June 18, 2025 • 32 mins
Tucker Carlson stated that participating in the Israeli-Iranian war could effectively end Trump's presidency?
What's the standing of US as the world superpower? What if another country took over?
What's the standing of US as the world superpower? What if another country took over?
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Michael, the global warming is coming this weekend of maybe
triple digits in Colorado. It's never ever happened before triple digits.
Speaker 2 (00:12):
Global warming.
Speaker 3 (00:15):
Man, I hate to disagree. I've disagreed with two talkbacks
this morning, but I hate to disagree with you this. Well,
maybe I actually do agree. I just you, I think
you framed it incorrectly. It is global warming. Do you
know why we know it is? Because I forget whether
(00:35):
it's Saturday or Sunday, that we could have one hundred
degree temperature in the summertime. And I heard, of all people,
Dave Fraser, meteorologist, meteorologists extraordinary, the number one meteorologists in
(00:56):
all of Colorado, announce that that would be record breaking heat.
The previous record was ninety nine. So it is unassayable
proof the global warming is here. I saw, you know,
I saw as I was walking out, Hey Rod, heading
(01:19):
down the hallway. You know I always glance up with
the monitors. The same station we're just now talking about
had a chiron and a story that heat might suppress
your appetite. I know your shot. I know you're speechless. Yeah,
I know you don't know what to say. He can
(01:40):
suppress your appetite. Humm, yeah, so you can, you know,
you and Dragon can quit all your weight loss crap
that you go through trend and just go you know,
just strip down to your birthday soon and go ahead
and get heat stroking. You'll you'll lose ten pounds.
Speaker 4 (01:58):
I mean, it's funny to say that, you know, it
jump started my journey. What getting heat stroke while we
were pulling weeds and I lost ten pounds?
Speaker 2 (02:09):
Totally serious?
Speaker 5 (02:10):
Actually, well one, I'm one.
Speaker 2 (02:13):
I'm glad to hear that I was the original trendsetter.
Speaker 3 (02:15):
We'll see, and that proves my thesis that all you
need to do is just go out and get.
Speaker 5 (02:19):
In you were you in your bathing suit?
Speaker 2 (02:22):
Now attire?
Speaker 5 (02:24):
Wow?
Speaker 2 (02:26):
So I could have been twenty yeah see you naked.
Speaker 3 (02:29):
Yeah, but naked and you would have lost well then
you would have lost even more weight because then you
had been arrested, thrown into you know, the jail, and.
Speaker 2 (02:38):
You'd been in my own backyard. Well, in this country,
you never know.
Speaker 3 (02:41):
Yeah, well, in Colorado, yes, there was a wait wait
wait wait wait Colorado. Now, in Oklahoma or Texas you
might get arrested for but in Colorado they'd probably celebrate.
Speaker 5 (02:53):
You mmmm, there there, there, there's.
Speaker 3 (02:58):
Well, until they found out that you might be a
little conservatism in you, and then they might be like, well, yeah,
let's arrest his ass, get him out of here, get
him out of here. So let's go back to the
fissure that's occurring.
Speaker 5 (03:14):
Carlson Tucker.
Speaker 3 (03:15):
Carlson publicly stated on Bannon's podcast that participating in the
Israeli Iranian war could quote effectively in Trump's presidency. That
hyperbly much because what I mean, you can take that
in any number of ways, but just taking it at
(03:37):
face value, what he'll be impeached or he'll resign, or
that means that the ayah Toola will actually carry through
with his threats to assassinate Trump. I mean, what do
you mean it's going to in in Trump's presidency? Of course,
the President, who we know cannot resist, describe Carlson as cookie. Now,
(04:02):
the problem is that's all like the New York Philharmonic
or the London Symphony. That's music to the media's ears.
Speaker 5 (04:15):
They love that. Now, there's.
Speaker 3 (04:22):
There's not too much harm in a little name calling
among friends. I'm certainly accustomed to being called names. Disagreement
is actually necessary to keep any political movement sharp and nimble.
I've often said that even here. I like it when
(04:45):
someone sends me a text message or an email or
somehow corresponds with me and says, I heard you say X. Now,
the first thing I always wonder is did I really
say X? Because people sometimes hear what they want to hear.
And I know that listening to radio or a podcast
(05:05):
or anything else, that everybody believes that they can multitask,
and everybody believes that they can multitask and fully engaged
in two tasks at the same time. And I don't
think our brains are wired that way. Now, you know
you can argue with me about that too. But sometimes
maybe you don't hear what you think you hear, or
(05:27):
you for that nanosecond you thought about lunch because it's
getting hot outside and you're thinking about lunch and you
miss the not in a sentence or the end or
whatever it might be. But the point is I name
calling among friends, man, Well, you should hear what I
(05:50):
call some of my friends. You should hear what some
of my friends call me. But the whole thing is debate,
an argument, and dissent is necess theory to keep anything
sharp and nimble. If you're in the corporate world and
all you want to yes people around you, you're you're
doomed to fail. And instead, if if you want and
(06:14):
are willing to hear and accept constructive criticism or dissent
from what you want to do, even though you may
end up rejecting that descent, you'll find that you'll be
a much more effective leader. I think this is less
(06:35):
a trust issue with the President, and I think it's
more about uh deale.
Speaker 5 (06:42):
Vu or as.
Speaker 3 (06:46):
Deja vu or PDSD. I don't care. It could be
PDSD too. And where does it come from? As I
said yesterday, it comes from memory of the Second Iraq
War in Afghanistan, it comes from our Republican Neil Khan days.
(07:11):
But there is a real possibility that the current finger
pointing could develop into long term fractures beyond repair, and
that endangers the widely agreed upon agenda of America. First,
a letdown after a high, especially a high of the
magnitude of the November fifth election, is to be expected,
(07:35):
but an extended hangover and extended infighting. Sometimes irrational infighting
doesn't do anybody any good whatsoever. Political infighting often takes
on the character of almost theological controversy.
Speaker 5 (07:58):
Back in the sixth.
Speaker 3 (07:59):
Century, the wise, know the Western Church, pondering the Trinity,
decided to make an addition to the the Seine Creed.
The Holy Spirit, they determined, proceeded not simply exparte from
the Father, but also from the Son. No big deal, right, wrong?
For reasons that I don't want to really get into,
(08:23):
I won't or I will refrain from dilating on now,
the Eastern Church repudiated the addition. Controversy rage for centuries. Indeed,
what became known as the Philippe controversy culminated in a
D ten fifty four in the Great Schism between the
Eastern Church and the West. But for us mere mortals,
(08:47):
that controversy might seem arcane, not to say, kind of immaterial,
But at the time that was a matter of life
and death. Did the indeed the Holy Spirit proceed exparte
from the Father or also from the Son? You it's
(09:11):
a great, interesting and fascinating theological debate to have, But
then that was a matter of those were fighting words
in order to recapture the sense of the urgency, then
felt consider the fate of the phrase America First under
(09:31):
Donald Trump, along with the phrase make America Great Again MAGA.
We'll use MAGA for short. America First was a foundational
mantra of the Trump movement.
Speaker 5 (09:45):
From the moment in just what.
Speaker 3 (09:49):
It was just a few days ago, back in twenty fifteen,
when Trump came down the Golden Elevator to announce his candidacy.
The idea that American politicians.
Speaker 5 (10:01):
With the I find this fascinating.
Speaker 3 (10:06):
But the idea that an American politician would put the
interest of the American people first has been the central
plank of his political platform. But let's think about America first.
It doesn't mean America alone. He and his spokespeople, the
(10:31):
people around him have often repeated, America First does not
mean America alone. And I've said from the very beginning,
and by the beginning, I mean back in twenty fifteen,
that the Trump idea of America First didn't have anything
to do with the isolationist movement of Charles Lindbergh back
(10:53):
in the late nineteen thirties. On the contrary, America First
was simply a receipt of American sovereignty. The late Angelo
Kavila was right when he observed that the phrase may
be the most succinct description of George Washington's state craft
(11:18):
in telling his fellow citizens that the name of American,
which belongs to you in your national capacity, must always
exalt the just pride of patriotism more than any appellation.
Who said that, George Washington, he was, in a way
(11:38):
presaging Trump's slogan, and over the years, Trump has expounded
the idea of America first in a number of speeches.
At the center of Trump's doctrine of America first is
the conviction that peace and international prosperity are more surely
guaranteed by strong sovereign nations that honestly pursue their own
(12:04):
national self interest. This is a leg of something that's
even more America First than that, and that is the
idea that America first is individual liberty and individual freedom.
And you can't have individual freedom and individual liberty unless
(12:27):
you are willing to guarantee among all nations that we
out the citizens of this country, the United States of America,
can indeed pursue their own national self interest by pursuing
their individual self interest. Our national self interest and our
(12:48):
individual self interest two separate things, but solely and tightly intertwined.
So in a world where the globalists, in a world
where the ambition of the globalists to dissolve national sovereignty.
(13:09):
You know, anytime I hear somebody say, well, I'm a
citizen of the world, I think, well, then you're a
homeless person, because I'm a citizen of the United.
Speaker 5 (13:18):
States of America. I may love you know, I.
Speaker 3 (13:23):
Well, Dragon's in Japan right now, and I have another friend,
totally unrelated, also in Japan right now. I'm and I'm
really envious because I love Japan. I wouldn't mind spending,
you know, a month in Japan. I also love Italy,
I love Argentina. I wouldn't mind spending months in any
(13:44):
of those countries. But that doesn't make me a citizen
of the world, and nor does it make me a
citizen of Japan, Italy, or Argentina. But there is this
ambition to dissolve national sovereignty, in this hazy idea of
world citizenship, which I think is both naive and counterproductive.
(14:05):
In fact, it's add another it's dangerous. It's it's being
naive translated into politics. And when you think about that complacency,
and I think many Americans are indeed complacent. That's the
(14:25):
enemy of security. In the aftermath of America's bloodless triumph
in the Cold War, we emerge as the world's sole superpower.
That's just that's an unistayable fact. But our status as
the world's superpower, the sole superpower, that's not inevitable, nor
(14:48):
is it automatically sustainable. It depended on our determined prosecution
of our own interests, America first, pursuing our own interests. Now,
I would argue that in recent memory, in recent years,
(15:11):
this country has more and more abandoned that pursuit of
America first, while we let other countries capitalize on our stuba,
bureaucratic paralysis, our regulatory suffocation, our internal divisions, the forward
(15:33):
march of progressivism all the way toward Marxism and communism,
all thanks to well Barack Obama, who took all of
the foundational principles of Marxism disguised as progressivism, from Woodrow
Wilson through FDR, through Lyndon Baines Johnson and everybody. Hence,
(15:57):
with the exception of Ronald Reagan and Barack Obama pushes
us over the cliff. So Trump out advocating America first
has now put us again center stage as all the pundits,
(16:18):
like like pack dogs, bark and scamper all around Trump's
rhetoric regarding the murderous Islamist state of Iran. Now, as I,
as we pointed out yesterday, I went through that litany
of sound bites where Trump has always insisted, time after
(16:40):
time after time, for more than a decade, even before
he was president, that the Iranians must not be allowed
to acquire news.
Speaker 5 (16:48):
Why why is that?
Speaker 3 (16:51):
Because the Molas repeated and sincere. I believe it is
sincere and genuine their promise to obliterate Israel and the
United States. You see, we often forget that the Iranians
don't want to just obliterate Israel, but we are. We
(17:13):
should wear it with pride. We are according to the
Ayatola Komenae, and according to Iatola comedy, we are the
great Satan. We are the great Satan? Do you not
get that we are the evil in the world?
Speaker 5 (17:33):
Now?
Speaker 3 (17:33):
What I find fascinating about that is there are a
lot of Democrats, well I should say communists described as Democrats,
who also believe that the United States of America is the.
Speaker 5 (17:45):
Great Satan, that we are the evil in the world.
Speaker 3 (17:48):
What's that elon Omar yesterday made some comment. Did you
send that to me a Rod in an email or what?
Let's see let me find it real quickly. I'll find
it during the break, yiss the United States is being
turned into one of the worst countries.
Speaker 5 (18:12):
Well, we'll take a listen to her, because she.
Speaker 3 (18:15):
Is well, she's saying the same thing you talk about
enemies foreign and domestic. She agrees with the Ayahtola that
we are the great Saintan. But that's thinking from.
Speaker 5 (18:32):
Mike.
Speaker 3 (18:33):
Heat suppresses appetite. Question mark exclamation point. Question mark exclamation point.
That's a confused person right there, Agrod confused. They're excited,
but they don't know why, or they don't know why
they're excited. Either way, then how do you explain obesity
rates in the US South Mississippi, et cetera.
Speaker 5 (18:55):
Fried foods, Baby, fried.
Speaker 2 (18:58):
Foods outdoes the sun, It out.
Speaker 5 (19:00):
Does the sign any day, fried foods.
Speaker 3 (19:07):
I had lunch yesterday at a place that I had
never been before for a meeting, and you know that
for me.
Speaker 5 (19:15):
There's I'm always on the question.
Speaker 3 (19:18):
I'm I'm I'm always in the quest for food, to
find the best of whatever. But there you go to
a like a pub or a sports bar. There are
two ways to test whether it really knows what it's
doing or not, and that's either a Reuben sandwich or
fish and chips. If they can do either one of
(19:41):
those correctly, then you know everything else in the menu
is probably good. Yesterday, I would give this place a
uh being generous, a C plus if if I you
was in a good mood, I give it a B minus.
(20:04):
But I'm not in a good mood because forty four
sixty seven, writes Michael, and if somebody is texting you
while you're talking, one may miss something. Yeah, but I
still want your text messages sixty eight twenty five. Michael,
I'm sorry'd let you know, but democratism and republicanism are
religions with their own set of rituals and sermons. Why
(20:28):
are you sorry to let me know that?
Speaker 5 (20:31):
I mean, you can.
Speaker 3 (20:32):
You can take the word religion and apply it to
almost anything.
Speaker 5 (20:37):
That we do.
Speaker 3 (20:39):
Just the idea. Think about the phrase religious fervor. What
does that imply? Well, you're you're doing it in a
religious style, and you have that religious fervor, and then
the others I'm going to ignore right now because two
text messages coming in within literally thirty seconds of each other,
(21:06):
say just the opposite. One says one thing about the conflict,
and one says another thing about the conflict. I rest
my case, your honor, I rest my case. The two
goobers that listen to this same host.
Speaker 5 (21:23):
Disagree.
Speaker 3 (21:25):
I love it. I absolutely love it. So let's go
back to yesterday's program for just a moment. I played
like ten sound bites I think I had like a
dozen more where Trump insisted that the Uranians must not
be allowed to acquire nukes, and the point was they
(21:49):
have repeatedly promised to obliterate Israel. And that's where most
people stop. Most people don't go on to the next point,
which is they've also promised to obliterate us. Even Kim
Jong un doesn't promise day in and day out and
doesn't get as you know, his starving people who are
(22:11):
eating bark off the trees to chant death to America.
China doesn't shout death to America. Oh, they want us
to die, but just enough that they can continue to
sell us junk. So they want us kind of brain. Well,
maybe they're kind of winning because they want US brain
dead but still buying Maiden China junk. But the Iranians
(22:34):
know they want nuclear weapons because they want to be
able to lob them into the United States and blow
up New York, you know, maybe clean up Denver a
little bit and Chicago, Los Angeles, and they wanted to
do that. By the way, you don't necessarily need a
ballistic missile to I don't want to use the word launch.
(22:54):
You don't need a ballistic missile necessarily to detonate a
nuclear weapon. You can carry it in and plant too.
Death to the Zionist entity, death to America. Those are
not slogans. Those are marching orders. We forget the time
(23:18):
from nineteen seventy nine when the hostages were taken, when
the Mulas took over. Now they control an abundance of
near weapons grade uranium, according to some estimates for about
nine bombs. I've heard as many as twenty two bombs,
but let's just stick with the conservative estimate of nine bombs.
Speaker 5 (23:40):
So Israel is doing actually Israel right.
Speaker 3 (23:45):
Now until something changes, which I think it will change,
maybe this week, maybe by next week. Israel is fighting
a proxy war for US. But people don't want to
admit that Israel's doing us, the United States States, and
the world for that matter, a great service by dismantling
the Iranian nuclear capability. Now that job is still incomplete,
(24:14):
but I'm pretty confident it will be soon completed, possibly
with our help, certainly with our connivance. Which brings me
back to the theology of America First. Donald Trump reinvigorated
the phrase, but deployed it in pursuit of restoring our
(24:38):
potency and our prosperity. It's very Reaganesque when you think
about it. When you think about it, more forget it is.
It has nothing to do with the isolationism. And maybe,
and may you know, I would say this, I would
say that many people think that America First is is
(25:00):
somehow the reinvigorating of Charles Lindbergh's isolationism of the nineteen thirties.
It is not that, but for those who happened. And
the reason I don't think that many Americans believe that
is because I think most Americans are historically ignorant Charles Lindbergh.
All they know Charles Lindberg for is oh, he crossed
(25:21):
the Atlantic and they can go to the air and
space museum and see the plane. They don't realize what
a staunch isolationist that he was. That really probably prolonged
World War One. But that's history. So maybe some who
do hear America first and do think that Trump is
(25:45):
espousing isolationism. I think you're just absolutely wrong about that.
I think he is espousing Reaganesque ideas that we are
the world's sole superpower and he wants us to remain
the world's sole superpower. Maybe you don't, because Gill, it's
like becoming a parent. If you think about the responsibilities
(26:11):
of parenthood and everything that can go sideways. If you
honestly sat down, say with a therapist, a psychiatrist, or
you know, a lawyer or a priest, anybody who could
help you analyze, the idea of becoming a parent by
mankind would die off because anything can go wrong. You
(26:36):
can do everything right and it'll go wrong. You can
raise your child absolutely the best possible way that you
can ever imagine, and that child becomes a serial killer
through no fault of your own. You would not raise
a child. So when you think about being the world
(27:00):
world's sole superpower, guess what that comes with responsibilities? And
if you don't exercise those responsibilities and exercise them in
a prudent effective I'm trying to think of every adjective
I could possibly add on to this, but a prudent effective, minimalist,
(27:24):
yet broad enough that you can achieve the necessary goal.
Then you shouldn't be the world's sole superpower. You shouldn't
be the superpower. But here's the problem. If we're not
the world's sole superpower, you want to turn it over
the Chinese Communist Party.
Speaker 5 (27:39):
I don't think so. I don't.
Speaker 3 (27:43):
I absolutely fear I truly fear the Chinese Communist Party
somehow getting through all the turmoil they're going through right now,
and we become so scared to be the world's sole
superpower that we allow them, we capitulate to them, and
(28:06):
they become the world's sole superpower. Now the world order
is governed by one of the most brutal regimes in
the entire history of mankind. Chijin Ping is an acolyte,
is a disciple of Mausei, toom he wants his own
(28:26):
cultural revolution. He wants adherence to Mao's philosophy. Does Little
Red Book will become required reading in all of America?
I know that maybe over the top, but that's how
bad it will be. I don't think that Russia can
become the world superpower. But if they were, do you
want of Vladimir Putin? You want that thug.
Speaker 5 (28:49):
Ruling the world?
Speaker 1 (28:50):
No?
Speaker 3 (28:52):
When Ronald Reagan said that we are the last beacon
of hope for the world, guess what, he was correct.
And guess what, it's even more true today than it
was when he uttered those words forty some years ago.
So when Donald Trump reinvigorated the phrase America first, he
(29:15):
deployed it in pursuit of restoring our potency and our prosperity.
And so how do you go about doing that? First,
secure the southern border, Deport as many illegal aliens as possible,
try to at least start the process of bringing manufacturing
back to the United States. The reassertion of national sovereignty
(29:42):
is just the pursuit of what Trump called the triumph
of common sense. Have you not read his second inaugural address.
It's pretty good. I suggest you go read it before
I get to the next point about America. First, about
(30:03):
the fissure in the MAGA movement. I'm one of those
guys that when Trump came down the escalator back in
twenty fifteen. Yeah, I wasn't. I wasn't convinced. And having
you know, worked in the White House and worked at
that level of government, worked in you know, at the
(30:25):
cabinet level, I too was I was skeptical at the
same time that I was intrigued. And they're still to
this day. Things that I've come to understand is just
Trump trolling the opposition, Trump trolling the media, and I've
come to admire that. And I've also come to just
(30:48):
laugh out loud when people are just like.
Speaker 5 (30:50):
Oh my god, I can't believe he said that.
Speaker 3 (30:54):
It's like the whole Trump twenty twenty eight thing, you know,
putting on a Trump twenty two hat. He has no
more intention of staying in the Oval office or trying
to even think about running for a third term than
than I think about running for you know.
Speaker 5 (31:12):
Dog catcher.
Speaker 3 (31:13):
It just it just ain't gonna happen. But he knows
that while he's over here working, you know, working Shijen ping, working,
Vladimir Putin, working with a Nettan Yahoo doing, you know,
doing all the things that he's doing, everybody's over here
screaming about twenty Trump twenty twenty eight, the world's master troller.
(31:34):
And I admire that, I actually like it. But now
we've got to the point where we see commentators starting
to wring their hands, starting to bite their lips about
whether Trump has abandoned or adulterated or poisoned the doctrine
of America first with the Iranian situation. Let's walk through
(31:58):
that America first. And now we see the commentators on
the mega side of the aisle wringing their hands.
Speaker 5 (32:06):
Has he abandoned it? And I say no, he is not.
Speaker 3 (32:10):
By taking a hardline against the Mollahs and their ambitions,
he is asserting our national interest. Does America first proceed
from a doctrine alone, or does it proceed from a
doctrine and a pragmatic, common cyensical recognition that our national
interest requires us sometimes to do stuff
Michael, the global warming is coming this weekend of maybe
triple digits in Colorado. It's never ever happened before triple digits.
Speaker 2 (00:12):
Global warming.
Speaker 3 (00:15):
Man, I hate to disagree. I've disagreed with two talkbacks
this morning, but I hate to disagree with you this. Well,
maybe I actually do agree. I just you, I think
you framed it incorrectly. It is global warming. Do you
know why we know it is? Because I forget whether
(00:35):
it's Saturday or Sunday, that we could have one hundred
degree temperature in the summertime. And I heard, of all people,
Dave Fraser, meteorologist, meteorologists extraordinary, the number one meteorologists in
(00:56):
all of Colorado, announce that that would be record breaking heat.
The previous record was ninety nine. So it is unassayable
proof the global warming is here. I saw, you know,
I saw as I was walking out, Hey Rod, heading
(01:19):
down the hallway. You know I always glance up with
the monitors. The same station we're just now talking about
had a chiron and a story that heat might suppress
your appetite. I know your shot. I know you're speechless. Yeah,
I know you don't know what to say. He can
(01:40):
suppress your appetite. Humm, yeah, so you can, you know,
you and Dragon can quit all your weight loss crap
that you go through trend and just go you know,
just strip down to your birthday soon and go ahead
and get heat stroking. You'll you'll lose ten pounds.
Speaker 4 (01:58):
I mean, it's funny to say that, you know, it
jump started my journey. What getting heat stroke while we
were pulling weeds and I lost ten pounds?
Speaker 2 (02:09):
Totally serious?
Speaker 5 (02:10):
Actually, well one, I'm one.
Speaker 2 (02:13):
I'm glad to hear that I was the original trendsetter.
Speaker 3 (02:15):
We'll see, and that proves my thesis that all you
need to do is just go out and get.
Speaker 5 (02:19):
In you were you in your bathing suit?
Speaker 2 (02:22):
Now attire?
Speaker 5 (02:24):
Wow?
Speaker 2 (02:26):
So I could have been twenty yeah see you naked.
Speaker 3 (02:29):
Yeah, but naked and you would have lost well then
you would have lost even more weight because then you
had been arrested, thrown into you know, the jail, and.
Speaker 2 (02:38):
You'd been in my own backyard. Well, in this country,
you never know.
Speaker 3 (02:41):
Yeah, well, in Colorado, yes, there was a wait wait
wait wait wait Colorado. Now, in Oklahoma or Texas you
might get arrested for but in Colorado they'd probably celebrate.
Speaker 5 (02:53):
You mmmm, there there, there, there's.
Speaker 3 (02:58):
Well, until they found out that you might be a
little conservatism in you, and then they might be like, well, yeah,
let's arrest his ass, get him out of here, get
him out of here. So let's go back to the
fissure that's occurring.
Speaker 5 (03:14):
Carlson Tucker.
Speaker 3 (03:15):
Carlson publicly stated on Bannon's podcast that participating in the
Israeli Iranian war could quote effectively in Trump's presidency. That
hyperbly much because what I mean, you can take that
in any number of ways, but just taking it at
(03:37):
face value, what he'll be impeached or he'll resign, or
that means that the ayah Toola will actually carry through
with his threats to assassinate Trump. I mean, what do
you mean it's going to in in Trump's presidency? Of course,
the President, who we know cannot resist, describe Carlson as cookie. Now,
(04:02):
the problem is that's all like the New York Philharmonic
or the London Symphony. That's music to the media's ears.
Speaker 5 (04:15):
They love that. Now, there's.
Speaker 3 (04:22):
There's not too much harm in a little name calling
among friends. I'm certainly accustomed to being called names. Disagreement
is actually necessary to keep any political movement sharp and nimble.
I've often said that even here. I like it when
(04:45):
someone sends me a text message or an email or
somehow corresponds with me and says, I heard you say X. Now,
the first thing I always wonder is did I really
say X? Because people sometimes hear what they want to hear.
And I know that listening to radio or a podcast
(05:05):
or anything else, that everybody believes that they can multitask,
and everybody believes that they can multitask and fully engaged
in two tasks at the same time. And I don't
think our brains are wired that way. Now, you know
you can argue with me about that too. But sometimes
maybe you don't hear what you think you hear, or
(05:27):
you for that nanosecond you thought about lunch because it's
getting hot outside and you're thinking about lunch and you
miss the not in a sentence or the end or
whatever it might be. But the point is I name
calling among friends, man, Well, you should hear what I
(05:50):
call some of my friends. You should hear what some
of my friends call me. But the whole thing is debate,
an argument, and dissent is necess theory to keep anything
sharp and nimble. If you're in the corporate world and
all you want to yes people around you, you're you're
doomed to fail. And instead, if if you want and
(06:14):
are willing to hear and accept constructive criticism or dissent
from what you want to do, even though you may
end up rejecting that descent, you'll find that you'll be
a much more effective leader. I think this is less
(06:35):
a trust issue with the President, and I think it's
more about uh deale.
Speaker 5 (06:42):
Vu or as.
Speaker 3 (06:46):
Deja vu or PDSD. I don't care. It could be
PDSD too. And where does it come from? As I
said yesterday, it comes from memory of the Second Iraq
War in Afghanistan, it comes from our Republican Neil Khan days.
(07:11):
But there is a real possibility that the current finger
pointing could develop into long term fractures beyond repair, and
that endangers the widely agreed upon agenda of America. First,
a letdown after a high, especially a high of the
magnitude of the November fifth election, is to be expected,
(07:35):
but an extended hangover and extended infighting. Sometimes irrational infighting
doesn't do anybody any good whatsoever. Political infighting often takes
on the character of almost theological controversy.
Speaker 5 (07:58):
Back in the sixth.
Speaker 3 (07:59):
Century, the wise, know the Western Church, pondering the Trinity,
decided to make an addition to the the Seine Creed.
The Holy Spirit, they determined, proceeded not simply exparte from
the Father, but also from the Son. No big deal, right, wrong?
For reasons that I don't want to really get into,
(08:23):
I won't or I will refrain from dilating on now,
the Eastern Church repudiated the addition. Controversy rage for centuries. Indeed,
what became known as the Philippe controversy culminated in a
D ten fifty four in the Great Schism between the
Eastern Church and the West. But for us mere mortals,
(08:47):
that controversy might seem arcane, not to say, kind of immaterial,
But at the time that was a matter of life
and death. Did the indeed the Holy Spirit proceed exparte
from the Father or also from the Son? You it's
(09:11):
a great, interesting and fascinating theological debate to have, But
then that was a matter of those were fighting words
in order to recapture the sense of the urgency, then
felt consider the fate of the phrase America First under
(09:31):
Donald Trump, along with the phrase make America Great Again MAGA.
We'll use MAGA for short. America First was a foundational
mantra of the Trump movement.
Speaker 5 (09:45):
From the moment in just what.
Speaker 3 (09:49):
It was just a few days ago, back in twenty fifteen,
when Trump came down the Golden Elevator to announce his candidacy.
The idea that American politicians.
Speaker 5 (10:01):
With the I find this fascinating.
Speaker 3 (10:06):
But the idea that an American politician would put the
interest of the American people first has been the central
plank of his political platform. But let's think about America first.
It doesn't mean America alone. He and his spokespeople, the
(10:31):
people around him have often repeated, America First does not
mean America alone. And I've said from the very beginning,
and by the beginning, I mean back in twenty fifteen,
that the Trump idea of America First didn't have anything
to do with the isolationist movement of Charles Lindbergh back
(10:53):
in the late nineteen thirties. On the contrary, America First
was simply a receipt of American sovereignty. The late Angelo
Kavila was right when he observed that the phrase may
be the most succinct description of George Washington's state craft
(11:18):
in telling his fellow citizens that the name of American,
which belongs to you in your national capacity, must always
exalt the just pride of patriotism more than any appellation.
Who said that, George Washington, he was, in a way
(11:38):
presaging Trump's slogan, and over the years, Trump has expounded
the idea of America first in a number of speeches.
At the center of Trump's doctrine of America first is
the conviction that peace and international prosperity are more surely
guaranteed by strong sovereign nations that honestly pursue their own
(12:04):
national self interest. This is a leg of something that's
even more America First than that, and that is the
idea that America first is individual liberty and individual freedom.
And you can't have individual freedom and individual liberty unless
(12:27):
you are willing to guarantee among all nations that we
out the citizens of this country, the United States of America,
can indeed pursue their own national self interest by pursuing
their individual self interest. Our national self interest and our
(12:48):
individual self interest two separate things, but solely and tightly intertwined.
So in a world where the globalists, in a world
where the ambition of the globalists to dissolve national sovereignty.
(13:09):
You know, anytime I hear somebody say, well, I'm a
citizen of the world, I think, well, then you're a
homeless person, because I'm a citizen of the United.
Speaker 5 (13:18):
States of America. I may love you know, I.
Speaker 3 (13:23):
Well, Dragon's in Japan right now, and I have another friend,
totally unrelated, also in Japan right now. I'm and I'm
really envious because I love Japan. I wouldn't mind spending,
you know, a month in Japan. I also love Italy,
I love Argentina. I wouldn't mind spending months in any
(13:44):
of those countries. But that doesn't make me a citizen
of the world, and nor does it make me a
citizen of Japan, Italy, or Argentina. But there is this
ambition to dissolve national sovereignty, in this hazy idea of
world citizenship, which I think is both naive and counterproductive.
(14:05):
In fact, it's add another it's dangerous. It's it's being
naive translated into politics. And when you think about that complacency,
and I think many Americans are indeed complacent. That's the
(14:25):
enemy of security. In the aftermath of America's bloodless triumph
in the Cold War, we emerge as the world's sole superpower.
That's just that's an unistayable fact. But our status as
the world's superpower, the sole superpower, that's not inevitable, nor
(14:48):
is it automatically sustainable. It depended on our determined prosecution
of our own interests, America first, pursuing our own interests. Now,
I would argue that in recent memory, in recent years,
(15:11):
this country has more and more abandoned that pursuit of
America first, while we let other countries capitalize on our stuba,
bureaucratic paralysis, our regulatory suffocation, our internal divisions, the forward
(15:33):
march of progressivism all the way toward Marxism and communism,
all thanks to well Barack Obama, who took all of
the foundational principles of Marxism disguised as progressivism, from Woodrow
Wilson through FDR, through Lyndon Baines Johnson and everybody. Hence,
(15:57):
with the exception of Ronald Reagan and Barack Obama pushes
us over the cliff. So Trump out advocating America first
has now put us again center stage as all the pundits,
(16:18):
like like pack dogs, bark and scamper all around Trump's
rhetoric regarding the murderous Islamist state of Iran. Now, as I,
as we pointed out yesterday, I went through that litany
of sound bites where Trump has always insisted, time after
(16:40):
time after time, for more than a decade, even before
he was president, that the Iranians must not be allowed
to acquire news.
Speaker 5 (16:48):
Why why is that?
Speaker 3 (16:51):
Because the Molas repeated and sincere. I believe it is
sincere and genuine their promise to obliterate Israel and the
United States. You see, we often forget that the Iranians
don't want to just obliterate Israel, but we are. We
(17:13):
should wear it with pride. We are according to the
Ayatola Komenae, and according to Iatola comedy, we are the
great Satan. We are the great Satan? Do you not
get that we are the evil in the world?
Speaker 5 (17:33):
Now?
Speaker 3 (17:33):
What I find fascinating about that is there are a
lot of Democrats, well I should say communists described as Democrats,
who also believe that the United States of America is the.
Speaker 5 (17:45):
Great Satan, that we are the evil in the world.
Speaker 3 (17:48):
What's that elon Omar yesterday made some comment. Did you
send that to me a Rod in an email or what?
Let's see let me find it real quickly. I'll find
it during the break, yiss the United States is being
turned into one of the worst countries.
Speaker 5 (18:12):
Well, we'll take a listen to her, because she.
Speaker 3 (18:15):
Is well, she's saying the same thing you talk about
enemies foreign and domestic. She agrees with the Ayahtola that
we are the great Saintan. But that's thinking from.
Speaker 5 (18:32):
Mike.
Speaker 3 (18:33):
Heat suppresses appetite. Question mark exclamation point. Question mark exclamation point.
That's a confused person right there, Agrod confused. They're excited,
but they don't know why, or they don't know why
they're excited. Either way, then how do you explain obesity
rates in the US South Mississippi, et cetera.
Speaker 5 (18:55):
Fried foods, Baby, fried.
Speaker 2 (18:58):
Foods outdoes the sun, It out.
Speaker 5 (19:00):
Does the sign any day, fried foods.
Speaker 3 (19:07):
I had lunch yesterday at a place that I had
never been before for a meeting, and you know that
for me.
Speaker 5 (19:15):
There's I'm always on the question.
Speaker 3 (19:18):
I'm I'm I'm always in the quest for food, to
find the best of whatever. But there you go to
a like a pub or a sports bar. There are
two ways to test whether it really knows what it's
doing or not, and that's either a Reuben sandwich or
fish and chips. If they can do either one of
(19:41):
those correctly, then you know everything else in the menu
is probably good. Yesterday, I would give this place a
uh being generous, a C plus if if I you
was in a good mood, I give it a B minus.
(20:04):
But I'm not in a good mood because forty four
sixty seven, writes Michael, and if somebody is texting you
while you're talking, one may miss something. Yeah, but I
still want your text messages sixty eight twenty five. Michael,
I'm sorry'd let you know, but democratism and republicanism are
religions with their own set of rituals and sermons. Why
(20:28):
are you sorry to let me know that?
Speaker 5 (20:31):
I mean, you can.
Speaker 3 (20:32):
You can take the word religion and apply it to
almost anything.
Speaker 5 (20:37):
That we do.
Speaker 3 (20:39):
Just the idea. Think about the phrase religious fervor. What
does that imply? Well, you're you're doing it in a
religious style, and you have that religious fervor, and then
the others I'm going to ignore right now because two
text messages coming in within literally thirty seconds of each other,
(21:06):
say just the opposite. One says one thing about the conflict,
and one says another thing about the conflict. I rest
my case, your honor, I rest my case. The two
goobers that listen to this same host.
Speaker 5 (21:23):
Disagree.
Speaker 3 (21:25):
I love it. I absolutely love it. So let's go
back to yesterday's program for just a moment. I played
like ten sound bites I think I had like a
dozen more where Trump insisted that the Uranians must not
be allowed to acquire nukes, and the point was they
(21:49):
have repeatedly promised to obliterate Israel. And that's where most
people stop. Most people don't go on to the next point,
which is they've also promised to obliterate us. Even Kim
Jong un doesn't promise day in and day out and
doesn't get as you know, his starving people who are
(22:11):
eating bark off the trees to chant death to America.
China doesn't shout death to America. Oh, they want us
to die, but just enough that they can continue to
sell us junk. So they want us kind of brain. Well,
maybe they're kind of winning because they want US brain
dead but still buying Maiden China junk. But the Iranians
(22:34):
know they want nuclear weapons because they want to be
able to lob them into the United States and blow
up New York, you know, maybe clean up Denver a
little bit and Chicago, Los Angeles, and they wanted to
do that. By the way, you don't necessarily need a
ballistic missile to I don't want to use the word launch.
(22:54):
You don't need a ballistic missile necessarily to detonate a
nuclear weapon. You can carry it in and plant too.
Death to the Zionist entity, death to America. Those are
not slogans. Those are marching orders. We forget the time
(23:18):
from nineteen seventy nine when the hostages were taken, when
the Mulas took over. Now they control an abundance of
near weapons grade uranium, according to some estimates for about
nine bombs. I've heard as many as twenty two bombs,
but let's just stick with the conservative estimate of nine bombs.
Speaker 5 (23:40):
So Israel is doing actually Israel right.
Speaker 3 (23:45):
Now until something changes, which I think it will change,
maybe this week, maybe by next week. Israel is fighting
a proxy war for US. But people don't want to
admit that Israel's doing us, the United States States, and
the world for that matter, a great service by dismantling
the Iranian nuclear capability. Now that job is still incomplete,
(24:14):
but I'm pretty confident it will be soon completed, possibly
with our help, certainly with our connivance. Which brings me
back to the theology of America First. Donald Trump reinvigorated
the phrase, but deployed it in pursuit of restoring our
(24:38):
potency and our prosperity. It's very Reaganesque when you think
about it. When you think about it, more forget it is.
It has nothing to do with the isolationism. And maybe,
and may you know, I would say this, I would
say that many people think that America First is is
(25:00):
somehow the reinvigorating of Charles Lindbergh's isolationism of the nineteen thirties.
It is not that, but for those who happened. And
the reason I don't think that many Americans believe that
is because I think most Americans are historically ignorant Charles Lindbergh.
All they know Charles Lindberg for is oh, he crossed
(25:21):
the Atlantic and they can go to the air and
space museum and see the plane. They don't realize what
a staunch isolationist that he was. That really probably prolonged
World War One. But that's history. So maybe some who
do hear America first and do think that Trump is
(25:45):
espousing isolationism. I think you're just absolutely wrong about that.
I think he is espousing Reaganesque ideas that we are
the world's sole superpower and he wants us to remain
the world's sole superpower. Maybe you don't, because Gill, it's
like becoming a parent. If you think about the responsibilities
(26:11):
of parenthood and everything that can go sideways. If you
honestly sat down, say with a therapist, a psychiatrist, or
you know, a lawyer or a priest, anybody who could
help you analyze, the idea of becoming a parent by
mankind would die off because anything can go wrong. You
(26:36):
can do everything right and it'll go wrong. You can
raise your child absolutely the best possible way that you
can ever imagine, and that child becomes a serial killer
through no fault of your own. You would not raise
a child. So when you think about being the world
(27:00):
world's sole superpower, guess what that comes with responsibilities? And
if you don't exercise those responsibilities and exercise them in
a prudent effective I'm trying to think of every adjective
I could possibly add on to this, but a prudent effective, minimalist,
(27:24):
yet broad enough that you can achieve the necessary goal.
Then you shouldn't be the world's sole superpower. You shouldn't
be the superpower. But here's the problem. If we're not
the world's sole superpower, you want to turn it over
the Chinese Communist Party.
Speaker 5 (27:39):
I don't think so. I don't.
Speaker 3 (27:43):
I absolutely fear I truly fear the Chinese Communist Party
somehow getting through all the turmoil they're going through right now,
and we become so scared to be the world's sole
superpower that we allow them, we capitulate to them, and
(28:06):
they become the world's sole superpower. Now the world order
is governed by one of the most brutal regimes in
the entire history of mankind. Chijin Ping is an acolyte,
is a disciple of Mausei, toom he wants his own
(28:26):
cultural revolution. He wants adherence to Mao's philosophy. Does Little
Red Book will become required reading in all of America?
I know that maybe over the top, but that's how
bad it will be. I don't think that Russia can
become the world superpower. But if they were, do you
want of Vladimir Putin? You want that thug.
Speaker 5 (28:49):
Ruling the world?
Speaker 1 (28:50):
No?
Speaker 3 (28:52):
When Ronald Reagan said that we are the last beacon
of hope for the world, guess what, he was correct.
And guess what, it's even more true today than it
was when he uttered those words forty some years ago.
So when Donald Trump reinvigorated the phrase America first, he
(29:15):
deployed it in pursuit of restoring our potency and our prosperity.
And so how do you go about doing that? First,
secure the southern border, Deport as many illegal aliens as possible,
try to at least start the process of bringing manufacturing
back to the United States. The reassertion of national sovereignty
(29:42):
is just the pursuit of what Trump called the triumph
of common sense. Have you not read his second inaugural address.
It's pretty good. I suggest you go read it before
I get to the next point about America. First, about
(30:03):
the fissure in the MAGA movement. I'm one of those
guys that when Trump came down the escalator back in
twenty fifteen. Yeah, I wasn't. I wasn't convinced. And having
you know, worked in the White House and worked at
that level of government, worked in you know, at the
(30:25):
cabinet level, I too was I was skeptical at the
same time that I was intrigued. And they're still to
this day. Things that I've come to understand is just
Trump trolling the opposition, Trump trolling the media, and I've
come to admire that. And I've also come to just
(30:48):
laugh out loud when people are just like.
Speaker 5 (30:50):
Oh my god, I can't believe he said that.
Speaker 3 (30:54):
It's like the whole Trump twenty twenty eight thing, you know,
putting on a Trump twenty two hat. He has no
more intention of staying in the Oval office or trying
to even think about running for a third term than
than I think about running for you know.
Speaker 5 (31:12):
Dog catcher.
Speaker 3 (31:13):
It just it just ain't gonna happen. But he knows
that while he's over here working, you know, working Shijen ping, working,
Vladimir Putin, working with a Nettan Yahoo doing, you know,
doing all the things that he's doing, everybody's over here
screaming about twenty Trump twenty twenty eight, the world's master troller.
(31:34):
And I admire that, I actually like it. But now
we've got to the point where we see commentators starting
to wring their hands, starting to bite their lips about
whether Trump has abandoned or adulterated or poisoned the doctrine
of America first with the Iranian situation. Let's walk through
(31:58):
that America first. And now we see the commentators on
the mega side of the aisle wringing their hands.
Speaker 5 (32:06):
Has he abandoned it? And I say no, he is not.
Speaker 3 (32:10):
By taking a hardline against the Mollahs and their ambitions,
he is asserting our national interest. Does America first proceed
from a doctrine alone, or does it proceed from a
doctrine and a pragmatic, common cyensical recognition that our national
interest requires us sometimes to do stuff
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
The Breakfast Club
The World's Most Dangerous Morning Show, The Breakfast Club, With DJ Envy And Charlamagne Tha God!
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.