The Great America Show - May 29, 2023


WILL U.S. USE NUKES TO DEFEND ALLIES？

Topics
interesting times
Hosted by
Lou Dobbs John Fawcett
Mentioned
Paul Bracken Henry Kissinger Andy Marshall Tom Schelling Herman Cain Albert Rolstetter Tony Blinken Richard Nixon Jake Sullivan Chris Farley Peter Navarro Albert Wilson Austin Scott Biden Obama
The Great America Show Mid-Day Update - May 26, 2023 The Great America Show Mid-Day Update - May 30, 2023

Episode Stats


Length

33 minutes

Words per minute

130.03

Word count

4,366

Sentence count

293

Harmful content

Misogyny

1

sentences flagged

Hate speech

16

sentences flagged


Summary

Summaries generated with gmurro/bart-large-finetuned-filtered-spotify-podcast-summ .

Yale Professor Paul Bracken, author of the book, The Second Nuclear Age, joins us on The Great America Show to talk about the growing threat to U.S. national security from within and without.

Transcript

Transcript generated with Whisper (turbo).
Misogyny classifications generated with MilaNLProc/bert-base-uncased-ear-misogyny .
Hate speech classifications generated with facebook/roberta-hate-speech-dynabench-r4-target .
Topics generated with Qwen2.5-3B-Instruct.
Hosts, guests, and mentioned names generated with spaCy (en_core_web_sm), reconciled against Wikidata.
00:00:00.000 First Republic, PacWest, Silicon Valley Bank, just a few of the latest casualties in the banking crisis.
00:00:06.360 Don't wait for the email reading, sorry, your account has been frozen.
00:00:10.100 Your accounts aren't safe.
00:00:11.480 Call American Alternative Assets at 866-3USA-GOLD to claim your free gold and silver guide today.
00:00:20.780 Once again, call now, 866-387-2465.
00:00:30.000 Hello everybody, I'm Lou Dobbs and welcome to the Great America Show on this Memorial Day holiday.
00:00:36.140 The day in which we honor those members of our military who died in service to the nation.
00:00:41.700 We want to take this moment to thank those American heroes whose sacrifice secured and preserved our liberties in these United States of America.
00:00:51.440 This is, above all else, a day of remembrance.
00:00:54.800 God bless all who have sacrificed all for our constitutional republic and the American way of life.
00:01:01.820 And to all who are serving the nation now in uniform all around the world, we thank you for your service.
00:01:08.780 Today, in my opinion, America faces the most complex range of threats in our history, from both within and without.
00:01:16.220 America is a nation that is without question, in political and societal turmoil, our national security at risk from a failing education system, corrupt government, open borders, the entry of millions of illegal immigrants, and deadly drugs produced by the Mexican drug cartels in league with communist China. 0.96
00:01:38.080 Those drugs kill more Americans than in any war this century. 0.99
00:01:42.380 And then there are the external threats.
00:01:44.840 The Russians are warning the world they may use tactical nuclear weapons against the Ukrainians and implicitly against their allies.
00:01:53.480 The Iranians are seizing ships in the Persian Gulf and advancing rapidly to their goal of having nuclear weapons. 0.89
00:02:00.740 The Chinese will, in a matter of years, have more nuclear warheads than the United States. 0.90
00:02:06.080 And the race for the fastest and most lethal hypersonic missiles is underway, and the United States, by most estimates, lags behind both Russia and China.
00:02:17.560 We face a national security threat.
00:02:20.360 It is immense, and it is immediate.
00:02:23.400 The U.S. military hasn't met its recruiting goals in years.
00:02:27.100 The woke military is losing experience, combat service members, officers, non-commissioned officers, and enlisted.
00:02:34.200 Our military faces shortages of weapons, ammunition, and munitions.
00:02:39.440 And obviously, weak leadership, civilian, and military pose a threat all their own.
00:02:45.600 Our guest today is expert in not only defense and national security, but also technology and the military-industrial complex.
00:02:53.680 Our guest is Yale professor Paul Bracken, who spent much of his academic career thinking about the unthinkable, and he is the author of the book, The Second Nuclear Age.
00:03:04.220 Paul, great to have you with us here on The Great America Show, and thank you for being with us.
00:03:08.680 And now, more than 15 months after the Russian invasion of Ukraine, Paul, the Biden White House is fighting a proxy war against Russia.
00:03:16.980 It's uninterested in a peace deal.
00:03:19.320 China is bolstering Russia's surprisingly weak military.
00:03:23.360 And out of nowhere, it seems a group of African nations is interested in brokering a truce between Russia and Ukraine.
00:03:30.680 How in the world did we get here, Paul?
00:03:32.680 Well, a couple of things going on here.
00:03:35.180 First of all, you see the South Africans selling anything they can to Russia now. 0.76
00:03:41.560 So this idea that we have a global democracy block that's all cooperating in this war isn't exactly the case.
00:03:50.940 But I think the deeper issue here is like we saw with the Chinese trying to start a negotiation, which is it bypasses the United States.
00:03:59.440 We're seeing something which has been long predicted, which is a multiple polar world, many decision-making centers, no longer run by two big powers, no longer run by the United States, as it was for a long time.
00:04:15.380 And I don't think we're prepared for this at all, particularly in the State Department, but also in the Pentagon, because it raises whole new issues about alliances and how solid they really are.
00:04:26.460 You see this in Asia, where I do a lot of work.
00:04:30.620 There's a tremendous skepticism that the United States would come in to defend Taiwan or South Korea or the Australians.
00:04:40.440 That's one of the reasons we did this submarine deal with the Brits. 0.98
00:04:44.780 Remember, we're selling the Australians a nuclear-powered submarine.
00:04:47.800 And they're really demanding, the Asian countries, the ones I just mentioned, are really, what they want is a strengthening of the U.S. nuclear guarantee to them.
00:05:01.480 Because they look at something which does not get the attention that it really needs is this massive Chinese nuclear breakout, where the Chinese in 10 years are going to be at American force levels.
00:05:16.880 And they're asking themselves in Seoul and, you know, in Canberra, will the United States really use nuclear weapons to defend us against China or against North Korea when China has the ability to destroy the United States?
00:05:35.620 And so they're scrambling in Washington, more the Pentagon than any place else, and actually more in Congress, to come up with sort of interim answers to this in the form of theater nuclear weapons.
00:05:49.400 But it's really a big problem, and it ultimately shows the increasing doubt that the United States has either the political will or the military power to defend all of this big world we're in all at the same time.
00:06:07.180 And I think they're also irritated at our rhetoric, which promises all these things.
00:06:13.820 But when it comes to actual behavior and taking actions, they just don't see it.
00:06:19.400 The uncertainty, the tensions are palpable, because China is asserting itself, obviously, and in direct conflict with India, which a lot of people are not thinking about.
00:06:34.680 But here are the two largest countries in the world that are straining at one another and creating another, if you will, problem for a world that hardly needs another.
00:06:47.460 Right. One of the things that has happened is that the U.S. has tried to make strategic deals with India, particularly on the intelligence and reconnaissance fronts.
00:07:00.880 So this is not getting a lot of attention.
00:07:06.060 But look, India has a nuclear force, and they're modernizing it.
00:07:10.980 If we ask ourselves, why has the Ukrainian military been so effective?
00:07:16.260 The answer is because they're killing so many Russians with highly targeted missile attacks.
00:07:22.360 And where do they get that information?
00:07:25.180 It has to be from the United States.
00:07:27.380 So the potential for the United States to transfer information, targeting information to India to make life very difficult for the Chinese and to create a separate front so that China can't put all of their energy against Taiwan. 0.65
00:07:45.600 But they have to worry about what's happening, you know, over the Himalayan mountains.
00:07:51.640 Let me point out something here that most people have forgotten.
00:07:55.860 And it's that when Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger went to Beijing in 1972, Henry had in his briefcase the beyond top secret documents that he collected from the Pentagon
00:08:11.440 about the location of every Soviet nuclear weapon east of the Ural Mountains with their longitudes, their latitudes.
00:08:20.500 He had maps, detailed descriptions.
00:08:24.000 He got this information to give it as a gift to the Chinese in a meeting held in the Great Wall at the Great Hall of the People.
00:08:31.240 And this bolstered Chinese military capability tremendously overnight because they had no idea where the Russian nuclear weapons were.
00:08:42.640 U.S.-Indian cooperation, I think, is moving in that direction.
00:08:50.120 U.S.-Indian cooperation, people don't want it to move too fast, but it's moving in that direction.
00:08:56.740 And you're going to see in the next few years three nuclear superpowers with possibly India joining this club. 0.53
00:09:06.260 India is the only country in the world that has ICBMs, MIRV warheads.
00:09:12.000 These are warheads.
00:09:12.900 You can put 10 warheads on a single missile, and they can really change the nuclear balance with respect to China.
00:09:22.240 So it's a very different world we're going into.
00:09:25.620 We're used to one of two nuclear superpowers.
00:09:29.640 We have three today, and I'm arguing you may see a fourth in the form of India. 1.00
00:09:36.040 And just imagine a Cuban missile crisis with three or four countries in it.
00:09:42.000 I mean, this has huge implications because there's another technological trend I don't think people pay enough attention to.
00:09:51.040 And that's that you can destroy an enemy's nuclear forces with conventional warheads now because they're so accurate.
00:10:00.700 And this makes life very potentially dangerous for any country with a small nuclear force.
00:10:07.620 I don't know how we're going to handle this, but this goes into this soup of technological political complexity that we're going to be working out for many years to come.
00:10:20.700 You've been a visiting scholar at the CIA, Beijing University.
00:10:27.240 Give us a sense of your judgment of the two bureaucracies, if you would.
00:10:36.400 Just your own personal sense about their effectiveness, their commitment, their capacity.
00:10:41.960 Well, the Chinese are highly focused, in a way that the Pentagon is not, on Taiwan, essentially.
00:10:51.960 This makes life a lot easier for them, number one.
00:10:56.060 Number two, the other thing we have to understand is that China was able to skip a generation of innovation that the U.S. did not skip.
00:11:06.660 If we're still pouring billions of dollars into maintaining armies, ships, airplanes, stuff like that, China is cutting the size of their mass infantry army.
00:11:20.300 And they skip the generation of tanks, radars, aircraft, jet fighters, stealth, to pour it into cyber warfare, to pour it into hypersonic missiles, to pour it into AI.
00:11:35.940 But to get to the heart of your question, I don't think the Chinese have thought through how they're going to use this in a real crisis or a real war. 0.87
00:11:50.220 We learned in the Cold War that what we thought was going to happen didn't happen.
00:11:56.780 That is to say, the problem wasn't surprise attack by the nuclear Soviet Union. 0.68
00:12:02.720 The problem was how to fight a limited war in Korea, then Vietnam, and what role nuclear weapons played in that.
00:12:12.720 OK, so I don't think China has really thought about that very much.
00:12:18.080 And I wish they would, because it's very dangerous.
00:12:21.940 China has now the ability to go on nuclear alert, DEFCON 2, the way the U.S. did in the Cuban crisis. 0.51
00:12:30.200 And this means flying around dozens or even hundreds of hydrogen bombs on airplanes, putting them on these reefs, which they fully intend to do, these artificial islands they've been building. 0.67
00:12:48.300 Right.
00:12:48.380 So they're climbing a learning curve to get to the United States side.
00:12:53.760 The way I see it, we've climbed this learning curve 40 years ago, but we're now going down a learning curve because we've forgotten about the existence of nuclear weapons.
00:13:07.720 That China will use these to threaten us, to get us to pull the Seventh Fleet back to Hawaii because we can't risk it, because it's vulnerable to nuclear attack. 0.67
00:13:23.000 And I don't see the Pentagon really taking this seriously.
00:13:27.540 They play war games with respect to defending Taiwan, but there's no nuclear play in it at all.
00:13:37.320 It's as if it's a force on force, almost an academic model.
00:13:43.580 When in the reality, as in the Cuban Missile Crisis, you'll see leaders in probably all countries be scared to death of an escalation.
00:13:53.600 And that can be used very effectively if the other side is more frightened of nuclear war than you are.
00:13:59.440 We'll be right back with Paul Bracken.
00:14:01.380 Stay with us.
00:14:05.780 This is a warning, my fellow Americans.
00:14:08.220 The news just broke and it's grim.
00:14:10.500 The banking collapse of 2023 is now more devastating than the banking collapse of 2008.
00:14:17.500 First Republic, PacWest, Silicon Bank, just a few of the latest casualties in this banking crisis.
00:14:24.280 And don't wait for the email reading, quote,
00:14:26.660 Sorry, your account has been frozen, end quote.
00:14:29.860 Take action now to protect what we've all worked so hard to build.
00:14:34.160 Believe me, you can protect your wealth by utilizing a straightforward tax loophole that's entirely legal.
00:14:40.720 Call my friends at American Alternative Assets.
00:14:43.680 Ask them for your free wealth protection guide.
00:14:46.340 Call 866-3-USA-GOLD.
00:14:50.840 That's right.
00:14:51.440 Call now.
00:14:52.580 866-386-2465.
00:14:57.020 This invaluable guide will outline the precise steps you need to take immediately to transfer your IRA or 401k into precious metals, all without tax consequence.
00:15:08.020 Call American Alternative Assets at 866-3-USA-GOLD to claim your free gold and silver guide today.
00:15:18.040 Once again, call now.
00:15:20.200 866-387-2465.
00:15:24.300 We're back now talking with Professor Paul Bracken.
00:15:29.000 Paul, I want to go to the issue of the Pentagon, not considering some of the imponderables, but imponderables that you do take into account and give great thought to.
00:15:44.640 And that is the multi-polar war.
00:15:48.580 Yes, that's where I think we're going.
00:15:50.740 Right.
00:15:51.820 And the problem that countries will have will be managing this.
00:15:56.500 What do I mean?
00:15:57.260 I mean, not letting China get too far ahead of us, bringing allies along who need the technology.
00:16:07.440 That would be India and, to some extent, South Korea, bringing the European Union along, both in terms of their nuclear forces in France and Britain, but also in terms of their just their general technology.
00:16:24.800 So it's kind of a very complicated management problem so that not one set of powers gets too far out in front of the other where they might exploit it for military purposes.
00:16:40.880 This national security team that you referenced earlier, and we're talking about Anthony Blinken, Secretary of State, Jake Sullivan, the national security advisors and their cohorts, are, I think, by even the left considered not top rate in terms of talent or experience.
00:17:03.240 We have a president that is woe-begone.
00:17:08.140 He is impaired.
00:17:10.560 He is compromised in the minds of most and highly ineffective, except in destructive direction and initiatives.
00:17:21.760 What are we to do when you have a second-rate national security team and a president who is effectively a non-entity?
00:17:31.600 Yeah, there's a tough question, but I believe some people are asking it in Washington, which is to say, what would we do if we got into a really serious crisis?
00:17:47.720 Which one thing we have not gotten into is like a crisis that could seemingly go all the way.
00:17:55.240 And there's not really a lot you can do in the bureaucracy without challenging civilian control of the military.
00:18:05.000 So it's sort of pockets of people that I talk to who are very concerned about this, but they really don't know what to do.
00:18:14.680 They don't see it getting any better, and it may get worse if there is another team, the replacement team for a second Biden administration.
00:18:27.400 You know, heaven only knows what that would bring.
00:18:30.920 Let me just say it, because people won't.
00:18:33.280 But they are afraid of a nuclear version of the exit from Afghanistan.
00:18:39.580 In other words, a crisis where you have to take important decisions in a very short period of time.
00:18:47.620 You don't have time to study it.
00:18:51.220 And you put an overlay of nuclear weapons on it or major military clashes of a kind we would see in a war between China and the United States.
00:19:03.280 And the Afghan Taliban could not really shoot back. 0.98
00:19:09.840 We're now dealing in this multipolar world with countries who can shoot back.
00:19:16.520 And I just I find a lot of concern that we're not taking this problem on head on.
00:19:22.100 You know, I have to say you're scaring the hell out of me just to contemplate this this president, this commander in chief with this this cadre of of so-called national security experts around him.
00:19:41.440 And I mean, that is just a thought that no one in the national media is contemplating, discussing, reporting.
00:19:50.320 There is not a lot of thought, it seems to me, going into the leader coming from the leadership of our military and certainly not much coming from this White House or from, frankly, academia to this Pentagon or to this White House.
00:20:07.180 Am I wrong in that?
00:20:09.600 No, I think that's right.
00:20:10.880 We have now a it's quite interesting that the.
00:20:16.940 Who does the government, the National Security Council, the CIA's National Intelligence?
00:20:24.100 What is the National Intelligence Committee, I guess?
00:20:28.500 And others, where do they draw from?
00:20:30.300 Everybody says, well, they draw from the think tanks and they draw from academia.
00:20:35.660 Fair enough.
00:20:36.160 That's true.
00:20:37.720 But if you look at where they draw from, it's always from, like, the Department of Political Science, history, the law school.
00:20:47.380 And what I see is a really a lack of understanding of management.
00:20:53.660 Management of what?
00:20:54.620 Management of anything.
00:20:58.620 How to buy and use technology efficiently.
00:21:02.540 I would be much happier if they were to draw into government people who were from engineering schools or business schools or even some of our big technology companies.
00:21:16.100 Now, you're beginning to see some of that out of necessity, but I don't think it has really gone far enough.
00:21:23.960 Grant strategy as a topic is has many, many books and articles about it.
00:21:30.140 But they're all drawn from the social sciences or the humanities.
00:21:35.980 Not from the B schools and the engineering schools.
00:21:40.920 So that's something we could change over time.
00:21:45.000 There was a time where you could expect to see a CEO give up his job.
00:21:52.400 Usually it was a man give up his job as CEO or chairman of the board and go to Washington and serve the country in some high position within the Defense Department or the State Department.
00:22:04.960 Bring lifetimes of not only achievement and success, but huge, huge, huge stores of knowledge about the world.
00:22:15.780 I see none of that.
00:22:17.240 It's a very dangerous point.
00:22:19.680 Let me just go back to the of how we got here.
00:22:22.860 Back in the Cold War, you look at the sort of architects of the U.S. military, people like Herman Kahn, Albert Rolstetter, Andy Marshall, Tom Schelling.
00:22:40.280 They all came out of the Rand Corporation, which was set up in the early 1950s.
00:22:47.980 And what did they do?
00:22:49.700 They broke the government's monopoly on the debate.
00:22:56.160 And back in the 1950s, we could, you know, if we had more time going to the U.S., the Pentagon was operating nuclear weapons in a way that was unsafe.
00:23:07.160 In a way that would get you into a war by accident.
00:23:10.820 Paul, can I do this?
00:23:11.680 Let me interrupt very quickly.
00:23:13.020 Let's take a break.
00:23:13.780 And let's talk about how much trouble we could have gotten into and why.
00:23:18.940 Talking with Paul Bracken.
00:23:20.140 We'll be right back after these words.
00:23:27.680 We're back now.
00:23:28.980 Paul Bracken about to tell us how much trouble we could have been in.
00:23:34.000 If you would, I apologize for the interruption.
00:23:36.280 But we have a format that is unyielding.
00:23:41.020 Paul, you were saying.
00:23:43.240 Okay.
00:23:43.720 Back in the 50s, the subject we were discussing was the creative people and very smart people going in to work for the government.
00:23:52.420 And the point I want to make is that the leading people who were the architects of the U.S. military, so people like Albert Olsen, Herman Kahn, Andy Marshall, Tom Schelling, I could go on.
00:24:11.260 So when they started to look at the problems, they found that there were huge potential for accidents and misaligned objectives, which would get you into a nuclear war that you didn't want to get into.
00:24:31.740 And the effect of these people, it wasn't that we agree with them or not.
00:24:37.820 It's that they broke the government's monopoly at the time.
00:24:41.260 Back in the 1950s.
00:24:44.400 To about how you discuss these issues.
00:24:48.340 Okay.
00:24:48.760 That was many worlds ago.
00:24:50.260 I mean, those issues were largely solved.
00:24:53.100 And it's not generally realized that those individuals and others made the world much safer.
00:25:00.720 Okay.
00:25:02.120 I don't.
00:25:02.820 That's the big danger I see today.
00:25:05.280 It's a big danger.
00:25:06.280 It's a big danger.
00:25:06.420 Which is the government, even the Pentagon, which is trying to do a good job, is just used to being in charge.
00:25:15.460 It's a military top-down command system.
00:25:18.100 The academics and the think tanks today don't challenge it, except on issues like you were outlining about diversity, equity, inclusion, and things like that.
00:25:32.360 They don't point out that nuclear weapons, as China builds up a force to rival that of the United States, are going to make an enormous difference.
00:25:42.900 They don't point out that countries now have the ability to destroy enemy nuclear weapons with conventional targets because of super precise missiles.
00:25:54.880 I often ask audiences, why would anybody want a hypersonic missile?
00:26:03.820 This is a very fast missile.
00:26:06.540 And nobody really knows.
00:26:08.640 But the reason these are so desirable today is that you can hit moving targets.
00:26:15.300 And most countries have put their nuclear weapons on moving platforms.
00:26:21.240 You want to be able to destroy these.
00:26:23.440 Well, if you think about that for a minute, it brings in a whole new layer of intelligence and reconnaissance and tracking.
00:26:31.380 How this is all going to work is something that has not been sorted out.
00:26:37.160 And to me, it illustrates the need for fresh thinking of a kind we saw when the 1950s brought in outsiders into the national security establishment.
00:26:48.620 Today, most of the focus is on just making the missile faster, not like what sort of trouble are you going to get into it with it or on what are you going to do if they blind our satellites?
00:27:03.960 Is there, in fact, a consideration going on at any level about what all the hyper ideological conflicts in this country are doing to our national security?
00:27:17.400 And I'm talking about the media, 95% of which is just energized around the idea of Marxism, Marxist-Democrat party leaders.
00:27:31.140 Our institutions are in the grip of all of this woke nonsense, indoctrination of left-wing principles, and very little attention in K through 12 to actual education.
00:27:47.340 And we've had, and I'm saying that advisedly, we're not turning out the same level of student that we once did from our high schools for entry into college.
00:28:01.760 Your thoughts on that?
00:28:04.100 Well, it's a sensitive subject, but I can say that I definitely see a consequence being the general decline in critical thinking.
00:28:15.420 Certainly in government.
00:28:17.340 Many reasons for this, but I believe the educational system, K through 12, and especially the elite higher education system, has a lot to do with this because if you combine hyper specialization, which is what most academics now are engaged in, and I was aware of that.
00:28:42.480 What I underestimated was the ideological change for whatever you call it, CRT, DEI, a whole range of issues.
00:28:55.960 Which to me, which to me, the biggest problem that it created was that it drove out thinking about big policy issues.
00:29:05.860 How do you run a world?
00:29:08.160 How do you engage in an arms race that you have to engage in because technology is becoming so important?
00:29:15.800 And without inducing a lot of bad reactions on the part of other countries.
00:29:23.620 One example is, that's just one example.
00:29:28.080 The highly illusioned efforts to abolish nuclear arms.
00:29:34.660 I was at Yale in 2011 when there was a conference, we're going to ban all nuclear weapons.
00:29:42.620 That's what I was told.
00:29:44.280 This followed President Obama's Prague speech in 2009.
00:29:48.320 Well, I didn't even feel safe to go to this meeting because I thought, it is not going to happen.
00:29:56.520 China and, good Lord, North Korea are not going to give up their nuclear weapons. 0.63
00:30:02.360 But I didn't feel like that I would even be respected by making this rather obvious point that they're not going to give up their nuclear weapons.
00:30:12.400 And I've been proven to be right, as anybody who had any sense could see in 2011.
00:30:21.000 So this driving out of big problems, which are now not being studied really at all in academia today, whatever the problem is, climate change, war and peace, inequality, there's an automatic leap to the progressive answer.
00:30:40.920 And there's no debate or attempt to look at other solutions the way there was when I started my academic career.
00:30:54.220 You know, I think, Paul, so often that we see the left emerge loudest and boldest in our media because their answers are so simple.
00:31:06.380 There's no rigorous thinking, there's no critical judgment, and there's very little possibility that we're going to get to an intelligent and effective answer.
00:31:16.520 Because we have created a whole society of liberal arts experts on things they don't even comprehend or who are completely unprepared for a technologically advanced world that they can only sort of drool at as they talk about what I consider to be nonsense.
00:31:38.280 Well, I agree, and that was the purpose of the liberal arts back in the 50s, 60s.
00:31:48.020 It started to change in the 1970s.
00:31:51.640 These are broader issues that have to be put into their appropriate political institutional context.
00:31:59.280 And that's almost gone now.
00:32:03.060 I mean, everything is mapped into a binary choice.
00:32:07.820 Are you in favor of saving the climate or having us all drowned?
00:32:14.140 That's the level of debate.
00:32:17.140 It is really, it's absolutely true.
00:32:20.140 We certainly appreciate you being with us here today.
00:32:22.180 We always give our guests the last word.
00:32:24.500 And, Paul, your concluding thoughts, if you would.
00:32:26.300 Well, the French have this saying that, I hope your children don't live in interesting times.
00:32:35.460 And, boy, does that apply now.
00:32:38.000 Because we do live in interesting times, what the French meant by that was they can often be very chaotic, unstable, and dangerous. 0.61
00:32:47.200 And we are moving into a more dangerous world, and we don't even recognize what many of these dangers are.
00:32:54.180 So, the world is sure interesting and to be continued.
00:33:00.140 Paul Bracken, thanks so much for being with us.
00:33:02.160 God bless you.
00:33:03.100 All right.
00:33:03.760 Good work going to you.
00:33:05.440 Paul Bracken, thank you.
00:33:06.800 And thanks, everybody, for joining us today.
00:33:09.060 We'll be taking up the debt ceiling negotiations that appear to be disastrous for the Speaker of the House and the GOP.
00:33:16.000 Among our guests this week, Judicial Watch's Chris Farrell, former Trump presidential advisor Peter Navarro, and tomorrow our guest, Congressman Austin Scott.
00:33:25.460 Please be with us.
00:33:26.520 Till then, thank you, God bless you, and God bless America.
00:33:30.580 AVAILABLE NOW