The Duran Podcast - Trump presidency at risk of unraveling w/ Robert Barnes (Live)

Episode Date: July 14, 2025

Trump presidency at risk of unraveling w/ Robert Barnes (Live)

All right, we are live with Alexander Mercuris in London, and we are joined by the great, the one and only Robert Barnes. Robert, how are you doing? And where can people find you? Right now you can find me in New York City. But the, Alex, where are you in Russia, Serbia? Where are you at these days? I'm now in Moscow. In Moscow. Well, we all might need to be there pretty soon, depending on how things go here in the United States. But if the for the different, I was here in New York for the Club World Cup final to give an idea of, you know, the, I guess I don't know if Trump has seen these before or not. Usually you get up there with the team and the team wins and then you leave if you're like the designated leader, the FIFA guy or the host or et cetera. Trump gets up there and he loves it. So he just stays up there.

And so you see all the players jumping up and down there. Trump running out. He's running around in the middle of it. You know, photo bombing the whole. thing. That was interesting. I hope that's his mood as he goes for this week and is not a warmongering mood. We'll see how that works out. But you can always, for all the law and politics, that's at Viva Barneslaw. Dot Locals.com. For the various picks, we had a, gave out a big pick earlier in the tournament that Chelsea would win the tournament at 10 to 1, 20 to 1 in some places. So that cash, that was fun. That's at

sportspicks.com. We give out all kind of not only sports, but law and politics. you name it. You can invest in anything these days, including what might happen overseas, what might happen domestically, et cetera. And then for a lot of the legal work, legal support work for important public policy causes, that's at 1776 Law Center.com. We're going to be updating that site to include information on prominent cases involving financial freedom, political freedom, medical freedom, food freedom here in the United States. So those are the places, is sports picks, Vio Barnes Law and 1776 Law Center in the places that you can find the work that we're doing.

And I have those links in the description box down below and I will also add them as a pin comment. Alexander, Robert, we have a whole lot of stuff to get to. Thank you to everyone that is watching us. Thank you to our moderators. Let's jump right into it because we have a lot to cover. So, Alexander. Indeed. Robert.

Indeed, so. And as we are making this program, we have to await a statement from Donald Trump. he's promised us a big statement about Russia. He had a conversation on the 3rd of July with Vladimir Putin. He said to be extremely angry about that conversation. He doesn't understand why Putin doesn't agree to whatever. I'm not quite sure what exactly was that Trump expected Putin to agree to in that conversation they had on the 3rd of July.

But anyway, he's now sent Kellogg, General Kellogg, back to Kiev. is going to be there for a week. Zelensky is going through a massive government reshuffle in Kiev at the moment, which is very interesting. But in the meantime, we're also getting reports that Donald Trump is now going to start supplying more weapons again to Ukraine, long-range missiles. I'm told that there are the Jassums, these long-range cruise missiles, that are air-launched offensive missiles.

and I get the sense that parts of his base are not happy. And this shortly after Trump reversed himself on Iran, at least attacked Iran, which I think also annoyed some people. But then we've also had other things. We've had the big beautiful bill passed, but we've also had the Jeffrey Epstein case. And in fact, if you don't mind, Robert, I'm actually going to start with Jeffrey.

at Stein, because I have to say, of all of the reversals, that is the one that surprised me personally the most. And I had not expected that. All of the indications were, including from Pam Bondi, that they were going to publish the client list. Now we're being told, and are asked to believe that there is no client list, that this man who was a trafficker, apparently trafficked and no one except himself. It seems as far as that I can make it out. And this is very strange. And what makes it particularly strange is the way in which this was announced, because you would have expected some kind of proper explanation,

some serious briefing to be done in the Justice Department. Perhaps Pam Bondi herself out there to explain what had happened. And there was nothing like that, just a sort of brief announcement. Trump himself is now publishing angry comment. I thought he was rather angry on truth social, which suggests that he feels very defensive about this. So, I mean, I can't understand this at all. I don't understand why this decision has been made. I'm sure there's explanations.

I'm going to just make one quick point, which is that I do think there's anybody on earth who is able to answer certain questions about Epstein better. I say answer them. I don't mean that you can provide us with explanations about the reality of Epstein himself. But I'm going to make a few observations. Firstly, nobody has ever explained to me how this man became as rich as he did. I think that he's widely acknowledged. But nobody either has explained to me how he could afford the kind of lifestyle that he had on the capital he's sort of. supposed to have had. He's supposed to have been had a net worth of about $500 million.

He owned a enormous mansion in Manhattan. And we all know what property taxes are like in New York. And apparently it was the third most tax expensive building in Manhattan in New York. He owned a massive ranch in New Mexico, 10,000 acres, I believe. He owned two, two, islands not as I'd imagine that I just checked two islands in the Caribbean he owned the better part of a massive building a residential building in the avenue fosh in Paris he also had another residence it seems in Palm Beach and he had a Boeing 727 private jet which again is incredibly expensive opting to operate which I you know it's not even a usual type of business jet I just don't understand this man's money, actually.

Nothing about it makes sense. So we're told that he's had no clients, there was no extortion, no reason to think anything suspicious about his death. A film provided that doesn't really explain anything or answer any questions at all. In fact, perhaps asks more. questions than it answers. And as I said, nothing about this story makes any kind of sense. But, I mean, especially about the money things. I mean, he must have had a second source of income

or more sources of income than are being revealed. And what is, how was this concealed? Because, I mean, even if you're hiding money offshore or something like that, what I know about tax law in the UK, is at the moment you start spending the money, that's when the taxman notices it, unless you are particularly skilled in the way you can seal it. So, I mean, nothing about this case makes any sort of sense. And, of course, the decision that the Trump administration has taken, basically to close the book on the affair is even more bizarre than any other. So I'm going to throw it over to you, Robert.

I mean, can you shed any light on this affair? Because I can't make any sense of it at all, any part of it. Well, if you look at its foundation, you could find an analogous to a degree, life story and a famous Brit who ended up with tight ties to Epstein through family. And that would be the one and only Robert Maxwell, born Jan Haq, in what was then Czech-Slovakia, what is now part of Ukraine, no luck. In fact, he grew up just a hip and a scott from, or skipping a hop, from the one and only Mr. Stepan Binderra, whose legacy we're still feeling in the war today. So before getting to Robert Maxwell is the kind of template for what might explain the otherwise, unexplained, as you point out in Alexander, about Jeffrey Epstein.

One is that, so this is a guy who shows up at the first time he's, involved with anything politically connected to any of these parties is in 1970 at the Dalton School, which for those that don't know, the Dalton School would be what would be called a public school in the UK, a private school here in America, a very elite privileged school. And what was unusual about it is that it was a school that prided itself on hiring like Ivy League graduates. And here they hired someone who hadn't even graduated. That was unusual by itself. From there, it's acknowledged that that's when he first gets into the world of New York real estate, finance, high-end politically connected parties, people that work at Bear Stearns.

Ultimately, people like Mr. like Les Wexner, who was the founder of Victoria's Secret along with a bunch of fashion, well, the founder, but the modern founder. And the founder of a bunch of fashion chains out of Ohio, who would, for unexplained reasons, to this day give a power of attorney to Epstein over all of his finances in life, a almost semi-mysterious billionaire from Ohio in many of his personal life aspects. So how does he get from college dropout to half a billion bucks in the bank and is living like he's got 10 billion bucks in the bank, as you pointed out of it. It's never been explained. And the, now you can draw some inferences.

The who was the headmaster at the Dalton school at the time Epstein was hired. Well, it was Donald Barr. You might recognize the name because he's Bill Barr's father. The Donald Barr would later go on to write a science fiction book in which he would portray in detail sexual relations between adult men and underage girls. Kind of a little lot. And if you go back further, Donald Barr's ties to intelligence date to the founding of intelligence in America in its modern era with connections to the OSS, the Office of Strategic Services, which merged into the Central Intelligence Agency. So he gets access to a lot, he gets access to wealthy, powerful people at Dalton School.

He also got access to underage girls at adult and school. And it would be an ongoing joke with his friends and coterie of community of what that dynamic. dynamic was and not a good one. He then ultimately, as you point out, almost all of his life is unexplained. These extraordinary properties worth billions of dollars all around the world. The money in the bank that nobody can track or trace. As Eric Weinstein has pointed out, he was not a legit trader. He was lying and pretending to be a big financial trader.

And he was not a financier of any kind of on a day-to-day basis, people don't know what he was doing. from the 1980s forward. He shows up in connection to arms running in the Middle East, including being part of the person who helped launder money to facilitate the Iran hostages, transaction in the Middle East. Those don't remember, I told it takes hostages in 1979, when the Iranian Revolution succeed, accuses the hostages of being U.S. spies. As soon as Reagan gets elected, they're suddenly all really,

You didn't have to be a super genius to be like, hmm, that's a lot. The day he gets elected, the Iranians love Ronald Reagan? I had no idea. The digging further, of course, there would be books about how this was all the beginning of guns for hostages that would continue to fund underground political movements, underground criminal operations all around the world. Guns for hostages, Iran, Contra is how it later became to be known in the late 1980s. and Epstein was even involved there. He ends up involved and connected to Galais Maxwell,

which always immediately caught my attention because of the very unusual history of one, Robert Maxwell, which if you listen to him to talk, you know, back in the day, he passed away in 1991 because he, like so many people around Epstein, have mysterious deaths. You know, you have the famous model magnate, Jean-Luc right there in France, gets arrested also for these similar kind of behaviors.

And he manages to kill himself just like Epstein, according to the official there. Of course, Robert Maxwell, he just dropped off his boat. He just dropped off that happens, I guess. You just drop off your yacht, boat, you're dead. Right at the same time, he was in serious trouble. And you look at Maxwell's history, you get a similar almost FIOP kind of story. You know, the born in a small town in Czech Slovakia, his whole, from an Orthodox Jew, Yiddish peasant farming family,

whole family gets wiped out during the Holocaust. He escapes. I suspect he was working with the communist initiative. just because the way in which he escaped, he's never really fully explained. And I was like, well, who would have had the connections at that time, you know, and the rest to be able to facilitate that? Ends up with the underground Czech army in Marseille. Then suddenly shows up as a split with them.

And he becomes a U.K. soldier. And then, I mean, you guys will understand this context. A lot of ordinary people won't. His true rise to fame comes in post-war Berlin, which was a nightmare of a city to be a dystopian place to be in. Everything is getting smuggled. You name it. You know, not just, you know, cigarettes and guns and alcohol, but everyday necessities and in some cases, frankly, human beings. The MI6 says, boy, he's an up-and-comer.

And I think he might have been going by a different nomadig air at this point. He would later become Robert Maxwell. He had his birth name than a nom de guerre during the war. Then another name when he went back to the UK as a respectable British citizen. The, is the MI6 decides to sponsor him. Robert Maxwell to buy a science publication to publish all the German scientists. Later it would turn out, Robert Maxwell was tied into operation paperclip. As I don't know, it was helping, which now must have been surreal for someone like Maxwell.

I mean, your whole family is wiped out by Nazis, and now you're helping Nazis escape to the West just because they have scientific skills. But Maxwell showed a certain degree of flexibility morally over his lifetime. And that's how he'd get into the world in the publishing world. And then he would be abridged to everything. he would end up publishing Soviet scientists. The KGB, he had a tight relationship with the KGB, I mean, he spoke nine languages, with the KGB is the predecessor of the FSB, then with my six, and with the CIA, he would be involved in Israeli spying on the United States, a whole bunch of things connected to it.

And that's why I was told me, if you want to start with Epstein, start with Robert Maxwell. and Maxwell has a similar, unusual trajectory life. And you dig in, it's deep ties to, he's a information launderer, money launderer, arms trafficker, human trafficker. He's a facilitator. What he was in 1946 post-World War II, Berlin, is what he would become on a much bigger, grander scale around the world with comfortable relations. And then he gets, you know, after he dies, when he stole, I think it was the time.

Maybe you'll remember Alexander. I thought it was the biggest fraud at the time in the history of the of UK. You know, still close to, you know, 400 million plus. Someone's up to a billion, depending on how you calculate it, from pensioners. It was setting up different shell companies. And it was the same con man orientation you get with Epstein. You get the same vibes with Maxwell. The and the, and so, and then we somehow, you know, miraculously,

Galane Maxwell, his favorite daughter, after the death of her father. father suddenly shows up in the arms of Jeffrey Epstein, facilitating the same connections. Because Robert Maxwell, by that point, had facilitated relations with leaders around the world, quite literally. And then, like, if you look at Maxwell is very close with the Republican Senator Tower here in the United States, who was an alcoholic. And what else? He had a pension for young girls.

And it's like at some point, and he got through Tower, he was able to get Israeli intelligence software infiltrating U.S. nuclear military basis. I mean, he has even connections to the Jonathan Pollard affair. So when Epstein suddenly shows up and Epstein suddenly connected to high-ranking financiers, scientists,

politicians, you name it, with unexplained sources of money, hanging out with Elaine Maxwell, who he appeared to be connected to through Robert Maxwell, you didn't have to be a super genius to guess what Epstein was and who he was, that he was a fixer, a money launderer, arms trafficker,

human trafficker, honeypot In fact, that's how Glane Maxwell refer to herself, who, by the way, she has rumor, has it. She's willing to spill the beans if they're willing to give her either immunity or something else on the whole thing. Everything about Robert Maxwell, every of her father, everything about Jeffrey Epstein, both. She's decided federal prison isn't for her. And if the Trump administration is sincere, they would absolutely get to the bottom of that, at least do a proffer session to see what that and tell her information is. So to me, it was clear who and what Epstein was. And the problem, I think for the, now the problem of the Trump administration, as you point out, Alexander, all of us are shocked by this because Trump was the one who introduced Epstein to the political scene in 2015 when he was running for the first time for the presidency.

He's the one who went on British TV, said, you know, you might want to look at Epstein's ties to Prince Andrew and what he was really up to. He did it here in the U.S. repeatedly, so much so that the Clinton campaign got nervous about it because Bill Clinton was deep. deeply tied Jeffrey Epstein. Many trips on Epstein's Lolita Express, as they say. And so they had somebody file what I thought was a fake suit, claiming to be a victim. They later dismissed the lawsuit, alleging Trump was in the files. So from the get-go, one way that the people implicated by the Epstein case did not want to get publicly implicated was to implicate everybody else, drag everybody else into it, so everybody's scared. He still said he was going to release the file. Now, it's under the Trump administration that Epstein gets charged again. But then it's

also under Bill Barr as Attorney General that Epstein magically ends up killing himself in a facility that in Metropolitan Detention Center in New York that is literally designed where the cells he was in to prohibit someone from being able to kill themselves. In addition, subsequent, his brother would say he was murdered. There was other prison guards or prison inmates that said they were offered money to kill Epstein. The official, the cameras actually on his cell never worked. They released camera images that are not of itself. They're of the hallway that leads to itself. The cameras supposedly stop working,

and the guards, you know, they just fall asleep. They snoozed and won't. I know I was going on. So everything about it screened red flags of a false flag that this man was murdered because of what he knew. And then you dig deeper, and the biggest implications were to high-ranking Democrats. Bill Gates, he had a long-standing relationship

with a lot of Harvard science. this Harvard University had a tight relationship with the others as well. And whether they knew the full story or they didn't, that's one question. But Trump said he was going, he said on Lex Friedman, said on multiple stations, he was going to release the Epstein file. Pam Bondi gave her legitimacy with the populist base, the MAGA base here in America, that, no, I'm not just some corporate lobbyist and mediocre prior state attorney general. No, no, no, I'm going to make sure we get to the bottom of the Epstein file.

She made this a signature issue to give her bona fides with an otherwise skeptical populist audience. The same was true, Cash Patel. He constantly, he said Bill Gates was on the list. He said Bill Gates was lobbying Congress to hide the fact that he was on the list. And he said other powerful people were too. He wrote a book called Government Gangsters about deep state corruption. He was an early exposer of Russia Gate while he worked for Devin Nune. Dan Bongino made it a practical signature issue for his rise to being Rush Limbaugh's potential replacement

after Rush Limbaugh's death, making it a signature issue on all kinds of podcasts, his own show, they are going on Tim Hool and talking about it in detail, et cetera. So everybody's expecting something to get disclosed because almost everything in the Epstein case has been hidden in one capacity or another. We know that when they seized his files, they seized a bunch of hard drives of video images. This has been admitted now by Pam Bondi, but she just claims all the images are solely of Epstein doing bad things. not anyone else at all. Now, I don't believe that she's reviewed those videos herself. Someone's just telling her that, and she's going along with it for reasons we can get into.

But you look at all of that. Ultimately, my guess is somebody somewhere along the way finally figured out what Epstein actually was, and that Epstein would implicate MI6, CIA, and especially Massa and Israel. the two different Israeli prime ministers visited Epstein regularly in the United States and no one has yet been able to explain why and what they were doing there. It's kind of like Robert Maxwell.

All you needed to know about his story is he had the equivalent of a state funeral with president's prime ministers, heads of intelligence agencies, in a country. He wasn't born. He didn't die in. And he was never even a citizen of.

the now they might have you know rumor had that they had something to do you can read robert maxwell israel super spy as a book read by a good old school english journalist you know one of those guys who turns out a book every couple of years that kind of thing passed away recently uh passed away a few years ago the but you can get one-to-one together is too it appears to me that uh trump has has for whatever reason decided to hitch his wagon to b b nanyahu because the only reason to really not disclose the epstein files uh because if you have let's say there's a certain group of people you don't want to disclose. Well, you can purge that, right? You can hide that, redact that. Just disclose everything else. Disclose everybody else. Disclose all the other

disclosed some of the financial records, et cetera. Unless you don't know if anything you disclose might implicate an intelligence agency in a foreign government. What if you don't know, well, if we disclosed this person was there, did CIA, Massad, MI6, some other powerful force, used that material to blackmail or extort somebody? And it was, Are they by act? Trump kind of slipped up on this once when he said, well, you have to make sure whatever you reveal or release about the Epstein files that you don't reveal methods and so forth. It's like, hmm, methods are only law enforcement and tell them. That's the only people who need to worry about methods being disclosed.

That's not Epstein's methods he was worried about. That was somebody else. And I agree his presidency sits at a very cliff's edge on the point of potential disaster or great success. If he keeps his promises and states a special counsel to review the Epstein case and let it go wherever it goes and to publish everything that can be legally published. If he reverses gear and returns to his original promise at not dragging us into Ukraine, the HECF gave him a nice fig leaf saying we don't have the weapons anyway. So why are he trying to send something that we don't have? If he stays out of war in the Middle East, if he does those three things, then the economy, wages are growing, jobs are growing, that a lot of the social issues that people are happy with, immigration is progressing well from his base point of view. He could be in an exceptional position to create a great second term.

If, on the other hand, he hitches his wagon to Bibi Netanyahu, a man that is in deep legal trouble in his own country that has aligned himself with the hard right of a revisionist scientist who believed that the biosephiated. is a guidebook to the territorial limits of Israel, then he's going to be in deep, deep, deep trouble. And the Epstein documents files are kind of a, they're a filter, right? It's not just what's in there that people want to know and they want people prosecuted who did horrible things to young girls. It's also, it's, are we ever going to purge the deep state? Are we ever going to become a transparent government again? And that's why he doesn't understand how symbolically significant the Epstein files case is.

If he doesn't reverse gear on it, his presidency is in great things. I completely agree. I don't understand quite apart from, you know, the decision itself, why it was conduct, why it was made in the way that it was. I mean, one of the things he could have done, he could have appointed exactly, as you said, special counsel or somebody to publicly review the case. We're the absolute world experts on how to do that here in the UK, and we do this all the time. We're never anything really bad and embarrassed.

turns up. We get some retired judge, total establishment figure, if we want to cover it all up. This person then conducts a five-year investigation. Eventually, he publishes an extraordinarily long report, which by this time most people have given up waiting for it. And of course, that report really doesn't tell you anything which you didn't previously know and makes a few harsh criticisms of people and says that things could have been done better and everybody moves on. Why this decision had to be announced in the way that it was, it struck me as amazing. And I can only assume, and this is a guess, that somebody must have been insisting very, very strongly to Trump.

This must be closed down now. we cannot have this hanging around at all, not for one year or five or for weeks or for whatever. And I think that Trump, I think, completely underestimated the effect of this, because again, exactly as you said, I get the sense that this thing has cut through, that the people who voted for Trump, many of them are not perhaps always interested in all the minutiae of policy about this or that, about tariffs or this, but this was one thing they understood very clearly and very well. And they were told quite definitely that the president and his team were going to get to the bottom of this and they were going to provide all of the information. And it would be out there for the people

to see. And instead, it's as if a switch has been pulled and the whole story has been closed down. The politics of this are terrible. And I think that if Trump doesn't understand that and doesn't reverse course, then I do think he's going to be in serious trouble over time because it is going to dent his credibility very, very badly. And up to now, his base, when he gets into trouble, has tended to give him the benefit of the doubt after this point. I think I'm going to suspect that they're going to do that less and less.

and less until eventually they stop believing in him and that will be the moment when i think he finds himself no longer um you know in control of events but controlled by them so those are my thoughts i don't know you want to add anything to them but those are my thoughts based on the things that you've just been saying and by the way i agree to quickly say about robert maxwell i've got nothing to have because you've described him very well of course i i knew him i didn't know him personally but I knew him very well. And I knew several people who worked for him, by the way. And they've described in exactly the terms that you did.

No doubt. I mean, the way I see it is either Trump's going to drain the swamp or the swamp's going to drain him. And he's a big risk of this. The reality is the only way he could prevent the swamp from draining him is to drain the swamp in the second term. He won't be able to escape by with the same routine as he did his first term and ended up hijacked.

And a lot of his agenda never getting implemented, particularly in the context of of foreign policy, but substantially in the domestic policy arena as well. And here he's finally going to get the big, you know, build the big beautiful wall, as he calls it, with the big beautiful bill. It has all the tax incentives for his industrial policy. And as you guys have been pointing out, there is a positive role to play potentially with tariffs if you utilize them to promote an industrial policy. If they're based on economics, if you're trying to protect your own worker base and your

own industrial supply chain. And that's what Trump historically has been committed to. And now all of a sudden, even that, he's starting to contaminate with ancillary EU vander crazy style politics. The like going after the Palestinian advocate at the UN Council of Human Rights, who quite frankly, I mean, I don't happen to agree with all of her determinations. There's certain words that have certain legal meaning. I would avoid using that she is. is quite liberal with. However, she's just doing her job. The Palestinians have joined that UN Council of Human Rights in terms of the, you know, I understand Israel, U.S., not part of the treaty, but Palestinians are. And it's their area that is being attacked. I mean, looks like ethnic

cleansing and purging to me. And, you know, I say this is someone who has long been an advocate for Israel as opposed to, say, Hamas or Hezbollah, but always an advocate for the U.S. over Israel. always an advocate for the rule of law in human decency. And to me, what Israel is doing in Gaza meets none of those standards. And I see no end to it. Especially once I understood that Netanyahu is aligned with the hard right, the old revisionist, Zionist crowd that believes in, you know, I mean, Israelis themselves used to make fun of this position. They say, no, we're not going to look into the Bible to discover what our land title is. I mean, granted, that was the old labor Zionism, the original founding sort of animus of Zionism in Israel, not this revisionist

Zionism, that's kind of disturbing, where we're going to be in ceaseless trouble. And so that's where what Trump does from here is critical. This summer will decide the future of his presidency. And maybe to some degree the future of the United States. Because as Steve Bannon has been emphasizing, if we don't kill the deep state now, the deep state will kill America. It's just kind of that simple. That's where those of us that have been involved in this and studying it for a very long time are very unsettled by the last several weeks.

What should have been a heroic time for Trump with surging polls, good wages, good jobs, good cost of living under control. And now he's talking about the loser Lindsey Graham's insane sanctions proposal. That would kill America. That would kill our economy. That would kill Trump. They ain't going to kill Russia. Russia will manage around it. They've been managing around it now.

a decade ever since the Crimean sanctions were imposed on it. This would just be a monumental disaster in the United States. Number one factor tipping for Trump in the election, cost of living. Number one thing he's got under control in his first six months. Cost of living. Cost of living down below the rate of inflation so much so that they're ragging on Jerome Powell for not cutting interest rates already, given he cut him before at a higher inflation rate. And now, you know, Powell may be for trouble because he spent like $2.5 billion refurbishing the Fed. What we should do is spend money shutting down the Fed. But I agree with Ron Paul on that and some others, Rand Paul, Thomas Massey, etc.

But all the things Trump is trying to do, build an industrial policy, integrate crypto into a new currency model, use immigration to policy to restore American jobs and American wages. All of those things go completely sideways, including his budgetary and economic. objectives, if he gets caught doing mass sanctions on Russia that leads to a blowback on the U.S. economy, if he gets caught another war again for Israel against Iran that we do not need, and that many Israelis also opposed that, you know, the BB's never had a majority support in Israel for very long at all in his entire political tenure. He gets into his coalition maneuvering and the like. But the, but now is not the time, but you're right, it's the timing, right? The timing, the only explanation for the timing is someone demand. he do this because why would you release this now?

You could just delay for four. If you had even made the internal determination for whatever reason, foreign policy, national security, connected parties are in the files, whatever the reason. You're not going to disclose it. You don't do it like this. This is the worst cover-up letter I've ever seen. They couldn't even sign the darn thing. Todd Blanche is going around.

Deputy Attorney General, former corporate lawyer, worked for Trump briefly. As Trump's counsel, that's how he gets a job of the attorney general's position. It's kind of ridiculous. that's another story. The saying they worked really hard to diligent on it. No, you didn't. We could put any of these, any of the people that supposedly signed off on that memo under five minutes, five minutes of examination and they would crumble. Not just based on their contradicting what they themselves have said. They themselves have Pam Bondi, the cash Mattel, Dan Bongino, I don't know about Todd Blanche. He wasn't very public. Donald Trump

have also this implicates highly powerful people, whether that's Bill Clinton, Bill Gates, whomever more. The two bills for sure, that they were deeply, deeply in bed with Epstein. But the real implication looks like Israel's calling the shots. It was almost like Trump thought, okay, shut down the Epstein files, all of one of the most embarrassing episodes of Israeli political history, using someone to set up honey traps, abusing young girls for the purposes of entrapment, extortion, and blackmail that I think the CIA and MI6 were all also involved in, but I think the principal moving agent in all of this, given the Maxwell Epstein connection, given Epstein connections to a bunch of Israeli prime ministers, given his

almost all of his money is tied to people who are big supporters of Israel, right? So the, whether you're talking about Wexner or anybody else. So the, would Wexner be in the principal and primary one, but not the sole work? The, for the most part, all of this suggests that somebody told Trump, you need to shut down the Epstein case to satisfy these groups. They're only going to be happy if you do so. It appears the motivating is it really a coincidence. He does it the day before Bibi Netanyahu shows up for his third White House visit.

I'm not buying that. It seems to me that for some reason, Trump has been convinced that if he hitches his wagon to Bibi Netanyahu in the Mideast and hitches his wagon to some aspects of the neocons in Ukraine, that he will somehow end up a hero in this. I often say that Trump's virtue advice are the same unusual trait. He believes ridiculous things. That can be useful, right? You can sit there and say, you know what? No, nobody who has never held public office has ever been elected president.

I'm going to do it. No person who's been under indictment has ever been elected president. I'm going to do it, right? You've got to be a little bit almost crazy to believe these things, right? That's a side that I describe it as you come to the cliff's edge and you decide man can fly. And there's two ways that can go. The virtue is you've become the right brothers and you learn how to do airplanes. You become a hero forever.

The other is you become a lifetime Darwin Award winner because you think you can jump over a hundred mile cliff by yourself. Unfortunately, Trump has a prohibit you to believe both things. And that's how you can believe ridiculous things like people are pitching them that, hey, this will solve all your problems. Hey, we'll rush it right about to collapse. Their economy is falling apart. They're losing 4,000 people a day.

Somehow, Ukraine can't find any of the body bags, right? was supposed to a body exchange, casualty exchange, you know, Russia's like, we got about, you know, 7,6,500

from this one region. Here you go. And Ukraine's like, well, we have about 25 or 30 for you. Where are all these dead body secretary Rubio that is supposedly dying every day on behalf of Russia?

He believes this nonsense because it's the part of it says you can solve these problems and bring massive peace to the world. If you just put, The pressure will be the hero and nobody will be mad at you. The neocons will be happy. The neoliberal will be happy. Your base will be happy.

The whole world will be happy. And he buys himself an ad. And that's how we get stuck in these nightmares. Absolutely. I'll just quickly finish with, I'll just go, sorry, just to turn to the topic of tariffs. Because this is an economic policy that he set out very clearly during his presidential campaign. He talked about you brought up William McKinley, he brought up protectionism, tariffs were going to replace the income tax.

This is something that he's been talking about. It's going to facilitate re-industrialization. And now he's starting to use tariffs, not in that way at all. They're starting to be used as a geopolitical tool. So he first of all imposes tariffs on Brazil. he criticises Lula for the prosecutions of Bolsonaro. I do not personally like Lula. I should say that.

I've got no particular game in hand for Lula. I think he's one of these people who, he's very vain and he's show off. And I don't think he achieves or does very much of Brazil. But our tariffs intended to be about the reindustrialization and the building up of the American economy, or are they about getting Bolsonaro out of his legal problems in Brazil? It's just all over the place. And then even more astonishing,

I've been reading about the Lindsay Graham Blumenthal sanctions bill. And it's now being justified by people like National Review, you know, William Buckley's outfit, that they're saying that this is a really brilliant way of actually imposing tariffs on countries around the world. You haven't up to now had proper constitutional authority to impose tariffs because Congress hasn't passed a bill authorising you to do that. You're basing it all on an emergency legislation for the 1970s, which is now being challenged in the courts. So we give you this wonderful new sanctions bill so then you can impose tariffs, whatever level you like against any country that trades with Russia. So are they sanctions?

Are they tariffs? Are they one and the same thing? I mean, this isn't the way to run economic policy. It's going to undermine again confidence amongst American trading partners. You're going to run economic policy properly, trade policy, you need consistency. You need to have a very clear head for what you're doing that this tax tariffs up one day, tariffs down the next day, going after once, some countries all the time, mixing them up with sanctions, confusing tariffs with sanctions. this is going to undermine the policy in the end. It's going to make other countries even more determined that they're going to be particularly careful

to trade with the United States at a time, certainly while Donald Trump himself is president. So again, he needs to understand his own policy, tariffs, protection, is his own policy. It's his signature policy. It's probably the single policy that won in the most votes, I'm guessing, in places like the industrial areas. It's not to be used recklessly and frivolously in this sort of way. And in the previous programme, in the previous programme that we did, I made the point because I, you know, once upon a time long ago,

I actually studied this period of the United States, of the history of the United States, the late 19th and early 20th century. and I could say that there is an enormous literature from that time by absolutely top economists of that period explaining what protectionism was, how it worked, what you can do to make it work, what sort of mistakes you should avoid, and you can access all of that, that vast amount of intellectual material,

which was pioneered in the United States, going all the way back to Henry, clay. You can go and you can find it and you can build on it and you can develop an intelligent and effective tariff and protection policy today. But that isn't what's happening. And again, I am bewildered. And why is he even giving someone like Lindsay Graham the time of day? I mean, the Lindsay Graham wing of the Republican Party is losing traction amongst Republican voters anyway. So why reach out and give this a particular senator who's been hostile to Trump in the past? Why give him the time of day?

Again, I just don't understand it. But over to you again on these points, Robert. Yeah, absolutely. I mean, because I'm a supporter of his tariff policy because I want to reindustrialize the American working class that has been deindustrialized like much of the Western world for the last half century. And there was ways to get that done. to give an example of how this is undermining another different version of this, take the trade deal with China.

It appears that when we went into that negotiation, we underappreciated that China's de facto monopoly on the production of rare earth gave them real leverage that we couldn't afford to counter. So it disturbs me that Trump didn't understand this and that people in the State Department, Treasury Department, didn't get this. So that's problem one, is that they undervalued it underappear, appreciated that. That became very apparent. And the second is, it's probably not a coincidence the timing of the China deal, right? The China deal gets signed the day after the ceasefire with Israel and Iran. The day after Trump walked back regime change in Iran. That, you know, that Monday, you know, that Sunday night, he was all excited. Monday morning, all of a sudden, he's like, drill, please, you know, drill baby drill, please. Let's get the oil. Oh, what has been that Vendib saying about how Iran's going to get nukes anyway from other nuclear countries?

What is this all about? Why is their foreign minister meeting with Vladimir Putin in a conversation that doesn't get published for the most part? But you can put the tea leaves together. China also leveraged it. Ruby was on the phone begging China to make sure Iran didn't shut down the Straits of Hormuz. We were right and the key state department advisors were wrong when they told Trump there was no risk of the Straits of Hormuz being closed even with an attack. And we pointed out that's just that that is overconfidence that bad things can't happen if you do bad things yourself. And so the or trigger a set of events in that context. And I think China leveraged it. China said you want us to help you with the ceasefire?

You want us to help make sure the streets where a move don't close? Okay. You're going to give us a better trade deal. And right now China has one of the most generous trade deals of all the countries Trump's dealing with, kind of his main economic adversary. And it's like, okay, so this is another example of how getting involved in dumb foreign wars completely unravels your presidency, even if you have the best of intentions, even if you have the best of motivations. It just has this knack of dragging you into the quagmire. Again, it's the swamp. You either drain the swamp or the swamp will drain you.

And Trump is on the verge of the swamp draining him, and he only partially appreciates it. Now, part of this is connected to his chief of staff, swampy Susie Wiles. She was a lifelong lobbyist. I mean, you get a mindset. People can watch her interview with Miranda Devine at the New York Post. She's sitting there saying, look at how great the cabinet is. I share opinions on some of those people, not all. But she goes, you know, we have lawyers.

We have experts. We have people from this profession, this profession. We even have a few minorities. Let's say, what? Let me just sound like George W. Bush saying, look, look, I got a black cabinet member. Look, look, right there. Condi Lee Lee Lee Lee Luzerast, I shot those Ruski's. We're not bragging about that.

What world are you living in? But that gives you a sense that she's from the, 1980s. He's even got the hairdo from the 1980s. It's like the Trump needs not just a bunch of boomers around them. The only people for today in America, the only country left where Israel's not completely politically underwater because of how they've handled the Gaza conflict. And to my Israeli friends, this public opinion didn't shift because people suddenly became anti-Jewish. That didn't happen in the last 18 months. This happened because what we talked about was you can believe entirely in Israeli self-defense. But if you're doing what they're doing, what they're

doing, it won't work. It's self-defense. It will simply undermine Israel's interest by undermining Israel's image in the core of public opinion, which is the key to opposition to Israel, is what's happening who funds people like Hamas, who funds people like Islam, who funds people like Fatah, what animates the Palestinian population to continue the conflict is doing things like what they've been doing for the last 18 months. In the United States today, there's only two groups that have a positive view of Israel, and that is boomer cons, white evangelical Protestants over the age of 50, and it's not based on the Schofield Bible, but some people are asking those questions. Ted Cruz doesn't know theology at all. This has been an extortion technique of what happened

was in the late 1970s, the religious right started to emerge in America due to persecution of religious schools under a misguided belief that they were racist. This is because schools in the Deep South, when integration orders came down, it would create private Christian schools, Christian quotes to basically resegregate the school system. However, that isn't, but religious schools in America existed long way independent of that, including an abolition territory,

is where some of the strongest, longest, longest, independent Christian schools have existed in Kansas and Michigan, other places like that. Where I grew up in Tennessee, I was part of that movement. I went to a small independent religious school. They were shocked that they were going to be at risk of losing funding and a bunch of other things, or being basically harassed by the DOJ

under the Carter administration because they're all accused of being racist. created the moral majority with a range of religious conservatives. They're also concerned about what's happening in the culture at the time that they thought was an attack on their religious, their way of life, their values, their views. And so they formed a group. And what happened is pro-Israel, A-PAC crowd, simply merged with them and created a political coalition. And they had benefit because a lot of evangelicals in America had a positive view of Israel

because of how they, if you're an evangelical Christian, it's easy to travel through Israel, as what Christians consider their holy land as well. But as that movement emerged, elites would try to hold really evangelical Protestants in line by telling them that Israel is God's country, Israel's God's people, so and so forth. That has not been the animating reason for the evangelical Israeli alliance, but you see people like Ted Cruz will repeat it because they think it's a coercive tool to whip evangelicals in the line. They haven't been paying attention to the data. That just isn't the case anymore.

The zeitgeist on the right is with Tucker Carlson, not Mark Levin. And I also think Trump doesn't understand this. I mean, I have reason to believe that because the conversations Vice President Vance has had with a poster Richard Barris about the whole Iranian conflict. There was a ton of information they did not have or insights or analysis they had not seen, which is very disturbing. What that tells, you really have four areas of influence within American foreign policy under the Trump administration.

You have the neoliberals. These are the Victoria Newlands of the world, who once was a neocon, now more of a neoliberal. What does that mean? The neoliberal is obsessed over Ukraine more than anything else. Europe is their obsessive project. You see it in the, they're very much Eurofiles at heart. So their priority would be that.

Now, where are they in the Trump administration? They're in the career staffers, right? So the other people Trump was appointing, but these are the people who always stay in power somehow, no matter who gets elected. They need the neo-cons. their obsession is Israel Israel first, Ukraine, second, China,

but they definitely want global ambition, use the military, what good is the medal in Albright, what good is the military unless you use it. Colin Powell, this isn't a risk game, you know, trying to explain to her, that's not how you should use soldiers, but those neo-cars, and they have appointed positions of power with the administration.

Marco Rubio on any given day is a potential neocon. He has been historically. He tries to go back and forth, but nobody really is quite buying it. Then you have two parts of MAGA. One part of MAGA is China focused. So think of them as like Neersheimer MAGA. So they're the ones that they see China as a threat. They don't necessarily, some of them think that we're just going to get into war with China, period. Not that they won a war with China,

but any award is going to happen. Some think it's necessary so we should prepare accordingly. The others in that group see it solely don't see it as quite a risk of military conflict, but they see it as the highest risk on the state. Then you have traditional MAGA, which is people like J.D. Vaines and Tulsi Gabbard. And these are people who just want less than Steve Bannon outside the capital. These are people who just want less war period, less extension of U.S. military resources, period. They see this as late stage Rome or overextended. Like they see it just from a geopolitical perspective, not necessarily as a peace nick, though Tulsi Gabbard really is, you know, is very peace oriented and once peace. But this is the group that over the, that was, you know, rising in power first three months,

and then has been declining in power the last three months. And nobody knows what happened. Other than a clear filter for this is the Epstein files. We went in February and March. We're going to disclose the Epstein file. Iran doesn't have a nuclear weapon. And we're going to get out of Ukraine. So three months later, we're going to get more involved in Ukraine.

We're going to wage war for Israel. And the Epstein files are never going to get disclosed. These three things are not coincidentally tied together. I completely agree. Let's in fact talk about Ukraine because we've had an extraordinary swing from one position to the next within us, well, just over 10 days, basically. So we had a decision first from the Pentagon that they're going to slow walk for the arms deliveries to Ukraine. We've got leaks in the media that Patriot missile inventories are now very reduced. there's concern about the amount of weapons that have been used in the fighting in the Middle East, in the conflict, the short 12-day conflict with Iran. Then we get the president himself saying that he didn't really know anything about this decision,

that this decision had nothing to do with him, which I have to say, I found very strange. Then he telephones Putin. Now, this as far as I can make up, came completely out of nowhere. then apparently they have a row. We don't quite know what each said to the other, but the Russians said that Putin told Trump that Russia went back down. So, I mean, that's in the Russian readout. So it looks as if Trump tried to tell Putin perhaps to agree to a ceasefire

or something like that. And then since then, over the last couple of days, last week or so, we've had firstly reports. about the Trump backing the Lindsay Graham sanctions, and we've just talked about those. They're merging the concept of sanctions and tariffs together in ways that I find really very disturbing, even by itself. And then we have the decision that they're going to send Patriot Missiles

after all to Ukraine, though not in the actual number that was first floated. And now the most extraordinary thing today, which is that they're going to send long, missiles to Ukraine to strike at Russia. Now, that takes us exactly back to where we were last year, because that's exactly what Joe Biden was doing. I mean, the missiles that people are talking about, apparently, are Jassums, air-launched cruise missiles, at least that's my understanding of it. Maybe you have more information here. But if it is the Jassams, Joe Biden authorized their transfer to Ukraine last August and suddenly this whole thing is being revived all over again. So in the space of about

10 days, Donald Trump has turned into Joe Biden. Does he understand quite what the implications of that are? I mean, Joe Biden was doing all of this for three years and he didn't do him any good. Why does Donald Trump, who won against Joe Biden, think that it's going to be any better for him? No doubt. I mean, and the only people like both sides of MAGA, whether the China Hawks or the Let's Focus on America First Truly, have no interest in the Ukraine war. And at least some portion of the neo-Colans see it as a distraction from Israel, just as some of the Mirchimer MAGA fans, see as a distraction from China. And it's already negatively blown back on him already in dealing with China for those elements. So you're right.

How does becoming Joe Biden's second term serve the interest of Donald Trump when he calls Joe Biden the worst president in the history of America and one of the worst leaders in the history of America? It is baffling to those of us who are observing it. And I mean, it's like right now because he's not disclosed the Epstein files, a majority of Americans think he's in them. That's going to be inevitable. You can't talk up a huge scandal and then say, oh, we can't show you anything about that scandal and pretend that scandal didn't happen without people putting one together and thinking you're the one that the two. I don't think it is. I think it's Israel primarily, but I think it's other intelligence operatives. And to some of the super chat questions that we're asking about, you know, to what degree is what is going on here meant to make sure the world doesn't know how nasty intelligence agencies are.

In other words, that the Normie American would probably be shocked at an honest reveal of the Epstein files. That, oh, you mean my taxpayer dollars go to defense contractors and intelligence agencies that then use that to entrap powerful men around the world and gather intel. I mean, Glane Maxwell at the Epstein Island, St. James Island, is one of his two islands, as you point out of it. The brag to locals that, brag to people who work there, you're going to see a lot of young girls here. They're the honeypot, but remember, I'm the Queen Bee. So that's how she herself portrayed and perceived this. And so how does Trump getting involved?

How does Trump being associated with Epstein, associated with BB? I mean, to give you an idea of how I have to touch that Trump White House is right now, the press secretary repeatedly put up Trump with BB and said, Nobel Peace Prize. And we're like, there's one person in the world you don't want to be photographed with if you want the Nobel Peace Prize. I mean, that would be like, you know, the Stalin and Tito getting together and promoting each other for the Peace Prize. You know, it's like, I don't know how it's going to work exactly. The or, you know, Hitler and the Japanese general. So, I mean, it's, but that's how politically clueless they are. They're living, also, the big risk. is Trump is increasingly dependent for media sources on Fox News and the mainstream media. So he's obsessively watching Fox and he's obsessively reviewing the New York Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal. Okay, Rubber and Murdoch wanted to take you out.

So why are you listening to Ruben Murdo? The famous adversary of one Robert Maxwell, we go back in the day. Remember, they originally didn't sell the, what was it, the world, the news of the world, the 1960s great British tablet. Murdoch stole it and got it from him. And then that was the first time all the Maxwell scandals came out. Like the Alato Shell companies and played the stock price.

He would repeat it all 30, 20 years later. But what was interesting is that the news of the world said they didn't want to sell to somebody who wasn't truly British. And so then they sell to Murdoch. It's like, I didn't know he was British. Seems kind of a lossy to me. But that's the news story. And it's a bubble within a bubble within a bubble.

Imagine thinking Beeching Netanyahu was your ticket. to the Nobel Peace Prize. How delusional do you have to be? At times, I think they've whacked Trump or they've got to, you know, kidnapped and they're hiding him in the basement, and we're dealing with like a live double. I mean, at times it's that level of disconnect. And you've seen it as I've told people, if you want to see what his base thinks, a couple of ways. One is you follow someone like in Alex Jones. Alex Jones, you go, the UK-based pollster, did a poll. Eight years ago, Alex Jones had 30 million Americans who had a very favorable opinion of him. He was the

highest rated independent media person on the right. A majority of Trump supporters said they considered Alex Jones InfoWars much more important than the New York Times, which shocked the media by the like, how I'm going to possibly true. But that's the zeitgeist for it. The and you can go to his truth post. Does he get at close to as many replies as he gets re-truths or retweets, but retruits as they're called there. The that's a sign his audience is unhappy because most people are only responding when they're mad at them. Like he'll normally get, you know, the racial usually be four to one, five to one to re-truths to negative replies. This statement he may have put out on Epstein had the most negative responses he has ever received in his life. The worst

ratio he's ever, you would hope that that breaks through this bubble he has put himself in. But then we hear today, I'm hoping today is theater. I'm praying today's theater. Yeah, we're going to send them these really, really important 10 Patriots that will intercept five Good good luck with that. We'll see how that works for you. I mean, I can I just say, I mean, I think you put your finger actually on the whole problem. I think he spends far too much time listening to Fox News to the various commentators there. And probably he's also encouraged to do that by some people within his administration. Just to say, I've been told that the Russians who are probably not especially informed about

these things, that they believe that the actual evil genius, if you like, within the administration is in fact Susan Wiles. What information they have to think that I really have no idea. But I have heard that from more than one source action. So it probably is what the Russians themselves think, why they would think that, whether she really is as important as they say, I don't know. what is so baffling to me about all of this is that in so many other respects, things are starting to go his way. I mean, he doesn't have to do this. He doesn't have to appease Lindsay Graham or the people on Fox News. I mean, he's got his big, beautiful bill through Congress.

And he made, he had, didn't have perhaps as much trouble. doing that as some people expected. There's a particular topic which, as you know, is very close to my heart, something which we were corresponding about last week and which I'd like you to discuss. The legal battle is now tilting, I think, decisively in his favour. All of these judges, district judges all over the United States imposing injunctions against the, you know, the administration, stopping his executive orders of any kind of application. I've said that in Britain,

that would have been inconceivable. And I understand some people think otherwise, but I can't understand why. They don't know what the British system is if they believe that. But anyway, the legal battle is coming down in his favour. He's getting strong decisions on his side, or at least so they seem to me,

from the Supreme Court of the United States. United States. This extraordinary justice that you have, Justice Katanji Jackson, is becoming wilder and weirder and stranger as far as I'm concerned in some of the things that she's saying. So those, that is also working out for him. And I know that he is your friend, but Kennedy is actually winning the support of people more and more. more and does seem to be changing things. And here, perhaps, you can pass this on. There's been a lot of discussion about what he's doing in Britain,

because, you know, we always have these problems with the health system in Britain. People are starting to notice, and it's interesting how the things that people used to say about Kennedy are now starting to shift as they actually see what he's doing. So you can see that things actually are starting to go right. So why is he tilting in this bizarre way? But I would also like you to comment on those three points, maybe especially about the legal things, because as I said, that's something that is very interesting

and that we talked about we've discussed with each other. You're absolutely right. I mean, this should be a celebratory moment for Trump. on the verge of a great precedent-setting second term in that his immigration policy is working and getting close to a million people to leave the country and those have been replaced by U.S. Native-born workers. We've had our first net growth in Native-born workers getting jobs since the last time Trump was president. Best cost of living adjusted, real wages have grown for the first time for American Native-born

workers since Trump was president. And the only other time it happened since 2004 was while Trump was president, that you have improvements on the diversity, equity, inclusion, all that sort of woke nonsense is being pushed back at an institutional level. Universities are under pressure. Schools are under pressure. Corporations are under pressure. A lot of them are reversing extraordinary progress on both the economic front and the social,

cultural, political front, and on cost of living because oil and gas prices have been going down for the first six months. Getting them down led to the biggest input cost for the cost of living. A lot of tariff products are not necessarily transferable because of just the way tariffs work and how it's structured. It doesn't always end up in a higher price of a good. That's not true with energy. Energy goes up. The price of goods go up as one follows the other.

So you're right. Great movement there. And then on the legal front, it looked for a while. The American judiciary was waging a war on Donald Trump, trying to prevent him from firing anybody. trying to prevent him from cutting anybody's budgets, trying to prevent him from deporting anyone. So on the immigration front, on the administrative state front, on the bureaucracy front,

he was getting stalled and stalled and stalled and stonewalled and stonewalled. And particularly for those of us that are anti-deep state, getting rid of the USAID, getting rid of the national endowment for democracy, getting rid of the fake real voice of America is not, I mean, there's a real voice of American, and the voice of America internationally and voice of Europe and all that to add, radio free or whatever it's all a bunch of bunch of hacks um was awesome but it was being stalled by courts being wrote and what was happening is these courts were adopting powers they never

constitutionally had either the constitution dedicated that issue to the congress dedicated to the presidency or if they did allow it to be to the judiciary they did it within the confines of individual disputes not uh collective uh actions as if you're legislators because that's what a nationwide universal global injunction is. And that's what the courts were doing. So they had Joe, you know, Joe Blow in front of them. And they issue an injunction that changes all executive policy. That doesn't just impact Joe Blow.

And the historical role of them, and this is where, you know, Alexander, you understand this well. American courts borrow a lot of their equitable powers from, because what happens? Constitutionally, the court says Congress has given carte blanche control over every court other than the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court has original jurisdiction, but every other court only has the jurisdiction, the power, the authority to act that Congress gives them. That's what the Constitution allocated. Congress passes the Judiciary Act of 1789 that in that core powers, it's never

changed. So what that means from an originalist perspective is whatever powers courts had, American courts had that Congress gave them in 1789 is the same power they have today. And that power was borrowed from the UK, from English, from English, British common law, which still plays a critical role in lots of different parts around the world. I've done cases all around the world, and the most common theory of law is British common law, whether you're dealing in the Caribbean, whether you're dealing in the U.S., whether you're dealing in certain foreign jurisdictions around the world, not all by any stretch. The Napoleonic Code took over as a legal revolution as an organizing legal principle in more nations after that date than the old English common law

structure has. But the English common law structure is still powerful in large parts of the world, particularly financial financially impactful parts of the world the Caribbean the Cayman Islands a bunch of island you know Ileman those other islands uh off the UK so the this power was completely wrote and I you know people I find it odd I'm a skeptic of courts in general because I'm a thing I'm a lawyer so you love court I really don't I find it a professional managerial aristocratic oligarchic class that thinks they know better than everybody else that doesn't respect the values of ordinary people doesn't respect the traditions and by ways of ordinary people.

And this was a coup attempt to overturn the 2024 election. That's what they were doing. You can disagree with these policies when an election. That's how you solve the problem of disagreeing with the policies. You don't do it by coups. And this was a judicial coup. And it was happening across the board, completely sidest wiping any meaningful agenda that Trump had on institutional reform.

Supreme Court steps in and says no court has ever had the power in America of universal, nationwide, global injunctions, because the courts in the UK didn't. I remember when I was studying trust law, because I do a lot of trust analysis and things like that for people in the tax context. And all-American trust law goes back to the unique way that the chance reformed in the UK. So you can help explain to people that, you know, the king's conscience and how that works and how it was an exception to the courts of law. And if you understood that history, then you understood how completely ridiculous this idea

of universal nationwide injunctions to people who are not parties to the case. somehow using the equitable power of the courts to legislate to overturn the executive branch and become the executive branch is completely foreign given the whole way chancery courts develop. And you know that as well as anybody. Well, absolutely. One of the fundamental things to understand about injunctions, so they're defensive. They're not supposed to be aggressive. They're not supposed to be used in this kind of way.

because obviously I was heavily involved in this sort of thing. If you want to understand the original principle of what an injunction is, an injunction is what is called an equitable relief. Equity is that body of legal theory that originated in England from the Court of Chancery. The Court of Chancery was one of the courts that was closest to the King himself. All law in England, and this is a key thing to understand, all law in England in theory, in legal, English legal theory, flows from the king himself, but the king is bound by his own laws. So that's the principle. Now, what happens is that in order to ensure that the law itself is not abused, the king exercising his own conscience has certain powers to grant religious. belief in order to ensure that the law is not used in an abusive way.

And that is equity. And Robert will know that there's lots of various maxims of equity that are, you know, followed, you know, equity will not assist a volunteer. Equity will not assist somebody who comes, you know, will only assist people with clean hands and all of these things. I mean, these famous maxims of equity. very restrictive. It is not supposed to be used in order to, as I said, do, basically to rewrite the law entirely. A fundamental principle of equity and indeed a limiting factor of injunctions is that equity follows the law.

In other words, it doesn't replace the law. It actually follows it. Now, given that executive orders are a type of law in the United States, and given that executive orders are a type of law in the United States, and given that they are the creations of the president himself, who is an elected official, with powers that he has from the Constitution of the United States, that he's given by the Constitution of the United States. It makes absolutely no sense to say that you can simply publish and make an injunction that somehow invalidates the entire operation of, in effect,

an executive order which is made in that kind of way. I mean, it is nonsense. It reverses the entire logic of what injunctions are and of what equity is. So it was a bizarre thing. And I think that finally, the Supreme Court has got to grip with this thing and is stopping this being abused in that way. Now, you can, if you have a case, and under particular executive order, and the case goes before a court, and the executive order

thinks that there's something, that you have some valid point, the court can perhaps suspend or make a decision which grants you the plaintiff relief against that specific application of the executive order. that is a legitimate use of equity, you know, provided that the criteria for relief are met. But to go from that, to leap all the way to say that the entire executive order is effectively suspended for six months or whatever, it's preposterous. It is absurd. It is to set the whole concept of equity and of injunctions completely on its head. It's never been done. And in Britain, it is inconceivable that it could be done against the executive,

against the king's own government in that kind of way. I just say. Oh, absolutely. I mean, it was wild watching it in a live time. I've been a critic of the American judiciary and the judiciary globally. Like, it was very interesting watching Russia experiment with the idea, the particularly under Putin. Like Putin, I know Russians with attitude, a great social media. account, cool podcasters. They're in Moscow, Alex. I think they are currently. They're cool guys.

They're true Ruskis. I mean, they're honestly got rich. Like that same like sardonic, slightly dark sense of humor, you know, all that. But they've been way ahead of the curve at understanding American politics in many respects. Fascinating to watch. But they pointed out that Putin is almost an autist when it comes to law. That he seems, he believes in the same principles that I believe in, which is a rule of law to govern people because it creates a predictable pattern for everybody to engage it. Not the rules-based international order that has no rules beyond he who has the power rules. That's the rules-based international order. But the Putin's really belief in it and experimenting it in the judicial system.

Like it was fascinating reading some stories originally when Russians started doing jury trials. And that the like they were like, hold on, what's going on here? This seems little sketchy. It's a trap. You know, it's fascinating because they have a totally different than the English-American legal history that set jury trials going back to the Magna Carter that, you know, it is foundational and fundamental to our understanding of liberty is rooted in law. And it's a little C. Burkean-style conservatism that understands how law can restrain

and prevent bad actors. It's not supposed to be a tool by which lawyers or judges hijack entire societies, economies and policies. And unfortunately, that's the latter is often what it's become. The judiciary kind of failed in Pakistan at protecting the real interest of the actual elected leader in allowing that de facto coup to occur some years ago. Around the world, you know, the whatever is happening in Brazil with both Bolsonaro, but also the censorship efforts, going after Glenn Greenwald, other people with that judge

that just is a power mad judge. Because if they all went back to what you're talking about, Alexander, the original principles of equitable power are defensive and limited and individualized, they would restore their own credibility and have more confidence in them as institutions if they did that rather than constantly pretend their politicians, their presidents, their legislators. That's how we end up with the bad decisions

that lead us into bad conflicts. Absolutely. So good for the Supreme Court that has made this decision. I mean, it's alarming that there is one particular justice who doesn't understand these things. but at least the others do appear to do so. And I get the sense, as I said, that the whole legal tide is shifting. And I think hopefully and conclusively on this.

And so as I said, this is a big plus one would have thought for the president at this time because it means that he can actually govern the United States and get the agenda that he was elected on, that he cannot actually actually. actually start to get that implemented properly. So he's got a strong position in Congress, it seems to me. He's got a strong position in law and the courts are gradually being brought round. His agenda is in many places working. Again, maybe we can't spend too much time on this,

but the health agenda, the attempts to get on top of that, which nobody I think expected, that is actually making a difference. And as I said, in Britain, people are noticing it. You're starting to get articles, even places like the Guardian here in Britain, which is starting to say favorable things about Robert Kennedy, which is really quite an extraordinary thing if you know the Guardian. So I come back to this.

Why does he spend his time worrying about what, you know, Sean Hannity and Mark Levitt and all of those people are saying on Fox News? I mean, if he just got on with the business of governing and carrying out his agenda and listening, not to those people on Fox, but perhaps also to people in Congress and people who are closer to his base, people like, and I'm going to say it, I mean, I'm probably wrong here, but I mean, I'm becoming increasingly impressed by Marjorie Ted Greene, actually. It seems to be that she's an extremely incisive and very, very tough politician.

But he should be listening to people like that. And they clearly are his supporters. I mean, they really are his supporters. They stuck with him throughout everything. All of these people that he's now sucking up to, if things start to go wrong, which if they continue the way they are, they will go wrong.

They will infallibly turn and blame him. I don't understand why he doesn't see that. Yeah, I mean, the health success, the person I thought had the most confidence in the administration, in part due to personal friendship, but also just knowing and prolonged creative time, was Robert Kennedy. And Robert Kennedy continues to do great work. He's managed to replace the entire vaccine committee. He's got reports that he understands you need to have an evidentiary foundation.

It's kind of truly the opposite of Trump at time where Trump is like, oh, I don't like that. I'm going to use this, do this. You know, it's useful, convenient, whatever. even when it undermined a lot of things he's trying to do. Like, I mean, if you're going to sanction an individual UN employee and you're going to weaponize literally everything. I mean, what have we not weaponized at this point? We weaponize the dollar. We weaponize the SWIFT, we weaponized institutions.

Weaponized actions of that. Now weaponizing terror. You know, it's, whoa, this is out of control. You see the opposite of that how Kennedy approaches things. It's very deliberate. It's very careful. He understands that first you have to announce reform policies within the institution. and you get as many people to quit as possible.

You get as many bad faith actors to just say, I won't be part of this. And you induce that if you intelligently change policy. Army Dillon has done the same with Civil Rights Division at the Justice Department. To be frank, those are the only two people that have had consistent success. You can argue Christie Nome and a home and have had success in immigration, but they had most of the people in the immigration infrastructure, particularly at the Border Patrol, were all on board with the Trump agenda. That was not true at the FDA, not true at the CDC, not true at HHS,

not true in these other positions. So they're just the opposite. So Kennedy comes in and announces a policy gets a whole bunch of people to voluntarily quit. It's about a third to about half in some departments. Second, you then put in your people in the policy. People who are smart, sage politically, but from outside the mainstream. Like as Kennedy pointed out, the one thing they all have in common is they've all been censored in the last five years. Otherwise, there's nothing else in common.

That was he's like, if you were saying something smart and good enough to get yourself censored, you're someone that's good enough to be in our administration. And that's why he's brought him so many good people. And then part three was get the science behind you. He understands the science. He understands how the administrative machinery works. So he understood that if he just came in and just, oh, I'm going to do this. I'm going to do this right out of the gate.

Courts would enjoin it. Congress would try to impeach him. Everything, the media would run smear pieces. He'd get derailed. He understands the system backwards and forwards. And he's sort of like what Putin was, right? How did Putin have success where Trump didn't? is Putin understood the system. You understood how to take it apart and remake it.

Trump kind of does. Trump operates by instinct. He wants certain ends, but his ability to translate that from an engineering architectural. I call him the idea that comes up, the guy that comes up with the business idea. He's not the guy that's the engineer to help actually build the building. He's not the architect to help design the building. He's the guy to give you the idea of how it would market well if they do this, this and this. And that's what Kennedy under, Kennedy's got the engineers and the architects and the designers. He's got them all to restructure the entire agency. to restructure public health. And he was able to leverage his position to get a bunch of private big corporations to

heal right out of the gate. He said, you know, rather than me changing this rule that could cause you all these headaches, why don't you just voluntarily agreed to the principal anyway? And that way when the rule comes into play two years from now, you have an edge in the marketplace. So he got a bunch of big companies to take out food diets. The first time I met him. Finally, he said, no more COVID vaccine recommendations for pregnant women or children. And he's moving that alone.

And he's already been sued on that, but he'll win that suit. He's also establishing the basis by which autism occurs. This started in the UK. Remember it was an Ader Wakefield, prominent British doctor who stumbled across it, that kids that had stomach problems were experiencing unusual rates of autism, and it appeared to connect to the timing of the delivery of certain vaccines. And he's like, I wonder if there's a connection. That's all he even said.

He didn't say there was a connection. He just said, I wonder if there is one. We should investigate this. And for it, he got ran out of town. I was here in America. the uh bill gaitz is one of the principal adversaries so kennedy understands how to take this apart piece by piece by piece and he's going to continue to do so the Kennedy model is the model trump should be following for everything else not the the restaurant is right by the way uh you know the that's where their intel connections can really work it's always fascinating to me it's like sometimes i think they're a little bit off like uh when they think uh who was it there was somebody they thought uh the the the bush family got killed i was like that's probably a reach but this is years ago. But the, Susie Wiles came up into the Reagan administration. That's how she got her political power through her husband. She then parlayed that into a career in a lobby. She helped organize and run

BB's 2020 Israeli campaign. Okay. So that's how, so she's not just domestic. She's global. And her, she lobbied, this is a big problem for Pam Bondi. Pam Bondi, when she was affiliated with Susie Wiles was lobbying for who, Pfizer. What is the currently the Justice Department is derailing the Pfizer case, they're lying to federal courts about my Brooke Jackson case against Pfizer, but that exposes how Pfizer lied. They promised the safe, effective vaccine for the prevention of COVID-19. What they delivered was dangerous, ineffective. It wasn't even a vaccine, didn't prevent COVID-19. And that was the financial conditions in terms of Trump's original Operation Warp Speed contract that they failed to perform that they stole $2 billion on and caused a bunch of debt and disabilities for. Bondi's lying about it. Well, maybe it's connected to Susie Wiles lobbying firm, lobby for Pfizer.

Is there a connection there? Sure seems like one. There's at least an inference of corruption. So Wilde is part of running it this, this way. Kennedy has managed to maneuver around all the problems. And Wilde has ultimately defended Kennedy because she understands Kennedy's political power, not only the name, but that without Kennedy's support, they wouldn't have won the election. So it was critical to them to continue that Maha support. And you're right. with the young people cutting edge voters, Richard Barris did a whole poll on this. The, this is, you know, food freedom is a huge issue.

Medical freedom is very close. And then financial freedom, political freedom affiliated with them. But it's an undervalued issue in the West. They don't understand ordinary people are waking up and they realize they don't want corporate processed crap as their daily diet. They don't want every solution to any problem they have to be another pill for big pharma that ends up causing more negative side effects than help. So Kennedy is the path.

And if Trump has this great opportunity, to shift back to his original platform, which is working tremendously in his first six months domestically. And he can basically either be the equivalent of the Wright brothers, believing that man can fly by delivering, focusing on his domestic agenda and extracting himself in these foreign policy debacles that are at risk of him getting drained into the swamp. Or he can be the presidential equivalent of the ultimate Darwin Award winner,

who thought he could, you know, hit his wagon to the neoliberal and neocons, and that working well politically when it literally has never happened that way. I completely agree. I think he should also listen to his vice president. I'm going to make a quick observation here because I followed very closely advanced during the 12-day war with Iran. And I think I mentioned this previously. I think that he acted with great deafness and skill.

he gave every appearance of sincere loyalty to the president, which a vice president must always do, but you could see that in every crucial respect, he was a counsel for moderation and wisdom and restrained at that very, very difficult time. And to the extent that we got out of that situation in one piece, or at least the administration got out of it in one piece, It is largely because I think Vance played the cards that he did. And I noticed that, again, he's been careful to sort of take a step back over the last week. Probably he'll be back when I think he's needed. So I think that the president has people around him who can advise him and who he should least listen to. Because I think you're absolutely right.

This is now the moment of decision. either we're going to get a change and we're going to get a real new direction for the United States or in the alternatively it would be the same as always which would not be a good thing Alexander Robert

Vance is with Trump right now in the Oval Office along with Mark Routte of NATO and we have some news for both of you guys to discuss Trump has announced that he has a deal with NATO to send weapons to sell, to sell weapons to NATO. And then those weapons will be given to Ukraine. We don't have the detail of those weapons just yet. And he announced Alexander and Robert that he will be placing secondary tariffs of 100% will be imposed on Russia. If a deal is not reached with Ukraine in 50 days, and of course, those secondary tariffs,

according to Trump, will be placed on Russia, but of course on Russia's trading partners. So that's the announcement from the Oval Office. Alexander Robert, your thoughts? Yeah. I'm really, that's pretty much. Well, I was going to say, Alex, you nailed it. You said that's what they were going to do. They were going to just laundering the weapons as being sold through NATO.

Now, it still doesn't fix the problems, as you guys have pointed out, that we don't have the weapons. There's a bunch of weapons we just don't have. The weapons they need are weapons we don't have anymore. So we can't just make it up. And are we going to abandon Israel? Are we going to abandon the Chinese front? I don't think so. I know as much people in Pentagon have no interest in doing that.

This strikes me as more rhetoric than substance, I hope, in the end. One, it's another one of those, well, if this doesn't happen within such and such a time frame. Well, how many of those has Trump made in the first six months? Has he ended up better for delivering on any of the best? Bad promises. No, he always pulls off the lever. I mean, God bless the man. But, you know, Chinese and Russians are two people I would not try to bluff. I once was in Moscow, where Alex is, went down to a poker game. This was early 2000s. I was like, I'll see what poker's like in Russia. I was helping people who were involved in Christian adoptions of Russian kids because the Russian foster system had kind of fallen apart at the end of the Soviet Union. you had all these kids who literally had nowhere to go.

They were getting caught in human trafficking, horrible thing. So I was helping various Christian other religious groups who wanted to adopt kids anyway to be able to adopt kids from Russia. That blew up when years, not interconnected to me, but somebody decided to send a Russian kid back to Russia because they didn't like the adoptee. And Putin was like, uh-uh, no more sending our kids anywhere outside the country. But this was back when it was more chaotic and different.

But I was so there for that. And I was like, I got to see a poker game in Russia. So I go down to this basement, right? is like underneath like almost an old cathedral or something. The, uh, go down there and I just saw the crowd that was there. And I was like,

this only ends one way. And it doesn't end with me walking out of here with money. It's like, if I win, I think I'm going to lose with this crowd. Or otherwise, I just lose it. Be happy about it.

The, uh, so I was like, I think I'll skip the, the Russian poker game tonight in, uh, Moscow. The, why try to keep bluffing the Russians and the Chinese? Of all the people in the world,

they try to bluff. These are not the people to do it. I mean, God, you know, God bless. drop, but this feels, I hope. Also, this is a hope, too, admitted some wishcasting, that this is just, hey, I'm going to be really tough. I'm really going to crush you. If you don't do what we say in 30 days, well, maybe 45 days, maybe 60 days, well, maybe 90 days. I'm hoping that's what it is. Because, first of all, how is he going to impose 100% tariffs on anybody buying Russian oil with countries that we have trade deals with? How are you going to do that? That would be a breach of the trade deal. That'd be a breach of the trade. promise. This is the problem with starting getting in your head. Oh, this tariff tool is fun. So why don't I just use it for anything that I want? Well, because it's no longer constitutional and

legal when you do it that way. Because it's no longer good public policy, globally and domestically when you do it that way. Americans are not interested in this Ukraine war at all. They're not going to pay a penny more at the gas station to help Zelensky, a dictator, who is not properly elected, ruling by Martin currently, not. ruling by martial law, hated by his own country, he would lose by 40 to 50 points by the only polls I've seen out of Ukraine, who is routinely, repeatedly, probably the most flagrant violator of human rights in the world. The depriving people of their right opposition parties have been banned, opposition press has been banned, not only have Russian religious groups being banned,

but now you've got Ukrainian Orthodox leaders being banned. I mean, this would be the equivalent of banning the Pope of Congresswoman Luna made this point. You're seeing Congressman Luna, parallel Marjorie Taylor Green. So Green has learned which sources to trust within the populist world. You know why Marjorie Taylor Green has an above average understanding of certain geopolitics and even a lot of people in the Trump White House do? Because she doesn't spend her days reading the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post, the foreign affairs, foreign policy, or God forbid Fox News. Where do young people get their news and information today? Podcasts like this one. Social media world. All kinds of places. When Robert Kennedy wanted to figure out what was going on in Ukraine for his own sake,

he had a son that was volunteering over there, made him nervous, etc. One of the places he came to was the Duran because he knew he could get better intel because he knew it from a life history of it than he could from the New York Times or the Wall Street Journal or any major media institution that had been busy smearing him for the last decade. So I think it's a dumb policy idea, just dumb, more on it. I think it's legal problems, constitutional problems, global problems, other problems. It would blow up badly on us. Russia, as Putin has pointed out, Germans can go get to missiles and bomb them here.

It will not change the war, but it might change the future of German. I mean, you got Medvedev's point about Ruta. You know, Ruth's ready to rage war with the whole world. You know, he's mostly living in a fantasy land. But if that fantasy land ever occurs, he better learn Russian because it would be useful in Siberia. It'd be useful in the camps. That guy's one. He's a better troll than troll.

Trump Medvedev. And I keep trying to remember, remind my friends here in the states that are anti-P Putin. I was like, you don't want to know what replaces Putin in Russia, my friend, because if you think that Putin is bad, wait until you see his replacement. It will be more nationalist, more aggressive, less concerned with rules of law or anything like that than Putin has ever been. So it's not going to change the war. It gives a timetable for Russia. It's basically the Putin. Get this done by the end of summer. So because then you can cut a deal on day four. You know that you'll get extended and extended. Trump's not going to hit a nuke button.

I truly believe, I mean, unless he's become politically suicidal overnight. He's not going to nuke the U.S. economy by imposing secondary sanctions that are not legal, not constitution. Maybe he'll do it in such an aggressive way. He'll get a judge to enjoin him and be like, well, I tried. I can't because the judge stop me. Who knows? Those come back. But this is, it's not going to change laundering more arms to Ukraine is not popular,

staying involved in this war, not popular, trying to impose arms. 100% tariffs that would only badly impact America and the Western world, not popular. That would be if he does that, that's why I've tried to explain to people with people who don't care it all about foreign policy. But foreign policy has a way to care about you. And so you can not care about foreign policy. But if Trump does this, actually falls through it on it. Then the net effect is not only destabilizing his public confidence in the U.S.

but it'll hurt the U.S. economy and hurt cost of living. That's the one thing Trump cannot afford. He cannot afford cost of living to get back out of control. He cannot afford the economy to take a serious, to control. client that they will attribute to him. That's the other problem. Maybe there's a recession coming anyway, right, and say six months. But you know the media and the public will blame Trump if this is happening because of foreign policy decisions that they can attribute it to, even if there isn't strict causation between the two. So at least this isn't a disaster

announcement because this sounds like Trump, but it still has the risk of disaster within it if he ever follows through on. Absolutely. I completely agree. I mean, too quick. Firstly, going back to the earlier point, the one that Alex made, actually, you made it in a program that we did. The conflation of sanctions and tariffs. I mean, again, maybe I'm making too much of this, but to me, this is very strange and very bizarre, and it is something that makes absolutely no sense to me. But the second point is the 50 days, because he's giving himself really, basically. he's actually creating a situation

where from this point onwards the pressure is not going to be on the Russians is going to be on him because in 50 days, by the way, everything can be sorted out and arranged. I mean, again, I know a little bit about this sort of thing. All kinds of things can be sorted out and arranged.

Oil can pass through all kinds of ways and things of that kind. But he will not want to be put into, a position where he's again imposing 100% tariffs on China, say, with a resumption of the trade war on China all over again. So this is exactly the kind of thing that I think he's going to try now within the next couple of weeks to try some kind of way out of it. So he's swung in one direction and hopefully he will swing in another. And I think it's a good sign, by the way, that Vance was there, because I'm hoping that Vance, who I think is much, much more realistic about

these things. I think I get the sense that Vance is a realistic in foreign policy, a genuine one, I mean, that and not somebody who's chasing the Fox News and the New York Times. I'm hoping that he will also be, again, a council of moderation. I, to me, this looks actually a little like rather less than I'd been led to expect from some of the buildup that we'd had over the last couple of days. By the way, it also preempts Lindsay Graham and Blumenthal and their tariff bill, but we'll see what, their sanctions bill. We'll see what that amounts. These are just comments that I made very, very quickly. Well, anyway, there it is. I mean, those are basically my questions to you, Robert. I think there's an amazing questions. I do have one. I do have one.

more, which is one, people were very angry with me. My friends in Britain were very angry with me when over the course of our live stream, our last live stream, I didn't ask you about what is happening to your friend and client, the Amish farmer, which again is a question that I know people in Britain are interested in. I just wanted to just say something. I always buy my food at the local farmer's market and there was a fishmonger there can I buy fish from and I didn't even know that he watched the duran and he said why didn't you ask him about the Amish farmer I was quite astonished my sort of jaw draw so what is the situation with that case I mean it sounds awful but tell me what is what what is going well America has basically become dependent on corporatized

industrialized food in a global food supply chain that has cut out small farmers and our access to direct farmers markets for food for most Americans. So about 90 to 95 percent of all food consuming in America comes from a small group of whether you're talking about poultry, beef, other things from four or five big corporations. And the corporatization and industrialization of food didn't take place until the late 19, early 20th century, led to U.S. laws, led to books like U.S. in Sinclair's the jungle. And it was supposed to happen, it was we were supposed to regulate the corporate industrialized food supply. That's what we were supposed to regulate, because people could know,

longer. Most of the food that most Americans consumed through much of our American history was actually by food they themselves grew or that some neighbor did because that's how a higher percentage of people were involved in farming as a way of life. And so it was totally new and novel to them to suddenly have to depend on some random corporation and some big store to guess whether the food was good, whether it was even whether it said it was. You could get a bit, you know, a can of kidney beans and inside his corn and so forth. The enough that Sinclair writes the jungle and you say, and there's all kinds of things on that food. You wouldn't want.

As up in Sinclair famously said, I aimed to hit their heart, I hit their stomach by accident. And that led all these food reforms in America, the FDA, USDA, etc. So the Department of Agriculture, food and Drug Administration, which took over both medicine and food.

It was supposed to be only about marketing. Their legal job in America was supposed to make sure the label on the product, it reflected accurately what was in it. So if it said it was a vaccine, it was a vaccine. If it said it was a drug for this purpose or that purpose, they actually were studies that supported that.

It was X food product. It was that food. product and met certain standards. That was the goal of marketing provision, and particularly to compete with Europe, because Europe was saying you can't buy American food. You want to get rid of all American food imports because look at Upton Sinclair's the jungle, look at how horrible that they make their food. Now, a lot of European complaints were correct. I mean, Europe has stayed closer to the natural way of food than America has. Like, I remember in France, I could shop and they would tell me where the beef came from. This came from this farm. This came from that farmer. I mean,

Nothing like that I'd ever seen in America. So the one community that best represents and reflects the historic values of America's founding generation is the Amsch. You know, the Baptist from Germany, Switzerland, and other regions of Europe who were wrongfully persecuted, who came to the United States. And William Penn, as the founder of Pennsylvania, the Quakers that founded Pennsylvania, established that the Amish could come there and their religious rights would be protected. And there's been wide-ranging state incursions on that in time, attempts to draft them. They don't believe in war. Attempts to force them into the public school system. That led to many Amish going to jail until a big Supreme Court case rolled their way.

By the way, the Supreme Court just last year referred back to that case and said that case is still governing law for everybody. Huge win for religious rights in America. There's legal principles that could be applied there across the world. And so in steps into that combined world, if you will, is. Amos Miller, a little Amish farmer from Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, the heart of dairy country, owns a beautiful farm, and he always wants just the best food techniques. He wants, you know, the best food sourcing, the best food techniques. And as part of that, he has delivered tens of millions of food products to tens of thousands of Americans over a quarter century.

And as government officials themselves have admitted on the stand under oath, literally not one customer has ever complained about the quality of his food, the quantity of his food, the value his food, the health of his food, no complaint ever. It is the best safety track record and customer satisfaction record of any farmer at that scale in America today. And yet, he is the most persecuted farmer in America today. The state government state of Pennsylvania continues to harass him and try to shut him down, including bringing environmental people and other people that just everybody just attacks, attacks, attacks, attacks, because they want him to get licenses and permits that would effectively shut him down. The way Pennsylvania's raw milk permit works, you can get

get a permit to sell raw milk to Pennsylvanians if you agree to not sell 95% of the products they want related to raw milk it's absurd licensure it's like people have been telling me i got to watch yes minister that they said that's the best take down of the deep state is the british early 80s show yes minister which apparently bbcgreen lit not realizing fully it was a deep state comedy thinking it was a margaret thatcher comedy and they wanted to take on margaret that's apparently has all these great truths in it that's what amy the omish go up to an eighth grade education their their their religion is their life and their life is their religion and how they do it. So they find all this bathroom. They're very naive. I have to be in Philadelphia. The reason why I'm in New York is

I'm heading on my way to Philadelphia because I have more Amish cases deal with because they constantly are getting harassed by the state government there. But the feds are also harassing. Now he's got the internal revenue service, the infernal revenue service, that revenue service, haranguing him and harassing him and nipping him on every little time. And the Amish aren't big. They don't use computers. They don't believe in modern technology. So they don't have the getting together records to put together stuff to feel the IRS is, let's just say, rather a big undertaking more so than normal because it's an Amish farmer. And then last but not least, the federal government's case against them still sits in federal court.

They have not dismissed the injunction. They have not restored it. Now, I will say enough people are making enough noise that Secretary of Agriculture, Brooke Rawlins, personally contacted me and said she wanted to discuss the Amos Miller case. And I was like, and so I said, yes, be happy to do so. So the opportunity the Agriculture Department has is to not only fix that case, but there was a study done by a major agricultural publication that's actually anti-Omish generally that said that the number that said Trump was guaranteed to win the election because he was guaranteed to win Pennsylvania.

And the reason why he was guaranteed to win Pennsylvania is a record number of Amish registered to vote and voted in the election. And they attributed it to Amos Miller. There's that much support within the Amish world that they're tired of being. want to do is just to live their lives. That's it. That's the promise we as America made, the promise state of Pennsylvania made. That's the promise President Trump made. So far, he's failed to deliver. Now, Secretary Rollins says she's sincerely interested in pursuing, getting to the bottom of it. If she does, all she has to do is restore the original definition of the custom exemption under the USDA law, which provided that if you bought food directly

from the farmer, the farmer did not have to be, get permission from the FDA, the USDA, or any state or federal agency before giving you that flu. That's an informed consent model. that our system of medicine and health and food is supposed to be about. I just know what I'm getting. As long as I know what I'm getting, it's up to me to decide what goes into my body, not to govern. And Amos Miller's case is a key for food freedom. He delivers, he's one of the,

only the best producers of certain food items. You can go to Amosmiller Organicfarm.com and see all the list. I just had some of his cookies were outrageous. Unleagly good. His milk is unbelievable. Milk's better than cocaine. And now the government wants to bathe it. Like it's cocaine.

So it's my thing. But Amos, Amos appreciates. all the prayers, all the good wishes. You know, the 1776 Law Center provides the legal support for them. We're part of that. So all the fundraising that goes into that, we appreciate everybody who can help in that capacity. And Amos Miller just wakes up each morning with kids all here. You get their hats on.

They get their homemade clothes on. And they can't wait to start a new day. That's who Amos Miller is despite the extraordinary amount of government harassment he has faced. The fight, unfortunately, has to continue because it's another. place where the Trump administration has not yet delivered. Well, this is excellent. Can I just say, I hope this conversation that you have really does go well and that's some kind of common sense and sanity and morality and ethics actually finally prevails here. As I said, it's amongst the farming community in Britain, which, by the way, is under a lot of pressure at the moment. This case has actually

you know, gained quite a lot of traction, as I discovered for myself. Well, Robert, this has been an amazing program, and this is where I finish. I'm going to hand over to Alex. I'm sure he's going to have a few questions to put to you. And thank you very much again. Robert, we have a lot of questions. We're going to answer all the questions tomorrow in a dedicated, yeah, in a dedicated video. I don't even know where to begin.

We've got so many questions. Let's see. A lot of questions about Vance, where Vance is gone. I give you, I mean, I talked to him at the beginning of the Ukrainian conflict. He's been a deep skeptic of the Ukrainian conflict all the way. He comes from the MAGA school that's a little bit Mearsheimer oriented so that he sees China as a potential risk. But he doesn't want military conflict. You can see his speech he gave two years ago about this.

He sees it as an economic and cultural and political geopolitical adversary, but that war is not the answer. in his opinion. He's someone who came up in Appalachia, Eastern Kentucky, Southern Ohio. That's the part he came from. That's the part that's had the most historic opposition to war in the history of this country. I mean, you can go back to the Civil War. I mean, why West Virginia is West Virginia because of this. So the not part of Virginia proper. So Appalachia's longhand skepticism. I mean, they're tough guys. They're tough people. They'll be tough warriors, but they are reluctant warriors. And they find most wars to be for dumb politicians, not for their self-interest. that's where he is. He's a deep skeptic of further engagement in Ukraine. My guess is he's probably the one who helped convince Trump to delay this. It'd be like Vance to figure, okay, how can I work with

Trump? Okay, I've got to get him away from this, but he's locked into it. Well, you know, why don't you just say you're going to do it by this date, if that, that gives negotiation room with Trump. Because with Trump, that gives you 50 days to look at some things, say, well, here's the downside, here's a risk, here's a problem. Here's if we go forward. Here's this. here's that. So Vance is trying to do the best he can within the administration as the vice president, not the president, but as the person who has the most political capital and the closest access to President Trump to get Trump to do the right thing and the smart thing and the intelligent thing. He wants it to be less war in the Middle East. You notice he wasn't in a lot of the photos with D.B. You don't see J.D. eagerly photo bombing those

shots. So I think this is part of trying to redirect Trump, rechannel his energy back into what is more positive and productive, and try to give some intellectual coherence to Trump's all over the place sometimes. So if it was up to JD, I think we would be out of all these conflicts. But Trump, for some reason, has gotten sidetracked into them. It will be up to J.D. to try to avoid a disaster that if Trump gets into that disaster, it will take the J.D. with him. Okay, Robert, from locals.

Mr. Mike, says, good day all. As I noted to Robert last week, the same politicians in power. brokers. The Maxwell Epstein operation wanted to blackmail are all the clients of the DC Madam who also died mysteriously in 2008. Paul Frey's black book has been court sealed for over a decade. We shouldn't expect anything different with Epstein. That's unfortunately the recurrent pattern. I mean, I've had the unfortunate position of seeing this up close. I had a client won't get into details. Let's say I represent him briefly, then got out of that. That that case real fast as fast as I could.

The, in which the music industry, I mean, the P. Diddy case was a cover-up case. That was a cover-up. The Diddy learn that from high-ranking music executives, same honeypot operation, blackmail extortion, etc. And they pretended the only traffic women to himself. He ended up getting acquitted of all the serious charges. And this is an embarrassment on the Trump administration because the case happened, even though prosecuted by Maury and Comey, someone else who has a job there. So the person is right that these entrapment operations are usually sustainable.

and survivable because they implicate so many powerful people that it scares people from ever really outing them for what they are. And that's what we're saying. Andrew Piscato says Epstein was about, was about to fight, Epstein was about, could you fight the deep state? Oh, right. Yeah, I can't.

You're saying for them, the symbolism is, if you can't take on Epstein, then you can't take on the deep state. That's how a lot of the Trump supporters saw it. That's why it's so significant. And Trump is, and Trump, while he's pretending to have nothing to do with each other, he knows down deep they do that Trump giving in did not disclose the Epstein files, is Trump giving into the deep state? Is Trump letting the swap drain him?

And that's why some of his core supporters are so concerned. Christina says, was the failed assassination of Trump intentional to manipulate him? He believes he was spared by God for a purpose. That's a dangerous thing. It can be if it gets really misdirected. No question about that. I mean, to his supporters, it was a sign from God that he should take out the deep state. Deep six, the deep state.

That's that. And the corruption of America's constitutional republic by these corrosive administrative, bureaucratic oligarchs that have railroaded our economy and society and politics. But there's always a danger that somebody takes the wrong message from it. Sparky says, Robert, is President Trump doing it? the opposite of what makes sense technique like George Costanza and Seidfeld. Is it actually a big picture, big, beautiful, shake the box technique? Will it work?

I wish that is what it was. Unfortunately, I'm not seeing a lot of evidence. That is what it is. This doesn't look like 4D chess. This looks like bad 2D checkers. The Palantir says Trump recently gave a speech in his Middle East tour where he spoke against nation building and neocon policies. Then Trump associates with Keith Kellogg and Lindsay Graham.

What is going on here? it is as baffling and befuddling to some of the Trump's closest friends and longest advisors as it is to the rest of us because I've talked to some of them and none of them, they're all like, I don't know what's going on. And I don't know why it's, I mean, many of them suspect there is some sort of blackmail or something else. But I don't, with Trump, it's easy. If he, he likes to buy himself an ad, you sell himself, you sell him on something that only he could do. Only he could bring peace to the world. You just got to bring pressure on Putin. Only you can bring peace to the Middle East.

You just got to bring pressure on those Iranian. Only you can bring peace and prosperity and democracy to the world. You just got to start using tariffs as sanctions policies, whether they're UN lawyers or Brazilian leaders. And that's all a trap. It's the ultimate form of honey trap, the illusion that you can create peace through war. And unfortunately, right now Trump seems to be succumb to it. Nico says Trump will not lose his presidency. Magar or a cult that supports him no matter what,

and Trump is bipolar and easily manipulated by the neocons. As to his supporters, just go to his truth page. Just look at what his supporters are telling him on his own platform about Epstein, about Iran. He's been getting ratioed for the first time he's ever got ratioed in the history of truth as a platform over Iran, over Ukraine and over Epstein. So they're not the cultists that people like to think they are.

There's probably about half of the Trump base they'll be with them no matter what. There's half that are already talking about walking away from him. So Trump's illusion that he has this sort of personality cult control over this audience, that isn't why this audience didn't come to him because they liked him. They came to him because they liked the policies he was communicated. The moment he abandons those policies, they will abandon them. him too. So he needs to wake up quicker or he'll be out the door looking like George W. Bush 2008. One more, one more question. Robert, a lot of people asking about Susie Wiles that she will derail

Trump's presidency. Can you speak to that very quickly? And then we'll wrap up the live stream. Yeah, I've been warning about it for a long time. America First Policy Institute also was this corrupt corporate institution funded by Big Oil that tried to pretend it was America First when it wasn't. and it is employed of like 75 plus people, the Trump administration, and almost every single person affiliated with that institute has caused the problem, including Cash Patel. Guess who the military advisor was at the America First Policy Institute? Oh, yes, dear General Kellogg, whose daughter is busy making money in Ukraine.

I mean, it's just incredible. So those of us that we've seen a lot of reasons for optimism, seen a lot of reasons for pessimism. Yeah, so you can do them in gloom. I prefer the white pill and the red pill instead. Just get involved in the court of public opinion. They're not censoring you because your opinion doesn't matter. They're not censoring others because those opinions don't matter.

It's those opinions that matter the most. So get out there, get active, get engaged, stay involved. And hopefully we can redirect the energy around Trump back to his original promises and away from the disastrous debacle of the warhors that are trying to drag him into the brothel of death, political and otherwise. Robert Barnes, thank you so much for joining us. Once again, where can people follow your work? Yes, so if you want to follow the Amos Miller case or any of those other freedom cases,

the Roger Veer case, man being wrongfully persecuted on bogus tax theories because he exposed out of the intelligence agencies and central banks for trying to manipulate crypto in order to suppress the individual democratizing freedom effect of it. You can go free Roger Veer. You can see that. So we put up information on Roger Veer's case on Amos Miller's case, financial freedom, food freedom, medical freedom, political freedom, proposed legislative reforms, how to use FOIA,

All of that is coming to 1776 LawCenter.com. If you want all the political, sports, culture, events, picks, that's at sportspicks. Dot locals.com. I had a very good month last month, so we'll see how things, and have had a good year so far. And then for all the law and politics, I have a hush-hush, currently up on the one and only Robert Maxwell at vipaarnslaw.com. As always, a privilege and a pleasure to be. Remember, the durand.orgals.com. When J.D. Vance needed independent information, you went to the Duran.

When Robert Kennedy needed independent information, he went to the Duran. I've heard from people in the White House who were relaying information that we talked about and that you gentlemen talked about over the last six weeks that helped Trump, motivate Trump, provide the information to people around Trump, but then got to Trump, that things were not going the way he thought they were in time not to get further involved in a war in Iran. Of course, that won't necessarily stop his temptation again, because the siren songs of war are always seductresses to pop. power and politics as nature goes.

So as always, go to the Duran.orgas.com, great locals community. I got a bunch of merch actually coming when I get back home to Tennessee. So always a privilege, always a pleasure. And remember everybody, the good, good philosophy, wake up, do something good for yourself. Wake up, do something good for somebody else. Do that each day. That's a good way to live. Thanks, everybody.

Thank you, Robert. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you to everybody. We will answer all the questions in a dedicated video tomorrow. That will be up tomorrow. So thank you for all of your questions and all of the supertrial. Take care, everyone.