Relatable with Allie Beth Stuckey - Ep 571 | Russia & Ukraine: What's REALLY Going On? | Guest: Jason Buttrill

Episode Date: February 24, 2022

Today we're talking with Jason Buttrill, head writer and chief researcher for the Glenn Beck Program, about the rapidly escalating situation in Ukraine. Jason is a former intelligence analyst for the Department of Defense and explains the geopolitical context and history surrounding Russia's invasion of Ukraine. How far back does this go? Is this primarily the United States' responsibility? What does Putin really want? We also discuss why the Biden administration is so interested in the situation and how all of this plays into what Western wealthy elites really want for the future of the world. --- Today's Sponsors: Carly Jean Los Angeles is a Los Angeles-based capsule clothing company & they provide clothes that are effortless, easy, & flattering on any shape, size, age, or season. Go to CarlyJeanLos Angeles.com & use promo code 'ALLIEB' to save 20% off your first order of anything in their online store. CB Distillery has over 2 million customers that use CBD for help with sleep, discomfort, and getting some peace & calm in their day. Order online with no prescription required - go to CBDistillery.com & use promo code 'ALLIE' for 20% off. Good Ranchers is American meat delivered right to your door, with packaging that makes it easy to cook what you want & save the rest. Go to GoodRanchers.com/ALLIE & use promo code 'ALLIE' to save $30 off your order! --- Buy Allie's book, You're Not Enough (& That's Okay): Escaping the Toxic Culture of Self-Love:https://alliebethstuckey.com/book Relatable merchandise: https://shop.blazemedia.com/collections/allie-stuckey

Hey, this is Steve Day. If you're listening to Allie, you already understand that the biggest issues facing our country aren't just political. They're moral, spiritual, and rooted in what we believe is true about God, humanity, and reality itself. On the Steve Day show, we take the news of the day and tested against first principles, faith, truth, and objective reality. We don't just chase narratives and we don't offer false comfort. We ask the hard questions and follow the answers wherever they leave, even when it's unpopular. This is a show for people who want honesty over hype and clarity over chaos. If you're looking for commentary grounded in conviction and unwilling to lie to you about where we are or where we're headed, you can watch this D-Day show right here on Blaze TV or listen wherever you get podcasts. I hope you'll join us.

Hey, guys, welcome to Relatable. Happy Thursday. Today's episode is brought to you by our friends at Good Ranchers. American Me delivered right to your front door. Go to good ranchers.com slash alley. Okay, as promised, we are talking about Russia, Ukraine. we are talking to Jason Buttrell. He is the chief researcher and head writer for Glenn Beck. He is a foreign policy expert. He's going to break it all down for us and explain what is even going on between Russia and Ukraine. Russia is invading Ukraine. They're saying that's because Ukraine really belongs to us. And then Western countries are saying not so fast. Why are we paying so much attention to this? Should we be paying so much attention to this? What does this mean? Geo, politically, and then we're going to talk about lots of things that fit into this.

Hopefully, by the end of it, you will have a picture of the significance of all of this in kind of the different perspectives on the left and the rights with it. We'll be following up on this big subject in the coming weeks, though, for sure. Without further ado, here is Jason Butchrell. Jason, thank you so much for joining us. Basically, we need you to explain this Russia-Ukraine. conflict like we're five. So pretend, like, we don't know anything about what's going on. What's happening in why? Just watching Kamala Harris talk to, uh, to the people over in the EU. You know what,

that's better. Explain it to us like we're Kamala Harris. Listen, guys. You like that? Yeah, exactly. Yeah, it was funny. I was watching her talk, uh, talk to them and she was talking about it as if this is, you know, she's like, we've been, it's been peace for 70 years. And, you know, now we're on the verge of war. Well, really, it's already been happening since 2014. There's been a hot war in eastern Ukraine between Russia since 2014. It hasn't stopped. It's just no one really talks about it. Oh, okay. So basically, I'm going to go back to Hillary Clinton. Okay. Hillary Clinton talked a lot about the Russian elections. When was that, I want to say, around 2008-ish, 9, 10, and Putin was up for re-election. And they did a lot of things.

working through NGOs, got some protests going, and from what they said, it interfered in their elections. Now, you fast forward to the 2016 election. Putin never forgot that. He struck back. I'm not saying that their election interference actually changed anything because it didn't. But they tried. But they tried. And they did it. And it was a direct payback from Democrats at the time screwing with Russian elections or interfering in Russian, you know. And again, I'm not apologizing for anything he did. It's just that's a fact. That's what happened. Now, you go to 2014, you had the Ukrainian Revolution, all of that going. Again, a lot of the same people in the State Department within the Obama administration,

Biden was the point man at the time. They helped orchestrate a lot of what was going on then by encouraging people to protest, supporting the protesters. So the Ukrainian Revolution in 2014, that was a revolution against Russia. Yeah, that was a... Taking over Ukraine. Okay, yes. If you could just fill us in, it's coming back to me a little bit about what that was about.

So that was, remember, that Russia, that very pro-Russia Ukrainian president, Yanukovych, he all of a sudden was like, hey, you know, we're not going to look towards the EU. We're not going, we're just solely going to focus on Russia. That was a huge, I guess, split from what the Ukrainian people actually wanted. Yeah. Western Ukraine is very, very pro-Europe. Eastern Ukraine, like in the breakaway regions now, which we can get to later. They're very, very pro-Russia. Yeah.

Very big split there. So this was Russia, you know, exerting its influence on their guy that was the president to completely side with Russia. That sparked off the revolution. The people in the foreign policy elite also did not like that here in the United States. That's why the Biden-Biden-Obama people, that's why they supported the Ukrainian revolution. And that's where the fissure happened. Well, Putin again, just like Hillary Clinton back in. you know, for the election stuff, never forgot that.

Now, there's a big reason why this didn't happen under Trump, because all of Trump's people weren't there, for one, but they had a different vision for, you know, how things would progress. Now, fast forward to now, Putin knows exactly what the Biden people want to do. They want to dominate Ukraine. And that's obviously a big red line for Putin. So he's striking back against the Biden administration and what they plan to do. That's why I see now it's just so ridiculous how, you know, there's actually people trying to blame Trump for what's going on now. Yeah.

They're like, you know, Trump's set this is just ridiculous. Rachel Maddow just tweeted something about how Trump's policies were in line with the Russian agenda. Now, is that true? Can you debunk that a little bit? Like, what were Trump's policies towards Moscow? Weren't they a lot harsher than what we hear? I mean, we hear that he was, you know, Putin's puppet. Is that true?

So ridiculous. It's revisionist history. It's a complete memory hole of what actually happened during the Trump administration. I mean, his entire strategy was to get NATO more money, basically to make NATO stronger. That's not the Moscow agenda, which is what Matt Lowe called it. Yeah. Sanctioning, Trump put sanctions against Russians. He expelled multiple diplomats. I mean, there was no. He gave Ukraine lethal weaponry when Obama would not. Yeah. That's not the Moscow agenda. So that's a little bit confusing, though, because you did say that Obama was, his administration was supporting Ukraine and the revolution against Russia, but it was Trump that actually supplied Ukraine with weaponry. So, like, who's really supportive of Ukraine? That's a little bit of a confusing point for me. There seems to be a debate between like the right, should we be supporting Ukraine? Should we care about this? And then it's like, well, is it a Democrat position to support Ukraine? Like, what is it which which administration which side really want support for ukraine and why well i think the left they want to dominate ukraine and they want to make as much money as possible as they can off of ukraine how would they do that how would they make money off of ukraine for example like beriz braismma um putting their guys in certain sauce because you think about right after the revolution then they saw it as wide open um there are all these industries that were within ukraine

that, and it's a very rich industry, actually, lots of rare earth metals, oil, natural gas, all that. They saw that as a big piggy bank. And that's why you had officials like Hunter Biden moving in and all of a sudden he's a, you know, an expert in Ukrainian natural gas and oil. It was ludicrous, but, you know, it was a cash cow. That's what it was. You know, other groups like George Soros that were in there and this is fully documented that we're leading this charge to dominate Ukraine. Every time one of these things happens, it's like Russia after the fall of the Soviet Union, there's all these people that suddenly become oligarchs. Billions and billions of dollars are made.

That's what the left wanted to do to Ukraine. They didn't want to give them weaponry, you know what I mean, to help defend themselves. No, they wanted to dominate the country. So you're arguing that basically they wanted to use Ukraine to line their own pockets. And that's why they didn't want Russia or one of the reasons that they didn't want Russia to overtake Ukraine. But when it came to the Trump administration, Army, Ukraine, what was the motivation behind that? Was it pro-democracy or what was it? I think the Trump administration always had this, you know, there's this idea of a multipolar

world. What we have now is really an aberration. We have one country that since the end of the Cold War has been a superpower that no one else can match the United States. Since our founding, we were never meant to be that. If you're, and this goes back to your question on why is there some confusion now on, you know, who supports who or what? Because, I mean, we are, you know, isolationists at heart. That's who we are. And it's, it's really hard to find a policy that, you know, I think conservatives can be behind on what to do to Ukraine. Yeah. I mean, we've got, you know, Canada on our northern border. We've got a Canadian Putin, if you will, right on our back door. You would think that we would, you know, be focused more on what's

happening to our northern neighbor. We would think, you know, we'd be focusing in more on the collaboration between the American left and, let's say the Canadian left that seemed to be going, you know, authoritarian. That to me, in my mind, is a lot scarier than what's happening in Eastern Europe. Yeah. But we still have a foreign policy. We still have to, as conservatives, juggle what do we do about this? And I think Trump's policy was more of this multipolar war. Let's have countries within Europe, be the first ones that are in line to defend Europe. Yeah. So rather than sending our troops over there, which is what has happened now, correct, he said,

you know, we'll equip Ukraine against Russia or help them, but we're not actually going to fight this war. We'll sanction Russia. Also, it seemed like a big part of deterrence of Russia's imperialistic power was energy independence for the United States, which Trump worked for. And Biden undercut that as soon as he got into office. He shut down the Keystone pipeline. Now we are relying on Russia for oil, correct? And so that's part of the issue. Yeah, gas prices. And it was that was yesterday, Biden saying that, hey, we're just going to have to, you know, we're defending democracy, you know, global democracy.

First of all, that's not our job. I mean, that's a Cold War era model of things. right that's not who we are anymore that's not what we're trying to do yeah but they said that we're going to go into incur some pain i don't remember the exact quote but it was something like that actually you know what i'm going to pause because we have the clip and we'll just play out byton saying that defending freedom will have cost for us as well and here at home we need to be honest about that but as we will do but as we do this i'm going to take robust action to make sure the pain of our sanctions is targeted at a Russian economy, not ours. Okay, so what he means by that is that we're going to be paying, what, even more in gas,

$6, like inflation's going to get worse. There was this ridiculous quote by CBS yesterday saying, oh, you know, the conflict with Russia and Ukraine, you're going to see prices go up as if we haven't, there it is. The U.S. economy has been hit with increased gas prices, inflation and supply chain issues, due to the Ukraine crisis, as if that hasn't been happening largely because of the economic policy of this administration for the last year. Now it's Russia's sole fault because of that. That seems like a lot of gas lighting. Yeah, it's such a cop out. It's such a cop out. It would be very not. I mean, just a year ago, we were energy independent. Right. Now because of all these,

I mean, they were saying that global warming and climate change and all that was the number one security threat to our country. Right. They were directing Pentagon assets to look at that over crises like this occurring. Right. It's baffling. It's absolutely baffling. But yeah, I think it's, I think just going back to where, you know,

when people are trying to figure out what to actually do about this. Yeah. I mean, there's one stance and I'll just like, I don't know if you saw Tugger Carlson's monologue last night. Yes. Where he was basically saying, what is Putin done to us, you know, like he hasn't said, you know, he. Basically, he, he is towing a.

very fine line that's Tucker. Tucker is where it's hard to answer if from a conservative and from isolationist point of view. I think that's where he's coming from, which when you get to the core principle, he is correct on that. Yeah. So, you know, we need to mind our own business and worry about what we're doing and not go meddling in the rest of the world. I believe that's where Tucker is coming from. And I do agree with that to a certain point. But I also don't think that there should not be consequences out in the world. Yeah. I don't think that, you know, there are things that we can do where we're not, you know,

committing U.S. forces, you know, defense assets, anything kinetic like military-wise. But you can make people pay for their, you know, for their actions. Sanctions are a good way to do that. Broad sanctions that hurt the U.S. economy don't have to happen. You know, there can be targeted sanctions that just hurt Russia. Yeah. There are targeted sanctions where you can sanction this oligarch, this oligarch, this oligarch, and put them against other oligarchs and have them fight it out and eventually push Putin out on their own.

You know, there's, and I'm just skimming the surface of this, but there's multiple things that you can do where you can insulate, you know, our interests in our economy so that we don't feel the pain. But that's not what's happening right now. That's not their focus. Right now what they're focused on is this. And I might, you know, make some people mad at this. But the way the United States has been operating ever since 1991, the end of the Cold War, is if the Cold War is still happening. Putin said that NATO was the big reason why he, you know, let me go back real real quick.

Those two breakaway regions in the East, that's what they're fighting over right now. And like I said before. And Putin says those breakaway regions, he says, you know, those have always been Russian. They're Russian regions essentially. That's what Putin is saying, basically, right? Right. And it's revisionist history. Right. It's, yeah. Well, he also said, just to kind of give people a little bit of context, basically, he's said, Russia kind of views Ukraine as like their little brother and treats them as that and doesn't really see them as an independent nation state, a self-determining country. And there is a large part of Eastern Ukraine that is very pro-Russia, as you mentioned earlier. And basically, they just think that they are taking, by overtaking Ukraine, what is rightfully theirs. correct? So that's what Putin said in his speech. That's what he said. And he says, oh, this is going to be good. We're a family, basically. We've got this shared history together, but that's

not exactly true. No. So in 2014, after they took Crimea and then the Eastern, you know, separatist reasons broke away, or I don't know even what you would call it. They just kind of said this is ours. Obama didn't really, did he do anything about that? Sanctions. Sanctions. I mean, that's what Biden knows exactly what's going to happen under this scenario. But it's been kind of stuck in a little cold conflict ever since then. But Russia, in effect, has already been there. In effect, they've already had this territory. So when he said, you know, made that grand statement that they're sending in, you know, Russian forces,

they're basically just making, in the Russian view, something legal and out in the open that already happened in 2014. So the fear now is that he won't just. just, you know, take those eastern portions. The fear now is that he'll go all the way and seize Keefe. That's the big fear, and that's when things could light up a lot more in Europe and, you know, with a larger conflict. Hey, this is Steve Day. If you're listening to Alley, you already understand that the biggest issues facing our country

aren't just political. They're moral, spiritual, and rooted in what we believe is true about God, humanity, and reality itself. On the Steve Day show, we take the news of the day and tested against first principles, faith, truth, and objective reality. We don't just chase narratives and we don't offer false comfort. We ask the hard questions and follow the answers wherever they leave, even when it's unpopular. This is a show for people who want honesty over hype and clarity over chaos.

If you're looking for commentary grounded in conviction and unwilling to lie to you about where we are or where we're headed, you can watch this D-Day show right here on Blaze TV or listen wherever you get podcasts. I hope you'll join us. But that speech that he gave, he sounded like a madman. He sounded crazy. Putin's not crazy. Right. And he certainly would never want to project that he is erratic or not in control in any way.

Right. Basically what he was saying, he was giving his own people the justification, the nationalistic, which Russians are going back to the Soviet times and even the Russian Empire. Very nationalistic. And their leaders know that and they know when to turn that up. That's exactly what Putin's doing. Yeah. He's a tactician. he's a hard geopolitics person.

He's not nuts like what he was projecting there. So why is that? You said that he sounded like a madman. Like what would have been his purpose behind that? Mostly towards his own people. Oh. But to scare people in Europe enough to say that, hey, I'm doing this now. I'm giving you my justification for doing it.

but leave that doubt of will I go further and continue to invade? What else am I capable of? That's basically what it is. And we got that, this kind of leads to that the thing that the left is really up in arms today about is that quote from Donald Trump, where, you know, he was, you know, basically complimenting Vladimir Putin. He said like, oh, it was, you know, it was brilliant. He was, you know, he kind of just listed what he was doing, his strategy.

the things that he said, and basically he said, oh, it's so brilliant, it's so smart, whatever. So let me contrast that with a tweet from Lawrence O'Donnell,

MSNBC, yesterday or a couple days ago. And the tweet, I just, it was hilarious. He was being absolutely dead serious. And he said, why does everyone think

that Putin is so smart? Is it because of his, in, you know, Prince's bad education? Is it because blah, blah, blah. And so basically he was saying

he was stupid. And I was like, that's exactly how you lose a, a war. That's exactly how you lose an argument. That's how you lose anything is when you assume that your opponent is dumb. Yeah. I was like, so Trump, I've never, every time he has made like any kind of positive remark about, you know, a bad world leader, it's never been from admiration. Yeah. You know, it's, it's, it is a respect of their capabilities. Yeah. Of what they're capable of doing. Yeah. But then media never takes it from that angle. They always like,

trying to turn it bad and be like, oh, it's because he loves ex-tators. Does he? Come on. Right. And like most things that Trump says, which this gets him in trouble, of course, you know, being if you were his publicist, you would just, it would be really difficult because I think if like we can speak Trumpian, which I'm sure that we can, what he is implying is that Putin is smarter than Biden and that Trump himself would be a better match for this because I think it sounds like he's saying, look, this guy knows what he's doing. He's not a good guy. He didn't say that. He's not a great guy. but he's a formidable adversary and look at our weak leadership

not able to even contend with him and I think Trump sees himself as really the only formidable adversary to Putin and so to me I'm like everything that Trump says is really kind of a way to build himself up in some way so I actually think

that that's probably what he was doing not actual admiration the same you know with Kim Jong-un but basically saying look he's a smart guy I'm a smart guy I think we can handle this kind of thing. Yeah, who do you want to face off against Putin? The guy that thinks he's dumb or the guy that respects his capabilities and what he might be might do in the future. Right. Right. I'll take the latter on that one. And yeah, and I totally agree with you. I think that's what it was.

Yeah. But I mean, the way Trump handled everything, you know, as far as Russian Ukraine was during his administration was just leaps and bounds ahead of everything the Biden administration is doing right now. Isn't that one reason though he got impeached was for a phone call with Ukraine? So ridiculous. It's so ridiculous. You know, I'll go back to NATO. Putin has said his prime, you know, reason for doing what he's doing now is because he doesn't want Ukraine to join NATO. He doesn't want NATO to expand. And I absolutely agree with Putin on that.

In fact, and this is what I said earlier is I might. You agree with Putin on not wanting NATO to expand? Yes. Okay. Can you explain that? I don't think NATO should exist anymore. NATO right now. is probably the only alliance still left that has no clear purpose.

They have no focus. Their focus died in December 1991, the Soviet Union. Okay. So that goes back to what you were saying, that we've basically been functioning like we're still in 1991. Correct. You could break that down a little bit. So, you know, NATO's purpose was to stop the spread of global communism. The head of that back then was the Soviet Union.

That was its design. and because of, you know, the threat of the Soviet Union had militarily nuclear weapons, they needed to have a collective defense, you know, agreement. So if one of, if one of us gets attacked, we all get attacked and they respond in turn. But the Soviet Union doesn't exist anymore. The spread of global communism doesn't even exist anymore. Russia does not believe in global communism. They're more, you know, akin to something like China who is not communist either. Sorry, I keep on asking you to break things down, but I would have, I mean, how is China not communist?

I know that they have forms of capitalism in a market for sure, but do they not have communism, at least, in how they rule their people? Or is it more fascism, you would say? So, yes, I think it's more akin to fascism, actually, because the state allows these businesses, you know, like 10 cent or, you know, all the other businesses over there. They allow them to have the, you know, illusion of private ownership. But the state tells them what to do. I mean, the state has an office, you know, for the Communist Party and every single, you know, corporation. That is the textbook definition of fascism. Right.

It's not what people, you know, mostly younger people today think fascism is. Basically, every time someone doesn't agree with their opinion, that's fascism to them. No, it's when the state allows the illusion of private ownership. but the state tells industry what to do. Which is basically also, by the way, what's happening in Canada with the banks, Trudeau was saying, hey, freeze the bank accounts of these people, who, by the way, didn't commit a crime, so we're violating due process. But we're peaceful protesters.

I mean, that is very fascistic as well. And Trudeau has the audacity to say that he's going to put all these restrictions against Canada and Russia for the sake of preserving democracy. Right. It's silly. It's a perfect example. And you look at the way, you know, the Biden administration here in the United States, States is trying to tell certain businesses, you know, how much carbon footprint they can have.

Yeah. You know, this industry can keep going. This industry can't keep going. You have to... Great Reset. It always comes back to the Great Reset in Davos. Regs I does. Every episode, it seems like comes back to that.

I know. I know. It's, you know, it's 21st century fascism, you know, just without all the, you know, the Jew hating and all that. You know, it's not in 1930s fascism. It's 21st century fascism. Yeah. Yeah. But yeah, but I don't believe that, um, that, that, that NATO, going back to that has that, um, they don't have that mandate anymore. They don't have a focus. They don't, it's almost like it's, you know, a, it's a relic of the Cold War that they're keeping alive because it did a good job back in the day. And they just want the nostalgia of the alliance. Well, the problem is, is that if you're Russia, you're looking at NATO, uh, and you're like, wait, so are you directing this at us solely now? Like, what is the point?

Why are they still accepting new members in a alliance that has no focus? Why would they, why would the Biden administration, and I guess this is kind of unfair because Biden is not the head of NATO. So the NATO does have a head and NATO can make decisions independently. But why was it completely off the table for them to say, we're not going to, you know, allow Ukraine to be into NATO? Why was that off the table? That was one of the first things Putin asked.

for was just tell us that, you know, that you're not going to have Ukraine in NATO. Yeah. No, they wouldn't do it. Yeah. It boggles my mind. And it shows that they just don't really, I don't know if they just don't know what they are doing or if they're pursuing some kind of, you know, goal that a lot of us don't really know about.

And I don't, I don't really know. But if I'm confused about it, you got to believe the people like the Russians are confused about it too. Yeah. But yeah, I don't think NATO should exist anymore. I mean, if you look at the way things are starting to shape up, and it's kind of scary, the map will probably look more like pre-war War I, where people that have like minds, like cultures, like, you know, values, even religion.

Language, that was something that. Religion, languages, values. He said we have a spiritual history or whatever. Yeah, he doesn't believe in that crap. Yeah, of course. Yeah, he doesn't believe in that crap. All that stuff. is just to stir up nationalism.

Yeah. But I think that Putin's main grievance, I'm not going to say he's right on anything, but I think his main grievance has merit, and it should be looked at. And I think that Trump during his tenure... The main grievance being that Ukraine was going to join NATO? Yes.

And then just NATO in general, really, because it doesn't make any sense for it to exist anymore. But I think Trump called that out during his administration. That's probably one of the reasons why Putin was willing to listen to Trump a little bit more. Because in essence, what Trump was doing was pointing out the irrelevancy of NATO. I mean, we were providing the vast majority of the funding for NATO. Other countries didn't care. Like Germany, the UK, like they know it was irrelevant too. Yeah. The funny thing now is that it's kind of ironic. Putin knew that as well. Look, they're basically

irrelevant. Why keep them around and leave it open to accepting new membership when you can just, you know, be rid of it? But the irony now is that, that he's kind of making it relevant again. So what you're seeing now is some countries, Germany, UK, Poland has always thought it was relevant because they have a very real, you know, they actually have a threat from Russia. Right, because like, I mean, Russia could go Ukraine, Poland,

and that's, so is that part of the reason why, though, this is a big deal? Like, is Russia so conquest-driven and imperialistic that he sees no end in sight to his empire? Like, is he trying to revive Soviet Union Russia and keep expanding his power? Or is it really just Ukraine? He just wants Ukraine. Like you talked about maybe the understandable motivations of why Putin is doing what he's doing.

But what are the nefarious motivations behind what he's doing? If you take his speech at face value, it kind of sounds like he wants to get everything the Soviet Union lost back. Yeah. I don't take his... Which is scary. Which is scary. Not good. Right.

And that's when it comes into, you know, not. really taking the Tucker Carlson side of it, being somewhere a little bit backed off. Still agreeing with him in principle of non-intervention and being more of an isolationist. But keeping in mind, if you don't do something there, where does it lead? Yeah. And that's my question. As someone who's not a foreign policy expert, like my inclination instinct is to, you know, agree with Tucker Carlson. I'm like, you know, as you mentioned, okay, well, we've got a fascist and what is supposed to be a fellow bulwark of Western civilization and democracy in

Canada. We've got tyrannical things happening here in the United States. China is doing terrible things all the time. Why do I care any more about what Russia is doing? They've always kind of been this dictatorship. They're imperialistic. Why should I care so much? So like, yeah, why do? Why should we care, though, if it does keep expanding versus like the expansion that we already see happening in China that a lot of the elites here don't seem to care nearly as much about. Why does Russia matter more? Yeah. Well, you know, it's pretty easy to.

So I will say that I don't think that, I don't think that Russia will go that hard and push out to all these different. I don't believe that will happen. I think that some kind of deterrent should happen as far as encouraging Europe to provide more militarily and us doing some kind of targeted sanctions. you know, just so that we're kind of playing with the team and so that we can still be a part of the team if it escalates even further. But I don't think Russia will do that. I think if to understand, one of the big problems with the foreign policy elite, like I just call them that because it sounds more of like a slander because I don't think any of them really know what they're doing.

But to really kind of see how they're getting most things wrong, especially with like China and Russia. Okay, let's look at China. Like, why is China pushing out to like places like Taiwan? all that. Is it just because of the nationalism they talk about? The one China? No. No, it, always take that stuff and throw it out the window, unless you actually do have a madman, you know, like a Hitler or something like that. But I don't think Xi Jinping's a madman. I don't think Vladimir Putin's a madman. I think they're looking at geopolitics. But the easiest way to do this is look at the country that you don't understand. Look at it, look at it from the map, how you've always looked at it,

then flip it as if you're in China. So flip the map completely around and then look out at the South China Sea. What do you see? A U.S. base here, a U.S. base here, U.S. base there, U.S. ally, U.S. ally, U.S.S. ally, U.S. ally. They feel closed in. So what they're doing is they're creating depth. They're creating space. Because if something did happen one day, in China's case, the United States and all its allies could blockade, blockade and choke them off. That drives China's policy. That's why they're always so concerned. You know, when you hear it from our perspective or any other country's perspective, they're, you know, being authoritarian, which they are. But are there being, you know, their military is spreading out and it's a danger.

To us, it looks that way. To them, they're just securing their own interests. When you look at Russia, it's the exact same way. Flip the map, look and see what you got. When you flip the map, you see your capital, Moscow, is not too far from Ukraine. If Ukraine ever became in NATO, you could just lob a couple missiles directly at Moscow. Historically, that's always been Russia's main fear. And for good reason, because they've been inviative.

vated multiple times throughout history, straight through Poland, places like Ukraine, right there to Moscow. That's why they actually had to move their capital from St. Petersburg to Moscow, just to give them a little bit more depth. Interesting. But that drives all of their foreign policy, getting more and more space. That's why Ukraine gives them a buffer. And is that behind a lot of their efforts to divide and deteriorate the West through propaganda,

through even just like social media and how they infiltrates our political conversations. I mean, I think we even saw in the Olympics that we have several members of the media who are basically mouthpieces for the Chinese Communist Party. They're certainly apologists. And that's, I guess, what I don't understand because China and Russia have kind of allied. Like China has come out and they've said that they supported Putin. I think they came together after the Afghanistan debacle. and they met, I think, with the new government in Afghanistan.

Why is it that the foreign policy elites, the media elites in the United States, they seem to apologize for, defend China, ignore China's imperialistic tendencies? I mean, there was hardly a peep after Hong Kong fell. China's been colonizing countries in Africa and South America for a very long time. all of the, you know, the media and the foreign policy officials that really have nothing to say about that are saying Russia is the biggest deal ever. Like, I don't understand why is it only Russia that matters to them? Why not China too? Is it because they're lining their pockets?

What's the deal? That's exactly the reason why. Money, money, money. Ever since China got into the WTO and, you know, opened up, you know, they had, you know, how many, is it two billion people they have in that country? They saw that as a huge cash cow. That's what it's all about. Media companies, you know, anything from shoe companies like Nike or the NBA. They see it as a vast, you know, market that they can get into.

It also exposes their hypocrisy, right? I mean, how can you be, you know, such a big activist on kids and cages in the border, but not care about the concentration camps that are going on, you know. You know, they talk about Trump's Muslim ban, which it wasn't a Muslim ban. Talk about that, you know, with such passion, but not care of. about them getting euthanized or forcibly sterilized in China. Right. Yeah.

I mean, it shows that they're just full of crap, basically. And it's not that you have to care about what's going on in other countries just as much as you have to care in your own. But if you are actively profiting off of that in another country, that does show your hypocrisy there. Mulan was filmed. Like, I am pretty sure it was filmed in Jingjing in China by Disney. And so, and they're always the first to say that they care about the Martin.

marginalized in America. So it absolutely shows their hypocrisy. I also think for like the average person who's not necessarily the average leftist, who's not necessarily profiting from the CCP, I think there's some like intersectionality that comes with it that people now just in their shallow understanding of politics just associate Putin with Trump and they're all white and they don't think that they can criticize a non-white country or non-white people. If you think of all white people as oppressors and non-white people as the oppressed, you feel like you can't. can't criticize China because they're brown. So I think that's part of the ignorance and the moral relativism that we see applied there. Yeah. And I think that and look at it from getting away

from corporations like the government. I always think that our government will be more critical of Russia because they view it as kind of like a kleptocracy. You know, we talked about, you know, after the Cold War, how, you know, oligarchs kind of came out of nowhere and they started gobbling things up. A lot of those oligarchs were former government people within the Soviet Union or, you know, KGB members, people like that, they just swooped in and stole everything. So that's basically what the Russian government is. It's a kleptocracy. The Chinese government is actually something that I think they aspire to.

So Justin Trudeau said 2013, he admires China because of their basic dictatorship, they can turn their economy on a dime. And I don't want to do it. But who always headlines the WF conference? I know. She. Like every year, he's like the first speaker to talk. Yeah.

But it's exactly what they want. want. They want a government that has an office inside every corporation. And if they want to turn the spigot off or turn it up in some of these countries, you can't produce that or we want you to produce this. Or hey, Spotify. Why don't you go ahead and take that Joe Rogan podcast down? Exactly. Yep. That is the government they really want. Yeah. And that's what Canada wants too. And that's exactly what they're what they're invoking right now. And it's always, by the way, people because when you bring this up to people on who are on Trudeau side, they always say, well, it's for safety. Yeah, totalitarianism is always for safety. It's always for protection.

It's always for our own good. I mean, it's just, it's insane to me how people don't see that. And just the irony of someone like Justin Trudeau, as I said, saying that they care, he cares about democracy. So that's why he is going to, you know, punish Russia when he is doing the opposite in his own country. There's also an irony and a hypocrisy that makes me skeptical about the passion of our elites about what's happening in Russia, Ukraine. And a lot of people have brought this up. But you hear all this rhetoric that every country has a right to their own sovereignty, has a right to their own self-determination, has a right to their own borders. Why not America? Why is America the only country that according to the left doesn't have that right? Why don't we have a right to enforce our

border law? Why don't we have a right to sovereignty? Why can't we be a self-determination? Why can't we be a self-determining nation with collective values and with the shared foundation. They don't believe that when it comes to America, but they believe that about this random Eastern European country? Like, I don't understand the motivations behind that. Yeah. Yeah, there's a typical left way of thinking. I think they're always chasing, you know, feelings.

And they're always chasing what, you know, will make them look morally superior in the overall argument. It's all lies because they don't really care. but like our border, they framed it in a way. And this is what they do for everything, economics, welfare, everything. But they framed it in a way that, you know, the conservatives looking, that want a strong border are somehow, you know, morally bankrupt because, you know, we'll have processing facilities at the border. Or we won't let certain people come in or whatever. We're more, we're morally inferior to them because they're like, oh, no, let them all in.

Look at the poor faces, you know, blah, blah. They just want a good life, blah, blah, blah. It makes them morally superior. Do they actually believe that? No, they don't care. They don't care that they're, you know, greenlighting trafficking. I don't care. They don't care that, you know, that Obama was actually the one that was called the deporter in chief.

They quietly dismiss that. They dismissed the fact that he built the cages. No, no, no, no. Don't concentrate on that. Just concentrate what we say. You guys are bad. We're good. You don't like welfare, you know, but look how great it is.

we care about the little guy. Do you really? Because the war on poverty, Johnson's war on poverty, was probably one of the most catastrophic things. I mean, I think it's worse than LBJ. I'm sorry, I think it's worse than Woodrow Wilson. I think it's worse than FDR. It incentivizes families to break up.

Yeah. It incentivizes them to stay where they're at, to split their families apart, and continue to take the checks. And look what that has done to an entire, all the families from the, from the 1960s up until now, look what that has done. It's been catastrophic. But we are considered morally inferior because we say we have a different way. Yeah. It's absolutely insane. But it goes to international politics or geopolitics as well. They're like, are you kidding us? Like, you know, we should run in and save Ukraine, you know, send in, I mean, if it came to, if they thought that they

could get away with sending troops and then they would have American, you know, a social contract to do that, they probably would because they could say, look, we're going there for their own benefit to save them. So do you think that that's a possibility? Do you think there will be American casualties because of this or will it not come to that? I don't know. I think that they'll avoid that like the plague. Yeah. So the troops that have gone have gone to neighboring NATO countries. And I think it's been largely symbolic. A thousand troops to, you know, Lithuania or something like that is not going to do anything to 2,000 Russian troops and all the, you know, military equipment that they have. So it's symbolic. I don't think that they'll go beyond sanction.

I guess now the question is, you know, what could happen? You know, Russia has already been complicit in the downing of that, you know, commercial airliner in Ukraine back in 2014. Something like that could happen if you have, you know, a Russian air defense system kickoff and there is a U.S. plane patrolling in, let's say, Poland. And it's an accident. What happens then? So when you have all of these military assets kind of hovering in the area, it ups the risk. that some kind of mistake could happen. And that's when things get hairy.

And that's why these things are so dangerous, you know, for them to kick off. Other things that could happen. And people should really look at this. I was just reading an article that the Biden administration was looking to wrap up the Iran deal to combat the rising gas prices. So their justification is we'll relieve the sanctions on Iran, you know, as part of this deal. And they'll let the spigot go on, you know, their oil. And that'll help drive the prices down if the Ukraine thing starts getting. too crazy. So rather than, so now we're again not relying on the United States and we're not relying on

Russia anymore. We're relying on Iran for their oil. So obviously it doesn't like the whole pipeline thing doesn't have to do with climate change. As far as I know, they're not more ecologically friendly in the Middle East or in Russia than we are. What's the motivation if you could guess behind turning us from energy independent, which we were under Donald Trump, to energy dependent on some of the worst, most brutal regimes in the world. What could possibly be the benefit of that? To pretend that the climate agenda is actually about the climate. Yeah. That's all it is. It has nothing to do with it. Again, they don't care about the immigrants at the border. They don't care about the climate. I don't care how. There's a small minority that are passionate about the

climate. They're the ones that got scared over the past since I was a kid, since they were talking about the ozone layer. Yeah. There were commercials about the ozone layer when I was a kid, you know, back in the 80s. They were like, oh my gosh, like all the movies were talking about the ozone layer disappearing. I don't think it did. And I haven't heard about the ozone layers since probably like 89 or something like that. But the people that grew up on that and actually got scared about it, they're the small minority that are actually the ones that believe it. Yeah. All the others see a road to great reset. style politics that's coming.

And I guess that's what's behind it is that in order for the great reset to be successful and people can go back and listen to or several episodes on that, then you really, you do need a weak United States. And certainly any form of nationalism and independence is kind of an impediment to what they see is like this global governing strategy, this so-called stakeholder capitalism. and where property, as you were mentioning with fascism, kind of becomes, you know, you can have personal property, but maybe not private property. All of that really is dependent upon changing America's understanding of, like, property rights,

our rights in general, the bill of rights and taking control out of our hands. And I don't know, and putting it into the hands of the government. That, to me, is part of what. has been behind the policies that have wrecked our economy and have made us energy dependent. It really is about weakening America. And I saw this montage the other day of all of these world leaders using the phrase build back better. It just made me think, you know, when people asked, do you think that part of all this,

how can you think that all of this COVID tyranny over the past couple of years was really about like Donald Trump's election or really had to do with America? Well, I don't think it's it exclusively had to do with America and Donald Trump's election, but I don't really have a hard time believing that it had a lot to do with getting Donald Trump out of office and making him as unpopular as possible. When you've got Joe Biden and every world economic leader saying build back better, there's a global strategy with a shared goal. And I think part of that is the deterioration and the weakening of the United States. I completely agree. And I think it's hilarious when we first started pointing out great reset stuff. you know, everyone started calling it a conspiracy theory.

Of course. And then things like that. It sounds like it, though. It really does. I mean, it is a conspiracy. It's just not a theory. Yeah. You know, it's a fact.

Yeah. And I mean, yeah, they would, they call us a conspiracy theory. They were saying it was a global plan. And then things like that came out. You're like, wait. So why is Boris Johnson saying build back better? Yeah. Why is the prime minister, New Zealand saying build back better?

Like, why are all these people saying build back better? Why is it on the Great Reef, the World Economic Forms website? Like, okay, we can't call them that anymore. And then I remember we were like, Yeah, you know, you got to look in, you know, how infiltrated some of these governments are with world economic form people. They were like, oh, your conspiracy theory. See, we told you. Now, did you see that, you know, thing from Klaus Schwab where he was talking about Trudeau?

And he said that they penetrate cabinets. And he said all the young people in Trudeau's cabinet are World Economic Forum people. Well, that is not surprised me. There's the one, what's her name, Kristen or something? That's like his right-hand woman who, gosh, I forgot her background. but she's very deep in the World Economic Forum. I mean, there are politicians on the right and the left, conservative and liberal in the United States who are seen as World Economic Forum leaders.

Klaus Schwab, a lot of people are passing around the new book that he put out. And, you know, he basically outlined. He's not scared that people know. He basically outlines his plan for the world. And literally one thing that he suggests to fight climate change is blocking out the sun. So like these people. People, I mean, it's crazy. They've got a lot of power, though.

Everything, I mean, this is not hyperbole. Everything's going on right now. You need to start looking at it through the lens of what they want to accomplish through the Great Reset. Everything. And that also pertains to Russia right now. Because, I mean, Rom Emanuel said, the quotes often misstated. They always say it was never let a crisis go to waste. What he really said was never let a serious crisis go to waste.

Something like COVID. They tried to build climate change. They're still trying to build climate change as a serious crisis. That has failed to work ever since the ozone. So why do you think that they're relieving a lot of places are relieving restrictions? If I'm trying to figure out how this fits into the Great Reset, like, why would the UK say, okay, no more restrictions, no more of vaccine passports? UK did it because Boris Johnson got caught having a party, you know, during the supposed

lockdown. And he was in a political crisis. That's why they're relieving it. Oh, you think? Absolutely. Yeah. Biden started, we started changing our tune over here when the polls got really bad. Look all over the world from France, Amsterdam, or the Netherlands, Brussels.

There's protests breaking out all over the place. They can't do this anymore. They pushed people as far as they could think that they get away with it. And now they don't think they can get away with it anymore. But they've doubled down in places like Canada. Yeah, you know, that's backfiring too. I mean, I'm kind of surprised that they're being so firm with it. But I never would have dreamed that.

Canada would leave the freedom movement, you know, in the Western world, but they are, you know, good on them. Yeah. I can't believe they beat us to the punch on that. And it's kind of depressing. You're getting in jail for it. I mean, but that's going to break out. That's going to continue. So either Canada is going to be forced into taking, you know, doing something or the government's just going to get voted out.

Either one. So what do you think in all of this? Is there a possibility with all this pushback that we're seeing? And certainly if war breaks out and it does turn into an actual war and there are even, you know, American casualties. And I know you said this is probably not going to happen. But if it does and, you know, we end up in a World War III type situation. I mean, and then, you know, inflation and gas prices continue to happen here in the United States. I mean, people are already so discontent with Joe Biden's presidency.

There's a large number of people discontent with a lot of the governments in the Western world. Is there hope to stop the great reset plans? Is there hope in this pushback and in these protests that we're seeing? Are you optimistic at all? I am optimistic. It's kind of scary that people like Klaus Schwab will say what I just, what I said earlier, something out loud, how they publish this stuff freely now. They used to just talk about this in private, you know, boardrooms.

Now they just say it and then publish it out in the open. because they don't care because that's how far the plan has gotten. So that's kind of scary. There's some things that still need to happen that we need to be on the lookout for and we need to mobilize like the Canadian truckers did to show that we're not going to stand by. But that gives me hope. Things like Canada gives me hope that people are not. And it's talked about so much.

You've been talking about it. A lot of people have been talking about it. It's more out in the open and people are seeing this is not a conspiracy. It's actually happening. But there are some things like, so they're looking for another serious crisis. this is one thing to look for. They could say, let's say prices get out of control because of inflation and what's happening with the Russia-Ukraine thing.

Let's say gas prices go insane. They're looking for a reason to go to a digital currency. They're absolutely looking for that reason. And that should scare the crap out of a lot of people because there's a thing right now. Everyone should look this up called Project Hamilton. That's interesting because he was the first one that, you know, talked about a central bank. Right. Um, digital currencies were for decentralization.

They're going the exact opposite direction with theirs. They're not going to use block. And you can read this on their website. They released a full white paper on it. Um, they're working with the Fed to get this done. Who? Um, uh, it's, uh, I think it's MIT, MIT. MIT and the Boston Fed are the ones that are partnered to do this, but Project Hamilton.

And they stay out in the open. It's not for, they're not going to use blockchain technology. Blockchain technology means that you're, um, All your transactions are private. They can't spy on what you're buying. There's like a ledger that kind of guarantees that they can track all the purchases and stuff that take place. But they can't tell what you spend it for. Or they can't even tell who spent the money.

They're not using that, which means they don't want a ledger of what they're doing. They want it to all be private. They don't want us to know what they're doing with our money. plus they can tell who bought what and all the different people who are buying stuff that means the end of privacy

that should scare everyone did you see did you watch a Joe Rogan podcast a couple days ago with that one dude that talked about I haven't gotten around to it yet but everyone's been telling me you gotta listen to this my brother sent it to me and was like this is fascinating oh my gosh he broke that his guest

broke it down perfectly and he showed an article from the telegraph so all all the governments in the world that are in on Davos and the Great Reset they're all wanting to do this. But their government actually said, look, we want our digital currency when we do it, we want it to be programmable. So what he meant by that was they want to be able to, let's say, let's say they get to

a point where they're like, you know what, we only want people to buy things that are essential, food, stuff like that. Yeah, definitely can't buy guns. Don't buy guns. Exactly. That's a big one. We don't want them buying anything what we deem frivolous or, let's say, bad to the climate or whatever.

So we're going to cut off all purchases on things like that. that's what the UK government wants to be in their digital currency. Or like think about it not just like they're not just restricting items. It's going to become so much easier for the government to do what Trudeau is doing by telling the banks, hey, freeze these, freeze all of these assets, freeze this money in these bank accounts. Well, the government can skip that step and just do it themselves and just say, you can't buy anything unless, you know, your social credit score is up unless you stop speaking about these things. I mean, there's all kind of incentives.

We're not going to pay for you to have a third child. There's all kinds of things. The government can say, this is what we want. These are the kinds of people that we are going to allow to buy and sell in society and restrict however they want to using that kind of centralized, programmable digital currency, right? Exactly. You call it social credit. That's exactly what it is.

Only they'll call it ESG standards over here. ESG. Oh, you got a low ESG score? Yeah. We're cutting off your non-eastern. It's already doing to corporations, by the way. And you say it's not a conspiracy. It's already happening.

Yeah. It's out in the open. So, I mean, how in the world would we even push back against that? Like, what do you do? I mean, once it's done, it's pretty much done. But, I mean, I... You said you were optimistic. You're leaving us on a sad note here.

Who do I work for? How much optimism do I really have? That's true. Hey, this is relatable, though. You don't see a chalkboard behind me. We like a little bit of optimism. So I guess you're just saying we have to keep talking about it and pushing back against this. I also feel like localization is one great way, relying on each other.

All of the things that the government has tried desperately to take from us over the past, over the past couple years is community, relying on your church, relying on your family, relying on your friends and your neighborhoods. And coming together, I mean, it's almost like we're going back 100 years in some ways. but relying on each other for the things, for the things that we need. Yeah, they're pushing basically radical globalism, controlled by, you know, a select few governments, basically, that hold most the cards. We need to look in the opposite direction.

We need to go, you mentioned localization, radical localization. I've taken all my money out of one of the big banks, one of the Fed banks. I took all my money out of there and I put it in a local bank. any bank that is kind of cut off from that Fed system where they will have the power to manipulate your money or pull a Justin Trudeau, you know, freeze assets, get your money as far away from that as you can. So local banks that aren't connected to that system. I was going to say Bitcoin. I've invested in Bitcoin, but I think they're going to be on the chalking block too. I mean, if the Fed creates a Fed coin, a digital dollar, they're going to want to hold the monopoly

on digital currency. That's what the government does. And what China do, China ban Bitcoin. Yeah. So that's the model. Yeah. That's the logical next step for them to try and do that as well. Yeah.

And while voting matters. I mean, I know that voting is everything. There are plenty of Republicans that are corrupt as well. But, I mean, elections do matter. Like, if we, America can still lead the charge against this stuff. They can still be the one to push back. I mean, I have to say, knowing everything that we, We know about the Great Reset.

It's hard to even, like, hope for the integrity of our elections. Just even if it's in the sense of, like, okay, a media orchestrated, a corporation orchestrated effort against the Republican candidate. That's still a way of rigging the election. Yeah. Which does worry me. But, I mean, it's the only, you know, we have to do it. We have to push. Yeah.

And the left is not used to us pushing back like that. Yeah. I just read a great article from Glenn Greenwald on his substack. And he was talking about. how the system, you know, for years has been gearing up to this to where they can silence all dissent. Yeah. By brutal means of possible, like the Emergency Act in Canada. That means that we're starting to scare them a little bit. When we can, when Canadians can mobilize something of that magnitude to push back on, you know, you know, leftist overreach, that's scary to them. When the

January 6th thing happened, that scared the crap out of them because they were like, oh my gosh, we knew that Donald Trump had a lot of supporters, but we didn't know they were actually going to, you know, rise to the occasion like we've been doing, you know, over the past few years, to actually mobilize and come together and let their voices be heard. They're not used to that. Same thing happened with a tea party.

Which I'm not, I don't know that the means that were used on January 6th by a lot of people were the best means. Oh, no. To put it mildly. No, no, no. But I mean, but I would say that the vast majority of the people that showed up at the January 6th thing had no intention at all. of breaking the law. And they didn't. A lot of them, I mean, were just there to hear President Trump

speak. And then there were other people that were absolute idiots and did what they did. I was in D.C. probably two weeks before that. I went with my boss to a meeting up there. And they had another rally. And it was all over the place. Like Washington, D.C. was shut down. There was Trump supporters everywhere. And it felt so cool. Because again, I had that feeling of, I'm not used to this. I'm not used to so many people on the right side of the spectrum showing up. in support of something like this. I saw it with the Tea Party. And that was, again, that was another thing

that completely changed everything for the left. It reoriented the way that they went about attacking us, you know, the way that they operate in general. But they're not used to that. That's why, as Greenwald pointed out, it's so important that we recognize what they're doing now in places like Canada, the January 6th Commission. They're trying to specifically go after silencing dissent.

That's the shift now. It's such a radical change because they used to be all about dissent, right? Like the 60s, the hippies. Well, they still see themselves as that. Which is insane. It's insane. You know, it's just insane. Like Anonymous.

This is another example. Anonymous, the hacker group. They were to, they were all about supporting dissenters, right? They were the ultimate dissenters. Now you had that co-founder of Anonymous that's doxing people, dissenters in Canada. Yeah. It's a complete, just flip-flop. It's a complete shift.

They're part of the, you know. the regime, their bootlickers, the very people that call themselves anti-fascists are the fascists. And it's clever. I mean, it has been the trick and the mode of operation of totalitarians really since the beginning of time, but definitely in the 20th century. And I just say, like I said the other day, if you want to know, like all people love to fantasize looking back at the 20th century and saying, you know, if I had been in Italy or Soviet Russia or Cambodia, like I would have been on the right side.

I would have stood against those totalitarians and the oppression. Well, where are you right now? Like, where do you stand right now when you look at what's happening in Canada? Where do you stand? That tells you exactly where you would have stood 100 years ago. It's no different. We haven't gotten to the same place yet where a lot of those countries did in the 20th century, but it doesn't happen all at once.

Yeah. And if we don't continue to stand, it will get that bad. It will. But that's, I guess, the source of my hope going forward is that that is starting to happen. And I think that I think that people are to that breaking point. I think that the left push too hard, especially with COVID. And I think that they've, that's kind of run, people have hit their limit. Yeah.

And as long as people keep standing up, you know, peacefully with, you know, in the vein of Martin Luther King, I think that we've got a good shot. Yeah. And Republicans in office, you need to kind of retabulate, recalculate and actually push for what your constituents want. Like, we just don't need the, like, tax cuts only party anymore. Like, we need fighters who are going to fight for the things that the people who voted for you want to fight for. And so let's hope that that happens.

Thank goodness. Jesus is coming back one day. Right. This is crazy, crazy. That's where my hope is, even if all this political stuff doesn't work out. All right, Jason, thank you so much for coming on. I really appreciate it. My pleasure.

Okay, make sure you tune in tomorrow for a bonus episode with Mike Rowe. Going to be an amazing conversation. You're going to love it so much. Leave a five-star review on Spotify or Apple Podcasts if you love the show. Thanks so much. See you guys tomorrow. Hey, this is Steve Day. If you're listening to Allie, you already understand that the biggest issues facing our country aren't just political.

They're moral, spiritual, and rooted in what we believe is true about God, humanity, and reality itself. On the Steve Day show, we take the news of the day. and tested against first principles, faith, truth, and objective reality. We don't just chase narratives and we don't offer false comfort. We ask the hard questions and follow the answers wherever they leave, even when it's unpopular. This is a show for people who want honesty over hype and clarity over chaos. If you're looking for commentary grounded in conviction and unwilling to lie to you about where we are or where we're headed, you can watch this D-Day show right here on Blaze TV or listen wherever you get podcasts.

I hope you'll join us.