All Episodes
Previous Next
July 9, 2025 - Ron Paul Liberty Report
34:44
The Quiet Part Of The Epstein Deception

Trump Administration officials' desperation to bury the whole Epstein chapter - with Trump berating a reporter for even asking about it - obscures something very important (in addition to child abuse) that appears to have taken place. Also today: Can a Musk "third party" actually "win"? Depends on what "winning" means.

|

Time Text
Alternative To The Dollar 00:04:56
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 this morning.
Good morning, Dr. Paul.
How are you this morning?
Doing well.
Good.
Doing well.
And we hope we can make the world a better place to live in, more peaceful and more prosperous.
But the rate we're going, I'm not so sure that the problems are going to be solved in Washington.
They reflect a lot of desires, a lot of ambitions, a lot of greed, and a lot of stupid ideas.
And things have changed since the founders gave us an outline on what we ought to follow if we wanted peace and prosperity.
And now we're a bit in a mess, and yet there are two parties fighting it out.
One party's right and the other one's wrong.
That's what they tell us.
But I happen to have to come to a conclusion that there's too many similarities with the two parties, and we don't see much difference.
Gold is in the news, and it should be.
It was one of the superficial, at least, but serious issues that prompted me to speak out about the monetary issue.
And that, of course, occurred in 1971 when we admitted we were bankrupt, and we would not honor the dollar at $35 an ounce.
So we literally started the bankruptcy rolling along.
And yet today, it's still existing, and it's permitted the deficit spending that I assumed would happen.
And now we're up to $30-some trillion dollars, and people are predicting not too long it'll be $40 trillion.
And if it doesn't get stopped, it's going to go much higher than that.
But the interesting news today, the gold is not soaring today, at least when I looked at it last.
But it's $3,000, which is soaring since 1971 when it was $35 an ounce.
And I believe there's a direct relationship between the value, the dollar, the nominal dollar, the nominal dollar amount for gold.
And that's going to be determined by deficits.
And they look like they're here to stay for a while yet.
But the interesting news today was, here is a little clip.
It says, gold has overtaken the Euro as the world's number two reserve asset.
And it's not just symbolic.
It's a seismic warning shot from the most powerful monetary institutions on the planet.
Central banks aren't hedging.
They're repositioning.
So 95% of the central banks are buying gold.
And the United States is not one of them.
So I remember when gold was $270 an ounce at the beginning of the century, the British were selling gold.
And Greenspan, the gold band, he was before the committee.
I said, do you think this is a smart idea?
Selling their gold at $270.
He was very, very serious.
He says, yes, they know what they're doing.
But that was, you know, the 35 up of 270 were big events.
But then the 270 at the beginning of this century led the way to $3,000.
So the gold is still around, and it does send the message.
It's a measuring rod, and it doesn't tell us very good things.
One thing that's good about it all, there's competition other than just the central banks, you know, buying the gold.
But they're actually talking about an alternative to the dollar.
And the markets have the final say on that.
And some people say it's around the corner, and other people say it'll be a while.
I always assume that it looks bad enough.
It should be tomorrow, but it'll last a lot longer.
So, what we're doing is looking at, but so they have this group called the BRICS.
There's five major countries involved in it, but there are five minor countries involved.
They're strictly trying to get together on an agreement on a reserve currency that they can trade in so they don't have to rely on the dollar.
And the five well-known countries are Brazil, Russia, China, South Africa, and India.
But there's five other ones, which are minor countries, which ironically, or interestingly enough, includes Iran.
But anyway, the plans are out there, and that's the way things work, even the enemy plans a long time, because I think the Federal Reserve was the initial planner on how we would remove any restraint on spending.
Five Countries, Secret Plans 00:09:04
And we had to get rid of the, you know, we had to establish a central bank in order to manipulate.
And the most important thing they said had to be done, had to be done in secret.
The Congress wasn't allowed to know, even though the Constitution gives the authority to the Congress and the Congress and the Constitution spoke out.
It said only gold and silver should be illegal tender.
But anyway, that's the bigger story dealing with some of the things we're going to talk about.
We want to talk about what's going on because everybody else is talking about it, and we're trying to sort it out ourselves.
And that's the Epstein scandal.
And it's sickening when you read about it.
You know, they talk about there's been reportings.
I happen not to accept them at face value.
Thousands of people have begun, you know, participants in this scandal.
And everybody knows how horrible it is, but when the Republicans get in, they're going to clean it up.
Well, it looks like in the last two days they tried to close it down.
And they've elected, you know, one person and put her in jail.
She was a ringleader, but nobody else has been indicted.
And the announcement this week was there's nothing to it.
There's not a real problem here.
And one article said Trump became annoyed when they started asking him questions.
Why are you bothering me with this stuff?
This is not the, we have to deal with issues.
We have to deal with tariffs and other things.
But, you know, once they close it out, and it's a bipartisan closeout, the Democrats never wanted to do anything.
Now the Republicans say, we're done with it.
We checked it out.
There's nothing there.
You know what that does to me?
I wonder what really is there.
And that's what we want to talk about today because the scandal so often when there's something in the news, I always assume that if everybody's talking about it, look elsewhere for where the real activity is.
And maybe that's what's going on right now.
Maybe there's something more to the Epstein scandal than the Epstein so-called scandal.
And maybe there's something else going on with that whole mess that we're looking at.
Well, I got a good gold story for you before we go on anymore because I had to get some tires.
And I always go to Brad's Sport Tire.
It's a local company.
The first time I went in there, they recognized me from this show.
They watch our show.
It's a great local company.
And when you go in there, there's always a cast of characters.
You could literally make a sitcom in that.
There's always a cast of characters.
The owners of the company are always joking and Josh.
And the first time when I walked in yesterday, they said, your hair is too long.
How does Ron Paul let you work for him with your hair that long?
So great guys, fantastic guys.
I love going there.
I love just hanging out there.
But a gentleman came in with his dog because they were afraid to change the guy's tire with his dog in the car.
And he just looked like a usual Brezoria County guy, shorts, t-shirt on.
And anyway, so the owner introduced me to him.
He said, this guy works for Ron Paul.
And the guy looked at me and kind of smiled.
You know how they are here, quiet.
He got up and he walked out.
And he's walked out.
He kind of looked over at me and shook his head.
He said, I wish I would have bought gold when Ron Paul told me to buy gold.
Turns out he's a local serious.
It's never too late.
Yeah.
Well, he's a serious local businessman, actually.
He has a big construction company.
So he's a very prominent guy.
And he's just shaking his head.
I wish I would have bought gold when Ron Paul told me to buy gold.
So anyway, that's just a fun story from Brazoria from over here in Clute.
The point on that first clip, now this is what we're talking about.
And we're going to play a clip from this.
Go back one to the beginning.
That shouldn't be number two.
That should be number one.
Yeah, here we go.
So this was on Hedge this morning.
We're going to go into this clip with journalist Nick Bryant where he talks about it.
But I do want to just, before we do that, Dr. Paul, go into kind of an update.
You gave us a good sort of summary, but if you go to that next clip, here's a summary.
And this is from Michael Snyder wrote this, and we saw it on Zero Hedge.
Apparently, we are supposed to believe that Jeffrey Epstein didn't have a client list.
He never blackmailed anyone, and he was solely responsible for his own death.
And now here's a quote from the article that he's talking about.
A Justice Department and FBI review of the investigation related to disgraced late financier Jeffrey Epstein found that there was no client list or evidence that he blackmailed prominent figures according to a memo detailing the findings.
The review also concluded that Epstein died by suicide while in custody at a Manhattan correctional facility in August 2019.
He was facing federal sex trafficking charges and his death was subsequently investigated by the Justice Department's internal watchdog and the FBI.
So this is what they want us to believe.
Now this is, you also mentioned this, but I just want to kind of give the detail on if you go to the next one.
So this is what happened yesterday when there was a press conference and a reporter asked the president about it.
He said, your memo in release yesterday on Epstein, it left some lingering mysteries.
I guess one is whether he ever worked for an American or foreign intelligence agency.
The former labor tech secretary, who was Miami U.S. Attorney Alex Acosta, he allegedly said he did work for an intelligence agency.
So can you resolve whether or not he did?
To which Trump responded, millions of people have seen this clip.
Are you still talking about Jeffrey Epstein?
The guy's been talked about for years.
You're asking, we have taxes.
We have this.
We have other things.
And are people still talking about this guy?
This creep, this is unbelievable.
Do you want to waste time?
Anyway, I could read the rest of it, but it almost sounded, Dr. Paul, like he's protesting too much, that people aren't just going to take his word for it, that there's no there.
You know, some people's waste of time is some people's very productive effort.
Some could argue that why don't you quit talking about tariffs?
You're just wasting your time talking about tariffs.
The history of tariffs and the understanding is very well known.
What about foreign entanglements and where our troops are in Fort Adam?
Is that we're just wasting our time?
Yeah, they'd like it to make us think of that because what they do is they distract.
And that's what I think we're dealing with right here.
There's been a distraction, you know, away from the real problems.
The whole thing is, is, you know, why is it, you know, my first thought was when the Republicans came out and says closed deal, the whole thing is closed down, case closed.
I got to thinking, well, you know, maybe there's some Republicans messed up in this deal, and maybe some Democrat.
Maybe so, but for what reason?
Is it all over the sexual angle, or could it be that they are participating in the cover-up, the cover-up of what's really going on, and they don't have to worry about how they're operating.
And I keep thinking, then they started using the word coup.
There's a coup that took over.
And I thought it was interesting that if we think that some of this stuff is to camouflage what the FBI and the CIA is doing and the secrecy of the foreign intervention, you know, that's one thing.
But people are saying there's been a coup.
And I got to thinking, you know, I did a little pamphlet on this about a year or so ago.
It was called a surreptitious coup.
And I dated that back to November 22nd of a historic day in 1963, which meant that I thought there was a big takeover of the security apparatus.
And when you think of, I hate to say it, but I think the security operator isn't exactly producing what I thought might happen on warnings about the real dangers.
And it isn't as smooth as I believe it should be and the way it is now.
But which means that back to the issue, it's bipartisan.
Is it bipartisan because there's people participating in that scandal from both parties?
Or is it because both parties are dedicated to the military-industrial complex and the way wars are fought and the way the deficits are run up?
That's where the real conspiracy is, and that's where I think the coup operates.
And more and more people are starting to realize this.
But right now, it's very, very, very partisan.
But overall, I think when you look at the big picture, policies don't change all that much, Republican, the Democrat.
Blackmail And Partisanship 00:02:28
Immediately, somebody will say, well, yeah, but look, aren't we doing a better job with our borders?
Yeah, I would concede that things are better to some degree.
But I think the big stuff, foreign policy, military-industrial complex, monetary policy, deficit financing, personal liberties, privacy, I don't think there's any magic with either party.
Yeah, I think what we're talking about, the Epstein issue, is two competing scandals.
One that's above the surface like an iceberg and one that's below the surface.
Now, the one above the surface is child abuse.
It's salacious.
It captures people's attention.
You mean a powerful person was abusing children and other people would go to his abode to also do such nefarious activity.
And that gets everyone excited because it's so horrific.
But on the other side, it's the influence operation part that people aren't talking about as much.
Why was this happening?
Was it because the guy was just a sicko or was there something else?
And now the narrative that I think the administration is trying to push and a lot of people connected to it is option A.
It's all about the perversion and the sicko.
And now if you go to the next one, this you can see in Pam Bondi, the attorney general, she's actually pushing that narrative.
Here's what she responded when Trump in the same press conference, she said, first to back up on that, in February I did an interview on Fox and it's getting a lot of attention because I asked a question, I was asked a question about the client list.
And my response is it's sitting on my desk to be reviewed, meaning the file along with JFK and MLK files as well.
That's what I meant by it.
Also, to the tens of thousands of videos, they turned out to be child abuse.
I'll use a different word because of the voice recognition.
Child abuse downloads by that disgusting Epstein.
Child abuse is what they were.
Never going to be released.
Never going to see the lie that they.
So she's basically saying, if you're interested in this info, then somehow it's a child abuse aspect.
You're just interested in the salacious.
But let's return to that original one that the journalist that I mentioned, and this was on this was featured on Zero Head.
You might want to grab your earpiece.
Because if we listen to the first 49 seconds of this interview, that first clip, he's talking about the blackmail aspect, which, as horrific as child abuse is, I would argue, is the real issue with Epstein.
Let's listen to 49 seconds of this.
Blackmail plays an integral role.
And I've been at this for 21 years, and Epstein had cameras in all of his homes.
I mean, Epstein was definitely a blackmail artist.
Perot's Support Impact 00:15:33
And the government wants to make sure that that does not come out.
That a huge part of our political system is predicated on blackmail.
And especially if that dark, malignant corner of the intelligence that is using blackmail against our politicians and other people, if they were using children, I mean, that would make the American people erupt.
So that's why that Wikipedia page is locked down.
And that's why this is important.
This is for that dark corner of intelligence.
This is Omaha Beach.
You know, they're not going to give an inch.
Interesting, no.
You know, I want to retain some bit of optimism about what's going on.
We're at least reporting on people who are suspect that we're not hearing the whole story or a lot of bias in the story.
And it's worth thinking about.
And time will tell.
The American people aren't with the gentleman that just spoke or us because they, you know, they're partisans and it's superficial.
But I refer back again to 1963.
You know, including myself, and I was in the military and I was very, you know, geographically close to what was going on down there.
And I said, oh, you know, and I followed hourly, you know, and all the killing that went on.
And I said, Oswald, boy, he's a shrewd character.
And most Americans agreed it, and they wanted to just get that back behind them.
But it went on and on.
And then there were this conspiracy theories.
And, you know, now some people report that probably 80% of the people in this country would not believe the government's explanation of the Kennedy assassination.
And there's a theory that goes along about we haven't heard everything about 9-11 and the various things.
And that in a way is healthy, but it's sickening too.
And this one is a little more complicated because of the two issues that are going on.
Because the last thing they want to do is look weak on, you know, one or the other.
They want to make sure that justice is heard.
At the same time, it's difficult for them to reject the idea because we have a very active president in foreign policy and trading policy, and that's a big deal.
And all that stuff.
And the big issues, and why is it, you know, this really goes back to why was I motivated to talk about exposure at the Federal Reserve?
And I started with, why don't we automate it?
Why don't we know what's going on?
Why don't we audit the whole government?
And I think Trump made some good statements on that.
A lot of people joined him for this reason.
And we did learn a lot.
We know a lot now about USAID, but it still doesn't solve the problem of unlimited government because the big issues are bipartisan and they're in secret because I believe in the coup.
Yeah.
Well, what Nick Bryant, the journalist interviewed here, what he was saying is something, if true, would rock the country to the core.
And that's why he's saying that everyone is pushing the child abuse narrative rather than the idea that our entire government is corrupted.
It's all being blackmailed.
Now, we don't know by who.
Could it be the Israelis?
Could it be the CIA, the deep state?
Who could it be?
But the idea that every senator or every senator of consequence, every member of Congress of consequence, every top political and maybe religious figure of consequence are being actively blackmailed.
A few years ago, I would say it's the craziest conspiracy theory I've ever heard.
But the more we hear about it, and the more also we notice the cover-up, the more possibility it seems, and it would rock the country to the core.
Now, if you go to that next clip, this is our good friend Jim Jatris, and he, as he often does, very succinctly in response to someone on X, he said, honestly, Natalie, I'm not sure which is more annoying, the Trumpanzes, it's kind of a nasty word, running cover for Trump, Bondi, Patel, Benino, et cetera, or, and this is the point, those who object to the cover-up solely on the basis of justice for victims against those exploiting them,
while evidently oblivious to the real object of the cover-up, the intelligence agency or agencies behind the whole operation.
It's kind of a bait and switch here, I think, Dr. Paul.
Sure is.
And I guess this issue is going to be alive for a while.
Just try to sort it out.
Because the administration is very, very adamant.
Those are strong words that Trump used on this.
And of course, the Attorney General is 100% with it, too.
And she always impressed me when she was not a person of so much authority.
And I thought, boy, yeah, law and order.
I like a little bit of that.
And maybe he should clean up the streets or maybe to be allowed to arrest murderers and things like that.
But right now, it's up in the air for my final opinion.
Well, we want to do a little bit on this article that we both saw in Political.
Actually, they had a couple things, and we have covered Musk's idea of a third party.
And we even mentioned Ross Perot.
But Politico had a really interesting piece today, believe it or not.
If you go to skip ahead a little bit to that Ross Perot picture, and the article was entitled, Advice for Elon Musk from the Most Successful Third Party Campaign in Modern History.
Now, this is Russell Varney, who was in charge of Ross Perot's campaign.
They interviewed him for Politico, Dr. Paul, and it was a fascinating interview because he talked about how Elon Musk could actually succeed.
Now, go to that next clip.
And he says, it starts out a new third party created by a billionaire born out of frustration with the ballooning federal deficit and the two-party system.
We're talking about Ross Perot's reform party, of course, because it sounds so, so familiar.
And he says the parallels to Elon Musk and his America Party are obvious, but Musk may be lucky to get as far as Perot did.
The Texas businessman won roughly 19% of the popular vote when he ran for president in 92.
And I highlight this part.
The most successful bid by any independent candidate in modern history.
Extremely successful.
That's right.
And people don't quite realize that just putting your name down, you're going to have automatic support.
And when I made efforts outside the Republican Party, guess who was opposed to it?
Both parties.
Yeah, of course.
You know, if you're competing with them, that's all of a sudden that pushes them together.
Then they become very defensive on the things we're talking about today.
They have reason to stick together, whether it's foreign policy or monetary policy, because I think philosophically, they're not really worried about the deficit.
I don't think they think we're just off balance a little bit.
I think they philosophically think, well, that's not a problem.
You just work harder, you lower taxes, stimulate the economy, and all of a sudden, you know, the deficits will disappear.
So that's why they do come together so strongly, and it's not too easy to start a third party.
Of course, my answer, which always got a response from a crowd, they say, what do you think about having a third party?
And I said, well, I'm looking for the second party.
So I'm saying something that's going to be different in a serious manner.
And I think what's interesting about the whole discussion is the idea of what is success.
Yes, Ross Perot did not win the presidency.
He got an enormous amount of the vote.
Now, go to that next clip.
I think this is worth pondering because I think there's a skewed idea of what success is.
Now, this is part of the interview with Russell Varney, who ran Perot's campaign.
He said, could Musk succeed where Perot didn't?
We asked Russell Varney, a top aide.
Now, here's Varney.
Still, Varney said Musk's efforts might still have an impact.
And I highlight this part, Dr. Paul.
Despite Perot's defeat, his clamoring for deficit reduction reshaped the political debate and fueled President Bill Clinton's push for a balanced budget.
Musk could have similar sway if he puts in the work.
And now go to the next one.
Now, this is the point, I think, Dr. Paul.
Now, whether or not it can be effective, absolutely.
Third parties don't have to win to be effective.
Ross Perot in 92 took a very obscure issue, deficit spending and accumulated debt, and explained it to the American public.
And for the first time since the Eisenhower administration in 1998, Bill Clinton actually balanced the budget for two years.
And it hasn't been balanced since then.
That was the result of the support Perot got.
And I think that's success beyond simply winning an election.
You know, it's the definition of being effective makes a big difference, you know, because I had to swallow a lot because by conventional wisdom, I was one of the most unsuccessful, effective members of Congress because people would come up.
What did you ever get passed?
What did you pass?
You didn't get any bills passed at all.
I said, yeah, but why don't you look at all the bills that got passed?
Have they helped you that much?
And I introduced a lot of bills, but my whole goal wasn't so much that I had high expectation.
But some people asked me, how did you put up with all this?
Living with these people that didn't believe in the Constitution and whatnot, how could you tolerate the environment?
I said, I just, I had low expectations.
I didn't think it was going to change the world.
Matter of fact, I was working in an area that was different than a political area.
It was sort of an opportunity for me.
That was my initial effort back in 1971, was to talk about something nobody else was talking about.
And so it was an opportunity.
And so I was a little bit shocked that there was a group of people out there wanting to hear that message.
And I was very pleased.
And I think there's been some progress in that area.
I talk about, I'm not a total pessimist because I think this outside effort by the various organizations that we've been involved in and many other libertarians have, the Mises Institute providing information.
And I know a lot of young people that I met during my campaigning and my career that are very, very active, you know, and they're participating.
So, you know, in my quiet secret way, maybe there was a little effectiveness in doing that because I believe so strongly in ideas.
And that's why I still think we have the opportunity.
We have the internet.
As much as I complain about it, all this technology, the internet has helped us get our message out.
And people have to learn how to sort it out, look at the pros and cons.
And so far, I think we've had that.
So I think we need to be friends with Elon Musk and see if he'll be friendly with us, which he has been.
And he hasn't been bashful to promote some of our ideas.
You know, the thing is, I mean, people would say, well, Rossport didn't win, but he changed the debate on spending money.
Ron Paul didn't win the presidency, but all of a sudden people were talking about the Federal Reserve.
People not just on the right, not just on the left, across the board, people who are championing progressive causes.
They started to understand that the wars are sucking the lifeblood out of working people in America, and they're paid for by stealing their money through inflation.
All of this stuff was condensed down to end the Fed, and that became a household name.
And so there's this misconception about what winning means.
And that's one of the challenges we face as an educational organization.
I mean, when you have a campaign, by golly, everyone wants to put that money in because there's a finite end.
If we just win this seat, things are going to be better.
But when we're in for the long haul, like we are with the Ron Paul Institute, tell you what, it's hard to raise money because people don't want to understand that influencing these issues takes time.
You have to grow new generations of people, which we do with your scholars seminar, grow new generations of people who will think differently.
So I just wish people would look at success differently.
Remember how they attacked Massey just a couple of weeks ago?
What have you ever done, Thomas Massey?
Well, he voted no, and that's what he did.
And he got the whole world talk, whole country talking about, hey, why did this guy vote no?
And a lot of them went and looked into it.
Why did he vote no on this bill?
Oh, that bill is terrible.
You know, that is making a difference.
They don't understand it.
And he's effective.
And I keep thinking a person like that, not only is his voice and vote not weak, it grows in strength because let's say that he's much more attuned to what is right and constitutional versus everybody else.
I mean, that's a powerful position because you're the spokesman for true liberty.
And we just need more.
And there has to be, there's a lot of them out there, and I can understand why they don't want to spend the time it takes to try to get a congressional seat.
But I don't think that should ever, when young people came up and they'd be excited about the message, they say, well, how do I get into Congress?
I just forget about it.
And Leonard Reed was one that always said to me, get to know your issues and believe in the principles, and something will come along.
And so many things came along to some of these young people.
They're out there.
They're very active now.
And so they give me a real boost because I don't think ideas are killed very easily.
I happen to think they're very powerful.
And if you're on to a truth, yes, they beat you up and the establishment beats you up and that sort of thing.
But overall, it's the attitude and the principles that last.
Look, the founders are on the defensive right now with the position, but just think of what they accomplished by gathering together for a couple of years and producing what they did.
It's lasted for a long time.
In a way, I think of what our efforts are: try to alert the very people if it's good because everybody said, yes, the founders are good, and the Constitution is good, even though they don't believe it.
I think that's why I'm so interested in the First Amendment.
Powerful Truths Persist 00:02:31
And right now, that bothers me more than ever because neither party is very good in protecting our First Amendment rights.
Yeah, that's true, absolutely.
Well, I guess we're running over, so if you wouldn't mind putting up that very last clip, the obligatory reminder.
Now, I don't think she'll mind, but my good friend Kelly Vlajos, who we have a long history with, and she's a terrific journalist.
She's the editorial director over at Responsible Statecraft, which I highly recommend their work.
She sent me a little note before the show and she said, Gosh, the lineup for your conference is looking really good.
If we could put that last clip up, please.
She said, the lineup for your DC conference is looking really good.
I'm definitely planning on making it if I'm in town.
So I take that as a real vote of confidence from someone that I really respect.
And I'm really glad to hear one of my peers, I consider her one of my peers and a dear friend, saying that we're putting together a great conference.
And so if it's good enough for Kelly, it's good enough for you guys out there to get those tickets.
Join us on the 16th.
We've got a great lineup.
We've got a couple more announcements to make, just sealing up a couple final things.
But even as it stands, we've got Dr. Paul, we've got Colonel McGregor, we've got Nassim Nicholas Taleb, we've got Max Blumenthal, we've got his wonderful wife, Anya Parampil.
It's going to be a great beyond left-right talk about what the heck is going on with this country and how we can fix it.
We all need to be part of that conversation.
So we hope to see you there.
There is a link in the description to snatch up those tickets as quickly as you can.
And thank you.
Very good.
And I too want to participate in the encouragement to the principles of liberty because that's what our goal is.
And we strongly believe that if you're looking for peace and prosperity, it's not a complicated issue.
It's a natural instinct, but it's also a natural instinct for some people who reject the idea of truth and liberty.
And that is the contest.
It's been around for probably millions of years, the contest between good and evil.
And we've had ups and downs, but right now it's available to us.
And instead of lamenting at the bad stuff that goes on, look for sorting out and do our best job we can to explain it from the position of looking at it from a libertarian freedom position.
I want to thank everybody for tuning in today to the Liberty Report.
Export Selection