David Rutherford Show: Is America Weimar Germany? Brandon Gresham On Propaganda, The Divided Right & The Strongman Trap

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:01):
Welcome back to the show, everybody.

Speaker 2 (00:02):
I've got a great guest today who's got a great
podcast out there, The Watchfire Podcast. His name is Brandon Gershom.
And I tell you what, when you watch his show,
you get a real....

Speaker 1 (00:16):
A real sense that.

Speaker 2 (00:18):
He doesn't look at the facts as some topical wavelengths
or pulling together different reels to assemble an opinion so
that he can generate clicks and the eternal click war
out there. This is a man who has an extensive
background in the military, but more importantly, I think he

(00:39):
has a real background in what he believes is factually accurate.
And I think more now than ever, that's the type
of person we want behind the microphone.

Speaker 1 (00:50):
So without further ado, welcome to the show, Brandon.

Speaker 3 (00:54):
Thank you, man. What an introduction. I really appreciate you
saying that. The clicks thing is something my co-host, Chris,
unfortunately couldn't be here today, praying for him and his family.
They're going through some things, but That's what we care
about more than anything. We talk all the time about
quality over quantity. Quantity, of course, being clicks. And with
the whole facts and the wavelength thing, like you said,

(01:16):
nothing is new. The time we're living in right now,
somebody else has lived in a time that is similar,
has all of these different ways that it rhymes throughout history.
That old trope about history repeating itself. If it doesn't
repeat itself, it certainly rhymes differently. There's always something you
can learn. Every conversation we've had about politics happened in
Athens 2,000, 3,000 years ago. The Romans were dealing with

(01:39):
many of the same problems that we're dealing with today.
The landscape looked different. The people and the things they value,
of course, were both similar and different. So, yeah, man,
we care a lot about the history over there. And people,
I think, find history as a way to use as
a tool now online rather than getting into the roots

(01:59):
of the why. which is in itself a tool to
disabuse some of the misinformation. But I think that it's
getting used more as a cudgel than anything. And that's
kind of become one of our big goals recently is
to bring forth all of this history, especially in the West,
where there's so much about our history that we've been
estranged from, I think, because of the online environment. But yeah,

(02:21):
it's an honor to be here today. I'm really looking
forward to having this conversation. And whatever it is we
talk about, man, it's going to be a good time.

Speaker 1 (02:28):
Outstanding. Yeah, it's interesting, man.

Speaker 2 (02:30):
In the last, like, I think two or three years,
you really have seen a lot more of the history
podcasts has really gained traction. Obviously, I think the one
that's really kind of been the most in the forefront
of everybody's consciousness is what Dan Carlin's historical podcast. He's

(02:52):
got an absolutely fantastic one about the Mongols.

Speaker 1 (02:56):
Love that. Yeah, hardcore history. hardcore history is just incredible.

Speaker 2 (03:00):
And then there's also the, I don't know, there's a
profanity about me that I'm trying to try and figure
out why Daryl Cooper and the Martyr Made podcast has
caused so many uproars. Perhaps it's his affiliation with Tucker
or wherever it comes from, but it seems like he
actually does the history in pretty good faith in how

(03:21):
he's delivering the facts. But you know, back to the
main point, there is a resurgence, I think, in the focused.

Speaker 1 (03:28):
Approach to facts, right?

Speaker 2 (03:30):
Because as I sit back and I look at, I go,
you know, my kids go to a private school and,
you know, I'm expecting.

Speaker 1 (03:38):
They're going to come home and they're going to really.

Speaker 2 (03:40):
Dig into, you know, 18th century history or Roman history, whatever.

Speaker 1 (03:44):
And, And it's the same thing. They're just covering kind.

Speaker 2 (03:47):
Of these, these, these, uh, neutered facts and, and they
don't give these kids much context. It's almost like, it's
like a check in the box to China. Just say, Oh,
we covered it. We covered it. You have a base
understanding of the system, but yet they don't really understand
the result of the politics, the, the economics.

Speaker 1 (04:10):
How, why is it that.

Speaker 2 (04:12):
This is such a important way for you to address,
you know, the topics that you guys are addressing.

Speaker 3 (04:20):
Sure. You know, that way of teaching history, it can
be useful for kids, I think, to develop an interest.

Speaker 2 (04:26):
Right.

Speaker 3 (04:27):
And the hope that they go and dig a little further.
And I think that's where we try to step in
is that digging a little further. Because people don't make
decisions for the most part in a box. They don't
come to very drastic conclusions out of nowhere. Normally, they're
led down a path. And I think that you can
see a lot of that even in our American history,
especially over the past 25 years, right? You can see

(04:49):
how we've come to a lot of these conclusions that
we've come to about our government, about the world, about
our place in the world, the way the world views
the United States, especially over the past several years. that
they didn't come to these conclusions about us in a box.
We didn't come to any of these conclusions about ourselves
as Americans in a box as well. So one of
those things to do that can help you out is

(05:10):
to understand the people involved in those decisions, where they
came from, why they made those decisions, the people that
they associated with, what were the economic factors going on
in their lives at that time? What other conflicts around
the world? We'd talked offline before about the episode we
just did about the Weimar Republic And the, the turn
of the century there, that industrial, the industrial revolution, right?

(05:31):
The United States as well at the end of the, the, uh,
19th century was going through, uh, you know, its own
gilded age and moving toward being a nation recognized on
the face of the earth as, as sort of an
upcoming power, right? In the, in the midst of, uh, British,
the British empire. So you understand all of us are
connected in a, in that way too. So there's going
to be all these things going on around the world

(05:51):
that are driving decisions going on, what people are doing. And, uh,
I guess we focus on the intangibles that go on
between people and the relationships they have with one another.
And we could talk about whatever it is to give
more specifics on this. But to answer your question, I
would just say that people are not as simple as
you realize that they are as far as why they

(06:15):
make certain decisions. It's not just one thing and you
walk away with understanding, oh, well, the Germans just woke
up one day and they chose Adolf Hitler or One day, basically,
the Khmer Rouge just decided to go and murder a
bunch of people. Well, there was a bunch of things
that happened before that that involved American foreign policy or
that involved the relationship between Weimar, Germany, Belgium, and France,

(06:36):
and the repayment of war debt and all these other
things where you can understand and contextualize people as people
throughout history. And we tend to look at those people,
I guess, as just idle objects in the past in
a rearview mirror perspective. and that you're looking at them
as 2D individuals rather than people that have lives just
as complicated as you do. And so that's where we

(06:58):
like to live in some of that complication. I love
the idea of the average person looking at this as
a 2D object.

Speaker 1 (07:09):
That's brilliant.

Speaker 2 (07:10):
And it's funny, I remember hearing someone talk about, maybe
it was Joe Rogan, but he's real fascinated with the Mongols.

Speaker 1 (07:17):
Because it's so far.

Speaker 2 (07:19):
Away, It loses the mythological inference of modern society, right?
And kind of the thing that I think was interesting
about that Weimar Republic episode you guys did is there
is this active comparison that's emerging and perhaps it's a
result of. you know, the, the, the challenges the Israeli

(07:43):
government are faces with, you know, what they're trying to
attempt as a result of October 7th and other, other, uh, preexisting, uh,
realities of, of that area. Um, perhaps it's the rise
in antisemitism as a result of that or whatever, but
it's like, you know, just in the last, you know,
two or three weeks, I've seen, you know, uh, the,

(08:05):
there's hard right folks out there that are, saying we're
the Weimar Republic. That's why when I saw you did
a show on it, it was like, man, that's like, that's,
that's very astute in, in what you're observing that's taking place. And,
and they're saying, we're going to be like, we need
that Hitler figure to arise, right?

Speaker 1 (08:22):
Whatever movement is.

Speaker 2 (08:23):
And then you have like, just what yesterday, the day
before you had Dave Smith, uh, um, he went, uh,
he debated Alan Dershowitz, uh, And in front of Mario
Noir did it for zero hedge. And Alan Dershowitz, as
soon as Dave insinuated some type of dual loyalty, which

(08:47):
seems like it's been professed. He said the main reason
he left the Democratic Party to go to the Republican
Party was because the Democratic stance against Jews and against Israel. And, and,
and so, and then as soon as Dave kind of
went there, he immediately incurred, we, the, the, the world
is facing in America is currently in a 1932 or

(09:11):
35 position. We are, we are Germany, 1935. And what
happens next is going to be the detriment of, of that.
And I, I, I was, I wanted to get your
opinion on why you think at this moment and what
we're seeing. that these comparisons to Germany, both good or

(09:31):
bad or whatever, why is this coming into the narrative
with such ferocity right now?

Speaker 1 (09:38):
Yeah.

Speaker 3 (09:39):
You know, it's really interesting why, because if you really
go and look at how 1919 played out for Germany,
and by that I mean the signing of the Treaty
of Versailles, you really begin to see at the advent
of that how there are many more differences than there
are similarities. And the latter half of Weimar, Germany, where
they did eventually collapse into unilateral control over the with

(10:03):
the with the Nazi party and then the handoff to
Adolf Hitler that's where I think most people are trying
to draw this comparison and um you know your your
your question about like why we're doing that I think
is I think has to do with maybe inflation I
think it has to do with Israel as far as
people not liking, I guess, the Israeli government. I'll just

(10:27):
say this up front. I know that we have a
mixed relationship with them. I know that Israel has not
always been an outstanding ally to the United States. I
know plenty of people who've done exercises with them. I
never have, who felt like they walked away like, man,
this was kind of sketchy. And so there's goods and bads.
And I'm not one of these people that It's just like, oh, well,
because Israel is full of Jews, we can't dislike anything

(10:50):
their secular government does. I'm not one of those people
at all.

Speaker 2 (10:54):
Right.

Speaker 3 (10:54):
So but I do think that there's conflation between the
Israeli government and, you know, I guess Jewish people, probably
majorly secular Jewish people and then Hasidic Jews. But I
think that's one of the reasons why I think because
that happened and the United States got drawn into this conflict.
I think that's one of those reasons. And I think, too.

(11:15):
the United States is facing its own aspect, or excuse me,
its own battery of problems. And people have grown very
accustomed to wanting change to happen really quickly. And in
the constitutional framework we have by design, it's not going
to happen quickly. The founding fathers wrote a relatively small
document to contrary to what people believe. I think a

(11:36):
lot of people would look at it and say, man,
that looks, man, I don't know if I could read that.
And it's just like, well, you know, it would probably
take you 10 minutes to do it yourself. And but
that might say a lot about our attention span here
in the modern world. And I think that has a
lot to do with it, too, in the expecting the
immediate change. And so I think it's I think it's
a combination of all those things, because when you want

(11:56):
an immediate change, you think, well, if I could just
give somebody temporary power and they could go in and
they can make all these changes, then all of these
problems would be solved. You know, and then the funny
thing is, is there's all these examples throughout history where
that really didn't work. And there are a few examples
where they did work. under constraint, right? So the Roman
Republic asking Cincinnatus twice to go and be a dictator

(12:19):
and handle situation problems for the Roman Republic. Well, he did.
And then he went right back to his plow famously,
which is why George Washington idolized Cincinnatus, was a member
of the Cincinnatus society. So that's an example people like
to point out. But it's funny because they really like
talking about some of the people that never relinquished power.
And so I think there's this appetite here in the

(12:41):
United States for People want our problems to be fixed.
They want their lives to be affordable. They want their
lives to go back to what they remember it being,
I guess, as a younger adult or a kid or whatever.
And I think that's also why you see this flirtation
with socialism, which we could talk about as well. Yeah,
I'd love to do that. Sure. We could talk about
characters like Eugene Debs and why even– this isn't even

(13:03):
the first time the United States has seen a rise
in interest in socialism.

Speaker 1 (13:08):
Oh, it was exploded in the 30s for sure.

Speaker 3 (13:11):
Correct.

Speaker 1 (13:11):
Yeah.

Speaker 3 (13:12):
You know, and you can say what you want about FDR.
And I'm not necessarily a fanboy for FDR, but he
the New Deal really killed all of the support that
a lot of the socialists that had during that time
frame had for people. They stopped voting for them. You
can watch an uptick in voting and then you can
watch that just plummet almost immediately.

Speaker 2 (13:30):
Yeah.

Speaker 3 (13:31):
And so I say all that to say as well
that you can– I think this goes into the Weimar
comparison as well, that you can fix this country inside
the constraints of the constitution. You don't have to find
a path inside of it to essentially wind up on
the other end where the constitution doesn't matter the way
that the Germans did from 1994 to 1933. The two
articles I talk about in that episode are Article 48

(13:53):
and 76. inside the Weimar constitution. But I think that's why, man,
I think people are just struggling. I think they, people
have a natural proclivity to want scapegoats and strong men
at the same time. And there are general comparisons on
the surface that, that people like to point to. Um,

(14:13):
and then the other half of that is, I think
that it excuse you, you said this actually pretty, I
would say this ties in really, really well, that people
see these things as a way to offload their own responsibility.
We talked about that before. An Immanuel Kant would call
that political immaturity. So you want to hand off your

(14:34):
responsibility to somebody else. And really, when you boil that
down to one emotion, that just means preference and that
you have a preference for a specific individual. And you
should ask yourself, if I gave the power I want
this person to have to the other person, intellectual side
or the other political side, would I still find that
power to be relevant? And would I still find that

(14:55):
power to be justified in that individual that I dislike?
And if the answer is no, then what you have
as a preference, you don't have a desire for things
to be fixed. You just want the other side to
get whipped in a way that you want them to
be whipped.

Speaker 1 (15:07):
Man, that's brilliant.

Speaker 2 (15:08):
And you saw that generate over the last, I would say,
I remember probably you know, the, since the Oh four
election for me, right. It was really your, it became
a lot more of that. It was, you know, the
demagoguery of the opposing party, like it, it, you know, and,

(15:31):
and it was, it, it morphed into these attacks against,
you know, the societal infrastructures that, you know, had been
built up and, and really had been, protected by both parties.
It seemed over, you know, the, the hundred, you know,

(15:51):
and a hundred, 200 plus years prior to that. Right. And,
and then, and then it started to shift and it
became more about this kind of, um, it was based on, uh,
you know, the, the stirring of emotions against, uh, a
societal imperfections, right. Whether it was, it was white privilege, uh,

(16:14):
Or whether it was– I think the Republicans' party immediate
call to that was like, oh, Marxism is coming back
and it's infesting. And then what happens I think with
the advent of social media is now the controlled distribution
of information was completely deconstructed. And so all of a

(16:36):
sudden now people found themselves in these, um, pretty rutted
silos of, of information, whether wherever they were finding it from.
And next thing, you know, you know, you've got, you know,
nine 11s and inside job, right. You know, and, and
if you watch building seven come down enough, it's just

(16:58):
enough to make you go, wow, that's a possibility, right.
And then I think one story after another begins to
fractionalize our, like what you're saying, our consolidated understanding, hey,
this system is large. And if we operate within the fundamentals,

(17:20):
the foundations of the system, over time, we can begin
to adapt or adjust accordingly to the financial pressures, to
the to the, um, what trade pressures to, um, the markets,
whatever it might be. But now, like you said, there's an,
there's a, uh, an increased desire for that instant instantaneous gratification. Um,

(17:48):
where do you, why do you think that the public
has such a, uh, a short sighted approach, uh, to
kind of, Understanding how the big bureaucratic ship turns.

Speaker 3 (18:04):
You know, I think the first thing that comes to
my mind when you ask me that question is the
24-hour news cycle. And so often does a story hit
and it sticks for long. Like the Lindsay Clancy thing
has captured people's attention for a long time, right? I
would say- When I say long time, I mean a
lot longer than three days, four days.

Speaker 1 (18:24):
Wow.

Speaker 3 (18:25):
We're still talking about this.

Speaker 1 (18:26):
Instead of four hours. It's three days, four days is extensive.

Speaker 3 (18:31):
Yeah, exactly.

Speaker 2 (18:32):
Yeah.

Speaker 3 (18:32):
You know, and I think that that has a lot
to do with it. And I think that that's manufactured
as well, that people are made to feel a certain
type of way about something. And, you know, I, I
always do this thing where I say that, you know,
the people trying to think of a way to say this.
It's propaganda, right? What you're talking about is propaganda. And

(18:54):
the relationship between the propagandist and propagandee is a perverted symbiosis.
The propagandist starts talking about something. And the unique thing
about propaganda is that they reach you at a level
that you feel like you're being talked to as an individual.
But then you realize that everybody around you or you think,
excuse me, you think everybody around you feels the exact

(19:16):
same way. So you feel like you are a part
of a group, but you're being touched by Individually, in
your mind, this is a problem I find. Other people
think the same way because they're listening to the same propagandists,
and there's this perception of consolidation. And that's not necessarily true.
And I think a really good example of that recently
would be the idea of America first because when President

(19:38):
Trump was running against Joe Biden, this America first thing
was what he talked about, America first, America first. And
that too is really old. It doesn't come from Donald Trump.
It's a much older slogan. And then he got elected
and then he started making policy decisions. And a lot
of people were like, well, I interpreted America first as
more of an isolationist movement. And that's not what's happening.

(20:00):
And other people like, well, I interpreted America first as
a primary focus on domestic issues like re-industrialization and or
going after Big Pharma or whatever it was, the Maha movement, right?
And other people sort of expected America First as this
sort of neocon view of the world where America was
going to exact its power around the world as it
sought to, as a hegemon. And that's what that means,

(20:22):
America First in the world, America First, all of these things.
And so people immediately started to fracture under this understanding
of what America First meant. And I think that's an
example of what I was just talking about when it
comes to propaganda. You know America is suffering. You hear
America first. You think, well, the reasons why I think
America is suffering would be benefited by an America first approach.

(20:44):
And that's the end of the thought process for you.
And you see everybody else talking about America first, and
they're really happy and looking forward to the election of
President Trump, just to continue with this example. And then
you learn later on that that's not what we all believed, actually.
We didn't believe in the same thing when it came
to what America first met. And that's how– I'm not
saying necessarily that that was intentional propaganda, but that's how

(21:04):
propaganda works is that it makes you feel like an
individual in a group. And because of that– Yeah, sorry.

Speaker 1 (21:10):
Go ahead.

Speaker 3 (21:11):
No, I was just going to say the news works
the same way. They focus on something that they know
you're going to care about. It's going to incite a
large emotion in you. And then for one reason or another,
and this is why I brought up the concept of
the propagandist and the propagandee, is there is responsibility in
both parties. The propagandist needs you, and if you listen

(21:31):
long enough, you wind up needing them. And that responsibility
on you becomes to detach from that stuff, start investigating further,
and you are going to pull yourself out of the
propaganda loop. you are not going to get pulled out
of it by the propagandists that propagandists needs you to
stay in it. And the news is the same way.
And the same with the government and understanding bureaucracy. They

(21:51):
all like to point at one another and say, well,
I'm going to pull the curtain back on this little
thing here and show you a little bit. And then
I'm going to spin it one way or another. And
that just keeps you in this loop of, of angry information.
You know, I think that's, I think that's why, frankly,
I agree.

Speaker 2 (22:08):
I think everybody's trying to, um, trigger an emotional reaction.
And I think the way everything's being delivered, like I
get in my car and I'm driving and here's just
a thought. Meanwhile, you know, they're reading it off their
screen or, you know, it's, it's some clever thing that
gives you a dose of something that you've obviously seen

(22:31):
in your other feed. And then that triggers you to
dive a little bit deeper and a little bit more.
And next thing you know, you're, you know, you're binge
watching a person's entire catalog of content and formulating that,
that next level bias in that, in that direction. Right.
Instead of like watching that and then watching the counterpoint,
watching that and then watching the counterpoint to try and,
you know, cultivate, as you say, your own conclusion based on, um,

(22:56):
the recognition that you are trying to be pulled in
or lulled in or, or provoked with an emotional reaction
to a particular, uh, narrative. Um, I did find it interesting.
Also yesterday, there was Brandon Strzoka did this really interesting
panel where he had, um, uh, the MAGA like MAGA

(23:17):
people and like Andrew Wilson was on there and some
other guys. And, and then he did the America first
and it had Joe Kent and, and Alex Jones on.
And it was really interesting because I thought it was
going to be a lot of screaming and hollering at
each other. And what it, what it ultimately came down
to is they all had very similar interpretations of things.

(23:38):
It's just like you said, it, it, it fall, it
fell in line with what she said. They believed what
president Trump was really saying was in line with their interpretation.
I think the America first, like the, the, the, the
people that seem to have the most, uh, eloquent, uh,
and articulated, um, points are almost like, you know, uh,

(24:04):
libertarians on steroids potentially. Right. And then you have, then
you have the, the, the MAGA, supposedly the MAGA, um,
loyalist maybe is that that's probably the best who, who
are kind of like, yeah, we're kind of like, no, no.

Speaker 1 (24:19):
Like it's the projection of American strength.

Speaker 2 (24:22):
It's, it's, we're no longer taking it on the chin
as was, was, uh, conveyed in, in the, you know,
the last two major election cycles that America was being
dominated by, foreign influence and foreign money and, and, you know,
all these NGOs and George Soros and the open society foundation.
But it was fascinating because they, they all seemed to like,

(24:43):
there were all these really hardcore touch points. They were
agreeing upon at the, at the center of what it was,
which was, Hey, we have a lot of domestic things
that people are struggling with. And why are we engaged,
you know, in, in, not restraining spending, I think was

(25:05):
the biggest thing or, or, and then the other big one,
I think is always the fact that Trump, you know,
was a staunch advocated for no new wars, right? That was, that's,
I think what this America first is really rooted in,
as you promised, we were not going to engage in another,
you know, fruitless or effort or whatever they're, they're framing

(25:27):
the Iran, uh, war. And, and, and I think, you know,
it's interesting that, as these positions now, cause in the
long form discussion for arena, like you have time to
let people get to the bottom of their conversations. Although
I do see a lot of timeframes coming back on people,

(25:48):
but you know, the, the good ones.

Speaker 1 (25:50):
Are really not worried. They're letting it go.

Speaker 2 (25:53):
They're letting people really deliver and trying to restrain the
other people trying to, uh, uh, address each point in
real time. Um, why do you think, um, there is
such a push to have these types of, of debates with,
with these and, you know, and you see it a

(26:13):
little bit in the democratic party too. They're trying to
figure out is the democratic socialist association or whatever that
DSA is, you know, is that what we are? Are
we more of kind of the, you know, labor intensive
old school blue dog Democrats are, you know, are we,
are we, is there, is there any vestige of the
Obama group left? And it's the same, it's like both, both,

(26:38):
both parties or both interpretations of the parties are definitely
split and emerging are, you know, everybody's trying to, like
you say, they're trying to find the one voice that
kind of pushes through the rest. So that they can
anchor themselves on one consolidated point because they don't like

(27:01):
the public, it seems, and the public is vast in
all of its different.

Speaker 3 (27:08):
Descriptions.

Speaker 2 (27:10):
Everybody's trying to– they like their points consolidated so they
can manage them emotionally in a more tolerable way. How
do you read– what you're seeing out there in this
kind of political landscape as we approach the midterms.

Speaker 3 (27:29):
Sure.

Speaker 1 (27:30):
Sorry, that was a rant.

Speaker 3 (27:31):
No, no, you're good. Yeah, I agree with what you're
saying completely, honestly. Let's talk about the podcast sphere with
that for a second because I think the right really
wound up inside the podcast sphere as a source for
information much more than the left does, right? There are
a bunch of liberal podcasts out there that are political.
Pod Save America would be an example of that. Um,

(27:52):
you know, I don't really, I don't listen to positive America,
but I will listen to some other, you know, liberal
things just to see what they're talking about. I have,
you know, I want to be well-rounded, but I think
that the right. Found a spot there because there was
legitimate censorship going on and mainstream sources. Um, the mainstream
wasn't talking to another half of Americans. And in fact,

(28:14):
they were belittling the other half of the, of Americans.
And so they, they found this place to exist. And
I think that it did create an open marketplace of
ideas for people to go in and debate. So I
think that there is a incentive as well to drive
traffic to channels why this happens. I think that's real,
though I don't think that's the entire point. The other

(28:37):
part of it is, is I see that almost everybody
who's a talking head on the right, ourselves included, right,
my show included, I think recognizes that the left has
done a very, very poor job of holding itself accountable.
And that's why they have relinquished much of their support
to the DSA, the Democrat Socialists of America, and the

(28:57):
people that now represent them. There was recently a poll
of the perception of the Democrat Party, and I can't
remember who did it. And they asked, do you think
that the views of the Democratic Party still represent an
Obama era view or even something, a Kennedy era view,
or is it more socialist? And the answer was overwhelmingly socialist.
And so you can't When the public perception of your

(29:20):
party is socialist, you've lost the Overton window to an
entirely separate group of people who are not Democrats at all.
It's like the old joke about the Holy Roman Empire
was neither Holy Roman nor an empire. And that's exactly
what it is. And so I think the right has
an interest in holding itself accountable. And I think the
right understands that. there are a bunch of people online

(29:42):
that go to whoever it is, whether it's Tucker, whether
it's Daryl Cooper, whether it's Dan Bongino or whomever else
sits online as these really, really big conservative or right-handed
talking heads. and wants to hear what they're doing in
hashing out these ideas because we are, we don't want
to hand over our, I guess, intellectual, the intellectual side

(30:07):
that we, we own to, um, a group of people
who I'm trying to like want to pervert, I guess
what conservative values are.

Speaker 2 (30:17):
Right.

Speaker 3 (30:17):
And I think that we are, we are much better
about the diversity of thought when it comes to that.
and much better about trying to listen to other people.
And I think that there is a, I guess, just
an interest in these debates being had, because we can
agree on 80% of the issues, but the other 20%,

(30:37):
we recognize that we have to come to some sort of,
not even consensus, right, but to open that tent up
and tolerate one another and move forward. Otherwise, you know,
divided we fall, you know what I mean? And I
think that there's a recognition of that And we haven't
I think the right has has been a lot less
passive on letting that stuff go and been much more

(31:01):
assertive in that endeavor to hold ourselves accountable than the
left and watching the left devolve into these ideas that
have failed over and over and over again. You know,
so that's that's why I'd say that interest in that
has has risen a lot recently. I don't know. What
do you think? You think that's.

Speaker 2 (31:17):
I just want to really talk about my incredible partnership
with one of my best friends, And that's Evan Hafer
and the boys over at Black Rifle Coffee. I'm so
honored to be a part of their organization and just
really can't thank them enough for allowing me to participate.

(31:39):
What I want you to do is go to BlackRifleCoffee.com
and I want to check out their new energy drinks.
They have these incredible energy drinks that you can buy
at all different kinds of stores, Walmart, Bass Sports, and others.
Or you can go online and order. And if you
want to put in your little promo code, FrogLogic20, there

(32:02):
you get a little discount on stuff there.

Speaker 1 (32:05):
I highly recommend that. For me, it's my morning coffee.

Speaker 2 (32:09):
I am addicted to Black Rifle Coffee's Just Black. I
think the Tiger Stripe Camo definitely reels me in. The
other one I love is the AK Espresso. This one
right here is phenomenal.

Speaker 1 (32:22):
Love these.

Speaker 2 (32:23):
But they have so many different things that you can
get at Black Rifle Coffee.

Speaker 1 (32:27):
You will love it.

Speaker 2 (32:29):
Again, when you go over BlackRifleCoffee.com and you're checking out,
type in FrogLogic20.

Speaker 1 (32:36):
Get your little discount code. uh, and tell them already rut, rut,
send you.

Speaker 2 (32:40):
So to all those, uh, folks out there who, uh,
love coffee, like I do, please do yourself a favor
and go over and check out my, my brothers at BRCC.
I agree. I, I, well, I mean, at first I, the, the, the,
the first guy that I really thought was, was going
after that was Piers Morgan. And, and, you know, initially

(33:01):
I just thought he was doing it for kind of
that Jerry Springer-esque type of combative back and forth, which
I think is a lot of what takes when you get,
you know, people screaming at each other and no one's
everybody it's not, but, but it seems like, and that's
when you add the left and the right, you know,
and you, you go both ways, but it seems like
now like this, this debating, obviously the biggest one recently

(33:25):
was Andrew Wilson and Candace Owens and the whole Charlie
Kirk stuff. And, and, And that– it's just a bizarre–
another bizarre aspect of division and how that's taking place.
But again, it's amazing that you can have just a such–

(33:48):
and not that I'm saying Candace is right either way
or wherever she goes, whatever. I'm saying the phenomenon is
that there are tens of millions of people tuning into
what she's saying. And out of those tens of millions,
the tens, they're not all hardcore.

Speaker 1 (34:06):
Candace Owens people.

Speaker 2 (34:08):
They're people waiting to attack what she has to say
with vitriol and vigor.

Speaker 1 (34:13):
And it's really spectacular. Even my best friend, Sean Ryan, right?

Speaker 2 (34:17):
You know, watching his growth from just a life stories guy,
you know, and, you know, watching and understanding this take
place in real time from a personal level with him
when he kind of went all in. in the summer
of 24 and he had JD on, he had the
president on, he did cash. He did, he did, he
did Hegseth. He did everybody, you know, came on and

(34:40):
now he's like, fuck them all. Like they lied to
us profoundly. And, and it's like, you know, I'm just
kind of like, whoa, dude, like this is, it's, it,
and it's almost as if people are tired of, It's
obvious I think people are tired of the cognitive dissonance
that's kind of built in traditional news or media, right?

(35:04):
Like it's kind of like you give this two-minute pitch
about a major story and then you're on to the next.

Speaker 1 (35:09):
Just enough for people to be like, oh, yeah, that's interesting.

Speaker 2 (35:12):
I'm up to speed because nobody reads newspapers anymore. They're
just reading the top quote of whatever is in your feed,
whether it's TikTok, Instagram, which– That's it and they're not
diving deep like we try and do to give context
to this stuff. So within that, this builds, this foments, this–
it supplants the preordained cognitive dissonance that was a derivative

(35:37):
of 50 years of– cbs nbc and abc and that's
it right and now there's so much on the landscape
of of ideas that the thing that's the craziest the
most emphatic the most incendiary like that draws our short
wave attention right to it and then we just we

(36:00):
parent those extremes right sure And then you combine that
with this, I think, the post-COVID collapse in our faith
and institutions in this conspiratorial reality that seems to be
unfolding in real time, right? And it's not like we

(36:21):
need 50 factual talking points to go in line with
the conspiracy.

Speaker 1 (36:26):
We need three, right? That's it.

Speaker 2 (36:30):
There's 1,700 emails with Epstein and whatever her Rothschild was.
So that proves the global conspiracy that the Rothschilds and
the Orsini's and all that are running this global government.
And it's like people are so desperate for conclusion or
something conclusive to prove that the whole system's rigged against

(36:54):
them in some way, shape or form. And then what's interesting,
that's taking place on both sides and that's opening the gap,
the opening the space to the extreme, the extreme people
coming in and, and saying, whether it's the DSA or
it's the, you know, the hardcore, I think he said, I, there's,

(37:16):
I don't know if it was your show or someone else,
but it was like this, this Catholic, hardcore right wing
Christianization of nationalism, you know, and that, yeah, you guys,
you and Chris were, that's who I got it from.

Speaker 1 (37:31):
And I was like, that's brilliant right there.

Speaker 2 (37:33):
That's, that's, that's the, that's the counterbalance to the DSA. Right.

Speaker 1 (37:39):
And it's like, and it's like in the.

Speaker 2 (37:42):
State of confusion and in a state of frustration, thinking you're,
everything's a lie, which is when you, I mean, Sean's,
openly going on Tucker and saying, everything's a lie, man.
Everything's like that, not advocating his point, which I, which
I keep pushing him to try and, you know, explain
himself a lot more to do. Um, but he's really frustrated, um,

(38:04):
is all, you know, but to say, Hey, I think
it's a lie because of.

Speaker 1 (38:08):
This, this, this, and this.

Speaker 2 (38:09):
And, and, and, and like you, you were, you were,
you and Chris were going down Tucker's 10 points for
what he'll bring back America.

Speaker 1 (38:16):
And you're like, that's all vague shit, man.

Speaker 2 (38:20):
And I frankly believe he was laying out the predicate
for whatever party is going to emerge once– and I
think it's something Vance is going to tap into because
I think there's a rift between Rubio and Vance that
they're going to separate and they're going to push and
they're going to run Rubio against Vance potentially.

Speaker 3 (38:40):
But I don't know.

Speaker 2 (38:41):
That's– trying to read the tea leaves and all that
is somewhat of our job. Yeah.

Speaker 1 (38:47):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (38:48):
So, you know, the, the question I think, you know,
for you is as, as you approach, first off, how do.

Speaker 1 (38:58):
You pick a story? Right.

Speaker 2 (39:01):
And what, what, what, how does that choice emerge? And
then how do you and Chris kind of lay out
the intention behind the deliverable of what you're going to
talk about?

Speaker 3 (39:14):
You know, I'm going to answer your question by talking
about two points that came to my mind as you
were talking about this. You can say everything is a lie,
and I think that there's a lot of lies. But
if if you are a hammer then everything looks like
a nail to you and that is also not a
good way to go about life whether it's your emotions
or it's your perception of information I think people give

(39:37):
too much credit to this notion that there's 12 dudes
in a room twiggling their mustaches and being evil all
the time you know they all look like the Monopoly
guy right I think that um I think there's an
aspect of Hanlon's razor here as well. Never attribute to
malice that which can be attributed to incompetence. I think
people underestimate how incompetent people can be.

Speaker 2 (39:57):
And you and I have definitely seen incompetence at its
highest level.

Speaker 1 (40:02):
Certainly.

Speaker 3 (40:02):
And a lot of incompetence and areas with a lot
of power can create a lot of bad things, which
can look on purpose. And I think that that has
a lot to do with the fact that everything in
the government is bureaucratic and thus connected. So when something
big happens, there's a domino that's going to fall. And
it's going to knock down a series of dominoes that
are going to go all over the place, right? So
it looks like this conspiracy. And by that, I mean,

(40:24):
like the criminal sense, right? A plot to commit a crime, right?
The other half of this too, is that I think
that I see the left and the right, let's talk
about this Catholic and DSA thing for a second. There
are a bunch of content creators online, whether you want
to count the online spaces, real life or not, I don't.

(40:45):
But a lot of people go to it and perceive
that this is what everybody around them thinks back to
that propaganda thing.

Speaker 2 (40:52):
Yeah.

Speaker 3 (40:53):
This is where horseshoe theory comes in because they both
arrive at the same conclusion. I've seen so many Catholics
suggest monarchy and it's just, and then at the same time,
they have an American flag behind them. It's like, I,
did you forget the war we fought a long time ago?

Speaker 2 (41:08):
Right.

Speaker 3 (41:09):
And then I got into a back and forth with
somebody about this and they were like, well, You know,
King George wasn't an absolute monarch. He had a parliament
and it's like, okay, but that's not quite the same either.
You know, we don't have a king and a parliament,
you know, it's anyway. But to, to get back to
the point of that, of saying is that they both
agree that the problem can be solved by one person

(41:31):
who thinks the exact same way they do.

Speaker 1 (41:33):
Right.

Speaker 3 (41:34):
So I recognize those patterns and how people are thinking online.
And this is something that I think you've probably, probably
come to the conclusion to as well, is that there's
just a lot of people online who take hook, line,
and sinker certain amounts of propaganda, and they really do
think that way. And it may be disconcerting to realize

(41:54):
that all these people around you are kind of NPCs,
non-playable characters walking around really thinking and drinking the Kool-Aid,
but it is. And when you kind of realize that,
it becomes easier to recognize the patterns people are going
to fall into. So when I see something online, I'm like,
what am I going to talk about today? What are
we going to go on the live show? And what
are we going to talk about? What are we going
to disabuse? What are we going to dismantle? I try

(42:17):
to find the patterns where both sides are talking about
this and they kind of agree on the problems and
they kind of agree on the solutions. It's the preferences
that they don't agree on. And it's like, okay, well,
let's go after those mesh points and let's talk about
those because they're both going to exploit you where you
agree because they're going to coax you into thinking they're

(42:38):
on your side, right? That's an X point. That's an
avenue of approach to you to get you to think
the way they want you to think. So if I
can find the gaps in that, and normally there are
gaps because it's an incomplete narrative. It's normally using a
version of history that doesn't include all the facts because
they're not interested in including all the facts. A propagandist
doesn't care about the facts. They care about their narrative, right?

(43:01):
And so that is an exploit. They just never go
back and close up. And so you can find all
of that stuff. And that's how we literally have a conversation.
Do you think this is real? I don't know. Let
me look at this. What did he say? He referenced
the Supreme Court case. Let me go back and read
the Supreme Court case and the decision. And then what
happened before that decision? Here's where that doesn't line up anymore.

(43:21):
And here's where they're using this as a way to
say something to you that isn't real, right? So that's
how we have those conversations. We know that this sphere
online that we don't exist inside of, going back to
that quality over quantity thing, that they're giving you the
material and the patterns that they share with one another.
It's just the facts aren't all there. So that's it.

(43:44):
I'm filling in the gaps for both of them. And
in the process of giving you the facts where those
gaps are, it disabuses both notions. Does that make sense?

Speaker 1 (43:52):
It naturally happens. Yeah, it is interesting how it naturally happens, right?

Speaker 2 (43:58):
We have a cognitive desire to make sure that our
thoughts are connected in a linear fashion, right?

Speaker 1 (44:07):
And so if it's A, B, C.

Speaker 2 (44:11):
E F we automatically put the D in no matter what,
even if the D is not there, it's act or
it's like three, you know, and then it comes back
because it's a different, it's a different, um, it's a parallel,
it's a parallel insinuation, right? Right.

Speaker 1 (44:28):
Something like that.

Speaker 2 (44:29):
Right.

Speaker 1 (44:30):
It's, it's something that can, that can tangentially.

Speaker 2 (44:33):
Uh, get near the, the, the narrative that makes you
want to believe it's a part of the narrative.

Speaker 3 (44:38):
It's close enough. And that's good enough.

Speaker 1 (44:40):
It's close enough. Yes. Yeah, man. That's the perfect description.
It's close enough.

Speaker 2 (44:45):
Yeah. Um, what are some of the, the, the main
topics that you're seeing right now? And, uh, uh, you know, the,
the zeitgeist at the morning that are, you're seeing this
type of thing really kind of, uh, unfold in real time.

Speaker 3 (45:03):
So you, do you mean some, some things where people are,
are making stories? Yeah. Yeah.

Speaker 2 (45:09):
Yeah. Let's talk about some of the main stories that are,
are interesting to you enough to potentially consider to do
a deeper dive like you did with the Weimar Republic or,
you know, Chris's, uh, uh, um, show on the next generation,
the next war, the army and how they're, uh, redesigning warfare.

(45:30):
They're getting rid of the GWAT scope and they're, they're integrating,
you know, large scale armies and how they're, uh, broken out,
how they're, the command and control works. And they're re
implementing that as, as a preparation potentially for Iran or
for Russia or for whatever is, uh, is taking place.
But obviously I think the, The thinking is that the

(45:53):
next conflicts will be at a much bigger scale.

Speaker 3 (45:57):
Sure. I think that there's a big picture being missed
with the energy war that's going on right now. And
we could talk about that. But I think something more
domestic would have to be data centers. I think there's
a lot of misinformation out there. I think also, too,
that people have just now realized that data centers are
a thing when they've been around for a long time.

(46:20):
It's just the type of technology and then not even
the purpose, but the more modern purpose that sort of
rhymes with why they've been there in the first place.
And we did recently learn that there is a concerted
effort by foreign nations, China specifically, Russia as well, to
put a misinformation out there about data centers. So if

(46:42):
you're going to look at that and you're going to say, well,
why don't the Chinese want us to have data centers? Well,
because the Chinese haven't reached parity with us when it
comes to semiconductors or artificial intelligence. You go and look
at DeepSeq when that was the topic of the day
earlier this year. And then you realize, well, Meta was the,
I think, I think pretty sure it was Meta and
then OpenAI were the first to come out and be like,

(47:04):
there's some patterns here and the distillation of information and
that they use something called AI stacking to train their models.
So this is them again, stealing American tech and American
innovation and their quest for parity and then superiority with
the United States. So that's why they don't want the
United States to build data centers. Well, okay. That's a

(47:25):
reason why people feel that type of way. There is
a totally organic, there's some organic negativity around data centers
as well. I think people just hear how bad they
may be for the environment or they are sick and
tired of losing natural resources to these things. Uh, I
think a lot of people are just associated with tech

(47:46):
and then don't like it because it's, it's just more
tech and they're anti AI. And, you know, there's some
of that, I think too, that exists on the fringe
as well as like what, what AI actually is. And
then the surveillance state would be another thing. And I
think all of that gets tied in with this whole
flock flock thing, right? I'm not pro flock. I just
want to, you know, that's, that's my position on it.

(48:06):
I really, I personally don't want to panopticon, uh, in
my life and everywhere I go, there's a camera. I've
done policing in Germany where people don't have First Amendment rights.
People don't have Fourth Amendment rights. You don't have probable cause,
all of these things. So I've seen what that's like.
And even in a first world country like that, what
your life can look like when you don't have those rights,

(48:28):
not to say that flock is a Fourth Amendment violation.
There's some debate on that. But to me, I think
data centers would probably want to be the biggest thing.
And anytime you open your phone, to look at the
funds and your USA account or your bank of America account,
or your doctor sends you, um, you know, a medical
report on a, um, an appointment that you just had

(48:50):
or whatever it is, or you use chat GPT for
that matter, you're touching a data center and your entire life,
your digital life. And now literally everything that we have
that holds us all together in our, in our digital
world touches a data center at one place or another.
It's not a justification for rubber stamping every single data

(49:12):
center to get built. It doesn't mean that everyone seeking
to build a data center in a very specific place
should get the funding or the land or the water rights.
usage or anything like that to build it. It definitely
means that you should be more involved in your local politics.
I would tell that to everybody and understanding that you
can go and talk to your county administrator and let
them know how upset you are about something or what

(49:33):
they should prioritize when it comes into letting some of
these places or these companies build data centers. But I
think that Like most of this stuff, it has made
people feel like they're powerless when they're just not. You
just have to be okay with doing the work and
going after work to a county administrator meeting on a
Wednesday afternoon or a Wednesday evening and sitting there and

(49:54):
listening and making your voice heard. Like these places are
forums that are still open and available for you. And
I think that if people would participate in that, they'd
realize the barrier to entry is not as big as
it is. you know, um, so data centers would be
one of those things. I think it is a, is
a big thing right now. We've done some, we've done
some talks on that too. So that's great. I, I,
I completely agree with you.

Speaker 2 (50:15):
I mean, I think, you know, I, I had a,
an economist on a, a couple of shows ago and,
and one of the big things he talked about was, Hey,
you know, regardless of whether you want to or not,
you know, the level of, of information that's being, uh,
that's required to, grow the GDP to increase all these productivity,

(50:40):
all these things to keep us at, you know, the
highest advantage are going to require these data centers. Now
he believes it's, there's kind of this data AI center
bubble that's taking place because obviously the, the, um, the,
the revenue that they're supposedly going to generate, they don't,
he didn't really believe that that's going to be viable initially.

(51:01):
It's going to take some time to be able to, to,
to reach that level where these, multi-trillion dollar investments pay
themselves off with how we actually implement ai and and
the other uh technological advancements that are supposedly going to
revolutionize our way of life right robotics uh everything um

(51:22):
um but you do see i you know you see
you know this small county out in utah uh where
they're they were going to increase the local uh taxes
by like 113 percent to help subsidize the development of
the data center. So, you know, you, you, you, you, you,
that's the challenge, right? It's like, I, you know, I'm

(51:43):
trying to consolidate the information that will what trigger that,
that deeper motivation that you're talking about to get off
my ass, right. Go past my, my iPad or my
Netflix account. And after working for, a long day or

(52:03):
traveling or whatever you're doing.

Speaker 1 (52:05):
And then go down to.

Speaker 2 (52:06):
That County meeting, uh, with, you know, people you don't
even know, cause you're not paying, paying any attention to
your local, your local elections. You don't even know what's
going on. And like, like where I'm from in Florida
and Boca Raton, we just had a complete wash of
the old city council. Cause they were, we have this,
these real estate wars taking place in South Florida right now.

(52:29):
Like we have, I don't even know how many different,
billionaire developers are in, and they're just gobbling up, you know,
dormant properties for exorbitant amounts of money and building these
mega more high rises for, for more people to come
in these condos and everything. And obviously no infrastructure is

(52:50):
being spent because I don't.

Speaker 1 (52:52):
Know, for whatever reason they're spending on their tax money.

Speaker 2 (52:55):
But, um, and, uh, you know, and I think that
motivation to get up and go invest is, and first
educating yourself as to what the significant impact is going
to be on your daily life, on your taxes, on whatever, uh,
you know, there's this, this giant hurdle that's, you know,

(53:18):
It's definitely self-imposed for sure, but how? And I think
the imposition is a derivative of being like, well, what's
it matter anyways? I've got no control. I've got no–
my voice doesn't matter. Like now the big one is
that votes don't even matter. I mean I've– I think

(53:39):
I've done– think i've done six or seven shows on
uh election uh uh insecurity and i mean i've had
some of the big pipe hitters in you know garland
favorito from from georgia i had david clements who's huge
in the industry i interviewed ralph pazulu who wrote a

(54:00):
book called stolen elections i had him on And if
you talk to these people, they're like, wow, our elections
don't exist.

Speaker 1 (54:08):
It doesn't matter.

Speaker 2 (54:09):
The machines are done. The voting rolls, you see what
the current DOJ has.

Speaker 1 (54:15):
I don't even know.

Speaker 2 (54:15):
They have lawsuits against all 26 democratically run states about
voter rolls and all this. And so I think, like
you said, what we were discussing in the beginning, so
many people see all these hurdles and which what stifles
motivation that there's any real hope. And so they drive

(54:35):
towards these, these extreme groups and start supporting, you know, this,
this some type of extreme reactionary force.

Speaker 1 (54:45):
Is there any, any, any story.

Speaker 2 (54:48):
That you see, um, that begins that's emerging like that,
maybe with the DSA politically or, or even kind of
the undertones of this Clancy case with the, profound outcry
of support for this woman and saying, hey, mental health
is far greater than you see it.

Speaker 1 (55:09):
And it's something that should excuse her lack of control.
Which one is.

Speaker 2 (55:18):
Emblematic of what you're seeing as what's driving people, I
don't know, I don't know how to frame that question.

Speaker 3 (55:30):
I would say this to you, that I think that
the people who are in positions of power know that
they can exploit your lack of knowledge on, not you,
but proverbially, right? Your lack of knowledge on how the
government actually works and make you think that it's a
completely irretrievably broken system that your participation in doesn't even

(55:51):
matter because it's so broken that your vote doesn't count.
It's so broken that you can't even go to a
meeting and drive change, even though stuff like that does happen. People,
if you went en masse and went to these meetings
and demanded results, there's examples of that happening. You can
disagree on whatever Cliven Bundy was arguing about with land rights,

(56:14):
but the fact that he showed up with a bunch
of people and guns and the government stood down. That's
the whole point of having a local militia, whether you
agree with his claim about cattle rights or whatever. All
these things still exist in the United States. You're mad
at somebody for running? Well, go run yourself. You're mad
at somebody for taking advantage of the tax code? Or

(56:36):
you're mad at a group of people for exploiting something
in your neighborhood or your county or whatever? Make your
own group of people and run and do it the
opposite direction and work against them. It just requires... Um,
the work, and I would say that there probably are,
I mean, there are people that really think that the
system is so broken. So they say to themselves, you know, uh,
why even try, you know, and to that, I would

(56:57):
say that you, people can probably do a better job
of informing themselves. Um, and, and, you know, people aren't
going to, and there's going to be folks that probably
at times in their low points feel like things are
so broken, but I would say like true, true nihilism
itself is a, is a cloak for cowardice more than anything, or, um,
a cloak for laziness. I think that people, people just

(57:19):
underestimate the fact that you can still participate in government,
government around your, wherever you live. Um, and you asked
me like, what, what's an example of that? That's so emblematic. Man,
that's such a, that's such a tough one. We, we,
we talked earlier about how it's not just an excuse
now for poor behavior that it's become like a badge

(57:40):
of honor to not care or to push this narrative
that everything is so broken. And it's hard to kind
of boil it down to one of those things. But
I guess if like you're talking about like victimhood in general,
I would say that we could talk about the Lancey
Clancy or Lindsay Clancy thing like that.

Speaker 1 (58:00):
The other half of that– I don't want to call
it a crutch, man.

Speaker 2 (58:10):
Cause certainly I know I have a lot of friends
that struggle with mental health issues. So it's not that,
but it's, it's, it seems like it's, it's, it's an
easy off ramp, right. For, for being more diligent as
to the causation of problems, right? Like, like it's not,
it's not, Oh, they're just nuts or, or the P

(58:33):
the government's nuts or Trump's nuts. You know, it's like
this easy, it's, it's almost, you know, if, if you're conservative, like,
you know, it's, or, or if you're a liberal, it's
like calling everybody Hitler. Right.

Speaker 3 (58:47):
Oh, sure.

Speaker 1 (58:47):
It doesn't agree.

Speaker 2 (58:48):
Yeah.

Speaker 1 (58:48):
Or like we, we, we, I.

Speaker 2 (58:50):
Think human beings like to have these broad spectrum, uh,
labels they can place to explain away the, the, the,
the nuance of, of movements, political shifts.

Speaker 1 (59:04):
Economic challenges, right?

Speaker 2 (59:08):
The emergence of new global powers or ideologies, right? Like
we want to have those broad stroke examples to make
it easier on us to pick a side potentially, right?
Because nobody ultimately wants to be in limbo. I, you know,

(59:29):
people and, and, and I think, you know, that's why
I think I like shows like yours that try and
that really broaden the perspective of, of do that. The
big thing that I, I'm, I'm not concerned, worried, like
every descriptive term you, you have for the next generation, right?

(59:53):
is the Zoomers, which are going to be a bigger
population than the Boomers.

Speaker 1 (59:59):
And they're going to hold a much greater weight.

Speaker 2 (01:00:02):
And I think how they're educating themselves is varied substantially
from how you educated yourself, how I have educated.

Speaker 1 (01:00:13):
I mean, for me, I remember in 1980, it was.

Speaker 2 (01:00:18):
Uh, you know, my dad reading the wall street journal
or the New York times and telling me, Hey son,
cause he's a cerebral guy. So he was always trying
to get me invested in it. And, uh, I was,
I was big into war movies. And so I had,
I had some, some desire to consume historical, you know,
significance and why things have, you know, so all that

(01:00:38):
was there. But it's nothing what these younger kids have
access to. But being able to direct themselves in a
particular way as opposed to whatever their feed is just reinforcing, reinforcing.

Speaker 1 (01:00:54):
What do you.

Speaker 2 (01:00:56):
Try and tell young people as they have access to
all this information? How do you get them to think critically,
to induce a greater– structure of how they deconstruct information.

Speaker 1 (01:01:17):
Man.

Speaker 3 (01:01:18):
Okay. The first thing I'd say to that is that
I think a lot of people, and this is millennials included, certainly,
and I'm a millennial, right? Yep. That we grew up
with this interpretation that we didn't inherit something that was
built for us. And that it was built to be

(01:01:39):
maintained by us. Okay. That we were handed something. We,
I think, interpreted life like a zoo. That everything was
going to be provided for us. The government is to
act in loco parentis to my own responsibilities. And that
if I just continue to behave this way, everything will

(01:02:02):
be fine. It's like that meme with the dog at
the table with a cup of coffee and everything around
him is on fire. And so there's a guy who
was writing during the Spanish Civil War. His name is
Jose Ortega y Gasset. And he describes people like that
as something he says is airmen, H-E-I-R, airmen. That they
have inherited something that they don't understand how it was made.

(01:02:25):
They don't understand the concept of maintenance. It just is
and therefore that's all it is. And he makes this
analogy about a car. And that a car to them
could be plucked from a tree as long as it drives,
then that's all he needs to know about it. Doesn't
need to know how the metal was procured. Doesn't know
how the oil was refined. Doesn't know any of this stuff, right?

(01:02:45):
They don't need to know any of it because they
don't view it as something that they need to maintain
and don't view it as something to understand. I think
millennials are really bad at that. I think Zoomers are
also really bad at that. and I think that zoomers
take it a step further and obviously it's, it's not
every zoomer. I just want to say that, but like

(01:03:06):
zoomers take it a step further and it's become an
excuse for not doing anything about it. And I think,
or even taking the time to learn about something, it's
become a joke to make fun of how broken something is.
And that's good enough for me to talk about how
broken society is or to talk about how broken, um,
the institution is itself. Um, and, It's cool and easy

(01:03:29):
to make a joke, but you could learn how it
works and go and understand how our representative government works.
We have three branches of government and know that the
judicial handles this, the executive handles this, the legislative handles
these things and how that looks at your local level,
all this stuff. And so I would say, you have
the world at your fingertips on a cell phone or

(01:03:50):
a laptop or whatever it is. rather than spending your
time in an area like Instagram or TikTok or Reddit
or whatever and looking at other people's interpretation of information,
go to sources. And then two, understand how an algorithm works.
You talked earlier about people have this tendency to see

(01:04:12):
that other people are looking at something or that they
recognize that by volume, this exists online. So therefore, it
must be true. I think a really niche example of this,
but kind of funny is this Jaquan Love dude who's
been in the news lately. Okay. He puts so much
bullshit about himself out into the internet that if you

(01:04:34):
Googled him, Google would tell you he did in fact
play for the 49ers. And it only does that because
of the information that it's pulling in from online and
you see the AI interpretation of that. Right. So therefore
it must be true. So you're using it as a source. Well,
what is your source's source is the question that you

(01:04:55):
should ask. Dive into where that information comes from. If
somebody online is talking, the Weimar Germany thing, if somebody
online is talking about inflation in Weimar Germany, and you say, well,
end over end, inflation in the United States has been 3%
over the past year or whatever. Oh man, that's inflation. Well,
Weimar Germany had inflation. Okay, go look at what inflation

(01:05:15):
was in Weimar Germany. And then when you walk away
realizing that you're talking about the difference of trillions of
dollars versus a cent in the United States, like, okay,
that is hyperinflation. Those are not the same thing. And
so I think that it's almost like, I don't understand it.
I don't need to understand it. And maybe even I
don't even understand that it's my duty to understand it

(01:05:38):
because that's what I would call it an actual duty.
You know, Edmund Burke says that civilization is the relationship
between the dead, the living and the unborn. And that's
the way you should look at life, right? If we're
going to uphold Western society, that's the way. As a man,
I'm sure you would agree that one of your duties
is the transmission of information to other people. That's how

(01:05:59):
we've gotten by. That's how the world has gone from
oral tradition into written tradition. If you learned how to
cook food or make a fire or build a house,
you're going to teach your son how to do that, right?
That was your job. You wouldn't just let your son
assume that it's just going to happen. And we've sort
of lost the plot on that too. But I guess
that's what I would say is that understand that there's

(01:06:19):
a source for the source. Get to the actual source.
Go and learn about the people that were making these
decisions and why they made these decisions. And understand as
well that you're not living in the worst of times.
This is not a movie. This is not a novel.
You can go and you can drive change yourself by
getting involved and finding people. That's what you're supposed to do.

(01:06:40):
That's why this American experiment has worked for 250 years.
you know, militia doesn't have to be you and your
bros with a rifle and militia is you learning that
your neighbor can change the alternator in your car, but
you can teach him how to do something else. And
then now you've got two guys in your neighborhood who
know if shit goes sideways, he can help me fix
my car or I can help him do X, Y,
and Z. And then you find other guys in your

(01:07:02):
neighborhood who do all these things. It's a, it's a broader,
you know, your skillset, it's, it's, it's community, all these things.
And just get, I think, man, I could really just
keep ranting on this, but the boil down is to
getting off the computer and talking to people. And this
sounds so trite to say, but I think it's just
so true. But getting off the computer, talking to people

(01:07:23):
that you have face-to-face with wherever it is, and then
sourcing your information, not online, but there's so much tangible
sources in books and older books. And I guess just
learning the intricacies of all this stuff and And stop
believing that everything is so broken that you can't even
participate in it. There's been times where people have felt

(01:07:45):
that way and we're still here. You have to be
that person or somebody else is going to. And you
may not like the way they handle business, I suppose.
So just personal accountability on all of that. But does
that answer your question? That was a really roundabout way of.

Speaker 1 (01:08:01):
Talking about it. No, it was very well put.

Speaker 2 (01:08:04):
I love the concept that you talked about from Edwin Burke, right?
It's our responsibility for the maintenance, right? The general maintenance
of society, of the immediacy of our neighborhoods. Of the
collective nature of a family, right? Of our brothers in

(01:08:26):
arms and their struggles, right? You know, raising children, like
the whole thing is, it's almost as if, and if
you look at the changes throughout history in the various
times of pre or post-revolutionary experiences or wars, right?

Speaker 1 (01:08:51):
Right?

Speaker 2 (01:08:51):
The, the, the rebuilding phase post is substantial and you
see the new, the new construct of of how society's
going to function as a result of those very, uh,
intimate and, and horrific, tragic, uh, um, circumstances that played out, right? I,

(01:09:12):
everybody always, you know, the, the big, uh, we're going,
I'm preparing for civil war. We're going to we're going
to protest, you know, this like we're going into this
is worse than, you know, the civil, you know, civil.

Speaker 1 (01:09:27):
Rights movement in the late 1960s. And I was like,
the fuck it is.

Speaker 2 (01:09:32):
I was like, dude, when Martin Luther King got shot,
there were 1300 cities burning in the United States.

Speaker 1 (01:09:39):
I don't know what you're talking about.

Speaker 2 (01:09:41):
Right.

Speaker 3 (01:09:41):
People were having children during the Great Depression.

Speaker 1 (01:09:44):
That's right. A truckload of kids, a truckload of kids.
That's right.

Speaker 2 (01:09:49):
Uh, you know, and, and again, um, I think it, it,
it also comes back. I think, you know, the, the,
the responsibility that I, I place upon myself in particular
with my, my children, I have four daughters is, is,
you know, I'm, I'm not going to teach them to
build a car, rebuild a carburetor one.

Speaker 1 (01:10:09):
Cause I'm, I suck at doing that.

Speaker 2 (01:10:11):
Uh, you know, I'm definitely not going to, you know,
teach them how to, you know, build a shed outside, right?
Like my, my skills with my hands come with, you know,
chest tubes and, and drilling somebody at a hundred meters
with my Glock, right?

Speaker 1 (01:10:26):
That's about it.

Speaker 2 (01:10:26):
But, but what I also can do is I, is
I know how to, I know how to teach how
to think because I've, I've, I've had that.

Speaker 1 (01:10:34):
Experience, that lived experience.

Speaker 2 (01:10:36):
And, and And I've learned how to think not just
because of my academic prowess, because everybody would tell you
there was none of that, but it was my life experience. And, and,
and what I, what I've taught myself about the human
condition and the human condition is a derivative of willpower, right? It's, it's,
you know, as you confront all these different aspects, the

(01:10:59):
sociological aspects, the, the political aspects, the economic aspect, you know,
all of this, this, you know, what, what can, what, what,
what comes together to drive a civilization or destroy it, right?

Speaker 1 (01:11:12):
You have to be aware of all those things exist.

Speaker 2 (01:11:15):
And so, you know, what I'm trying to do with
young people is say, Hey, you know, if you, if you,
and you said this, you mentioned cowardice. If you, if
you integrate a sense of courage that, that the, your
future is a derivative of your own investments, Right.

Speaker 1 (01:11:35):
And you have the courage to.

Speaker 2 (01:11:37):
Explore the necessity of your involvement. Right. Then you're going
to educate yourself as to the reasons why you need
to involve yourself. You're going to educate, you know, and
and the way we ultimately do that is by looking
back at what just happened and say, hey, let's not
repeat that again.

Speaker 1 (01:11:58):
Right. And what I direct people always toward is the
20th century.

Speaker 2 (01:12:03):
There's no greater century in human history that is filled
with mistakes, right?

Speaker 3 (01:12:09):
Oh, yeah.

Speaker 1 (01:12:11):
And so here were the ramifications. This led to this.
This led to that.

Speaker 2 (01:12:15):
If you understand the nature of the human experience and
what we have, like because you said it when we started, right?
Nothing's new, right? No problem is new. No religious problem
is new. No ideology is new. No political structure is new.

(01:12:36):
And so if you're– I think it's not comfort.

Speaker 1 (01:12:41):
If you're– is it educated?

Speaker 2 (01:12:43):
If you're aware, if you're deeply aware, right, and then
you laden in a heartfelt motivation to educate yourself in
the awareness, now you're prepared– um, for what is, is
coming and what is coming is the unknown and the unknown.
And I think once you can push off the unknown as,

(01:13:07):
as predetermined and, and allow that sense of, uh, your
willful contribution, you know, you flip the narrative. And so
like you, and like you're suggesting with millennials and zoomers, like,
Hey man, like this is on you to keep this
shit going. And so like, and I, that's why, you know, when,

(01:13:28):
when Baker introduced me to you guys and I started
listening to your show, I, I like your show gives
me hope.

Speaker 1 (01:13:35):
Wow.

Speaker 3 (01:13:35):
Well, thank you.

Speaker 1 (01:13:36):
Yeah, man. Like it's one of those things. I like,
I'm like, okay.

Speaker 2 (01:13:40):
Uh, you know, if, if, if more shows start to
dedicate themselves to that level of, of understanding and sure. we,
you know, you've earned the right to have opinions, right. And, and,
but there's a, there's a deep, there's a deep adherence

(01:14:01):
to like deciphering the facts as they actually are and,
and not, not as a feed wants us to believe.
And I, and I think you're right. I think if, if,
if we can like what not, it's not, what a detach.

(01:14:21):
It's not a detachment. If we can, if we can get,
you know, your generation, a younger generation, a, a grander
sense of that, like you said, that personal responsibility, that
they play a role, then, you know, I, I think
we're going to, we're, we're already in a great position.
America's already, you know, the, the, the most dominant country of, of,

(01:14:45):
of what it aspires.

Speaker 1 (01:14:47):
Are there problems? Yeah, fuck yeah, there are.

Speaker 2 (01:14:48):
But, But literally, if you want to pursue, if you
want to go be a mechanic, if you want to
go work at SpaceX, if you want to go be–
work for an asset management firm or coach college football,
all those things are available to you with limited restrictions, right?

Speaker 1 (01:15:05):
I mean it's indicative of your own motivation. But yeah.

Speaker 2 (01:15:10):
Oh, yeah.

Speaker 3 (01:15:10):
No, your personal motivation is a big aspect of this.
When you were– Talking, one of the things that kept
coming to my mind over and over again is a
book that C.S. Lewis wrote called The Abolition of Man.
Have you ever read that book before? There's a line
in that book where he said the job of the
modern educator is not to cut down jungles but to
irrigate deserts. And one of the things– that's exactly what

(01:15:31):
you're talking about actually. You said your lived experience, like
you kind of put yourself down about your academic prowess,
which you shouldn't do because definitely you're a very smart person.
But your experience, the time that you take to learn things,
all of this stuff is you irrigating a desert in
your mind. And if you have children, that's what you
should do is you should push them towards information. And
the other thing that you were talking about too is

(01:15:51):
you have to look at truths and be okay with
where the truth takes you, even if it's a place
that you didn't expect or want at the same time.
And that comes with viewing history. And I think that
history is one of those things where Can it be exploited?
Can it be pseudo-history? All of these things. Yeah, like
actually it can. And it's really hard to look at
history sometimes and find sources that, you know, as human beings,

(01:16:13):
we all tend to have our own biases. So it's
good to read multiple sources across, you know, time. And,
you know, as it gets older, it's harder to find
sources and all of these different things. So you have
to take things with a grain of salt. But what
I say and why I talk about things like the
Weimar Republic or even the episode that we did on
the Roman Revolution is a book on a guy named

(01:16:34):
Ronald Syme wrote, don't, don't read history and walk away
with this conclusion that that happened to them. And so
it's going to happen to me as if somehow this
is a binary that is just meant to replay itself
for you.

Speaker 2 (01:16:47):
Right.

Speaker 3 (01:16:47):
You know, I make the point in that Weimar episode
that the Germans essentially, and all the things that they
went through, right. With hyperinflation, absolutely terrible. It would be,
it would be horrible to watch your children to suffer
with hunger, right? I have not had to do that.
People have had to do that. That's a horrible thing.
And we can sit there and sympathize and empathize with
the decisions that they had to make. And at the

(01:17:07):
end of the day, I still come away with the
conclusion that they allowed this to happen. They allowed strong
men to take over. You could talk about, you know,
Rome in the last hundred years of the Roman Republic
and this desire for strong men as well. And we
can get into that, but you don't have to walk
away with this conclusion that it's going to happen to
you too. And you shouldn't. That's not the right way
to read about history. The reading about history is to

(01:17:29):
take away a lesson that you can avoid things. People
have avoided things. The structures that you have and we
have here in the United States that you were talking about.
I made the point in the Weimar episode. We've corrected
our own mistakes inside of the same constitutional framework. And
why it's so frustrating for me to see the consolidation

(01:17:49):
of power up underneath the executive branch of government because
it doesn't solve problems. We have three different branches on
purpose that are meant to work together. It's not the
president's fault that everything goes wrong. It's a complete total
lack of participation and the ability for these other branches
to function. And it's just so ironic that the one
that is the least functional is the one that's supposed

(01:18:11):
to be the most representative piece of our entire American experiment.
That should tell you everything about like what people and
their apathy towards all of this, you know, vote these
people out, all this other stuff you want to say,
you know. Um, and so that's, that's something I would
say to zoomers too, is understand that just because, you know, don't,
don't use history as like this excuse to look at

(01:18:32):
and say, this happened, we've got to throw all of
this away. Like, no, dude, you're, you're throwing the baby
out with the bathwater. The baby is the lesson. And
the lesson is that you are a person right now.
And that talking about it isn't doing anything like, yeah,
it's great to inform. It's great to go out there
and try to, to, talk about these problems and all
that stuff. Like, yeah, that's what you're supposed to do.

(01:18:54):
You're supposed to teach other people when you learn something.
But it's not an excuse to not participate. It's not
an excuse. And I say this over and over again,
and I'm just going to go to I'm going to
plug something really fast. If you don't mind, you know, we, me,
Aaron love, and a few other people, we have a
pack of our own trying to find veterans who are

(01:19:14):
willing to run and help them out and, uh, want
to participate and, and changing the government from the inside
out and understanding that it's going to be a slow process, right?
That's a lot of work and we do it. I
have a family. I have three children. Aaron has children.
The other guys that do this with, they all have kids,
you know, it's, All of this stuff is going to

(01:19:35):
come from people that don't have a lot of time,
but basically sacrifice all of their free time for things
like this to go and find people willing to run
and to fundraise and to help veterans like our goal
to help veterans get into office. People that align with
our values and want to see America repaired from the
inside out and not hand over power. You know, you,

(01:19:55):
it's so funny. Like you watch all of these politicians
have arguments with one another and they sort of become
these rivals over time. Like this politician hates this politician.
That's like, yeah, Sulla hated Marius in Rome because one
of them got glory and the other didn't or felt
like they didn't deserve it after the Jugurthine War. And
eventually that rivalry between them devolved into strongman governance and

(01:20:18):
then fractal camps of other strongmen who funded other strongmen
that wound up at Caesar. And all of these things,
it's like a small number of people can make massive
amounts of change is what I'm trying to say. And
those guys did. They weren't thinking about necessarily the outcome

(01:20:38):
that they may have. We have the vantage point of
history to look back on it and say this is
how it wound up at Caesar's.

Speaker 2 (01:20:45):
Right?

Speaker 3 (01:20:46):
All of, you know, soul is, um, going after and
killing all of these people inside Rome that were from
the opposite faction was really, really bad, you know, but
you don't have to, you can look at that history
and walk away and say, I don't have to, I
don't have to accept that that's my fate. You know,
I can accept that I have, uh, um, I can
get involved and I can be that person to drive change. Um,

(01:21:08):
and you know, that's what we're trying to do with
the pack is be a group of people who find
and support others who want, who think the same way.
You know, that's talking about it on the internet isn't
going to change anything. Getting involved is going to change
things is the point I'm trying to make.

Speaker 1 (01:21:21):
I love that.

Speaker 2 (01:21:22):
I have been so focused on trying to give, uh, young, uh,
former veterans who are running a platform.

Speaker 1 (01:21:31):
We interviewed, uh, probably four, I think three or four guys.

Speaker 2 (01:21:35):
A couple running for lieutenant governor, some running for Congress
out in Montana, some running for Congress out in Maryland.
And I feel the same way. It's like, all right,
how are we going to do it? Tell us about
the PAC and what kind of candidates are you looking for?

Speaker 1 (01:21:53):
Yeah.

Speaker 3 (01:21:53):
So we're called Freedom Syndicate. And it is, the goal
is to find what we say, America first veterans. And
so we just talked about what America first means, right?
And the goal is to find guys and gals who
are veterans. That's our primary goal. We have the plan

(01:22:14):
of branching out at some point, but for right now,
very focused on just veterans and more than likely veterans
of the global war on terror, getting involved the right,
you know, just kind of the right age for that.
And supporting them, getting into office through fundraising, whatever it is,
helping them with messaging, things like that. but that we
want to see America's role in the world, uh, with

(01:22:36):
a healthy ecosystem of allies who actually support the United States.
We're not an isolationist group. We understand that this is
the United States is part of the world, right? And
it doesn't have to be completely and totally responsible for
the bill on everything that goes, that goes on. And
I think that's been a large, you know, it's, it's
something that's happened to our country and not just like, um,

(01:22:58):
It's almost become the norm to just expect the United
States is going to foot the largest part of the
bill for all of that. And so when we say
we want a healthy ecosystem of allies, we want a
healthy ecosystem of allies who are going to share that
load with the United States. Do we view the world
in this way where American exceptionalism and power have completely disappeared? No,

(01:23:19):
we don't view the world that way. We feel personally
that the world is safest and strongest when America leads.
That is how we feel about that. We also understand
that the United States now is in a position, it
would be unrealistic to think otherwise, where we don't have
to react, unfortunately, to other nations around the world like China,
because we did spend 20 years fighting a war. And

(01:23:41):
the CCP took complete and total advantage of that. We
gave away our industrial base. And one of those reasons
why the British Empire made the same mistake. They focused
so much on becoming the world's bank that they stopped
making things. And that's exactly what the United States did.
You can You can go all the way back to
the Bretton Woods Accords and what the United States was
trying to say with the gold standard and the dollar

(01:24:03):
around the world and all these things. Well, all it
did was hollow the United States out in a large way,
especially deindustrializing the United States. So we believe in reindustrialization.
We believe in not just– nearshoring is one thing, but
homeshoring all of this manufacturing and not just the big things,
but the things that sit in intermediary manufacturing as well.

(01:24:25):
You have to be cool with United States trying to
start a space program again. Like, I think that that's
an amazing thing. I don't think that's a waste of
money in any way, shape or form to use that
as an example. So many people are like, who cares
that NASA is sending Artemis into space, like, and eventually
going to go to the moon again. I think that's amazing.
That's American exceptionalism. I love that we have private industry

(01:24:46):
that can build rockets and, you know, reusable rockets at that.
That's completely revolutionary. You know, it doesn't bother me that
somebody becomes a billionaire along the way that that happens.
you know, look at all the people that he employs.
I'm talking about Elon Musk, obviously, you know what I mean?
I don't have to completely like somebody to see their value.
And that's another problem we have as well. You know,
so we believe in re-industrialization. We believe in the intelligent

(01:25:07):
use of the US military and that not every conflict
requires American blood to be lost for, you know, um, uh,
the world to be safer that we have allies and
re and they can be, uh, responsible for certain regions
of the world and should participate in those things. If
we all can agree that, you know, uh, Islamic terrorism
is a bad thing, that's not America's sole responsibility to oust.

(01:25:29):
Or if we recognize that supply chains are being choked
by another nation or manufacturing is being choked by another nation.
And we saw, I think, a good example of that
would be what happened during COVID. So many people, I think,
woke up to the fact that the Chinese control so much.
It's not just manufacturing, it's pharmaceuticals as well. I mean,
freaking Andrew Bailey sued the CCP for For masks and

(01:25:53):
95 masks, not making it to the state of Missouri,
drove all the way to Chicago to serve the CCP there,
knowing that they weren't going to respond so he could
take back the land that they owed in Missouri to
to get back basically compensation for the loss of life
and money in his state, you know. So things like that.
But I'm just trying to say that the United States,

(01:26:13):
we view the United States as the greatest nation on earth,
and we don't have to foot the bill to continue
to be that nation. And that we have to rebuild
an industrial base in the United States. And we have
to be smarter about our military and its use. And
we have to repair some of the infrastructure we have
in the United States, prioritize bridges, prioritize roads, prioritize Getting

(01:26:34):
money into the military to build ships at a rate
that we need to or to build the actual semiconductor
infrastructure here in the United States that the military is
going to use in the next phase of fifth generation warfare.
All of these things, de-bloat the government, get rid of
a lot of the bureaucracy that exists inside of it,
be more efficient. All of these things hamper our ability

(01:26:54):
to have a functional country. These are real things and
they're overwhelming things. But they aren't going to change unless
you get involved and it's going to take incremental bits.
How do you eat an elephant? One bite at a time.
That's exactly the way we look at the United States.

Speaker 1 (01:27:09):
And start with the ass, for sure. Start with the ass.
There you go. Start with the ass.

Speaker 2 (01:27:13):
Hey, Brandon, man, I am just so grateful that you
came on this show.

Speaker 1 (01:27:19):
I appreciate it. You are a fascinating human being. Your
intelligence is.
Uh, is, is pretty amazing.

Speaker 2 (01:27:27):
And, and I just recommend that all my viewers and listeners, uh,
go check you out, you and Chris. Uh, I really
hope and pray Chris is going to be okay with
whatever he's going through. He's got our prayers with him
for sure. Um, where can people follow, find, and, and
help you out with, uh, the veterans pack as well too. Yeah.

Speaker 3 (01:27:48):
So if you want to help out with the PAC,
you can go to Freedom Sin PAC. So Freedom Sin
is S-Y-N as in syndicate and then PAC, P-A-C dot org.
So Freedom Sin PAC dot org. You can donate if
you can hit us up on Instagram or you can
hit us up on X. If you are a veteran
looking to run, you don't know how to get involved,
any of that stuff. We're here to educate, too. If

(01:28:09):
you don't know how to get involved in local politics.
we'll help you out. We'll answer questions. We'll point you
at people that you can talk to, get your resources,
all that stuff. So the website would be the first place.
And then our social media, like I said, Instagram, and
then X would be another place for that. And then
as far as the podcast goes, we're on Spotify, we're
on Rumble, we're on YouTube, we are on Apple podcasts.
We got social media on Facebook, Instagram, and X. And

(01:28:33):
you can hit us up over there, pretty responsive over
on Instagram, post a lot of short form content and
stuff like that over there. But yeah, I mean, that's where,
where you can find us. We would appreciate your follow,
but we understand, you know, there's a lot of information
out there to consume.

Speaker 1 (01:28:46):
Well, thank you, sir.

Speaker 2 (01:28:47):
I hope everybody gives these guys, gives you a follow
and starts paying attention.

Speaker 1 (01:28:52):
I know I'm going to start really digging in for sure.

Speaker 3 (01:28:55):
Thank you. Appreciate it, man. Thank you for your time too. Absolutely.

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show News

Follow Us On

Hosts And Creators

Clay Travis

Buck Sexton

Show Links

Popular Podcasts

Stuff You Should Know

Dateline NBC

The Joe Rogan Experience

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}David Rutherford Show: Is America Weimar Germany? Brandon Gresham On Propaganda, The Divided Right & The Strongman Trap