All Episodes
Previous Next
Jan. 18, 2026 - The Political Cesspool - James Edwards
54:39
Radio Show Hour 2 – 2026/01/17
|

Time Text
First Week In South Africa 00:02:42
You're listening to the Liberty News Radio Network, and this is the Political Cesspool.
The Political Cesspool, known across the South and worldwide as the South's foremost populist conservative radio program.
And here to guide you through the murky waters of the political cesspool is your host, James Edwards.
Folks, I'm just going to tell you what you've heard so far this year is our talk radio program at its very best in 2026.
I mean, you go back a couple of weeks ago, the first week we were there in South Africa for a live report from the scene tonight.
Retired officer Jim Lancia and last week are talking about the Minnesota situation with Rene Good's shooting.
Last week, I really don't think there could have been a better treatment given on Venezuela than what Patrick Martin, the former government contractor, and Jose Niño himself of Venezuelan Heritage provided you.
I did say, though, last week, if there was only one person that could have matched or surpassed it, it would have been Mark Weber.
And well, here he is now for the first appearance of the new year.
Mark, welcome back.
It's great to have you back so soon this year.
Thank you very much, James.
It's a pleasure to be on again.
I'm looking forward to this because we're going to continue the talk that we had last week about Venezuela, but we're going to expand that beyond Venezuela to looking at interventionism, American interventionism from a historical perspective, as you, the director of the Institute for Historical Review, are most incredibly suited to do.
So just reading from an email that you and I exchanged earlier this week as we were setting up the topic for this evening, you wrote, amid the blizzard of commentary and opinion about the recent U.S. strike against Venezuela, Trump's announcement that the U.S. will now run the country, quote unquote, and his threats to take over other lands, not so much has been said about what this means for our people and especially the long-term interests of white Americans.
It's important, I think, you write, to underscore the unintended but predictable results of tough guy U.S. military adventurism, which usually begins with eager applause by Americans who want the USA to be a kick-ass Rambo country that wins, but often forgotten are the long-term results of such so-called victories.
The Philippines' Desire for Independence 00:08:54
Mark, let's begin your commentary there.
Right.
Yes, over and over in our history, when the United States launches a strike or an attack against another country, especially one that is portrayed as bad, bad, bad, whether it's Iraq or so forth, the enthusiasm by Americans, the support by Americans, is usually very high.
And that goes back a long ways.
But in almost every case that I can think of, certainly in modern times, the long-term consequences turn out to be very different.
And the public turns on it.
The public tires of it and gets very unhappy.
And then people are embarrassed about it.
This really started in 1898 when the United States decided to become an imperial power.
Up until that time, America followed the guidance of the founding fathers who said that America should stay out of other countries' wars or problems and concentrate on being the best country it could here.
And that also meant not being an imperial power.
After all, the United States was the first country to break away from an imperial power in modern times, namely Britain in 1776 and fought a war exactly to oppose imperialism.
But in 1898, the United States and the American people were impressed by the imperial power and the imperial outreach of Britain and France and other countries.
And many Americans said, well, we have to join the big guys.
We have to be an imperial power like they were.
And at that time, the Spanish controlled Cuba, Philippines, and Puerto Rico.
And they were repressive against the Cubans who wanted independence from Spain.
And so there was a big campaign by people, you might say on the left, we call it today on the left, who said, we have to support Cuban independence.
And other people said, well, Spain's a rotten old country anyway.
Who likes them anyway?
And so after an American warship blew up in Havana Harbor, almost certainly it was a boiler explosion, explosion internally, the American press blamed it on Spain, which actually didn't want war with the United States, was very much opposed to that.
And the United States went to war against Spain and acquired the Philippines, Puerto Rico, and Cuba.
Now, there was a lot of enthusiasm for this war when it first began, especially because Teddy Roosevelt, who had been vice president of the United States, later president of the United States after McKinley died, he led his so-called own Roughrider troop against Spaniards in Cuba.
And the Spanish were beaten very quickly.
And that's what's happened over and over.
The military side or the immediate military side of the conflict ends pretty quickly, whether it's against Saddam Hussein or whether it's against Spain in 1898 and other times.
But the real problems begin then.
And in the case of the Spanish-American War, the thing ground down, especially into a kind of guerrilla war in the Philippines, because the Philippines thought, well, the United States has come in, got rid of the Spaniards, we want independence.
And America said, no, we're going to hold on to it.
And the result was there was a great souring of this after a while, after thousands of Americans died, putting down people who wanted independence in the Philippines.
And there was a lot of resentment in Cuba as well.
And the long-term result of all of that is that today Puerto Ricans are U.S. citizens of the United States.
Now, is that all to the benefit really of the United States?
Would the United States, would our people are really better off if Puerto Rico is part of the United States or is a colony of Spain?
It doesn't really matter much for us, really, except that it changes once again, as it has with many other wars, the demographic, racial, cultural character of the United States.
And people warned about this at the time.
Now, we've seen this happen over and over.
There was enormous enthusiasm after 9-11 for President Bush when he invaded Afghanistan, and then also when the United States went into against Iraq.
And in each case, win or lose, actually, the United States eventually leaves these places.
The result, one of the results is huge numbers of people from those countries end up coming to the United States and becoming settled here in this country.
And at the end of it, people wonder, well, what was it all for?
What was the point of the whole thing?
And I think we're having a similar time now here with Venezuela.
Yeah, the United States could get Maduro president of Venezuela, and they did.
They took him out in a very bold and impressive action.
But now we have to, as Donald Trump says, run the country.
Is that something Americans want to do, especially at a time when here in our country, the vast majority of people want our government to run this country well, whether it's Democrat or Republican, whoever's in charge.
But the long-term prospects of making this whole Venezuela venture really good for our people is, I think, very, very slim.
And as exciting as it is to have our military go out and beat bad guys, the downside of that is really a very bad one.
And it comes from a kind of, I think, dangerous view of America's role in the world.
Anyway, that's the initial point I would make about all of this.
Mark, this is Keith Alexander.
I think the ultimate question we need to ask if we want to unravel this Gordian knot is Kui Bono.
Who's benefiting it?
Who is benefiting from, first of all, the wars in the Middle East?
And secondly, this takeover in Venezuela?
What's your that's a very good point because when Donald Trump first started making noises about going after Venezuela, he said it was because Maduro, the president and the government of Venezuela, was smuggling drugs into the United States.
In fact, Venezuela is pretty unimportant in terms of drugs to the United States, much less important in that way than other countries.
And it's a controllable thing.
But after Maduro was taken, then Donald Trump announced very blatantly that what we really want is the oil.
We want to take the oil.
Now, if you want to be, we don't know exactly what his motive is because Donald Trump will often change and switch about what his proclaimed motives are for going into a country.
But one explanation might be that he wants cheaper oil so that gasoline prices come down in this country, he hopes, and he'll win the midterm elections.
Now, that's a pretty cynical view.
I hate to think it's that craven or that mercenary on the part of Trump.
But he also seems to think that we'll just get a whole lot of benefit for the American public out of seizing oil from Venezuela.
And by the way, he says, the people of Venezuela, he says, will benefit from that as well.
But that's also very dubious.
But I think not only in this case, but in many others, it's very hard sometimes to figure out exactly what Trump's motives are.
And we should mention in that context now his really brazen effort to take over Greenland.
And because he says he needs it for security, but in fact, Greenland would be even less secure for the United States if it takes over than if we just keep it under NATO and under Denmark for reasons that I'll go into.
I absolutely, as a matter of fact, I want to talk to you about the Monroe Doctrine.
I want to talk to you about the debate between David Zuddy and Patrick Martin, both on the air and in print the last couple of weeks.
Jose Niño's take on the primary and residual beneficiaries of this action are white interests being served in any capacity.
We'll get to that.
But since you mentioned it, I do want to get to Greenland next.
That was on deck tonight this hour, but we'll go to it next.
Stay tuned.
And nonprofits to hype white on black murders aggressively, or even claim that blacks are living in fear of white people.
Why Trump Undermines Alliances 00:15:17
Lynch for simply being black.
Hard to believe, but that's what was done.
And some people still want to do that.
This is why National Conservative launched the Interracial Homicide Tracking Project.
We have now documented well over 2,000 confirmed interracial homicides since January 2023 and created the most comprehensive overview of these killings anyone has ever made.
We plug the gaping holes in data left by other homicide trackers and government crime stats.
Rather than engaging in hyperbole and vitriolic rhetoric like everyone else, we are simply creating a massive sample size of empirical evidence so people can form rational and informed opinions about a sensitive and politically charged issue.
Visit natcon.life.
N-A-T-C-O-N.l-I-F-E.
Bypass the mainstream narrative with Liberty News Radio at LibertyNewsradio.com.
Engage with charismatic hosts live or on demand.
We cover the crucial news, focused on God, family, and country.
News that other networks simply refuse to use.
Think of Eleanor's hard-hitting news and podcasts at your fingertips, anytime, anywhere.
Join us at LibertyNewsRadio.com.
Empower your day with the truth because the truth will set you free.
Libertynewsradio.com.
Introducing Managed IT services from NPI.
We offer top-notch data backup and recovery, email spam protection, and network security tailored to your needs and budget.
With 20-plus years of experience in the medical field, our HIPAA certified consultants know what it takes to protect sensitive information.
Don't settle for less.
Give us a call at 801-706-6980 and experience the difference with managed IT services.
Remember, your IT support should be fast, efficient, and reliable.
Of course, Mark Weber is a guest who needs no introduction to this listening audience.
Unless you're brand new, you know that Mark is one of the most interviewed guests ever in the history of this program.
I think top three, top two?
You know, he's right up there.
And for good reason.
He is, of course, not only the director of the Institute for Historical Review, he is also an accomplished historian, lecturer, current affairs analyst, and author.
He was educated in both the United States and Europe.
He holds master's degrees in a master's degree, rather, in modern European history.
We're going to go straight to Greenland, and I've got an interesting take.
It's historically factual and it's calls for thought.
But before we go to that, Keith has a very quick question, and we'll have a very quick answer to it.
Yeah, Mark.
Yes.
Maduro's capture coincided with Netanyahu's visit to Trump.
Was that merely a coincidence or is there some connection?
Well, many people have made the point that Maduro or possible motive for getting Maduro was to help Israel because Maduro has been a big critic of Israel.
But that, I think, is, if it's any factor, it's a very minor one because many other countries, of course, have been also very critical of Israel and its policies.
In fact, most of the world is.
I think that's a very minor point.
And there's plenty of good reason why Netanyahu would want to see Trump anyway, far apart from the whole Venezuela thing.
But yeah, so that's my quick answer to that.
But really, with regard to Greenland, coincidence.
Yeah, well, I mean, I think that, yeah, it's a different thing.
Yeah, coincidence, yes.
All right, so here's what you wrote about Greenland, Mark.
Just to interject very quickly, because I'm going to set this up for you.
I'm going to put it on the T and then you come in with a weighted bet.
You wrote this in your email this week.
Trump's military strike against Venezuela, along with his high-handed threats against Denmark, aka Greenland, in this situation, Panama, Colombia, and even Canada, are a showy grandstanding antics of an aging imperial bully.
However impressive such displays of military power might be, they do nothing for the long-term interest of our people.
So that was your comment to me via email this week, and I would bring this up for your consideration.
There is, of course, some historical precedent to the talk of acquiring Greenland.
First of all, pretty much all of America, as we all know, was won by either military conquest or by purchase, the Louisiana Purchase being the most obvious example.
However, you go back to William Seward, who was Lincoln's Secretary of State during the war.
And four years after it, he very nearly negotiated the purchase of Greenland in the late 1860s, and he was successful in purchasing Alaska at that same time.
So the talk of America acquiring Greenland is not new.
What makes it different now?
What makes it different is the world is different, and because it's contrary to the principles America claims to support now.
Donald Trump says he's going to take Greenland even if the people in Greenland are against it.
And more than that, it also destroys the alliance that the United States has not only with Denmark, of which Greenland is an associated part, it destroys its relationship with all the other NATO countries.
Trump says that his own thing, it's not a good thing if you want the United States to be any kind of player in the world because America needs allies.
No country can run the world or do whatever it wants without allies of some kind.
Not even Alexander Great or the Romans could pull that off.
If for no other reason, then we can't even have military bases in other places.
Donald Trump seems to think that the United States can do what it wants, project its power in the world militarily without regardless of what anyone else happens to think.
That's bad.
A country is much stronger when it has countries that are friends, that are allies, and they have the same interests.
Donald Trump has managed to tick off just about everyone in the world, except, according to a research poll last year, the two countries that seem to like America more under Trump are Israel and Nigeria.
Most of the rest of the world is increasingly distrustful.
Trump says that he wants to take Greenland for American security.
In fact, Greenland is already secure for the United States through the NATO alliance.
In fact, if another country were to take Greenland or try to take Greenland, every member of NATO, including the United States, would be obliged to defend it.
If Trump takes it over, then the only country that would be obliged to defend it would be the United States.
The United States used to have 14 military bases in Greenland.
Now we have only one.
We only have one because there isn't any immediate threat.
But Donald Trump seems to look at Greenland in terms of his real estate experience, and that is he wants to own it, not just lease it.
Well, it's not crucial for United States security to own it.
But the big difference is this.
If the United States does this, it's in effect saying in a blatant way that what really matters is whatever we want, and the people who live there and the alliances and the promises and the pledges we've made to other countries don't matter.
That weakens America.
The strength of a country isn't just its military power.
It's also its credibility, its soft power, and its economic influence.
And Donald Trump doesn't seem to grasp that.
He seems to think that the United States' role in the world should be like a Rambo or a Superman who just goes out, beats bad guys, and gets the job done.
Well, that's not how the world works.
It might be that way in Hollywood movies or comic books, but that's not how the world works.
Well, let me tell you, NATO, with friends like NATO, who needs enemies?
They're the reason we can't get out of this quagmire in Ukraine.
And they seem to be at odds with America on just about every topic that comes up from homosexual marriage on up.
So I'm not sure that it's going to be a great loss.
In fact, I think it should have happened back in 1990 that we got out of NATO and dissolved NATO.
I got another view on that, but go ahead, Mark.
You know, there's a good argument to be made for changing or getting rid of NATO.
The main one is that NATO's purpose is gone.
NATO was set up to defend against the Soviet Union.
It lost its original purpose in 1991-92 when the Soviet Union fell apart.
And since then, the United States and the other countries in the NATO alliance have been unable to really present a coherent reason why or the purpose for NATO.
I agree.
That's all true.
But what's Trump is doing now?
I mean, the best thing is to, not just with regard to NATO, but with regard to European and other countries, is to handle this in a way that clearly defines what our interests really are.
With regard to Ukraine, well, I guess Trump's view is, well, if Europeans want to defend Ukraine, that's their business.
We don't care.
Donald Trump doesn't seem to care about Europe, really.
That's really a bigger problem.
He has no more loyalty to Europe than he does to Saudi Arabia, I guess, if it's nice to him.
He seems to judge the relationship to the United States with every other country completely in terms of, well, how nice they are to him, how flattering they are to him.
Europe does not seem to have any loyalty to America.
Well, but to Mark's point, I mean, he judges his own allies in Congress by that thing.
Yeah, that's right.
He doesn't seem to have.
Yeah, okay.
Yeah.
Well, no, no, I was just, yeah, you know, you're right on that.
I mean, he does that both here and abroad.
The cult of personality.
I am still, I know our first guest, Jim Lancia, sees it a different way.
But I still see Trump more favorably than disfavorably.
But there is a character flaw there where to the point that if you're nice to me, if you give me compliments, Lindsey Graham, for instance, you're my ally.
If you push me in any sort of way that may not be to my fawning, yes, or push back in any certain way that is not overly fawning, Marjorie Taylor degree, you're my enemy.
My stated positions on the issues notwithstanding.
Right.
The big point is we should have clarity about who the we are.
What is it we are trying?
What are the interests that we have?
I don't mean just in the short run in a spectacle, but what are our long-term interests?
And the long-term interests of the United States, I think, demand that we should be focusing above all in making this country a better country.
We have enormous problems in this country internally.
We're a dying country.
I mean, both, you might say literally or demographically, but also culturally, educationally, and so forth.
That is far more important than America's military power overseas.
It's what we do and our actions are.
In light of that, Mark, in light of that, is he right to say that we need to revive the Monroe Doctrine and just take care of the Western hemisphere and let the rest of the world take care of the rest?
Well, Trump has said, don't anybody mistake we're dominant here in the Western hemisphere and that's going to stay.
Look, this is a real misreading of the Monroe Doctrine.
The Monroe Doctrine was made, as you know, in speeches by President Monroe in the early part of the 19th century.
In those days, the country that the countries of Latin, that the countries of Latin America were fearful of was Spain and Portugal, but especially Spain.
And many of them had just broken away from Spain, and the Americans didn't want another country coming in and dominating that and also being a rival of the United States.
But the world now is very different.
Now, the countries of Latin America, if they're worried about any bully, it's not Spain, it's the United States.
And also, the situation is, and also even up until into the 20th century, the American relationship with Latin America has changed.
Up until fairly recently, by far the dominant economic influence and power in the Western Hemisphere was the United States.
That's changed.
The biggest trading partner of Brazil now, the biggest economy and country in Latin America, isn't the United States anymore.
It's China.
The biggest trading partner of Argentina after Brazil is China, not the United States.
Trump is trying to make up for with military power what he cannot accomplish in economic terms.
Brazil.
Isn't it better for us to focus on the Western hemisphere rather than Israel?
That's a question we'll have to answer.
That's certainly true.
Slip that question in as the music is playing.
Exposing Corruption.
Informing citizens.
Pursuing liberty.
You're listening to Liberty News Radio.
News this hour from Town Hall.
I'm Mary Rose.
Venezuelan opposition leader Maria Karina Machado said she presented her Nobel Peace Prize medal to President Trump at the White House Thursday, saying she had done so as a recognition for his unique commitment with our freedom.
Florida Governor Ron DeSantis says President Trump deserves credit for transforming the political landscape of Latin America.
Think about before President Trump took over.
You had more Marxist regimes in the Western hemisphere under Biden than you did at the height of the Cold War.
Colombia fell.
Brazil fell under Biden.
Obviously, Mexico's problematic Cuba is terrible.
Venezuela.
Well, now, what?
We've got an Argentina leader that's conservative.
Chile just elected somebody more conservative.
And now potentially having Venezuela move back to where they used to be could be very, very good.
There's a 24 years to life in prison sentence for a New York drunk driver who killed four people.
Daniel Hayden, who worked as a substance abuse counselor and wrote a book on addiction, was convicted of murder and other charges.
Prosecutors say in 2024, he drove a Ford F-150 at high speed through a fence and did not stop until he hit a family and friends celebrating at a park in lower Manhattan.
Charlie Kirk's Case Continues 00:00:57
The truck stopped just feet from Helena Herrera, its momentum halted by bodies trapped underneath.
Herrera says she is still haunted by the fact that the only reason she is still alive is that the bodies of her best friend and others is what actually stopped the truck.
I'm Lisa Dwyer.
The Utah man charged with killing conservative activist Charlie Kirk returned to court Friday as his attorneys sought to disqualify prosecutors because the daughter of a deputy county attorney involved in the case attended the rally where Charlie Kirk was shot.
ThinkFactor: Boost Your Brain Power 00:03:45
More on these stories at townhall.com.
Whether you're climbing the corporate ladder, launching a new project, or just looking for that extra edge, your brain is your most valuable asset.
Now there's a way to support it every single day.
Think factor.
From the makers of Relief Factor, ThinkFactor is built to help you stay sharp, nurture your memory, boost your attention.
It unlocks the mental clarity and precision you need to stay ahead of the game, no matter the challenge.
After a couple of weeks of taking Think Factor, I noticed a dramatic difference in my clarity, my focus, even my memory.
And look, the longer you take Think Factor, the better it works.
This is not a one-off.
You want to take Think Factor regularly.
If you're a go-getter who refuses to settle, ThinkFactor can help you perform at your best and keep your edge.
Call 8004RELIF.
That's 800-4RELIF or just visit ReliefFactor.com to order ThinkFactor.
Go to ReliefFactor.com or call 800 the number for Relief.
Your first bottle is just $19.95.
Think Factor.
Think clearer, perform better daily with ThinkFactor.
Find your inner rebel at Dixie Republic, the world's largest Confederate store, located in Traveler's Rest, South Carolina.
The anti-white, anti-Christ, anti-Southern world ends at the asphalt.
Welcome to God's country.
Log on to DixieRepublic.com to view our Southern merchandise from flags to t-shirts to artwork.
At the store, browse through our extensive collection of belt buckles and have a custom-made leather belt handcrafted in our Johnny Revs gun and leather shop.
That's DixieRepublic.com where you can meet all of your Southern needs.
While you're waiting, drop by our Confederate corner for a free cup of coffee and good conversation.
Remember, there are no strangers here, just friends who haven't met yet.
Dixie Republic, we're not just a roadside attraction, we're a destination for our people.
For more information, visit DixieRepublic.com.
God tells us in Hebrews 10, 25 that we should gather together to worship Him.
This isn't a request.
It is a command.
Going to church isn't an option.
It is your Christian duty.
With the hellish apostasy of mainstream churches, attending church these days can be difficult.
That is why your King James Only traditional services in the ancient Church of St. Mary Magdalene are live online.
And I invite you to gather with our congregation to study God's Holy Word.
Join us every Sunday at the TemplarChurch.com and especially on the first Sunday of the month for Holy Communion.
This do in remembrance of me is also a command that all Christians must obey.
I'm Reverend Jim Dowson, ordained Puritan minister, nationalist, and a veteran pro-life campaigner.
Tune in to my weekly sermons at the TemplarChurch.com.
Based in Ireland, this old-time religion is the faith that built America.
God bless you.
You know, it's an embarrassment of riches when you, as a talk radio host, could see a full and complete and very well-executed three-hour program with any of your guests.
And we have had a guest each hour so far this year, and it's not going to end tonight.
Why Conservatives Depart From Constitutional Strictures 00:15:52
We've got Jason Kessler coming up in the third hour tonight.
But any of the guests that we've had on so far this year could have dominated a full show.
Mark Weber, of course, chief among them.
And when we have Mark Weber on, of course, we want to integrate, if I may use that word, current events with historical perspectives.
He is, of course, the director of the Institute for Historical Review, ihr.org.
Mark, let's talk practical politics for a moment while we are talking about Greenland and all of this bluster regarding Cuba and Canada and Puerto Rico, you know, Venezuela, Cuba.
The GOP, you know, would have a hammerlock in the House in the foreseeable future if two things go their way.
If provisions of the Voting Rights Act are discarded by the Supreme Court, which most legal observers are anticipating, you know, that's going to add about 10 to 15 seats currently held by black Democrats in the South are going to be kaput.
Yeah, right, Keith.
And then you add on to that the forthcoming 2030 census.
If they stop counting illegal aliens as citizens, the Democrats are all but locked out of the House.
So why bring in these places that are going to give you two guaranteed and I know this is hypothetical with Trump, a lot of it is bluster.
I don't really think he's going to go after Greenland, although, you know, they said the fair market value was $700 billion, you know, at fair purchase price.
You know, I don't think he's really going to incorporate these other countries as states of America, but if he did, you're going to have two guaranteed Democratic senators and God knows how many congressmen.
So, Mark, in your expert opinion, and you are an expert, how much do you believe this is just hot air versus what we may actually see over these next three years?
Well, of course, yeah, you're closer to that than maybe I am because you have a very good pulse of what people are thinking.
But my impression is that the vast majority of people, and especially those people who wanted an America-first policy from Donald Trump, are disappointed.
They don't want America focusing on parts of the world they don't even can't even find on a map.
Ambrose Bierce once said that wars is God's way of teaching geography to Americans.
And so when Donald Trump starts talking about Gaza or Venezuela, people think, well, where's that?
And we're going to figure that.
And we've had that happen before.
I mean, this is not popular with the American public.
And those people in his own party, like Massey, who are against it, Donald Trump's trying to silence or destroy.
But the mood of most Donald Trump supporters is not to go off in search of new monsters to destroy around the world, not to go after that.
I mean, Maduro may be a terrible guy.
Nobody disputes that.
But is America the policeman of the world that's going out to get bad guys because they're bad?
Well, no, our people think there's plenty of bad guys right here in our own country we ought to be thinking about.
But no, that's a bigger problem for Trump.
I think he's gambling that if he pulls off a number of things before the midterms, that will help him get elected enough Republicans to keep him from being the subject of impeachment hearings in the House.
That will almost certainly happen.
As he himself said, if the Democrats get control of the House, and if they get control of both houses of Congress, it's going to be very bad for Trump.
Trump has other problems, too.
I mean, the Supreme Court may declare his whole tariff policy illegal, which I think it certainly is unconstitutional.
You know, one of the most interesting aspects of all of this is how Republicans who support Trump have basically turned their back completely on the Constitution of the United States.
The old idea that Republicans are conservative is out the window because Donald Trump is not only grabbing, but brazenly grabbing more power for the executive than I think any president in modern times.
Sure, all sorts of presidents have been doing this and going in this direction for a long time.
But Donald Trump is unabashed about it.
He is insisting on the right to make war anywhere in the world on his say-so alone.
Not even a debate in Congress, much less authorization of Congress is needed for Donald Trump.
And he also says, I have the right to impose taxes on my own authority.
I mean, with the tariffs, which are taxes on American corporations.
And he says that's entirely up to him.
That's a real grab of power.
And it means that turning one's back really on the Constitution, which is supposedly supposed to restrict that power.
I mean, it is, of course, hypocritical for Democrats to complain about that because they're guilty of that too.
But it's changing the whole way Americans look at the presidency.
They look increasing at the presidency as a kind of autocrat, not just a president of the United States who swears to uphold the law made by Congress.
Well, first of all, there's a long heritage in America of disregarding the Constitution, particularly in regard to a declaration of war.
I don't think we've really had a declaration of war since maybe Grenada or World War II.
Only against half of the belligerents in World War II.
Yeah, that's true.
But Donald Trump has taken this to a new level.
He doesn't even ask for an authorization from Congress.
He doesn't even care if Congress debates it.
He says it's entirely up to him.
In a recent interview, he said, the only limit to what I do is my own sense of morality.
That's what he said.
That's an extraordinary thing.
I've got a modest proposal for you.
One of the things that has occurred to me is that he is focusing on foreign policy because he has been stymied by lawfare, by pesky Jewish liberal judges like Boesberg, who have basically prevented him from doing a lot of what he wants to do domestically.
That's true.
Yeah.
Yeah.
That's true.
And he's stymied.
He would like to replace the head of the Federal Reserve, a man he appointed to, by the way.
But anyway, he wants to, yeah, he wants to, he feels stymied locally.
And he feels, I think, that if he can get a win, quote-unquote win in some area, foreign policy or whatever, that will boost his popularity.
Because right now, even among many Republicans, there's grave misgiving.
And I think the support by even his own base is a lot squishier than it was when he took office in January.
You know, that is interesting, Mark, that you mentioned the date, and I'll mention it in the next hour when we do this year-in review of Trump.
It was this weekend, a year ago, that we had on this program Steve King and Lou Moore and Jared Taylor to sort of anticipate the coming age of Trump, Trump 2.0.
And it was a fantastic show that really set the stage for an incredible year, an incredible run that we had, not limited to, but including, of course, the conference in Greenville last spring that you headlined, Mark.
And so it's almost unfathomable, though, that it's only been a year ago because a lot of history has happened in the last year.
I mean, what is the old saying?
Sometimes Lennon said sometimes there are decades when nothing happens and there are weeks when decades happen.
I mean, that's exactly what I was going for.
Go ahead.
Well, in fact, those are all signs, really, of we're seeing just in many different ways, internally and internationally, the breakdown of the post-war order that America presided over from the end of World War II until now or recently, you might say.
That's been falling apart for years now.
It was during the Reagan years that America changed from being the number one creditor nation of the world to the number one debtor nation of the world.
Donald Trump, I think, still, because of his age and his experience, he sees America as a country that should be like it was when he was a boy.
When he was a boy, America was tops in the world.
That's changed tremendously.
When he was a boy, 1960, the top 10 banks in the world were all U.S. banks.
Today, the top four banks are all Chinese.
There are only two American banks in the top 10, and the top four are Chinese.
In 1960, China produced just less cars than, I guess, the Netherlands or some crazy country.
Today, every day, China produces more automobiles than the U.S. and Japan combined.
There's so many ways in which the world has changed.
And that's one of the reasons why the most dangerous thing a country can do is to overestimate its real power.
And I mean real power to do things.
America's ability to do things is much less than it was in those days when we had this kind of unpreeminent place in the world, especially in Latin America.
That's all changed.
As I mentioned, the number one trading partner of Brazil and also of Germany is China now, not the United States.
And Americans seem sort of oblivious to that that is the real challenge for America in the 21st century, not the bad guys in Venezuela or Iraq or any other country.
That's where things are going to be really even more of a hairy situation in the years ahead.
One of the reasons why we have a president that seems to want to depart from the strictures of the Constitution, I think, may be that this allegiance to the Constitution is one of the things that has caused conservatives to lose all these culture war battles.
What do you think?
We're still going to get Mark's answer on whether or not whites can benefit from any of this recent military adventurism, as he puts it, to work luster for forthcoming interventionism.
Rather than being concerned about the concern, I'm the Constitution.
I'm concerned about it.
Did you know that every issue of the American Free Press now features my own published QA interviews with one of your favorite guests from the radio program?
That's right.
The American Free Press has officially partnered with TPC to expand our audience into the realm of print media.
I encourage you to read it for yourself by subscribing today at AmericanFreePress.net.
Did you know that regular TPC contributors like Nick Griffin and Jose Nino also have their own exclusive, insightful, and hard-hitting columns published in every issue of the American Free Press?
I love this paper and read it as soon as it lands in my mailbox.
Whether you prefer to receive the print edition or a digital subscription, the choice is yours when you subscribe at AmericanFreePress.net.
We are advancing, but we need to be wise and well-informed.
Enhance your intellectual ammunition today by subscribing to America's last real newspaper.
If you enjoy listening to this broadcast, you'll love reading the American Free Press.
Subscribe today by calling 1-888-699 News or by visiting AmericanFreePress.net.
Why don't we say to the government writ large that they have to spend a little bit less?
Anybody ever had less money this year than you had last?
Anybody better have a 1% pay cut?
You deal with it.
That's what government needs, a 1% pay cut.
If you take a 1% pay cut across the board, you have more than enough money to actually pay for the disaster relief.
But nobody's going to do that because they're fiscally irresponsible.
Who are they?
Republicans.
Who are they?
Democrats.
Who are they?
Virtually the whole body is careless and reckless with your money.
So the money will not be offset by cuts anywhere.
The money will be added to the debt, and there will be a day of reckoning.
What's the day of reckoning?
The day of reckoning may well be the collapse of the stock market.
The day of reckoning may be the collapse of the dollar.
When it comes, I can't tell you exactly, but I can tell you it has happened repeatedly in history when countries ruin their currency.
So much more I want to cover with my friend and longtime guest on this program.
I mean, you know, in a way, even after 22 years, it'll be 22 years later this year, but that's two decades plus, no matter how you slice it.
We built this show on the shoulders of guests like Mark Weber.
He's been appearing since day one and always to our credit.
I do want to talk to you about, I want to go back to the Monroe Doctrine.
I want to go back to can white interest be advanced through these actions and these threats or promises, whichever adjective you choose to use.
But first, and I don't know where I picked this up from or else I would give attribution, but there is a book called The Picky Eagle.
And it explains why the United States abandoned territorial expansion and instead built the modern international system which outlawed territorial acquisition.
And the basic premise is that, well, maybe the spoiler is that you want to take in non-whites.
Well, that's pretty much it.
The U.S. gave up on expansion because it concluded that its neighbors weren't worth the trouble of annexing and incorporating into the United States, which is why Puerto Rico still isn't a state.
So, you know, reconcile all of that with what's going on now currently here in the very early days of 2026, Mark.
Well, right.
That is a factor.
And that was a big factor in the national debate.
All right, we lost Mark.
We're going to bring him back.
We're going to try to call him.
At least that was on his end and on ours, which is unusual.
But we'll wait for our producer to bring Mark back, and then we'll go from there.
But anyway, Keith, you can continue for a moment until we reconnect with Mark.
The whole thing is, well, the whole reason we didn't expand our dominance to the entire hemisphere was there's a lot of people incompatible with our civilization.
See, rather than being, you know, conforming to a set of rules like the Constitution or a particular theory of expansion, common sense ruled our ancestors.
They did not want Mexico to be part of America.
They could have insisted upon it after the Mexican war, but they knew that, you know, that's something that they did not want.
They did not want to be in the lead and embrace of the Hispanic population of Mexico.
Same thing for a lot of other expansion all over the place.
And expanding, basically, we're allowing ourselves to be used by interests that are not consonant with the interests of the right American people.
Final Word on Immigration 00:08:36
It's what Pat Buchanan said.
He said, cui bono, who benefits?
Well, all of these wars in the Middle East have benefited Israel a lot more than they've benefited Americans.
Well, let's go back to Mark then.
We had a temporary disconnection.
Mark, great to have you back with us.
So again, the question was this book, The Picky Eagle, the author is Richard Haas.
And I don't believe that he necessarily aligns with our way of thinking, but he did mention, as a matter of fact, that the international system, which outlawed a territorial acquisition and going into basically the U.S. gave up on expansion because it concluded its neighbors weren't worth the trouble.
And how many aren't white?
How would you reconcile that with current activity?
Well, this was exactly a point, points made during the debate in 1898 about whether the United States should acquire the Philippines or Cuba or Puerto Rico.
That point was made by many people at that time.
These people are not assimilable.
They're going to be different.
They're different than we are, and we should not acquire people who are going to be, that will bring only problems.
A senator from South Carolina, he was especially emphatic about this.
He says, we already have a majority in my state, he said, of non-whites, and I don't want to add more to that to the American public.
But again, it was thrilling at the time.
And I'm trying to make the bigger point that many Americans, they see, they want to see Uncle Sam kicking ass and being a winner without regard to the long-term consequences.
That's a really problem with even, you might say the mentality.
It's like many Americans think that if they're living in Texas, when the Dallas Cowboys win, somehow that helps Dallas, Texas.
Or they think that when the Pittsburgh Steelers or the New York Yankees, somehow that that's a win for New York or whatever city, it's not.
Those are games.
And many Americans look at foreign affairs and especially the wars we have overseas as a kind of game because we don't experience war in the way that other countries have had to experience it with bombs on our falling on our cities, with terrible losses and destruction and so forth.
After World War II, the rest of the world was in ruins.
This was a big point I've learned being in Europe and Asia and so forth.
People in those countries have a very vivid and horrifying sense of what war means.
For us, wars, whatever we win or lose, whatever happens, they're far away.
We lose in Afghanistan, we come back home, and life goes on.
Even we lose in Vietnam.
Okay, it's bad, but life goes on.
But that's not what war means for many other people.
And that's one of the reasons why I think many Americans look at war or look at U.S. ruling war as a kind of comic book thing.
They see Uncle Sam kicking his ass, is doing his thing and so forth, and that's a win for us.
But it's not a win for us, really, in any meaningful sense of the word.
The long-term impact and effect is really harmful for us.
And that's something that I think is later.
We learn that.
I mean, Donald Trump achieved a great deal of applause and, I think, respect in 2016 when he said publicly to Jeb Bush, your brother lied us into war over Iraq.
And he said.
Mark, that, along with an attendant to his position on immigration, propelled him from a joke of a candidate to a two-term president.
I mean, there's no doubt about it.
It was foreign policy and immigration 100%.
And so, but here we are now.
And I'm going to ask you a question.
I'll give Keith the final word this hour.
But the question is this.
You looking at this, surveying this landscape with your very informed opinion and your prescient really knowledge of things.
This has been the debate going back to the first week of this program with David Zutti first, then Patrick Martin and Jose Niño.
The question is, can white interest in America be served by this newfound foreign policy from Donald Trump in any way?
The short answer probably is no.
I mean, I'm trying to think of some way it serves.
Yeah, immediately if Donald Trump apparently in Venezuela is simply seizing whatever oil is there now and trying to sell it to whatever country or company bids the best for it.
Yeah, but that may be a short-term benefit, but the long-term harm of this and other foreign policy adventures far outweigh any short-term immediate benefit there might be.
Again, he's managing to make most of the, I mean, today there were demonstrations in Denmark of all countries against the United States.
When you piss off Canada and Denmark against the United States, you really achieve something.
And I don't mean that as a compliment.
That's a strange thing to get Canadians and Danes angry at the United States.
That's the last thing.
Well, the truth of the matter, though, is that they're pissed off at us anyway.
Canadians stay pissed off at us.
We certainly don't have genuine friendship with any of the NATO members that are prominent, and certainly not Canada or Denmark.
IHR.org, Institute for Historical Review, support the work of Mark Weber.
There'll never be another one like him.
ihr.org, Mark, with two minutes remaining.
The final word to wrap up this entire hour, this entire conversation is yours.
Well, I think we're seeing really, these are desperate moves, and they're antics by, as I said, by Donald Trump, who's flailing.
I mean, this is not what his supporters wanted.
It's not what Americans want.
And the consequences of this will not be good.
In fact, they're going to be even worse than they seem maybe in the short run.
That's a bad thing for us.
In the meantime, we're wasting time, really.
We're not focusing on what's really important.
Our internal, America, our health, our well-being is far more important than whether we grab some oil for a while from Venezuela or what we do in these other places.
And Donald Trump doesn't seem to understand that.
And that is a big problem for Americans who supported him and for our country going in the next years.
I try to especially focus on looking at this after Donald Trump is gone.
The world is changing, and it's not to the benefit either of America as a country or to our people.
Well, let me just say this.
Abraham Lincoln said that America is so uniquely blessed by having two large moats called the Atlantic and Pacific Ocean and a polar ice cap separating us from the rest of the world that I conclude that America must either endure forever or die by suicide.
And I think because of that, the best thing for us to do is go back to the wisdom of the founding fathers and tend to our own knitting exclusively.
And on the other hand, possibly a compromise would be focusing on the Western Hemisphere on the Monroe Doctrine.
We certainly don't have any interest in Africa, in Asia, in the Middle East, and really in Europe.
Let them take care of their own business over there, and we'll take care of ours.
I mean, there are our standards.
And as Hank Williams said, the famous country singer, he said, if you mind your own business, you'll be busy all the time.
But I still, I don't know.
I'm partial to our civilizational brothers.
Mark, 30 seconds.
Last word is yours.
Well, I agree with each of you in a way.
Yes.
I mean, I think what we all agree is that the problems we have here internally are so great, that should be the primary focus, at least for the foreseeable future.
I think we can all agree on that.
IHR.org, great to kick off.
I mean, we are only in the third week of the new year.
Great to have you on so soon, Mark, this year, as you have been appearing with us for so many years prior to.
Look forward to the next time already.
IHR.org, support the work of Mark Weber.
He is at the tip of the spear.
We'll be back with our third and final hour.
Export Selection