Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Jan. 16, 2025 - Stew Peters Show

57:39

Millstone Report w Paul Harrell: NEOCON Rubio Speaks AGAINST Post War Order, Trump Slams WARMONGERS

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Music Music
	Music Music Music Music
	Thank you.
	Thanks so much for being with us.
	My name is Paul Harrell, and this is the Millstone Report.
	And as always, we can't do the program without you watching every single day.
	You guys know the drill.
	We really appreciate you tuning in.
	I will say this.
	It's not often that we lead in with really the namesake of our show, but we do have a story for you.
	I don't know if you've seen it.
	I know it was just featured over on The Insurrection with Mike Lauber and Derek Evans.
	They had another terrific show, by the way.
	But I would just say this.
	There are two accounts of this verse that the Millstone Report is based on in the Bible, in two different Gospels, and it essentially is a warning to the disciples who are with Jesus not to cause little ones to stumble, that it would be better for a millstone to be tied around your neck and drowned into the seed and to cause one of these little ones to stumble.
	An example of that, although the doctor that did this barbarism, I don't think that this person would ever claim that they're a Christian.
	I don't see how that they could.
	I'm told this is out of Tim Waltz's Minnesota.
	You've seen the video of a mentally handicapped woman or girl who has had top surgery.
	And I'm not going to show you that, because I just don't feel comfortable showing it.
	I know people will say, well, she's had top surgery, so her breasts are gone.
	But I don't feel comfortable showing it, because it's just absolutely...
	And in the video itself, clearly there's mental deficiencies going on.
	Is this woman, this girl in the wheelchair before the top surgery, and she's got all of her clothes on.
	Here it is.
	And again, this is from Libs of Blue Sky.
	This, quote, trans boy has now had top surgeries clearly being taken advantage of.
	Their guardian needs to be investigated.
	So this human being...
	This human being who is waving around the flag, waving around the rainbow flag, waving around the trans flag.
	There was a doctor in Minnesota that performed a top surgery.
	So you may be wondering how could a child like that consent to that type of procedure
	And this is obviously what we would ask of any child who is, and I don't know how old this girl is, regardless of their mental state, regardless of their IQ or anything.
	I'm leading with this story.
	We're not going to spend a lot of time on it, but I want you to understand something.
	We read in the history books, pick your totalitarian regime.
	Pick any regime that you consider to be fueled by the forces of evil.
	Pick any satanic regime in world history.
	And I would just submit to you now that America, America at this point in time, is a part of that conversation.
	Historically speaking, America is now in there with some of the most barbaric, satanic regimes that you can think of.
	You know, Mal comes to mind just because right now you have this phenomenon, we'll talk about this later if we have time, of everybody abandoning TikTok because they think that TikTok is about to be banned.
	And so a lot of Gen Zers are going over to this Red Note app that is actually translated to Little Red Book.
	Which, of course, is Mao's little red book that he made everybody carry around and everything else, essentially creating for himself his own version of Chinese scripture and holding people accountable to it.
	But now, we are now, and I guess you could argue the point, arguably, we're now in the conversation, and there's probably other people that already thought we were there, and you could certainly make that argument, but I'm just telling you, look this in, there is a video going around, again, I'm not going to show it, of this girl.
	With her shirt off, with the top surgery scars, and she is in the same mental state that you just saw there.
	And, you know, I almost didn't even cover it because this is one of those things where you just want to look away.
	You just want to pretend that this type of stuff isn't going on.
	But at the same time, it is abject or object.
	Objectively evil things like this that are also serving to wake other people up to realize that if there is objective evil, then there also is good, objective good, that is from heaven and can be found in the Bible.
	So all I have to say is we need to continue to...
	To get on our knees and pray for this country in spite of everything everybody's excited about.
	Hey, Kamala lost.
	Trump's in there.
	There's no question things look brighter than they otherwise would have, especially if you believe in Christian liberty.
	And, you know, you want Christians to be able to go about the gospel of Jesus Christ in peace.
	We have way more of an opportunity to do that under Trump than we do under Kamala Harris.
	But there's still stuff like this that's going on in our country, in the state of Minnesota or California, where Jeff Younger's fighting for his kid's life.
	And yet we're the United States of America.
	But it doesn't feel very united when this is not considered child abuse, when the doctor that did this is not in jail.
	I digress.
	I digress today.
	Moving on in what yesterday, this is originally how I wanted to start the show.
	Yesterday, Russell Vought, speaking of Christians, yesterday Russell Vought testified, and this may not be very sexy because, you know, Marco Rubio, Pam Bondi, everything else, and we're going to talk about Rubio here in a minute, but Russell Vought is a Christian.
	He's an outspoken Christian.
	I believe he's a Southern Baptist.
	William Wolfe tweeting this or posting this yesterday.
	Pete Hegseth, Russ Vaught, and any other outspoken Christian who will hold a position in Trump's administration are just normal, faithful Christian men applying their faith to their lives as protected by the First Amendment.
	It's their critics who are the extremists.
	Now, the reason William Wolfe, the head of the Center for Baptist Leadership, wrote this yesterday in preparation for this hearing with Russ Vought is because Russ Vought was the director...
	of the Office of Management and Budget in Trump's first term.
	And in that first hearing, Bernie Sanders went off and tried to hammer him over his Christian faith, over his belief in the Bible and Jesus Christ.
	And we already see the left is freaking out about this as well because, as a matter of fact, right before the hearing, if you went ahead and went to this USA Today article that was telling you Russell Vought's confirmation hearing to lead budget office how to watch...
	You hear this.
	The very, very first line is about Project 2025. Project 2025 contributing author Russell Vaught is slated to resume his formal role as the Office of Management and Budget Director following Senate approval Wednesday afternoon.
	Of course, they're terrified because Project 2025 has ideas in there like, oh, I don't know, banning pornography.
	Because...
	Pornography is a weapon that is being used against this country to destroy families and destroy men's lives.
	This is anathema to the people on the left and even some libertarians that think the founding fathers were sitting around saying, well, we're going to write the First Amendment because it'll give the freedom to distribute pornography, which, of course, is preposterous.
	That's not what they thought the First Amendment would do.
	You've got State Senator of Oklahoma, Dusty Deavers, endorsing Russ Vought.
	That happened yesterday.
	Who actually is Russell Vought?
	Here is an old clip.
	Let's see.
	This was posted yesterday, but I believe this is an older clip, of Russell Vought talking about his pro-life views.
	And this is all going to be relevant.
	Just bear with me.
	But over the past eight years, my personal story has fortified my beliefs.
	My daughter, Porter, suffers from cystic fibrosis, a genetic disorder that shortens life and requires intensive care.
	Alone in an airport in Texas, when my wife called me to tell me that our kids would be at great risk of being born with CF because we were both carriers, before we had met either one of them, I did what you shouldn't do.
	I started Googling.
	And it was not good.
	The lung transplants, the feeding tubes, the time in the hospital, and ultimately the shortened life expectancy brought great grief to my wife and I. Our first daughter, who Mary was already pregnant with, did not have CF. But then came the decision to pursue a second pregnancy, and it was not obvious to us, given the odds.
	And again, as I look back on the decision to have Porter, I remember my mind being shaped vividly by two impressions roughly around the same time.
	One of great sorrow and one of great joy.
	You see, dear friends of ours had just buried their infant daughter who had a rare condition called anencephaly.
	Which means that the baby lacked a cranium and likely couldn't survive the birth.
	And didn't.
	They obviously knew of this during the pregnancy.
	And the way they cherished those nine months with their daughter, knowing that they would never see her alive outside of the womb, was truly astonishing.
	It had to be one of the most thoughtfully pro-life pregnancies I have ever heard of.
	They would have given anything for those few months with her in the womb.
	And one day I remember pondering them while I was holding my oldest daughter.
	Sitting on the couch with her and experiencing the joy of a dad with his little girl, I thought to myself how much I was shortchanging the preciousness of life to judge it in my fear based on how long it could last for my daughter, for her sake primarily and for ours.
	Porter has now turned six years old and she is a dynamo of energy enthusiasm.
	You would never know that she has cystic fibrosis.
	She tells me every day, Daddy, tell the president I said hello today.
	She thinks that's totally natural.
	87% of babies diagnosed with CF are tragically aborted.
	Think about how much life is lost because of those tragic decisions.
	Much of which is uninformed or out of fear, as Kristen said.
	My hope is that patients' parents' hearts and minds are shaped before that awful news comes to them.
	Before the medical community comes into the waiting room with their grim options, looking so austere as if life has ended when life is beginning.
	Again, that is Russ Vought or Russell Vought.
	He was the former Director of Office Management and Budget under Trump's first term, and Trump has selected him again in spite of the fact he contributed to Project 2025. Or maybe that's actually a bonus.
	Maybe that's the reason he did give him the nod.
	Nevertheless, we have this headline from The New Republic.
	In light of the hearings yesterday, the most terrifying answer.
	In Trump's budget chief hearing.
	Terrifying.
	Now, this is a leftist publication.
	Why would they think that something that Russell Vought said was terrifying?
	Donald Trump nominated Russell Vought to run the Office of Management and Budget.
	Who wrote this?
	Okay, so somebody named Hoodling.
	Ellie Hoodling.
	Senators on both sides of the aisle took issue Wednesday with Donald Trump's nominee to run for Office of Management and Budget, noting that Russell Vought's evasive and bureaucratic non-answers as to whether he'd obey the law while serving the country were alarming when pressed on whether he would obey the Impounding Control Act.
	So this is, by the way, this is what is considered the most terrifying answer.
	Is Russell Vought's answer...
	Over something called the Impounding Control Act.
	Let me just quit describing it, and I'll let you listen to it yourself.
	Mr. Rhodes, under your leadership in 2019, OMB illegally withheld $214 million that Congress appropriated to the Department of Defense to provide security assistance to Ukraine.
	The Government Accountability Office concluded that OMB's actions were a violation of the Impoundment Control Act and that your actions then forced Congress to reappropriate the funds.
	Just four years ago, you told this very committee that under your leadership, OMB would abide by the Impoundment Control Act.
	However, your past actions and public statements suggest that you may not follow this law in the future.
	So my question for you, sir, is if you are confirmed as OMB director again, do you commit to follow the law and allow OMB to withhold funding from programs that Congress has appropriate?
	Senator, thanks for the question.
	I will always commit to upholding the law.
	I disagree with the characterization of the General Accounting Office.
	My time at OMB, we follow the law consistently, and we will continue to do so.
	So that you can withhold funds that are appropriated by Congress?
	You think that's within the law?
	Again, Senator, we did not hold inappropriately funds.
	We were engaged in a policy process with regard to how funding would flow to Ukraine.
	We released the funding by the end of the fiscal year.
	Do you believe the Empowerment Control Act of 1974 is the law of the land that you must follow?
	It is the law of the land.
	As you know, the president has run on that issue.
	He believes it's unconstitutional.
	For 200 years, presidents had the ability to spend less than an appropriation if they could do it for less.
	And we have seen the extent to which this law has contributed to waste, fraud, and abuse.
	But as it pertains to the parameters of how we would use that, that's something that his team will have to consider when they are confirmed in these roles.
	So I want you to understand what's actually going on here.
	Notice the issue that the senator is bringing up has to do with funding to Ukraine.
	Now, why would the Democrats be so focused on funding something like Ukraine?
	So if Congress does send the funds, the idea is that the president can sit on it or maybe not send all of it.
	This doesn't just happen concerning Ukraine.
	This could be anything.
	He's saying for 200 years the president had this ability.
	He could do it for cheaper if he found a way.
	And no, they want it all going.
	Now, why do they want it all going there?
	The answer is obvious.
	Foreign aid is riddled with money laundering.
	Foreign aid, and Ukraine specifically, as I've said for a year now, is a uniparty, both Republican and Democrat, money laundering scheme.
	It's a money laundering depot.
	It's how they're funding and they're getting kickbacks.
	And this is not just Ukraine.
	This is foreign aid everywhere.
	This is a giant scheme.
	They'll run it through NGOs.
	It'll wind up in non-profits.
	And it ends up back in the campaign coffers.
	Or maybe it ends up in the...
	I don't know, like in the case of Hunter Biden, he gets a sweet job somewhere.
	Or the family members of these politicians.
	That's what this is about.
	We don't want you to be able to...
	Not send money where we tell you to send it.
	Vaught to say, look, for 200 years, it wasn't always like this.
	So you know that the Empowerment Control Act has created a process that's been held by courts over and over again.
	Courts in Trane v.
	City of New York have consistently rejected attempts by presidents to withhold funds unless Congress clearly allows it.
	And Clinton v.
	New York also determined that laws which allow the president to unilaterally cancel appropriations are unconstitutional.
	Correct me if I'm wrong, but is there anywhere in the Constitution it gives the OMB director to determine whether or not a law is unconstitutional?
	Again, there are 200 years of practice by the presidents of the United States have used this.
	So you're saying these courts are wrong?
	That's fine if they're wrong, but these are the laws of the land right now.
	I'm aware that they are the laws of the land and the caseload that is on the books, and this is something that the administration will consider when they are in these roles, if confirmed.
	So you're going to continue to challenge and break the law going forward?
	Sir, I'm not going to continue to break the law.
	I'm giving you my commitment to uphold the laws of this land.
	And these court precedents?
	You don't care about the court precedents?
	No, sir, that's not what I've said.
	I've said that the president has run on the issue of impoundment and has reminded the country that 200 years of presidents have used this authority and will be developing our approach to this issue and strategy once his administration is in office.
	Okay.
	Well, as a member of the Senate Appropriations Committee...
	Now, I mean, it's crazy because...
	The reason I'm bringing this up is because of how the New Republic is characterizing this.
	That that exchange that you just witnessed was a terrifying answer.
	A terrifying answer.
	Now, the average person probably fell asleep during that exchange.
	You may have thought it was boring as well.
	I mean, I kind of do as well.
	But this is terrifying to whatever Intel oligarch agency controls this publication.
	It's funny.
	Essentially what I'm saying is foreign aid directly affects the intelligence community.
	It directly affects their ability to essentially undermine the American people.
	They undermine the American people back home by screwing up geopolitics abroad.
	But I just want to make sure that everybody understands that they really are worried about the Christian nationalism of Russell Vaught.
	Let's see here.
	He scooped up another supporting role in Trump world during the incoming executive presidential campaign, developing a 180-day transition playbook to expedite Project 2025's implementation in the federal government.
	But this appointment to run the nation's budget office could see him enter a critical role in shrinking the federal government and advancing Trump's agenda.
	The 920-page Christian nationalist manifesto.
	Advanced outwardly outrageous policy positions including dismantling wholesale staples of the executive branch, such as the Department of Education.
	But as time has marched on, those outlandish policies, they say, have morphed from a fascistic pipe dream to a forthcoming reality among the far right in Congress.
	We can only hope, right?
	On Monday, North Carolina Representative David Rauser introduced legislation in the House formally filing to eradicate the Public Education Agency.
	Other portions of Vought's Project 2025 propose revisiting federal approval of the abortion pill, which, by the way, I think that's obviously what needs to happen, because after Dobbs and after the overturning of Roe v.
	Wade, they made Walgreens and CVS on every corner.
	Basically, they put a Planned Parenthood on every corner of this country.
	In small towns, CVS, Walgreens, now you can go and you can just, you know, you can do your walk of shame to the CVS or the Walgreens and you can kill your baby that way.
	Also, a national ban on pornography, placing the Justice Department under the control of the President.
	Listen to that.
	Placing the Justice Department under the control of the President.
	Well, I thought that was already the case.
	Slashing federal funds for climate change research in an effort to sideline mitigation efforts and increasing funding for the U.S.-Mexico border wall.
	They also didn't like that, by the way.
	They also didn't like that.
	Because in Donald Trump's first term under Russ Vaught, They moved money to the Army Corps of Engineers to begin the construction on the wall that Paul Ryan did not want.
	And I'm deeply concerned about reporting that indicates that you designed the plan to abuse the National Emergency Act to circumvent laws passed by Congress by moving military construction money to build the border wall.
	Do you commit?
	So my question for you, sir, is do you commit to not recommend the use of presidential emergencies?
	to accomplish the president's policy agenda.
	Senator, with regard to that instance in our first term...
	We were specifically using the transfer authority that had been provided in the language of the Department of Defense Appropriations to be able to transfer that authority to the Army Corps of Engineers for its use on the border wall.
	It was specifically a transfer authority that Congress had given the President in the underlying appropriation.
	You're criticizing me for using an authority that Congress actually gave us in that instance.
	You just don't like what we did.
	That's the truth.
	But then we've got to turn to a former CIA agent on the committee.
	Matter of fact, is that even a thing?
	Are you ever former CIA? You know, you said that OMB was not an agency where you had a bureaucratic problem.
	You said that OMB was not an agency where you had a bureaucratic problem.
	But which bureaucracy specifically do you believe have been weaponized?
	Again, I'm not going to get into all of the agencies that I believe have some of those characteristics.
	Let's give an example of one.
	Well, I think, you know, the Department of Justice is clearly one that has bureaucracies within it that engaged in trying to take out their own president during the first term.
	The extent to which the FBI goes and investigates someone that comes to a school board meeting in Loudoun County for being concerned about the situation with his daughter and then gets investigated as a domestic terrorist?
	I would think those qualify.
	Certainly what the Department of Justice did to Donald Trump, but also what the FBI did to concerned parents that are trying to stand up for their kids at their local school boards.
	I don't know if Senator Slotkin...
	Is that how you say her name, Slotkin?
	I don't know if Senator Slotkin really wanted that answer in public.
	But it's the truth.
	Anyway, she is a textbook former intel oligarch.
	And then we have this.
	The Heritage Foundation, on this hearing, Russ Vought, the Constitution envisions that a bureaucracy would work for the president.
	So right now, we have a situation where, let's just say it, there are thousands of people in the executive agencies, which are otherwise known as bureaucracies, that need to be fired.
	Where in the United States Constitution does the bureaucracy stand in terms of power versus the president?
	Senator, it's a great question.
	Thanks for the kind words.
	The Constitution envisions that the bureaucracy would work for the President of the United States in Article 2. So now I come from the private sector, where I ran companies with thousands of employees.
	I suspect it should work, but correct me if I'm wrong, where if you're the chief executive, that means that all the people that work for you actually work for you.
	Is that true in government also?
	It is not the case currently, but it is something that, as a policy objective, I think our founders would have envisioned it that way.
	So, meaning that the president, not Congress, not the judicial branch, has total and complete discretion over who serves at his or her pleasure?
	Again, those are not the laws that are on the books that we know today.
	The president has many laws that...
	Paradigms have been put in place to ensure that the American people's will, when they select a president, are not what prevails in the agenda-setting process.
	Because I would suspect that most voters, somebody like me who wasn't into politics a few years ago, would suspect that the president is actually the one making these decisions, not some unnamed bureaucrat, whether they're a good person or a bad person, or been here for five years or 25 years, that it's the president's agenda that should be implemented.
	Is that correct?
	I'd hope that would be their suspicion.
	Yeah.
	But that's obviously not what happened.
	Obviously, that's not what happened in the first term.
	Anyway, sound off of the comments.
	Let me know what you think about all this.
	Obviously, the fiscal goal, we didn't really focus on that at all, but the fiscal goal here is to reduce spending.
	Where our spending has increased.
	In the Biden administration and Trump's administration, it is out of control.
	Although I still maintain that our national debt is just a crisis in a glass case.
	And if you can say, and we'll get through the inauguration, let's pray that there are no assassination attempts.
	If you can say that Donald Trump survived the intel oligarch's assault on him.
	One of the last things might just be an intentional economic collapse, where all of a sudden, the debt finally matters.
	It didn't matter with Obama.
	It didn't matter with Biden.
	$36 trillion.
	What's the difference between $20 and $36 trillion?
	Honestly.
	I mean, it's such a gargantuan amount of money.
	At least this is my point.
	I do think that that's possibly the next obstacle, but we'll wait and see.
	Before we go any further, I want to tell you about Neutronics Labs and Man's Edge, specifically the fact that we are in the midst of a testosterone crisis in America.
	Specifically, it's because I think our food is poisoned.
	You know, all this red dye 40, red dye 3, which we'll see if RFK can help that.
	But there's a lot of stuff that's going on.
	We have less testosterone.
	According to studies, then our grandparents did.
	Then you probably have less testosterone at the age that you're at now than your father did at this same age.
	And so that's where, and you see Sylvester Stallone's brother, Frank Stallone, uses this product.
	This is Man's Edge.
	It's a natural testosterone booster.
	And there are great products at NeutronicsLabs.com for both men and women, by the way.
	And I want you to give it a try.
	I am currently taking the Man's Edge.
	I'm also taking the IGF-1.
	And I'm also taking the IGF-1+.
	The IGF-1 has glutathione in it, which is good for detoxing your body of all of the poisons and toxins that are around us.
	I want you to go to NeutronicsLabs.com slash Paul.
	And when you use my name, Paul, you save 10%.
	And if you sign up for AutoShip, you save even more.
	And you can cancel the AutoShip at any time.
	It's neutronicslabs.com slash Paul.
	Use my name, Paul, and save 10%.
	I highly recommend this product.
	Okay, moving on now to foreign policy.
	Donald Trump dunking on neocons like I've never seen before.
	And so this is my question.
	And I don't know if this is true.
	I don't know if this will happen, but it's my question.
	Will Trump end neocons for good?
	Will Trump end neocons once and for all?
	Will we finally see it?
	Now, there's plenty of things out there to suggest to be very skeptical of that.
	I certainly wouldn't hold my breath.
	But when we get stuff like this, I guess the question is...
	What are going to be the key differences between the first Trump administration and the second Trump administration, specifically taking into account the fact that at least two times that we know of, someone tried to kill Donald Trump, not to mention the fact that he was shot.
	What would that do to you if you got another chance in the most powerful position in the world, and they tried and failed to kill you at least twice that we know of?
	Food for thought.
	Donald Trump on Truth Social.
	As of today, the incoming Trump administration has hired over 1,000 people for the United States government.
	They are outstanding in every way, and you will see the fruits of their labor over the coming years.
	We will make America great again, and it will happen very quickly.
	In order to save time, money, and effort, it would be helpful if you would not send or recommend to us people who worked with or are endorsed by Americans for No Prosperity, headed by Charles Koch.
	Dumb as a Rock, John Bolton, Bird Brain, Nikki Haley, Mike Pence, Disloyal War Monkers, Dick Cheney and his psycho daughter Liz, Mitt Romney, Paul Ryan, General?
	Mark Milley, James Mattis, Mark Jesper, which that's a typo.
	I think he means Mark Jesper, or maybe there's something about Mark Jesper.
	Maybe that's a pun.
	Maybe he's a yes man.
	Deep State, I don't know.
	Or any of the other people suffering from Trump derangement syndrome, more commonly known as TDS. Thank you for your attention in this matter.
	It's pretty wild, right?
	So I'm old enough to remember when Americans for Prosperity, or as he calls it, Americans for No Prosperity, was a big deal.
	You know, when Rick Santelli goes on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange, and he is, you know, For the most part, credited with kind of sparking the Tea Party.
	We're tired.
	You know, stop this bending.
	Stop this bending.
	Stop this bending.
	And then it kind of reinvigorated.
	There was this huge movement across.
	There was grassroots.
	It really was grassroots.
	I remember my home state of Arkansas.
	There were little Tea Parties that sprung up everywhere in 2009 and 2010 and everything else.
	And it was really good.
	And then Americans for Prosperity came in.
	Americans for Prosperity came in and they started working with these Tea Party groups.
	They did it heavily here in my state of Arkansas.
	And then there was the, you know, 2010 midterms after Obama was in office and, you know, Republicans were swept into power and then we, of course, had John Boehner, which, you know, all you need to know about John Boehner is the entire nation was giving him a huge benefit of the doubt by not pronouncing his name the way it was actually spelled.
	That really, I mean, we were already giving this guy the benefit of the doubt, but it not just was when the pronunciation of his name, but it was literally everything the guy did.
	People just kept saying, no, no, no.
	And so, you know, the whole movement was essentially then astroturfed, and a lot of other stuff has happened since then, but you get the point.
	Americans for Prosperity was a big part of that.
	Donald Trump wants to know.
	I remember being at Americans for...
	And I used to go.
	I went to, like, their bloggers conference back a long time ago.
	I went to one in Minnesota.
	I went to one in Las Vegas.
	My only time in Las Vegas, by the way.
	I hated it.
	I mean, I remember all that.
	I was on local radio in Arkansas back in the day when all that was going on.
	Actually, I ran into Mike Pence at the Las Vegas one, and I asked him a question.
	That's somewhere.
	I can't remember where that is.
	It's out there.
	While he was walking.
	But anyway, it's incredible that Americans for Prosperity, again, they used to be involved in everything, and now they're basically...
	Oh, I remember.
	So I was at this rally once, and...
	Americans for Prosperity was there, and somebody brought up immigration, and somebody brought up the open border, and boy, you could just tell.
	We do not want to talk about the border.
	We do not want to talk about the cheap labor that is streaming across the southern border.
	And that got shut down immediately.
	I remember that was like, huh, I wonder why Americans for Prosperity doesn't want to talk about the border.
	They wanted prosperity.
	But in their term of prosperity, it meant not addressing the wide-open border and immigration.
	Which at the time, and I'm just kind of riffing here, but at the time, Lou Dobbs, the late and great Lou Dobbs, was on CNN every night, and he was hammering the border.
	Hammering the border.
	Exposing so much about what was going on.
	And little did we know Donald Trump would come along and tap into that and actually make it.
	The national issue that it is.
	Little do we know that when Biden was installed as president, he would essentially make the problem so much worse.
	So, but on the neocon front, here is Donald Trump talking about what he calls an epic ceasefire agreement in the Middle East.
	On Truth Social, he says, We'll continue to
	work closely with Israel and our allies to make sure Gaza never again becomes a terrorist safe haven.
	We will continue promoting peace through strength throughout the region, he says, as we build upon the momentum of this ceasefire to further expand the historic Abraham Accords.
	He goes on, this is only the beginning of great things to come for America and indeed the world.
	We have achieved so much without even being in the White House.
	Just imagine all of the wonderful things that will happen when I return to the White House and my administration is fully confirmed so they can secure more victories for the United States.
	Okay, that's the full statement.
	Now, I think this peace agreement is going to be implemented in steps.
	And in that entire process, it's important to remember that either party could violate it and then the whole thing collapses.
	Okay?
	So, this is still...
	A very fluid situation, or it could be a very fluid situation, if people, Netanyahu included, obviously Netanyahu does not abide by these steps and agreement.
	However, this is what Jimmy Dore says.
	Jimmy Dore says, as I predicted many times on my own show and elsewhere, Trump likes to do deals and take credit for them.
	Voting Harris meant more genocide and slaughter of the children in Gaza.
	Trump provided a chance for peace, he says.
	His envoy, Witkoff, did not waste time or words, and Jimmy Dore says, forced a deal that Israel did not want to end the war.
	He says, I didn't endorse Trump because of his rhetoric, but I always held out hope that he would do exactly what he's just done.
	Biden and Harris could have gotten the deal done months and months ago, but refused to use any leverage at all to stop it.
	All the people who voted for Harris voted for slaughtering children.
	No way around that.
	The people of Gaza are celebrating.
	Joe Biden and the cult, and they are, I've seen the videos, assuming they're real, the people of Gaza are celebrating over this deal.
	Joe Biden and the cult that is the Democrat Party...
	Are lying and taking credit for Trump's peace deal.
	Even Israel is acknowledging this is being imposed on them by Trump.
	The Democrats continue to be corrupt liars who will forever be known as the monsters that funded and enabled genocide.
	So, is that true?
	When I read that, and I'm just reading all these different takes, I mean, I've read the peace deal, and again, it happens in steps.
	I'm reading Jimmy Dore's take, and I'm thinking, Okay, is that true?
	Is there any evidence out there to suggest that Israel is in fact unhappy with this agreement?
	And then I saw the tweet by my own senator from Arkansas who has never met a war that he does not like, Tom Cotton, was criticizing the deal.
	Senator Tom Cotton knocks Gaza ceasefire hostages agreement, offers an alternative deal, which is obviously just going to kill everybody.
	But The Hill writes that Senator Tom Cotton, a Republican from Arkansas, criticized the ceasefire and hostage release deal mediator struck between Israel and Hamas on Wednesday, saying the only agreement should be Hamas's unconditional surrender and to return all the hostages.
	His statement on the social media platform X came before official details of the agreement were unveiled and before both President Biden and President Trump jockeyed for credit for striking the agreement.
	Quote, why is lame duck Biden trying to cram down a bad deal on Israel on his way out the door?
	Now, when I saw this, it was interesting.
	I was like, why is Cotton saying this?
	Does he not know that Trump's envoy in the Middle East, Whitcoff, is over there negotiating this thing?
	The only deal should be unconditioned surrender by Hamas, he goes on.
	Cotton proposed an alternative deal.
	Unleash all hell if hostages are not released.
	So hours after Cotton's statement Wednesday, Trump, though, then took to social media, as we just read, and took credit for the deal.
	We have a deal for the hostages in the Middle East.
	They will be, let's see, where did it go?
	We have a deal for the hostages in the Middle East.
	They will be released shortly.
	Thank you, he wrote.
	So, yeah, I don't know.
	I mean, look, it's very fluid, but you've got Doris Take, which is saying, look, Israel didn't want this.
	You've got Tom Cotton, who is upset with the deal, trying to blame Biden.
	It is, it's certainly, I guess what we could say is, well, it's, you could always say that, and you can never actually prove yourself to be true if you go down the will of Kamala.
	We're elected, this would never happen, but...
	It's interesting.
	So while this is going on yesterday, you've got Marco Rubio testifying to the Foreign Affairs Committee, and he sounds like he's America first.
	Now again, yesterday I said you've got to keep Rubio on a short leash.
	You've got to keep your friends closer, your enemies closer.
	And I don't trust Rubio as far as I can throw him, which would be a very long way, because I understand he's kind of a small dude.
	He wears lifts.
	But I don't trust him as far as I can throw him.
	But here is his mostly peaceful jawbone enthusiast, a great follow, Rhett Koppel.
	And he's got this clip from Rubio.
	Rubio coming out against this globalism and the post-war global order is not just obsolete, it is now a weapon.
	So for all of the talk, all of the controversy about the post-war consensus that has been going on for the last year in reformed Christian X circles, the new resurgent Christian right, I think this is fascinating.
	Listen to Marco Rubio.
	Out of the triumphalism of the end of the long Cold War emerged a bipartisan consensus.
	And this consensus was that we had reached the end of history, that all of the nations of the world would now become members of the democratic Western-led community, that a foreign policy that served the national interest could now be replaced by one that served the liberal world order, and that all mankind was now destined to abandon national sovereignty and national identity and would instead become one human family and citizens of the world.
	This wasn't just a fantasy.
	We now know it was a dangerous delusion.
	Here in America and in many of the advanced economies across the world, an almost religious commitment to free and unfettered trade at the expense of our national economy shrunk the middle class, left the working class in crisis, collapsed our industrial capacity, and has pushed critical supply chains into the hands of adversaries and of rivals.
	An irrational zeal for maximum freedom of movement of people.
	has resulted in a historic mass migration crisis here in America, but also around the world.
	It's one that threatens the stability of societies and of governments.
	Across the West, governments now censor and even prosecute domestic political opponents.
	Meanwhile, radical jihadists openly march in the streets and sadly drive vehicles into our people.
	While America far too often continued to prioritize the global order, Above our core national interests, other nations continue to act the way countries have always acted and always will in what they perceive to be their best interest.
	And instead of folding into the post-Cold War global order, they have manipulated it to serve their interests at the expense of ours.
	The post-war global order is not just obsolete.
	It is now a weapon being used against us.
	And all this has led to a moment in which we must now confront the single greatest risk of geopolitical instability and of generational global crisis in the lifetime of anyone alive and in this room today.
	This is a complete 180. This is a complete 180 from this.
	Talking about escalatory tactics, the stunning new leaks in the Nordstrom pipelines connecting Europe to Russia.
	Western intelligence officials say they were likely caused by underwater explosions.
	President Biden called it a deliberate attack of sabotage.
	Does the U.S. have evidence that Russia is responsible?
	Well, I'm not going to comment on whatever intelligence products they've produced or had.
	I think logic and common sense will tell you that these things don't blow up on their own, especially in strategic and key points.
	Someone has to know where the vulnerabilities are, and someone has to have the capability to go down there and do it.
	So there's only a handful of countries that do.
	I doubt very seriously that the Chinese are involved in it, although I'm not a fan of the Chinese Communist Party.
	I wouldn't go as far as to accuse them of doing that.
	I think it's pretty clear.
	Someone did this, and the only people in that region who have both the motive and the capability to have done it are Russian or Russian forces.
	So I think for me it's not an intelligence matter at this point.
	It's a common sense matter.
	It's common sense, he said, that Russia blew up their own pipeline.
	Jeffrey Brodsky now reporting that Gazprom lost $6.9 billion because of the Nord Stream pipeline.
	Russia decided to blow up their own pipeline to cost them their...
	Anyway, it's just...
	Look, I'm just compiling data points.
	Because...
	It's just nuts, right?
	I mean...
	The whole Ukraine-Russia war paradigm, I mean, if you were on board with funding Ukraine, if you were on board with confronting Putin, if you were on board trying to cast him as the new singular focus of evil in the world today, that was right in line with the neocon strategy.
	It's been very clear since this all happened that Biden and people like Marco Rubio, they wanted this war.
	They wanted this confrontation with Russia.
	They, I think, to prop up a collapsing Western financial system that is full of corruption.
	And that's what this was.
	Now he gets nominated for Secretary of State and he goes in there and he says, whether he's talking about World War II or whether he's talking about the post-Cold War order, whatever he's talking about, probably the Cold War.
	It's still incredible that now he's saying, yeah, I mean, the American people have suffered because we're paying more attention to this global order, preserving that, whatever that is, while we're being overrun and people are driving cars into parades.
	And our people.
	Again, I don't trust Marco Rubio the same way I don't trust Mark Zuckerberg.
	But isn't it interesting?
	Isn't it interesting that now that Trump has won against all these odds, against the weaponization of government, the assassinations, the bullet in the ear, all this stuff, you've got people...
	That are drastically changing their views.
	I guess, to me, and again, I know Rubio is reading a statement yesterday, and it was released the night before, and you could read it, and I was like, wow, this is just, I mean, this is just very America first in a lot of ways, right?
	I mean, it's not, it just didn't seem like, I don't think Marco Rubio wrote it.
	I'm just observing this change.
	And what it shows you is that power works.
	To me, it just shows you that so many of these people, they worship power.
	And whoever is in power, they're going to fall in line.
	And actually, that's a lesson, by the way.
	That's a valuable lesson for those of us who are sick and tired of the rotten fruits of this pluralistic society, where we have to say, well, Transing this girl who is mentally handicapped.
	This girl just had top surgery.
	I'm not going to show it.
	If you're just joining us, I'm not going to show it.
	But the blessings of liberty, as New York Times David French would say, means we just have to accept this as part of being an American, as part of our freedom.
	And I say, no, banning things is good sometimes.
	That's what I say.
	Banning things is good.
	Sometimes.
	Before we go any further, I want to tell you about Cortez Wealth Management.
	Carlos Cortez, you see it there.
	He's faith-based.
	He's going to take care of your wealth.
	You can trust him.
	He's conservative.
	But here's the deal.
	There's a lot of places you can spend your money.
	There's a lot of places you can put your retirement.
	And I'll just tell you that most of those conventional means that I'm aware of are going to...
	Fund companies like BlackRock or companies that are owned by BlackRock.
	And that's where you get the DEI. That's where you get all of this anti-American garbage.
	So don't invest with these people that hate you, they hate your kids, they hate your future, they hate your posterity.
	Don't invest with these people.
	You can call Carlos Cortez at 813-448-3446 and ask him, mention my name, Paul, but just ask him, hey, what is this America First retirement plan?
	Is there a way for me to invest with you and not fund these companies that actually hate America?
	It's just worth a conversation.
	You can also go to the website, corteswm.com, 813-448-3446.
	That's 813-448-3446.
	All right, let's see how much time we have left to show.
	Not a lot.
	Let's see what we can get to in the meantime.
	Where were we?
	We were here.
	Ah, okay, yeah, this also happened.
	Joe Biden decided to...
	Give his farewell address.
	I didn't watch it live, actually.
	I went to a Bible study instead.
	And I was much better off than watching this.
	That's why my farewell address tonight, I want to warn the country of some things that give me great concern.
	This is a dangerous concern, and that's a dangerous concentration of power in the hands of a very few ultra-wealthy people.
	Dangerous consternation of power.
	Dangerous consequences if their abuse of power is left unchecked.
	Today, an oligarchy is taking shape in America of extreme wealth, power, and influence.
	Okay, so the few times that I've interviewed Jeff Younger, he's talked about a swapping of the elites.
	Every society is going to have elites.
	We have our current oligarchy, our current elites.
	The idea was Silicon Valley and really just a whole coalition, your RFKs, people like that, and even people like Peter Thiel, that this was really...
	Some sort of, you know, this was the conflict here.
	Right, Silicon Valley wanting more freedom versus like an old Wall Street oligarchy.
	At least that's what Younger has said when he's been on the program, and I found it to be, you know, for the most part, true.
	So it's just, you know, total hypocrisy.
	The idea that we don't have an intelligence oligarchy now that's...
	Basically been weaponized against the American people, not to mention our political candidates.
	It's just insane.
	The speech was ridiculous.
	Here's Scott Jennings, his take on it.
	I think the way he's leaving office has been, frankly, pretty terrible.
	He's going to be remembered for a few things.
	But politically, it's mostly for when he was vice president, he and Obama sort of ushering in the Trump era initially.
	And then as he's leaving office as president, bringing back Trump.
	And Trumpism stronger and more popular than ever.
	Today, Biden has like a 61% disapproval and Trump is over a 50% approval and more popular and his ideology is more popular than it's ever been.
	If everything you say is true, the Democrats should have had no trouble getting re-elected in this election, yet they were...
	It's an issue of a communications failure.
	I know, and for Democrats, it's always been about communication and no introspection about the policies that led to him leaving office as one of the most unpopular presidents.
	When I watch this tonight, I remain astonished that he, his family, and other people around him thought he could ever run for another term.
	I mean, there's no way he could serve another six months, let alone another four years.
	The fact that they pursued that farce for as long as they did, to me, remains one of the most astonishing things.
	Yeah, I mean, he's right.
	That is the legacy.
	I mean, if we're really honest about it, you know...
	History.
	I think history is going to, assuming things get better and not way worse, history is going to record that he was a complete puppet and an invalid.
	I mean, the man has Alzheimer's or dementia.
	Just a complete joke.
	Joe Biden is the emperor-has-no-clothes president.
	That is his legacy.
	His legacy is one of...
	You know, something that you would see out of North Korea, honestly, or at least what we think, the news that we get out of North Korea.
	Who knows if anything is true anymore?
	You know, when Kim Jong-il died, you had all these people fake crying and trying to show the most grief for their leader dying.
	And it was really totalitarian and sick.
	I mean, really...
	What's the difference in that and all of these talking heads and all of these people?
	Not just the media that knew they were lying, but the brainwashed masses, leftist masses that were like, yeah, Joe Biden is totally fine.
	He's totally fine.
	He's totally fine.
	Yeah, he's fine.
	The right's crazy.
	I hate the right.
	I hate Trump.
	Joe Biden's the smartest president we've ever had.
	People like Harry Sissi, that guy, or Sisson, or whatever his name is.
	Of course, he was paid to do it as well.
	I mean, he knows what he was doing.
	But yeah, you go down as just, it's marked by delusion.
	It's marked by a literal insanity on the part of some to pretend that Joe Biden was perfectly mentally sound.
	No one thought he was mentally sound when he ran in 2020. That's why everybody thought there was no chance he was going to win.
	And there's no chance he got more votes than Barack Obama because the man was...
	Mentally, something was clearly wrong with him.
	So there's that.
	Speaking of totalitarian regimes, this Red Note app, be very weary of it.
	I know everybody is trying to own the left and the Gen Z. They don't want their TikTok taken away, and I get it.
	I understand it.
	I'm not for banning TikTok at all.
	I think TikTok was one of the few places that you could actually see in real time.
	The ethnic cleansing that was going on in Gaza and the terrible images there.
	And there are people that don't like that.
	They don't like that information was able to get out on these apps, and so they're wanting to squash it.
	So I'm not a fan of banning TikTok.
	I'm also a little cautious now.
	Everybody's hopping on a Chinese app, though.
	Not necessarily.
	National File reporting that Red Note is actually a fake English translation for the word, this Chinese word that you see there.
	And it actually means Little Red Book.
	Little Red Book, of course, is Chairman Mao's Little Red Book, where he gave it to all of his generals, and then eventually you give it to the citizens, and you make them...
	You make them have to fall in line.
	Anyway, that is all the time that we have for this edition of the Millstone Report.
	I've gone over on accident, unless I'm providentially hindered.
	I'm going to see you guys back here tomorrow, wishing you a happy Friday.
	Until then, God bless everybody out there watching.

▲