May 12, 2025 • 39 mins
Listen to The Next-Gen Report live! Sundays at 7:00 p.m. on AM950, KPRC.
The United Kingdom becomes the latest country to come to the table and cut a trade deal with the Trump Administration. Not surprisingly, this deal was a big win for the United States.
Democrats continue their mission to fight tooth and nail for criminal illegal aliens. The mayor of Newark, New Jersey, is now facing charges after he broke into an ICE facility with the help of other NJ Democrats.
For the latest news, follow me on Instagram, and X:
@the.ethanbuchanan
@_ethanbuchanan
The United Kingdom becomes the latest country to come to the table and cut a trade deal with the Trump Administration. Not surprisingly, this deal was a big win for the United States.
Democrats continue their mission to fight tooth and nail for criminal illegal aliens. The mayor of Newark, New Jersey, is now facing charges after he broke into an ICE facility with the help of other NJ Democrats.
For the latest news, follow me on Instagram, and X:
@the.ethanbuchanan
@_ethanbuchanan
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:02):
From the heart of the Space City to the heart
of gen Z. Welcome to Next Gen Conversation, not Dad's
Talk Radio.
Speaker 2 (00:12):
Ethan talks to you about the issues and events the
man ares who are our generation.
Speaker 1 (00:18):
This is the next Gen Report What Ethan?
Speaker 3 (00:21):
You came in?
Speaker 4 (00:24):
Hey, what's up ladies and gentlemen. Good Sunday evening to you.
I hope you had a good week. My week was
pretty great. I got my marriage license. This is a
fun announcement that unless you're following me on social media,
which you should be you should be, you wouldn't know this.
I'm getting married at the end of this month. I
am very excited about that, very excited. So I got
(00:46):
to go get my marriage license.
Speaker 5 (00:48):
Now.
Speaker 4 (00:48):
I don't know how much you know about me, but
I'm very much a small limited government type of guy.
And I'm also a very big believer in the idea
that the marriage of a man and a woman is
something that should be, you know, performed by this by
the church, not the state. In my opinion, the state
has no role in marriage. The only reason state has
(01:11):
a role in marriage now is because of the income
tax and the government rightly said we want to incentivize
marriage so we'll give you a discount on your taxes
if you are married. Now, of course you have to
go through the process of proving that you're married to
get that discount, so that there's not fraud and abuse.
In Lottie Dot e dot, I think the income tax
is deeply moral that shouldn't exist, And if that didn't exist,
(01:33):
we wouldn't need the state to be involved in marriage
at all. But now that we've got the state involved
in marriage, that opens the door for the state deciding
what marriage is. And as a religious Christian who has
very specific views on what marriage is and is not,
I just I don't like the fact that the state
is involved in this at all. All right, I think
the founding fathers would be rolling in their graves if
(01:53):
they knew that one day the country they built on
the principle of limited government, you would one day be
paying the government to get married. All that's beside the point.
I got my marriage certificate. I'm happy I got it.
I'm super excited to be getting married. So there's that
announcement right there. But since we're on the topic of religion,
I think this is a good segue into today's topic
or today's first topic, I should say.
Speaker 1 (02:16):
Habbius Papham. We do have a pope.
Speaker 4 (02:18):
Now, I made very clear last time I talked about
this that I am not a Catholic.
Speaker 1 (02:23):
I am a Protestant.
Speaker 4 (02:24):
I'm kind of a Southern Baptist Calvinist type person, and
so because of that, I do not put as much
weight on who the pope is religiously so much as
who the Pope is kind of politically and societally. I
do not recognize that he has some sort of special
religious power beyond that of any other pastor. However, there
(02:46):
are a bunch of people in the Catholic Church, like
one point four billion I think is the last estimate
that I saw of practicing Catholics that do recognize him
as a very important moral and religious leader. And that
is worth noting. One point four billion is not a
small number, and those people are spread all over the world. So,
as we talked about last time, who is the pope
is incredibly important even if you're not a religious, practicing Catholic,
(03:09):
and if you're someone who values Western society, which the
Catholic Church, whether you like it or not, does have
a role in. You can go back and find the
episode where we talked about that in detail on the
podcast The Next hyphen Gen Report. Wherever you get your podcast,
go find it, listen to it. This is a very
important topic, all right, So who is the pope matters.
(03:29):
Who becomes the next pope matters. And we now know
who the next Pope is going to be, former Cardinal
Robert Provost. He's the first American pope. That's kind of
a big deal just because he's the first. Anytime anyone
is the first of anything that's worth mentioning. Now, the
big question here is is he's going to be someone
kind of along the lines of Pope Francis or is
he going to be a more traditional person. Pope France
(03:50):
has kind of worked up the reputation of being a
little bit more socially liberal, and a lot of people
really didn't like that. I really didn't like that because
I think it's kind of steering the Catholic Church in
the wrong direction. Because remember, the Catholic Church holds an
incredible influence over the entire Western world.
Speaker 1 (04:07):
I value the Western world. I put weight in who.
Speaker 4 (04:10):
The pope is not because I value the Catholic Church
as a religious institution. I value it as a social
institution that built the Western world. To use a boat analogy,
because I'm about to go on a cruise, the Catholic
Church is kind of the rudder that steers the entire
Western world, and the Pope is the guy who's at
the kind of you know, steering wheel of that boat.
Speaker 1 (04:30):
Right.
Speaker 4 (04:31):
He controls the rudder, which is the Catholic Church, and
that rudder kind of moves the Western world and tells
us which direction.
Speaker 1 (04:37):
We're going to go.
Speaker 4 (04:37):
If you go too far to the left, you get destroyed.
We've seen that Pope Francis seemed to be kind of
steering the ship to the left. That was a big
problem for a lot of people. It's a big problem
for me, even though I'm not Catholic. I care about
the direction of the Catholic Church because that will shape
the direction of the entire Western world. And I do
care about the West because I live in the Western world.
I am a Westerner. Everyone should care about this. So
(04:59):
let's dig in to a little bit. Who is Robert Provost.
He's from Chicago, as I already mentioned. But what we're
all really concerned about is is he kind of a
left wing guy or is he kind of a right
wing guy, or.
Speaker 1 (05:08):
Is he somewhere in the middle.
Speaker 4 (05:10):
I've been digging into this guy since he officially was
announced as Pope a couple of days ago, and I've
kind of fallen into the opinion that Robert Provost is
more of a kind of a centrist, so far as
I can tell just by reading up on some of
the things that he's said and done.
Speaker 1 (05:24):
Now, my friend Kenny.
Speaker 4 (05:24):
Webster makes the argument that you can't really apply the
kind of modern political left and right to the Catholic
Church because it's a far older institution that just doesn't
match up right. I don't know if I agree with that.
I see the argument there. I definitely think it has merit.
It needs to be discussed. Let me know what you
think about it. But even if it can't be applied
to the Catholic Church, it can definitely be applied to
individuals within the Catholic Church, I think. And so this
(05:46):
guy definitely seems to be more of a moderate. He
very much has a history of kind of signaling at
least kind of hinting that he's a little bit more
open borders. He's got a number of different tweets out
that are kind of criticizing Trump and Jay Evans for
their border policies, which, you know, what else is new,
I guess so a lot of people on the right
have been digging those tweets up and then getting upset
(06:07):
about them because they think he is a liberal.
Speaker 3 (06:09):
Now.
Speaker 4 (06:09):
Now, another thing that I've noticed is a lot of
left wing accounts on Twitter are also very upset about
this pick, which kind of informs my decision to decide
that he's probably a kind of political moderate, because I
tend to be of the opinion that if you're pissing
both sides of the political aisle off, you might be
doing something right. So I already told you what was
pissing the right off. Here's what's pissing off the left.
(06:30):
I found a good thread of just quotes from now
Pope Leo over the years that kind of hint more
towards kind of traditional value. So the first one is
a quote where he said, the promotion of gender ideology
is confusing because it seeks to create genders that don't exist.
Speaker 1 (06:46):
I like that.
Speaker 4 (06:46):
Opposition to gender ideology is obviously a good thing. Here's
one that's kind of more theological. The church is not
wholly because of our actions. But because of Christ himself
as her head, our task is to live in conformity
with him, not shape the church to our image. I
really like that. That kind of signals to me that
he's not going to kind of change the church to
be more modern in order to, you know, attract young people.
(07:10):
We've seen that a lot in Protestant churches here in
the United States. They kind of go ridiculously off the left,
to the point of not even being churches anymore, just
to attract new people. There was a fear that that
kind of ideology and approach was kind of infiltrating the
Catholic Church, which would not be good for anybody. And
of course there's a number of very pro life quotes
in here as well, which is of course a good thing.
(07:31):
So where do I come down on this guy? Like
I said, he seems to be sort of a moderate.
We'll see kind of how he governs the Catholic Church
as a pope. It's kind of too early to make
a decision on whether he's good or bad right now,
but he seems like a decent candidate at best. All right,
stay tuned, We're gonna be right back. This is the
next gen report on AM nine to fifty KPRC. Okay,
(08:21):
so it just occurred to me that throughout the entirety
of the last segment, I was calling the new Pope
Robert Provost.
Speaker 1 (08:31):
It's Robert Prevost.
Speaker 4 (08:34):
I just now realized that that was an E and
not an O, just because I wasn't looking closely enough
at it and paying attention. My bad on that my
bat on that Robert prevosts now Pope Leo the whatever. Anyway,
guess who is still alive. You're gonna be surprised by this.
Joe Biden. I know, I know. I was shocked to
hear it as well.
Speaker 1 (08:54):
I really was.
Speaker 4 (08:55):
I thought that once he kind of lost the election
and no longer became president and more, they just kind
of stopped taking him out of the casket and drugging
him up to make him look like he was live.
I figured they just leave him in there, but no,
they wheeled him out again for some reason. He did
an interview. He actually did a couple of interviews over
the course of this last week. One of them was
(09:17):
with BBC, which is interesting to me. This is the
first interview he's done since losing the election, since no
longer becoming president. And I say he lost even though
he dropped out of the race. So somebody said, well,
he didn't lose, he dropped out. Kamala Harris lost just
by virtue of him having to sub in Kamala Harris.
(09:37):
That's a loss right there, in and of itself. Okay,
And then Kamala Harris turned around and lost. So Joe
Biden arguably lost twice, which is even worse. So I
will say he lost. He did lose. His party lost,
he lost his legacy. Sucks, he was a loser. He
is a loser.
Speaker 1 (09:52):
He sucks. He lost. All right, all that put to
the side.
Speaker 4 (09:56):
Is it not kind of weird that a former American
president the first interview he does after leaving office is
with the BBC, which is a British outlet, the British
broadcasting company or corporation or whatever it is. Why didn't
he do an interview with an American outlet. You'd think
you'd do an interview with an American outlet. Now does
this actually matter?
Speaker 5 (10:17):
No?
Speaker 4 (10:17):
But is it kind of weird and interesting? I think so,
so I pointed out. Anyways, so we're gonna dig in
a little bit to this BBC interview, because I found
one particular cut that was just frankly hilarious to me.
So obviously, one of the first questions that Joe Biden
is asked by this BBC interviewer is did you leave
the race too late and kind of screw over whoever
was gonna come in after you? Because a lot of
(10:39):
people say if if Joe Biden had dropped out earlier,
the Democrats could have had an actual proper primary, selected
a better candidate Lottie Dottie Doll, and maybe they would
have beat Donald Trump. First of all, I don't think
that that's the case. I think even if Joe Biden
had announced, like in twenty twenty three that he was
not going to run for reelection, even in situation, Kamala
(11:01):
Harris still would have become the candidate.
Speaker 1 (11:02):
Here is why the Democrats have literally no one else
on the bench.
Speaker 4 (11:05):
For one, there's a case to be made that maybe
Gavin Newsom is the candidate of the future for them,
but his record in California is so terrible he will
never be able to win anything nationally. He has way
too long of a history of being way too radical.
He will never make it. He's way too public facing.
Everybody can look at his record and see that it's
radical and terrible. He would never be able to beat
(11:26):
even a moderate Republican and the top dogs that the
DNC know that they do. On top of that, the
base would have lost their mind. If you replace Kamala
Harris with anybody just by virtue of being the vice president,
she's viewed as being the air apparent. We can see
that right now with JD Vance on the right, people
are kind of looking at him and saying, hey, what
are you doing in twenty twenty eight, JD. And for
(11:47):
the record, he's probably gonna run. I'm calling it now,
he'd be a fool not to. On top of Kamala
Harris being viewed as the air apparent, she's also a
black woman. And if you replace a black woman with
anybody that's not also a black woman, the radical left
kind of we have to check all the box's base
of the Democrat Party is going to lose their mind
(12:07):
and they will not show up, and you'll lose because
of that reason as well. So either way, the moment
Joe Biden drops out of this race, the race is over.
Donald Trump wins. The Democrats have nobody else. Kamala Harris
was never going to be a winning candidate. Nobody likes her,
nobody ever has all right, the idea that she could
have won if she had more time and ran a
better primary, that's ridiculous. The idea that somebody else other
(12:29):
than Kamala Harris could have stepped up in one is
also ridiculous.
Speaker 1 (12:32):
So when this.
Speaker 4 (12:33):
BBC guy asks Joe Biden, if he had passed the
torch earlier, would we maybe be in a different position,
The answer is no.
Speaker 1 (12:41):
That's not Joe Biden's answer.
Speaker 4 (12:42):
Joe Biden just goes on a tangent about why he
didn't drop out, and you'll never believe his reasoning.
Speaker 1 (12:47):
Take a listen to this. Did you leave it too late?
Speaker 6 (12:51):
Should you have withdrawn earlier given someone else a bigger job?
Speaker 2 (12:55):
I don't.
Speaker 7 (12:56):
I don't think it would have.
Speaker 4 (12:59):
Mattered.
Speaker 1 (13:01):
Okay, he's right, it wouldn't have mattered. They would have
lost anyway.
Speaker 7 (13:04):
But we left at a time when we had a
good candidate, she's fully funded. And what happened was I
had become what we had set out to do no
one thought we could do.
Speaker 4 (13:21):
I mean, hey, give him credit words due, He's right.
Nobody thought he could wreck the country as bad as
he did.
Speaker 7 (13:26):
I become so successful our agenda it was hard to
say now, I'm going to stop now. I meant when
I said when I started that, I think it's I'm
prepared to hand this to the next generation, the transition government.
But things moved so quickly that it made it difficult
to walk away to get and it was a hard decision.
Speaker 4 (13:54):
But you didn't make that decision, Joe, don't lie. You
didn't make that decision. I don't know if he knows
he didn't make that decision. But he did not make
that decision. He has not made any decision in at
least three years, maybe four years. Come on, be real, Joe,
be real.
Speaker 1 (14:11):
Regrets.
Speaker 7 (14:13):
No, I think it was the right decision. I think
that the uh, well, it was just a difficult decision.
Speaker 1 (14:25):
But you shouldn't have taken it out.
Speaker 7 (14:28):
Well, I don't, I don't think. I don't think so.
I mean, I don't know how that would have made
much difference.
Speaker 1 (14:32):
He's correct, it would not have made much difference. It
wouldn't have.
Speaker 4 (14:36):
It just plain wouldn't have for all the reasons I've
already said. But what's wilder to me? Is he thinks
he did something. He thinks he's gonna have this legacy, right,
And that's what he wanted the whole time. He wanted
the legacy. He ran for president just because he wanted
to say I was the president. Remember, that's the like
highest level of politics that you can achieve if you're
(14:57):
a career politician like Joe Biden, is being the president
of the United States. That's that's the peak of your career.
That's what it is right there. And he wanted that.
He just wanted that accolade. I don't think he even
wanted to actually do anything. A lot of people behind him,
the radical people that were actually running the Democrat Party,
running his administration and putting him forward as kind of
(15:18):
the face of their movement. They wanted things done. But
Joe Biden didn't want anything done. He just wanted to
say I was the president, just to have the accolade.
Speaker 1 (15:27):
The achievement.
Speaker 4 (15:27):
Now I almost feel bad for him because he doesn't realize,
and I truly believe he doesn't know this. He will
go down in history as a terrible president. The history
books will skim past Joe Biden's presidency to get to
Donald Trump too.
Speaker 1 (15:40):
I guarantee it. Okay.
Speaker 4 (15:41):
So that was just one of a couple of interviews
he did. The other interview that he did was on
ABC's The View, and The View, to their credit, asked
him a question that a lot of people want to
see asked of Joe Biden, and nobody in the mainstream
media has asked them. So credit where credit is due.
The View asked him this question. They asked him about
his cognitive decline. Take a listen to his response here,
(16:02):
and then I've got another clip that I also want
to play for you to kind of illustrate a point.
Speaker 1 (16:06):
Take a listen to this.
Speaker 8 (16:07):
Yeah, mister president, since you left office, there have been
a number of books that have come out, deeply sourced
from democratic sources, that claim in your final year there
was a dramatic decline in your cognitive abilities in the
final year of your presidency. What is your response to
these allegations or are these sources wrong?
Speaker 7 (16:26):
They are wrong. There's nothing to sustain that number one.
Number two, you know, think of what we're left for.
We left for the circumstance where we had an insurrection.
I started nonsense of civil war. We had a circumstance
where we were in a position that we well the
(16:50):
pandemic because of the incompetents of the last outfit, end
up over a million people dying, million people dying.
Speaker 4 (16:58):
We're also okay, So completely blew past the question. He
just said no and then started rambling about his record,
which is terrible. I don't even know if he was
rambling about his record there. I couldn't really tell. He
was kind of rambling about his record and Trump's record. Anyway,
He says there's no evidence about his cognitive decline. Just
a few seconds later, on that same interview, he gave
us blatant evidence of his cognitive decline.
Speaker 7 (17:18):
Take a listen, all the the project, the benefits. How
do you lead the world with having that best instruction more?
How do you lead the world having been out him
the best healthcare role? How do you lead the world
without having the best educations more?
Speaker 1 (17:33):
How do you lead the world.
Speaker 7 (17:34):
And you don't have that done?
Speaker 4 (17:36):
How do you leave the world without you gotta have
to lead the world. Joe Biden is clearly a disabled
old man. Get him off the screen, let him lift
his last years in peace.
Speaker 1 (17:47):
He does not need this. All right, stay tuned, We'll be.
Speaker 4 (17:49):
Right back this is the next gen report.
Speaker 1 (18:18):
All right, drop another coin and your ethan was right jar.
This time it's on tariffs. We got some trade deals
coming in. Who called it?
Speaker 4 (18:30):
I called it, I called it, everybody called it. If
you were kind of an honest person who was looking
at the actual economics of all this, and I'm by
no means an economic expert, it's not hard to sort
out how this was going to go, how this was
always going to go.
Speaker 1 (18:44):
We cut off our markets to other people.
Speaker 4 (18:45):
Other people try to make concessions to us to get
access to our markets because our markets are amazing. We
have the most amount of the most wealthiest people in
all of the world. So this is where you go
to sell stuff the United States of America. We should
be getting something out of that. I think that Trump
thinks that. I think it's common sense. All right, So
(19:06):
let's turn back the clock by a couple of weeks, right,
So let's think back to Liberation Day.
Speaker 1 (19:12):
That was April third.
Speaker 4 (19:14):
I believe that's when Trump actually formally announced all of
these massive tariffs and the stock market. Let's look specifically
at the DOWD Jones Industrial as an example. Here went
from forty two thousand all the way down to about
thirty seven thousand, and everybody said, this is the end
of the world, right, Trump is upsetting the economic balance.
(19:34):
We're going to get cut off from the global markets.
The entire economy is going to crash and tank because look,
the stock market or the Dow Jones is all the
way down to thirty seven thousand and at the time,
what I said was, hey, guys, it was actually way
lower during certain points of Joe Biden's presidency. And on
top of that, just wait a little bit for the
(19:55):
negotiations to happen and for deals to be cut, and
then the stock market will go all the way back up.
Speaker 1 (20:02):
Flash forward a couple.
Speaker 4 (20:03):
Of weeks to now, to May eleventh, and as of
I guess yesterday ish, those are the numbers I'm looking
at right now, is the yesterday's numbers. The Dow Jones
had climbed all the way back to forty one thousand
and some change. So that's just a few hundred points
lower than it was on Liberation Day, and it'll probably
continue to go up. Why because we're still working on
(20:25):
more deals. So what caused it to spike just now? Well,
I'm glad you asked Trump cut a deal with the
United Kingdom. That's right, the United Kingdom. This is not
a small piece of news. This is big news, all right.
So essentially, over a couple of weeks after that initial
shocking dip, the markets had kind of worked their way
back up, and then we got this trade deal cut
(20:45):
and it spiked again. So, as I said at the time,
if you just hold off and wait for the deals
to be cut, everything will be fine. And that's exactly
what happened. So let's get into this trade deal that
we had cut with the United Kingdom because it looks
it really does look like a great deal. First of all,
I want to play you the cut of Donald Trump
earlier this week, or I guess earlier last week, because
(21:06):
Sunday's the first day of the week announcing the trade
deal had been cut. So that's Trump jd vance, a
bunch of the top guys in his cabinet. Howard Lutnik
is there sitting all around the phone at the Resolute
desk with British Prime Minister Keir Starmer on the phone
and they're announcing this trade deal.
Speaker 1 (21:24):
Take a listen.
Speaker 5 (21:25):
This morning, I'm thrilled to announce that we've reached a
breakthrough trade deal with the United Kingdom, credible country. Today
is a victory day for World War Two. We won
the war together exactly eighty years ago, so there could
be no more perfect morning to reach this historic agreement.
And it's beautiful weather out. I will tell you that here,
(21:47):
beautiful weather is so perfect outside. But it's really in
particular the agreement with one of our closest and most
cherished allies, and we're so happy that's the way it
worked out. I want to thank Prime Minister Starmer and
his very talented team for their outstanding work and partnership.
(22:09):
Today's agreement with the UK is the first and a
series of agreements on trade that my administration has been
negotiating over the past four weeks. With this deal, the
UK joins the United States and affirming that reciprocity and
fairness is an essential and vital principle of international trade.
Speaker 4 (22:29):
Okay, so he's really talking up this deal. So let's
dig into some of the details. Now, this is the
White House cheat sheet, so it's, you know, sort of
a bias source.
Speaker 1 (22:38):
But I trust this particular source. You can trust it
or not trust it if you want.
Speaker 4 (22:42):
But these are the details that the White House has
put out about this big UK trade deal. First of all,
this will grant five billion dollars of new market access
to United States exports.
Speaker 1 (22:55):
Right, So that's.
Speaker 4 (22:56):
Basically five hundred billion more dollars that are open to
America companies selling American products because we can sell to
you know, parts and places in England, or sell cheaper
in England than we could ever before. That's good. Our
company is making more money, is good for us. We
like that tariff revenue six billion dollars. And this is
(23:16):
an estimate, of course, because we don't know how many
UK products are going to be brought into the United States.
But the estimates are about six billion dollars of new
external revenue. That's great. Let me dig into that a
little bit. So Donald Trump has not removed the tariffs
on the UK. Right, that was not the deal. The
deal was not zero for zero, which is good for us.
(23:39):
Actually it is. It is good for us. So we
all think the income tax sucks, or at least if
you're listening to the show, you should.
Speaker 6 (23:46):
I do.
Speaker 4 (23:47):
If we're getting a crap ton of money from other
countries because of tariffs, we don't need the income tax, right,
we can make all that money up without having the
income tax. This is something that Donald Trump has voiced
support for replacing the income tax with external revenue from tariffs.
I like that idea, and we've done that in the past,
as Donald Trump has, you know, constantly pointed out. So
(24:08):
six billion dollars of new external revenue is absolutely a
good thing. So where's that six billion dollars of external
revenue coming from. I noted that we have not dropped
our tariffs on the UK, and the UK has not
dropped all of their tariffs on us, but they have
significantly lowered them. So before this deal, UK tariffs on
American products were about five point one percent. US tariffs
(24:32):
on UK products were just three point four percent, all right,
So that is an imbalance, right. They were charging us
five percent to sell our products there, We were only
charging them three percent to sell their products. Here, Donald
Trump is right to look at that and say we
are being a taken advantage of. We pretty clearly were.
So what is the new deal? What are the new
terms of trade? Well, they're way better in our favor,
(24:55):
all right. Now, UK tariffs on American products are going
to be just one one point eight percent.
Speaker 1 (25:01):
That makes sense, that's fair.
Speaker 4 (25:03):
You know, they have the same interests that we do, right,
They want to protect their industry, protect their products, their business.
It's just like we want to protect ours. So it's
it's completely fair for them to say we're gonna have
a tariff on your product. That tariff being one point
eight percent instead of five point one that's a huge
win for us. The bigger win for US is our
tariffs on their products. UK products coming into the United
(25:27):
States will now be hit with that baseline ten percent
tariff that Trump talked about. Now, you might say, wait
a minute, their tariffs are just one point eight percent
on our products. Our tariff on their products is ten percent.
That's not fair. Maybe it is, maybe it's not. I
don't care. I'm an American. I want us to win.
We are winning with this deal. This is a good
(25:48):
deal for us. That's my concern. I don't care if
it's unfair for them. I'm not from the UK. I'm
an American. I want our business, our interests protected. Ten
percent on their products one point eight per on ours sold. Now,
I would also make the argument that that actually isn't
really that unfair, just because of how much more the
UK exports to US than we export to them. So
(26:11):
in twenty twenty four, and these are rough estimates, so
two hundred and sixty one billion dollars worth of goods
went from the UK into the United States in twenty
twenty four, give or take. Right, from the US to
the UK, just under eighty billion dollars worth of goods
was exported. So there's a big difference there. It makes
sense for them to pay more because they're exporting more.
Speaker 6 (26:33):
Right.
Speaker 4 (26:33):
I think at the end of the day, this will
wind up being a good deal for both parties, both sides.
And if it's not such to be British, I guess
we're the United States.
Speaker 1 (26:42):
We win. We can't stop winning. Cry about it.
Speaker 4 (26:45):
So let's now get into the details about how this
actually benefits us. So, according to the White House, this
will be unprecedented access to the UK market for ethanol, beef, cereals, fruits, vegetables,
animal feed, tobacco, soft drink, shellfish, textile, chemicals, machinery, and more.
That's great. That's a lot of stuff that we in
(27:06):
America do really good oil. We're great at that, beef,
We're great at that cereals, cinnamon, toast crunch for the
wind baby all day, every day, tobacco great, soft drinks great.
Speaker 1 (27:17):
These are all huge.
Speaker 4 (27:18):
Industries in the United States. Most of them are food related.
That there's the reason we're fat. But this is really
good news for American companies. We can now sell our
products easier in the UK. Right listen to Agriculture Secretary
Brooke Wallins explain why this is such a big deal
for American farmers and ranchers.
Speaker 3 (27:36):
Specific to the beef, this is going to exponentially increase
our beef exports into be very clear, American beef is
the safest, the best quality, and the crown jewel of
American agriculture for the world. So I think a really
important part of this deal isn't just the ethanol reducing
of terrorists from nineteen to zero, which for our road
croppers is a huge deal, but also for beef. And
(27:58):
as we move forward, I know our incredible trade team
is looking at all the meats, all of the produce,
really all of our agriculture exports, and I don't know
if there's an industry that has been treated more unfairly
and has suffered more.
Speaker 1 (28:11):
Than our agriculture industry. So we look forward to you.
Speaker 3 (28:13):
I'll be in the UK on Monday talking to my
counterpart over there for really for next week, and look
forward to moving that out.
Speaker 2 (28:20):
Across the country.
Speaker 1 (28:21):
This is a big win for Texas.
Speaker 4 (28:23):
Everybody knows we got a lot of cows here, we
got a big beef industry here, we have a lot
of agriculture here. This is a huge deal for us
because it's going to incentivize more people to get into
or stay in that kind of small town family farm industry.
Speaker 1 (28:36):
Right.
Speaker 4 (28:37):
It creates more demand for our beef. This will benefit Texas.
It will our farmers, are ranchers, our small town family
farms that we keep saying we're dying, this industry is disappearing.
This is going to revitalize it. That's a huge win
for us. All Right, stay tuned. We got one more
segment coming up right after this break. This is the
next Gen Report. All right, let's close out by talking
(29:22):
about these ridiculous Yankee Democrats. I will never understand how
the Democrat Party managed to get so bad at politics.
They're just they're not very good about it. You guys
remember January sixth, right, you probably should. It was a
big deal at the time. So the Democrats have gone
(29:42):
nuts because how could a bunch of evil Trump supporters
storm into a federal building that they're not allowed to
be in and assault police officers?
Speaker 1 (29:55):
How terrible is it that that happened?
Speaker 4 (29:58):
And then no less, then, like four or five years later,
they all do the exact same thing at an ice
detention facility in New Jersey. This is the wildest story
of the week by far, and we're gonna talk about
it because it is insane. So the Democrats whole thing
right now is we love criminal legal aliens. I don't
(30:20):
know why that's their thing. I don't know why they
think that's going to win them anything. Because remember, one
of the biggest wins for Donald Trump right now has
been the border. That's why he won the election. People
were sick of the border crisis. Donald Trump won the
election because of that. He closed the border. He's got
super high approval ratings on the border right now. So
the Democrats say, well, hey, this is really popular, let's
(30:42):
do the opposite of it. For whatever reason, So on Friday,
a bunch of Democrats, a couple of New Jersey representatives,
and I believe the mayor of Newark, New Jersey all
got together and said, hey, well, we're just gonna go
and we're gonna demand entry into this ice detention facility
in New Jersey, and we're gonna fight and push our
way past and assault whoever we have to in order
(31:03):
to get into this detention facility. Spoiler alert, the mayor
of Newark actually got arrested over all of this, because hey,
you're not allowed to just break into an ice facility
and assault cops in order to get into. That's against
the rules. It's a big no no. You'll go to
jail for it. So here is US attorney Alena Habba
basically giving the breakdown of what happened and why the
(31:26):
mayor of Newark got arrested.
Speaker 1 (31:27):
Take a listen for you're.
Speaker 2 (31:28):
Right, Congress. People have the right to investigate, and we
allowed them. In number one. Number two, the mayor was
actually inside the facility, was warned, was asked to leave
several times more than once, refused to leave, was put
under arrest inside the facility, walked out when he was
told he was under arrest, and then was tough.
Speaker 1 (31:50):
That is what happened.
Speaker 2 (31:51):
Lucky for our team in HSI who I stand behind
who many people don't understand that the Department's Justice encompasses
that they did absolutely everything correct. If you look at
these individuals Twitter accounts, they have been openly saying they
are going to go in. There is a reason these
Congress people are standing out there running them up and
(32:11):
running their mouths as usual. But however, I will tell
you this. The mayor was inside, was told he was
going to be under arrest inside when he refused to
leave after several obligations, several notifications that he should remove himself,
chose not to do so, and then was placed under
arrest when he walked out of the facility. So while
I love this scheme, the game and the tactics of
(32:35):
these individuals that are perfectly fine and we're not touched,
I will say very clearly the.
Speaker 1 (32:40):
Mayor were not assaulted.
Speaker 2 (32:41):
These three individuals, none of them were assaulted. They were assaulted, Martha,
But I'm asking you know, in terms of what happened
in there, you know, it is very striking, especially after
having read the list of at least some of the
people who are in this facility, and I'm trying to
figure out exactly what they are doing to protect together there.
(33:03):
It's called Grand standing unfortunately, Martha, and when you break
the law, there's no grand standing that will help you,
period the end.
Speaker 4 (33:09):
Okay, So now the question is, well, did they break
the law? What exactly happened? So I'm not gonna play
the video because you really have to see it more
than hear it right now. Otherwise it just sounds like
a lot of people yelling. You can't really make out
just from listening what exactly is going on. But I
took the liberty of reposting the video. You can find
it on my x page Underscore Ethan Buchanan. It's very
(33:31):
clear from watching the video that there are multiple actual
legal violations here by one of the representatives who's trying
to basically push and fight her way into this ice facility.
The BODYCIN footage is already available, Like I said, it's
on my Twitter. You can see Representative la Monica mc
iver just kind of like pushing, shoving. It looks like
(33:52):
she may have like thrown some smacks around. I won't
say punch, but it looks like she may have tried
to like slap one of the ice officers, and she's
yelling at him and cussing at him and trying to
get them to let her in, and they're just kind
of trying to push them away because she's up in
these officers' faces yelling and shouting, and obviously that's not allowed, right,
(34:13):
It's pretty clearly not allowed. I mean, if you look
at this video and then look at the kind of
January sixth body cam that's floating around out there, it
looks very very similar.
Speaker 1 (34:23):
It does.
Speaker 4 (34:24):
But the Democrats are not upset about this for whatever reason.
It perfectly illustrates the double standard. If you do this
and you're a Republican at the Capitol, you go to
jail for years at a time. But if you do
this and you're a Democrat at an ice facility, you're
hailed as a hero by the left. Ross Baraka, the
Newark mayor, who again as Alina Haba, made clear he
(34:45):
was inside a facility he was not allowed to be in.
He was asked multiple times to leave, he refused to,
he was arrested. That makes perfect sense. This is federal trespassing.
This is a crime.
Speaker 1 (34:54):
You're not allowed to do it.
Speaker 4 (34:56):
But he goes out and he does a victory lab
on CNA and talks about how important it is for
democracy that he goes and gets himself arrested for trespassing
at a federal detention facility.
Speaker 1 (35:06):
Take a listen to.
Speaker 6 (35:07):
This, well, I mean, I obviously was charged with federal
trespassing and you know, which is a classic misdemeanor. But
you know, going through this is just really humiliating and painful.
But the reality is this is this is what democracy
is right and so you know, we are in dispute
(35:27):
here and we're just living in a time period now
where if you are opposed to the ideas of people,
you can be threatened with arrests or intimidation. And that's
exactly what's happening. And that's not the America that we
want to be in. That's not the America that people
chose to move thousands of miles from around the world to.
This is not this place, and they're turning it into
an authoritarianist government.
Speaker 1 (35:48):
Do you have any regrets about how today happened?
Speaker 6 (35:53):
No, I don't have any regrets at all. I went
down there to support my congress people, my congress woman
from my district.
Speaker 4 (36:00):
No regrets, folks, no regrets. He doesn't regret anything at all.
How stuck up do you have to be to be
making this case that like, oh, I'm being attacked. I'm
the victim because I broke the law, and now I'm
going to jail. You be in charge with misdemeanor truspassing
because you were misdemeanor truspassing. That's not a threat to democracy,
that's the claim he makes. This isn't the America that
(36:22):
people have moved thousands of miles to come to. This is,
you know, an authoritarian government.
Speaker 1 (36:28):
No, it's not.
Speaker 4 (36:29):
You broke the law. This is the consequences. Remember, I
remind you it can't be said enough. The Left is
the party of nobody is above the law. And now
we're finding out that now that Donald Trump is president,
everybody is above the law as long as they're not
Donald Trump. Leticia James is above the law. This guy,
this goober mayor from Newark, New Jersey, he's above the law.
(36:51):
Arresting him for clearly committing a trespassing crime.
Speaker 1 (36:55):
That's just authoritarian, that's oppression. This is bad. We can't
do that.
Speaker 4 (36:59):
I think that I honestly expect and hope the voters
to not notice the blatant hypocrisy.
Speaker 1 (37:05):
I think that's what they're going for.
Speaker 4 (37:06):
They're just hoping we can do whatever we want and
the political memory will be short enough that everybody will
forget that less than two years ago we were arresting
the former president of the United States for essentially nothing.
It's definitely a political gamble, to say the least, and
I don't think this is gonna pay off just because
the Trump administration is better at politics than they are,
so they're going to bat for these illegal aliens in
(37:29):
this detention center. Right, So, you would assume that if
the Democrats are gonna make this political gamble, they're gonna
do it on behalf of like some sympathetic people that
are being mistreated by the Trump administration. Right So, DHS
dot gov, the Department of Homeland Security official twitter page,
posted a list of some of the people that are
(37:49):
in this detention center that these radical Democrats are going
to bat for, and it is bad. Up. First, we
have Chinchilla Calabrello, who is in ice custody pending removal proceedings. Caballero, Cabrello,
or however you pronounce his name, is a positive match
to numerous TESC lookouts and is a known active member
of MS thirteen. On top of that, we have Ramos Marin,
(38:11):
who is wanted in Brazil for homicide and has an
Interpol red notice. We also have Adonus Estevez Bello, a
twenty three year old citizen of the Dominican Republic. Steves
has multiple felony convictions for possession of a controlled dangerous substance,
drug trafficking, resisting arrest, and possession of a weapon for
unlawful purposes. And yet these are the people that the
(38:33):
Democrat Party is going to bat for. These are the
people that they're willing to go to jail for, these criminal,
illegal aliens. Let me know how that works out for
you in the primaries.
Speaker 1 (38:42):
Anyway.
Speaker 4 (38:42):
That's all I've got for you this week. Thank you
very much for listening. Tune into the podcast. The next
hyphen Gen Report will be back on Wednesday. Check me
out there, all right, Thank you very much for listening.
From the heart of the Space City to the heart
of gen Z. Welcome to Next Gen Conversation, not Dad's
Talk Radio.
Speaker 2 (00:12):
Ethan talks to you about the issues and events the
man ares who are our generation.
Speaker 1 (00:18):
This is the next Gen Report What Ethan?
Speaker 3 (00:21):
You came in?
Speaker 4 (00:24):
Hey, what's up ladies and gentlemen. Good Sunday evening to you.
I hope you had a good week. My week was
pretty great. I got my marriage license. This is a
fun announcement that unless you're following me on social media,
which you should be you should be, you wouldn't know this.
I'm getting married at the end of this month. I
am very excited about that, very excited. So I got
(00:46):
to go get my marriage license.
Speaker 5 (00:48):
Now.
Speaker 4 (00:48):
I don't know how much you know about me, but
I'm very much a small limited government type of guy.
And I'm also a very big believer in the idea
that the marriage of a man and a woman is
something that should be, you know, performed by this by
the church, not the state. In my opinion, the state
has no role in marriage. The only reason state has
(01:11):
a role in marriage now is because of the income
tax and the government rightly said we want to incentivize
marriage so we'll give you a discount on your taxes
if you are married. Now, of course you have to
go through the process of proving that you're married to
get that discount, so that there's not fraud and abuse.
In Lottie Dot e dot, I think the income tax
is deeply moral that shouldn't exist, And if that didn't exist,
(01:33):
we wouldn't need the state to be involved in marriage
at all. But now that we've got the state involved
in marriage, that opens the door for the state deciding
what marriage is. And as a religious Christian who has
very specific views on what marriage is and is not,
I just I don't like the fact that the state
is involved in this at all. All right, I think
the founding fathers would be rolling in their graves if
(01:53):
they knew that one day the country they built on
the principle of limited government, you would one day be
paying the government to get married. All that's beside the point.
I got my marriage certificate. I'm happy I got it.
I'm super excited to be getting married. So there's that
announcement right there. But since we're on the topic of religion,
I think this is a good segue into today's topic
or today's first topic, I should say.
Speaker 1 (02:16):
Habbius Papham. We do have a pope.
Speaker 4 (02:18):
Now, I made very clear last time I talked about
this that I am not a Catholic.
Speaker 1 (02:23):
I am a Protestant.
Speaker 4 (02:24):
I'm kind of a Southern Baptist Calvinist type person, and
so because of that, I do not put as much
weight on who the pope is religiously so much as
who the Pope is kind of politically and societally. I
do not recognize that he has some sort of special
religious power beyond that of any other pastor. However, there
(02:46):
are a bunch of people in the Catholic Church, like
one point four billion I think is the last estimate
that I saw of practicing Catholics that do recognize him
as a very important moral and religious leader. And that
is worth noting. One point four billion is not a
small number, and those people are spread all over the world. So,
as we talked about last time, who is the pope
is incredibly important even if you're not a religious, practicing Catholic,
(03:09):
and if you're someone who values Western society, which the
Catholic Church, whether you like it or not, does have
a role in. You can go back and find the
episode where we talked about that in detail on the
podcast The Next hyphen Gen Report. Wherever you get your podcast,
go find it, listen to it. This is a very
important topic, all right, So who is the pope matters.
(03:29):
Who becomes the next pope matters. And we now know
who the next Pope is going to be, former Cardinal
Robert Provost. He's the first American pope. That's kind of
a big deal just because he's the first. Anytime anyone
is the first of anything that's worth mentioning. Now, the
big question here is is he's going to be someone
kind of along the lines of Pope Francis or is
he going to be a more traditional person. Pope France
(03:50):
has kind of worked up the reputation of being a
little bit more socially liberal, and a lot of people
really didn't like that. I really didn't like that because
I think it's kind of steering the Catholic Church in
the wrong direction. Because remember, the Catholic Church holds an
incredible influence over the entire Western world.
Speaker 1 (04:07):
I value the Western world. I put weight in who.
Speaker 4 (04:10):
The pope is not because I value the Catholic Church
as a religious institution. I value it as a social
institution that built the Western world. To use a boat analogy,
because I'm about to go on a cruise, the Catholic
Church is kind of the rudder that steers the entire
Western world, and the Pope is the guy who's at
the kind of you know, steering wheel of that boat.
Speaker 1 (04:30):
Right.
Speaker 4 (04:31):
He controls the rudder, which is the Catholic Church, and
that rudder kind of moves the Western world and tells
us which direction.
Speaker 1 (04:37):
We're going to go.
Speaker 4 (04:37):
If you go too far to the left, you get destroyed.
We've seen that Pope Francis seemed to be kind of
steering the ship to the left. That was a big
problem for a lot of people. It's a big problem
for me, even though I'm not Catholic. I care about
the direction of the Catholic Church because that will shape
the direction of the entire Western world. And I do
care about the West because I live in the Western world.
I am a Westerner. Everyone should care about this. So
(04:59):
let's dig in to a little bit. Who is Robert Provost.
He's from Chicago, as I already mentioned. But what we're
all really concerned about is is he kind of a
left wing guy or is he kind of a right
wing guy, or.
Speaker 1 (05:08):
Is he somewhere in the middle.
Speaker 4 (05:10):
I've been digging into this guy since he officially was
announced as Pope a couple of days ago, and I've
kind of fallen into the opinion that Robert Provost is
more of a kind of a centrist, so far as
I can tell just by reading up on some of
the things that he's said and done.
Speaker 1 (05:24):
Now, my friend Kenny.
Speaker 4 (05:24):
Webster makes the argument that you can't really apply the
kind of modern political left and right to the Catholic
Church because it's a far older institution that just doesn't
match up right. I don't know if I agree with that.
I see the argument there. I definitely think it has merit.
It needs to be discussed. Let me know what you
think about it. But even if it can't be applied
to the Catholic Church, it can definitely be applied to
individuals within the Catholic Church, I think. And so this
(05:46):
guy definitely seems to be more of a moderate. He
very much has a history of kind of signaling at
least kind of hinting that he's a little bit more
open borders. He's got a number of different tweets out
that are kind of criticizing Trump and Jay Evans for
their border policies, which, you know, what else is new,
I guess so a lot of people on the right
have been digging those tweets up and then getting upset
(06:07):
about them because they think he is a liberal.
Speaker 3 (06:09):
Now.
Speaker 4 (06:09):
Now, another thing that I've noticed is a lot of
left wing accounts on Twitter are also very upset about
this pick, which kind of informs my decision to decide
that he's probably a kind of political moderate, because I
tend to be of the opinion that if you're pissing
both sides of the political aisle off, you might be
doing something right. So I already told you what was
pissing the right off. Here's what's pissing off the left.
(06:30):
I found a good thread of just quotes from now
Pope Leo over the years that kind of hint more
towards kind of traditional value. So the first one is
a quote where he said, the promotion of gender ideology
is confusing because it seeks to create genders that don't exist.
Speaker 1 (06:46):
I like that.
Speaker 4 (06:46):
Opposition to gender ideology is obviously a good thing. Here's
one that's kind of more theological. The church is not
wholly because of our actions. But because of Christ himself
as her head, our task is to live in conformity
with him, not shape the church to our image. I
really like that. That kind of signals to me that
he's not going to kind of change the church to
be more modern in order to, you know, attract young people.
(07:10):
We've seen that a lot in Protestant churches here in
the United States. They kind of go ridiculously off the left,
to the point of not even being churches anymore, just
to attract new people. There was a fear that that
kind of ideology and approach was kind of infiltrating the
Catholic Church, which would not be good for anybody. And
of course there's a number of very pro life quotes
in here as well, which is of course a good thing.
(07:31):
So where do I come down on this guy? Like
I said, he seems to be sort of a moderate.
We'll see kind of how he governs the Catholic Church
as a pope. It's kind of too early to make
a decision on whether he's good or bad right now,
but he seems like a decent candidate at best. All right,
stay tuned, We're gonna be right back. This is the
next gen report on AM nine to fifty KPRC. Okay,
(08:21):
so it just occurred to me that throughout the entirety
of the last segment, I was calling the new Pope
Robert Provost.
Speaker 1 (08:31):
It's Robert Prevost.
Speaker 4 (08:34):
I just now realized that that was an E and
not an O, just because I wasn't looking closely enough
at it and paying attention. My bad on that my
bat on that Robert prevosts now Pope Leo the whatever. Anyway,
guess who is still alive. You're gonna be surprised by this.
Joe Biden. I know, I know. I was shocked to
hear it as well.
Speaker 1 (08:54):
I really was.
Speaker 4 (08:55):
I thought that once he kind of lost the election
and no longer became president and more, they just kind
of stopped taking him out of the casket and drugging
him up to make him look like he was live.
I figured they just leave him in there, but no,
they wheeled him out again for some reason. He did
an interview. He actually did a couple of interviews over
the course of this last week. One of them was
(09:17):
with BBC, which is interesting to me. This is the
first interview he's done since losing the election, since no
longer becoming president. And I say he lost even though
he dropped out of the race. So somebody said, well,
he didn't lose, he dropped out. Kamala Harris lost just
by virtue of him having to sub in Kamala Harris.
(09:37):
That's a loss right there, in and of itself. Okay,
And then Kamala Harris turned around and lost. So Joe
Biden arguably lost twice, which is even worse. So I
will say he lost. He did lose. His party lost,
he lost his legacy. Sucks, he was a loser. He
is a loser.
Speaker 1 (09:52):
He sucks. He lost. All right, all that put to
the side.
Speaker 4 (09:56):
Is it not kind of weird that a former American
president the first interview he does after leaving office is
with the BBC, which is a British outlet, the British
broadcasting company or corporation or whatever it is. Why didn't
he do an interview with an American outlet. You'd think
you'd do an interview with an American outlet. Now does
this actually matter?
Speaker 5 (10:17):
No?
Speaker 4 (10:17):
But is it kind of weird and interesting? I think so,
so I pointed out. Anyways, so we're gonna dig in
a little bit to this BBC interview, because I found
one particular cut that was just frankly hilarious to me.
So obviously, one of the first questions that Joe Biden
is asked by this BBC interviewer is did you leave
the race too late and kind of screw over whoever
was gonna come in after you? Because a lot of
(10:39):
people say if if Joe Biden had dropped out earlier,
the Democrats could have had an actual proper primary, selected
a better candidate Lottie Dottie Doll, and maybe they would
have beat Donald Trump. First of all, I don't think
that that's the case. I think even if Joe Biden
had announced, like in twenty twenty three that he was
not going to run for reelection, even in situation, Kamala
(11:01):
Harris still would have become the candidate.
Speaker 1 (11:02):
Here is why the Democrats have literally no one else
on the bench.
Speaker 4 (11:05):
For one, there's a case to be made that maybe
Gavin Newsom is the candidate of the future for them,
but his record in California is so terrible he will
never be able to win anything nationally. He has way
too long of a history of being way too radical.
He will never make it. He's way too public facing.
Everybody can look at his record and see that it's
radical and terrible. He would never be able to beat
(11:26):
even a moderate Republican and the top dogs that the
DNC know that they do. On top of that, the
base would have lost their mind. If you replace Kamala
Harris with anybody just by virtue of being the vice president,
she's viewed as being the air apparent. We can see
that right now with JD Vance on the right, people
are kind of looking at him and saying, hey, what
are you doing in twenty twenty eight, JD. And for
(11:47):
the record, he's probably gonna run. I'm calling it now,
he'd be a fool not to. On top of Kamala
Harris being viewed as the air apparent, she's also a
black woman. And if you replace a black woman with
anybody that's not also a black woman, the radical left
kind of we have to check all the box's base
of the Democrat Party is going to lose their mind
(12:07):
and they will not show up, and you'll lose because
of that reason as well. So either way, the moment
Joe Biden drops out of this race, the race is over.
Donald Trump wins. The Democrats have nobody else. Kamala Harris
was never going to be a winning candidate. Nobody likes her,
nobody ever has all right, the idea that she could
have won if she had more time and ran a
better primary, that's ridiculous. The idea that somebody else other
(12:29):
than Kamala Harris could have stepped up in one is
also ridiculous.
Speaker 1 (12:32):
So when this.
Speaker 4 (12:33):
BBC guy asks Joe Biden, if he had passed the
torch earlier, would we maybe be in a different position,
The answer is no.
Speaker 1 (12:41):
That's not Joe Biden's answer.
Speaker 4 (12:42):
Joe Biden just goes on a tangent about why he
didn't drop out, and you'll never believe his reasoning.
Speaker 1 (12:47):
Take a listen to this. Did you leave it too late?
Speaker 6 (12:51):
Should you have withdrawn earlier given someone else a bigger job?
Speaker 2 (12:55):
I don't.
Speaker 7 (12:56):
I don't think it would have.
Speaker 4 (12:59):
Mattered.
Speaker 1 (13:01):
Okay, he's right, it wouldn't have mattered. They would have
lost anyway.
Speaker 7 (13:04):
But we left at a time when we had a
good candidate, she's fully funded. And what happened was I
had become what we had set out to do no
one thought we could do.
Speaker 4 (13:21):
I mean, hey, give him credit words due, He's right.
Nobody thought he could wreck the country as bad as
he did.
Speaker 7 (13:26):
I become so successful our agenda it was hard to
say now, I'm going to stop now. I meant when
I said when I started that, I think it's I'm
prepared to hand this to the next generation, the transition government.
But things moved so quickly that it made it difficult
to walk away to get and it was a hard decision.
Speaker 4 (13:54):
But you didn't make that decision, Joe, don't lie. You
didn't make that decision. I don't know if he knows
he didn't make that decision. But he did not make
that decision. He has not made any decision in at
least three years, maybe four years. Come on, be real, Joe,
be real.
Speaker 1 (14:11):
Regrets.
Speaker 7 (14:13):
No, I think it was the right decision. I think
that the uh, well, it was just a difficult decision.
Speaker 1 (14:25):
But you shouldn't have taken it out.
Speaker 7 (14:28):
Well, I don't, I don't think. I don't think so.
I mean, I don't know how that would have made
much difference.
Speaker 1 (14:32):
He's correct, it would not have made much difference. It
wouldn't have.
Speaker 4 (14:36):
It just plain wouldn't have for all the reasons I've
already said. But what's wilder to me? Is he thinks
he did something. He thinks he's gonna have this legacy, right,
And that's what he wanted the whole time. He wanted
the legacy. He ran for president just because he wanted
to say I was the president. Remember, that's the like
highest level of politics that you can achieve if you're
(14:57):
a career politician like Joe Biden, is being the president
of the United States. That's that's the peak of your career.
That's what it is right there. And he wanted that.
He just wanted that accolade. I don't think he even
wanted to actually do anything. A lot of people behind him,
the radical people that were actually running the Democrat Party,
running his administration and putting him forward as kind of
(15:18):
the face of their movement. They wanted things done. But
Joe Biden didn't want anything done. He just wanted to
say I was the president, just to have the accolade.
Speaker 1 (15:27):
The achievement.
Speaker 4 (15:27):
Now I almost feel bad for him because he doesn't realize,
and I truly believe he doesn't know this. He will
go down in history as a terrible president. The history
books will skim past Joe Biden's presidency to get to
Donald Trump too.
Speaker 1 (15:40):
I guarantee it. Okay.
Speaker 4 (15:41):
So that was just one of a couple of interviews
he did. The other interview that he did was on
ABC's The View, and The View, to their credit, asked
him a question that a lot of people want to
see asked of Joe Biden, and nobody in the mainstream
media has asked them. So credit where credit is due.
The View asked him this question. They asked him about
his cognitive decline. Take a listen to his response here,
(16:02):
and then I've got another clip that I also want
to play for you to kind of illustrate a point.
Speaker 1 (16:06):
Take a listen to this.
Speaker 8 (16:07):
Yeah, mister president, since you left office, there have been
a number of books that have come out, deeply sourced
from democratic sources, that claim in your final year there
was a dramatic decline in your cognitive abilities in the
final year of your presidency. What is your response to
these allegations or are these sources wrong?
Speaker 7 (16:26):
They are wrong. There's nothing to sustain that number one.
Number two, you know, think of what we're left for.
We left for the circumstance where we had an insurrection.
I started nonsense of civil war. We had a circumstance
where we were in a position that we well the
(16:50):
pandemic because of the incompetents of the last outfit, end
up over a million people dying, million people dying.
Speaker 4 (16:58):
We're also okay, So completely blew past the question. He
just said no and then started rambling about his record,
which is terrible. I don't even know if he was
rambling about his record there. I couldn't really tell. He
was kind of rambling about his record and Trump's record. Anyway,
He says there's no evidence about his cognitive decline. Just
a few seconds later, on that same interview, he gave
us blatant evidence of his cognitive decline.
Speaker 7 (17:18):
Take a listen, all the the project, the benefits. How
do you lead the world with having that best instruction more?
How do you lead the world having been out him
the best healthcare role? How do you lead the world
without having the best educations more?
Speaker 1 (17:33):
How do you lead the world.
Speaker 7 (17:34):
And you don't have that done?
Speaker 4 (17:36):
How do you leave the world without you gotta have
to lead the world. Joe Biden is clearly a disabled
old man. Get him off the screen, let him lift
his last years in peace.
Speaker 1 (17:47):
He does not need this. All right, stay tuned, We'll be.
Speaker 4 (17:49):
Right back this is the next gen report.
Speaker 1 (18:18):
All right, drop another coin and your ethan was right jar.
This time it's on tariffs. We got some trade deals
coming in. Who called it?
Speaker 4 (18:30):
I called it, I called it, everybody called it. If
you were kind of an honest person who was looking
at the actual economics of all this, and I'm by
no means an economic expert, it's not hard to sort
out how this was going to go, how this was
always going to go.
Speaker 1 (18:44):
We cut off our markets to other people.
Speaker 4 (18:45):
Other people try to make concessions to us to get
access to our markets because our markets are amazing. We
have the most amount of the most wealthiest people in
all of the world. So this is where you go
to sell stuff the United States of America. We should
be getting something out of that. I think that Trump
thinks that. I think it's common sense. All right, So
(19:06):
let's turn back the clock by a couple of weeks, right,
So let's think back to Liberation Day.
Speaker 1 (19:12):
That was April third.
Speaker 4 (19:14):
I believe that's when Trump actually formally announced all of
these massive tariffs and the stock market. Let's look specifically
at the DOWD Jones Industrial as an example. Here went
from forty two thousand all the way down to about
thirty seven thousand, and everybody said, this is the end
of the world, right, Trump is upsetting the economic balance.
(19:34):
We're going to get cut off from the global markets.
The entire economy is going to crash and tank because look,
the stock market or the Dow Jones is all the
way down to thirty seven thousand and at the time,
what I said was, hey, guys, it was actually way
lower during certain points of Joe Biden's presidency. And on
top of that, just wait a little bit for the
(19:55):
negotiations to happen and for deals to be cut, and
then the stock market will go all the way back up.
Speaker 1 (20:02):
Flash forward a couple.
Speaker 4 (20:03):
Of weeks to now, to May eleventh, and as of
I guess yesterday ish, those are the numbers I'm looking
at right now, is the yesterday's numbers. The Dow Jones
had climbed all the way back to forty one thousand
and some change. So that's just a few hundred points
lower than it was on Liberation Day, and it'll probably
continue to go up. Why because we're still working on
(20:25):
more deals. So what caused it to spike just now? Well,
I'm glad you asked Trump cut a deal with the
United Kingdom. That's right, the United Kingdom. This is not
a small piece of news. This is big news, all right.
So essentially, over a couple of weeks after that initial
shocking dip, the markets had kind of worked their way
back up, and then we got this trade deal cut
(20:45):
and it spiked again. So, as I said at the time,
if you just hold off and wait for the deals
to be cut, everything will be fine. And that's exactly
what happened. So let's get into this trade deal that
we had cut with the United Kingdom because it looks
it really does look like a great deal. First of all,
I want to play you the cut of Donald Trump
earlier this week, or I guess earlier last week, because
(21:06):
Sunday's the first day of the week announcing the trade
deal had been cut. So that's Trump jd vance, a
bunch of the top guys in his cabinet. Howard Lutnik
is there sitting all around the phone at the Resolute
desk with British Prime Minister Keir Starmer on the phone
and they're announcing this trade deal.
Speaker 1 (21:24):
Take a listen.
Speaker 5 (21:25):
This morning, I'm thrilled to announce that we've reached a
breakthrough trade deal with the United Kingdom, credible country. Today
is a victory day for World War Two. We won
the war together exactly eighty years ago, so there could
be no more perfect morning to reach this historic agreement.
And it's beautiful weather out. I will tell you that here,
(21:47):
beautiful weather is so perfect outside. But it's really in
particular the agreement with one of our closest and most
cherished allies, and we're so happy that's the way it
worked out. I want to thank Prime Minister Starmer and
his very talented team for their outstanding work and partnership.
(22:09):
Today's agreement with the UK is the first and a
series of agreements on trade that my administration has been
negotiating over the past four weeks. With this deal, the
UK joins the United States and affirming that reciprocity and
fairness is an essential and vital principle of international trade.
Speaker 4 (22:29):
Okay, so he's really talking up this deal. So let's
dig into some of the details. Now, this is the
White House cheat sheet, so it's, you know, sort of
a bias source.
Speaker 1 (22:38):
But I trust this particular source. You can trust it
or not trust it if you want.
Speaker 4 (22:42):
But these are the details that the White House has
put out about this big UK trade deal. First of all,
this will grant five billion dollars of new market access
to United States exports.
Speaker 1 (22:55):
Right, So that's.
Speaker 4 (22:56):
Basically five hundred billion more dollars that are open to
America companies selling American products because we can sell to
you know, parts and places in England, or sell cheaper
in England than we could ever before. That's good. Our
company is making more money, is good for us. We
like that tariff revenue six billion dollars. And this is
(23:16):
an estimate, of course, because we don't know how many
UK products are going to be brought into the United States.
But the estimates are about six billion dollars of new
external revenue. That's great. Let me dig into that a
little bit. So Donald Trump has not removed the tariffs
on the UK. Right, that was not the deal. The
deal was not zero for zero, which is good for us.
(23:39):
Actually it is. It is good for us. So we
all think the income tax sucks, or at least if
you're listening to the show, you should.
Speaker 6 (23:46):
I do.
Speaker 4 (23:47):
If we're getting a crap ton of money from other
countries because of tariffs, we don't need the income tax, right,
we can make all that money up without having the
income tax. This is something that Donald Trump has voiced
support for replacing the income tax with external revenue from tariffs.
I like that idea, and we've done that in the past,
as Donald Trump has, you know, constantly pointed out. So
(24:08):
six billion dollars of new external revenue is absolutely a
good thing. So where's that six billion dollars of external
revenue coming from. I noted that we have not dropped
our tariffs on the UK, and the UK has not
dropped all of their tariffs on us, but they have
significantly lowered them. So before this deal, UK tariffs on
American products were about five point one percent. US tariffs
(24:32):
on UK products were just three point four percent, all right,
So that is an imbalance, right. They were charging us
five percent to sell our products there, We were only
charging them three percent to sell their products. Here, Donald
Trump is right to look at that and say we
are being a taken advantage of. We pretty clearly were.
So what is the new deal? What are the new
terms of trade? Well, they're way better in our favor,
(24:55):
all right. Now, UK tariffs on American products are going
to be just one one point eight percent.
Speaker 1 (25:01):
That makes sense, that's fair.
Speaker 4 (25:03):
You know, they have the same interests that we do, right,
They want to protect their industry, protect their products, their business.
It's just like we want to protect ours. So it's
it's completely fair for them to say we're gonna have
a tariff on your product. That tariff being one point
eight percent instead of five point one that's a huge
win for us. The bigger win for US is our
tariffs on their products. UK products coming into the United
(25:27):
States will now be hit with that baseline ten percent
tariff that Trump talked about. Now, you might say, wait
a minute, their tariffs are just one point eight percent
on our products. Our tariff on their products is ten percent.
That's not fair. Maybe it is, maybe it's not. I
don't care. I'm an American. I want us to win.
We are winning with this deal. This is a good
(25:48):
deal for us. That's my concern. I don't care if
it's unfair for them. I'm not from the UK. I'm
an American. I want our business, our interests protected. Ten
percent on their products one point eight per on ours sold. Now,
I would also make the argument that that actually isn't
really that unfair, just because of how much more the
UK exports to US than we export to them. So
(26:11):
in twenty twenty four, and these are rough estimates, so
two hundred and sixty one billion dollars worth of goods
went from the UK into the United States in twenty
twenty four, give or take. Right, from the US to
the UK, just under eighty billion dollars worth of goods
was exported. So there's a big difference there. It makes
sense for them to pay more because they're exporting more.
Speaker 6 (26:33):
Right.
Speaker 4 (26:33):
I think at the end of the day, this will
wind up being a good deal for both parties, both sides.
And if it's not such to be British, I guess
we're the United States.
Speaker 1 (26:42):
We win. We can't stop winning. Cry about it.
Speaker 4 (26:45):
So let's now get into the details about how this
actually benefits us. So, according to the White House, this
will be unprecedented access to the UK market for ethanol, beef, cereals, fruits, vegetables,
animal feed, tobacco, soft drink, shellfish, textile, chemicals, machinery, and more.
That's great. That's a lot of stuff that we in
(27:06):
America do really good oil. We're great at that, beef,
We're great at that cereals, cinnamon, toast crunch for the
wind baby all day, every day, tobacco great, soft drinks great.
Speaker 1 (27:17):
These are all huge.
Speaker 4 (27:18):
Industries in the United States. Most of them are food related.
That there's the reason we're fat. But this is really
good news for American companies. We can now sell our
products easier in the UK. Right listen to Agriculture Secretary
Brooke Wallins explain why this is such a big deal
for American farmers and ranchers.
Speaker 3 (27:36):
Specific to the beef, this is going to exponentially increase
our beef exports into be very clear, American beef is
the safest, the best quality, and the crown jewel of
American agriculture for the world. So I think a really
important part of this deal isn't just the ethanol reducing
of terrorists from nineteen to zero, which for our road
croppers is a huge deal, but also for beef. And
(27:58):
as we move forward, I know our incredible trade team
is looking at all the meats, all of the produce,
really all of our agriculture exports, and I don't know
if there's an industry that has been treated more unfairly
and has suffered more.
Speaker 1 (28:11):
Than our agriculture industry. So we look forward to you.
Speaker 3 (28:13):
I'll be in the UK on Monday talking to my
counterpart over there for really for next week, and look
forward to moving that out.
Speaker 2 (28:20):
Across the country.
Speaker 1 (28:21):
This is a big win for Texas.
Speaker 4 (28:23):
Everybody knows we got a lot of cows here, we
got a big beef industry here, we have a lot
of agriculture here. This is a huge deal for us
because it's going to incentivize more people to get into
or stay in that kind of small town family farm industry.
Speaker 1 (28:36):
Right.
Speaker 4 (28:37):
It creates more demand for our beef. This will benefit Texas.
It will our farmers, are ranchers, our small town family
farms that we keep saying we're dying, this industry is disappearing.
This is going to revitalize it. That's a huge win
for us. All Right, stay tuned. We got one more
segment coming up right after this break. This is the
next Gen Report. All right, let's close out by talking
(29:22):
about these ridiculous Yankee Democrats. I will never understand how
the Democrat Party managed to get so bad at politics.
They're just they're not very good about it. You guys
remember January sixth, right, you probably should. It was a
big deal at the time. So the Democrats have gone
(29:42):
nuts because how could a bunch of evil Trump supporters
storm into a federal building that they're not allowed to
be in and assault police officers?
Speaker 1 (29:55):
How terrible is it that that happened?
Speaker 4 (29:58):
And then no less, then, like four or five years later,
they all do the exact same thing at an ice
detention facility in New Jersey. This is the wildest story
of the week by far, and we're gonna talk about
it because it is insane. So the Democrats whole thing
right now is we love criminal legal aliens. I don't
(30:20):
know why that's their thing. I don't know why they
think that's going to win them anything. Because remember, one
of the biggest wins for Donald Trump right now has
been the border. That's why he won the election. People
were sick of the border crisis. Donald Trump won the
election because of that. He closed the border. He's got
super high approval ratings on the border right now. So
the Democrats say, well, hey, this is really popular, let's
(30:42):
do the opposite of it. For whatever reason, So on Friday,
a bunch of Democrats, a couple of New Jersey representatives,
and I believe the mayor of Newark, New Jersey all
got together and said, hey, well, we're just gonna go
and we're gonna demand entry into this ice detention facility
in New Jersey, and we're gonna fight and push our
way past and assault whoever we have to in order
(31:03):
to get into this detention facility. Spoiler alert, the mayor
of Newark actually got arrested over all of this, because hey,
you're not allowed to just break into an ice facility
and assault cops in order to get into. That's against
the rules. It's a big no no. You'll go to
jail for it. So here is US attorney Alena Habba
basically giving the breakdown of what happened and why the
(31:26):
mayor of Newark got arrested.
Speaker 1 (31:27):
Take a listen for you're.
Speaker 2 (31:28):
Right, Congress. People have the right to investigate, and we
allowed them. In number one. Number two, the mayor was
actually inside the facility, was warned, was asked to leave
several times more than once, refused to leave, was put
under arrest inside the facility, walked out when he was
told he was under arrest, and then was tough.
Speaker 1 (31:50):
That is what happened.
Speaker 2 (31:51):
Lucky for our team in HSI who I stand behind
who many people don't understand that the Department's Justice encompasses
that they did absolutely everything correct. If you look at
these individuals Twitter accounts, they have been openly saying they
are going to go in. There is a reason these
Congress people are standing out there running them up and
(32:11):
running their mouths as usual. But however, I will tell
you this. The mayor was inside, was told he was
going to be under arrest inside when he refused to
leave after several obligations, several notifications that he should remove himself,
chose not to do so, and then was placed under
arrest when he walked out of the facility. So while
I love this scheme, the game and the tactics of
(32:35):
these individuals that are perfectly fine and we're not touched,
I will say very clearly the.
Speaker 1 (32:40):
Mayor were not assaulted.
Speaker 2 (32:41):
These three individuals, none of them were assaulted. They were assaulted, Martha,
But I'm asking you know, in terms of what happened
in there, you know, it is very striking, especially after
having read the list of at least some of the
people who are in this facility, and I'm trying to
figure out exactly what they are doing to protect together there.
(33:03):
It's called Grand standing unfortunately, Martha, and when you break
the law, there's no grand standing that will help you,
period the end.
Speaker 4 (33:09):
Okay, So now the question is, well, did they break
the law? What exactly happened? So I'm not gonna play
the video because you really have to see it more
than hear it right now. Otherwise it just sounds like
a lot of people yelling. You can't really make out
just from listening what exactly is going on. But I
took the liberty of reposting the video. You can find
it on my x page Underscore Ethan Buchanan. It's very
(33:31):
clear from watching the video that there are multiple actual
legal violations here by one of the representatives who's trying
to basically push and fight her way into this ice facility.
The BODYCIN footage is already available, Like I said, it's
on my Twitter. You can see Representative la Monica mc
iver just kind of like pushing, shoving. It looks like
(33:52):
she may have like thrown some smacks around. I won't
say punch, but it looks like she may have tried
to like slap one of the ice officers, and she's
yelling at him and cussing at him and trying to
get them to let her in, and they're just kind
of trying to push them away because she's up in
these officers' faces yelling and shouting, and obviously that's not allowed, right,
(34:13):
It's pretty clearly not allowed. I mean, if you look
at this video and then look at the kind of
January sixth body cam that's floating around out there, it
looks very very similar.
Speaker 1 (34:23):
It does.
Speaker 4 (34:24):
But the Democrats are not upset about this for whatever reason.
It perfectly illustrates the double standard. If you do this
and you're a Republican at the Capitol, you go to
jail for years at a time. But if you do
this and you're a Democrat at an ice facility, you're
hailed as a hero by the left. Ross Baraka, the
Newark mayor, who again as Alina Haba, made clear he
(34:45):
was inside a facility he was not allowed to be in.
He was asked multiple times to leave, he refused to,
he was arrested. That makes perfect sense. This is federal trespassing.
This is a crime.
Speaker 1 (34:54):
You're not allowed to do it.
Speaker 4 (34:56):
But he goes out and he does a victory lab
on CNA and talks about how important it is for
democracy that he goes and gets himself arrested for trespassing
at a federal detention facility.
Speaker 1 (35:06):
Take a listen to.
Speaker 6 (35:07):
This, well, I mean, I obviously was charged with federal
trespassing and you know, which is a classic misdemeanor. But
you know, going through this is just really humiliating and painful.
But the reality is this is this is what democracy
is right and so you know, we are in dispute
(35:27):
here and we're just living in a time period now
where if you are opposed to the ideas of people,
you can be threatened with arrests or intimidation. And that's
exactly what's happening. And that's not the America that we
want to be in. That's not the America that people
chose to move thousands of miles from around the world to.
This is not this place, and they're turning it into
an authoritarianist government.
Speaker 1 (35:48):
Do you have any regrets about how today happened?
Speaker 6 (35:53):
No, I don't have any regrets at all. I went
down there to support my congress people, my congress woman
from my district.
Speaker 4 (36:00):
No regrets, folks, no regrets. He doesn't regret anything at all.
How stuck up do you have to be to be
making this case that like, oh, I'm being attacked. I'm
the victim because I broke the law, and now I'm
going to jail. You be in charge with misdemeanor truspassing
because you were misdemeanor truspassing. That's not a threat to democracy,
that's the claim he makes. This isn't the America that
(36:22):
people have moved thousands of miles to come to. This is,
you know, an authoritarian government.
Speaker 1 (36:28):
No, it's not.
Speaker 4 (36:29):
You broke the law. This is the consequences. Remember, I
remind you it can't be said enough. The Left is
the party of nobody is above the law. And now
we're finding out that now that Donald Trump is president,
everybody is above the law as long as they're not
Donald Trump. Leticia James is above the law. This guy,
this goober mayor from Newark, New Jersey, he's above the law.
(36:51):
Arresting him for clearly committing a trespassing crime.
Speaker 1 (36:55):
That's just authoritarian, that's oppression. This is bad. We can't
do that.
Speaker 4 (36:59):
I think that I honestly expect and hope the voters
to not notice the blatant hypocrisy.
Speaker 1 (37:05):
I think that's what they're going for.
Speaker 4 (37:06):
They're just hoping we can do whatever we want and
the political memory will be short enough that everybody will
forget that less than two years ago we were arresting
the former president of the United States for essentially nothing.
It's definitely a political gamble, to say the least, and
I don't think this is gonna pay off just because
the Trump administration is better at politics than they are,
so they're going to bat for these illegal aliens in
(37:29):
this detention center. Right, So, you would assume that if
the Democrats are gonna make this political gamble, they're gonna
do it on behalf of like some sympathetic people that
are being mistreated by the Trump administration. Right So, DHS
dot gov, the Department of Homeland Security official twitter page,
posted a list of some of the people that are
(37:49):
in this detention center that these radical Democrats are going
to bat for, and it is bad. Up. First, we
have Chinchilla Calabrello, who is in ice custody pending removal proceedings. Caballero, Cabrello,
or however you pronounce his name, is a positive match
to numerous TESC lookouts and is a known active member
of MS thirteen. On top of that, we have Ramos Marin,
(38:11):
who is wanted in Brazil for homicide and has an
Interpol red notice. We also have Adonus Estevez Bello, a
twenty three year old citizen of the Dominican Republic. Steves
has multiple felony convictions for possession of a controlled dangerous substance,
drug trafficking, resisting arrest, and possession of a weapon for
unlawful purposes. And yet these are the people that the
(38:33):
Democrat Party is going to bat for. These are the
people that they're willing to go to jail for, these criminal,
illegal aliens. Let me know how that works out for
you in the primaries.
Speaker 1 (38:42):
Anyway.
Speaker 4 (38:42):
That's all I've got for you this week. Thank you
very much for listening. Tune into the podcast. The next
hyphen Gen Report will be back on Wednesday. Check me
out there, all right, Thank you very much for listening.
Popular Podcasts
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show. Clay Travis and Buck Sexton tackle the biggest stories in news, politics and current events with intelligence and humor. From the border crisis, to the madness of cancel culture and far-left missteps, Clay and Buck guide listeners through the latest headlines and hot topics with fun and entertaining conversations and opinions.