's on the outs, but his ideas, his ideology, well, that rules D.C., they have a huge influence on this, and they're pulling him in one way.
So, what happens after he says something happened to them?
Well, he makes some threats.
Go to the next one.
And here's what, not the clip, not the video.
The question raised by the post: well, what happens then?
I.e., if they don't make a deal, Trump says, well, if they don't make a deal, they're not going to have a nuclear weapon.
Trump answered.
If they do make a deal, they're not going to have a nuclear weapon, too, you know?
But they're not going to have a new nuclear weapon, so it's not going to matter from that standpoint.
But it would be nicer to do it without warfare, without people dying.
It's much nicer to do it.
But I don't think I see the same sort of enthusiasm for them to make a deal.
I think they would make a mistake, but we'll see.
I guess time will tell.
Asked on the question of China's influence on Tehran, Trump described, I just think maybe they don't want to make a deal.
What can I say?
And maybe they do.
So what does that mean?
There's nothing final.
Now, you can imagine being an Iranian negotiator and trying to make sense of this and thinking, well, what is the U.S. position?
What do they want from us?
What's the deal here?
It's very, very confusing.
Now, this may work in New York real estate, where you're jumping around and pretending to not like this property and that you do like it.
It's underpriced, it's overpriced.
But when you're dealing on the international stage in matters such as this, I just don't think it works.
Well, since he can't convince us he's on solid grounds, morally, ethically, or by international law, when you read headlines like we had talked about earlier, Trump threatens to bomb Iran to smithereens for playing by the rules.
I mean, well, that is annoying.
It doesn't make any sense.
What do you achieve from that?
Other than the fact, you know, and there are articles, and there's been, you know, more appearance that maybe our relationship with Iran is not America first.
Maybe it's a bipartisan thing, or maybe there's one other country that has tremendous influence on what we're doing.
But anyway, from my viewpoint, I suppose yours, it's not really in our interest to do this, to not deal with them in a decent manner.
And you imply that Iran actually deserves a little bit of credit.
This is where it is.
This is what the law says.
This is what the treaty says.
This is our obligations.
This is what America has said.
But you're the ones that have changed the rules.
Yeah, exactly.
Yeah.
Well, you know, there's a lot of criticism for Biden over the fact that he never did press conferences because now we find out he wasn't able to think properly, which makes sense that he wasn't talking to the press.
Now, to Trump's credit, he does a lot of press.
He does a lot of media availabilities.
He talks a lot.
I think it's almost too much of a good thing.
He almost talks too much.
Maybe he should bite his tongue.
Maybe he should talk about sports or something or golf or something.
Not always this.
Now, here's an example from that article, Dr. Paul, though.
How I think that Trump's, they've done something.
They're not, you know, actually caught the Iranians by surprise.
Because one of the reasons we're talking about this is there is a next round expected on Sunday between the U.S. and Iran to try to get this deal.
And I think these next couple of quotes that I picked out reveal that Iran is actually was taken by surprise by Trump's comments because they must have been because they thought things were going well.
Put this next one on.
More political headlines from News Squawk.
The Iranian foreign minister, now he sounds quite sanguine about the whole thing.
He says, as we resume talks on Sunday, it's clear that an agreement that can ensure the continued peaceful nature of Iran's nuclear program is within reach and could be achieved rapidly.
Therefore, U.S. President Trump is less confident about the Iran deal, according to New York Post podcast interview.
The Iranian foreign minister says Trump's position on Iran's possession of nuclear weapons could form the basis of an agreement.
So he's saying we both agree.
We don't want nuclear weapons.
We won't have them.
And we believe that we can come to a deal, but then Trump throws his curveball out there.
I don't really know what the purpose is.
I don't know if anybody's absolutely sure what the policy is at the moment, but I still have in my mind the standout of these threats.
I think that carries a lot of weight because sometimes this is where you really learn what their feelings are.
And yeah, well, I misspoke or I was a little strong there because I like these people.
I love these people.
But by the way, we have to do that.
So it's something that bothers me, but it should bother the American people because it's so important.
But there's other things going on too.
There are riots in California and they're spreading.
I read an article that could come to Texas.
And so that's a different story.
And then you wonder about the conspiracy.
Could that be a distraction from some of the other problems?
And that's always the case because there's a lot of people engaged in trying to undermine the good things that Trump's trying to do, like cut some of the terrible, terrible spending and not messing up on some of our other policies.
Well, here's the wild card in the whole thing with Iran, Dr. Paul, and that's Russia, because there is something out there that just needs to be sort of grasped from the ether that would be a solution.
Now, Bloomberg threw something out this morning.
If you put that next clip on, Russia makes Iran nuclear offer for U.S. Pact, Interfax says.
So Russia is trying to come in and basically kind of play the honest broker here.
Russia's Honest Broker Offer 00:04:39
Russia proposed transferring Iran's excess nuclear material to its territory as part of efforts to assist Iran and the U.S. in reaching an agreement over the Islamic Republic's program.
We are ready to provide assistance to both Washington and Tehran, not only political assistance in the form of suggestions that could be used in the negotiating process, but also practical assistance, said the Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov.
For example, through the removal of surplus nuclear material made in Iran and adapting it for the production of reactor fuel.
Makes perfect sense.
Now going to the next one, U.S. President, this is from the same Bloomberg article.
U.S. President Donald Trump said this month that Russia may take a role in communications with Iran after a phone conversation with his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, amid difficulties in the talks.
So we know we talked about it.
He did make a call to Putin.
They did talk, and it turns out the readout says they were talking about how Iran or how Russia might get involved in the process.
Russia is a close ally with Iran.
It makes perfect sense, and it's a way to improve our relations with Russia and with Iran and avoid a war.
You know, and I happen to believe that, and maybe it's just hopefulness on my part, but I really think the Russians would like to have a better arrangement with the United States.
I think they want to do something that the United States would be pleased with and help solve the problem.
But boy, I just don't see that happening.
You know, not with the statements that are coming out of the administration.
And I don't know.
You know, some people claim that the last person to talk to the president has the greatest amount of influence.
But I don't know who the last person was.
I know he hasn't talked to you lately.
Well, the neocons are around, and they're relentless, as you know.
And I'm sure they are bombarding Trump left and right.
They're telling him he'll be a failure if he doesn't take out Iran.
You know how they are, you know, and I'm sure it's not easy.
It's easy for us to sit here and say, well, Trump should do this, but it's not easy being Trump, I'm sure, because I don't think he wants to do some of the things they're pushing him into doing.
So now, something else I sent you this morning is an article in the American Conservative magazine, which came out today, which sort of dovetails with the Bloomberg piece.
And put this next one up because it's a good article.
To solve Iran, work with Russia.
It's a no-brainer, is my add to that.
But that next one, this is from the article, Dr. Paul, it says, amid continued tensions between Washington and Moscow, not least on the dangerously escalating war in Ukraine, cooperation on Iran's nuclear program could serve two vital purposes in addition to blocking Tehran from building a bomb.
Number one, delivering on Trump's pledge to avoid new wars.
And two, fostering a much-needed dialogue between two adversarial great powers.
That this opportunity is seen seriously in Moscow is underscored by the remarks of Russia's influential deputy foreign minister, who I just mentioned, Ryabkov, who is a country's chief negotiator on Iran.
Speaking to the state news, Asin she TASS on Sunday, Ryabkov noted, quote, these days, Washington's much more serious in its intent toward concluding a deal with Iran on mutually acceptable terms.
So they're ready, and it's beneficial.
Yeah, but you know, where Trump may be trapped, emotionally speaking, is that I think deep down he had been working with, he's been accused of being too friendly with Russia.
Exactly.
And now, you know, where he could do something which would be above board and would be helpful to us as Americans and for the cause of peace.
But he's in a trap because he can't back off on this now.
It's getting worse.
I mean, why didn't he just stop and say, yes, the inspections are working?
And, all right, you send your own inspectors in, which we have.
But still, it comes back.
You can't trust them.
So there's some neocons floating around the world, I think, that have influence on Trump.
Yeah, and I think Netanyahu is one of them.
And reportedly, they had a phone call, Netanyahu and Trump the other day, in which Trump told Netanyahu, at least it's reported this way, do not dare start bombing Iran right now while we're having these discussions.
Fighting for the Constitution 00:03:38
And if that's the case, that's good news.
Which contradicts what we worry about.
Yeah, yeah, exactly.
So don't get in the way.
So we'll see.
Hopefully this Sunday will go well and we'll keep an eye on it.
Now, the second thing we want to talk about a little bit is the war on free speech.
And Trump said kind of a, well, I won't prejudice your view.
This is what Trump told the troops in a recent talk.
If we can put that video clip on, we want to put our earpieces in and check out that video clip of Trump speaking to the U.S. troops.
Do we have that one, that second, that middle clip?
That first video where he's, yeah, that one right there.
Let's listen to what he has to say.
But they proudly carry the flags of other countries, but they don't carry the American flag.
They only burn it.
Did you see a lot of the flags being burned?
They weren't being burned by people from our country or from people that love our country.
People that burn the American flag should go to jail for one year.
That's what they should be doing.
Okay, so you've got a lot of laws.
People who burn the American flag should go to jail for one year.
You know, I told you a little story about, I was talking with a relative who wasn't much interested in politics.
I didn't know what his position was.
You know, it was back when I had a vote on burning the flag or not.
And I guess what?
I voted that they shouldn't punish you for burning the flag.
But this individual that I thought was totally non-political, when I set the stage for it, excuse me, he said that his first question was, who owns the flag?
Like, if you have your own flag, go out and buy a flag and burn it.
That would settle the whole thing.
But no, this is symbolism.
This is patriotism going amok, you know, carrying away its emotionalism.
To me, it's a real serious problem, the way people react.
He had a lot of problems in the military.
That's what we're fighting.
We're risking our lives for this to go out and burn something.
You know, yeah, it's terrible, but I think trampling on rights and doing the way the government does and expanding the government and ruining the monetary system, those are things you ought to be demonstrating with and talking about, but not this.
This does not solve the problem by undermining the principle of the First Amendment.
Yeah, you know, and we're told that the troops are fighting for our freedoms.
They're fighting for our liberty.
They're fighting for the Constitution.
Well, that Constitution does include the right of free expression, even the kind of free expression that many Americans find distasteful.
There's not a lot of Americans, when they walk by and see some dude lighting up a flag, they're going to say, hey, that looks like a great thing to do.
Most people do find it repulsive.
But nevertheless, this idea that you probably would spend more time for doing that than you would for murdering someone in one of these blue cities.
But nevertheless, Thomas Massey, he was posting this, and he, as usual, had the right take on it.
If you put that next clip, what Massey's comment was, Massey said, bring this bill to the floor.
This is an easy no vote for anyone who took their oath to the Constitution seriously, is Massey's response to Trump's proposal.
I predict they won't bring it to the floor.
Yeah, yeah.
Yeah, I mean, he's good at rallies.
Trump was good at rallies.
Controlling Speech Through Stolen Money 00:09:26
You know, he's great at talking to people.
He's the troops, they seem to love him, certainly a lot more than how they felt about Biden.
But nevertheless, sometimes I think he speaks a little bit too quickly.
Remember, sadly, our friend Walter Jones, he didn't always have the position that he developed over the years, where he represented many, many people in North Carolina in the military.
And he worked on the assumption that the military, you had to do whatever was conventional wisdom.
But he changed his mind and decided that the wars in Iraq and the Middle East were totally wrong.
And he stood his grounds.
He learned how to express himself.
He was very honest about it.
He never tried to hide where he came from and how he changed his mind.
And his popularity grew.
You know, he never had to suffer the consequence for making this point that changing your mind and believing in civil liberties and limitations on our military forces and all our government does makes it's more popular than people believe.
Yeah, that's what I think.
Well, there was another attack on uh first amendment rights by a senior Trump official.
It wasn't just the president and this was his attorney general, Pam Bondi.
Now she came out and she is.
She's furious, but it's not because of all the crime everywhere.
It's not because of the corruption in government.
No, she's furious about something else.
She's furious about a coffee shop and what they chose to name one of their beverages.
Let's watch that last video and see what Pam Bondi, the top cop in the USA, what is she so upset about?
Let's get that one cued.
If we can, let's listen to Pam.
After the October 7th anniversary, that horrific day, the anniversary of October 7th, after that, they added new drinks to the menu.
One was Sweet Sinoir in honor, a tribute to the leader of Hamas who tortured Jews, who orchestrated the October 7th attacks.
That's the world in which we're living, that they do a drink honoring him and can't do that.
And so we've sued them and we're going to stop this from happening.
And anywhere in the country, if you do this, we're coming after you.
Cannot do this.
I mean, that's pretty egregious.
I didn't do that.
Anywhere in the country, if you name your coffee beverage after a figure they don't like, we are, quote, coming after you.
That is crazy.
Makes no sense whatsoever.
They didn't have a good education.
A person like that is well educated in the law and a different approach to civil liberties, but they didn't learn the fundamentals of what they might learn outside government schools, you know, and approach us in a different manner.
So because I have argued the case or made a point at least that the First Amendment is probably one of, it could be the most important.
If you can't speak out and compete with words, what do you have left?
I guess they said the Second Amendment, if they won't let you use the First Amendment.
But it is a shame that the demagogues that have been educated, what percentage of the people that are in Washington that were educated only in government schools?
I thought most of them, it took me a long time to find three people that ever heard of Austrian economics, you know.
And that is to me the fundamental problem why we should have more homeschooling and private schooling in competition with the government.
And I think there's some of that going on.
And there are some school districts that are trying to improve it.
And Musk at least said, turn it over to the states.
States aren't perfect, but the federal government, when they're imperfect, they affect all of us for a long time.
Yeah, you know, there's a lot of talk about the woke right.
And the people that are on the woke right don't want to be called woke right.
Well, Pam Bondi is definitely the woke right.
If you remember the left, the woke left, you better call me by my right pronoun or that's violence.
And I'll use the authority of the state against you.
That's the woke left.
This is exactly the same thing on the right.
You cannot name your coffee after someone I don't like or I will use the force and power of the state to come after you.
And she literally said, come after you.
It's the exact same thing.
You know, it's DEI writ large, but just from the other side.
You know, there was a time when the American Civil Liberties Union would sort of pride themselves in defending people who were really bad people, had bad reputations, but they deserved, you know, a defense in a court.
And they emphasize that they do it less now these days than they used to.
But I think somebody unlike Bonnie could have, you know, had a plus and wake up people to civil liberties.
You know, I don't like this, and I resent it, but there's no way that we should use force to do this.
I told you a story about, you know, the individual that I talked to.
Oh, I was at a town hall meeting after I made that terrible vote and voted against burning, you know, that punishing people who burned the flag.
And an elderly person stood up.
He had been a strong supporter, and he gave a very little talk, a short talk about this.
And he explained why you don't write laws against this.
And he defended the First Amendment, but he said, I'll tell you what else I do.
I would take care of that guy out of bump in the nose if I saw him.
So he resented it personally, but he was not willing to use the power of the state to do anything about it.
I mean, there is a market solution.
If there is a coffee shop somewhere that has a coffee named after someone you think is really bad, then don't go to that coffee shop.
And maybe they'll go out of business if enough people think, you know, wow, I mean, what if you, you know, Hitler hot sauce?
Let's go buy some.
You know, a lot of people don't want to do that, and that's fine.
That's the market solution.
The state doesn't come in and force you to shut down, come after you actually like it.
Well, you know, I've been amazed at the success of the more than a small coffee shop having, but what about the boycotts in Target and a few other places?
It made them change their patterns.
Look, how many are rejecting a lot of that nonsense now?
Robbie Starbuck, he's the guy that, yeah, he did that.
So, no, I think that method of, you know, I think the boycott was just wonderful, you know, but they'll probably get arrested for loitering.
Yeah.
Well, now you mentioned the ACLU and how much they used to protect speech like this, and they're not.
But, you know, there is a group now that has taken over that I think is doing much better, and that's fire.
And we had Nick Perino on our show not long ago to discuss this.
In that time, it was about the college campuses, but they have been consistent and they are non-political.
They simply stand up for the First Amendment.
And thankfully, Nico, I'm sorry, Nico Perino, Nico did comment on Pam Bondi's remarks.
If you put that last second, there we go.
And of course, he's great.
He's terrific.
And he absolutely hits it on the head.
He said, naming a drink something offensive is not unlawful.
It's protected speech.
The Department of Justice lawsuit may be more complicated, but the fact that Bondi focuses her talking points on protected speech and then threatens more prosecutions on that basis betrays the First Amendment.
Very, very well said.
See, the problem is the government has their fingers and our money in their business, whether it's a college or whether it's a foreign government.
So we give them the money, we tell them what to do.
And I've always said if they do it, we give them more money.
If they don't, we bomb them.
So they use this in the college.
They say, the problem is you're allowing people to give speeches and they're controversial and they don't want to do it.
Well, why in the world did we ever send them the money anyway?
Because a college should allow anybody to do anything under their rules as far as what they can say and what their decorum is and their behavior.
But no, they don't do that.
What they do is they say, ah, if you don't do that, we're going to take your money away from you.
So it's a way of controlling speech by the use of stolen money.
You know, you bribe people.
But eventually, though, people get tired of it and we run out of money.
So there's opportunities for people to wake up and demand that they are in charge of the curriculum rather than the federal government and being bribed and pressured by the money that they have stolen from the people.
Blueprint Peace Early 00:02:14
Absolutely.
Well, let me close out, Dr. Paul, if you put that last clip up by reminding everyone early bird prices for the Ron Paul Institute, D.C. Dulles Conference.
We always have a great time.
If you put that clip up now, the last one.
I'm sorry, I got you running like a maniac back there.
Blueprint for peace, August 16th, early bird prices.
You know, we got a lot of people we like that are going to speak there.
And it's going to be exciting.
We have our good friend Colonel Doug McGregor, people that are following Russia, that are following Ukraine, that are watching the Judge Napolitano show.
They know that Doug is everywhere now.
Also, our good friend, Nassim Nicholas Taleb, brilliant guy.
He spoke in 2018, I think it was, at our conference.
He's going to be back, The Black Swan.
He's got a lot of commentary on the Middle East.
It's going to be terrific.
Blueprint for peace.
And it's not just about foreign policy.
It's about civil liberties at home as well.
So there's a link in the description.
Snap up those tickets while they are still available.
Get them early so you can be assured of place.
Over to you, Dr. Paul.
Very good.
I'm going to close with a quote, you know, a subject we've already talked about to emphasize that diplomacy is something that a lot of people don't understand, or they understand it so well they want to use it against common sense.
And this comes over the problem with Iran.
And a leader in our country, I won't say his name, but he has a lot of authority.
He says, if we don't make a deal with Iran, there will be bombing.
It will be bombing like of which they have never seen before.
Well, that's not good diplomacy.
The better diplomacy is if you're not shooting and killing and there's no declared war, work it out.
It should be in the best interests of both sides.
And the one thing term that should be used that we use with person to person is activity should be voluntary.
And if they worked on that principle and they agreed to a treaty, they ought to obey it.
I want to thank everybody for tuning in today to the Liberty Report.
Export Selection