Kind: captions
Language: en
China has done something extraordinary.
In just a few decades, they've lifted
hundreds of millions of people out of
poverty, mastered global manufacturing,
and positioned themselves as a true
superpower. But as they rise, the
question for the West isn't just how do
we compete, it's how do we live with
China without losing ourselves. Today's
guest is former CIA operations officer
Mike Baker, an expert in intelligence,
geopolitics, and the subtle forms of
power that most people never see. In
this episode, he breaks down how China
is reshaping the world, not with bombs,
but with data and influence, as well as
economic leverage. This isn't about
fear, but it is about understanding the
game that is actually being played so we
don't sleepwalk into a future that we
didn't choose or
control. Now, what do you think the real
threat is with China? Are there things
that they're doing that Americans might
not be aware of?
Well, if you'd asked me
that, you know, a handful of years ago,
two, three, four years ago, I'd say um
there's probably a lot that they're
doing that people aren't aware of, but
it's actually been in the news more. And
um look, you can hate Trump or like
Trump, doesn't matter, right? But one of
the things that that he's done is put a
spotlight on China. and whether that's
sort of their lack of transparency over
what happened during the pandemic um or
whether it's their theft of intellectual
property um their economic
espionage whether it's their
aggressiveness in the South China Sea
there's been more of a focus so I think
people people have become increasingly
aware and then there's the Tik Tok issue
and that's probably to answer your
question probably where the the shorter
term threat comes from with the Chinese
regime is their understanding of how to
influence opinion um through something
like Tik Tok and that that's
legitimately what they're doing, right?
I mean, they they they're very good.
They the Russians, you know, the
Iranians to some degree, anybody who's
got resources and motivation. They've
learned some time ago um the uh
importance of of manipulating opinion
through disinformation and
misinformation. Uh how easy are we to
influence? Most people aren't curious
enough to keep digging or they don't
have enough time to keep digging or they
just not motivated to keep digging and
say, "Well, where does that information
come from?" Right? Has this been
reported anywhere else? Right? Is it
credible? What was the actual source of
it? You ask those questions of the
things that you read and you're likely
to be less um siloed, right? But we tend
to just end up in a in kind of a one
swim lane that makes us feel good
because it affirms sort of our thought
process anyway. So yeah, they I think
the the Chinese certainly the Russians,
they they've figured out that we're
fairly easy to manipulate as a general
population. Yeah. Okay. So um of those
that's a full basket of things that I
think people should certainly be
thinking about. Which of those, like if
you had to rank order some of the top
ones, are you most worried about their
ability to influence us via Tik Tok and
sort of algorithmic control? Are you
more worried about economic problems,
the espionage, manipulation of opinion,
that's a top tier priority, right? The
theft of uh economic information,
research and development, intellectual
property, um that's a top tier concern,
right? It's it's hard to prioritize and
say this is worse than the other because
they're running on the same, you know,
time frame and it's all they they're
they're very good at multitasking,
right? Because in part the Chinese
regime has a very long view. So, you
know, whether it's it's those issues,
the the military concerns, right? This
this this concern over the invasion of
Taiwan, you know, and what that could
look like, uh their aggressiveness in
the South China Sea, those things are of
real concern. their um their development
of of new weapons technology. Um I run
the algorithm that we're for sure going
to deal with the cold wary stuff first.
So the espionage, the um the influence,
the economic warfare for sure. Do you
share that? Like if I had to sequence
them, I would say, okay, let's we know
that we're we're on the edge of between
China as a rival and China China as a
true adversary.
Hopefully, everybody wants to stay
rivals and not spill over to
adversaries. And I think the the best
way to do that is to if you got to lash
out at each other, do it at the Cold War
stage. But do you think that we have to
sort of parallel track the Cold War
stuff, the espionage, the influence with
the aggression uh kinetic side of
things? Yeah, I I think so. Um, look, a
a good friend of mine, uh, a China
expert, Gordon Chang, we've talked about
this a lot, right? And his point of view
is is always that China is on a war
footing, right? We just we just prefer
define that. Well, he says that they're
not not necessarily Connecticut, you
know, uh, event tomorrow or next month.
But in their minds, right, they don't
view us as a rival. They don't view us
as a economic competitor. They literally
view the the regime, I mean, not the
Chinese people, but the regime views um
the West, certainly the US at the top of
that heap um as the primary obstacle to
getting to the top of the food chain. I
was going to ask, so what is our goal in
all of this? Just to be number one. Be
number one, right? Globally or in the
region? Globally. But first of all, in
the region, right, they've always been
upset that since World War II that we've
kind of patrolled the seas. I mean,
that's that's always been which explains
kind of their behavior in building up
their navy and and creating artificial
islands and pushing themselves out.
They're now starting to develop uh
relationships with other countries to
develop ports uh for their navy. I mean,
that's is it's a slow creep, but it all
speaks to this idea that there's no
reason why China shouldn't be at the top
of the food chain. And they they have a
much longer view on things. We worry
about what's right in front of us,
right? Why do you think they care so
much about being at the top? I think
it's just I think from Xiinping's
perspective from all the way back to Mao
I think they just that's their
assumption. I mean, local Americans, you
know, we we talk about it all the time,
you know, don't get me wrong, I don't
want to give up the spot, right? Right.
Right. It's a pretty good place to be,
right? And so, and it's not a community
of nations, so you can't share the top
spot, right, with with others. It just
doesn't I know a lot of people think,
you know, well, if we just stop being
aggressive, you know, we I spent way too
much time overseas to have that point of
view, right? It's not a community of
nations. We've got allies. Um, and most
of the time our allies share our same
particular interests or concerns.
sometimes not. So, you have to be
pragmatic about that. But, um it's not a
place where, you know, we're all going
to hold hands, right? And and and and
it's just it's not the way the world
works. It'd be lovely if it did, but it
doesn't. So, with China, I think you
have to you have to look at all these
things at the same time. If there's a
global conflict, if there's a kinetic
shooting match that goes on, all these
other things will come into play, right?
the the effort to influence the opinion
of of the American population, right?
The cyber attacks that will take place
on the home front, right? To shut down
our transportation and our water and our
power grids, um our ability to move
everything from food to fuel to
pharmaceuticals. All that's going to
come into play to bring the pain right
home as quickly as possible, right? And
also then to drive the thought process,
right? So, it all eventually kind of
comes into like the same pot. Yeah. And
I think you have to we have to be smart
enough to worry about all of it at the
same time. And sometimes we're not that
good at that, right? We tend to be a
little bit
too we get blinders on, right? And and
we think about one thing, you know, like
and so, you know, it's for what that's
worth. Is that a an American uh
temperament thing? What is it culturally
or systemically that leads us to get
myopic like that? You know, I Yeah, it's
I don't know if it's uniquely American
and certainly we've certainly taken it
to new levels. We've developed it. Um,
you know, and so we, you know, we're all
like a bunch of raccoons chasing a shiny
tinfoil ball and then we see something
else over there and we go chasing that,
right? And you you see that in other
parts. I mean, over in Europe, it it
there's a little bit of that. I think
they've got, if you just look at the
Russia Ukraine conflict, they've got a
different perspective, right? I mean,
we're we're acting as if right now, at
least the Trump administration is acting
as if, well, that's it. You know, if
they don't agree, then we're walking
away. Okay, what does that mean? What?
Walking away from what? The peace talks.
Walking away from Ukraine. Literally,
the peace talks. They actually didn't
attend. Yeah, they didn't attend. They
Marco Rubio said it was a logistical
issue. They couldn't make the meetings
in London. Um, so they had some
low-level discussions, but uh, you know,
we have to, and I think that, not to
disappear down there, but I think, you
know, the problem with the the the
Russia Ukraine negotiations is that
people are attacking it from a different
reason, right? Ukraine's looking at it
and Zilinski is looking at it. It's an
existential threat, right? It's a little
bit like how Israel looks at their
problems and then people don't
understand why Israel does the things
they do. Well, they it's an existential
threat. They're surrounded by enemies.
Ukraine looks at it and goes this is an
existential threat, right? Europe looks
at it from a, you know, a somewhat same
sort of traditional east west
perspective because they're right there,
right? You know, I think part of our
issue is the the the current
administration. They're looking at it
from a domestic politics perspective,
right? How does it play in in the US
with the voters? And, you know, we
talked about on the campaign trail,
we're going to end it quickly. So, we
just want a peace deal. So, we're going
to construct a peace deal that we think
will get across the table quickly, which
means we'll give Putin essentially what
he wants. We'll give him Crimea,
recognition of Crimea. We'll freeze the
battle front on the 20%, you know, that
he currently occupies. Um, no mention of
Russian withdrawal from those those
areas. Uh, we'll say that, you know,
Ukraine can never join NATO, which goes
counter to their uh their charter. Um
and uh essentially there if we draw up a
peace plan that gives Putin his key
demands, okay, we can get it across the
table and now we've done what we said we
did, you know, so good for us and the
voters will be happy. They're not
looking at it from a geopolitical
perspective, right? So, okay. So, I
definitely want to get back to Russia
and Ukraine, but um going back to China
for a second. So, I told you I would
disappear down rabbit holes, right?
Which I love because I'm going to I'm
going to connect all these dots cuz um I
think we think I'm glad you came cuz I
can't. A similar way. Here it is. Uh so
real politique I think is what draws us
all together. Now um I go live three
times a week and one of the things that
I constantly see in the community is ah
Tom is like got such a hard on for real
politique.
Uh I'm just saying that's how the world
is. Not that I like it or that I want it
to be that way. But if you want to be
functional, rule number one is deal with
the world the way that it is, not the
way you wish it were. Right? And now I'm
very open if somebody can convince me
that it actually isn't that way. But
when I walk through the just first
principles of it all, um I suppose if
you believe in God, you think that
there's something above it. But the
world that we live in from a
militaristic standpoint is
um you have an opening where the strong
will do as they will and the weak will
suffer as they must. Now, we have for
the last 70, 80 years, we've kept that
in check where everybody post World War
II just had kind of a same vibe, which
is at least in the West. We're not going
to tolerate somebody invading another
country. We had enough of that with
Hitler. Um, but what it feels like is
happening now is that collective um
understanding given that that generation
and the generation after it have died.
Yeah. Um or at least boomers are
beginning to pass on. uh we don't have
the same level of like visceral
understanding of we don't want this to
happen, right? And given that you're
seeing now the reassertion of aggression
and to me it I look at it and I'm like,
yeah, this is real politique. It was
always real politique. You were just
living through a moment of peace brought
to you by fatigue. Um but the fatigue is
now worn off. We've gone through
political cycles where that appears to
be the case. you know, they they imagine
this lovely world that would be nice,
but it's not the one we live in. It's
the Saudis. That's a good example of
that, right? Um, you know, people are
sometimes, you know, horrified that we
have relations with the Saudis because
what they'll do is they'll point to
obviously to, you know, human rights
abuses or or treatment, hacking a guy,
right, Kosogi. And you think, yeah,
crazy. It was crazy. But my point being
is, okay, yeah, that's terrible, right?
But we're in this world, right? And
you're going to end up having
relationships with uh countries that
don't always share your values, but for
real uh solid reasons, you know, being
selfish for your own country's best
interests, you're going to need to deal
with them, right? You don't necessarily
need to like them all the time. You
know, it's like the politicians, right?
I don't need to like a politician. I
need to like their what it's going to
get, right? where we're going with with
either policy or the reason why there's
a there's a drive there for that
relationship with that country and the
Saudis are good example of that, right?
Um so yeah, I I
guess at the end of the day, we we don't
tend to do that very well here in the
US, right? I think most accept the
realities of the way the world works.
Yes. Yeah. And I and I think part of
that is
um because you know people
don't it does it's not particularly
satisfying right when you talk about
that when you say look this is the way
it is you got to deal with it right we
may not like them but we have to work
with them right we may not like that but
we have to work with that you know it
sounds better to say these are our hopes
and dreams and this is what we're going
to do we're going to build a community
of nations and we're going to that
sounds good right and I think it plays
well to people makes you feel better.
Um, but yeah, I'm I'm not one to I don't
like to sugarcoat the way the world
actually operates. Every country
operates according to its own best
interests, right? Although, again, in
the US, we we we seem to uh apologize
for it more often than not. And if we're
All right, help me remove the scales
from my eyes. So, I live in constant
fear that I'm becoming too paranoid
about China. And when I was preparing
for this episode, I first I wrote an
intro that was like basically
um this is how China could take over
without ever firing a shot. And you
could as I was writing the intro, I
could hear wolves howling in the
background. And I was like, oh god. Like
okay, hold on. Like I need to understand
that um my tone matters. How I set
things up to my audience matters. And
that we are easy to influence. And that
means if all I do is broadcast fear, my
fear is real. But if all I do is
broadcast the fear element of it, then
that's the bit of nudging influencing
that I do in the world. If I polyana it
and it's a lie, then I'm setting people
up to getting knocked off course. But if
I don't understand that there's a middle
ground, there is a you need to be
paranoid, but you also need to
understand that your paranoia can become
runaway and it will make you make bad
decisions. And now instead of working
with them, you're being antagonistic
towards them, which is making them be
more antagonistic towards you. Right? Uh
and so I people will have heard the
intro that I actually settled on by the
time they hear these words. But my hope
is that I struck that balance right of
uh China's done something extraordinary.
The I am hyperfamiliar with um China
under Mao and how dark things were. And
so China now um in the modern era under
Xiinping and using what I call red light
green light capitalism to pull people
out of poverty it's really been
extraordinary and in many ways I feel
like they're surpassing us in cultural
energy innovation like there there's a
real sense of we can do this we can
regain our uh what I would say if my
understanding of their culture is
accurate our rightful place as the
leaders in the world and if boys and
girls if you look back over the last
5,000 years of history, it's all us. And
we've had a hundred years of
humiliation. It's never going to happen
again. Uh and and this becomes their
hundred-year plan now and how they plan
to move forward. And so I it feel I feel
that energy coming off of them. And so
I'm like, "Okay, these guys are really
playing to win. I want to acknowledge
the extraordinary things that they've
done. I want to acknowledge that part of
my life is that they make things,
incredibly complex things, for very
cheap and we benefit from that. So, I
don't want to um I don't want to make
them out to be some dark evil
civilization. They're, I'm sure, just
flushed with incredible, lovely,
beautiful human beings creating
extraordinary things. So I don't want to
unnecessarily find myself battering
heads with them. But I'm so aware that
Thusidity's trap when you look back in
history says when you have a declining
power the US and a rising power China
they cannot help but collide. So I'm
like okay we are going to collide. And
so now how do we do that? Well
yeah. Um look I I agree my my daughter
uh great person. She lived and worked
over in China uh a couple of different
occasions. Uh it's a great place. People
are terrific. Culture is amazing. U
history is incredible. Um and
uh and that's and so that's all true,
right? It's also true that they've
gotten to where they are over the
decades um in part by the theft of
intellectual property. realizing that
the way they get there is to accelerate
that whole development process by
skipping the research and development
phase early on. It's you know it's been
less now as they've kind of made these
advances and now but they they went for
a while just kind of bypassing that you
know the idea that you're building
generations of engineers and innovative
thinkers and now they you know that's
I'm not saying they don't have them but
the initial goal was this is what we're
going to do. We're going to hoover up
everything that's available out there in
the west from everybody and we're going
to use that to jumpst start the process
and bypass the heavy lift of of of uh
research and development. So, okay, well
done them because they accomplished that
and they still do it from a variety of
ways, right? It's as innocuous as, you
know, attending academic conferences,
right? Maybe bumping into, you know, a
professor of interest or a researcher of
interest, right? Developing that
relationship. Maybe it's targeting first
or second generation Chinese Americans,
which they do all the time. Playing off
targeting in what way? Well, you know,
basically identifying and saying, you
know what, the leverage point here is
going to be uh ultimate loyalty to the
homeland, right? And so we're going to
play off of that. And so getting a
Chinese American to like, hey, just help
educate us. If you look at the counter
intelligence operations that have taken
place over the years where there have
been a successful result in terms of
identifying that we've got a threat that
we've got people who are passing uh
secrets uh or economic intelligence
whatever it might be then often times
you'll see that that's what they've
done. They've targeted because that's
that's natural, right? If you're doing
an operation like that you're you're
looking, you know, it's like a criminal
walking the streets. It's looking for a
soft target. So in their minds, you
know, it may not be true because, you
know, you may come across someone that's
that's that's that sees through that and
says, "No, my loyalty is actually here."
Or, "No, I'm not going to, you know,
provide this information." And it could
be a slow pull, right? It could be just
something as simple as, "Oh, you know,
you're working on that. It's so
interesting. You know, my my daughter,
as an example, I'm just saying my
daughter is writing a paper about that."
And you know, if you have anything, you
know, that that's of interest, right?
Maybe they just give you something
completely unclassified because they're
working at a a company of interest to
the Chinese service. Maybe just gives
you like a an article. Well, that's
good, you know, because it shows that
they were willing to listen and
accommodate to your request. So, they'll
work on that. That's a leverage point.
Then they'll start working and saying,
"Okay." And eventually they're saying,
"Well, what about this?" Right? And
they're looking to see how far they can
pull you along to see what level of
information you're willing to provide.
And eventually, you know, maybe you're
handing over something that, you know,
you shouldn't be, you know, and then at
that point they feel like they've set
the hook. So, again, I'm disappearing
down sort of operational, you know,
procedures. The deeper you go, it's so
that's that's um, you know, I there's
there's lots you can have conflicting
ideas or truths, you know, so wonderful
history, culture, etc., etc. You can
also have okay well the reality is
they've gotten you know they've
accomplished this magic of advancement
through in part this the theft of
intellectual property and using that to
jumpst start their own um uh sectors
whatever it may be aerospace or
communications
um and then you you you
you right you know if you accept the
idea that the US is a you know
civilization in decline right I'm I'm
not quite sure I'm there yet, you know,
I mean, we have our ups and downs. Um,
but and and that they're on the ascendy,
then sure. Yeah, there's going to be a,
you know, at some point there's going to
be a collision. Um, I think, you know,
if you just look in the immediate issues
of the trade war, as an example, right?
Um, that has recalibrated uh Xiinping's
thinking, right? Because he could read
uh Biden. he knew what to expect from
Biden as an example, right? I'm again I,
you know, I'm not talking partisan
politics or anything like that. I'm just
saying this is the way someone's going
to think. Then they look at Trump and
you know, again, love him or hate him,
um, he keeps people guessing, right? And
that's on purpose or is he a [ __ ] Um,
I don't know that it's on purpose,
right? Look, he's a tri-state property
developer, right? I mean, that's that
that that's the experience that he came
out of, right? So now when I hear
something like that, I I immediately go
to and I have no idea if this is true.
He's had to deal with unions, mob
bosses, like all kinds of like right
dicey [ __ ] And so this is just a guy
that knows how to keep people on their
toes. Well, or you get punched in the
nose and you punch someone back, right?
I mean, that's how you negotiate, right?
I mean, there's it creates a look, you
can't get away from your past, right?
And he had a long period of history as a
tri-state property developer working in
that business, right? And also, I mean,
obviously he had other properties around
the world, but but that's kind of where
he grew up, right? And what he learned
from that I should take this is a guy
that's not afraid to be tough. He's not
going to be easily intimidated. Like,
what's the short sentence that I take
away from that? You have to admit he's
done things that other politicians or
other people in that position haven't
been willing to do, right? And so either
he's just doing it because he doesn't
care about getting punched in the nose
or he's doing it because he 100% firmly
believes it's all the right thing to do.
He he's doing it in part because he
knows that's what the people voted for,
you know, at least the people that voted
for him. Um I don't know. I'm not in his
inner circle, so I I can't read his
mind. But I will say that if you're
Xiinping
um or you're Putin or you're Nicholas
Maduro in Venezuela or whoever and
you're looking at this, there is an
element of unease. You're not quite sure
what he's going to do next, right? And
so therefore, you you have to spend a
little bit more time, you know, kind of
thinking through your strategy. So they
looked at as an example the Chinese
regime has been watching what we've been
doing in Ukraine uh for all these years
now the three plus years of the conflict
there trying to understand and interpret
okay what does that tell us about how
they would act if we moved on Taiwan
what what do we believe well they've got
to set their playbook aside a little bit
right now and think okay well now what
do we think is going to happen if we
invade Taiwan I don't frankly believe we
we're ever going to put boots on the
ground there So, you know, they their
assumption is probably we'll provide
material support um and a lot of angry
memos in the UN, but they probably
believe at the end of the day they'll
accomplish their goal because we're not
interested in getting into a shooting
match whether it's a Trump
administration, Biden administration,
anybody. Um so, yeah, it's just
um yeah, again, I I what I guess I'm
saying is sort of the
um the disruption of the current
administration, the US administration,
the what appears to be chaos on the
surface. I don't know whether sometimes
it's it's designed chaos or whether it's
just chaos, but I, you know, I'm more
interested in how it plays out in the
halls of power overseas with countries
that we need to be concerned about from
a national security perspective. We'll
get back to the show in a moment, but
first, let's talk about something that
stops most people from starting an
online business. Overwhelm. When you're
staring at a blank screen wondering how
you'll create product descriptions, set
up payment systems, and figure out
shipping, that's when most people give
up. But with Shopify's AI tools, you
don't have to figure it all out on your
own. Entrepreneurs with zero technical
skills can launch successful stores
because Shopify handles the hard parts.
Their AI assistant, Shopify Magic,
writes compelling product descriptions
from just a few keywords. It creates
personalized FAQs for your customers and
even helps craft email campaigns that
actually convert. From firsttime sellers
to household names like Mattel and Gym
Shark, they give you everything you need
to succeed with awardwinning support
every step of the way. Turn your big
business idea into with Shopify on your
side. Sign up for a $1 per month trial
period at
shopify.com/impact all lowercase. Go to
shopify.com/impact now to grow your
business no matter what stage you're in.
Now, let's get back to the show. When it
comes to the chaos, uh my gut read is
that he is somebody that uh understands
that there is utility in chaos if you
can figure out how to capitalize on it,
but that it's not like a clear-cut thing
because chaos by its very nature, you
don't know what's going to be on the
other side of it. So, I think he just
thinks you have to shake up the way that
people where wherever they're
entrenched, you've got to shake that up
to get them off that position so that
you can get them hopefully to a new
position that you want to be on. Yeah.
For some reason, whenever I say that,
people think that that's me defending
it. I'm just I am trying to map what is
actually happening. Yeah. And there's
one way to map Trump, which is he's just
dumb and doesn't can't anticipate the
amount of chaos that he's creating. Uh,
another way to map Trump would be that
he understands that if you can get
somebody off their position, now you've
got a chance to move them. Whether you
can end up moving them to the right
place or not comes down to your belief
in yourself. Trump's self-belief is off
the charts. I think it's ludicrous. I
think he believes in himself way too
much. Yeah, there's a lot of confidence
there there. I would say he's now in
pure delusion territory. But in terms of
um understanding the cause and effect of
what you get when you elect Trump is
that he is um he believes that there's
utility in chaos and so he doesn't mind.
Not only does he not mind it it's like
step one. Yeah. Um well this chaos
opportunity right I mean you see this
again I you I always fall back on what I
know best. Um, from an operational
perspective, you know, movement often
creates opportunity, right? And so
you'll you'll do something just to to
shake things up to see what the other
side you talking about a terrorist
operation or you're whomever a cartel
operation and you sometimes just
creating uh a scenario where they've got
to react or they they've got to move in
some fashion, it can create opportunity,
sometimes unexpected opportunities,
sometimes, you know, it's not
necessarily an upside. Uh but I I I I do
think that sometimes the current White
House, the Trump administration,
uh probably has that in the back of
their mind. Let's do this and see what
happens. Let's let's tack on another 50%
on the tariffs and see what they do,
right? Um China's interesting because
they got to a certain point. Look,
China's not going to get bullied like,
you know, most other countries out
there, right? They're not even though
they're completely export dependent,
right? That's not their mindset, right?
They're not going to say, "Okay, well,
let's go to the table, right? You have
to figure out a way to get out of this
now so that they um save face
basically." And you know, they can sell
that. Um so I
think you know, but the idea of imposing
additional tariffs in part on China. Um
you there was an probably an element.
I'm not saying that everybody's playing
3D chess over at the White House, but
I'm saying there's probably an element
there of saying let's let's see what
this does out of curiosity because we
know we have to rebalance to some
degree, right? And that's that trade
imbalance is never going to, you know,
right? I mean, we're number one consumer
out there, right? So, it's never going
to we're never going to balance trade
between countries, but there certainly
could be some advantages here to
shifting the dynamics between the US and
China. And I think that's what they're
that's what they're ultimately after. U
but you know, China turned around and
said, "Okay, fine." You know, you want
these sort of reactions. We're not going
to up the tariffs anymore past whatever
125% on US goods. But how about we shut
down export of, you know, rare earth
minerals. Well, that's a problem. That's
a long-term problem. Yeah. Um because we
once again we were so busy whether it
was Gwa whether it was the global war on
terror or it was something else we were
so busy looking in this direction that
for the past 15 or 20 years we didn't
watch China out there signing up
minerals deals all around the world and
then building up a monopoly on refining
of minerals in you know in China control
maybe 90% of that. So, we were focused
over here doing something else and
they're over busy doing that because
they they had a longer view and now
they're trying to say, well, that's, you
know, in part a benefit of our longer
view. We've got this as leverage. I
think it's going to backfire on them to
some degree. How would it? Well, I think
I mean already you're getting um
regulatory changes here in the US. I
mean, just in a short order, right? Ever
since the the Chinese announced that
they're going to stop exports of rare
earth minerals. Um, and look, you keep
you you got to have these minerals,
right? You're building everything from
uh I was about to say spaceships. I
don't know if we build
spaceships, everything from the
aerospace industry and military
hardware, uh semiconductors, uh
smartphones, you know, pretty much
anything clever that you're using. Um,
but I think it, you know, already in the
US, the uh the White House is saying
fine, you know, let's let's fasttrack um
mining operations here in the US. uh the
ability to refine those minerals. I mean
that's been part of the problem for
years, right? And one of the reasons why
we've given that ability to China is
because over here environmental policies
and you know regulatory concerns, we we
mine almost nothing, right? Because it's
so goddamn difficult to get a mine
approved and well you you're going to
pay for that eventually. And we've been
happy to look the other way and let [ __ ]
get mined in in Africa, right? Where
I've been to some of these, it's awful,
right? You want to talk about
environmental impact, but hey, you know,
we're not looking at it, so fine. Let
somebody else do the dirty work and we
can act all self-righteous about our,
you know, environmental policies. And so
it hurts the environment and it hurts
our national security interests. So
we're now fasttracking the ability to do
that. I don't think Xi Jinping factored
that in. The EU is also doing the same
thing. Can you imagine Europe saying
we're going to we're going to open up
mining and refining, you know, policies
here in in the EU as in response so that
we're not dependent on China. Um, so
that's what I mean by I think it it
might be backfiring on them because I
don't think they they imagined that
would be one of those uh results. It's
interesting. Uh I don't know if I
imagine they didn't imagine it. I have a
feeling that this moment is all about
the inevitability of the way that the
human mind works. Uh, and what I mean by
that is they just can't stop themselves.
So, if my on both sides, we can't stop
ourselves from from electing a populist
president because we're in a populist
moment because of debt, because of what
debt does to asset prices, which what
that does to the difference between the
rich and the poor. All of that's just
like the way that people are going to
react to those moments is entirely
predictable. And the only question mark
for me is did we numb out young men to
the point where they just aren't going
to fight back the way that they have
always historically in moments like
this. Uh so we'll see about that. But um
the what do you what do you think in
terms of how we numb them out? Yeah. No,
I think given the swing to the right on
the youth vote, I have a feeling that
we're reawakening that and if we
actually do target health things, I
think uh a rise in testosterone will
overcome some of those other things and
people will get the I'm mad as hell and
I'm not going to take it anymore. Um I
think what we just lived through is
people believed the way to have their um
their oh god, what does Jordan Peterson
call it? doesn't call it their Christ
moment, but that kind of thing where
like I'm doing something that really
matters and I'm sacrificing and I'm
sacrificing in the name of something
that uh is really important. Messiah
moment. I think that's what he calls it.
I would call it a come to Jesus moment,
but that's just well that when you're
having if somebody is going the wrong
direction and you want to help them have
their Messiah moment, yes, you have them
come to Jesus. Uh but that was um that
moment was all about basically neutering
uh the aggressive male instinct. And so
the righteous thing to do was to be woke
to um really lean into a beautiful thing
that the left has like I'm a I don't you
don't know me well enough to know my
stance on this but like I really believe
you want tension between the left and
the right. They they are both critically
necessary. Uh and so unfortunately
humans tend to swing from one side to
the other and that's what we're
witnessing now. But so you had this
moment where the left went pathological
and they were overindexing on uh
compassion and all those things which
are beautiful but they can go too far.
And now we're about to see the swing
back. Will it go pathological on this
side? Yet to be seen, but it's certainly
the thing that we should be looking out
for. But I have a feeling that no, we'll
reawaken that beast with the onetwo
punch of they now have a new thing to
focus on, which is don't let America die
on the vine culturally. Uh, and if it's
actually happening at the same time that
we're rectifying health concerns that
hopefully impact testosterone levels,
it's that's a super oversimplification,
but directionally correct. I don't know
that there's going to be a
a a moment on the left side where they
think, uh, look what, you know, we we
overstepped, right? Now we've got to now
we've got to recalibrate. I I don't know
that that's going to be the case. It
doesn't seem to be the case right now.
It's never the case. No one ever lets
go. They have to be smashed in the
mouth. Yeah. Yeah. It's Yeah. I think
you have to find the the bottom before
you you change, you know. It's sort of
that we've already done that on the
Well, I don't think so really. They seem
to be look I mean they're I think
they're searching right now on the left.
I think they're searching for uh some
some solutions, some leadership. Yeah.
But they're record low like approval.
Record low. So the leadership might be
deranged, but I don't think culturally I
think we bounced off the bottom anyway.
That's Yeah. Yeah. I I I'm I'm not sure.
I think that they'll they'll view this
as I mean there's obviously you can't
paint them all with the same brush, but
so like Gavin Newsome I think read the
tea leaves and said, "Okay, I've got to
I've got to drift a little bit towards
the center without offending everybody
on the left." And so he's trying to to
position himself that way. I think even
Pritsker in Illinois is trying to
pretend as if he's not, you know, hard
left. And so there will be some, but I
think there's still a a a fairly sizable
portion on the left that feels like no,
we just we didn't get our point across
enough, right? So and and maybe the
population just wasn't smart enough. Uh
so if anything, we've got to figure out
how do we message the same message, but
you know, reach more stupid people in in
their minds. I So, you know, I I think
look, I'm I I tend to be a I'm a
centrist, right? I think, you know, you
got to be willing to listen to to
everybody and without throwing a hand
grenade um and then say, "Okay, well,
those ideas are just batshit crazy and
those over there are and so let's find
something that that means it." But, you
know, compromise has kind of become a
bad word, I think, over Yeah. So uh but
I don't think that I think there was
unwarranted confidence on the right
after the election that somehow we are
in a new golden age meaning in their
minds anyway that it's always going to
be this way. I think, you know, there's
every chance that
um what people sometimes can perceive as
chaos from the White House with the
Trump administration or how a a portion
of the media drives it that way in terms
of a narrative could influence the
midterms and suddenly, you know, you're
back to inertia uh in Congress because,
you know, that flips, maybe they keep
the Senate, but um I would never be
overconfident. I think we're we're at
the stage where to your point about, you
know, bouncing from one side to the
next. I
think the the the the time frame within
that happening is is has lessened. So,
we're going to see more of that
short-term like shifts from left to
right. And, you know, I don't think
we're, you know, I guess what I'm saying
is I don't think we're looking at a a
stable long-term period of politics
here. I definitely don't think that. Um
the thing I was trying to address
specifically is traditionally in a
moment like this where you get populism
rising, you get the um the people rise
up and just say we're we're not going to
take this anymore. It can break bad or
it can break good and you get uh one way
or the other you get on the other side
of that inequality. It tends to uh come
at the end of a whole lot of bloodshed
and fatigue. Um but at least you get to
the other side of it. I mean, I think we
we've gotten Yeah, I I would agree that
we've gotten better at calling things
out, right? I mean, like
um the idea that you you're okay with,
you know, boys and girls sports, right?
I mean, I'm a simple individual. I'm
thinking, well, I'm not a big fan of
that. You want to do that, create a
trans league. If it's that big of an
issue, you know, for the left, then
fine. Promote a trans league and say
that's where we're going with this. But
having raised three boys in in
competitive sports,
um there are just differences, right? I
mean, I you know, that's it. So, I'm a
firm believer in the whole idea. You got
boys and girls. Maybe you're a boy who
feels differently and and you believe
yourself to be something different.
That's great. You do whatever you
goddamn want to do. I don't care, right?
I mean, people should be allowed to
think the way they want to think as long
as it doesn't hurt anybody. But don't
try to alter science to say we got, you
know, something other than what we have
when you've been, you know, as an
example during a pandemic, screaming at
people to believe the science, right?
Well, you know, turns out we probably
should have listened to a lot of
different opinions, right? And just
admitted that we're doing the best we
can, right? But not that this is a 100%
tied down solution, right? How about you
just do that as a government? How about
you say, "Look, this we're following
what we think is the best advice, right?
But we're not going to, you know, we're
not going to put you in prison camps if
you don't go along with us, right? So, I
think, you know, not to say we're going
to learn anything from the pandemic when
the next pandemic hits, but look, I my
my my boys are a good example. I again,
you kind of base your opinions on your
immediate orbit. And so, I look at at
what they went through in their public
schools, right? And the way that schools
changed a little bit during the course,
right? I've got 17 all the way down to
13. The 13-year-old boy was squarely has
been squarely in that sort of
DEI, you know, trans um you want to
believe you're a cat and dress like a
cat at school, god damn it, we're going
to support you, right? All these things,
right? So, he was squarely in that. The
17-year-old kind of missed it, right? He
got a got further ahead and or it wasn't
quite taking hold. He wasn't like, well,
it hadn't really taken hold firmly,
right? And then and so uh and the middle
boy, he's just like all about
basketball. He's like, I you know what?
You guys do whatever you want to. I'm
I'm busy getting my shots up. And so,
but the youngest one, you know, if
anything, it's it's made him more
conservative, right? Because he's looked
around and thought, "What? Well, you're
not a cat, right? Or you know, and he's
not rude about it. It's not like he
walks around and confronts people, but
you know, you talk to this kid and he's
like, "No, it has, if anything, it's
it's reinforced in him the idea that um
you know, he he'll he he'll come back
and say, how was your what was the game
like or whatever?" And he'll go, "Well,
early days it was like um you know, they
they stopped keeping score because we
were winning." And so, you know, and
then we had to give them the ball so
that they you know, like they're playing
believe that shit's real. I've heard you
go on the playgrounds and oh my god, you
go on the playgrounds and it's just
like, well, you can't, you know, you
don't want to you don't want to make
people feel bad by winning. I'm
thinking, well, I'm okay. I'm sorry, but
someone's got to lose. Someone's got to
win, right? And and you want to be on
the win side as far as I'm concerned.
So, you want people to learn how to lose
properly and lose graciously and be kind
and empathetic and all those things. But
we really took it. I mean, I' I'd
watched team sports for youth where,
yeah, literally they wouldn't keep
score, but you know who was keeping
score was the kids. They knew exactly
what the hell was going on, right? So, I
don't know. Again, I'm uh disappearing
down some rabbit hole that I don't know
where it leads. Uh let's bring it back
to the very thing that worries me about
all of this is while China is um playing
to win. We've had such an extended
period of things being great being
peaceful at least on the homeland that
we were able to have these luxury
beliefs where we don't have to teach
people to be competitive. we can um I I
think that many people really don't
understand that the world is such that
uh the strong will do as they will and
the weak will suffer as they must
because they've been protected from it
for so long. But then eventually that
protection wears out because you get a
China who's just at a different cultural
moment where they are playing to win.
They don't give a [ __ ] if you want them
to hand you the ball. They're not going
to do it. They have a totally different
cultural lens, right? uh and so
I am very worried that given the
importance from a day-to-day life
perspective of being the reserve
currency of being the dominant world
power that we're going to lose that and
people do not first of all they don't
give up that easily. Uh and so this is
the whole idea of thusidity strap for
anybody that's hearing this for the
first time. Thusidity trap was something
from ancient Greece where they realized
when you have a declining power and a
rising power, the declining power does
not want to acknowledge that they're no
longer as strong as they once were. And
so they expect the rising power to still
show them difference. The rising power
is like, "Hold on a second. I'm now your
peer or maybe even surpassing you in
some ways. And I expect you to
acknowledge me as such." And they're
both incapable of negotiating that.
Well, and so they almost always end up
in a kinetic war. And that's the part
where I'm like because I'm looking back
at history, I just can't shake off that
this moment matters. Yeah. No, I I again
I I agree with the the notion u maybe
I'm one of those people that doesn't
recognize that we're in decline like you
just pointed out because I'm quite sure.
But I will say what markers do you look
at to decide whether we're in decline or
not? Yeah. Um well again being fairly
simplistic one of the things that I do
believe is that and this probably you
know is why I say like I'm not
completely convinced that we're a nation
in decline rather than saying oh we're
not in decline or you know moving
towards a new golden age is because I
think it's just on a very simplistic
level it's human nature right and stick
with me on this is that you want things
better for your kids right so my parents
uh born uh quite some time ago. They're
deceased now. Great people, wonderful
people. Um 1919, 1920, right? So, you
know, they there was some hardship in
the way they grew up, right? They did
not grow up in in easy environments. Um
and they wanted it better for us, right?
My grandparents, they came even out of
more difficult um settings, right? And
um they but they wanted it better for
for my my parents. I want it better for
my kids. Right? If you have that
perception, right, you do reach a point
where we're not spending our days
searching for clean water and food,
right? We've got more and more free
time. We've got we've developed more
comfortable lives. A certain point, you
get to diminishing returns. I'm
certainly willing to believe that,
right? And so things become softer,
become easier, and that's absolutely
true. And so I think you get the more
time you have to sit around and and and
get all angsty and and worry about
little things, right? Um yeah, the
softer you become. I'm sitting here
talking myself into god damn it, we're
in decline. Well, here's the thing. I
would say uh pick the KPIs. Like so I'll
give you my handful of things that I
look at. Uh okay, what's your GDP? So
that's going to matter. um what is the
uh cultural energy that you have in your
country and most importantly what is
your debt that is a big part of this and
so even just looking at those three
things but you can certainly add more
military readiness um looking at those
things it seems self-evident to me that
we're in trouble our our debt is it it
is the thing that animates me. So when I
think about it's oversimplified, I'll be
the first to acknowledge that. But if
you were going to say what's the only
thing that matters. In fact, as we were
my producer and I were prepping for this
episode, uh one of the questions I
considered asking you was what what is
the biggest threat facing the US? And so
he asked me what do you think the
biggest threat is facing the US? And I
said debt. And so um we're here talking
about China, but honestly the thing that
I worry the most about is debt. It is
because of debt that I think that we're
having the collision now that we're
having with China. If we weren't in the
kind of precarious situation that we
were in and we still had the ability to
leverage leverage debt in order to bring
back manufacturing here so that we could
compete with China. And if anybody
thinks that I'm crazy about China out
manufacturing us, they make boats,
ships, not all military, but this is
manufacturing capabilities
232 times right more than we make. Yeah.
So whoever controls the seas controls
the world. So hey, when your pure
competitor, perhaps adversary,
outproduces you on the seas, the most
important thing by
232x, you've got a problem. Yeah. Our
ship building industry is is I don't
want to say it's non-existent, but it's
nowhere near where China's is. And they
did that deliberately. Our technology,
our capabilities, they have more
vessels, right? on a military
perspective, they have more they have
more military vessels, but um
our collectively our our capabilities, I
would still argue, are somewhat
stronger. So, it's not sometimes with
with with with naval power, it's not
just numbers, right? But, uh but they're
getting there. Look on that. Well, no,
it's I mean, look, you can throw out all
the small craft you want. What does war
three look like? If if US and China went
to war, what would the primary battle
weapon be? Weapon. Well, it' be I would
argue it would be cyerspace.
Interesting. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. There'll
still be boots on the ground. There'll
be, you know, kinetic war. There'll be
Yeah. Yes. So, yes, sea power is I'm not
I'm not saying by any means that sea
power is not important. And that's why I
think we we've been I've been talking
about this for some time and and I know
that the from a a Pentagon perspective,
they understand the importance of it.
Doesn't mean that things are getting
done. I think drone warfare is the big
thing. China controls that entire supply
chain. Yeah, I I think that's drone
warfare is certainly there. Uh the
weaponization of space which has already
happened. Um so those those and look the
the drone capabilities we've already
seen in real time in Ukraine how that
can adjust uh your perspective, right?
Whether it's armed drones or whether
it's the ability to gather better
intelligence and you know pre-plan
operational activity. I think um but
again going back to your point there's
no doubt about it. People would be
shocked to learn the speed with which
they've created a navy that numerically
is greater than the US is the largest in
the world at this point. Um but can you
imagine in China them ripping down
somebody's Chinese flag waving out in
front of their house?
Oh no. That's that's the ad, you know,
when you say something, well, that's the
advantage of being in an authoritarian
environment. I that people imagine that
that is like the benefit. It's like it's
like when you talked about Trump, if you
say something that people think, well,
you must be defending Trump. I'm not
defending their regime and their their
their style of government, but I'm
saying, you know, from a efficiency
perspective, you know, whether it's
controlling population or um focusing
resources on particular needs or or
perceived
requirements, they're living in an
easier environment. But do you really
think given what's happened to China
over the last call it 35 years that they
would internally feel like we suck? I
think watching what happened to China
over the last 35 years had to be one of
the most miraculous things ever that
they would all just be standing in
amazement like I can't believe this is
crazy. In like 1965
Yeah. 45 million people had just starved
to death. Mhm. So from that to now
arguably the most extraordinary
metropolises anywhere on the planet,
they have something like nine cities
that are bigger than New York. Yeah. I
mean, look, there's some underlying
weaknesses in their system. There's no
doubt. No doubt. But I'm saying if I'm
Chinese and I'm looking at what we just
did, right, and I'm an American. I
remember this is like three years ago. A
friend was like, "Oh, I just put an
American flag up in front of my house."
I said, "The first time you leave,
someone's going to rip that down." And
they did. And I was like, uh, our own
flag has become a symbol of racism,
which is crazy. Where were they, if I
could ask? Here. Here in LA. Yeah.
Toast. I mean, look, if they were in
Texas, it's probably not going to
happen. Not going to happen. Here. Here
in LA. Gone. And And literally, it
actually happened. This is not just a
prognostication. So, that's the energy
that I feel. Now, I'm an 80s baby, so I
grew up like, yo, America's the greatest
ever. Like, this is the place. And that
energy has died. So, that's bad. We're
36 trillion dollars in debt and getting
more in debt. That's bad. And so is that
too because I mean I think you could go
out there and you could ask a 100 people
what's the biggest threat to the US and
I think you're going to get a very small
number of them talking about the debt,
right? They're going to they're going to
look at it in a in a different way.
Maybe a regional player, say China,
they'll say, "Uh, this is why I scream
myself to sleep every night." But why do
you think that's the case? I mean, I'm
I'm genuinely because I I'll be very
honest. If you had said if you had asked
that question to me, I I wouldn't have
come up with debt. I wouldn't have said
I I you know, I'm aware of, you know,
the the issue and and I mean, but I
guess maybe it's because the way I look
at things, I'm thinking of like targets,
you know, what's our biggest threat? Oh,
it's this. the, you know, and so I'm I'm
I'm a little bit more
um, you know, focused on on sort of that
that immediate regional threat than
debt. But I take your point, but I'm I'm
just curious why why wouldn't people
look at it and say, "Yeah, this is our
number one threat." Uh, there are two
things that destroy nations. Genghaskhan
and debt. Sort of kidding. But, uh, of
course, you can be invaded and that's
going to take you out. So, uh, that is
real. And if you had said, uh, China is
our biggest. Or if you said, I think
Trump is unhinged, and that's our
biggest. Like, I would at least have a
frame of reference, I'd be like, I get
it. I disagree, but I get it. Right. Uh,
debt though is simply because people
don't understand. They don't understand
money. That's why the average person
isn't going to say it. Um, and the
reason somebody like you, who's very
plugged into it, still might not look at
that and go, "This is our biggest
thing." is because you and I probably
share different base assumptions. So my
base assumptions go like this. The
reason America is tearing itself apart
is because people no longer believe that
their kids' lives will be better than
theirs. Yeah. That that's like covenant.
That is a covenant you cannot break if
you want your country to do well. The
reason people say it's the economy
stupid is because it changes everything.
If people feel like, "Oh my god, I'm I'm
going to make more next year than I'm
making this year. I'm going to be able
to do better and cooler things. This is
amazing. Oh, and by the way, I'm almost
jealous of my kids because their lives
are going to be even better than mine.
Like now everybody feels good. And the
cultural energy is we're winning. We're
doing the right things. This is
phenomenal. We're in a land of plenty.
All is well. What ends up happening? You
create that like this cycle is as old as
time. So you get into that space because
you understand the power of leverage. So
the great irony of all of this is debt.
the early stages are the very reason
that America became America. We
understood how to leverage debt. And
Alexander Hamilton, who basically gave
birth to the modern world economy, PS uh
he was like, "Okay, listen. Debt is the
thing that destroys nations, literally
said it just point blank, the very thing
that will cause a revolution in America,
said Alexander Hamilton, is if you get
in debt and you don't pay it off." So,
I'm going to allow us as a country to
get in debt. But I'm always going to
have a mechanism by which that debt will
be discharged. If you which we did not
take advantage of, right? If you brought
Alexander Hamilton here today, he'd be
like, "Oh yeah, I get this is exactly
how people react." Except you
[ __ ] I warned you about the
debt and you still did it. And so what
ends up happening is the rich get richer
and the poor get poor. That is a
mechanism of debt because the only way
to cover the debt is money printing. So
you could say this is a money printing
problem. You can say this is a debt
problem. It's the same phenomenon. And
so the assets go up in price. They
become inaccessible to the masses. And
so the elite class who already think
they're better than you literally
intellectually uh and think that they
should be able to control your
narrative. It's happening again
literally even postco. I won't fractal
us on that. But you've got the debt
becomes it will rapidly just the
interest just the interest on our debt
will become the number one uh financial
expense of the US government like the
next 20 years or something. I mean this
is not a distant future thing. This is a
very soon thing. It's already number
three. It's surpassed our spending on um
military. It's nuts. So you've got it
makes the rich rich or the poor poor and
it makes it impossible for you to do
something like fight a war, right?
Uh yeah, people have been warning about
this. There have been voices up on
Capitol Hill that have talked about this
over uh quite some time. But I guess I'm
just I mean I think you Yeah, it I I I
get what you're saying. I'm
just thinking that okay, maybe it's too
big an issue for people to put their
heads around and given how we all get
focused on what's right in front of us
that it's not, you know, it's not an
immediate threat. And so people are
happy. It always ends in war. For real.
This is why I uh I kid that I scream
myself to sleep. But there are days
where I hit a wall not of existential
dread of just, oh, this is why nobody
can pull out of it because one, look,
I'm a reasonably bright guy. I am not
the smartest guy around. I'm all too
aware of that. Uh well, in this room,
you're certainly the smartest guy.
Overly kind. Uh it took me a long time
to figure I still feel like I'm on the
bottom rung of actually understanding
how money works truly. And even that
took me probably two years of like
really trying to wrap my head around how
does this connect to this? How does this
uh so the average person is just Yeah.
Let's say they're smart enough. They're
not going to spend the time. It's way
too much time. They're trying to love
their kids, raise your kids, make me
daily activities to keep you busy and
you're focused and maybe something pops
up on your radar because it's a it's a
violent threat or it's, you know, it's
more easily understood. Okay, look, we
got this problem in in in the Middle
East. Okay, that's a complex problem.
But I I get it. Okay, it's a threat. Or
Ukraine Russia conflict. Oh, okay. China
even. I mean, I don't think people see
down the road the the the the concern
there, the threat there necessarily, but
certainly easier than they do when you
talk about uh money issues and the debt.
Um, so I guess, you know, I I'm a
somewhat cynical person when it comes to
um Washington DC's ability to resolve
problems. Oh, that makes two of us. So,
yeah, I don't see this changing. That's
the problem. This is why. So uh how does
debt traditionally get resolved? Through
war. War or revolution. So I'll give two
examples. Uh debt got discharged in the
French Revolution. So they took the rich
people and literally cut their heads
off. Uh so I guess I don't owe you money
anymore because your [ __ ] head just
rolled into a basket. Yeah. That that is
way number one. So that's very common.
And then way number two is World War II
where in World War II you had Hitler who
was like, "Oh, you're going to bury me
under debt. Guess what? I'm just not
going to pay it. Oh, NPS, I'll take
Czechoslovakia." Yeah. Uh and when then
I got Chuckle Slovakia without firing a
shot, I realized, "Oh, you guys don't
have the will to fight. You guys are fat
and happy." I'm not. I'm [ __ ] hungry.
I am driven. I'm going to take this
over. He literally said, "How do we
create our own American dream where
people can just expand west?" like super
jealous that Americans can do that. Uh
so we're going to do that into Russia
and we're just going to expand into
Ukraine. It's going to be amazing and
the German people are going to feel just
like the Americans do. It's going to be
incredible. We're going to love it. Part
of Putin's mindset currently probably
and we will certainly get to that. But
to finish this thread so uh now you've
got at the time the UK Britain is an
empire. They're the fat and happy. They
are the sterling is the reserve
currency, the exact position that we're
in now. But they've got an empire.
They're everywhere and they're starting
to realize, whoa, we're racking up a lot
of, drum roll please, debt, trying to
run this empire. And now we're fighting
against the Germans. And oh my god, we
are racking up so much debt with the
Americans because they have way better
geography and because nobody's bombing
them and they're becoming a
manufacturing powerhouse, uh, they're
the ones. And so we're going to buy a
bunch of ammunition from them, do it all
on credit. And so from then till now,
the pound has lost over 99% of its
value. Okay, let that sink in. If you
had a $100 in World War II, which is a
long time ago, but not exactly that long
ago, you would have a penny now. A
little bit more than that, but not a
lot. So it's like, yikes. This is uh
this is how it happens. So you get
broken. Even though England won the war,
they still lost their status as reserve
currency. They lost their entire empire.
They were just like, "Well, I I guess
we're now a small island again." Yeah.
It's just that's how debt gets just
discharged. It's just people don't have
the will to fight anymore. And so they
just FDR drove some very hard bargains
too during the course of those
negotiations. Exactly. Yeah. Exactly.
And that's part of why Trump is, I
think, lashing out at China right now.
He realizes we sort of still have some
cards and so I'm going to play them
before they run out. Yeah,
it's a cheery thought dude. I am the
most optimistic person in my real life.
Wait, really? Actually true. To the
point people used to make fun of me for
being Polyiana. Yeah. And so my whole
life I've been like no no no no but this
will work. No, no, but this will work.
No, no. And then you just get punched in
the face over and over and over with
things that don't work. And my mission
in life is to map what's real. Well, I
would say you can't change
um nothing's going to happen up on
Capitol Hill in Washington DC to impact
the the situation regarding the debt. Um
if things remain the same right now, by
I I think I've always been a big uh
advocate for uh term limits because I
think one of our problems is look, Dick
Durban just retired, right? And and
there's big big news. Oh, Dick Dur, what
a statesman, right? He's been up on
Capitol Hill for [ __ ] what, 44 years,
45 years. Um, that's a problem, dude.
Mitch McConnell froze. Yeah. I was like,
what the [ __ ] are we doing, right? This
is crazy. Well, Biden fro froze. I mean,
all these people, I mean, look, you
listen occasionally to Chuck Schumer
ramble. Um, there's there's a problem
here. And I think part of it is not just
the fact that, you know, it was never
intended to send people up there to have
a career so they could become
multi-millionaires, which they're all
doing, right? It's, you look at Bernie
Sanders on his, you know, save the save
the working class tour, right? And you
think, well, okay, you you want to do an
asset trace on Bernie and see how much
money he's got is pretty impressive. Or
how much AOC has made, you know, since
she's been up on the hill. Uh, it's just
a self-serving institution, right? So,
if you have term limits, at least you
rotate. And I think it might help do a
couple of things. You you remove some of
that special interest. Uh because if you
if you got somebody who you think is
going to be on the ways and means
committee for the next 25 years, you're
going to invest a lot of time in that
person, you're going to develop very
deep relations. If you if you've got
maybe whatever give people eight years
at the most up on Capitol Hill, you got
to think about things a little bit
differently. you know, if you're a
special interest or a lobbying group.
Um, and then I think it also maybe it
promotes bigger, bolder, stronger,
smarter, more difficult decisions,
right? Because you're not going to be up
there and you're not overly concerned
about getting elected for the next, you
know, 30 years. So, I think, you know, I
guess my point being is if you want to
change the debt issue to some degree,
you got to change what impacts it the
most. And that's our our the way that we
structure who we send to Washington and
for how long.
Yes. And uh human psychology. So people
want entitlements. They want what they
want and they're going to vote for
people short-term or long term that are
going to get them what they want. And
that's tough. And this is why uh it
takes like real pain. Yeah. But if
you're if you're not up there for a
career, if you get elected, right,
you're going to be I think anyway, maybe
I'm completely wrong. I think you're
going to be more inclined to tell people
we got to change this. You we this is
unsustainable and here's what it means.
It's a little bit like I mean the
current administration again I keep
saying the same thing. Love Trump, hate
Trump because anytime you mention Trump
or the Trump administration, people
immediately go into their corner, right?
But what I'm what I mean there is look
they they came out and said it's going
to create some pain right now. Whether
you love them or hate them, that's a
pretty brave thing for somebody in a
position of power to say, right? You got
to ride this out a little bit, right?
There's going to be some short-term pain
here. And but I think, you know,
rebalancing trade issues, it's going to
have a long-term positive effect. Okay.
Well, maybe you get that as far as
entitlements go. Maybe you'll get
somebody who says, "Okay, look, we can't
keep doing this. How about we do this
simple thing of increasing retirement
age to 68 because the actuary tables
have changed over the years, right? or
70 or something. We grandfathering. Who
knows? But I think you will get people
who are willing to at least speak the
truth about some of these issues because
they're not sitting there thinking, "My
god, this is a good ride. I'm going to
ride this son of a [ __ ] out for 40
years." I don't know. Fingers crossed,
man. I I would love a diplomatic
solution would be lovely. Speaking of
diplomatic solutions, why have we not
been able to stop the war in Russia,
Ukraine?
Because Putin doesn't want to. I mean I
you know like I know the White House has
made Zilinsky to be the villain in all
of this right he is the invaded country.
Um but Putin right now one of his
Kremlin advisers was very I thought very
clear talk about speaking the truth he
said a couple weeks ago said why would
Putin stop now right he sees the US
backing away from Ukraine. He's making
admittedly slow progress on the
battlefield but it's progress. Is he
really? Yeah he's I thought it was
completely stalled. No it's not
completely stalled. It's they are I mean
again it's it's World War I progress
right you're talking about yards and
meters and and and in in territory
taking one village you know over the
course of a twoe offensive right
whatever it might be but their
perception is yeah we're we're doing
this he's ordered the conscription of
another 160,000 troops right um they
just had the most devastating you know
bombing on Keefe that they've had all
year right and
um heat you Uh he's he's you know again
that the White House came out and said,
"Well, we're not getting played." Well,
okay, I get it. You know, you don't want
to say you're getting played, but Putin
is basically stalling, right? Whether
you want to call that being played or
not, I don't know. But I don't think he
he has any interest really in peace
right now because of those things. He he
if he sees the the US saying we're going
to walk away from this, you know, and
and and Trump came out and said over the
past, I think 24 hours, he said, "Look
to Zilinski, you either solve for peace
now or we're walking away and then you
you can spend the next three years
fighting and just lose your entire
country." Putin's saying, "Goddamn
right, let's give that a go." He's got a
3 to1 manpower advantage. he's managed
to get past sanctions with the help of
China um and certainly Iran in terms of
the drone capabilities. Um so I think
that's the problem and and they drew up
a peace proposal over the past few days
and presented it to Zilinsky and uh I
think Witoff is going to talk in Moscow
in the next couple of days.
Um the peace proposal essentially gives
Putin his key demands, right? um
recognition of Crimea as Russian. Um
let's freeze the battlefront on the
existing alliance. So you're talking
about 20 plus% of Ukraine and Russian
occupation. Um guarantee that they'll
never join NATO, right? I mean basically
with every with the exception of maybe
the idea that we'd have peacekeeping
troops on the ground, they're
essentially here's a plan. You know,
we're giving in to Putin's demands. What
the hell? Why isn't Zilinsky agreeing to
it? Well, you may not like Zilinski, but
if you were in his shoes, you probably
wouldn't be inclined to agree to it. Why
specifically? Because you're you're
you're doing things that look, you've
been fighting for three years, you've
been invaded, and now you're just going
to hand over all of this to Putin.
That's what I mean. I mean, it's Do you
think he'd be murdered by his own people
if he negotiated? Well, I think if if he
gave in, signed that peace plan, the
other demand that that Putin has been
making for the past three years is let's
get rid of Zilinski, bring in somebody
else. What he means by that is bring in
somebody like Victor Orban in Hungary, a
Kremlin friendly face. Uh so he would
get that as well too. Yes. Because they
would they would uh undoubtedly
domestically say that's it. you know,
let's have elections and get you out of
here because you just gave away, you
know, Crimea plus 20% of our of our uh
country plus which is a very resource
part of it. I mean, that's another
reason why, you know, Putin, you know,
eastern Ukraine from an agricultural
perspective, from minerals and resources
perspective. It's a very rich part of
that country. So, I think he's, you
know, Zalinsky understands plus also
it's in their national charter that, you
know, they will join NATO. They were
promised that, you know, also isn't in
their charter that you cannot let go of
those territories. Yeah. Yeah. So, yeah,
he he'd be gone, which again feeds into
what Putin wants, right? And and so I
think I'm just saying again, you can you
can think that Zalinski is a a villain
or you think Zilinski's, you know, an
idiot or corrupt or whatever you want
to. I mean this, you know, the the
narrative turned pretty, you know,
remarkably over the past 6 months from,
you know, look at, you know, the Ukraine
fighting and Zinsky fighting and
everything. It turned to, well, he's the
roadblock here. He's the he's the
impediment to peace. Um, do you think
that's reasonable in any way? Well, I I
no, I look at it in the sense of, you
know, what would I do if I was in charge
of Ukraine? And
I, you know, I'll be honest with you,
I'd probably think the same way. I'm I'm
not No, I can't sign up to this deal,
right? I would rather cuz look, the US
says we're going to walk away from this.
All right, fine. I'll just, you know, I
got to keep fighting because, you know,
I'm going to I'm going to lose the
country, you know, at some point if, you
know, uh, one way or another, you know,
they give up and they don't have
peacekeeping troops in place in Ukraine
and, you know, do we honestly think
Putin's just going to say, "Okay, that's
it. I'm good with with what I've got
over a long period of time." I don't
know. I don't think that's his mindset.
So, that's the way I look at it from.
So, I'm just
saying in his shoes again, whether I
think he's great or not, I can
understand why he's doing what he's
doing. I can understand why. And I, you
know, and I get it. Look, the White
House wants a deal. They just want to
say, "Look, we told you we were going to
secure a peace there quickly. So, you
know, we want it from a domestic
politics perspective, we want a deal,
right? And so, easiest way to get a deal
or to get Putin to the table is to give
him what he wants. And then you gotta
just try to figure out how to get
Zilinsky to give up everything. So I get
I get that. You know, once I heard that
it was in their constitution that they
couldn't give up that territory, uh I
mean I guess Zullinsky could go to their
parliament and pres or their I don't
know if they have a parliamentary
system. Yeah, he could go he could he
could you could you could work uh
internally to try to rewrite the
constitution, right? There's some
amendment process presumably. But
imagine going to your country and or to
your population and saying, "You people
have suffered immeasurably because we
were invaded by Putin's military." Um,
and now I want to rewrite the
Constitution so we can give them the
territory. Yeah. I mean, listen, there
is a point at which they fought so much
and lost so many, they will do it. Uh,
people agree to just about anything if
they've suffered long enough. If they're
so far on the back foot. Yeah. If But
right now, it's it's still, you know,
again, they're making some progress, but
like I said, it's it's super slow. Who's
making progress? The Russians. I mean,
the Russian military. So, what I mean is
is you're right. I mean, if they're if
they were getting their ass kicked in a
major way, sure, then your incentive is
to say, "We got to stop this ass
kicking, right?" But I think they look
at it and they go, "Okay, you know, are
we going to be losing US support?" Well,
it seems that way, but is the EU
stepping up in a bigger way. Well, it
seems that way. So, maybe their calculus
is, well, you know, right now, you know,
we're just getting punched in the nose a
little bit. You know, we're losing some,
but maybe we can turn that around.
Maybe. Who knows? But I I just think I
get, you know, I get what they're
thinking. You know, I don't have to
agree with it or disagree with it. I'm
just saying this is what I imagine that
is is the impediment. And and again,
from the US perspective, the Trump
administration, I think they're they
look at it more from a domestic politics
perspective than a geopolitical
perspective. How do you think this plays
out if the US walks away eventually? Um,
I think that the if if uh unless there's
some unforeseen event, I think
eventually Putin wins. He he ends up in
Kev at some point. Um, I don't think
that the EU can, particularly when it
comes to air defense, um, I don't think
that they can fill the gap if if the US
were to say we're done. And if they do
and they completely shut down all
military aid, then yeah, maybe to your
point, maybe Zilinsky at a certain point
says, "Yeah, okay, I've read the tea
leaves. You know, we're going to have to
try to get this deal. Maybe this is the
best deal we're going to get." Right.
But right now, I don't think that's his
calculation. Do you know um so I had
literally never heard of this. I always
thought Trump was misspeaking or just
trying to be a dick when he said that um
Zalinsky started the war. Like that
seems super crazy to me. Uh during our
live today, somebody pulled up a video
um that purports that there was a
ceasefire and the Ukrainians broke the
ceasefire by shelling into I think the
Dawnbass.
Um any credence to that? Is that when
was the ceasefire? Right before uh Putin
invaded. Oh well, look, Putin was
already in eastern Ukraine, right? He
had proxy troops in eastern Ukraine for
a number of years. He took Crimea back
in what 2014. Um so
um you know the the you know the the
invasion the full invasion yeah sure
that was an escalation but Putin was
softening the target for some time and
you know to your point about Hitler
moving on Czechoslovakia. You know Putin
took Crimea and what he got he got some
angry memo from the Obama
administration.
Um, and I think he made the same
calculation, but he's been look, he's
had troops in South Asessia and Georgia
for years and years and years, right?
He's and he's talked about wanting to
reform in some fashion the Soviet Union,
you know, not entirely, right? He's not,
you know, don't take him literally, but
he means in some fashion, right? Um, he
wants that buffer zone against NATO. Um,
and people say, you know, it's it's it's
the US and Ukraine's fault. it's the
EU's fault because, you know, they
talked about, you know, uh, Ukraine
joining NATO and, you know, it it, you
know, it became part of their charter
that they would eventually join NATO and
and so they're saying, well, it's their
fault being aggressive. That's why Putin
invaded,
but, you know, I'm not signing up to
that thought process. That sounds just
ridiculous. Yeah, Putin invaded, right?
I mean, it's he's the aggressor. He's
the guy. He if you wanted peace, he
could actually bring peace, right? he
could actually if he if he you know but
it's not in his you know it's not in his
best interest right now so he's not
going to do it. Um but you know was
Ukraine corrupt you know has Ukraine
been corrupt? Is that why you know for
years they you know there was always a
barrier to joining NATO because well
look at this and well sure. Yeah. Yeah.
But going all the way back to the
beginning of our conversation you deal
with what you got right and
I don't know it it's it's interesting. I
just don't
think I don't think that the White House
looks at this the way that traditionally
um certainly in the US politicians or
the Pentagon or pundits or others look
at it, right? This east versus west
calculation.
Just does my base care. Yeah. Yeah. I
said I was going to get a deal. Give me
a a deal. A deal and uh let's move on.
Right. Um I don't think Do you think
this hurts him if he fails to get the
deal ultimately? No. No. I think it's
more you know what hurts him is if you
know the economy goes sideways, right?
Or you know we don't get a a decent deal
with China and ships keep you know
sitting in port and containers keep
stacking up and you know small
businesses you know get really you know
um sideways. I think u that's what what
hurts him. you know, Ukraine, Russia. I
think it had its moment in the sun.
Everybody was, you know, putting Ukraine
flags on their front yard and I stand
with Ukraine and, you know, the first
year or so and and it became a rally and
cry.
Um, you know, I I just I think most
people move on and I think they've
they've kind of moved on. So, if he
doesn't get a deal, I don't think it's
really going to impact his, you know,
his his uh polling numbers. Not like it
would if if if the economy hits the
skids. Yeah, that's for sure. Now,
you've said that um he has some level of
ambition to reunite the USSR. How
worried should Europe be? Should they be
arming themselves to the teeth? Like,
how should they be thinking about it?
Well, I think they are. Well, not to the
teeth, but I mean, for them, look,
Germany's, you know, agreed to ramp up
their their defense spending
significantly. 2%. 3%. Yeah. Yeah.
They're going for their you and and
that's People look at that go a 3%. It's
it's it's a it's a psychological shift,
right? And so, um, and I think they look
at it and particularly, you know, the
Baltics, they look at that and think he,
you know, they look at it, again, it's
it's it's the way that you try to
interpret uh Netanyahu and Israel's
moves, right? And if you don't at least
say, okay, let me let me try to frame
this in terms of how they think or or
you know, the realities that they're
facing, right? then you got a problem
understanding what the other side is is
thinking, right? It's a business
negotiation, right? And I my company
spends a lot of time gathering
information on who's on the other side
of the table, right? What are their
plans and intentions and motivations,
right? And and so you have to do that.
Put yourself in their shoes and you
think, "Okay, I get why the EU would
would look at this differently than they
do in Washington, right? They're right
there." And it's all more visceral and
and like you said, World War II wasn't
that long ago. My dad fought in World
War II. I mean, so you know, it's it's
not that far removed, although it seems
like it sometimes because we keep
throwing around, oh, he's a Hitler, you
know, I love that one. I mean, now
Hitler apparently is just some guy you
didn't like that much or you don't like
or you don't trust or whatever. It's
kind of lost its its uh its bite, you
know. Um because we just throw it
around. It probably happened with
Genghaskhan, too, back in the day. Hey,
he's like Genghask, you know. Now she's
that guy was a whole different Oh my
god.
Like that that one's uh read about that
if you want to understand the full
breadth of the human experience, man.
From uh what he did with the Silk Road
was incredible. Good on you. Amazing.
Brought a unification of basically the
known world at that point. Oh, and by
the way, you slaughtered your way to
doing it. It's like, yo. Yeah. Yeah,
that one's true. Well, it's like Stalin.
It's like pole pot. It's like I we got a
lot of examples out there that we could
look at and see the the depths of of
human behavior.
Um but yeah, I I just think um the EU uh
is in the process now of of building up
their own defense capabilities because
they view this differently than the US
does. That's a good thing, right? I
mean, that's because maybe that, you
know, okay, fine. We, you know, to your
point about debt and everything else,
we've got to got to figure out ways to
spend less, right? And so they should be
taking on more of their uh spending,
right? there's no reason why we should
for decades support their social welfare
systems because they don't have to spend
on the defense, right? Uh it doesn't
make any sense. So yeah, I'm again it's
one of those opportunities that arises
from things that initially look perhaps
a little bit chaotic. Yeah, you brought
up Netanyahu and trying to get inside of
his mind. Um how do you think about
that? It's uh I was going to say let's
talk about the easy one. uh
like this. Let's talk about something
that's not controversial, right? Let's
let's go right to the one we can solve
here on the podcast. Yeah. How about we
talk sports? How's that sound? There you
go.
Yeah. Um what do you think he's
thinking? What's the play here? Should
they be backing off at this point? Like
what what's going on? Well, let's see.
Uh uh Hamas, you know, they're all over
the map. They they refused a week and a
half ago, they refused the
latest ceasefire proposal. Um, now
they've put their own forward. I think
they they gave it to the Egyptians in
Cairo and said, "This is our latest
proposal." Um,
have you seen the details? Well, it it
it provides for the release. I think
it's a one-phase step. Basically, it
provides for the release of all the
remaining hostages and I think there's
59 hostages remaining and maybe half are
alive, right? That's their best estimate
at this point. Honestly, I don't think
anybody really knows because I think I
don't think Hamas has complete control
over that anymore. I think they've lost
control over it. When the hostages were
taken, it was a mix of groups that took
them, including just like criminal
elements that happened to be engaged in
this scamper across the border to kill
people, right? So it was, you know,
Islamic Jihad and it was Hamas and it
was various, you know, uh, there's some
family criminal organizations inside of
Gaza. And so I don't think Hamas
actually knows completely, but you know,
maybe half our lives. So it it it the
their proposal kamas's proposal is okay
we'll release those in in one fa in the
first phase basically one phase we'll
have in
exchange they haven't given I don't
think yet they haven't given a specific
number of Palestinian prisoners that
they want released
um it will likely be if anything is is
true from past releases it'll be in the
thousands maybe you know 1,000 1100 1200
something like that um and then there'll
be a 5year truce. That's what they're,
you know, calling for. That's all very
optimistic. Um, a a re-engagement of
humanitarian aid, right? Uh, which was
for the most part stopped back in March.
I think the the aid that goes into Gaza,
um, the dirty secret there is most of it
ends up with Hamas uh, for financial
purposes. Then they resell it. uh they
control doing it out that maintains
their power, their grip on power. Um so
they're very keen. They've been they've
been having some cash problems. You
know, the reports are that they haven't
been able to pay their fighters uh in a
timely basis. That's a problem. Although
you can imagine with the devastation,
you know, over the past year, they've
also got a somewhat a bottomless well of
new recruits that they can count on uh
to replenish their base. So, um, but
they're also saying, "We're not going to
give up our weapons." So, there's no
disarmament. And that's been a that's
been a no-go for, um, for the Israelis
for some time now. So, they're saying,
"We're not going to give up our
weapons." They may be putting that in
there because they really don't care
about, look, I think they feel like the
only reason we haven't been completely
destroyed as an organization is because
we still have some hostages. So when you
talk about leverage points, that's kind
of their only leverage at this point.
Um, so I think maybe there's there's
some gamesmanship here where they throw
that no, we're not giving up our
weapons, and they're doing that because
they know that it won't be accepted. So
you look at that um, and look, the the
Palestinian Authority, which has always
been at odds with Kamas, they've come
out and bered Kamas, said, "Just give up
the the damn hostages. Move on, right?
stop it. Um, meaning, you know, stop
giving the IDF the reason to continue
their occupation and their offensive on
the ground and the the continued
destruction that that causes and
civilian casualties. It's a it's a god-
aful situation. Um, but I think it's
helpful if you, you know, you step back
and say, "Okay, let me put myself in the
mindset of of Hamas. Let me put myself
in the mindset of the IDF. try to
understand what their what their
thinking is, right? Um
um you know, you don't have to agree
with one or the other. I'm just I'm just
saying that's that's where it stands
right now in terms of the latest
proposal. Um I don't think it's going to
fly. And then there's a lot of you know,
there's domestic pressure on Netanyahu
at home. You know, um he doesn't seem
interested in bending to it. So I think
he he feels as if his course of action
here is to continue. Um maybe they get a
deal with Hamas, maybe they don't. I
think he's been pretty clear about that.
If we don't, we're going to continue. Um
they'll do everything they can to try to
get those hostages back,
but you know, um it's it's a goddamn
mess and but then it has been for
generations. So, you know, we tend to
always approach every conflict like this
and think, well, we've got to solve it
without thinking, well, you know, is it
solvable at the end of the day?
Um, and then you got the Iranian regime
sitting over the top of it, you know,
pulling the strings on everybody from
Hamas to the Houthis to Hzbollah to
Islamic Jihad. Um, and so then you could
argue, well, you can you can, you know,
put lipstick on a pig, you know, and
solve this little problem here, but are
you solving the big problem? Because the
Iranian regime is, you know, their
stated objective is the removal of
Israel. U, they've created these proxy
groups with the same stated objective.
So until you deal with the Iranian
regime in some fashion, and the hope has
always been that the population would
rise up and do it internally, which it
would be a great way for it to happen,
obviously. So
what are the odds? Not good. God, I
sound I sound so cynical. Uh yeah, you
know, we've been hoping for that for for
a long time, right? They've had a couple
of major protest movements. You know,
there was never any real meaningful
support to those movements. Um and you
know but there's some indications that
the you know
the population not just the middle class
or the educated population which you
know has been uh more increasingly
disgruntled with the regime in Iran for
years now but they've always gotten
their base from you know the outer
outside the cities and the sort of the
poor populations the agricultural side
of things. There's some indications that
those people are also starting to get
fed up, right? Um, personally, I think
the only way to do this is you got to
keep the screws on as far as the
economic sanctions go, right? Um, and if
the Mullers feel like they're losing
their grip in a serious way, then
they'll they'll maybe change their
mindset. But because that's really all
they want, hold on power. You know,
that's all any of them want. That's what
Xi Jinping wants. That's what Putin
wants. It's everybody, I guess, in
charge. That's what they want. Now, it
seemed for a while like people were
hoping that um certainly that the that
Hamas had gotten fat and happy and that
they weren't going to be pushing an
agenda, but if they're really underneath
what Iran wants, is there any
indication? I mean, it does certainly
doesn't seem like it now, but what odds
are there that Iran just
we've had enough, we just want stability
and they ease off the gas of we got to
get rid of Israel. Yeah, that's that's a
great point. I mean, it may be we may be
seeing some of that right now because
they have shown some willingness to talk
about their nuclear program. Uh although
they've said kind of like with Hamas
saying we're not going to disarm, the
Iranian regime has said, you know, we're
not going to give up uranium enrichment.
Not going to happen. Now, they got what
six 650 pounds of enriched uranium at
60%. And getting from 60%, that's the
heavy lift. Getting up to 60% is the
heavy lift uh process. getting up to 90%
or weapons grade purity on on that is
that's a relatively quick process and
they you know they appear to have uh at
least according to people that you know
are are monitoring this much closer but
the IAEA and some others say look they
basically got all the components they
need for a bomb and so you know their
breakout time is probably right around
the corner frankly but they appear to be
interested in having some dialogue
there've been two going on three rounds
of of discussions
indirect discussions taking place
between the US administration and the
regime their foreign
minister who is it Abasari. Um and
so you know that's interesting right
because they may be looking at this and
thinking okay we've we've had our proxy
groups take such a hit whether it's or
the Houthis now and certainly Hamas that
maybe it's time to step back a little
bit. I don't think I don't think they're
thinking is now we want peace and we're
going to give up on our objective. I
think they're probably from a strategic
point of view thinking let's regroup,
right? But we need some time. So where's
the pressure coming from now? A Trump
administration being more aggressive
with sanctions again or just the quote
unquote defeat in Palestine. I think
it's I think it's the I think it's a
combination of those things. I think
they realize the Trump administration
again to what we talked about earlier is
keeping them guessing a little bit more.
Um they're concerned. They're not quite
sure where he's going with this. Um
they're seeing some military buildup,
right? We moved two carrier groups now
out in the region. We've got B2 stealth
bombers sitting on Diego Garcia, right?
Um now you could say, okay, well that's
to deal with the Houthis. or maybe it's
to, you know, support some, you know,
larger scale Israeliled offensive on
their nuclear infrastructure in Iran.
So, I think they're they're they're not
quite sure, you know, again, the thing
about, you know, the B administration,
you know, was they were readable, they
were consistent, you knew what they were
going to do. There was never a surprise
with with any of that. So, because you
had a track record, you could look at
Biden's eight years with Obama, right?
And so I think that, you know, gave them
some comfort, but so I think there's
there's an element there. The sort of
the degrading of their proxy groups
certainly plays into it. Uh, you know,
that the changeover in Syria, I mean,
that was a, you know, a big surprise to
everybody in the region, right? And not
just the US or our allies. Everybody out
there was like, "What the hell just
happened?" I mean, it was like almost
overnight. So, I think there's there's
there's elements here that say, well,
maybe now is a good time if we can get
them. I wouldn't take our foot off the
gas. That's what they want. They want a
relief on the sanctions, but I'd keep
the the foot on the gas there while we
have these discussions and then see I'm
not saying we should trust them down the
road. But if we could get a deal that
actually provides for verification on
their facilities. We didn't have that
with the 2015 JCPOA deal um because they
were able to keep facilities off of the
inspection list. So they they made that
decision and we agreed with it, right?
And then John Kerry would talk about,
well, trust would verify. Well, sure you
can verify the facilities that they
allow you to look at, you know? So if we
had a full transparency on that, then
great, we should do that, right? You
always want diplomacy. You always want
dialogue. you always want talk. Um, so
when I kind of denigrate Putin and talk
about, you know, how this thing is
includ I I think I I'm I'm pessimistic
about a long-term solution out there
just because history tells us it's
probably not going to happen. Right now,
having said that, we are seeing the
Saudis, Jordanians, and others. Look,
they're not going to be unhappy if the
mullets go away, right? They'd be pretty
happy to see a change in in that because
what do they want? I mean,
well, you know, they they in in in part
they want a more stable region to allow
them to focus on their economies to keep
their populations happy. So, you know,
things may be changing slightly and and
providing a more optimistic, you know,
landscape so that we could actually get
something done. But um as far as an
internal uprising inside of Iran, uh I
don't think that's going to happen. Low
odds. Yeah. Uh so the the theocracy side
of Iran,
um where are we at on that? Is the
leader I forget his name. Is he how
many? Yeah. How many? Yeah. Uh is he
getting old? Like do we have any hope of
like could pass away of natural causes
and we don't have to worry or is there
already people filling in behind him?
Like how much of this is uh great man
theory of history and how much is he
goes away the next one just comes right
in. It's the latter. I think could be a
son. Um more problematically it could be
if he and he is he is old. I mean
they're already you know they've been
dealing with this succession issue for a
while now. Um there's been talk about
his his uh son taking over, but the
IRGC, the the Revolutionary Guard Corps,
um which is sort of the the enforcer for
the Mullers. Um and they also have their
fingers in every aspect of Iranian
government and the economy, right? They
make a great the IRGC makes a great deal
of money, right? It's it's there's an
element of it that's just basically a
financial enterprise. So, they've got
real vested interest in staying in
power. Um there is some talk that maybe
they take if Kami dies then the RGC is
more involved in determining the next
leadership uh structure and and that's
not necessarily a good thing right
um so yeah there's there's been talk
about it um wouldn't be surprised if all
that happens you know within the next
year so it's it's you know I don't wish
I don't wish ill health on anybody not
even but um I'm just saying that the
reality is look he's getting older and
he's reportedly had some health problems
now you know Putin reportedly has had
health problems there been people
talking about him you know for some time
but the intel is not all that good and
he seems to be you know chugging along
so u but that's always it's interesting
it's always a calculation um when you're
dealing with uh other countries
particularly those that are hostile to
your interests is evaluating the health
of whoever's in charge and then
understanding really digging into and
spending a lot of time there's elements
within the intel organizations that
spend all their time evaluating what
that next leadership structure looks
like right uh what those relationships
are like uh you know who is likely to
land where and then you're maybe you're
trying to set the table right establish
relationships with people you think are
it's you know it's it's fairly you know
common sense I suppose but there's a lot
of resource put into it all right join
me in putting a tinfoil hat on for a
second. Oh yeah, here we go. Uh, are we
gonna talk UFOs? I hope so. No, you got
a take, man. I know literally nothing
about UFOs. Uh, but the when I look at
the thing we were talking about at the
beginning that you've got espionage,
whether from China or somebody else, uh,
that certainly Russia and China have
realized that Americans are easy enough
to sway their opinion through social
media if nothing else. Uh and one of the
most divisive things right now is Israel
Palestine.
Um when you look at the just radioactive
like way that people clash over this, um
does that just all feel natural or is
there something sort of pushing that
division? Well, there's certainly
elements pushing it, right? And and part
of it, look, Iranian the Iranian regime
has a very active um cyber operation,
right? disinformation campaigns. Um
others, it's in the best interest, I
guess the best way to put this, it's in
the best interest of countries that
aren't aligned with with the US or have
our interests at heart um to create
division and chaos, right? So whether
they're doing it based on um politics,
partisan politics, whether they're doing
it based on race, right? whether they're
doing it based on a geopolitical issue
like the the Israel Palestine conflict.
Um yeah, you can guarantee that some of
what you're seeing out in social media,
there's something underlying it, right?
There's there's something bigger than
that. It's not just some individual
sitting there, you know, spouting off.
You know, I'm I'm not saying that
everybody's opinion is being driven by a
a a nation state, but there are elements
or groups within those intel services
that are actively working to influence
hearts and minds, right? Based on what
they think to be easy targets, right?
During BLM, that was an easy target.
Man, we're going to throw out some some
[ __ ] and see, you know, look at this.
Now, we've generated people are, you
know, uh and they're doing the same
thing that like an influencer would do,
right? that that that intel or
disinformation unit in Russia, they're
going, "Oh, look at that. We got 2,000
likes on this. Let's work that issue."
Right? They're making the same
calculations. I can't believe I never
thought about there's like a social team
over there that's checking stats. Yes.
What's working? What's the engagement?
How do we troll these guys? It's no
different than a than a um like an
advertising campaign. What's working?
What's sticking? You know, who's
watching? Are they looking at and just
clicking through? I mean, this is what
they they're doing. It's the same thing
that you would do because it just makes
sense. It's a lot easier in the old days
when you wanted to influence arts and
minds in that fashion, right? What would
you do? Well, the media was radio, media
was newspapers. So, maybe you go out and
recruit a handful of uh of journalists,
newspaper writers, and then you'd start
seeding articles out there in the local
press, right? And and they'd have like a
a lean in a certain direction, right?
You're trying to create or drive a
narrative. And so, back then it was it
was clunky. It was a heavy lift, right?
let's build up a network of of
journalists, you know, that we can use
or radio individual. Let's get some of
these things in there. It was slow
process. Now, technology makes it so
much easier. Spin them up. So much
easier. And um and you know, as you
pointed out, you know, earlier in in our
conversation, people aren't inclined,
right, whether it's in the US or
overseas where you're trying to
influence opinion, people aren't
inclined to go, I wonder where this came
from. You know, what was the ultimate
what was the original source of this?
just don't do it. So, usually you get a
pretty quick hit. You know, given your
background in the CIA, when you look at
um the campus protests, I've heard a lot
of people say like, "Oh my, these are
organized. This is not authentic." Um
does it give off like sta not staged but
orchestrated vibes or does that seem
truly ground up? Some of No, some of
it's orchestrated. I don't I don't
really believe uh at this stage I'll
tell you why, but I don't necessarily
believe that anything's really a
grassroots movement anymore. I always I
mean I hate to say it I you know okay
fine if there's a local tiny little
community issue and you're okay fine
what I mean by that is um
let's take a let's take an issue
um mining we talked about mining earlier
in regulatory policy very sensitive
issue here in the states people don't
you know most people don't want to mine
in their backyard so I'm so shocked I
know it is shocking surprising that
diamond mine in Russia looks cool that's
right how about a cobalt mine Yeah.
Yeah. Yeah. Let's dig up the local park.
Um so but if you've got let's look down
in in a place like Florida, right? U
phosphate mining, right?
Um now you can't do large scale
agriculture in part without phosphate.
You know, it's fertilizer basically a
component. So
um you know there there's always been
you know real pressure on the the state
house down in Florida for example to say
no you know we don't want to do mining.
stop that. We want to go after any any
mine that's there. Um even though it's
probably not in our best interest from a
national perspective, economic or
security perspective, uh to stop mining
things that are critical to our
interests, but it is in the interests of
a place like China, right, or another
country that um Morocco or wherever that
that's big in phosphate. Um, and so
you'll see a a grassroots grassroots
movement. And then if you dig hard
enough, you'll realize that what uh a
place like or or at least the the the
folks that think about this within the
Chinese regime, what they realized some
time ago was that it's very hard to to
impact federal policy in in the US,
right? going through DC and navigating
that. It's not as difficult to influence
local policies, city or state. I have
some town council that, you know, you've
got somebody lobbying for a a mine in
that area. Well, I'll bet I could
probably get that town council to change
their opinion or the state house to
change their opinion if I work this.
Right. Right. So what I'm saying is then
you'll get you'll get money coming in or
you'll see you'll see the different
you'll see linkages between finance or
legal support or communication support
and if you dig hard enough you'll
realize that and again I'm not saying
every case I'm not you know I'm not
saying spooks behind every door but if
you imagine that it's not in their best
interests to have some impact and then
think about well how are they going to
do that well you drill down you realize
that yes I and I can influence a town
council a lot quicker than I can
influence Washington DC. And if I get
that town council to say, "No,
absolutely not. We're not going to do
any mining here. Um, they push it up to
the state house, maybe you get something
that's even broader in that state.
That's a big win at a relatively low
cost." And yet it started out by going,
"Oh, look, the community is rising up
and they're trying not to do this." And
same with, you know, maybe oil and gas,
right? You could argue the same thing.
We've seen that over the years. And you
know, I mean, I've been running an
intelligence and investigations and
security firm now for going on 24 plus
years, right? So, we've seen a lot of
things. And again, not to see a spook
behind every corner, but you always have
to imagine, okay, are there other
interests that are, you know, that will
benefit from this? And often times the
answer is yes. And it's so again, I
think um um I know it makes me sound uh
paranoid, but it's just based on
experience. Yeah. I mean, uh, if you're
not making a blanket statement that it's
everything, being aware of the fact that
this kind of thing happens, I think is,
uh, it makes more things in the world
click into place. Yeah. Certainly when I
look at the division and like you can,
uh, feel when something's like really
body. I mean, if you spend as much time
on social media as I do, you start being
like, hold on a second. Like, this
comment feed feels so weird.
um what is it about the clash between um
Israel and Palestine that like lights
this off? Like why are the Jewish people
so often like well I forget who said it
but uh might have been Douglas Murray.
When people start calling out about the
Jews, your society's in trouble and and
that is just repeated over and over and
over. Yeah.
Um it's a a great and complex question
uh to go before I do that I finish a a
thought with the um question you had
about the campus protests. So what I'm
saying there is yeah some of it's just
organic right sure you've got and some
of it's informed uh organic you've got
people genuinely concerned and and
worried and they feel bad and they want
to get out there. You got some people
that are just there because they want to
be part of a community, right? You got
people that are like, "Yeah, sure. I'll
be part of this, right?" And then and so
they get to university and they, you
know, it's like the old story of, you
know, you send your kid off to Brown and
they come back and after the first year
and they hate capitalism, you know, and
they want to tell you all about it and
okay, fine. So, you've got some folks
that just enjoy being part of that
community and they want to get out there
and beat a drum. Uh but then you've got
a part that's definitely organized and
whether it's you know um you know
justice for Palestine or any other group
that's out there is funding that goes
into this. There's organization that
goes into it. They you know it's just
it's not just some uh well-meaning
informed heartfelt you know kids that
want to go out and protest this. There's
there's something behind it. And so but
it's but it's a combination of those
things right and that's and and that's
not being unreasonable to say that. And
it's also um reasonable to say, well, it
would be interesting to know who is
behind these groups, right? And who
where does the money come from? Where
does the organizational ability come
from? Who's driving them? Their
knowledge of media, right? And and how
do they all know what not to say, right?
And and early days of the campus
protests on this issue, you'd get kids
saying all sorts of things. And then
shortly thereafter, they got a little
bit more buttoned up because somebody
was driving that narrative and saying,
"No, don't don't say that. In fact,
don't even answer. you direct them to
your campus media spokesperson, right,
who will answer in a more informed
fashion rather than saying, "Well, I
just don't like them," right?
Um, so yeah, and then and then you get
the groups like I was walking down the
streets of New York past a public
library one time, big massive protest
and again some very well-meaning people
and then some who are there for, you
know, other agendas and they're more
organized and focused um and uh some
anti-semitic, some not. Then you see
signs like um you know Koreans for
Palestine or queers for Palestine. And I
thought, well, that's an interesting
thought. Um, has anyone been to Gaza?
And have you se seen what the the
environment is like in in in some of
those countries towards some of your own
personal, you know, uh, well-meaning
beliefs? I I just I'm having a hard
time, you know, putting those
contradictions together. So, uh, it is
it it's it's fascinating.
Um, I don't know what
the spark is.
There's, you know, when when it's gotten
this deep and you're talking about so
many years of animosity, I I have no
idea. it's way above my pay grade to
break down and understand what the you
know what is it how because it'd be
great if you could you know maybe if you
get to that level then maybe you could
actually find a solution
um you know I I'm I'm very cynical that
that ever gets resolved. So we'll kick
the can down the road again. Get a
ceasefire at some point I'm sure because
it will be in one of their best
interests to do it and then someone will
blink and we'll get a deal. but you're
just putting a band-aid on a sucking
chest wound, right? You're not solving
the problem. So, it's just uh one of
those situations that arise from time to
time that will have to over an
extraordinarily long period of time play
itself out. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I that's
very very unsatisfying as an answer. Um,
I give I give a fair number of talks or
speeches around the the country and and
my wife, who's the greatest person I'll
ever ever meet,
um, she always says, "Try not to bum
everybody out completely, right? Try to
try to leave them smiling somehow,
right?" And I'm like, I with a medley of
show tunes or what do I do to to do
that? Because, you know, the world is
the way it is, right? I think it's a
very resilient world. So to your point
about well we just ride it out you know
it we get these moments in time with
these various locations and you get a
flare up and we all imagine it's going
to be the absolute worst that it's ever
been or like the in civility and the
partisan politics in the US. Oh my god,
this is the worst it's ever been. No, it
hasn't. You know, Civil War was pretty
bad. Um so we've seen worse. Um I tend
to maybe I'm just grasping on to
optimism. I don't know. But I do think
it's a very resilient world and you know
things do work out because I think
there's a certain survival instinct that
kicks in. Sometimes it takes a lot. You
like you said you got to hit the
bottom but ultimately I think we find
it. So I don't think I guess by that I
mean I don't think we're heading to a
nuclear confrontation anytime soon
because humans will check themselves.
Yeah. Yeah. I think so. Maybe if I'm
What do you think about Iran? If they
got a nuke, do you think that they would
use it on Israel or do they understand
that the response to that would be so
severe that they're just I Yeah, I
honestly other than just to be in a
bigger position, I don't see what the
pursuit is because if they drop a nuke
on Israel, bro, it is game over. No, I
agree with you and I think so I think
you're on to the right point which is I
think they're it cements their their
position, right? It gives them leverage
which everybody wants. Um and it um you
know it kind of cements their ability to
I don't I don't think necessarily to
pursue the destruction of Israel. Um
they've tried that for years now through
their proxies, right? And I think what's
happened with their proxy groups because
it allowed for supposed deniability on
their part um has surprised them to some
degree. I think that the the
aggressiveness
um has um has caught them uh offguard
and caused them to recalibrate. But I
think I I don't think that they would
use that. I think the danger is it
creates a sort of a domino effect. The
Saudis would certainly pursue it. We're
already in conversations with the Saudis
about their nuclear energy program.
Yeah. Uh they've wanted a a civilian
program for some time in part because
they're setting the table. They're
worried about, you know, what happens
when Iran says, "Hey, we're a member of
the club." And so you would get others
in the region. Now it becomes more of a
problem because now you're you're
increasing the potential for a an event,
a mistake, right? Something that you
can't predict necessarily. Yeah. Um, so
I think yeah, uh, that's that's the
danger. Not that they get the the bomb
and and the next day they drop it on
Israel because I I agree with it. They
want to stay in power. So yeah, I mean,
if I'm So to your point, put yourself in
their shoes. If I'm in their shoes, I
know better than to drop the bomb. But I
also know that uh it is a possibility
that Israel continues to try to disrupt
us. And if this escalates enough, I want
to have that in my back pocket. I don't
want to be in a position like the
Ukraine where a stronger force can come
in and invade them because they don't
have. But yeah, from a nuclear
proliferation standpoint, that strikes
me as
um very unal. Yeah, you would grow the
the new club relatively quickly at that
point in in terms of the regional actors
and given the number of of conflict
spots out in that region, that's a bad
thing. So yeah, I mean I I agree with
the idea that you we've got to we've got
to stop them. we've got to in some
fashion whether it's through a a better
deal uh you know eventual relief from
sanctions whatever it might be you know
you're making decisions it's sometimes
you choose it's operationally speaking
sometimes you're taking the least worst
you know operational choice right and
yeah you're making information or
decisions with imperfect information
right but um I think it's right to
pursue that to make sure that you know
if we can we we get a deal now if we
don't you know the option that's on the
table right now is a military option
[Music]
and you know Israel has talked about
well we would degrade them so that they
can't you know it would push the
breakout period like a year down the
road really that's all you're pushing it
you're going into a potential you know
military confrontation that you can't
predict an outcome to get one year you
know relief uh so I'm not sure about
that calculation.
Yeah. What do you think about what's
going on with the Houthis? So, another
Iranian proxy. Uh, US has been unabashed
about smashing them in the face. Um,
where do you think that goes? Is this a
thing that we're doing to curry favor
with Europe? like why given that
whatever if um Vance's math is correct
and only 3% of our commerce goes through
there um are we doing it as a signal to
Iran like hey we're looking at you while
we do this or well I think there's an
element maybe a small element of that um
look we're protecting international
trade routes which is very important you
know from a no matter who's in charge in
in in the White House um that should be
a key concern um is the the, you know,
free travel of trade. Um, look, I tell
you, the only country that hasn't gotten
a problem in this is China. And, you
know, the the Houthis came out early and
said, "We won't attack Chinese flagged
uh or owned vessels." And there's good
intelligence, good reporting that shows
that the Chinese uh again the the their
intel apparatus in the PLA appear to
have provided them with um targeting
information. Yo. Yeah. So, okay. Because
you ask yourself, well, why would the
Houthis say, you know, we're going to
back off of, you know, targeting any
Chinese ships? Well, there's got to be
some quid proquo. And, you know, if
they're providing them with some
assistance on identifying targets or at
least providing clarity on what these
vessels are, who's moving through the
area, um, because, you know, the Houthis
don't have the best, you know, naval
traffic control systems. So, they're
getting their information somewhere. And
the reporting is that it it appears to
be coming from the Chinese. And there's
a there's a trade-off there, right? They
there was one Chinese vessel attacked
and um the Houthis came out immediately
and said it was a mistake, right? It was
a it was uh apparently had just
transferred ownership to a Chinese
entity. Uh I think it was still
Panameanian flagged at the time. Um and
that's it. That's the only one. And they
they said sorry about that. So you look
at at this and you think, okay, well um
again, you know, um I'm not sure where I
was going with that other than I just
find it interesting that um you know,
they always the the Xiinping and and his
foreign ministry and others, they they
want to portray themselves as as uh
disinterested mediators of peace around
the globe, right? We just want peace,
right? Well, that's [ __ ] Of course,
they're they've got their own specific
interests, right? I mean, every country
does. the US, which also sounds like the
US's stance. Yeah, exactly. And so you,
you know, people roll their eyes and go,
go, go, go, go, go, go, go, go, go, US
is doing this, too, or whatever. Well,
yeah, that's just the way it works,
right? And so, but don't don't believe,
you know, the Chinese regime when they
say they're just interested in mediating
global peace. They've got a hand in in
just about everything, right? So, I
think um it is interesting, but with the
Houthis, I look, we've we've degraded
their their weapons uh stockpiles pretty
well so far. they've shown some uh
pretty impressive resiliency, right, in
continuing their their targeting, their
attacks. Um, but that's a I think that's
a minor issue, frankly. I I mean, it's
it's occupying the military's focus to
some degree, and it's certainly taking
up time on signal chat
groups. Who hasn't who hasn't sent air
strike plans to their wives in the past?
I know I have. Yeah.
Um Yeah. Um, think about that, by the
way. I think it's fire him immediately.
No.
Um, I you know what?
I I I I question the the judgment of a
number of the folks who were allowing
themselves to be part of a signal chat
group where they were talking about
things like this. You've got government
provided comms. They can be a little
clunky at times. Um, you can discuss
these things through approved channels.
Uh, I get it. Everybody wants ease of
communications, right? Uh Signal being a
commercially available app. Some people
will say, "Well, but it was behind a
government firewall." And so I was like,
um, you know, don't
underestimate, you know, um, whether
it's China, Russia, North Korea, Iran,
or others with motivation and ability,
their ability to access information that
they're looking for, they want. It's an
incredibly aggressive uh space. And so I
think it was an awful mistake. I think
they should have admitted it right off
the bat. This was a mistake. They got
very defensive and certainly he's gotten
defensive over the second goround. Um I
do I think he should be fired. Um you
know above my pay grade. Do I think he
should have been nominated in the first
place? Eh, you know, also above my pay
grade. I would I'd like I always like to
see people with a lot of experience, a
wide range of experience. Do I think
he's the most experienced person that
they could have tagged? No. But you know
what were they looking for? They were
looking for loyalty. you know, almost
all those people that they've they put
into those positions, one thing that
they've got in common is they've been
insanely loyal to Trump over the past
first term and and then the intervening
years. And I think they were after that
first term, I think, you know, that was
a priority. Who's going to who's going
to stand with us regardless, right? And
so, I get it. I understand why they were
nominated. I'm not, you know, not sure
that they've put the most experienced
people in some of those positions.
That's a very diplomatic way to put it,
I suppose. Um, I do know you shouldn't
be using no matter whether it's by a
government firewall, not a commercially
available app to uh communicate
anything. And they're saying, look, it
wasn't classified information. Okay.
Yeah. I mean, maybe you're parsing
words, you know, was it top secret? I
don't know. But if you're referencing um
air strikes or attack plans in any
fashion, you know, not necessarily an
attack plan as it's as it's technically
referred to within the military, but you
know, just keep your yap shut and talk
through approved channels. That's
shouldn't be that difficult. And it, you
know, it erodess confidence to some
degree amongst, you know, junior ranks.
um if you're doing things it's it's like
when people started writing books um
when they got out of senior positions
right uh in the military and intel
community and you know eventually that
creates you know whether you want it to
or not or whether you believe it does it
does create a certain mindset that says
well they're talking you know why
shouldn't I so then you get somebody at
a junior rank somebody comes out of
enlisted guy and says I'm going to write
a book during my time in the SEALs or
whatever um people coming out of the
agency say I'm going to write a book
about my time in the agency think, okay,
but I think the same with this. They
look at it and they think, well, that
doesn't seem very buttoned up. So, you
know, next time I've got to get a hold
of somebody quickly, maybe I'll use
Telegram or something. I I don't know.
Anyway, that's it's a rambling answer to
your question.
Well, going uh to something that I think
is potentially pretty um important. We
had effectively an open border for a
while. What do you how do you assess the
level of danger? Should we be paranoid?
Uh were foreign nationals coming across
or was it just people seeking migrant
work? It's a combination. People seeking
a better life, people seeking, you know,
immediate employment somewhere. Um you
had people that were being trafficked.
Um you had uh criminal elements, cartel
elements. I'm sure that you had again,
you know, you say things like this. I'm
going to I'm going to say this. Look,
you had a large number of of Chinese
males coming across the border uh
particularly in the uh San Diego sector.
Were all of them PLA intel operatives?
Of course not. Right. Would the PLA look
at this and go, there's essentially an
open border down
there. It's an opportunity. So, doesn't
cost us much. Let's use this opportunity
to maybe insert some folks who it could
be very innocuous. we want you to do a
wrecky on a on a facility or tell us
something that you find of interest uh
related to the power grid or you know
look at the water treatment facility
there and you know northern California
you know wherever um it doesn't have to
be give me the nuclear codes right to be
of interest to an operation like the
Chinese regime so um yeah certainly
there were some people that came across
that had nefarious intent in that regard
certainly the cartels were were getting
their people across um what what would
the cartel's goal be? Well, there that's
revenue streams, right? So, human
trafficking. Um they were making uh
massive amounts of money off of uh floor
fees and and um just the the the it's a
large scale business, so you're moving
people across whether they're Chinese,
whether they're from Haiti, whether
they're from Venezuela, whether it
doesn't matter. Um there's a revenue
stream there that is fairly well
organized and they were making billions
of dollars off of this. And then you got
the drug smuggling which has always been
sort of their number one, you know, uh
revenue stream. And that's actually as
the numbers have dried up. There were
95% fewer crossings in March of this
year than there were the previous year.
Right? So the numbers have dropped
dramatically. And what does that mean?
Well, that means the cartels have to
adapt, right? because they're all about
cash, making money. So now they focus
more on what they've always been their
bread and butter, which is the movement
of drugs. And we're already seeing more
uh drug busts, more effort by the
operation by the cartel operations to uh
move gear across the border. So that's
not a surprise. Um yeah, if if you don't
have a secure border, um you can't as a
as a government, as a federal government
tell your citizens that you're doing
your primary job, which is keeping them
safe. You just can't because you don't
know who's coming in, right? Maybe one
person. Well, as we saw from 9/11, you
don't need that many people, right? Um
to create a a whole hell of a lot of
tragedy.
So, you know, I I it never struck me as
as something that should be difficult to
understand. And it clearly it wasn't a
problem. You know, that in short order,
the current administration has enacted
policies that have stopped the flow,
have dissuaded people from making the
trip to begin with. And in reality, for
a lot of those people, protecting them,
right? because a lot of those people end
up on bad situations or they get
trafficked or whatever it may be and
then they get turned around and sent
home now and they're not inclined to
make that trip. So, um I'm all about
border security, do it the right way. I
don't know, you know, about, you know,
the issue of okay, well, what's the
Constitution say about this particular
issue? I you know so the you know the
the insane amount of attention that
they've given to this cat down in El
Salvador that was deported strikes me as
perhaps the left you know I get what
they're saying about this is this is why
we think that was a bad idea or needs to
be rectified. I just think they picked
the wrong target. So anyway um yeah I I
I'm glad to see the the added security
on the border. I think it's I think it's
very important because again look every
other nation does this right? Um, even
the EU is now rethinking their open
border policies. They have to. They have
to. Yeah. Um, if you offer entitlements
or and or you have a culture like having
open borders is going to be a problem.
People will for sure come for the
entitlements. Yeah. And then also
there's just integrity to the culture.
If you at all care uh about your
culture, you want to make sure that the
people that are coming in are going to
adapt to the culture, right? They have
to look like you, but they have to share
values. And if you don't share values,
man, you're in real trouble. Yeah. And
that's the whole issue of assimilation.
Um, you know, if you don't if you don't
expect or insist or or create an
environment uh where you expect the
incoming people to to assimilate, I
agree with you 100%. You got a serious
problem. And now the the UK as an
example, they actually celebrated sort
of because I think they thought in their
minds, look, how self-righteous are we?
were celebrating diversity, but they
were telling people, "No, you're if
you're coming here from wherever, um,
you know, pick pick a place,
Afghanistan, Iraq, wherever, then you're
Iraqi and you should celebrate that,
right?" And they almost for years had
this policy and they had a name for it,
I forget, but it was like, you know,
celebrate where you come from, you know,
and maybe eventually, okay, great,
you're part of the UK society, but that
wasn't their primary focus. And they've
created this environment now where
there's a there's a lot of folks there
who just don't feel invested in the
game, right? They don't feel part of the
UK because they were told they don't
have to be, right? And and it wasn't in
their, you know, their makeup to that to
be their first thought was, okay, I'm
here now. I've got to I've got to be
part of this. Uh and when they're told
otherwise, then sure, great. you know,
um, and so I I it's it's no surprise.
But anyway,
um, I think, you know, does the Trump
administration sometimes do things,
whether it's with immigration or other
issues, where it's a self-inflicted
wound because they don't necessarily
message it properly. Sure. Yeah. Yeah.
Maybe. So, they they are a move fast and
break things kind of organization yet
and they're going to drive some people
nuts. Yeah. I mean, we'll see if he if
they make mistakes and they rectify it,
great. if they just move fast and break
things, those things that they break are
going to build up over time and they're
going to lose their credibility. They
will lose the midterms and then it's
game over. So, we'll see. I I don't
think Trump is constitutionally capable
of reigning it in. Uh so, we'll see. But
I also think that people end up barking
up the wrong trees. Um the thing with
immigration that I am just absolutely
shocked by. So I this is always a
dangerous thing to talk about, but uh
when I look at America and I look at uh
the formation of Israel, I see basically
very similar things where you've got one
group of people that come somewhere
where there are already people uh and
slowly over time you just bring more of
your people and whether it's through
smallpox like in the case of just
absolutely weakening the Native
Americans and then uh just warfare and
then if you want to talk about how we uh
under Pulk, President Pulk ended up
taking from sea to shining sea, uh we
also had to take over a huge swath of
what would otherwise be Mexico. And even
while it was happening, our own generals
were like, "This is a stain that America
will never be able to wash off itself."
And of course, over time, people just
forget. Yeah. And it's like, "These are
the borders. It is what it is." And
everybody moves forward. So, I could not
be more proud to be an American. But I
also am not going to lie to myself about
how America came to be America, right?
Uh and so same thing with Israel. It's
like, hey, it exists now. Good luck
getting it to not exist. Like they're
going to fight really hard. Yeah. Uh but
similar thing. Yes. They uh that was
their ancestral land. But it wasn't just
them. And so they just I mean it it is a
game that works. They kept importing
people until they got to the point where
they are economically powerful which
then allows you to be uh politically
powerful and then all of a sudden you
have a state and so to pretend that that
didn't happen is deranging and I don't
understand why people don't acknowledge
that people are going to feel some kind
of way about that. Yeah. But then you
have to say but it is what it is. We are
here and so if you attack we are going
to retaliate. But that's why I'm like
hey UK, hey Europe, guess what? look at
how this played out with America to just
let a whole bunch of people come into
your country. Uh over time they go,
"Hey, we've now imported enough people.
This is a great place. Really like it."
Yeah. Uh and we have a different value
system and so we're going to do things
our way. Yeah. Uh it's not like
Americans came over and adopted the ways
of the Native Americans. They came over
with their culture intact, said [ __ ]
you. Like we're prepared to fight for
this. They did and won. And so if this
happened time and time again, right?
Literally, this is history. And so, if
you are cool with that game, fine. But
people are acting like that's not how
this stuff plays out over time. And I'm
shocked by that. I'm just like, uh,
what's happening right now? Yeah. I
don't know why they would imagine that
it doesn't. Maybe they think that we're
in such a special time that we've
stopped that pattern of history and now
we can just do something differently.
And I think that's probably, look, every
generation thinks they're going to do
things better, right? They always think
they're going to solve a problem better.
Um, you know, look at Afghanistan,
right? We knew exactly what the problems
were that the Soviet Union had when they
were in Afghanistan. And then we just
turned right around and and repeated
that, right? We couldn't control the the
cities, right? Or sorry, we couldn't
control the countryside. And we
couldn't, you know, figure out the the
fraud element within the government. You
couldn't figure out how to create more
of a federal system. You couldn't figure
out, you know, how to find leaders that
could, you know, hold things together.
Um it was a real it's a real sh and we
knew that from a very very recent case
study with the Soviet Union. You went in
there thinking we're going to do it
because it's us. Yeah. Right. We're
going to do it better. Yeah. And they're
going to love this. They're going to
love democracy. Right. People do not
understand frame of reference. Yeah.
People have a frame of reference. They
grew up in a certain system and that
changes their perception of a million
little things and you coming over and
saying do it like this. It just won't
feel right. This is why the game is if
you want to take over a territory is you
have to uh import enough people or if
you don't mind ruling by just absolute
hammer fist force uh then you can do uh
like Genghaskhan where him and Alexander
the Great would both be like oh like we
love you guys and this is amazing but by
the way we just slaughtered so many of
your people and this exact took over
right and so you can [ __ ] around and
find out if you want, but if you're
going to do it through the nonviolent
means, you have to import the people
that already have that value set and
then it will work. Yeah. And but you're
not going to switch people's value sets.
That's how you get insurgents. And so
it's just like looking at the world that
seems to repeat over and over and over
and over and over. Yeah. Uh well, I
think we see it a little bit in in in
Ukraine uh with Russ uh Putin's like
let's let's set the table. let's get
people in, you know, and he's always
considered Ukraine basically part of
Russia anyway, but his feeling has been
that look, I'm going to have enough
people in here who are on my side that
eventually I'm not going to need a
military, you know, occupying every
major urban center. Um because you're
already now you've you now you've kind
of fallen under my umbrella and that'll
be fine. So I You identify as Russian.
You identify as Russian. Yeah. So u yeah
I I don't know. I think people don't do
a very good job and by that I mean
people just don't learn from um history
very well and I think it is because it's
human nature to think we can do it
better and maybe there's some benefit in
that it kind of gives you that
confidence to try something perhaps but
I think for the most part we we don't um
we don't look at patterns uh however you
put it we don't look at at at um case
studies that are staring us in the face
and I think that's a real problem we're
looking at you look at Syria now Syria's
got every bit of opportunity to fall
into a Libya situation. Libya is a
horrible hot mess. So, right after you
Assad fell and Assad was a butcher. His
dad was a butcher. Um, so rightly so,
people were going, "Yay, Assad fell, you
know, and oh, now we're going to get
we're going to get this federal
government and they're going to respect
all, you know, religions and it's going
to be great and uh, you know, fine. I
get the optimism or the desire for
optimism, but we probably want to be a
little more pragmatic." Yeah. Even just
looking at America, the founding of
America was uh shocking to me in that uh
it was something like six or eight years
after uh in I think eight after no more
like 12 years after the signing of the
Declaration of Independence. I think
that's correct. 1776 to uh 88 is when we
finally ratified the Constitution. So
you got 12 years 12 years before uh we
actually become a country from the time
that we say okay we're willing to fight
for this. So I didn't realize even after
the war ended how many years it took him
like another four years to actually like
get it locked down and get the states to
agree. And when I looked at that I was
like oh damn like this really is a
brutal process and it's so fragile
through that whole time that um creating
another American experiment I don't
think is going to happen very easily.
Yeah I no I I agree it's a it's a sort
of a conflation of events. um that have
to all fall together in and almost in a
in a in a in a perfect storm. But I
guess but I think that um we were on a
very bad path um with the open border
essentially open border policy. I don't
know the previous administration would
refer to it that way, but it's basically
what it was. you know, when you're
talking about millions of people coming
across on a on a constant basis and
you're trying to not just from a
national security perspective or from,
you know, the criminal element or
whatever that may be embedded in there
and and it's wrong to talk about all
those people and say, you know, getting
all the, you know, worse people, of
course not. You're getting a lot of
people who just actually want something
better, right? and they're living in
very awful conditions and they see this
and they they see sort of a welcome sign
out there and like you said they see
entitlements and they think great why
wouldn't I make this trip but um you
know I think that you can't you can't
sustain that over a period of time and
people always say well we're a country
based on migration or immigrants and
yeah that's true but um there was also a
sense of well in the sense of um sure we
had we had there was it was more No, you
had no entitlements. It was no
entitlements. It was less I would argue
it was a little bit less diversity. A
lot of European, you know, migration.
Even like set that aside for a second.
Let's say it was the world's most
diverse thing ever. And yes, we clearly
were founded on uh immigrants for sure.
However, it was so different than what
people mean by immigrants today. Uh you
rolled up and first of all, you the odds
of you dying like 30% or something on
the journey on the journey. So it's like
you might not even make it. Yeah. Uh you
get there. no entitlements whatsoever.
So, this is a if you can make it here,
you can make it anywhere kind of thing.
Yeah. Uh if the weather didn't get you,
if you didn't starve to death, uh you
were going to have to potentially fight
depending on how early you come over. Uh
because Native Americans were not
exactly like, "Hey, welcome." Uh so, not
after the first few encounters. Yeah.
That this may not be going the way we
wanted to. So, it's like that is a very
different kind of immigrant. Yeah. I
think look, I think I think also to your
point about
you know, the the way that the country
was built, you know, going way back in
time, it's a lot messier, right? Whether
we're talking about the history of the
Middle East or we're talking about the
formation of the US, whether we're
talking about the the you know, slavery,
it's a lot messier than people would
would want to necessarily think about,
right? It's it's um you know, where did
slavery start? Who was involved in that,
right? Well, it wasn't just a a bunch of
white southerners, right? And that it's
got a lot longer of a history, right?
You look at the, you know, American
Indians and their use of slaves and
taking of slaves. And you look at Africa
and how they they were, you know, at the
front. So that's that's an example. You
look at the Middle East and you think
about, you know,
how how problematic it all is, right? In
terms of it's not it doesn't lend
itself, I guess, is what I'm saying, to
an easy solution. It's not one side
good, one side bad, right? It's it's but
we don't have the time or the the
interest or the inclination to to say,
"Okay, it's a complex problem. let me
understand all sides of it, right? Um,
so then it becomes, oh my god, I'm I'm
embarrassed about the formation of the
US. I'm so embarrassed and we have to we
have to suffer and and and apologize on
a constant basis. [ __ ] it. I'm not
apologizing. I think I'm, you know, it's
it's a it is what it is. It's not
there's some ugliness to it and I think
we should all learn about it and you
should study it, right? You don't
whitewash it, but at the same time, you
don't sit around full of angst, right? I
mean, from my perspective, you you try
to make things better, right? You do
what you can in your little orbit to to
be a good person, to try to help people,
to try to be the best you can. I'm not
going to sit around and angst over, you
know, how the US was formed. Um, or, you
know, the past. I'm going to be aware of
it and, you know, you work hard to make
sure that you do the right thing. But,
yeah. Anyway, and and I I I don't know
where I was going with that other than I
thought it was your like uplifting show,
Mike. I like it. That's what it was. God
damn it. It was uplifting, wasn't it? It
is. See, you you did your wife very
proud. Yeah. Nobody Nobody Nobody ever
said that about Mike before. He's
uplifting. Um Yeah. Anyway, no, you
look, life is simple, right? You got you
I tell this to our boys all the time.
You don't have that many options on the
decision tree, right? Don't make life
more difficult than it is, right? Um,
you got to oftenimes make decisions with
less than perfect information, but
always, you know, you try to do the
right thing, whether it's for religious
purposes or not, regardless of whether
you believe or not, hey, you're playing
the odds. You're, you know, maybe you
get up there, you were an, you know,
atheist all your life. You you die, you
find out that there is something bigger
up there. Well, if you tried your best
during your life to be nice and good and
do the best you can, hey, it paid off.
You know, maybe whatever's up there will
will reward that and you that's great.
If not, then that doesn't matter, right?
But you still did the right thing or
tried to do the right thing. It's not
that tough. And then you work hard. And
the one of the few goddamn things you
can control in life is how hard you
work, right? Um, you know, I tell that
to to uh the middle boy all the time.
He's a basketball player. He loves
basketball. Has worked very hard at it.
He's never going to be
6'10, but god damn it, that kid works
harder than anybody else on that team,
right? And always has and wherever he's
at, whatever program he's in. And you
can control that, right? And and same
with the other kids, you can you can
make that effort and always and there'll
be a place for you if you just keep that
in mind and it's and it doesn't break
your back working harder than most
because a lot of people don't work that
hard, right? And you know, we've
populated the world with with enough
average people, right? So I think if
you're a parent, you're trying to raise
kids, you got to set the bar higher.
Say, I'm not here to raise average,
right? That's do what I can. I'm not
expecting Olympians. I'm not expecting,
you know, that that's not the point. But
you got to whatever it is that sparks
you, you got to work as hard as you
possibly can on that because that's
that's what that's what everybody
deserves, right? You need to do that uh
to make a mark or to leave a make a
difference, right? Life's short. So, you
got to work hard. I love it, man. Where
can people keep up with you? Um, well,
they can come by the Idaho compound,
just knock on the door, say hello. We'll
pour some bourbon. Um, it there's uh the
X or the what used to be known as
Twitter. uh by everybody's favorite uh
technologist Elon Musk I guess is uh uh
ATM MB company man and then uh the
company is Portman Square Group. It's an
intel and investigations and security
services firm should you ever need that.
Um and then uh I hope people will will
uh pay attention to the president's
daily brief. It's our uh podcast every
day in the morning for about 20 minutes
in the afternoon for 10 minutes. It's
the PDB. Uh, and we basically just
highlight three or four critical stories
around the globe. We try not to tell you
how to think about them. We just tell
you what's happening. You guys can think
about it the way you want to. Um, and we
have uh at uh President's Daily Brief is
our YouTube channel and so you can get
all the episodes there and our weekend
show that has guests and and insight. I
appreciate you letting me bang on. I
realize I've just taken 30 minutes to
talk about, you know, how to get in
touch with me. Great. But anyway, that's
it. Yeah. Awesome. All right, everybody.
If you haven't already, be sure to
subscribe. And until next time, my
friends, be legendary. Take care. Peace.
If you like this conversation, check out
this episode to learn more. Tomorrow,
the president is going to get a briefing
from the CIA on his desk. What should be
in that briefing? That's a great
question. Uh, it's it's going to be uh a
different briefing than it was
yesterday, which is it goes without
saying, but at the same time,