Ep 654 ｜ What’s REALLY Going On with Taiwan & Pelosi？ ｜ Guest： Jason Buttrill
Episode Stats
Words per Minute
180.95905
Summary
Jason Buttrell joins us to talk about what's really going on with Nancy Pelosi's trip to Taiwan and why we should care. We also get a brief update on what's going on between Russia and Ukraine and an analysis of the Biden administration's successful killing of an al-Qaeda terrorist in Afghanistan. And at the end of the episode, we talk about George Soros' new op-ed in the Wall Street Journal and what it means.
Transcript
00:00:00.000
Hey guys, welcome to Relatable. Happy Wednesday. Today we are talking to Jason Buttrell. He's
00:00:05.580
going to tell us what is really going on with Speaker Nancy Pelosi's trip to Taiwan. Is she
00:00:12.880
just a patriot defending democracy? Or is there something else that we should be talking about?
00:00:19.220
We're also going to get a brief update on what is going on between Russia and Ukraine. He's going to
00:00:26.500
give us his analysis of the Biden administration's successful killing of an Al-Qaeda terrorist in
00:00:34.560
Afghanistan. And then we are also at the end going to talk about this George Soros op-ed in the Wall
00:00:42.480
Street Journal and what it means, why we should care. This episode is brought to you by our friends
00:00:50.980
at Good Ranchers. Go to GoodRanchers.com slash Allie for a discount. That's GoodRanchers.com slash Allie.
00:01:08.300
Okay, before we get into that conversation with Jason, which you're absolutely going to love, I
00:01:12.260
mean, he just breaks things down when it comes to foreign policy so well. I do want to give you an
00:01:18.320
update about a story that we talked about at the beginning of the week on Monday about Moms for
00:01:24.160
Liberty. I told you they had been suspended from Twitter temporarily for criticizing a California
00:01:30.000
bill that basically revoked the rights of parents whose kids want to travel to California for quote
00:01:36.440
unquote gender transition procedures and surgeries. And they also were kicked off PayPal. They don't really
00:01:46.360
know why PayPal didn't give an explanation, but basically punished them for the views that they
00:01:53.140
have. PayPal has done this to other organizations and individuals who speak out against gender ideology
00:02:01.680
who use PayPal as a way to take donations. And now Governor DeSantis of Florida is fighting back.
00:02:09.700
This is according to FloridaVoiceNews.com. PayPal unfreezes Moms for Liberty funds after DeSantis
00:02:18.100
announces crackdown on woke banking. So here's what the article says. Governor DeSantis announced last
00:02:24.540
week that Florida would begin cracking down on woke banking. Moms of Liberty said many of their donors
00:02:30.140
give automatically via PayPal. Obviously, they weren't able to do that when PayPal froze their abilities to
00:02:36.060
receive those donations. While Governor DeSantis was speaking at their Liberty National Summit on July
00:02:41.400
15th, they started getting emails that PayPal had stopped processing all of their monthly donors.
00:02:47.400
PayPal froze the organization's $4,500 and wouldn't let them transfer the money out until the IRS had
00:02:53.740
approved the organization's paperwork. I mean, this is really an example of at the very least soft
00:03:00.740
fascism. A way to think of fascism is the wedding of corporate and state power to punish dissent.
00:03:07.660
That's exactly what is going on here. And of course, all of the people who said that they are anti-fascist
00:03:12.640
are for this kind of wedding of corporate and government power. Really scary stuff. We saw it in
00:03:18.200
Canada with the trucking protest as well. Moms for Liberty said PayPal had already accepted the paperwork
00:03:24.140
they filed with the IRS. After DeSantis' press conference announcing that he wants legislation passed
00:03:30.300
to prohibit companies like PayPal from discriminating against customers. This press conference happened
00:03:36.260
just the other day. PayPal released the funds and began letting Moms for Liberty use them again.
00:03:42.640
So don't you see that it just takes a little strength from the people in power? For so long,
00:03:48.820
Republicans have just said, oh no, companies can do what they want to do. That's freedom. That's the
00:03:53.660
free market. Well, now that we now we see that corporations use their power. They pair it with
00:03:59.980
the government's power. They weaponize it to punish people that do not agree with that do not go along
00:04:06.940
with the progressive regime. And the only way to fight back, the only way to push back on that
00:04:13.300
is people with power, Republican elected officials saying no and say, no, we are going to punish the
00:04:20.640
companies that are punishing you. Conservative. And so that's what DeSantis is doing. Of course,
00:04:26.540
that's what he did with Disney as well. Fully support this. If this is the new form of conservatism,
00:04:32.060
if this is the new form of the Republican Party, I am 100% on board. So once again, go DeSantis.
00:04:39.760
This is what I like to see. I want to see more Republicans leading in this way and following his example.
00:04:50.640
Jason, thanks so much for joining us. Tell us why Nancy Pelosi is going to Taiwan. Why does it matter?
00:05:08.120
Taiwan is one of the more interesting things going on in the world right now, mostly because it's just so
00:05:14.280
ambiguous. And I think that's a good word because the original, you know, our original act, the Taiwan
00:05:21.020
Relations Act was nicknamed strategic ambiguity because it was so confusing. And it was done that
00:05:26.920
way on purpose, right? It was done that way so that we didn't really know, they didn't really know what
00:05:32.380
we wanted out of Taiwan, vice versa. We didn't want to confront each other on it too much. We kind of
00:05:39.080
just wanted to let it, you hear the word status quo, just be what it was, which was ambiguous.
00:05:46.420
So that's just the way they were, you know, you know, hoping that it remained. But Pelosi going
00:05:51.960
there is, is interesting on many levels, because you really don't know why Pelosi does some of the
00:05:58.140
things she does when she does them internationally. Like, why is the Speaker of the House undermining the
00:06:03.080
foreign policy of the President of the United States? I don't like the current President of the
00:06:06.400
United States. But even still, Speaker of the House shouldn't be undermining United States foreign
00:06:12.160
So how is this undermining United States foreign policy, her going there?
00:06:16.020
So the official line of United States foreign policy, as confusing as it is versus, you know,
00:06:22.420
as it pertains to Taiwan, is that it's an unresolved issue. It's an unresolved issue. It's
00:06:27.720
been unresolved since, you know, it began around 1950.
00:06:31.280
And by unresolved issue, you mean that Taiwan sees itself as independent. China does not see
00:06:36.720
Taiwan as independent. And China kind of wants to take over Taiwan the same way that they took
00:06:41.800
over Hong Kong. And so the U.S. is kind of like, well, we don't know.
00:06:45.860
Right. And, you know, we've been trying to stop Taiwan from actually saying, hey, we're sovereign
00:06:50.440
and declaring independence, even though that's what they want.
00:06:52.840
So when the State Department says, I think you just said the other day, we don't support
00:07:01.860
Yes. But you're not really supposed to say that out in the open like that.
00:07:05.340
That's why it was, you know, labeled strategic ambiguity, because you're not supposed to make
00:07:09.800
a very public statement. When people say, has that basically been the United States? You've
00:07:14.000
probably seen that a lot from people like on social media or whatever. A lot of people were
00:07:18.360
putting out like a quote, said, yeah, that's the way it's been since 1950s.
00:07:22.000
I would say technically, yes, but also more ambiguous. No. Right. I mean, again, think of
00:07:30.780
everything going on with Taiwan as like the most confusing Christopher Nolan movies that
00:07:35.660
we've ever seen. Or, you know, like we're like, wait, this could be taken this way. It
00:07:39.460
could be taken that way. China's one China policy. Right. That is Christopher Nolan's
00:07:45.280
inception. Our treaties and our foreign relations and how we deal with them.
00:07:50.940
That's interstellar, which for me was even more confusing than inception. And then who
00:07:56.780
actually holds claim to the island of Taiwan period, whether it's, you know, the Republic
00:08:01.720
of China, which we can get into that later, which is Taiwan, or if it's China itself, you
00:08:07.060
know, that's Tenet, basically. And it's all confusing and no one understands. But I think
00:08:11.240
a good way to start with is just kind of go back into the history, like why this is coming
00:08:16.260
to a head now. But basically, the thing between Taiwan and China is the maybe the only unresolved
00:08:23.580
civil war that's still going on. Of course, when Mao overthrew the Republic of China, you
00:08:29.960
know, back in the 50s, the leadership just picked up left as they were getting beat back
00:08:36.120
and driven to the shore, hopped on boats and went to Taiwan. So the current government in
00:08:41.820
Taiwan has its roots from the civil war, the government that Mao kicked out. And now they're
00:08:47.340
on Taiwan. So you can see why this is very symbolic to China, they never finished the job,
00:08:52.420
right? This would be like if General Lee and our civil war didn't give up and said, No, screw you
00:08:58.120
guys, we're going to keep fighting. And we're going to take the United States back one day, and
00:09:03.000
went to the island of Cuba, and just set up and they continue to call themselves the United States
00:09:08.720
of America, or the Confederates of America, or whatever. And it was still frozen to this
00:09:13.940
Right. Okay. That's a good comparison to kind of help people understand what's really going
00:09:18.420
on. And some people don't even know what Mao's Cultural Revolution was. I know it's hard to
00:09:22.660
sum up in a sentence, but can you just talk about what it was and why there is still so much
00:09:29.560
Well, Mao, so Mao basically was, you have to destroy your history, you have to destroy
00:09:39.280
everything, all your values, everything that made you who you were, and you have to be brought
00:09:43.600
up in this mold of communism. So everything culturally identifiable to them at the time,
00:09:50.980
they completely destroyed. The people that left Taiwan that were fighting against that,
00:09:55.940
they were the ones that were, you know, alive during this area, they were the ones that were
00:10:00.620
I'm not going to go to bat for the Republic of China, because I'm sure they, you know,
00:10:04.060
the people that left and went to Taiwan, because, you know, I'm sure they did a lot of messed
00:10:07.600
up things too. But those were the people that were around in that era, and then left.
00:10:11.620
Yeah. Mao was a communist in the 20th century, and his Cultural Revolution was basically trying
00:10:16.360
to implement communism everywhere. That and the whole Great Leap Forward killed tens of millions
00:10:21.420
of people, not just by killing dissidents, as totalitarians always do, but also through
00:10:26.760
famine. So the people that went to Taiwan were kind of rebelling against that communist revolution.
00:10:33.100
And those tensions are still there today, because, of course, the Chinese Communist Party is still
00:10:38.020
communist and still holds on to a lot of Mao's values, right? So they see Taiwan as a threat.
00:10:44.480
Sure. Yeah, an actual threat, and a symbolic threat, because they never actually got it done.
00:10:50.000
China. China's one China policy is very interesting to me, too, because everyone has a different kind
00:10:56.300
of description for it. And you've even seen that from US leaders, as far as people in Taiwan. So
00:11:01.260
Taiwan and China, they don't recognize each other as actual governments. Taiwan doesn't see the PRC
00:11:06.360
as an actual government, you know, government, the people in control of China. And China, likewise,
00:11:11.440
does not recognize the Republic of China, Taiwan. So when they say one China, and this was even said way
00:11:19.220
back in the day, when, when Nixon, and then Carter, and then it was solidified, you know, in 1979,
00:11:24.960
with the Taiwan Relations Act, that look, everyone agrees that there is one China, that Taiwan, people
00:11:32.480
in Taiwan, and the people of China are the same people, and that there can't be more than one China.
00:11:37.800
But the problem is that the wording on our end is very ambiguous, because we're not really saying
00:11:43.700
that the people in Taiwan aren't the legitimate government, even though we've told China that we
00:11:49.520
say that the PRC is the legitimate government of China. Taiwan thinks that, yes, there is one China,
00:11:56.300
they agree, but they think that they are the ones that you know, it is so convoluted, and it's so
00:12:02.260
confusing. And that's exactly the way they've kind of wanted it to be. Yeah. That's why when you have
00:12:07.980
like the, you know, the State Department coming out and saying, no, we do not, you know, support
00:12:13.240
sovereignty, we don't support independence in Taiwan. That's when you come out and say it so bluntly,
00:12:18.340
you're basically agreeing with the People's Republic of China, with the Chinese Communist Party.
00:12:23.220
So what's stopping China from just taking over Taiwan the same way that they took over Hong Kong
00:12:39.060
a couple years ago? So Newt Gingrich went in 1997. China did not like it then. But they didn't have
00:12:46.160
the military capability to do it. They still don't really have the military capability to do it, or
00:12:50.940
they would. They're on a, they're on a timeline to eventually get everything they want. They were
00:12:57.500
on a timeline to take back Hong Kong. And a lot of people were saying, hey, you know, this is
00:13:02.440
outrageous, you know, it's supposed to be two parties, you know, or two systems, you know, one
00:13:06.620
country. True. But in the agreement with Hong Kong, it was always that China would take full control
00:13:11.960
eventually. There was I can't remember how many decades it was until the two systems was just going to
00:13:17.640
be thrown out the door. China just accelerated it because they're more in a position to accelerate
00:13:22.100
right now. The thing with Pelosi that really pisses me off is, is that now, since China's growing in
00:13:29.160
their military, military capability and economic power, they're accelerating the timeline with Taiwan.
00:13:35.740
So when you when you asked me earlier about, you know, why Pelosi's visit was so important or so
00:13:43.200
damaging. That's one of them. You're accelerating a timeline, which is going to be painful. You know,
00:13:47.920
it's people will die when this happens. She's accelerating that time. And we don't even know
00:13:52.940
if, you know, why is Pelosi even doing this? Yeah. Is it purely legacy? Because I remember it was back
00:13:58.520
in the this was right after Tiananmen Square. Remember, she did this big public member that
00:14:03.180
unfurled that thing. Well, I saw a clip that was going around recently. And I think that was
00:14:07.800
people were trying to say, look, she's always been an ally of Taiwan. This is her taking a stand
00:14:12.260
against the CCP, which, look, I'm for taking a stand against the CCP. And if that's what it was
00:14:18.240
for, I'd be happy, I guess that, you know, for that kind of courage. But it's hard for me to believe
00:14:25.380
that someone who has sold out the United States so consistently to the CCP in a variety of ways,
00:14:31.700
economically and so on, that she would really be taking the stand out of sheer bravery and virtue.
00:14:37.180
Right. And that's, that's the left in a nutshell, right? They, they put this mask of virtue on,
00:14:42.580
but what are they doing behind the scenes? And we know what the Pelosi's do behind the scenes. That's
00:14:46.080
what makes this, this is almost like the Biden's, you know, when they talk about, you know, again,
00:14:52.720
being virtuous or just be, you know, having, you know, the country's interests in mind,
00:14:56.940
but you have the president's son flying off with you and doing deals in China,
00:15:00.260
or doing deals in Eastern Europe and all this stuff. They're crony capitalists is what they are.
00:15:05.760
They're everything the left says they hate, but they are the poster childs for this. And Nancy
00:15:09.780
Pelosi is one of the worst as well. How are we supposed to know what you really want to do
00:15:13.020
when she was headlining that, that chip act to boost, you know, semiconductor production here
00:15:19.720
in the United States? Yeah. Tell us a little bit more about that, because that's what a lot of
00:15:23.460
people are saying. This is really about. So what does that mean? Well, you know, I don't know if
00:15:27.980
that was really about, but it definitely looks suspicious, right? I mean, and what is that act?
00:15:32.600
So that's supposed to boost semiconductor production in the United States by granting
00:15:37.200
subsidies to, you know, chip companies here in the United States.
00:15:41.320
What does that have to do with China? Why are people saying that that actually helps
00:15:44.560
China and that this somehow has to do with Pelosi and Taiwan?
00:15:48.280
So Taiwan is by far the biggest semiconductor producer in the United States. So this is,
00:15:54.480
you can see where the conflict of interest start coming in. So there was that very public
00:15:58.180
selling of her husband's when he sold that Nvidia stock took a loss. Nvidia gets all of their chips
00:16:06.980
pretty much from the largest company in Taiwan that makes superconductors. She actually, that was part
00:16:15.620
of her trip is she got a tour of their manufacturing plant like yesterday, hours ago, I guess.
00:16:23.080
So this could be about making her and her husband more money.
00:16:27.240
It could be. We don't know. And when they're so, when it's that corrupt and that's, you know,
00:16:33.180
it's, it's that crony-ish, if that's a word, you don't know what their true motivations are.
00:16:38.240
What we do know is they've made tens and tens of millions of dollars, the Pelosi family,
00:16:42.640
by gaming the system, right? I mean, this, this is what we hate about government, right? It's like
00:16:47.720
when, when they claimed to be for everyone, but they all become multimillionaires when they were
00:16:53.420
just regular people, when they first got into office, you know, it's, it's bull is, is what it
00:16:57.700
is. Yeah. But, but we don't know, right? So like, she's either chasing a legacy or just doing photo
00:17:03.020
ops like she did in Tiananmen Square. Maybe this was her last hurrah, you know, because she's, what is
00:17:08.400
she, 81 or something like that? Maybe this is her last legacy defining moment. You know, when I stood up
00:17:13.400
to China, even though you're accelerating a timeline and making it, making military conflict
00:17:19.560
closer. Yeah. That's the danger we're talking about. And all for a photo op or for what stock?
00:17:24.720
Yeah. More stocks. And Taiwan seems eager to welcome her. Also Pelosi, she wrote or someone
00:17:32.200
wrote for her an op ed in the Washington Post. And I'll just get your reaction to what she says.
00:17:38.460
It's a little bit different than how you're describing it. She says that the Taiwan Relations Act
00:17:42.580
set out America's commitment to a democratic Taiwan, providing the framework for an economic
00:17:47.120
and diplomatic relationship that would quickly flourish into a key partnership. It fostered a
00:17:51.400
deep friendship rooted in shared interests and values. And she says yet disturbingly, this vibrant,
00:17:57.640
robust democracy is under threat. In recent years, Beijing has dramatically intensified tensions with
00:18:03.080
Taiwan. They've ramped up patrols of bombers, fighter jets, surveillance aircraft near and even over
00:18:09.460
Taiwan's air defense zone. In the face of the CCP's accelerating aggression, our congressional
00:18:14.440
delegations visit should be seen as an unequivocal statement that America stands with Taiwan, our
00:18:19.320
democratic partner, as it defends itself and its freedom. So that's why she says that she's going.
00:18:25.680
Well, so Taiwan Relations Act, like I said, was very, very confusing. It was very confusing on purpose.
00:18:31.840
They were not a democracy when we did that act. That came later in the timeline. I think the only
00:18:41.080
reason, really, the only reason that we had to do it is because the Soviet Union was around at the
00:18:46.160
time and we were fighting a cold war against the Soviet Union. We wanted, it was not only, again,
00:18:52.160
symbolic, but it was also very strategic to have the other largest communist, you know, entity in the
00:18:58.160
world, China opposed to the Soviet Union. So that was a big ally. That's why Nixon began it in the
00:19:03.440
early 70s. It's why Carter continued it. That was a huge shift in global geopolitics when we brought
00:19:09.600
the Chinese in with us against the Soviet Union. That was the only reason we continued to, you know,
00:19:16.560
try and deal with Taiwan. And before that, it was because we supported the Republic of China.
00:19:21.960
We did not support communist Mao. Um, that was the, it was practical geopolitics. It had nothing to do
00:19:29.140
about feelings and it had nothing to do with, you know, setting a framework for democracy in Taiwan
00:19:33.920
had nothing to do with that. And this is a problem with things that remain that are old, like the
00:19:39.740
Taiwan Relations Act. Um, and it's, you saw this, you know, in the, in the breakout of World War I,
00:19:45.680
old treaties, old alliances will bring larger conflicts later in line when things change.
00:19:51.960
The world is not what the world was after World War II. The world is much different.
00:19:57.240
Um, and another example, and we might've talked about this before, but Japan, there's no reason
00:20:01.940
why Japan should still be under a constitution, you know, clause or amendment that says they can't
00:20:08.000
build up their military more that we imposed them on them. MacArthur supervised that they should
00:20:13.660
get rid of that. It's a legacy of World War II. They should be the ones countering China
00:20:18.540
and offering friendship and protection to Taiwan. They're right there. They're in the region. That
00:20:25.160
should not be us. Yeah. We should not be responsible to grant security for a country
00:20:30.720
that's what? 10,000 miles away. That should not be us. If you want to see, and you, you asked a good
00:20:36.760
question before, why doesn't China, why haven't they just done this already? You know, and why do they
00:20:41.880
think they can do it now? Well, they're pretty much at the point where they can make a significant
00:20:46.940
case that they can pull this off. And that is, you know, take Taiwan. How can we really defend
00:20:53.000
them? And the answer is we could have back then, you know, after World War II or during the Cold
00:20:57.900
War, we could have back then. Right now, I don't know if we could, we could put up a good fight,
00:21:03.040
but you're looking at a country that's right next door to the other country that might invade them.
00:21:08.100
How are we going to cross six to 10,000 miles and put up an adequate defense on that? The world is
00:21:13.900
not the same. It's different. Yeah. And we should not be acting the same way we were post-World War II
00:21:18.760
or during the Cold War, post, in the immediate years post-Cold War, of being the security grantor
00:21:24.320
for all these people. Like, it really shouldn't be our job. And it even says in the documentation
00:21:30.100
in the Taiwan Relations Act and all the other communicators during the time that, look, this
00:21:34.780
is a problem that you, between Chinese people, Chinese people need to figure this out. Chinese
00:21:39.720
people in Taiwan, Chinese people in mainland China. This is something you guys need to figure
00:21:43.480
out. Our security grantee said, look, all we're saying is, we don't think that it should be
00:21:48.580
core, you know, kinetic coercion. It shouldn't be violent. There shouldn't be violence. There
00:21:54.620
shouldn't be blockades, none of that stuff. Then we'll come in and help you if it happens. But you
00:21:59.260
need to figure that out. Problem is, they're just never going to figure it out. Eventually,
00:22:04.240
it will come down to them, whether militarily or I can't think of any other way they would. But,
00:22:09.460
you know, the two brothers are going to have to fight it out, probably, and figure it out
00:22:13.080
themselves. But the United States should not be the ones, you know, based off of an old treaty
00:22:17.820
that says, hey, we're going to go in. And remember, this goes back to the Soviet Union and us fighting
00:22:24.100
the Soviet Union. How ridiculous is it now that this is leading our foreign policy between China
00:22:28.780
Taiwan now? It's insane. And China is obviously upset by this. They said that they're running
00:22:35.780
targeted drills, missile tests around Taiwan in response to Pelosi's visit, said that these
00:22:41.380
operations are designed to safeguard national sovereignty. China vowed to resolutely thwart
00:22:46.720
external interference in Taiwan's independence and separatist attempts. 21 aircraft entered
00:22:53.440
Taiwan's air defense zone. U.S. officials have decided this is all according to Politico,
00:22:59.180
have decided that China's threats are nothing more than an intimidation tactic. But the Pentagon
00:23:03.360
did deploy four U.S. warships, including an aircraft carrier in waters of East Taiwan. I mean,
00:23:09.780
are we looking at a provocation of war with China? Because that kind of freaks me out.
00:23:15.560
Yeah. The military exercises by China is pretty much what I expected. I didn't think that they
00:23:21.460
were going to do anything to Pelosi, the plane, or even start actually firing missiles or anything.
00:23:28.300
They're not quite ready to do that. This is what they want to do, but they're not quite ready.
00:23:35.380
I think that they'd be willing to do it over Taiwan because of the symbolic nature of it.
00:23:40.340
But the U.S. should not be willing to do it, is what you're arguing.
00:23:43.260
No, no, no, no. The U.S. is not in a position to carry that out.
00:23:47.320
And I'm sure there's going to be tons of people that will disagree with me on that.
00:23:50.540
Do you feel the same way with Russia and Ukraine?
00:23:54.400
Yeah, absolutely. I do agree that the world is changing. People need to come to that agreement
00:24:05.400
And that we should not be going around, as you said, being the safeguards for countries that
00:24:13.640
Right. We shouldn't be the granter of security for all these people anymore.
00:24:16.420
That is not the world, even though all these people, and you'll hear it from foreign policy
00:24:20.800
experts on mainstream media, they're still talking as if it is 1985 or the end of the Cold War,
00:24:31.480
That's right and left. Exactly right. We are not that country. The world is not that world.
00:24:38.160
China is more than capable of trying to do this and probably can do this. We are not capable
00:24:45.460
of responding to everything else that is going on in the world and coming out victorious everywhere.
00:24:52.980
We're just not. Like I said, it's not a unipolar world anymore where the United States is the
00:24:56.660
sole superpower capable of pretty much doing whatever they want to do with no other country
00:25:02.860
Some of these countries now are capable of responding. Some of these countries are forming
00:25:06.580
other alliances, you know, to counter us. And they're more than capable of doing it.
00:25:14.400
And that's the reality. And really, that's pretty much where it should be. There shouldn't
00:25:18.820
be one nation in the world running off to take care of all these problems. Other countries
00:25:26.120
can take care of their own problems. We've got plenty of problems we have here at home that
00:25:42.460
And America is not what it was in 1985. I'm not even sure there's a will to be that country
00:25:48.400
that's running around to other countries. And I'm not sure if our military has the capability
00:25:53.700
or the willpower. I mean, think about the cultural rot that has infected a lot of the
00:25:58.620
military, even though a lot of them are still some of the best people in the country. I mean,
00:26:03.080
I also doubt our capability to do the things that it seems like our elected officials want
00:26:09.280
us to do, which is, as you said, be the guarantors of safety and security for the world. I just
00:26:13.860
I'm not sure that we can even do it if we wanted to.
00:26:17.120
It's funny you say that, because yesterday I was watching all the developments going on. And there was
00:26:21.980
one article that popped up, you know, in my feed that said, you know, the United States Air Force
00:26:26.000
is, you know, ready and willing to respond if needed. Very second article I saw said,
00:26:33.040
U.S. Air Force host drag queen story hour on base, blah, blah, blah. I was like, are you kidding me
00:26:41.880
Because, I mean, who wants to enter the military as I mean, they're so often working class young
00:26:48.980
men, very often young white men who are now hearing from top officials in the military that
00:26:55.900
they are going to be analyzing and dismantling what they see as white rage and toxic masculinity
00:27:01.600
in the patriarchy. I mean, who wants to serve that country? Who wants to serve that military?
00:27:05.560
It's sad. I just want to get your quick reaction analysis to the Al-Qaeda leader,
00:27:11.560
Ayman al-Zawahari, that was apparently killed by U.S. forces. Is this a win? What do you think?
00:27:23.040
So you can take a win from that. One of the, that definitely deserves to be a headline. But there
00:27:29.220
needs to be another headline right next to that headline that says Al-Qaeda reestablishes
00:27:33.900
his base of operations in Afghanistan, which I did not really see that, I don't think at
00:27:39.560
all, right after that happened. This guy got killed in a posh neighborhood in Kabul, the
00:27:46.420
capital. Not in some deserted farmhouse, you know, out in a desert somewhere where, you
00:27:54.020
know, he was trying to hide. He was not trying to hide, right? Who was he meeting with when
00:27:59.140
he was there? Was he meeting with the Taliban defense secretary or whatever he's called?
00:28:05.800
Was he meeting with the other radical, Al-Qaeda is radical enough, but the more radical militant
00:28:12.080
arm of Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan called the Haqqani Network? Was he meeting with them? Probably.
00:28:17.080
Yeah, probably. What a tragedy. Everything that we fought to get rid of.
00:28:23.680
What a tragedy in that. Al-Qaeda is now back in the capital of Afghanistan and operating
00:28:30.940
so openly. That's insane. Much thanks to our disastrous policy and pull out last year,
00:28:39.280
a year ago. I guess it was a year ago now. Right. Yeah. Yeah, exactly. A year ago. Yeah.
00:28:43.640
And I think pretty much everyone agreed that we needed to get out of there. We needed to pull
00:28:48.180
out. That was not the question. The question was how we did it. Yeah. And the way they did it,
00:28:52.940
it looked as if the Biden administration was doing it again as a symbolic something for his,
00:29:00.680
for Biden's legacy or for the Democrats. It was almost like they were looking for some kind of
00:29:04.700
political win or something like that and forced this issue way too early. And strategically,
00:29:11.940
I can't even imagine how our military generals signed off on what went down. Just catastrophic,
00:29:18.820
absolutely catastrophic. But yeah, the killing of the Al-Qaeda leader, like I said, I'm glad he's
00:29:25.140
dead. He was a bad guy. A new leader will rise up. They probably already declared who that is.
00:29:31.260
And they're still operating out of Afghanistan as if it was the year 2000, which is just insane.
00:29:37.540
Yeah, just insane. Give us an updated analysis of what's going on between Ukraine and Russia,
00:29:43.980
if you can. A lot of people saw and were very put off by, to say the least, the Vogue spread
00:29:50.580
of Zelensky and his wife. It just seemed a little out of touch.
00:29:59.120
There was the most ridiculous photo in that spread. They were all ridiculous, right? But the worst one
00:30:05.120
was she was like in this like very expensive coat, you know, and she was like gazing off into the
00:30:09.740
distance. And there was like this war-torn scene behind her and a couple of troops, you know,
00:30:14.460
looking off in different directions. I was like, how ridiculous was that photo shoot? They basically
00:30:18.640
went out to some place. I'm sure it was safe wherever they were at or she wouldn't be there.
00:30:22.620
But they brought in these soldiers to be like prop pieces and like, hey, take some time off the war
00:30:27.960
just so you can pose here with the first lady or whatever she's called over there. Absolutely
00:30:31.220
ridiculous. Totally tone deaf. But he's a showman, right? Zelensky, which is kind of funny now because
00:30:36.120
the mainstream media is starting to criticize him a little bit. Yeah, I think I've seen a
00:30:40.940
couple of things. I haven't really looked deeply into it because I've kind of been, you know,
00:30:46.940
about it for the past few months. But I have kind of noticed that some mainstream outlets have
00:30:52.400
criticized him a little. Well, now it's now it's back in style that you can acknowledge the fact
00:30:57.260
that Ukraine's an incredibly corrupt country. Yeah, all of a sudden, which is weird, because we've
00:31:01.040
given Ukraine a blank check. Like, how many times you hear Biden? Okay, another 500 million
00:31:05.440
dollars. Like what? I think just yesterday I saw tens of millions of dollars. And I've heard
00:31:10.060
from Ukrainians, actually, that the money is just being laundered. I think it was Ron Paul. I'm going
00:31:15.320
to butcher the quote, but he said foreign aid is money sent from poor people in rich countries to
00:31:22.000
rich people in poor countries. And that seems to be what's happening here, as it happens in most cases
00:31:26.780
when we send tens of millions of dollars to these poor war-torn countries in the name of compassion.
00:31:33.080
Every time you hear about another several million or billion dollars going to Ukraine right now,
00:31:39.020
everyone should Google $1.8 billion goes missing or whatever in Ukraine, $1.8 billion of aid. And
00:31:46.820
this was after 2014. After that, you know, their little revolution, we gave them $1.8 billion.
00:31:52.640
It went missing out of their state bank, Privat Bank. And then they think that it got laundered
00:31:57.420
through Cyprus and other shell companies. But we continue to give them money. But I think it's
00:32:01.760
funny now, though. But now they're bringing that up. They stopped talking about that, Ali,
00:32:05.520
when the president's son, then vice president's son, started dipping his toes into some of that
00:32:10.560
corruption through burisma and all that. Then they didn't want to talk about it. They didn't
00:32:13.940
want to talk about it. And as Biden was running for president, they definitely didn't want to talk
00:32:16.860
about it. They were shutting down articles, the New York Post laptop article. They were shutting down
00:32:21.160
some of these articles to expose some of that involvement. But now, as we kind of see people are
00:32:26.860
turning against Biden, now they're turning on the lights again. Now they're like, oh, maybe we can't talk
00:32:31.120
about this stuff again. Maybe we can't bring that up. But the situation in Ukraine is interesting
00:32:35.800
because Russia has... Economically, they're not in a great spot. To be a great power...
00:32:45.040
To be a great power, you need to have a strong economy, you have a strong military. They don't
00:32:48.520
have a strong economy, but they were banking on that they had this strong military and the
00:32:53.060
world perceived them as being strong militarily. And that is completely thrown out the window
00:32:58.800
in Ukraine. They did not look like a professional military force at all. They had basic problems.
00:33:03.860
They did not, you know, for the military people listening to this right now, combined arms and
00:33:09.140
their ability to execute combined arms. That's, you know, troops on the ground, artillery, planes,
00:33:15.140
all that stuff, make it work cohesive. They did not do that at all, as if they'd never even
00:33:21.020
They had, you know, conscripts out on the front lines, just kind of walking around aimlessly.
00:33:25.440
They got their butts kicked in the beginning of this war. They really did. It was a, they
00:33:28.820
wanted to do a shock and awe, you know, thing, and they got their butts kicked and they got
00:33:32.360
driven all the way back to the areas where they kind of pretty much already controlled
00:33:37.300
So what's happening right now and how is it going to resolve? Is it going to be resolved?
00:33:42.080
Yeah. Russia, if they wanted to, could really make their country suffer and just put overwhelming,
00:33:49.880
you know, numbers at this and possibly come out more on top than they are right now. I don't know.
00:33:55.400
That's, that's a big if because they're already running out of munitions, like smart munitions,
00:34:00.660
things like that. And then people are just kind of getting pissed off and just annoyed with it,
00:34:04.200
I think. But the West United States has provided a lot of weapons, a lot of good weapons,
00:34:10.460
smart weapons, effective weapons that they're at least showing that, Hey, if you want to stick
00:34:16.960
around for this for a while, we're going to make this as painful as possible for you. I still think
00:34:21.820
that this ends in some kind of treaty that helps Putin save face, but it's going to give Ukraine
00:34:30.700
some relief, but they're not going to be completely happy with it. So it's going to be something where,
00:34:36.140
you know, they agree to seed Eastern Ukraine or formally say, okay, fine, you have Crimea or
00:34:42.340
something like that, where Putin can say, see, our special military operation worked, we got what we
00:34:47.040
wanted, I gave you what we delivered. But that is not at all what he wanted. He wanted Ukraine,
00:34:53.200
he wanted to topple the government, he's not going to get that. So in my opinion, eventually,
00:34:59.500
and I hate making predictions. But I think the, the most plausible outcome would be that they
00:35:05.320
maintain control of that little sliver in Eastern Ukraine, and they formally get, you know, seeded
00:35:11.500
Well, to bring our focus back home, just really quickly, just because I wanted to cover this today,
00:35:26.920
and I want to get your reaction to it. You mentioned earlier that we've got a lot of problems to be
00:35:33.560
fixing and addressing here. One of those problems is, of course, George Soros, and his attempt to
00:35:39.500
quote, unquote, reform prosecutors. I don't know if you saw that he wrote an op ed in the Wall Street
00:35:44.620
Journal. And he said, people have had enough of the demagoguery and divisive partisan attacks that
00:35:49.840
dominate the debate and obscure the issues. Gosh, just makes me roll my eyes. The system is rife with
00:35:54.740
injustices that make us all less safe. The idea that we need to choose between justice and safety is
00:36:00.800
false. So basically, what he's talking about here, he's addressing the criticism that, of course,
00:36:05.500
he and his foundations have gotten for funding these progressive DAs in these blue cities that are not
00:36:12.560
prosecuting crimes, that are allowing people back into the streets, pretty much based on their skin
00:36:18.460
color. They're meeting these arbitrary quotas and saying, OK, we've arrested too many black people this
00:36:23.500
year. We're not going to arrest. We're not going to prosecute. We're not going to keep them in jail,
00:36:27.420
basically catch and release. And the recidivism rate, of course, is very high. People are being murdered.
00:36:32.640
I see stories every day. People are being murdered by someone who should have been in jail if our
00:36:38.160
justice system worked. And a lot of this is due to the funding of George Soros of these progressive
00:36:43.400
DAs. And so basically, he's saying, look, I'm not going to stop. I'm not going to stop doing this,
00:36:48.640
even though in the cities with the top 10 cities with the most murders per capita, if you look at the
00:36:55.500
politics of the district attorneys, they are all Democrat. The mayor is Democrat, even if the states are
00:37:01.900
Republican, St. Louis, Baltimore, Birmingham, Detroit, Dayton, Ohio, Baton Rouge, New Orleans,
00:37:07.420
Kansas City, Memphis, Cleveland, all run by Democrats, many of them funded by George Soros.
00:37:12.940
He's not going to stop. I mean, if anyone cared about this country who is in charge,
00:37:18.000
what he's doing would be barred, prohibited, illegal. But it's not. What's your take on all of this?
00:37:23.900
Yeah, it's absolutely insane. Think about any other country. How would they react if a foreign
00:37:28.400
billionaire goes around basically inciting chaos on your largest cities? Right. How would they react?
00:37:37.420
We can barely even discuss this, like this conversation right now. Remember Fox News and
00:37:41.880
Newt Gingrich brought this up and they cut him off? Yes. They cut it. Fox News. Fox News. Fox News
00:37:48.300
said, oh, no, no, no, no. That's a conspiracy theory. I've been told, of course, before, but by
00:37:52.480
left-leaning people, that's an anti-Semitic conspiracy theory. Insane. Yeah. Absolutely
00:37:57.740
insane. I think it was $29 or $30 million, what Soros has spent on some of these district
00:38:03.100
attorneys. It's absolutely ridiculous. In his little op-ed, I mean, it was ripe with just
00:38:11.720
inconsistencies and hypocrisy. Of course. Orwellian, doublespeak. I mean.
00:38:16.880
He was talking about, so he acknowledges mental health, right? So he's like, yeah,
00:38:22.320
mental health issues, you know, and so that's why some of the, you know, there's chaos. Not
00:38:25.760
because of my district attorney is not prosecuting. So mental health is one of the reasons. So the
00:38:31.380
cure for that in his district attorneys is less laws and less action on the streets. But he also
00:38:38.060
mentions gun crime. He mentions, oh, yeah, an overwhelming amount of guns. So more laws for that.
00:38:43.800
He won't acknowledge mental health on some of the, on some of the gun crimes and some of the
00:38:47.720
mass shootings. Where's the consistency there? Right. It's obviously, this is completely partisan.
00:38:54.020
You're trying. So my completely tinfoil hat thing is that he. Is anything even really tinfoil hat
00:39:00.720
anymore? Not anymore. I mean, conspiracies just keep on coming true. They all come true.
00:39:05.260
Eventually it's nuts. But everything that we've already talked about or just hypothesized because
00:39:08.940
some of this stuff doesn't make sense. Yeah. Why would they do this? But like, this does not make
00:39:12.720
sense unless you want the judicial system to completely come crashing down. Of course.
00:39:16.340
You want chaos. You want anarchy. Because why would he be funding that here? He's not an American.
00:39:22.360
Of course, I think that he has an interest in the collapse of America and Western civilization and
00:39:26.720
has for a very long time. He's not funding these progressive DAs. I mean, maybe he is in some other
00:39:32.000
countries, but I don't think that he is funding the same kind of lawlessness in China. So I think
00:39:37.660
someone should ask themselves why here? Yeah. Well, the Chinese system is exactly what they want.
00:39:41.800
It's the same people, the guys over in Davos World Economic Forum. They're all billionaires
00:39:45.100
themselves. They're all the elite of the elite. They've already made their money. They've made
00:39:50.240
their power. Now they want a system like China where you have to have a government official
00:39:54.720
in every single company. You have to have a government. So you want to bring everybody
00:39:58.260
down to parity while you stay at the very, very top. It's the socialist, you know, you know,
00:40:02.640
communist system in a nutshell. But it's different. It's it's more like, you know, 21st century
00:40:07.340
fascism. It's it's it's it's cause chaos. So people can say someone save us government
00:40:12.920
step in and do something and then they take their power and that's it. And give these private
00:40:16.800
companies the illusion that they really own their property and their business when we tell
00:40:21.360
them everything what to do. And equity and social justice is the Trojan horse by which they're
00:40:26.220
accomplishing all of that. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Well, we do have a lot to focus on here in the US. But
00:40:31.860
thank you for giving us an analysis of everything that is going on around the globe. No, it was it
00:40:38.980
was great. I really do appreciate it. Thanks, Jason, so much for coming on. I encourage people to
00:40:43.820
follow you. You're on Twitter and all that good stuff and people can catch you there. Thank you.
00:40:48.680
All right, guys, hope that you enjoyed that explanation from Jason. I told you he breaks
00:41:04.640
it down really well. If you want him to come back on for a part two to kind of get into more detail
00:41:09.400
of anything that we talked about, we had a limited amount of time. There are a million questions I
00:41:13.720
could have asked him. So we'll bring him back if that's something that you that you want us to do.
00:41:18.520
I know you guys love him as a guest tomorrow. We are going to be talking about all of these stories
00:41:24.140
that you are hearing that these women are unable to get miscarriage care. They're unable to get
00:41:30.040
ectopic pregnancy care. I am going to talk to a journalist who just wrote an almost 5000 word piece
00:41:36.940
for national review, looking at each and every abortion law and figuring out whether that law is
00:41:45.980
actually causing this prevention of care or inhibition of care for these women that are suffering
00:41:54.180
from miscarriages or ectopics. And if not, if it's not the law's fault, then what is really going on
00:42:00.220
here? What's going on here with the lawyers, with the doctors, with the hospitals, with the insurance
00:42:06.380
companies? We're going to analyze all of that tomorrow and get a lot of insight and clarity
00:42:10.520
from Alexandra De Sanctis. If you haven't checked out our merch, make sure you do that. We've got
00:42:15.120
lots of fun stuff. We'll include the link in the description today so you can check that out.