The Glenn Beck Program - Best of The Program | Guests: Rep. Chris Stewart & Jason Buttrill | 8/2/22

Episode Date: August 2, 2022

Is Disney trying to erase founder Walt Disney by removing a speech he made? Rep. Chris Stewart (R-Utah) joins to discuss House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's visit to Taiwan and the actions China may take. Glenn Beck's chief writer and researcher Jason Buttrill shares his insight on the seriousness of China and Taiwan and what America's response would be in various scenarios. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

It's never too early to plan your summer story in Europe with WestJet, from rolling countryside to cobblestone streets. Begin your next chapter. Book your seat at westjet.com or call your travel agent. WestJet, where your story takes off. What a powerful show for you today. We started out with something that was great. I can't remember it anymore because I did it a while back,

but I remember it being great. I remember it being great. Oh yeah, I remember what it is. the tide is turning and people are starting to realize that and they're getting bolder and bolder. This time we heard something from Walt Disney and yeah, he was on ice. He was in the refrigerator. We defrosted him. Asked his opinion.

And a Holocaust survivor. We also had Eric Schmidt on he is the recipient of the Trump endorsement or is it the guy running against Eric Schmidt also named Eric. We don't know because Trump just said I'm happy to endorse Eric in the primary in Missouri. Thanks for that. So we talked to him and I think we got it squirt away. Also a lot of coverage on China and serious talk on what does this mean? What is coming? How do we prepare for it?

And finally, the question that I think is on everybody's mind. Well, why drunken stupor did Nancy Pelosi think this is a good idea? All that and more on today's podcast, brought to you by Relief Factor. Grace lives in Oklahoma, and for decades, she has dealt with pain in her lower back and legs. She'd come home from work at the end of the day, and it was all she could do to make it through the evening. Then she was listening to me on the radio program talking about Relief Factor, and she said, I'd give it a try. Maybe that'll shut him up.

Well, she said within a week or two, she found herself coming home from work feeling good. That was unusual. The pain that she had for so long was finally gone. She got her life back. And you can too. Try the quick start from Relief Factor. 1995. It's a trial pack.

Try it out for three weeks. 70% of the people who try it out for the trial pack for three weeks, they go on to order more month after month. I do as well as Grace. Call them now at 800, the number four relief. That's 800 for relief. Or go to Relieffactor.com. That's Relieffactor.com. You're listening to the best of the bliss.

Let me begin with something that was deleted from the anniversary, the 67th anniversary celebration of Disneyland. Every year they start with Walt Disney. and what he said at the ribbon cutting in 1955. They've just deleted this now, and they're trying to erase even Walt from the Walt Disney world. Here he is in 1955. Listen carefully to what he said.

To all who come to this happy place, welcome. Disneyland is your land. Here aid relives fond memories of the past. and here youth may savor the challenge and promise of the future. Disneyland is dedicated to the ideals, the dreams, and the hard facts that have created America, with the hope that it will be a source of joy and inspiration to all the world. Thank you.

Do you hear what they deleted, and can you understand why they deleted it? To all those who enter here, greetings. Disneyland is dedicated to the ideas, the ideals, and the hard facts that created America to send them forth as a source of courage and inspiration throughout the world. They haven't been doing that in a long time, but now they're not only cutting Walt the founder out of Disney, but they are also cutting America. out. The America that we all grew up in, the America that we thought we knew, is gone. But it's

only on hold, and it's on hold because it is in each of us, those of us who lived it, who know its truth, to know its promise, to have received its inspiration. It should now give us courage to continue to stand up. Because we know what it was. Our kids, Kids don't. But I want you to know that it is only... It's been put in a closet for a while. And it is our job to open that door and take it back out of the closet.

It's only on hiatus. If we choose, otherwise it is gone. I have spoken about the Holocaust for a very, very long time, and I've been called of Nazi propaganda. I've been called all kinds of things because I support Israel. I support the Jews. And I really truly believe in never forget.

Never forget. And that means something more than just telling the story. Holocaust happened, killed six million Jews, blah, blah, blah. No, never forget means never forget what led to that. insanity. So you can stop it. Vera Sheriv was three years old when her world collapsed. This is from the epic times. She and her family were chased out of Romania and herded into a concentration camp in Ukraine during World War II. There they were left to wait and starve. She said, the cloud of death was always there. Weekly, a list determined who would be sent where and whether

it would be death or a slave labor camp. While at the camp, she said her father died of typhus when she was five, which was widespread throughout the camps because of cold and malnutrition. After three years at that camp waiting, she was rescued in 1944. She said, my mother got wind of a few orphans that would be transferred and transported out of the camp, so she lied and said that I was an orphan to save my life. And that's how. I wound up leaving. This began what she calls her Odyssey as a child without parents, left to her own intuition and critical assessment of others' intentions.

She said, I had to assess at a very young age who I could trust to take care of me. She was on a train at the port of Constanta in Romania, where there were three boats waiting to take groups of people to Palestine. She befriended a family. However, on arrival, she found herself assigned to a boat with other orphan children that would separate her from the family with whom she thought she could trust. So she rebelled. No matter what, I could not be convinced to get on that boat. And miraculously, in the end, they gave in to me.

C-6, she fell asleep that night, only to wake up to find out that the boat with all of the orphans had been torpedoed. by who she said she found out decades later to have been the Russians. Though she carried guilt for having survived, she was grateful that she resisted because that resistance kept her alive. I do not obey authority, and it saved my life. She's now speaking out. She said these memories of the concentration camp and what she went through returned in 2020 during the web of COVID-19 restrictions that spun out of control with the help of media propaganda. She said, so now, I'm quoting, when people are obeying authority mindlessly and giving up their rights to make decisions about their own lives and what goes into

their own bodies, I think back to that time. She's now a medical activist and founder of the Alliance for Human Research Protection. It's a network. of lay people and professionals who work to uphold humanitarian values and ethical standards established in the Hippocratic Oath. The Nuremberg Code and the Universal Declaration on bioethics and human rights. Most importantly, she just joined Scott Skera, a co-founder of Amazing Grace's Light Shines On Corporation. She said, both of them see the parallels now between the national socialist regime in Germany and the current medical directives being carried out in the United States through government funding. Before I go on, I want to tell you, I played Walt Disney

because that's who we are. That's who we can be. That's who we once were. But we are in danger of it forever slipping through our fingers if we don't recognize times have changed and you're not living in the same country and playing by the same rules. Since the death of his 19-year-old daughter, Grace in a hospital in 2021, and he again is the co-founder of our Amazing Grace's Light, his daughter died in a hospital in 2021 after having been injected with a combination of drugs that he found out later was part of a federal hospital protocol. He said what's happening is genocide. He's been crusading to tell his daughter's story, the network with others that have had similar experiences while bringing attention to the protocols that he believes amounted to the murder of his daughter who had Down syndrome. Under the Nazi regime, he said, medicine was weaponized as it is being today. Though the Jews were the primary target, she said,

the first medically murdered victims were disabled German infants and children under the age of three. Most people don't know this, but Mangla, who was the butcher of Auschwitz, he was the guy who did all of the evil experiments on people. he was actually the head of the children's hospital in Germany. In the Mercury Museum, I have the last prescription that he wrote at the Children's Hospital. And it is for a massive amount of the drug that they were using to kill the children in the hospital. This expanded into the operation titled T4 for the street address of the... program's central office in Berlin for all of the disabled of all ages ages and the mentally ill

and senior citizens because as she points out the Nazis called them worthless eaters t4 was a concerted effort to rid what their propaganda called the economic burden sheriff pointed out to 2021 medicare trustee report she said have you read it it evaluates the cost of keeping the elderly and disabled, federally funded. 39% of the federal budget goes to those two groups right now, which is $2.2 trillion a year. On page 11 of the report, there's a call for a substantial change to address the financial challenges.

Quote, the sooner solutions are enacted, the more flexible and gradual they can be, the report says. For her, the implication is, while not overtly stated, a call for eugenics that was supported by the academic elites in early U.S. history and later adopted by the Nazis. Ten years after he took power, Hitler launched his genocide program that had been introduced in incremental steps with the help

of propaganda portraying the regime as heroes. What happened to grace and what happened to many disabled and elderly in Western Europe, Australia, Canada, the United States in March and April of 2020 was medical murder. Genocide isn't new to the United States. You should know this. We started it here. We started these programs to kill and sterilize the disabled here in America. The Nazis took it from us. So don't think that it couldn't happen here. U.S. Supreme Court, Oliver Wendell Holmes, voted in favor, 8-1 majority opinion in the 29, sorry, the 1921 case of Buck v. Bell, which upheld the Virginia Sterilization Act of 24, the forced sterilization of Kerry Buck, who was alleged to be mentally defective. Holmes said it would be better to prevent the mentally disabled from being born, then allow them to sap the strength of the state or let them starve. for their imbecility. The principle that sustains compulsory vaccines is broad enough to cover cutting the fallopian tubes. The justice wrote, in his opinion, three generations of imbeciles are enough. Unfortunately, she was never actually mentally disabled.

Arguments for eugenics were always built on a lie, she said, but it is an ideology that continues to poison the public health policies. She says she's very familiar with the banality of evil, and it makes mass murder possible by making it a bureaucratic routine that is handed down his orders through the chain of command to the person who pulls the switch or gives the injection. No one ever called it murder. The Nazis were very adept at propaganda and language,

and the Jews were called spreaders of disease, not unlike the epithets thrown at those who didn't take the jab in 2021. The unvaccinated, it was called the pandemic of the unvaccinated. The whole language was dehumanizing. To cut to the chase here, doctors encourage the mother to get amniocentesis tests. If the test shows that a down syndrome or another disability would complicate the parents' life, they encourage abortion.

There's an unholy union when medicine gets in bed with the government, and the Hippocratic oath goes through the window. Do no harm. Look at what Big Pharma is now doing to children. Look at what's happening with the gender reassignment surgeries. She says she's concerned with the elite ruling class that is godless, believing only in what is measurable and controllable. We should not fall into the trap, to the false law. light that Satan will eventually ride in to steal more souls. God's true light protects those who believe. We the people need to reclaim the sovereignty by learning to trust in intuition, experience, and the ability to assess lies from the truth. That's the problem. Stop watching mainstream

media. They're all reading from the same script. They're bombarding people with fear mongering, which is exactly the same thing the Nazis did and how they controlled the population through fear. Have no fear. And if I may, quote our Holocaust survivor, America, resist, wake up, and stop obeying. This is the best of the Glenn Beck program, and we really want to thank you for listening. Because this is such a critical event. that could go sideways quickly. And China doesn't seem to be the kind of management, if you will, that bluffs an awful lot.

And they are using stronger language than they've ever used with any of our allies about this visit to Taiwan. Can you explain what the heck is happening? Yeah. Well, let me do my best in the sense that it's hard to predict the future, and it's hard to predict Chinese leadership and the actions that they might take. It's a very, very difficult intelligence target. I think, though, Glenn, I agree with you. As high as tensions might be, and despite the actions that Chinese leadership is taking in the bluster, again, I agree with you. I think it's unlikely that we're at war with China in the next, you know, short period of time.

And part of the reason for that is China doesn't need to be provoked for an excuse to take Taiwan. I think they will do that at a time of their choosing. When they're ready. It's pretty clear. Yeah, it's pretty clear. That's her intention. And they've made that very clear. And again, I don't.

Okay, so hang on just a second with that, Chris. When you say that and you're looking at that, let's take it here. China went in and took Hong Kong when they were ready and the world was distracted and they came in easily and just took Hong Kong. Freedom squashed. I think that's the kind of opportunity that China would be looking for for Taiwan. Just take it when nobody's watching and the world can't do anything. And that time will come. They also don't have the landing crafts at this point, if I understand this correctly.

I have seen that China doesn't have the landing crafts that would be needed to take an island like Taiwan, but that is on the horizon. But let me balance this now with the other side. China's economy is collapsing. They have people that are in the streets now defying tanks at the bank of China. So China may need a distraction and a reason to rally all of the people. to take their attention off the financial trouble. Is that fair to say that that's what makes this really kind of an unknown? Yeah, yeah, I think everything you've said is true,

and I agree with everything that you said. And I think your point on Hong Kong is so important and has to be elaborated on. I mean, Glenn, I remember you and I talking about, remember when Hong Kong had millions of people protesting in the streets, On one weekend, they had more than 3 million protesters out of a nation of 6 million people. Half the people were protesting. And during that time, we had something like 35,000 Chinese security forces. Now, they called them policemen and civilians, but they weren't.

They were military. And yet, China did not invade Hong Kong at that point, even in the midst of this incredible uprising. But to your point, when they did was when the U.S. was completely absorbed with COVID. And they did without a peep. No one even noticed. And I actually think that's an argument for why right now isn't the time for them. Because I do think they can choose when they make this invasion. And I think it's almost inevitable that they will.

But I think they can choose a better time. And to your second point about the amphibious assault ships, that's exactly right. Turns out that invading Taiwan is not a simple military operation. In fact, it actually has some fairly significant natural defenses. The only way you can do it is through amphibious assault landings. You can't do it through the air. You just simply can't put enough soldiers on the ground. And they're not quite prepared yet.

Now, they're working aggressively towards that. But our analysis is that they don't have enough ships yet. So I think right now it's probably premature for them to take this type of action. And finally, to your third point, yeah, you're right. There's a lot of upheaval in China right now. And I guess the question and equation of the leadership would have to evaluate is, does us invading Taiwan, which is going to aggravate all of those internal financial stresses in China, not alleviate them, does that help us or does it hurt us? And again, I think most of the analysts and just common sense that it's probably not the right time right now.

But finally, Glenn, let me say this. Who knew who that Russia was going to invade Ukraine? Who knew the CDC was a political organization? I mean, who knew the Great Reset was going to reframe a lot of what we do in society? So the truth is, is we live in a very unpredictable and a very dangerous world. And it's hard to save a certain what the next day might hold. So the New York Times is, I think, pretty much taking Nancy Pelosi apart. Thomas Friedman had an article in the New York Times, I think it was yesterday,

where he was talking about Ukraine, the money we're sending over there, how corruption is on the rise, we don't know what we're doing. and now we have Nancy Pelosi running over to China. And he thought it was a big mistake for her to go over. It's not necessarily a mistake to go over, but it's a mistake to announce you're going over because it gives China the chance to do what it's doing and putting us into a situation to where you got to go

because you can't give in to China. But you don't want to go because it's pissing China off. Wasn't that the mistake that Nancy Pelosi made? Yeah, I think there are a couple of mistakes that made. Number one is that that did occur. And there have been members of Congress who have visited Taiwan in the last couple years. But they do exactly what you just said. They don't announce that they go there.

We show our support. We have meaningful meetings. We talk about, you know, military alliance, you know, things that we can do to help them. You leave and then perhaps you talk about it when you get home. In some cases, we don't even discuss it once we've returned. I don't think Nancy Pelosi announced that she was going to Taiwan. I think the Biden administration leaked it. And you have to ask yourself, why would they do that?

Why? Is there anyone who thinks that 10% for the big guy wants to provoke China? Because this president doesn't want to provoke China. He wants to kowt to China. And a really good example of that is, why in the world is it so hard for this administration to say the truth about the origins of the coronavirus? I mean, a seven-year-old could look at the evidence and say, Yep, it almost certainly came from the lab.

And yet they're reluctant. In fact, it's impossible for them to do that. They just simply won't. And I think that's a good example of they don't want to provoke China. They thought Pelosi going there would be a provocation, therefore they leaked it, I think. And there are others who believe this as well, in order to compel her not to go. And to her credit, Glenn, I think, oh my gosh, I can't believe I just said that about Nancy Pelosi. But in this case, it's true.

to her credit. Weirder things have happened. And the evidence says she probably landed there just a few minutes ago. I think they were scheduled to land at about 10.05 p.m. local. And it's like I said, just a few minutes ago, we don't know for sure if she is. But that attention apparently was her intention. So I want to play something from the Pentagon that I just don't understand. And it regards the Taiwan Relations Act, which I want to.

you to get into here in just a second. But let me play this and then ask you a question on. Here's Pentagon. Repeatedly said that we oppose any unilateral changes to the status quo from either side. We have said that we do not support Taiwan independence. And we have said that we expect cross-strait differences to be resolved by peaceful means. We have communicated this directly. So wait a minute. John Kirby just said we don't support Taiwan independence. According to the Taiwan Relations Act, which is very carefully written, there is strategic ambiguity through it. And I think that's even a phrase that comes from that, strategic ambiguity, where we have always played, look, we support the Taiwanese people and, you know, we'll defend them.

We accept them as a separate party. but we never say absolutely positively, we're going in, or absolutely positively, we don't support this. Why are we saying this now? Yeah, you know, that's another good example of the delicate nature of this relationship, and that is, you're exactly right. The strategic ambiguity is intentional, it's deliberate, and it's written into this agreement. And it was a way to split the baby, if you will, at the time, And that is, you know, philosophically and in many practical ways, we were supportive of the people of Taiwan.

But on the other hand, we didn't want to go to war with China at the time. And we said, OK, well, we're going to have this strategic ambiguity. Well, we're going to kind of support him, but we're not going to support him in open or in public or in very aggressive ways, which is, by the way, coming back to the president one more time. And his apparent willingness to, you know, to improvise and to change 30 years of national security. security strategy in an off-end comment at the end of an interview, which he says, oh, yeah, we would absolutely militarily defend up Taiwan. Well, that's not been officially our policy for a long, long time.

Again, it relied on this ambiguity. Strategic ambiguity. China not knowing what we would do. And I think it's a good example of, again, it's a delicate balance there. And this president has tipped the scales in a way that brings a lot more uncertainty. Okay. Let me take a quick one minute break. And I want to go back to, A, what China is saying, what Russia is saying about this. Russia came out on Russian TV, and I'll play that for you here in just a second. And then I just want to talk to you about what do you think we should prepare for? What are the options? Because honestly, I am more afraid of the, this government's response than I am of China's response. I, I, these people screw everything up. They'll only make things worse. And I don't know, I mean, I just, Biden is practically an

imbecile at this point. God only knows what he would choose to respond with. So I want to talk to you a little bit about that coming up in just a second. This is the best of the Glenn Beck program. I remember I'm 18 years old. I am working at WPGC in Washington, D.C. And I can see the light on top of the Washington Monument. So I'm at Ground Zero. Ronald Reagan is in office. And there's something, I don't remember what it was, but a confrontation with the Soviet Union. And it was really serious. And I remember keeping the door to the telegram. in my studio open. Teletype is how we used to get the news. And it had bells on it. And a 10-bell event would be nuclear war. And I kept that propped open so I could hear those bells and count the bells. And, you know, we got to think as high as like six bells. And I would count them because I knew. And I thought, I'm at ground zero. I mean, this could be over in 12 minutes. I haven't felt that way, really, until this administration.

You know, even after September 11th, I remember feeling on September 11th, boy, I don't know what they're going to do. But it wasn't a fear of nuclear war or all-out war over the whole world. We're approaching that kind of place. We now have, do we have the live footage? This is, they're tracking Nancy Pelosi's plane. We can show it to you. She's at about 10,000 feet headed towards Taiwan. She has avoided the restricted airspace over the South China Sea.

However, China has just closed the airspace above the Taiwan Strait. And they are. they're at least flexing their muscles. If you look at what China is sending out online, you are seeing military being moved. You have the aircraft carriers from China moving out of their home ports and headed towards Taiwan. I don't know what's going to happen.

we have a guy who actually is, I mean, somewhat of kind of an expert on this area working for us. He's our chief researcher and head writer for the Glenn Beck television program, Jason Batrill. Hello, Jason. How are you? Hey, Glenn. Doing good. So, Jason, help me out on how serious is this with China, do you think? I think it's very serious, especially considering, you know, the symbolic meaning of Taiwan. Taiwan's very, very symbolic to the Chinese Communist Party. This has been an issue since, you know, the communists took over, really.

So this is probably one of the most crazy, ambiguous treaties we've ever had. The Taiwan Relations Act is the most ambiguous thing ever, which makes Kirby's, you know, remarks yesterday, kind of odd to come out and say, you know, we don't support independence so publicly. I mean, I've read the Taiwan relations that cover to cover. The ambiguity, just to say it's ambiguous is even an understatement. It's the equivalent of one of the most confusing Christopher Nolan movies ever. Take Inception, take Interstellar, take Tenant, and then have 30 different people try to describe what it actually means. Like, oh, I actually think of me. That's basically what we're talking about here. So this is Taiwan and China are at war with each other. It's a civil war. And it happened in the 1950s. So this has been going back and forth from the 1950s. But it is, it's coming to a head. And that's because as China rises in power, they think the odds are that they can take the United States of America. I don't think that's possible yet. But I think we're maybe five years, two to five years away from them.

actually being able to take Taiwan and call our bluff or just fight the war. Yeah. You think that's accurate? No, absolutely accurate. China sees Taiwan like they see Hong Kong. When they made the deal with Hong Kong, it was always, people always say, oh, well, you know, China does, you know, has no right to do this. It must be two systems, you know, under one country. Yeah, but it was in that agreement that China would one day take full control and it would be one system.

people usually leave that part out. They just decided to accelerate their plans. They see Taiwan as one China, and they believe it's rightfully theirs, and their plan is always to take it. They just don't have the military capability. Now, moving towards what we're seeing now, the thing that would have always, you know, tip us off, and in the Taiwan Relations Act, we will say that if you try to coerce, you know, militarily, onto Taiwan to change Taiwan and take it, we will respond. And President Reagan, and I believe 1980 or 1982, reassured right after the, you know, the 1979

Taiwan Act, reassured that, hey, we are still giving you weapons. We are still coming to your defense. So this is a very, very old agreement we've had. And yes, we will go and respond. But the thing that has always kept, you know, the things, you know, kind of open and, you know, that we can see what's going on in the future is it would take a tremendous Chinese military buildup. to be put in place before we would, you know, the actual action. So we would see it.

We'd see the buildup. We'd go and, you know, respond to it. What Pelosi's done, and let's put this into context, the Speaker of the House has just undermined her presidents in the same party, his foreign policy. She has taken it on herself to manipulate U.S. foreign policy. It's absolutely unprecedented. She has no right to do this. It's not under the duties of the Speaker of the House.

But her actions are allowing this military buildup to happen. It's accelerating an already accelerated plan that we've seen, you know, with China and Hong Kong. I tell you, it is, it is truly frightening. And by the way, the reason why Taiwan is important to the United States is if Taiwan falls, we then are pretty much out of Asia. The next country to fall would be New Zealand and Australia. And China would just overrun all of that hemisphere. And between Russia and China, you know, that would be a very difficult match for us to even stand shoulder to shoulder with.

Okay. So let me give you a couple of scenarios. And I want to hear what you think the best scenario is. These are five different scenarios that have been put together by a Taiwan, based researcher. So the first one, minimalist approach. The people's army

occupies Jemen or Matsu Islands, as well as Taiwan's islands in the South China Sea, maybe even the Peng Islands. They declare part or all of the Taiwan Strait a no-go zone. They just did that.

And they say, give it a no-go zone to all military shipping. This would be fairly easy, etc, et cetera, et cetera, and it would not overcommit them. It would just be a step up. Scenario number two, hybrid warfare, some sort of a partial naval and aerial blockade of Taiwan intended to interfere with the economy to combine with stepped up harassment such as direct flyovers, which they did last night while we were all sleeping.

Incursions into maritime space by China's military. they might also have cyber attacks, which they just did about two hours before Pelosi's plane was taking off. Scenario number three, a serious attack, but no invasion. This would involve air and sea warfare, no boots on the ground, full aerial and naval blockade, protracted set of naval and aerial battles designed to degrade Taiwan's military, combined with ballistic missile attacks on military targets. The scenario number four, real actual invasion. Scenario number five, short of a nuclear attack, would be the worst case.

Full air and sea blockade, massive ballistic missile attacks on military targets, cyber attack, aggressive naval and aerial attacks, and boots on the ground. I don't think that one is even possible right now, but maybe it is. Which one, or do you have another scenario that you think is more likely to come from this? So to point out, I think every single one of those scenarios would break the Taiwan Relations Act, which would require an American response. So if they're thinking about doing any of those, they're ready for war.

Just really quick, if I can remember all of them, the first one, occupying some of those islands in the air defense zone. We already see all the air defense zone, occupying any of those islands, including the Pengu Islands. Those are part of the Pescadour Islands, which is specifically named in the Taiwan Relations Act as part of Taiwan. So that's a huge, that's a huge, you know, we're getting involved, basically, if they do that and they're. So that is, or that is a progressive way to, for China to do it, where they're not taking all of it. They're just moving in and then, like Republicans always do, you just back up and like, oh, well, that, that's okay. Well, we'll get it on the next vote. You know,

that's a progressive tactic. And America would probably not go to war over something like that, I would hope. Yeah. We should point in note real quick. Nancy Pelosi has just landed in Taiwan. So that is just working. Just watched it live here. So whatever game is being played

is going to be played. The other scenarios, pretty much many of them involved economic, you know, hybrid warfare or blockades. economic hybrid warfare was not mentioned back then in the Taiwan Relations Act, I would put that in the same category as blockade. That's also mentioned. So if any of those things happen, we are then, according to the text, obligated to respond. So we're responding anyway. Okay. So if they pretty much do anything, even the lightest, the minimal approach, they would be in violation of this act, you know, or our treaty, if you will. And it puts us into action and calls our bluff.

I am terrified of what the Biden administration would do because the Biden administration is absolutely toothless. We have no allies. What we've done in Russia has only benefited Russia and hurt everyone else. I think these guys could overreact and do something very provocative that in the end will just destroy us. What should be our response, Jason? Oh, gosh. Like I said, this is such a complicated issue because it's so, I hate to use the word again, ambiguous. I think that, let me just go to this point.

I think that I don't think China will do any of those things. I think that China will use this as an excuse to do a massive military buildup. That's what I think. And we already saw. Massive military exercise. Massive military exercise. Oh, we're just going to position all these things here. We're going to put all these boats here.

We're going to keep these aircraft carriers here. That way, it puts us off balance on we don't know how far they've escalated their timeline. And that's why I think this is such a horrible, not only dangerous, but horrible move by Nancy Pelosi in doing this, is you, you're bringing right. to the surface what we think we have 10 years to plan for and to prepare for. That's what I think will happen. I think that just we'll see a lot more military buildup in that area. It'll be harder for us to know when they are actually going to attack. Now, if they do any of those other things, I think that we're obligated to respond in some way.

I'll leave it up to them to decide what is the, you know, how to balance it all out. They're obviously not the ones that I want, you know, in charge right now to do that. But, I mean, we're signaling to everybody else in the region that, hey, you know, the time of you being able to count us, that's over now. So, you know, yeah. I will tell you, Jason, thank you so much for your analysis. And, of course, we'll be watching it. No, no, no.