Pam Bondi Out, Birthright Citizenship on the Line | Guest: Tom Sauer | 4/3/26

Hey, everybody. How's it going? Thanks for joining me this afternoon. I've got a great stream

with a great guest. I think you're really going to enjoy before we get started. I just want to

let you know that the Blaze has this fantastic series called the coverup about the COVID lockdowns.

If you're like me, you entered into politics in many ways because of what happened in COVID and you

want to understand what was going on behind the scenes. This is the final episode, episode six.

So if you want to get access to all the episodes, head to FauciCoverup.com slash Orin and use

the code lab leak to get $40 off your subscription. That's Fauci.com or FauciCoverup.com with the promo

code lab leak to get $40 off your subscription. Also, we're going to be launching a new show with

Stu. Stu and Dave do America. Stu is one of the nicest guys in the business and he's always

thoughtful. He's always insightful and well measured and then Dave Landau is hilarious. It should

be a really good pairing. That show is going to premiere on April 6th. So make sure you're getting

ready for that as well. All right, guys, we know that the goal is regime change in Iran, but it seems

like we might be getting a little regime change in home here recently. We had Pam Bondi fired yesterday

from her position. We also have an army chief of staff and several other generals. It looks like

there are some spring cleaning happening over with the Trump administration. We also have the

critical case of a birthright citizenship, the 14th Amendment. Can you just be an American because

you happen to be born here while your Chinese mom was paying a bunch of people to traffic you into

the United States? Well, the Supreme Court for some reason is having a difficult time deciding if

that's the case. Joining me to discuss this is Tom Sauer. He is a fellow at the Claremont Institute.

Lincoln fellow and he's also a former, excuse me, a former Navy EOD officer. Tom, thank you so

much for coming on. Hey, Aaron, thank you so much for having me. This is a huge honor because I'm

a big fan of yours. I mean, I even have your book back here. And I think you're one of the best

guys in the business of all this and it's a real, it's a real honor to be here. I watch you all

the time. So this is very surreal for me. This is great. Well, Tom, no one will accuse you of not being

a man of taste and distinction. So I really appreciate you coming on today. Well, let's open up

with the biggest news, which is, of course, the Pambondi situation. Now, Pambondi came in obviously

after there was already some contention for that spot. Matt Gates was originally supposed to be the

pick for attorney general, but obviously had a very difficult confirmation in front of him

and ultimately withdrew for the good of the president's administration. When Pambondi came

in, many people were hopeful, but there have been some bumps in the road. I think the most notable

one has been the Epstein rollout. Well, I know that's not the strictest legal issue, but for many

people, the way that was handled was something that really hurt the administration's momentum in

certain ways. And then, of course, we've seen Pambondi with some positive movement when it comes to

Antifa, but not the follow-ups. Many people were hoping in the wake of Charlie Kirk's assassination.

They were looking for broad sweeping attempts to break down the leftist machine, the different

NGOs and others that fund many of the violent terrorist organizations that operate in the United

States under the auspice of leftist protests. And I think in general, the idea was that while

Pambondi seemed competent in certain areas, she felt that flat and the ones that were most important

to many of the public relations issues that the Trump administration was trying to address.

What's your read on the switch up? Yeah, I'd say that with Pambondi, I think it all started with

that Epstein rollout. All of a sudden, that was not the best start. I had several friends of mine

that were part of the influencer, social media, and I'm sure you did too, that were in the room for

that. And it's interesting there's a backstory to that that I think that most people might not be

aware of is a lot. All of those folks of social media influencers did not attend, didn't show

the White House because of Pambondi and this Epstein files, you know, volume one or phase one

or whatever it was. They were there because just like the White House is inviting social media folks

there. It was my buddy Jack the Sobic and Mike Cervitch and a few other folks that were there.

And that wasn't part of it. They were just there to meet, talk to media, see how they could

interact, et cetera, et cetera. And then unexpectedly, Pambondi rolls up with all these binders

and about the Epstein files and they said, hey, we've got this. We want to give these to you guys

and this is it. Everyone was kind of taken by surprise and nobody had really gone through the

binders and it was funny because right when it happened, I was getting a call from a couple of

friends who were involved and they said, yeah, it was kind of crazy what happened. And then

everyone wanted to take pictures. They took pictures and we thought this is it and then they

start going through it and right away, this is like, wait a second, there's nothing new here.

And on top of that, you know, because look, is, how do I say this, are the Epstein files like the

most important thing going on within DOJ right now? No, but I'd say that they're very, it's a very

emotional thing for a lot of people. I don't believe that the Epstein drama saga, what are we going

to call it, is ever going to be salt. I don't think it will ever be, you know, as much as I wish

it would be. I don't think it will be. It's been mopped up whatever it is and they're hoping it's

going to get memory hold. So I think that was the first misstep or at least in terms of optics.

Whether right or wrong, I think it was just an optics thing. And then next when you had,

when we had her dealing with a lot of the antifa folks not going quite as hard, there's a lot of

tough talk and strong strongly worded tweets and letters and whatnot. But you know, what we were

really looking to see was like, we wanted to see people who rightly should have been going to

prison for 10 years, 10 plus years for what they did and we're not seeing that. And so we didn't

see a lot of that. But apparently out of all of that from the read I got where there's two big

things, it was one, she didn't have a great performance in front of Congress when she was testifying.

It was a little cringe. And then, but apparently what really did her in, according to sources,

people familiar with the matter is that it was because apparently she had tipped off

Swalwell regarding some documents that were going to come out regarding his relationship with

the Chinese spy that he was sleeping with. And apparently she inadvertently or maybe deliberately

tipped him off and that and when she wasn't supposed to and that really upset the president.

And that was really the final straw that did that that did her in. So yeah, that's kind of what

happened there. And yeah. Yeah, I think that's right. As much as a lot of people want to downplay

the importance of the Epstein files, whether there was a true deep dark conspiracy to unravel

there or not. And honestly, I think there is a lot of smoke in that fire. Ultimately, the biggest

part of it is not the actionable part. It's the part where people believe this to be critical

to the credibility of the Trump administration, right? You're supposed to go in there. You're

supposed to clean up the corruption. It's about cleaning up the swamp. The one thing we want you

to do is at least give us a window into the swamp. What's going on there? Even if you can't prove

everything, even if you can't indict everyone, be upfront and honest with us, right? And the fact

that the Epstein files eventually did start to come out only made it harder for the Trump administration

because then a narrative they owe kind of got away from them, right? Like this was a big thing,

even even JD Vance was talking to Theo Vaughn saying, hey, we got to get the Epstein files out there.

Right? When you have the vice president saying that right before an election, and then we just get

nothing in the administration says, oh, well, it's probably like Russian disinformation or something,

like that hits people between the eyes. That's just one of the biggest political fumbles I've

ever seen. Again, I totally get it. Maybe you can't indict anybody. Maybe that's just the case.

But you got to bring that information forward and control the release. We're the good guys. We're

the ones in charge. We're the ones bringing the light. Even if we can't nail everybody down,

at least you know, we're on your side and we're trying to get things done. I think that was a

big difficulty in transition. And then like you said, just the fact that you did not have that

prosecution is coming forward, it's very clear. We need a wartime AG. And I don't just mean that

because we're at war. I mean that in the sense of, you know, the whole domestic agenda really

rests on making sure the Democrats pay a price for what they did while Joe Biden was in office.

And what we've just seen from Pambondi is just no price being paid. There was the group,

obviously, Don Limon and those that went into that church during the protests. They did go after them.

I'm very glad that happened. All credit to them for that. But that's really unfortunately,

it feels like an outlier and an otherwise rather a lackluster attempt to really punish the left

for their behavior. And I think a big part of all of this that not enough people appreciate.

So like I live here in the DC area. I just moved back here a few months ago after spending about

six years in Southern California. And, you know, I live, you know, 20 minutes from the White House

in Pentagon and all that. I'm really close to a lot. And I have a lot of friends who are in the

admin, White House Pentagon, et cetera. And I talked to them all the time, personal friends,

right, that I've known for a long time. And one thing that I have noticed a kind of recurring

theme is we have to realize though that, you know, the total state, you know, the deep state,

whatever you want to call it, right, like your typical mid-level. And in some cases,

senior bureaucrats, right, who really run a lot of these things are not on our team, right?

And so when you only have so many political appointees, right, there's only so much you can do.

And I'm not saying that's not saying that's an excuse. It doesn't make an excuse for everything.

But sometimes it's like you got to deal with the people. Even if they might be notionally aligned

with you, it's like, hey, this is kind of that way. We do things. We're not going to move too fast.

I'm not making excuses. I'm just kind of explained like that's the state of things. We have that,

you know, we talked, you know, there's the other folks who've gotten fired the generals, right?

We've had a few generals that have left and got to keep in mind that so much of the rank and file

of the DC establishment, even under the Trump administration, you know, there's only so many

political appointees you can put when you've got to, you know, what, I don't have

many million people in the federal government, especially what positions of influence,

there are civil servants who are in positions of influence, real influence there.

They're not political appointees and they carry a ton of sway. They say, oh, we can't find

this. They'll slow roll it. And a lot, look, and their objective is to really weight you out.

And they were very effective at it in the first term. They are less effective at it in the second

term. I'm not saying it's perfect. But then again, look, and I there's probably been a recurring

theme that you've talked about is what is the alternative, right? Like this is about as

the best we can hope for right now. But the thing is, I think it's really important to kind of

take a good look at like the bright side of things. Like there's a lot of things that are happening

within the government that are really, really good right now. So it's not a perfect report card,

but I mean, this is light years ahead of what I think that we could have reasonably expected.

Yeah, this is such a difficult situation because as you say, I know several people in the

administration who are truly burning the midnight oil to try to make this thing work, right? Like

it's not a joke for them. It's not fake. They're not there for the to collect the paycheck or get

the line on the resume. They want to make this thing work. So I know these people are in the admin.

I'm not here to throw shade on their work or disparage them in any way.

But this is what I've told people when I've talked to people in the admin about this stuff,

I've told them repeatedly. You guys are making the biggest change I've ever seen by any

Republican administration in my lifetime. And it simply isn't enough. And that's not an insult.

Like you guys are doing your moving mountains. Unfortunately, we need you to move planets on this one.

And this is that's brutal because there's nothing worse than like being the best guy at what

you're doing and being told you have to do better. But it's just the case. Like we're in a position

where the administration was elected into a do or die situation. And so while what they're doing

is still very impressive, it just isn't sufficient. And so that's the message I want going out to

these guys. We appreciate what you're doing. We appreciate your service. We know you're working

hard, but we got to put whatever gear you're in. If it's if it's already four, we got to go to five.

Like there's just no there's no other option. And that this is why it would be helpful. I think

it really would. If the Trump administration is hampered in the manner that you are discussing,

I would appreciate them just coming out and saying that directly saying, look guys, we

came here to get this done. But 75% of the admin is still appointed by previous guys,

part of the deep state. We simply do not have the power that you think we have. We need that

power because you can't ask for the power until you admit you don't have it. And right now,

I feel like the Trump administration is trying to pretend they have the power when they don't. And

it would just be better if they would come to the American people say, we want to give you the

whole Epstein files. We want to prosecute these people. We want the mass deportations. We want to

do this stuff. But we can't because we are we are literally being denied this. The the government

system, as you understand, it does not work the way you think it does. Here's how it actually works

and why we can't operate it. I think while some people would say, oh, well, that's admitting that

you don't have power, I think that's actually a good thing because then you can come to the American

people and say, we need more authority. And you can give it to us. Right. When when plan mold

bug, we go full plan mold bug. No, but also an issue of it isn't just necessarily power because

a lot of times the powers there, it takes time. And that's one thing you think, oh, you've got

four years. That's not a lot of time. So and for example, I'm sure you've got friends in the

admin. I certainly do. I've got more than one who has told me independently that they even though,

look, a lot of people are hopeful and hey, a lot can change between now and the midterm elections.

But a lot of people in the admin are planning as though there we will lose in the midterms.

There's been prepared for it, right? Yep. And they are fully expecting to have. And that's why

sometimes when I text certain friends of mine, you know, about something even remotely work

related, they just don't answer me. And I was like, what the hell? You know, you answer me about

totally personal things. And then and then they in when I met him in person, he said to me,

hey, look man, here's the deal. I've been told pretty much already that next year, we should

expect to have all of our phones subpoenaed and we're going to get the post. So I mean, like

they're planning for it. And just to precaution, hey, maybe things can change. It's not like

anybody's emitting defeat, but you've got to be able to plan for the contingency, right? And so

they're already planning on like every text and the email, well, email is already as a matter of

public record, right? But every text, I mean, even probably off their personal phones,

is going to get subpoenaed and they're going to get the post. They're planning for that right now.

As though just like, hey, this is your working assumption. So be very careful what you say,

even over signal anything like that. I mean, it's they're taking it pretty seriously. But it's

just an issue of time. Now, I'm very actually hopeful. I'm, I'm, you know, hope springs eternal.

I'm a forever white pillar kind of a guy. And, you know, I think that's a magic can happen between

now and this November. But also keep mind there's a lot of people who view this as like, look,

we really only have a year to get things done less than a year, right? To get anything done.

Because if we lose the house, then basically the expectation is that the remaining two years

is going to be completely embroiled in nothing but oversight hearings and impeachments, right?

Like that's kind of like, hey, if we lose that's why that's why we have to wait, you know, I agree

100% but that's why I was hoping for four million more deportations by now, you know?

No, I know. And I get it. And the other one that I heard a lot from folks at Friends at DHS

that kind of tell me is like, look, one great way to enable a lot of mass self deportations

is start requiring proof of citizenship, proof of ID for banking, you know, travel, all sorts of

stuff. We're based, you make this place unlivable. Apparently, there's some pretty serious banking

influence that's kind of trying to push them away from that. So that might change though. No,

no way, Tom. Really? I know. I know. This sounds crazy, right? Yeah. I know. There is. There might,

I've been told there's some of that, but and this might be the silver lining though to a potential,

a potential, you know, hey, if the, if this Supreme Court decision doesn't go our way and,

you know, we're not sure about that, is that might trigger us to take some more extreme measures

when it comes to deportations. Like we got to get something done here with the birth

right citizenship issue, you know, 100%. So we'll get, we'll get further in that in this

a second, but before we leave, Bonnie, I did want to get your thoughts on possible replacements.

Obviously pod blanches her deputies going to be stepping in to the breach in in the next few

months. But do you see him staying on permanently? Do you, you know, many people have floated

people like Armit Dillon or Ron DeSantis, possibly though, obviously his relationship with

the administration is as touch and go. Do you see any stronger figures? Because one of the arguments

people always gave and sadly, I thought they were probably right about that is like, you might think

Pam, Pam, Bonnie's bad, but who's behind her? You know, who, who, who you actually replace her with?

What I think matters, the biggest factor in all this is who can get confirmed, right? So it has

to be, and like that, that's the thing that like, yeah, I mean, sure, we'd all love that Steven Miller,

who's not even an attorney, right? To be, you know, the attorney general, we can put him in

attorney general. You can nominate him, but you, but you got to get him confirmed, you know,

and so I, so I think they're going to have to go. So I think I think a Lee Zeldin could be it.

Yeah. You know, people have already asked Mike Lee, but, but no, he's not leaving. He needs to,

you know, I'm sure that there are some folks who love it. So there's, there's one fewer

Senator bang in the drum about the Save America act, but, you know, I, if I to guess,

probably Lee Zeldin or could be Blanche, who could stay on your, or you'd still have to get confirmed

again. So I think those are the most likely ones. I think we're going to get somebody decent,

but I think it's got to be somebody that's confirmable that we don't need another circus of a,

of a Senate. Yeah. I, of course, agree with you about that, but I'm also worried, you know,

it's like, well, when we're fighting for that kind of viability, oh, they have to be able to

get approved. Well, that's how we lose a guy like Madgates in the first place. That's, you know,

ultimately how often we get half measures there. It looks like Tom might have frozen, so I don't

know if he's still there. You still there, Tom? He might have had an internet connection issue.

Hopefully we'll get him back soon. But either way, yeah, I am worried about the oh, well,

it's whoever we can get approved line. It is, of course, tactically correct. You do obviously

have to get throughout someone through the Senate approval process, but, you know, the people

who can get through that and will actually do the job seem probably like a smaller and smaller

list every day. And that's extremely concerning. Yeah, it looks like Tom dropped out there,

but we'll get back to him as soon as he is able to reconnect. So next thing I wanted to talk to you

guys about today is, of course, the Supreme Court talking about birthright citizenship. One of the

most exciting things that the Trump administration was able to announce was its interest in challenging

birthright citizenship. The 14th Amendment has been poorly understood for a long time. It's been

manipulated. Originally, it was part of the 13th, 14th, 15th Amendment. This is what we often call

the Civil War amendments that have. And after the Civil War, 13th Amendment, outlawed slavery,

14th Amendment had lots of different parts, but one of them was, of course, adjustment to citizenship

to address whether or not slaves of the children of slaves would be considered Americans for the

purpose of citizenship. And the 15th Amendment secured voting rights for African-American men

at the time. So a big 14th Amendment switchover was when we stopped seeing it as something that was

specifically made to write the wrongs of the Civil War. And instead was turned into a blank check

for giving pretty much everyone citizenship. Here's Tom. Back here, it looks like they were trying

to take you out, but glad you were able to reconnect here. But I was just diving into the, yes,

but glad you're able to reconnect. It looks like, like I was saying there, though, that the Supreme

Court is looking at the 14th Amendment challenge here, looking at birthright citizenship. And it's

unfortunately not looking great for the Trump administration. I want to play a few clips from some

of our illustrious justices before we break this down real quick. Here is Justice Jackson on,

well, what we can only say is one of the most amazing assertions we've ever had during a Supreme

Court hearing was thinking about this. And I think they're various sources that say this,

that you can have, you obviously have permanent allegiance based on being born in whatever country

you're from. That's what everybody recognizes. But you also have local allegiance when you are on

the soil of this other sovereign. And I was thinking, you know, I'm I US citizen and visiting Japan.

And what it means is that, you know, if I steal someone's wallet in Japan, the Japanese authorities

can arrest me and prosecute me. It's allegiance meaning can they control you as a matter of law?

I can also rely on them if my wallet is stolen to, you know, under Japanese law go and prosecute

the person who has stolen it. So there's this relationship based on even though I'm a temporary

traveler. I'm just on vacation in Japan. I'm still locally owing allegiance in that.

Tom, I'm not a legal scholar, but I feel like when I listen to Supreme Court justices, I shouldn't

actively lose IQ points. And when you assert that what loyalty means is when someone has power to

arrest you, like what kind of just like insane amount of brain damage you have to take to this

even offer that argument out loud at a party much less as an active Supreme Court justice.

We're at feeder kid levels of justice. It is really bad. You know, I imagine Anthony

and Scalia is, you know, rolling over in his grave right now when you hear stuff like that. And

also it just really does concern me because we've seen a complete deterioration and dumbing down

of even among elites. You know, I was just reading the other day how, you know, Stanford is quietly told

that you told VCs and tech companies that, hey, I stand for graduate today isn't the same as they

were 15 or 20 years ago, right? And I don't want to say it's DEI, but it is DEI. And everyone wants to

make, and of course you're being called a sexist or a racist or both or something. But look,

we all know that she was explicitly chosen for that position because she was a black female.

And when you have that, I think, you know, it just further inflames accusations of race inequality

and bell curves and all the rest. And it further inflames that. I think it's really terrible.

You know, I see Clarence Thomas every morning, right? We go to the same at Daily Mass. We go to

the same church and see him every morning. And it's super nice guy. But one thing that's important

though is, is, you know, he's a sharp guy and all that, but he's getting older. And he clearly,

and I saw some people point this out on X that they really need to is he needs to retire in the

next couple of years. He really does. And he, because we have to be able to get our guys in there,

because if he waits out past this term, he's going to be unfortunately too old, you know,

and I'm just being real, you know, and that's just going to be really unfortunate. So people don't

realize, and we always thought we got really lucky with the Brett Kavanaugh, which we did,

an Amy Comey Barrett. Yeah, I'm not really sure what to, I don't know what else to say,

only that it's just like, look, this is, this is really bad. I want to get all Jacksonian about it

and say, you know, the Chief Justice made a decision, let him enforce it. But, you know, I don't

know if that's in the cards right now. Yeah, I mean, we'll get to the wider responses in a second.

But I will say, you know, I love Clarice Thomas. And I really appreciate that he, like Atlas,

is currently holding the entire American constitutional order aloft on his shoulders.

That said, I really don't, you know, it's like people who call for the Constitutional Convention.

I get it, I get it in theory, but in practice, I don't think we can produce a Constitution as good

as the one we already have, which isn't working at the moment. I don't know that we can replace,

you know, him with anybody who would be worthy of it. I am honestly really, really skeptical of

the Trump administration's ability to get a Chief Justice approved or get a Justice approved

to replace Clarice Thomas. That would be anywhere near as stalwart as Clarice Thomas is.

I'm sure they'd be better than whoever, you know, a Democrat would select. And so in that,

I guess, tactical sense, I agree, but it would be a significant loss. You can't just swap

somebody into Clarice Thomas's place. He's basically unreplaceable. I agree with that,

but at least so much you're getting somebody who's going to vote the way you want to, right?

And also, let's be honest, like, look, the Supreme Court was created and probably up until

presumably 50 years ago, maybe it was terrible back in the 1800s and we just aren't aware of it as well.

But like, look, you're when you're electing a liberal judge versus a conservative judge,

you know, the conservative judges are going to rule based on strict constitutionality, legal

precedence, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. And the liberal judges are going to vote for what

they want, right? I mean, who is the really smart guy who said that the side that wants to play

by the rules will always lose to the side that wants to win? Was that you? Someone, someone,

yeah, someone wise probably said that. I mean, I mean, I repeat it all the time. And a lot of

people don't like it when I say that, you know, especially my normie friends and they're kind of,

oh, oh, yeah, well, oh, I mean, that's that's simply it. So I don't know a way to get somebody

there. I mean, we look, we just have somebody who's going to vote the right way. At this point,

it isn't even as hardly even a matter of their intellect. Sadly, it's got dumb down to that point

where it's like, look, we got to get a right winger in there because guess what, they're going

to put left wingers in there, you know, like you might say what you want about Amy Coney Barrett

because she's, you know, moderate, moderate, right on most things. But, you know, the Dems never

would have put somebody like that there. Sure. You know, so they never would have. So, I mean,

unfortunately, that's the game that we're playing right now. I mean, it sadly is. And again, you

know, because generally speaking, the republicans are beautiful losers, right? I mean, that's kind

of it. So it's, it's, it's a very sad state of affairs. I, I, I, I'm not hopeful about this

decision that comes out, I guess, in the next month or two, I suppose. And I think we probably know

how it's going to go. Hope springs eternal, though. But then, you know, then the next question they

had when they had, you know, our friend Theo Wall, he, I saw him on an interview on Newsmax,

he's like, we got to get serious about talking about, you know, a constitutional amendment to the

14th. That's a massive, I mean, yeah, I get it. We've got what 25 states that are, you know,

that are, have read legislatures. I mean, maybe we could get something going with that. But I,

I think, sadly, I think things have to get a hell of a lot worse before they can get better.

And they're already pretty bad. I mean, we're not at like United Kingdom levels of bad,

but it's not looking great on, on that front, you know, so, well, Tom, I'm the black pill merchant

on this show. Okay, it's my job to be the, the, the downer. You, you can't outplay me here,

but you have somehow, no, look, I'm with you, you know, it, it is a sad moment when you have to

look me in the eye and say, or in realistically, we can't put intelligent people on the court. We

just have to put people who vote the way we want them to on the court. You're of course right. You're

100% right. I have no argue with there, but still a little piece of me dies inside, but the,

the Supreme Court, we just can't find nine people who aren't absolutely idiots to

dissed on the court, but you're, you're, you're absolutely right. And I, I think that,

well, let's, let's play the second clip and then we'll get into. Oh, there's more. Oh, yeah,

there's, there's more. I've got one more black pill for you, sir. Just hold on tight.

Okay, let's talk about its applications. So, you know, there are some, I can imagine it being

messy and some applications. So how, what would you do with what the common law called

fanlinks? You know, the thing about this is, then you have to adjudicate if you're looking at

parents and if you're looking at parents domicile, then you have to adjudicate both residents

in intent to say, what if you don't know who the parents are? I think, I think there are

marginal cases that one I think has the benefit of being addressed in 1401 app where it talks about

yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, what about the constitution? Under the constitution, it's, it's, it's,

I mean, look, domicile is a constitutional standard in all kinds of other situations. Well,

and it's hard. Diversity jurisdiction, personal jurisdiction, sorry. Well, yeah, in personal

jurisdiction, I mean, 1332, diversity jurisdiction. And the thing is, it has to be litigated because

it turns on intent. And both the virtue of both usoli and usanguiness, whichever one you pick,

it's a bright line rule. How would it work? How would you adjudicate these cases? You're not

going to know at the time of birth for some people whether they have the intent to stay or not,

including, including US citizens, by the way. I mean, what if you have someone who is living in

Norway with, you know, their, their husband and family, but a still US citizen comes home and has

her child here and goes back. How do we know whether the child is a US citizen because the parent

didn't have an intent to stay? I'd say make two points one, practical one. So basically, it's going

to be hard. And we're going to have to think about it. And so that's why we can't have any kind

of immigration restriction. Like, I'm not sure what these questions are leading to. Like, yes,

of course, we would have to make a case by case determination. Yes, of course, not everyone

born in the United States would then be a citizen. That's the whole point. That's literally how it

works in the vast majority of countries in the world. But there it seems to think like that's

going to be some insurmountable problem. How did she think this would work? What was the conception

here that we would just have this immediate understanding of exactly who is in the country and who

gets citizenship right away? I just don't understand this objection at all.

Yeah, I don't either. It just again, it's an example of showing like the extreme outlier

edge case as an exception. But my mind, that proves the rule, right? It's that extent. And so,

of course, obviously, it would be, you know, now granted, I know that I'm sure plays a factor

because Amy Koby-Berry, who's a very lovely lady, she really is, is, you know, but she's got

adopted kids from Africa, I believe, right? And I think that there's a very soft spot in her heart

when she looks at this, when she's like, don't deport the foreign children, right? They deserve

at homes and not like, you know, I know that obviously that judges and justices are supposed to

put all that stuff aside. But I mean, I think in her case, I think that maybe she's not legally

conflicted to the point, I'm not a lawyer, right? I didn't go to law school, but maybe she's not

legally conflicted to the point where she'd have to recuse herself, but she has to, I keep that

mind because I do believe that that is something that is just in her heart because, you know, she looks

at her own family and she could see like, well, what if, you know, kids like mine are getting deported

and that will cause them to do a lot of mental gymnastics? It happens all the time and it's not

unique to women, it might be a little more prevalent women, maybe call me a sexist or something,

but I think it is and but it can be like that with everyone where it's when you have your own

personal situation and you think about that and you kind of internalize that and then it can really

it can really skew your view on something like this. And I know that Supreme Court justices are

supposed to be anything but that. I think it still happens though. No, I think you're absolutely

right. And the fact that it doesn't seem to dawn on her that we are kind of, you know, staring

into the gaping mob history of this moment that like this really is a critical moment, you know,

for civilization for the continuance of our country is pretty worrying. That's that's a very

concerning thing that she's not, you know, seeming to take that very seriously. Now, as you were saying,

if we're in a situation where the 14th Amendment is interpreted in its current

manifestation to allow for birthright citizenship and it unfortunately looks like we might be

heading down that road, then our options become pretty radical, right? Like as you said, you know,

the 14th Amendment then at that point has to be amended or repealed. I'm going for repealed,

by the way, the 14th Amendment is an absolute disaster that radically changed the way that the

country was run, but that's a much higher, you know, that's a heavier lift. The point being,

we need a radical change in the way we understand citizenship and if it can't be done

legislatively, literally because the Supreme Court says the 14th Amendment means this thing

and you can't overrule it unless you actually change the 14th Amendment, then we are in some really

serious problem because if the Biden administration can bring 8 million plus illegals in during four

years and the Trump administration can deport like maybe 4 million if they're lucky in four years,

then birthright citizenship just defaults to the fact that the children of these people will get to

vote and they will vote Democrat. At that point, Tom, how do I have a legitimate election ever

again in my country? Like how do we look people in the eye and pretend that politics, elections,

any of this stuff is in any way constitutional in line with the founding? You know, you can believe

in all of that stuff, but if we don't fix this, then the story of American government is going to be

a punchline and not something anyone's going to honor as a legitimating factor.

I, you know, sadly, I do feel that it's one of those things where it will have to get worse before

it can get better. You know, and I thought it was getting really bad with, you know, 8 million,

however many illegals came in and we've got at least 20, 30, some say 50 million people who are

here illegally. I mean, it might have to get that worse and like where, you know, look at like Mike

Anton, great Claremont man, you know, he talks about we might have to have like, you know, a red

Caesar or a blue Caesar, right? We have the way things one way or another get so bad and that we

might have to see radical change. We might just have to see a plan mold bug or something like that

happen and, you know, keep in mind that even other liberal countries like, for example, I spent a

little bit of time in Australia and I had no idea and I think it's something that's changed in

the very recent years, but up until just like eight or two, I was out there about 10, 12 years ago

and I was there for a couple of months and, you know, what blew me away is how strict they are on

their immigration and they're very selective of who they went in. I mean, they were happy to turn

boats of Rohingya away like get out of here. We don't, you know, we don't, I mean, get the hell out,

like they'd turn boats away and then, for example, I had a member of my family and in law who

he moved to Australia to take a job. This guy went to, you know, a very good school. He had an

MBA. He had, he worked for a software company to work there for a year. He got recruited to open

up an office in Sydney. He had to hire, his firm had to hire an immigration lawyer and like go

through about six months worth of paperwork. This guy, I mean, who was like, and you basically have

to show how you are a significant value add to this. And this guy is like, you know, goofy white guy

from America, you know, this is not a, you know, poor refugee or anything like that. And you had to

like really show how you are adding value to the country and like legally and like, and that was

Australia when they're pretty liberal and some other things too. And it's like if that's what the

Australians were doing. I mean, maybe I've heard different things in the past few years. It's gotten

yeah, they've unfortunately are now getting overwhelmed despite that policy. That's how bad it

is is even with that policy. They, you know, still are. I'm not, you know, I'm a big, my second

favorite country in the world is Singapore. And I know you're talking about that recently with

Jay Birdon on his show. And, you know, I went to graduate school in Singapore and I've got a lot

of friends who are Singaporean. And to me, it's like, oh, this is amazing of what a, you know,

a right-wing authoritarian country could look like where, you know, but maybe I'm just wish-casting

too much. I don't think so. So yeah, I think it's just going to have to get worse before it gets

better. I hope it doesn't. I really don't. But, you know, we're just going to have to wait and see.

But yet again, despite all the blackpilling, despite all the blackpilling, there are still really

great things that we're getting done. I mean, truly. So, and I'm not just saying this because I'm

a, you know, a plan trusting support of the president, although I am. But I do mean that, you know,

I mean, so there are things that are getting a lot better here. So, you know, some of the stuff

we're just going to have to wait and see. Yeah, I think that ultimately you're right that the

cycle of regimes is just going to have to complete itself. And the, the, the, the, the wheel that

that turns on is Caesarism. So I think that ultimately, you know, but at the same time, this is, you know,

I think that's why that's what a lot of people wanted from Trump, whether, you know, and it's kind

of interesting because you even see it played out on the left, like the left, they, even though Trump

doesn't have the power of the dictator, they need to treat him as if he has the power of the dictator,

right? Like for some reason, they, they're projecting on into them. And then the expectations of

people on the right are that he's a dictator. And I think that reveals, and Congress doesn't want

to do anything because what they want is a dictator. And I think what that reveals is what everybody

wants is just a dictator. Like they just, that's the only thing that anyone really thinks is going to

break through this. And it's all just kind of the dancing in the show before someone finally pulls

the trigger, which is why a lot, you know, a lot of people looked at Jan six and we're like,

well, you know, what do you expect? Yeah. No, don't, don't fish in the Rubicon, baby. Like,

let's get across it or, or don't mess around. Stop, you know, stop tap dance. And that's why I said,

it would be better if the Trump administration would just say, look, we want to do these things.

And we don't have the power to do them, but we can have the power to do them. There is a way,

there is a way forward, but we don't have the power to do it now, you know, and the left did have

their dictator. They had FDR. That's right. You know, and, and I mean, that guy just steamrolled

Congress and people were happy with it for the most part. I mean, people, well, I take that back.

I mean, there were a lot of people weren't happy with it, but it was, it was something at the very

least he was doing something and he was creating change and he was being effective. You might not like

it, but he was being really effective. And I think one of the biggest things that comes down to

is, and this probably will segue well when we start talking about the Iran stuff, is winners win,

right? Like, everybody loves Americans love a winner. And when you win it, things, even if it's

something that not everyone is thrilled about, it just, it just helps. So, um, yeah, I don't know

what's going to happen. I'll be honest, I wish I had some crystal ball, but I would not be expecting

any crazy radical change that happened, but it is dramatically better than in the first term,

and in the first Trump term. And I think, you know, let's just wait and see what happens. I think

the biggest thing that people can do, honestly, is just make sure we win, we win in the midterms.

And that's not necessarily just writing a check because sometimes I hate getting all the stupid text

messages to, right? You know, New King Rich texted me this morning. I don't know about you,

but you know, I get all these crazy text by friend. I need your help because, you know, you give

money to a couple of candidates. And next thing I'm on some database and I get like literally 30

text messages a day. But I think it really is not just if you can't give money, but also just

to like actually knock on doors. And even if you think your Senator or Congressman or candidate

is total milk toast, maybe they are. It's not about that. You just got to get the seat.

And I mean, that is something I think where a lot of the libertarians that you're talking about

with with Jay Burton the other day is a big part of that because it's like, well, it's not perfect.

It's not exactly what I want. It's like, guys, don't let great be the enemy of good, right?

Like it's it's it's there's a certain amount of pragmatism that a lot of folks who are who watch

politics from the outside don't really understand that the people on the inside have to deal with.

And that's just what our system is. Yes, it's devolved. Yes, it has degenerated.

And maybe it's going to get a hell of a lot worse. And then maybe we're going to see a big change.

But there could be a lot of really bad up people with that too that nobody really wants.

I don't know, man. Like, I think the right move is like, we just got to win in the midterms.

That's the best way to get it. I mean, it really is. The best way to preserve all this is to

keep the house and keep the Senate. I mean, right now it's like they're really worried about the house

and the fair enough and maybe even worried about the Senate. So we're, you know, because we know

of what considered that if the Republicans take the, or the Dems take the Senate, it's like filibuster's gone.

You know, I just wish we would actually use power because the Republicans, you know, the cocaine

conservatives and heroin liberals argument is extremely true where it's like, you know, the

the Republicans are really good at getting everyone stirred up. We got to stop the liberal left

and the extreme left wing and the far leftist and all this. Like, they're really good at

stirring up the pot, raising money, getting people excited about it. But once it comes time to

actually govern, they're often, I'm really talking about Congress here. They're often left,

much is left to be desired to put it mildly. Yeah, well, and that's the huge issue. Like,

I totally agree with you that obviously losing the midterms is terrible. You want to preserve

at least what you've gained at this point, whether you feel the Trump administration has done

enough or not, it's clearly a better option than the left and will only be hampered by the

entrance of the Democrats into control of any part of the government. That said, Tom, there's only

so many times we can tell people, look, we know Congress isn't going to do anything, but you should

just vote for the GOP anyway. In case Congress decides to do something and then there'll be some GOP

people in there. There's also the huge problem. Look, we're going to get into this now, so let's

get into it. But if we gave one crap about the midterms, starting a war, a deeply unpopular war

in driving up gas prices by a couple dollars right before the midterm is pretty much the worst

possible move you could make politically. Now, maybe it had to be done militarily, but I'm really

skeptical about that too. And I think a lot of people are, and so a lot of people are saying,

well, then if the Republican Party and Donald Trump didn't care about the midterms, why should I

care? If they couldn't hold themselves off for nine months to start this war, it's not like

the Iranians were going to have a nuke in nine months. That's not like they were going to be

firing things into New York City in nine months. If they can't hold off nine months to secure

this essential election, then what should I be doing? Now, as we said, the chief of staff of the

army has just been fired. Multiple generals have been fired. You probably assume that some of that

has to do with the fact that things have not been going as we would hope. We're obviously going to

militarily defeat Iran. I have full faith in the American military to do amazing things. They

prove that in Venezuela. Obviously, we have a service full of, you know, completely competent

operators who are going to get things done. But it's very clear that once again, despite the

ability of the American military, we have not factored in the political cost that is required,

because wars as you probably very well are aware are not fought just on the battlefield, especially

now today. It's about the will of the American people. The Iranians know that their greatest weapon

in this war is not machine guns. It's not nukes. It's the American economy. They understand that

their their greatest weapon against the Trump administration and the American military is the

American economy. And if they can make Americans bleed in the pocketbook, then eventually we will

lose resolve on the battlefield. And then it doesn't matter how good our troops are because ultimately

that's not the deciding factor for what's happening there. So I guess my question is when we know

the political ramifications and we know how critical the midterms are. What are we doing in Iran,

Tom? Help me out. So I was in the run up to this. I had a lot of doubts and reservations about us

going into this for all the same reasons you have. And look, I have I don't like hate Israel or

anything like that. I've been to Israel a few times. I have a few friends who live in Israel.

I even worked for an Israeli company actually my first job out of the military. I worked for an

Israeli defense contractor because it makes really good tech that I didn't even know. That's going

to help you in the comments later on by the way. Oh, I know. I know. It's over. I know. I'm

I'm yeah. And then also I know it's not really bad. And I was about to mention as well that I do

a couple of media appearances like this. And I've been on Fox a few times. I think I'm going on

later today or tonight. And I got asked by Mark Levine of all people and who I am not a fan of.

I'm like his producers reached out. And I said, you guys looked at my Twitter. You guys clearly

have it. And I am not a fan. And so but I went on his show on his weekend show. And I told him as

much. I said, Hey, look, I wasn't a fan of this operation at all. But the thing is I think there's

a very American perspective to look at this. And yes, I do believe that Israel does have a

inappropriately large amount of influence over over our government and especially over Congress,

right? Look at Israel as another foreign country. The same way we look at Italy or France or Spain.

It's like, I don't hate them. I don't like that. They got their interests and all that. But here's

one thing that I think a lot of folks who are kind of and it's kind of a long if you allow me.

Is one, I think that if you if someone believes that hey, it's it's nothing but Benjamin Netanyahu

like whispering, you know, into Trump's ear and tell them what do we got to do this. And it's only

the pro-Israel folks like, look, you're kind of taking agency away from Donald Trump because like

that guy thinks what he thinks. And I don't think he's going to allow himself to get pushed around

by people. He makes up his own mind on a lot of things. And remember, he goes back 10 years,

10, 15 years saying like, I bombed the shit out of him. Am I allowed to say shit? Sorry.

You're an engineer. All right, sorry. You know, and but also he gets, but he gets pissed off,

you know, and remember back last summer where he's like, they don't know what the fuck they're

doing because he's pissed off at the Israelis. And look on the on the day, like, you know,

everyone thinks that Israel is holding us by the short hairs. I think we've got Israel by the

short hairs. Okay. So all that aside, right? Like, look, there is a real case for from the

strictly American point of view, even if you take Israel out of it, right? And that is, is like,

look, I do believe that like we cannot let Israel get a nuclear weapon. Was Israel going to get a

well, right, we're not going to let him get nuclear weapon, but we say it's too late. But the thing

is is like, I do believe it and thing is I talked to folks who are in the game. And it's like,

they were at that point where they're building up so much conventional that they could defend

against that. And further, here's a deal. If we have an Iran with a nuclear weapon, with a long

range strike capability, which they've already shown they have, because they fired some medium-range

missiles to Diego Garcia, who that what they said they didn't have, then the issue though is because

all these authoritarian dictatorships look at nuclear weapons as their insurance policy, because

and they can start doing whatever they want. Here's another example, right? North Korea.

North Korea is, you know, like nobody messes with them because they deliberately, they very wisely

say you could call the North Korean the Kim family crazy. They're not stupid. I look at them more

as like an organized crime family, right? They're like a mafia family that runs that. And they want,

and I haven't spent a lot of time in Korea having written part of the Korean what we call operation

plans, the war plans for if we go to war with North Korea. That is their ace in the hole,

because they know that nobody will ever screw with them at all because the risk of having a nuclear

weapons, right? So all of these smaller mid-range, you know, countries want to get nuclear weapons,

because they know it will be, it is cheaper than a standing army, believe it or not, it's hard

to have, but also it is an absolute insurance policy against anyone else. Further, when another,

you know, authoritarian dictator that we don't like, Mo Mar Gaddafi, you know, when he had,

was working on a program, and he saw the raid at writing on the wall, and he willingly went to,

you know, the UN, everybody, and he said, hey, I'm going to give it up. I'm going to give it up.

And I said this on Mark Levin, by the way, and I said, all of this I said on his show is afterwards,

you know, and what happened to him? He got sotomized with a bayonet on the hood of a pickup truck.

That's what happened to him. So, okay, so that's putting yourself in the Iranians,

you know, like you got to have what we call tactical empathy as input, doesn't mean sympathy,

it just means you got to be able to put yourself in your enemy shoes. What would I do if I were them?

They're doing every, like, if I were the Iranians, I did just about everything. I, we got to stall,

play the game, eventually get a nuclear weapon that we can get small enough that we can mountain

on a missile, and that way we can do that. What makes Iran different from North Korea that just

wants to be left alone and just have their own little prison kingdom, right? What they, what they want

is like they've openly expressed hostility towards, you know, towards Israel, said they want to

nuke them. And even if they don't nuke them, there is, they're holding that threat of that overhead

that makes it very difficult for the Israelis for anyone, you know, to actually attack them,

and including the Gulf States. So, it's like quite frankly, we're taking a lot more influence

from the Gulf States than we are from the Israelis. So, you know, now, granted, after I went on

Mark Levin, I went to a little reception with a bunch of the guys from New Founding and a lot of

fellow right-winger guys were all there, and I'm like, yeah, I just, I just did Mark Levin's show,

and they're like, holy shit. And so, I was being referred to as Levin's top goi, which I thought

was kind of funny. And so, I don't know if I'm allowed to say that, but, but the thing is, man,

but it's just like, look, there really is an American case. So, I had a lot of doubts and reservations.

However, okay, with all that said, we're actually doing really, really well to give you an idea

within the first like week or so, we took out like 7,000 targets, which is insane, right?

You go back to Desert Storm, one of my buddies, who I worked with, up like that, he, he was one of

these older guys, he flew the first missions in Desert Storm, flew an A6 intruder, badass plane.

Anyways, they did like 300 in the first week, and all of these are precision munitions, right?

So, I mean, it's, it's actually pretty impressive. We've totally screwed them up, like they don't

have a Navy, yeah, could they get a few pot shots with some missiles, and a few drones here and

there, and then somehow they shot down like one of our planes, you know, we've lost more aircraft

to friendly fire from the freaking Kuwaitis, and, you know, and one of our own planes had crashed,

you know, out inside a combat that we have to, to the Iranians, we're kicking the shit out of

them, like we really are, and then we're taking away any of their offensive capability, we're killing

anybody who tries to say anything that we don't like, I think we actually are going to get a deal.

So, I believe that Trump, and go back to the political implications, right? Winners win. I believe

that in the next 30 days, maybe less, and look, and you can go back to the tape and maybe I'll

eat my words, but I don't think I will, is that we are going to wrap this thing up, you know,

for the most part, I think you're going to see gas prices normalize, and then also it's like,

look, we got to start handing off responsibility because this is part of what our real pivot

to the Pacific needs to be from a foreign policy standpoint. The Under Secretary of War for Policy,

Bridge Colby, awesome guy, freaking genius, right? Niceest guy you ever met, too. I read his book,

I don't know, I don't know.

Oh, we might have lost Tom again there. His connection's been a little spotty. Give him a second,

if not, I'll talk a little bit about what he was discussing there. I certainly want to answer

some of his comments directly, but obviously if he's disconnected, I'll have to hopefully retread

some of that when he comes back. So, a few things that I want to discuss about what he was saying

there. The first is, you know, the idea that Trump is his own guy and he makes his own decisions,

and he's not going to be pressured into this stuff. I've heard this a lot, and I think, you know,

often the kind of counter, oh, there's Tom, you're back. I am so sorry, man, I just so you know,

the logo, it wasn't my regular Wi-Fi, it's actually our entire network and our neighborhood has been

caught. So, I'm not sure. DC Internet is now what you're hoping for there. Yeah.

Yeah, you're just cutting up a little bit. Hopefully,

let's see if the connection here will hold on.

Can you hear me? Okay.

All right. Well, like I was saying, one of the things I'm concerned about when it comes to the idea

that Trump is just going to make these decisions on his own is that obviously Trump has been highly

influenced by advisors previously. All right. This is a good and a big thing. Oh, do we got it back?

I'm really sorry, man. I had to go on my phone hotspot. Can you hear me now?

Yes, I can hear you now. You seem to be clearing up a little bit. It's, yeah, never good

when your cell phone Wi-Fi is better than your Wi-Fi. No, it is. I know. It's the local internet

has been canceling on us and it's like, not can't, but it's like, it's like, it's not my home Wi-Fi.

It's like the Cox cable, which I'm about to leave now. I'm going to get a Starlink, finally.

I'm just going to get a Starlink. So, like I was saying to the audience before

you cut out there, just to kind of come back and discuss some of the points you were going over,

when you say that, you know, Trump is his own man and he's not going to be over influenced by

others. I mean, this is the guy who put Anthony Fauci in charge of the country, right? So,

I love Donald Trump. He's done a lot of great things and I've heard this line of reasoning before,

but I think it's more of like a gut check of like, of course, Trump wouldn't get, you know,

manipulated. Like we've seen him get manipulated before. Of course, he wouldn't shut down the whole

country like we saw him kind of. Actually, I think he would. Like this is kind of a good thing about

Donald Trump a lot of times. He'll listen to very smart people when he's listening to CNN Miller

or JD Vance. I'm very excited that he's listening to Council. But when he's surrounded by a bunch

of Neocons, I don't know. I don't know if the well, Donald Trump has made his own decisions

thing really holds up. You know what I'm saying? Like I think it actually matters who's in the room

with Donald Trump and he can make very great decisions when he gets the right advice, but he needs,

you know, that circle around him and that's what many people have, you know, when Joe Kent step

down, that's what he said. It's like, look, a lot of people are cut out of the room. It was

hard to get access. It was hard for him to hear other voices. And so that's my concern. It's not

like Donald Trump is incapable of making great decisions. Obviously, he has made great decisions,

but he is obviously very swayed by advisors. We've seen that play out over and over again.

Point well taken. I think there are plenty of cases where that and sorry, but one thing I was

getting to before the elders of Zion cut my internet connection. I joking, guys. No, but what

did things as well is that I think the intention is to wrap this up, right? And then we're in a

much better situation. And then finally, thanks to guys like Bridge Coal, we can actually pivot

to the Pacific because I think that's the real enduring policy, foreign policy issue we have to

deal with. But we had to deal with that, knock it out right away. Hopefully that, you know, take

care very quickly. I think you're going to see gas prices normalize and then we can pivot to

the Pacific and largely, you know, are not completely, but like pull out of the Middle East for the

most part and stop making it the foreign policy concern because look, it's like, you know, the

ideas to have look, let the Middle East run itself and let the Saudis be in because they're working

with the Israelis now a little bit, let the Saudis, everyone else, let the Gulf States cooperate

to run the Middle East, you know, let Europe worry about Ukraine, but we need to worry about China.

And that's like, you know, Bridge Colby's entire thesis is China is the only game in town for

the United States and no, we cannot walk into gum at the same time. That's what we have to worry

about. So I hope that, you know, Christmas will come early for Bridge Colby and he can actually

start working on a lot of those issues. But I think that is the goal. Here's one question that I

don't know the answer to and I probably should have like investigated this for coming on here,

is everyone says, well, oil is a global commodity. Okay, sure, I can understand that. But we are the,

you know, the largest oil producer in the world in the United States and also we're getting a ton

of oil from Venezuela now because there are best friends. You know, now that we have that,

I understand why American gas prices can't come down more. I just don't, maybe that that's my,

I took a macroeconomics course. I was kind of hungover through a lot of it. I'm not really sure,

but you know, I that's one question that I have that probably somebody in the comments can tell me

where where I'm jacked up. But I think that's why we're continuing to see the supply be fine in

America, right? Like you're actually getting gas shortages in places in Europe and the, you know,

the where the supply is actually getting cut off. So I think that's why we're continuing to see the

flow of oil, but the prices will still be higher because it's a global commodity. So we will continue

to have full access due to the amount we produce and our neighbors produce. So that will be the

upside as we are not getting hit as hard as a place like Europe or probably Australia, you know,

these other areas that might be fed more by those, you know, those outlets that are connected

to the strait of her moves. But we will still feel the pain because, you know, it's, it doesn't really

matter again because it's a global commodity. The price still gets jacked up even though the supply

continues to flow. That would be, I'm not an econ major either. But here's some to think about.

But here's some to think about if that's the case, right? And why, why is it a good idea to allow

a country like Iran nuclear armed to control that such a big portion of the global economy, right?

Like that's like not a great move. I, I, you know, so that's that's one thing where it's like, okay,

if they are even stronger and more able to defend themselves,

ourselves, especially with nuclear weapons, then what does that say that like maybe that's just

a sad state of affairs that we need, we can't really stand and it might be painful and maybe it's

the right thing to do. So, you know, I'm, I look forward to reading the comments, but I mean,

it's just one of those things where it's like, I don't think that it's necessarily that it's like

the Israelis who are, you know, being the pop-up masters behind everything. I think that even though

they do have outside influence over our foreign policy, which I wish they didn't, I really do,

you know, those two things can be true at the same time. Maybe that, that it's like, hey,

this could, it could be the right thing to do. And also, the Israelis need to chill, you know?

Well, that's, that's my, so Tom, that's my ultimate inclination, right? It's not that I don't

understand there being some military interest for the United States in a non-nuclear Iran. Like,

I totally get why we want that, right? That is not my issue, though whether or not we had to go

and direct military conflict to resolve that problem is a wider question. My main concern,

and the one that like Marco Rubio made very clear is that Israel is dictating our timeline on this.

So this was my, from the beginning, when I started hearing the explanations to why we're going to

a war with Iran, it wasn't, we need to cut off access to oil to China. It wasn't because ultimately,

we're worried about, you know, this or this thing that impacts the United States. The answer was,

Iran is a major sponsor of terror. They're looking for freedom. The Iranian people will

greet us as liberators, you know, the, like all the Neocontocking points. And I was like, why is

this administration that has never talked to me like this, suddenly talking to me like this?

And once Marco Rubio comes out and says, well, it's because Israel was going to go and we had to go

to, then it's like, oh, this makes sense. Maybe the something was we were going to do,

but it did make sense to do it now. And the only reason we're doing it now is because Israel's

influence. That doesn't mean that Israel runs the entire United States. But I don't want to be

lashed to any ally that then tells me when to go to war, Tom, like we're the United States.

We tell you to get in the back seat and we'll slap you around a little bit if we hear you

mouth off again. Like that's how you respond to Israel putting pressure on you being the actual

people who are doing the fighting because Israel's made it clear. They're not putting boots on the

ground. Okay. That's not happening. They're busy fighting in Lebanon and in, and in like five

other areas, they had, they had, they don't have the military to do this. We just lost enough

15. We just lost an A 10 today. Like it's very clear that we are constantly in the scenario where

we're going to win. Again, I have full confidence. We're going to militarily dominate Iran. But they

didn't have the straight closed until we did this. And now they have, you know, I'm not going to

nerd out too hard on you. But it's basically the, the scenario in Dune where politics is going to

blow up all the spice. You don't have power because you have the superior military. You have power

because you have control of the flow of energy. Right. And I don't think that changes in the next

30 days. Unfortunately, I think Iran can produce enough drones and fire enough missiles to,

and put enough mines in the strait to control it for a long time. And that means we're probably

going to be there for many months after even if we make a deal with a government theoretically,

somewhere we haven't blown up, like we are probably still going to have a military deployment

permanently in the strait of our moves to make sure that we can keep oil flowing. And again,

I just don't think this is going to be a popular thing for the midterms. If you wait until after

the midterms, I could understand this move more. I think it's pre midterm timeline is almost

entirely dictated by the fact that a tiny country gets to determine when we go to war. And I'm just

not a fan of that though. I agree that those comments by Secretary Rubio were regrettable.

I agree. You know, and so, but also one thing to keep mine. I'm not sure if I agree that

they'll still be firing drones and missiles left and right. Also, one thing worth pointing out

in this link that I have very detailed knowledge on. The, as of today, to my knowledge, actually,

I'm almost certain we have not found one mine, not one. There's reports of the mine going out

is not a single ship. I mean, I hope I get skewed in the comments, but I've been looking

not a single ship and also like my job as a former Navy EOD officer. We're the ones that clear

minds, right? My little brother is still an EOD officer. He was the operations officer for

the Middle East Task Force in charge of clearing the strait, right? Several years ago. And like,

there's guys who are there right now. There's a couple of things about that. But first off,

I do know that we have been searching quietly. We have ways to search without putting our minds

into the water and all that. We have ways to do that. And we have yet to find one. And also,

there's yet to be a ship struck by a mine. Most likely, that's because we got left of splash

as we call it. We're basically, we took out all their mine lane capabilities because in order to

mine something effectively, you got to lay a lot of mines. And even though it's a very narrow

straight, it's still one big body of the water. And you got to lay a ton of mines. So, no mines

have been found as of yet. Maybe one could be, they call it indiscriminate mining. It's where

basically it's like, hey, there might be one here one there. But the thing is, I think the drones

are actually could be a bigger threat than mines right now. But also, it's like, I think we are

going to be able to take out the vast majority of their missiles and their drone capabilities. But

it also just comes down to perception because the underwriters don't want to, like the Lloyds of

London, for example, don't want to ensure some of those ships that's becoming an issue now.

Now, we had a solution to that that that helped a little, but we got the development finance

corporation, which is a bank, essentially, that we have. We had them do some underwriting.

Now, but I think again, this plays into Trump's larger grand global strategy, right? Where it's like,

hey, Middle East, Europe, Asia, when he said, come get your oil, come get your oil, right? Because

we're pretty secure, what we have. And also where it's like, hey, we're knocking off a couple

of dictators here and there. I think Cuba is next. I don't think it's without any shots fired.

It's probably going to happen. And we're kind of realigning the world order, which in general,

I'm really happy with timing and execution matters, right? Maybe some factors happen that wasn't

exactly what we wanted to do it. And hey, there's consequences. This is a high stakes game. This is

the highest stakes game. So yeah, but I'm not, I'm not fully convinced. I think we actually could

have all those threats eliminated now. And then hey, Europe, time to get, go get your oil. I think

that's something that they got to do. And I think we're actually realigning, you know, the global

order. And I think that is overall a really good thing. Maybe I'm just the classic plan truster.

So I am actually. So yeah, hey, I certainly hope you're right. Like I, you know, as I said from

the beginning, I want to be wrong about all of this. I want, you know, the greatest thing in the

world I could hear is in two weeks, Donald Trump says, we got a deal. We're wrapping it up. We're

going home. Oh, it looks like we don't have to mess around in the Middle East anymore. You know,

Europe's going to take a more muscular stance to protect itself and have influence in this area.

We can hand things off and, you know, take care of more things domestically. And that was the plan

along. I would absolutely love that to be true, man. I really hope you're right about that. I'm a

little skeptical, not going to, not going to lie to you. But I certainly, you know, you have more

more knowledge when it comes to, you know, naval ordinance removal than I do. So by all means,

I certainly hope that your analysis is 100% correct there. We do have some questions coming up

from the audience here. Oh, man, here it comes. Yeah. Yeah. If they call you an ugly

mini face, I'll make sure to screen that one. They can call me ugly. I've had worse things said

to me by better people. It's okay. So all right. Well, before we go to the questions of the people,

sir, where can people find you if they want to follow your work? Get your opinions.

Yeah, I, you know, I am my drug of choice is Twitter X. So ads Thomas B sour. I don't have a

sub stack or a podcast or a book to shill. I'm here in the DC area. I do a little bit of

government, you know, a little bit of consulting to help some companies out, you know, when they're

trying to get into into the admin, I as far as like doing business with them and whatnot. I just

a small one-man shop. I just kind of help some of those companies. That's some really good ones too.

So I do a little bit of that, but that's kind of more word of mouth. But yeah, just find me on

Twitter. That's it. And buy orange book. There you go. Wise man, wise man. Also, you know, apparently he's

now a fixture on Fox News. So you can check them out. Yeah, I got a phone in. So I'm sort of

phone into the five. And my mom is losing her mind. She's so excited. It's catnet for boomers.

For the boomer cons. I love it. It'll be great. And then yeah, I'm doing a bunch of stuff on

I'm on Laura Ingraham a lot. And it's interesting to see because I get to see like the inside like,

you know, you're in the green room. You meet the folks. You see the studio. Everyone at Fox is

super nice. I mean, they're really great. It isn't really interesting to see. I do enjoy it.

I wish it start paying me, but I don't think they all. Yeah, maybe they will eventually we'll see

what happens. You're getting you're getting paid an exposure, Tom. That's, you know, that's the most

valuable. No, you know, my mom and all of her friends are just like get excited. They get

really excited. So it's great. So the first time Jesse Waters read one of my tweets on Fox,

my mom, Mike, I just immediately get pictures, you know, my, you know, my parents are freaking out,

you know, it doesn't matter if you've been on, you know, you know, all this other stuff.

Until you've been on Fox news, you just don't have a career, you know, so once that happened,

that was a, that was a light. Which is silly because honestly, man, it shows like yours that are so,

and I'm not just saying this just to gas you up, but I am gasping you up is like shows like yours

are so much more interesting. And I really enjoy it. I mean, I honestly, I really pay attention to

the shows. I always make sure I watch his you, Jay Birdon and John Doyle. He's great. I love,

he's hilarious. And also for some reason, my baby daughter absolutely loves, I'll put him on TV

and she just watches him just stared and she doesn't do that with anyone else. She loves John Doyle.

It's wild. But, but yeah, those shows are so much better. I really do enjoy them. And then of course,

I have to make a plug for my dear friend, Jack Bissobick. I love going on his show a lot. He was

my Navy intel guy back in the day. I don't know if you knew that. Yeah, I heard you're, you're in,

you're in charge of him at some point, right? Yeah, he was just one of the intel we need. I don't

want to say I was in charge of him. But now I go on his show and he tells me what to do. So, you know,

that's right. It's fine. Yeah, he's a great guy. Love him and his family. They're awesome.

All right. Well, let's head to the questions of the people here real quick. Wild Speaker says,

my preferred picks for A.G. are Judge Dread, Frick Castle, Cato, The Elder, and Steven Miller.

You know, that's a dream Supreme Court too. We could put that one together. Steven Miller, I would

love that. Yeah, I'm friends with one of his staffers and he is a really, really good man,

him and his wife. They're good. They're really good people. And they don't deserve all the hate

that they get. I mean, the threats. I mean, they had to move on to base. They put them in a

general's house, which is nice, but like they, you know, they have to live on base now. It's insane.

No, this defense, Steven Miller, it all costs to be clear. 100 percent.

Uh, but Weird E. Curve says, I agree with Tom. You're one of the best in the business or in lots

of guys who just scream into their echo chamber. You don't keep it up, but well, thank you very

much, man. I appreciate it. We do our best. Look, there's going to be people come on here. I had

Tom Woods on a few days ago. You know, it's passionately anti-war. You know, awesome. We're going to

have Tom on. And then, you know, Tom, uh, you know, Sauer comes on and he's got, you know,

some, some ways in which the I ran more might ultimately be beneficial to the United States.

We're going to hear everybody. Okay. That, that, you know, as long as someone has an interesting

opinion, has, you know, a good way to deliver something that's thoughtful. We're going to have

that conversation. You're going to see those meetings of the mind here. And I hope

everybody eventually appreciates that. I know everyone's not going to agree with each person I have

on. And that's okay. If you did, I would be doing something wrong. Right when coalition says nice

duo. Well, thank you very much. Sure. Appreciate that. Uh, Elijah time and says, for the progressive

leftists trying to rebuild a egalitarian heaven on earth, words do not have meaning. They have

purpose. Yes, they are instruments to achieve a goal. They are not ways to communicate any shared

understanding or negotiate any kind of compromise. That was Richard Weaver, his book. I read that in

college ideas have consequences. Yeah. You want to be OG conservative, you know, right wing writers.

And, uh, yeah, I read that the Naval Academy. I was surprised they let us read that. I had a very

base, I had a very based, uh, active duty Navy officer professor. And he had us read that. But

which is good. I mean, like ideas have consequences. That's, you know, words have purpose for them.

And it's true. We don't, we don't realize that yet. Yeah.

Uh, Z H Z H. I don't know about sure how we would pronounce that. Uh, we might as well vote for

Democrats or stay home for the midterms Trump can veto whenever a Democrat controlled Congress passes.

I mean, I don't think that's true. Look, I, I understand the strategy here. You know, you saw the

UK and they did the no seats things to the conservative party to punish them for the betrayal they

had there. I get the impulse to do that here. The only difference is we don't have the opportunity

to raise up a rupert low. Like you have to get your work done inside the Republican party in some

way or fashion in the United States. That's just going to be the vehicle. Now we need to take over

the Republican party. We need to have guys at the bottom building their way up. We need to start

taking regional control. We need to start pushing for people who are going to be radically better

in these positions. We essentially need to skin suit the Republican party. But it's going to be

the Republican party. It's not going to be the Democrats. Can I make a plug on that one as well?

So when you talk about folks who need to get in the government, right? There is an organization

that you might be aware of that I am a huge supporter of both financially and just, you know,

spiritually. It's called American Moment. Are you familiar with American Moment? Yeah.

Nick Solheim. Yeah. Okay. So I would say this if there's young folks out there who are sharp

and hungry, you don't have to have gone to a good school. That's deliberately who they seek out

or folks who didn't necessarily go to the to Princeton or Stanford or, you know, a Berkeley or whatever.

And they seek out top talent and they put them in a fellowship and then they place them in

key jobs in the admin. You can be in your 20s or they put them on the hill. They are absolutely

phenomenal. I mean, they're and so like my wife and I we sponsored a couple of fellows, right?

We pay for their fellowship and all that. And one of them, I'm we're friends with them now. I mean,

one of them then within weeks he was on the vice president staff and then now just I found

his a week ago. He's he's on the security council. And this guy's like in his late 20s. So there

are folks in their early mid late 20s. So I tell you, so any of those listeners out there right now,

please go take a look at American Moment dot org. Look at their programs. Look what they have.

And if you're someone, if you're a young person or even if you're not that young and you are

actually looking to get involved, their biggest number one priority is alignment with America

first values. I mean, they're a little more right to that than even the president, but they're

staunch reporters of the president and especially JD Vance as well. So I mean, they was started.

It was inspired by JD. So everyone out there, please, if you're looking to actually get involved,

you want to do something and actually start a real career in the right way and get started,

look at American moment. So Nick Solheim, everybody who runs that outfit and their founders,

Sarab Sharma, who now works in the White House. He was no longer a part of it. But yeah,

you guys got to really take a look at American moment. They're the best outfit out there. And that's

how you get started. So go that, do that. Thank you. Yeah, I met him at a Claremont event.

I'm very glad that that that work is getting done. So yes, please people absolutely put

yourselves in that position. It's, look, I am absolutely here to, you know, criticize people

when they're not doing what I want to do, but you also have to take action. It's got to be paired

with doing things. So get in there and do the best you can get as involved as you can.

He also says, Israel had to attack Iran now because in a year or two, Israel would not be able to

attack Iran on their own. Iran never threatened America. I would not say Iran never threatened America,

but I would say the primary threat was to Israel. And I'll be honest, I agree with you. I think that

is why we're on the timeline that we are. I think Israel knows they've only got a short amount

of time where they're ever going to be able to do this. The opportunity is going to slip away from

them. And that's why they were so encouraging, what we could say, to make this happen on that timeline.

I would also keep going. Keep going. Yes. Okay. Always feel like you can jump in there.

While Speaker says, I can only imagine that those in the admin know the consequences

of losing power are prison for them and reundation of their loved ones. Iran seems like such a

gamble given those obvious truths. Yeah, that's my confusion. I mean, I'm with, you know, Tom,

100%. I think that the administration understands, you know, the consequences of losing the midterms,

they're already preparing for what could have been a dicey midterm just because of, you know,

the president usually loses the midterms is the incumbent party is usually, you know, losing

midterms. That's just a political rhythm and reality. Plus, everything else on top of that.

But then that only asks the question, why do this now? Right? Like, that's why I think it was so

confusing to people because it just didn't seem like Iran was a threat we had to deal with at that

exact moment. If the midterms really were that important and really did hang in the balance.

And that's why so many questions are being asked about the war. I don't think, I don't think the

idea that Iran is just never, ever going to be a threat to us is correct. And I think that's

overstating your case. I think the thing to focus on is the timeline because I think that's where

people have the real questions. I think that's a fair argument, man. I get it. It does seem

though is that there are some folks who, you know, obviously that have access to more information

than we do. So, and sometimes you just got to take the word for it because, you know, they're not

going to show you all the intelligence. I get that. But also, it's worth pointing out though that

a lot of these folks were especially the Pentagon, right? Senior leaders in the Pentagon,

they all had to deal with the forever wars. And they don't want that, right? Like they don't.

And like, I mean, if for some reason Donald Trump was trying to force Pete Hague Seth to send,

like, we're going to invade mainland Iran or something like that, which I know wasn't really

ever on the table. But if they were, like, you would get real push back. And then you'd see some

real resignations. And one thing about Joe Kent as well, I think that's where saying here as well

is, look, I met him a few times. Some of my friends worked with his wife at that command that

doesn't officially exist. And, you know, I love that guy. I wish he hadn't quit. I'll just say that

much, right? And like, I don't, I think the timing might have been an issue, but I, it's not how I

would have done it. But I really got, I got, I really bristled when I saw some people out there

who were just bad mouthing him right away. Because I'll tell you what, Joe Kent has given more for

this country than you, me, and just about anybody we know. So he gets a hell of a lot of grace

from me on that one. So even though I disagreed with his decision, I wish he had just stayed in all,

and just kept pushing and kept pushing because, you know, because right now, unfortunately, his,

you know, his career of having any influences kind of over outside of maybe doing podcasts and

books. I'm not saying there's nothing to that. But being on the inside matters a lot more. So,

look, I don't know as it is hard, but I wish that he hadn't done that. But the man's a patriot,

okay? And like, we owe him so much. Yeah. That's exactly the right stance to take. Look,

I understand people have tactical questions about Joe Kent. Maybe you could have had more influence

on the inside. Maybe that would have been a smarter way to do it. But one thing I can't abide is

people telling me that this guy got his opinions because he watched too much Candacellans.

Like this guy has six broad stars. He's a gold star, you know, spous, spous, he's a guy who has

been in the CIA. Like, this is not some guy who just like, you know, watched a podcast and was like,

you know, I think she might be right about these railings. Like, this guy might have had some

interactions with the intelligence community may have been familiar with a few of the, you know,

working things. Again, if you disagree with him ultimately or the way he went about things,

I respect that. When I cannot respect is someone who's throwing any shade on the man's, you know,

service, his credibility, his character, I'm sorry, that's just gross. It's gross. And when people

do it about Erica Kirk, and it's just as gross when someone does it about Joe Kent, I'm sorry,

these are the ones the same to me when people talk about it. Yeah. It's just and further. I say,

when I got really pissed when that story, that story, the leak about him being under investigation

or leaking, that's total bullshit. First of all, that is a leak by itself. And also, it's like,

oh, we can say they were suspect that he was under suspicion of leaking classified material

to the press, but they let him keep his job. As soon as there's you can't, I know the way it works

because trust me, I've been in these circles, you know, I held the cops to your clearance. I held

a cue clearance for the Department of Energy for nuclear weapons. It's like, if somebody catches a

whiff, it could be an unsubstantiated rumor of you doing anything like that. The immediately

to spend your clearance, like, hey, you're out until we sort this out immediately, right?

So that would have happened. So that was a complete bullshit. Yeah. If you get a $5,000 deposit out

of nowhere in your bank account, you're losing your security clearance much less, you know, this idea.

So yeah, I, again, it just, no truck. I totally understand people who want to stand behind the

president, people who ultimately want to support what's going on. But if you are, if you are

destroying a guy like Joe Kent publicly, you just don't have honor. Like that's really all there is

to it. CHEH also says, here's the questions for your pro-Israel guest. I know you're going to get it

eventually. Why didn't we just ally with Iran and build a couple of military bases overlooking

the straight? I feel like that's an easy question for you, but go ahead. Why didn't we

ally with Iran and build it? Well, maybe because they keep saying death to America. Yeah.

Right. I don't know. I mean, I don't know. Why don't we build a couple of military bases in the

South China Sea with the Chinese and monitor the South China Sea? I don't, I don't, I don't,

I don't know. Like I said, this is a softball for you. Yeah. I know. You got five bucks.

Yeah. Yeah.

Henry says, any reason our oil production wasn't increased. I'm in the oil patch and it's slow.

That's a good question. I don't know enough about current domestic oil production numbers. I don't

know if there's an intentional slowing or if that's just, you know, the current rate of extraction

due to conditions. You know, I really would not have any inside information on that, but it's a

good question, man. I don't either. Have you ever, does oil field rando do appearances?

No, sadly, I've, I've encouraged him to do so, but he's, he's told me directly, he's like, I make

too much money doing what I'm doing now to go on podcasts and get this. Fair enough. Yeah. Yeah.

Exactly. Yeah. He's a novel. No. Yeah. Well, I've told him, I, I, I remember when Manhattan

Institute was looking for research as like, uh, this guy, like, obviously, like one of the best

business, yeah, that said, said that no conservative think tank can offer him more than he's making

right now because we definitely could use a full time oil rando on, uh, on this beat.

Let's see here. A string of numbers and letters says the left has FDR and they also had Lincoln.

Yes, yes, they did. Uh, the Imperial presidency has some strong roots in the United States. Uh,

you know, let's not forget Jackson, though I would put him on the other side of the, uh,

political spectrum when it comes to imperial presidencies and then Washington, we can,

we can probably cite at least four imperial presidencies in the US.

There's a really interesting book by a guy and you've probably heard of him even though I disagree

with him on so many other things, uh, Fad Russell, who wrote a book called The Rogue History,

the United States. I don't know if you've ever read that book. It's really interesting where he kind

of goes in. He's such primary sources about how reconstruction after the Civil War was a complete

disaster on so many levels and how I mean, like some really like, and then they even had like audio

recordings where they interviewed like the 1920s a bunch of, uh, freed slaves who were old men and

women, uh, at the time, but they were young men and women, uh, during this, during and right,

immediately after the Civil War. And it's a lot, there's some very uncomfortable things that they

talk about on there. Like, I mean, this is not like sticking up for, and he's a, he's a big lefty too,

but it's like not sticking up for, you know, the, the south and slavery when it comes to all that stuff,

but not at all. But it was just one of those things where it's like how the Republicans back in the

1860s and 70s kind of like looked at these new freed slaves kind of like, like children that they

had to like teach and coddle and take care of. And I mean, and honestly, I kind of do take,

again, that's just kind of the leftist. I know I sound like a total boomercon when I say it, but I

mean, you know, do you know the left of the real racists? But it's like, you know, but they,

but they really do look at a lot of those folks as people just don't know about how they need to be

taken care of because they're that weird maternal instinct among many leftists.

Well, the, you know, the, uh, if you want to go for some really interesting reading,

you can recognize that the reconstruction was really the first like Haliburton rebuilding your,

your, your, your Afghanistan type scenario where just it became an infinite money pit for all the

northerners that the carbon baggers and the different banks. And this is how you got fortunes

like the Vanderbiltz and the Carnegie used were built on this railroad expansion that happened

because of the southern conquest and then the westward expansion that came thereafter. So many of the,

let's just say foundations that are currently ruining America were built entirely off the

largest that came out of the reconstruction and westward expansion and government funding of

these massive fortunes. They didn't come because these guys were amazing businessmen. They came

because they literally just got to war profiteer, but that's a whole different episode. I should

probably put that right. It is. Be a fun one though. Yeah. Recruit George Baggy for that one.

Why Sean Wyland says does an American moment or anyone else work with the office of strategic

capital and the sovereign wealth fund for reshoring, manufacturing to say that?

Yes, they do. I recently introduced actually just last Friday I introduced Nick and the

American moment guys to the director of OSC is a friend of mine. Yeah. And actually, so Sean,

if you're looking to do some work with them or, or if you have a company that is seeking capital,

you should, you know, shoot me a note on a DM or something like that, man. Yeah. So honestly,

very quickly, the office of strategic capital is probably one of the most important offices in the

Pentagon right now. They're looking to reindustrialize the United States and that and they're done so

through very good loans that are meant for companies that can absorb a lot of money and deploy it

rapidly. It's not a place for a startup or you got a good idea. These are for folks who you have

factories, you have manufacturing capability, you make things that have a commercial market that you

can sell. But that the military has or might want a use for in the future, right? So and they

are offering loans of, but these are very large loans. I mean, this is like billions of dollars

and you got to show that you can absorb it and deploy that money. So I'm actually, I actually

work with them right now and we're helping like screen companies for that. It's a very unique

profile they're looking for. So yeah, I mean, that's something you got to shoot me a DM.

All right, Tom, I need you to sit the administration down like grab a comms guy by the

collar and be and shaken until he says, he said, tell people about this stuff. Like go out there

and tell people about this stuff. I promise you like 95% of the office have just learned about

the office of strategic capital and that's such a critical program that the Trump administration

should be like talking about and dragging about and helping people to understand. These are the

domestic wins I want to be talking about instead of Iran. And like, so grab somebody at the

admin and be like, please sit down and start talking about what's funny. I started doing it because

I went on Laura Ingram's show like a month ago and I was talking about them like, Hey, David

Lorch, the off-street capital. It's amazing. It's also great. And that's how Dave found me and he

like reached out to me on LinkedIn and then he's like, Hey, do you want to come in the office?

Like we need to get the word out about this. So that's one of the things I've been doing. But a

lot of it is, but the problem is is like they get so much volume. They got it. They can't filter

the signal from the noise. For example, they, you know, they're telling, they were saying publicly

that like they got one guy who like let them down a primrose path for like weeks about this huge

opportunity. It turns out like his uncle just owned a lot of property like Nebraska or something.

He's like, Hey, you can mind some stuff in there. Can I have a billion dollars? And they're like,

no, no, that's not it. But if it's, but the thing is if the company is the right fit and it's a

unique profile they're looking for, they're looking at and where your biggest constraint is capital

then there might be a candidate there. But this is for manufacturing and like building the national

and the defense industrial base. It's a phenomenal office and it's going to be one of the things

going to save this country in the next 10 years. And the HGH also says, we have a base near South

trying to see it's called Japan. Iran says death to America, but we could smooth things out

with Iran. If we tried, look, if you look, okay, I'll just say this, if we want to drop two

nukes on Iran and occupy them for a good 40 years, then yeah, like I think, you know, that's probably

a, that's real regime change, okay? We have done regime change. We know how to regime change

Germans and Japanese, but it's a little more of extensive process. So I hear you, brother,

I hear you, but I think that's my, what it might take and you know, not taking off the table,

but that's probably what's good to require to turn out the same way. We also have a base right

next to the street of Hormuz. It's in Bahrain, right? I mean, that is Navy's Fifth Fleet

Headquarters. I spent a lot of time in Bahrain and people don't realize the Persian Gulf is very

compact. I mean, it's, you know, it's not a big body of water. And so we already have a base

there and we've got, and we keep a lot of stuff there, but at the same time, it's a narrow body

water. And it's like, when you've got, you know, Iran's coastline is like about the same size

of California, right? I mean, it's huge on their coastline and it hits that choke point. And I

think that, you know, we will start, we will smooth things over with Iran once we get somebody

in charge that we like, I don't think you're going to see regime change. I'd be very surprised

because they have so many internal, like police states, you know, police organizations, not just

the IRGC, they've got like one different, like four or five different secret polices that all

keep tabs on each other. It's, they've actually like very, very cleverly, like designed their

government to be coup proof, if that makes sense. So I think it's very unlikely you're going to see

a major regime change. You might see somebody at the top who says, okay, okay, okay, okay, we'll back

off. I think that's what we're doing. And because I think they know that, you know, everyone who

keeps pushing back, you know, has a hellfire dropped on them, you know, maybe eventually somebody's

going to say, okay, okay, okay, we'll cooperate. I think that's my, I think that's the plan.

And I'm a plan truster. Well, I'm certainly hoping that that plan works out either way. I would

like the troops to get home as soon as possible with a victory in their pocket and get back to

domestic politics. I think that's what we're all praying for. So I think that's something that can

unify both the plan trusters and the hardliners on this one. So that said, Tom, it's been fantastic.

Speaking with you, I'm glad we battled through your internet connection to make this happen.

Guys, if you're first time on this YouTube channel, you need to subscribe, click the bell

notifications, all that. So you know, when we're going live, if you want to get these broadcasts,

podcasts, you need to subscribe to our Mac and Tyres show on your favorite podcast platform.

And when you do leave that rating or review. It helps with the algorithm magic. Thank you,

everybody for watching. And as always, I'll talk to you next time.