Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
A National Convention of Conservatism met recently in Washington, d C.
We have coverage from Kurt Mills, one of the gathering's
biggest newsmakers. Is it a good idea for the American
government to take ownership interest in the nation's most iconic companies.
We'll debate it tonight. The streets of Chicago are a
war zone. We'll chat with someone who's done exceptional and
(00:21):
rare journalism from the ground. And the HHS Secretary RFK.
Junior gave testimony today in the Senate. There are some
strange political debts going on in Germany.
Speaker 2 (00:31):
We'll cover it all. Next to the Macads show. Let's
do this shaking up Washington, d C. We're breaking the fever.
Do you haven't watch this guy on television.
Speaker 3 (00:40):
It's like a machine.
Speaker 2 (00:42):
He's great. Matt Gates as we join you tonight.
Speaker 1 (00:49):
There is major fallout in the conservative movement following some
big clashes and a key gathering of conservative voices in
our nation's capital.
Speaker 2 (00:57):
Nat Con.
Speaker 1 (00:58):
It's a gathering of thought leaders on the right to
discuss key issues. It's usually a bit of a boar
with lots of bow ties and pocket protectors, but this
year things got spicy over the issue of the US
Israel relationship. Kurt Mills, executive director of the American Conservative,
appeared in a breakout session titled America and the Israel
(01:18):
Iran War a debate he delivered a very provocative talk
named Israel First or America First. During the debate, Mills
challenged the US Israel dynamic. He described Israel as quote
perhaps the world's historic case of the tail wagging the
dog close quote. He implied that Israel's influence over US
foreign policy often overrides America's strategic interests. He argued that
(01:41):
the US should not treat Israel's security priorities automatically.
Speaker 2 (01:44):
As our own. The exchange grew tense.
Speaker 1 (01:47):
Mills had Max Abrams in that debate and discussion, and
he's a pro Israel academic. He dismissed the realistic US
strategic arguments as isolationist. Abrams pushed back, labeling isolation Israelists
as insane.
Speaker 2 (02:02):
We disagree with that.
Speaker 1 (02:04):
Joramazani is Natcon's founder and a staunch supporter of Israel.
He watched the debate and later warned that such internal divisions,
especially over Israel, could fracture the broader nationalist movement if
not handled carefully. The session revealed a growing ideological fault
line within the nationalist conservative movement. On one side, Mills
and like minded realists push for a more restrained sovereignty
(02:27):
first foreign policy. On the other, traditional supporters like Abrams
and Azani advocate for continued robust US alignment with Israel.
Hazani signaled that the debate was permitted, not suppressed, yet
he cautioned that unchecked dissent could harm up political figures
aligned with the coalition like Jade Vance or Marco Rubio,
and even threaten the larger America First project. Mills emphasized
(02:51):
he wasn't discussing tactics, but strategy. He questioned why America
adopts Israel's conflicts as its own when doing so is
often in conflict with our national interests. Kurt Mills uses
NatCom platform to forcefully argue that American foreign policy should
prioritize US sovereignty and strategic interests, not those of its allies.
The debate with Max Abrams illuminated a growing divide within
(03:13):
the movement over the US Israel relationship. The split is
now more visible than ever. Kurt Mills is with us now.
So you gave a provocative talk at NOTT Con. What
was the main message you wanted to convey to the audience?
Speaker 4 (03:27):
Yeah, I mean it was a group that was gathered
to talk about the intellectual underpinnings I think that have
inspired President Trump's movement the last ten years. And I
just sort of laid down the gauntlet and said, although.
Speaker 5 (03:41):
The US and Israel can have.
Speaker 4 (03:44):
Coordinating interests, that their interests are not the same and
if there is ever a choice between America and Israel,
it's not a close call.
Speaker 1 (03:53):
And when you offered this just absolutely hyperbolic theory that
were two separate countries with two separate sets of interests.
Speaker 2 (04:01):
How was that received?
Speaker 5 (04:03):
I think there was a divide within the audience.
Speaker 4 (04:06):
I think there were a group of, if I may speculate,
older Americans in the front row who cheered for my
opponent frankly, and then the vast majority of the room
was younger, and by younger, I mean under fifty. And
the reception towards my message was pretty rapturous.
Speaker 1 (04:23):
And what do you think drives that generational divide on
this question?
Speaker 4 (04:28):
I mean, I'm born in nineteen ninety, so you know
the formative experience was the Iraq War the two thousands.
But I think even for the generation younger than me,
so the people, the Zoomers, people born after twenty ten,
even I mean, these people are online. This stuff seems
so unbelievably anathema to what anything could be called America First,
(04:50):
that it's not even rooted in experience. It's just so
obvious that US and boldman in the Middle East on
behalf of Israel is not something to the US should
be doing.
Speaker 5 (05:00):
So.
Speaker 1 (05:00):
One of the organizers founders of this conference, you know,
was was quick to pat himself on the back for
allowing the debate, but also proffered this theory that the
divide on the Israel question really could threaten the utility
of the conservative movement, the America First movement, and really
we all ought to figure out a way to not
have that happen. You know, I've been very involved in
(05:23):
this debate, and I don't get the sense that it's
that way from the realism side, Like I don't believe
people who are pro Israel should be driven out of
the church, Like maybe you don't let them preach the
sermon at the front, But I don't know that they're
like to be shunned and cast away.
Speaker 2 (05:42):
Do you get the sense that.
Speaker 1 (05:43):
It's the same on the converse side, where the pro
how the pro Israel groups kind of think about the
message you were conveying.
Speaker 4 (05:51):
No, I mean, look, first of all, I have to
thank mister Zoni for having me, But as far as
I gather from his opening statement, I'm not really sure
what he was off. HAZONI is in Israeli and you know,
I do know that he is a former staffer for
the now Prime Minister of Israel, Benjamin Netnaho. And if
his offer is get in line and do whatever the
(06:13):
net Yahoo administration djure you know wants, Uh, that's not
much of an offer, if the I think, I think
this is what the frustration here is.
Speaker 5 (06:24):
There's not actually much of a coalition here.
Speaker 4 (06:28):
No matter what Republican candidates talk about in every election cycle,
it seems like the ones who get the policy wins
are the people who want the tax cuts, never mind
how we pay for them, and new wars in the
Middle East. Everything else seems very very tertiary.
Speaker 1 (06:45):
And do you think that is a consequence of people
who embrace foreign policy realism having a challenge getting credentialed
by some of these gatherings, organizations and things think tanks.
Speaker 4 (06:56):
To an extent, But I actually think there's a real
counter elite on foreign policy of an administration wants to
plug them in. And so yeah, I think there are
you know, John Miersheimer is obviously the most namous realists going,
but there are a ton of people who are not
household names that could staff an administration. And so yeah,
I'm not so sure it's a it's a platforming issue
(07:17):
as much anymore. Ron Paul, the you know, the heroic
former congressman and presidential candidate, also covered this event and
talked about my address, you know, earlier today, and he said,
there really is. You know, it was sort of fun
for him to say a vibe shift going on where
they did.
Speaker 5 (07:33):
The reality is they can't deplatform us because they would
look so ridiculous.
Speaker 2 (07:38):
So what should be our offer to them?
Speaker 1 (07:41):
Like, what offer can foreign policy realists make to the
israel first crowd to say, look, you know, you probably
align with our border policies, with some of our economic policies,
our regulatory policies don't allow the fact that we want
to be we want to have the type of friendship
where you can be honest with your friends and critical
of your friend ends. And we think those folks should
(08:02):
stay aligned with the conservative movement.
Speaker 5 (08:05):
I mean, I think this should be a beautiful divorce.
Speaker 4 (08:08):
I don't think the U s should be funding Israel's military,
and I don't think Israel should be funding the America's military.
And I think from there you can have an actual
alliance of where it interests intersects that we can partner.
But the US is an enormous contributor to Israel's military,
and the US constantly provides diplomatic cover.
Speaker 5 (08:29):
To the Israeli government. That's the big one.
Speaker 4 (08:31):
I mean, the State Department itself is trying to bar
Palestinian representative, successfully trying to bar Palestinian representatives for coming
to the UN. Now, look, you don't have to be
a huge fan of the UN, but it's probably not
going anywhere, and it's probably not leaving New York City.
And the idea that the State Department should spend one
second of its political capital or attention on doing the
(08:51):
bidding of a foreign government as opposed to pressing America's
case of the UN, I think is a joke.
Speaker 1 (08:56):
I do want to spend a moment to reflect on
where you think the left is on this question, Like
you were at the center of this debate and how
the right is confronting it, but there is a similar
confrontation going on on the left.
Speaker 2 (09:09):
Who do you think ultimately prevails out of that?
Speaker 4 (09:12):
I think that the Democrats are moving away from Israel,
or at least this current Israeli government. I think it's
also a generational story. But I think this is the reality.
I mean, I think the net Yahoo address to Congress
in twenty fifteen, where you know, basically most members of
Congress clapped like seals for a foreign government. I think
(09:34):
that was a seminal moment because the critique of net
Yahoo ten years ago was this, if net Yahoo sided
with one party, as he sided with the Republican Party
against Barack Obama, say wis you will, he would risk
losing both parties within a generation. And I think it's
complex on both sides. It depends who the standard bear
is in twenty twenty eight, but you saw, you know,
(09:56):
Pete Boutajez is probably a fairly serious presidential candidate. He
gave a garbled, horrendous answer on Israel policy questions and
he got absolutely clauded. So you're going to need someone
either more sophisticated or more hard line on this question.
And I think this is going to spill out twenty
twenty eight. People talked about this issue like, ah, you know,
(10:16):
the Republicans might turn on Israel five, ten, fifteen years.
I think this is coming in the presidential primary in
twenty eight. It thinks it's a big issue, especially if
the war's going on.
Speaker 1 (10:24):
And so let's forecast the twenty twenty eight presidential debate
stage between the ultimate Republican nominee and the ultimate Democrat nominee,
which one do you think is most willing to prostrate
themselves for the interests of Israel over the United States.
Speaker 4 (10:39):
I mean, that's a possible situation. It depends you know
who the nominee is on each side, you know.
Speaker 2 (10:46):
Well, of course, that's why I'm asking you to prognosticate.
Speaker 5 (10:48):
I'm not going to predict it.
Speaker 4 (10:49):
I'm not sure if to predict that. I think we
know a lot of the people who are going to
be on the stage in twenty eight. So I don't
want to premptively offend anybody here, but I think there's
there's a real chance though, as what I'll say, the
Republicans have less of a sort of humanitarian right as
opposed to the humanitarian left, and so if the Republicans
(11:11):
break the link of Israel, I think it's going to
be unsentimental versus the left will always be sort of
dogged by, you know, this sort of argument that we
need to do x X foreigner or Y foreigner. Now
that there's no argument towards it, but it's just it's
less likely to have currency. And you know, I think
there's is a real fight also within the American Jewish
(11:31):
community itself, and two thirds of American Jews vote Democratic,
and so I think it's if that debate could be
more protracted. I know it seems very contrariant, but the
break on the right could happen.
Speaker 1 (11:42):
Quicker Kurt Mills has called for a beautiful divorce and
this type of an unsympathetic separation. Kurt Mills, the executive
director of the American Conservative Thanks for Jonas, thank you,
and coming up, Jeff Dornick will be here to discuss
the ten stake in intelally taken by the US government.
Speaker 2 (12:01):
We'll debate it after a quick break.
Speaker 6 (12:07):
Viewers are always asking me how can they watch OAN live?
Speaker 7 (12:11):
The solution is simple.
Speaker 6 (12:13):
It's a streaming platform called cloud tv. Now it's spelled KLOWDTV.
Simply go to cloudtv dot com and subscribe to watch
twenty four to seven live feeds of Oan. The live
package is only two dollars and fifty cents per month
for all you can watch. Again, simply go to cloudtv
(12:35):
dot com and do it today. Hey, did you know
that One America News Network has launched a twenty four
to seven Twitter like social media replacement. We're calling it
free Talk forty five. So why is it branded free
Talk forty five? Well, free talk because you will not
be censored for expressing your opinion there, and forty five because.
Speaker 7 (13:00):
Is a really lucky number.
Speaker 6 (13:02):
So join us at free Talk forty five and express
yourself with no fear of cancelation. Ever, Hey, if your
cable provider doesn't offer One America News Network, you should
give them a call and kindly demand that they carryan Now,
(13:22):
you're the customer, and without your feedback, your cable provider
will not know that there is a strong demand across
this country for One America News Network. So please call
your cable company today and kindly ask or demand that
they ADDANN to their channel lineup.
Speaker 7 (13:45):
Hey everyone, here's a question for you.
Speaker 6 (13:47):
What does Roku TV, Apple TV, and Amazon fireTV all
have in common. The answer is that all three platforms
offer you the ability to live stream One America News
Network from your Roku TV, Apple TV.
Speaker 7 (14:02):
Or Amazon Fire device.
Speaker 6 (14:04):
Simply go to the app store, search out FORAM then
enjoy all the great programming offered by OEN, including my
show Real America.
Speaker 8 (14:19):
Biden gave away eleven billion dollars and Donald Trump took
back right an equity stake for the money that Biden
had given away. If we are adding fundamental value to
your business, I think it's fair for Donald Trump to
think about the American people. If you need, need, require,
and need the United States of America, Donald Trump is
(14:42):
going to think about it, but he's going to make
sure that benefit of the bargain is earned by the
American people, not just.
Speaker 7 (14:47):
Giveaways all the time. Lockheed Martin makes ninety.
Speaker 8 (14:51):
Seven percent of their revenue from the US government. They
are basically an arm of the US government. There's a
a lot of talking that needs to be had about
how do we finance our munitions, acquisitions, I think a
lot of that is talking, and now you have the
right people in the jobs and Donald Trump at the
(15:13):
head thinking about what is the right way to do it.
I tell you the way it has been done has
been a giveaway.
Speaker 1 (15:19):
That was US Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnik explicitly defending
nationalizing portions of US companies to give taxpayers a stake
in the action. Many call it patriotic capitalism. Lutnik framed
these discussions as part of a broader strategy. Rather than
giving away grants, the government actually wants equity, allowing taxpayers
to share in a potential upside. He suggested this goes
(15:41):
beyond tech, pointing to companies like Boeing or Palanteer. If
we're adding fundamental value to your business, could be that
the American people own a part of that business. Separately,
Lutnik defended the Trump administration's plan to convert previously committed
Chips Act grants into a ten percent equity stake in Intel,
arguing it's about ensuring taxpayers actually benefit from their investments.
(16:04):
Not socialism, but a return on investment. That's how the
argument goes. The shift is partly response to concerns over
US dependence on foreign supply chains, especially for semiconductors and
rare earth minerals. Critics warn that this trajectory could erode
market flexibility and corporate autonomy, hinting at implications for free
market norms. This is playing out in a global ecosystem
(16:25):
where China and other rich countries are pouring government cash
into business enterprise. So how will America keep up with
China if we don't compete under the same rules, And
how can we preserve the innovative features of the free
market with government ownership of private companies. Joining us tonight
(16:45):
to discuss is Jeff Dornick, the CEO of Pickaxe. He's
got a piece up in PJ Media taking the position
that the government should not have an ownership stake in Intel.
Jeff joins us, Now, so tell us what are the
great scourges that befall society with the government holding a
ten percent stake and Intel?
Speaker 9 (17:02):
Yeah, I mean you're you're dealing now with kind of
the merging together of a private company with with the
federal government, which you know, takes the government out of being,
you know, truly a neutral arbiter of you know, between
you know, whether it comes to a court case, whether
it comes to legislation, gives an unfair advantage to the
private corporation as well. So there's a variety of issues,
(17:26):
especially from a from a constitutional perspective. I believe it's
the tenth Amendment that specifically states that, you know, if
any any power that's not enumerated to the federal government,
that it doesn't have the authority to actually do that.
And I know a lot of our founding fathers were
very concerned about the blending together of private entities with
the federal government as well, that we could dive into
as well.
Speaker 1 (17:45):
Yeah, and I think that, you know, someone would have
a robust view of the Commerce Clause to hang some
sort of federal authority on. But one might also argue, Jeff,
that the government already shows this favoritism when we look
at the issuance of grant or the way certain definitions
are constructed around who can get loans at preferential rates.
(18:05):
And so if the taxpayer is going to give that
upfront benefit to a company, why should it only be
the shareholders of that company that benefit on the back end?
Speaker 9 (18:15):
Yeah, I mean, and in all reality, there are there
are arguments, you know, even against some of the some
of those concessions from the federal government to these private companies,
you know, and I think really one of the main
issues that were truly coming down to is should the
government have equity stake in a private company? I mean,
you know, you know, you could argue it's only it's
(18:36):
only ten percent, it's a minority stake. But if it's
ten percent, now what about fifteen percent? What about fifty percent?
What about the work?
Speaker 1 (18:43):
So we should nationalize? I'll grow I'll take the maximalist position.
The number of times the taxpayer has bailed out Boeing,
we should just nationalize Boeing, like the way that we
the way that we prop up some of these entities,
and we use the apparatus of government to wrap around
their business model functionally?
Speaker 2 (19:03):
Does it anyway? You own all the downside?
Speaker 1 (19:06):
If Lockheed Martin were to go bankrupt tomorrow and say
we can't make stuff anymore, I guarantee you there would
be a line of Democrats and Republicans lining up.
Speaker 2 (19:15):
To bail them out.
Speaker 1 (19:16):
But even if that happened and then they soared to
great heights, like, there would be no payoff on the
back end. I get your point. About disruptions of the
of the marketplace. It would offend the libertarian sensitivities of
all of us. But I just wonder like whether or
not it is a corrective measure for the grift that
so many of these corporations have run for decades.
Speaker 2 (19:38):
Yeah.
Speaker 9 (19:38):
Well, you know, the thing is that if we continue
along along that line of reasoning, then we're basically enabling
enabling the grift to a certain degree, you know, And
I think that that's that's part of the that's part
of the problem. So when we go back and we
look at American history, we didn't have this type of
issue until the early nineteen hundreds when we saw the
massive expansion of the federal government getting involved in private
(20:00):
and we began to see this, you know, through over
the decades, throughout the throughout the throughout the nineteen hundreds.
When we go back to the foundation of our country,
what we actually saw the only time that we really
saw a debate over this with our founding fathers was
dealing with the First and Second Bank. Specifically, the federal
government ended up having a twenty percent stake in that.
George Washington had to be convinced by Alexander Hamilton in
(20:20):
order to allow this to happen. But people like James Madison,
people like Thomas Jefferson, strongly opposed the federal government having
any kind of stake on any kind of private entity.
And then Andrew Jackson even even went so far as
to lead the dismantling of the Second Bank because he
completely opposed the corruption that happened when you had this
kind of a stake where the federal government had equity
(20:43):
over this this private company.
Speaker 2 (20:45):
That was indeed the debate.
Speaker 1 (20:46):
But let's fast forward about a quarter of a century,
or let's let's fast forward about two hundred and fifty years,
with China now making so many state sponsored investments into enterprise,
do you think that, uh, this is a competition issue,
and how is the United States States supposed to compete
with China if they're if they're engaging this type of
(21:07):
market manipulation and we unilaterally disarm that tool.
Speaker 9 (21:12):
Yeah, you know, I I don't think that that that
two wrongs make make a right. And I think that
that that's the issue is, like we look at China.
China is obviously communists, right, So I don't think that
the that the response to you know, communist you know,
investment and private ownership or public ownership into these companies
should be responded responded to by the United States basically
(21:35):
doing the exact same thing we're supposed to be, you know,
bringing about freedom, bringing about liberty, bringing about true capitalism.
I think there's lots of things that the federal government
could do without actually having an equity stake in a
lot of these companies, which, you know, really really when
you take it to us nth degree leads to socialism
and communism.
Speaker 1 (21:53):
Yeah, and that you know, it's it's interesting that the
communist countries are getting more capitalistic. We seem to have
been on a trend of becoming more socialist, and you
wonder where it all intersects and how it infects the
competitive dynamic. Jeff Dornic, CEO of Pickax, thanks so much
for joining me and chopping it up.
Speaker 2 (22:10):
Thank you.
Speaker 1 (22:10):
And coming up, we take to the streets of Chicago,
where YouTuber Nick Shirley has been talking with local residents
ahead of the battle for the Windy City, which is
sure to come with President Trump promising we're going in.
Speaker 2 (22:22):
Nick Shirley's here after a quick break.
Speaker 6 (22:28):
Hey, did you know that one America News network has
launched a twenty four to seven Twitter like social media replacement.
We're calling it free Talk forty five. So why is
it branded free Talk forty five. Well, free talk because
you will not be censored for expressing your opinion there,
and forty five because forty five is a really lucky number.
(22:50):
So join us at free Talk forty five and express
yourself with no fear of cancelation. Ever, Hey, if your
cable provider doesn't offer one America News Network, you should
give them a call and kindly demand that they CARRYAN. Now,
(23:11):
you're the customer, and without your feedback, your cable provider
will not know that there is a strong demand across
this country for one America News Network. So please call
your cable company today and kindly ask or demand that
they add OANN to their channel lineup.
Speaker 7 (23:33):
Hey, everyone, here's a question for you.
Speaker 6 (23:36):
What does Roku TV, Apple TV, and Amazon fireTV all
have in common? The answer is that all three platforms
offer you the ability to live stream One America News
Network from your Roku TV, Apple TV, or Amazon Fire device.
Simply go to the app store search out FORAAN, then
(23:56):
enjoy all the great programming offered BYN, including my show
Real America.
Speaker 7 (24:06):
Hey, did you know that?
Speaker 6 (24:06):
Video clips from my program Real America and all the
other talk shows offered by One America News Network are
available to you for free on OA and N dot com.
You can also enjoy the latest in breaking news videos
by visiting OA and N dot com. Make sure you
stay informed and visit O an N dot com daily.
(24:27):
And if you'd like to show support and wear some
support for One America News Network, then visit our online
store for the latest shirts, hats and mugs.
Speaker 10 (24:40):
Living here in Chicago, we've been talking with these guys
right here. Is it pretty dangerous to be walking around
these streets?
Speaker 2 (24:44):
Hey?
Speaker 7 (24:44):
Yeah, I ain't gonna bro?
Speaker 2 (24:45):
Is that why you're walking down?
Speaker 6 (24:47):
I got up thrown by faux pipes in one day
and that was That was the first day I ever
even knew.
Speaker 7 (24:52):
How to hit a lead on Margoma.
Speaker 9 (24:54):
Don't come through playing.
Speaker 2 (24:55):
Were gonna leave you right here in his line?
Speaker 3 (24:57):
That threat, however you want to take it?
Speaker 11 (25:00):
Oh, the ore the kids out here when they first
get their first guns initiated like that. And now if
you've really got shot, how do you feel about gun bynance?
Speaker 2 (25:08):
You're ready for the gun vinance to stop.
Speaker 7 (25:11):
Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa whoa.
Speaker 1 (25:13):
That was YouTuber Nick Shirley walking the streets of Chicago.
So you don't have to Illinois Governor and Pillsbury Doboy
gone wrong. JB. Pritzker is taking a rather indefensible position
that the people of Chicago don't need help. Several of
them die as a result of violence. Seemingly every weekend.
Criminals have exploited bonehead policies like cashless bail. Law enforcement
(25:34):
has seen their hands tied. Illegal aliens have made the
Windy City their sanctuary as many friendly Midwesterners have had
to abandon the once mighty Chicago. Former Illinois Senator Darren
Bailey told us last night the Trump administration's moves have
finally given people hope.
Speaker 10 (25:50):
Overall.
Speaker 5 (25:51):
People are or they really are. They're overjoyed.
Speaker 10 (25:53):
I does's National Guard troops show up in Chicago.
Speaker 12 (25:56):
They are going to restore order to that city, and
people are going to be grateful.
Speaker 1 (26:01):
So how are things going on the streets of Chicago?
Just a little before the battle for Shytown begins. Joining
us now is independent YouTube journalist Nick Shirley. So, Nick,
you were out on the streets of Chicago we just
showed some of your stuff.
Speaker 2 (26:15):
What did you learn from the experience.
Speaker 11 (26:17):
You know, Chicago it's a very interesting place. I was
down on the West Side, and I mean everything you
hear about Chicago is true.
Speaker 10 (26:23):
It is a dangerous place. It is a dangerous location.
Speaker 11 (26:27):
There's lots of love from the people inside Chicago, and
there's also a lot of things happening that maybe might
not be the most legal per se. But I mean
everyone treated me with a lot of respect out there.
Speaker 1 (26:38):
Do you think they know they don't have to live
this way?
Speaker 10 (26:42):
I mean it's a choice obviously, right, Like they liked
living like that. The people I was with.
Speaker 1 (26:48):
Like they like living among gunshots. I mean I was
watching your videos and I saw people pointing out the
bullet holes and their abdomens to you.
Speaker 10 (26:57):
Yeah, I mean, it's definitely a different culture.
Speaker 11 (27:00):
I mean that's what they They're all proud to show,
and that's why they That's why I was able to
go in there and talk with them, because it's stuff
they want to show to the world.
Speaker 10 (27:08):
But I personally wouldn't want to live in that. But
to each their own.
Speaker 1 (27:12):
When the National Guard arrives, when federal presence is there,
what do you think those folks will how do you
think they'll react?
Speaker 11 (27:22):
Yeah, I think the reaction, if it does happen, the
reaction will be the illegal activities and such.
Speaker 10 (27:29):
The shootings will obviously go down. Nobody's gonna want to shoot.
Speaker 11 (27:32):
Or do anything illegal knowing that the National Guard is
right there, and so you'll see what happened to Washington,
DC as well. Crime will go down and the residents
will be live in a lot more peace per se.
Speaker 1 (27:45):
I mean, are these people who have jobs and families
and other things they do or are they just kind
of hanging out on the street, And if so, how
are they able to sustain themselves?
Speaker 10 (27:56):
You know, a lot of the would probably say they're
hustlers entrepreneurs.
Speaker 11 (28:00):
In their own way, and I don't go too into
detail with them about what they're doing, but Ye'll allow
them to say they're hustlers entrepreneurs, and some of them
do have normal jobs as well.
Speaker 10 (28:11):
We met a lot of.
Speaker 11 (28:12):
People that also have jobs where they work, whether it
be at the shop in the street, or the shop
inside of the community, or.
Speaker 10 (28:21):
Any other job that you can think of.
Speaker 1 (28:23):
So I was watching you out there during the daytime
having these great discussions and as the sun went down,
I thought, well, surely he's gonna be not out there
doing this stuff, and you persisted. Was there ever a
point you were scared or concerned for your safety?
Speaker 3 (28:39):
Yeah.
Speaker 11 (28:39):
At one point I was walking on the side of
the sidewalk closest to the road, and I was like, oh,
maybe I probably shouldn't be on that side, and some
cars slowed down and they told me I was all
state inside of their neighborhood, so I was protected.
Speaker 1 (28:55):
It looks like you made some lifelong friends. Where are
you headed next to get more of this type of
great content?
Speaker 10 (29:01):
The world may never know.
Speaker 11 (29:02):
They'll have to check it out, but maybe overseas in
the next few weeks or so.
Speaker 1 (29:06):
All right, Well, I'm eager to see if you find
other circumstances and dynamics less safe, more safe, How the
different laws and regulations impact what you're able to gather
about how people are living. Independent journalist YouTuber Nick surely thanks.
Speaker 2 (29:21):
For joining us on the program.
Speaker 1 (29:23):
Thank you and coming up. RFK Junior has testifying in
the Senate. He has had some combative exchanges with folks
on the left, and we see there's also some additional
support coming from the White House, backing RFK, backing his
testimony and the decisions that will make America healthy again.
Grace Price is an independent journalists following the story.
Speaker 2 (29:44):
And she will join us next.
Speaker 6 (29:51):
Hey, if you're a cable provider doesn't offer One America
News Network, you should give him a call and kindly
demand that they carry away in. Now you're the customer,
and without your feedback, your cable provider will not know
that there is a strong demand across this country for
One America News Network. So please call your cable company
(30:13):
today and kindly ask or demand that they add OANN
to their channel lineup.
Speaker 7 (30:23):
Hey, everyone, here's a question for you.
Speaker 6 (30:25):
What does Roku TV, Apple TV, and Amazon fireTV all
have in common? The answer is that all three platforms
offer you the ability to live stream One America News
Network from your Roku TV, Apple TV, or Amazon Fire device.
Simply go to the app store search out forn, then
(30:46):
enjoy all the great programming offered by including my show
Real America. Hey, did you know that video clips from
my program Real America and all the other talks offered
by One America News Network are available to you for free.
Speaker 7 (31:05):
On oaan n dot com.
Speaker 6 (31:07):
You can also enjoy the latest in breaking news videos
by visiting OA and N dot com. Make sure you
stay informed and visit oann dot com daily. And if
you'd like to show support and wear some support for
One America News Network, then visit our online store for
the latest shirts, hats, and mugs. Viewers are always asking
(31:28):
me how can they watch OAN live? The solution is simple.
It's a streaming platform called cloud tv now it's spelled
klowd TV. Simply go to cloudtv dot com and subscribe
to watch twenty four to seven live feeds of OAN.
The live package is only two dollars and fifty cents
(31:49):
per month for all you can watch. Again, simply go
to cloudtv dot com and do it today.
Speaker 12 (32:02):
We are the sickest country in the world. That's why
we have to fire people at CDC. They did not
do their job. This was their job to keep us
healthy than you. I need to fire some of those
people to make sure this doesn't happen again. You're saying
the Biden administration politicize all the day.
Speaker 6 (32:20):
Go back to all I can't well g fire doctor
from surgeon General.
Speaker 12 (32:25):
They fired doctor grad. They fired all the people who
questioned the orthodoxy. Most Americans will be able to get
it from their pharmacy.
Speaker 2 (32:32):
Question is everyone who wants it?
Speaker 13 (32:34):
That was your promise.
Speaker 14 (32:36):
I know I never promised that I was going to
recommend products with which there is no indication. Wait, you said,
and I know you've taken eight hundred and fifty five
thousand dollars from pharmaceutical company. Senator, you are the one
who said you would not take them away. Now, Senator,
I'm not taking them away from a secretary.
Speaker 12 (32:58):
You want me to indicate a product for which there
is no clinical data?
Speaker 10 (33:03):
What you want?
Speaker 5 (33:04):
What you said were live.
Speaker 9 (33:06):
You just use plator moving the type.
Speaker 15 (33:11):
Are you using that?
Speaker 12 (33:12):
M R and vaccine has never been associated myocard items
or para card items.
Speaker 9 (33:17):
The people that you have put on that panel after
firing the entire of.
Speaker 7 (33:23):
Aiding the question.
Speaker 12 (33:24):
The industry makes the studies and they could not provide
a study that said that it is effective for healthy guilts.
Speaker 13 (33:31):
Where when have you produced the data that you relied
on and that this FDA relied on to change those parameters?
Speaker 7 (33:38):
You did it behind the dat doors of the data public.
Speaker 13 (33:41):
Now, parents who decide that they do want their children
down which stuff?
Speaker 7 (33:46):
I'm not just making stuff up.
Speaker 13 (33:47):
When were you lying, sir, when you told this committee
that you were not anti vax or when you told
Americans that there's no safe and effective.
Speaker 5 (33:54):
Vaccine both English and trail.
Speaker 13 (33:57):
Oh, so more of denial, more back and forth. I mean,
here's what I know, here's what I need to explain.
Why you'll actually I want you to listen to me.
Speaker 12 (34:08):
Okay ahead, you went on.
Speaker 13 (34:09):
Fox News blaming school shootings on antidepressants.
Speaker 12 (34:14):
I never said that you're making it up. Interesting, Yeah
you are.
Speaker 14 (34:19):
You want to talk, You want to harangue, and you
want to solically.
Speaker 12 (34:24):
You want to have partisan politics. I want to actually
solve these problems.
Speaker 1 (34:31):
Who it's just Secretary RFK Junior had combative and dazzling
testimony in the United States Senate today.
Speaker 2 (34:37):
Vice President JD.
Speaker 1 (34:38):
Vance had the hottest take posting on social media. He said, quote,
when I see all those senators trying to lecture and
gotcha Bobby Kennedy today, all I can think is you
all support off label, untested and irreversible hormone therapies for children,
mutilating our kids, and enriching big pharma.
Speaker 2 (34:58):
You're full of blank and everyone knows it.
Speaker 1 (35:01):
Indeed, we do Republicans are leaning into the Maha movement.
Democrats say they're scared because they think it will kill them.
We think they might be scared because the politics are
very powerful with us. Now for more on RFK Junior's testimonies,
investigative journalist Grace Price.
Speaker 2 (35:16):
So, Grace, there were.
Speaker 1 (35:17):
Fireworks and insults and praise all kind of meshed in together.
What was your reaction to the day's testimony in the Senate?
Speaker 15 (35:26):
Well, to be quite honest with you, Matt, I was
just absolutely appalled by the slander that RFK Junior was
met with from some of our country's senators. Like I
thought it was extremely honestly, just everything about it was
extremely not right for what RK Junior is trying to
do for our country, and considering that they were supposed
(35:49):
to be talking about President Trump's twenty twenty six healthcare agenda,
and they instead spent the majority of the time chastising
ARK Junior for saying that he wasn't going to recommend
vaccines when in reality they really mean push vaccines on
the majority of Americans just because the science that is
made available to the public doesn't encourage him to do so.
Speaker 1 (36:13):
I thought it was really interesting when he pointed out
the amount of money that Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts
had taken from Big Pharma. That is a way to
peel off the veil in a compelling manner. Do you
find that to be persuasive when showcasing the motivations behind
some of these senators who were slandering the secretary one percent?
Speaker 15 (36:38):
I think that if we don't continue to look at
the corporate capture of a lot of Americans' most trusted
health institutions, and we're actually not going to get anywhere
with our health crisis that we are facing. We already
know that children are sicker than ever, and it just
drives me insane that every time our k Junior would
mention that goes to seventy six percent of Americans now
(37:01):
are extremely sick and ill, and they instead would just
brush that off and move on to the next point
about vaccines, when in reality, the senators that were poking
at him for that were actually paid off, like we
saw with Elizabeth by Pharma with their own kinds of
donations that they had made. And so it's very much,
I think a case of common sense, where, of course,
(37:22):
if you have any kind of ties to these big
food companies or big pharmaceutical companies, then you're going to
want them to succeed. And you're not going to like
what RK. Junior is doing with all of the HHS stuff.
Speaker 1 (37:34):
You mentioned big Food, and we heard some of their
talking points regurgitated by Democrat senators.
Speaker 2 (37:41):
One is that we can't take.
Speaker 1 (37:43):
Dies and bad oils out of food that is present
in food deserts. That these convenience stores that are highly
subsidized by EBT and food stamps just have to continue
to have high processed foods.
Speaker 2 (37:57):
And I'm sitting there and thinking to myself.
Speaker 1 (37:58):
Like, why is the away assists in a food desert
have to be poison We are the most powerful country
in the world. We can't get high quality food and
calories without all of that processed fat into the poor
places of our country. Like, when people make those arguments,
do you think their voters will hold them accountable for
the stupidity?
Speaker 15 (38:20):
I sure would hope so. And I can only speak
from my own experience, which is even on college campuses,
which are arguably some of the largest food deserts. I
would say, if you're just talking about nutrient density of
the food, you can actually super easily get different products
into your local seven eleven or food mart or whatever
it is that the college students are going to get
their food from. They just do it based on what
(38:42):
is being requested. And there are different products that use
non carcinogenic chemicals in their own processed food you can get.
I think I saw a hot pocket the other day
that didn't have any kind of artificial dyes. It didn't
have any kind of strange chemical solvent in it that
is un necessary and adds no nutritional value. But that's
(39:03):
how absurd these arguments have become. People are arguing to
keep these chemicals inside of foods that are actually completely
useless for humans, and our necessity of some kind of
good energy instead is just slowly killing us and poisoning us.
Speaker 1 (39:21):
Yeah, I needed to go to a food desert when
I was in college when I was putting on the
Freshman fifteen.
Speaker 2 (39:26):
But we did see the vice president JD.
Speaker 1 (39:28):
Vance Way in on this, and he pointed to the
great irony of those who embrace, like, you know, injecting
some sort of gender depriving mystery juice into the next
generation of children. They defend that, but then they want
to criticize what RFK is doing to deploy the scientific
method absent politics at the CDC, do you see a
(39:51):
rub between those who want to be critical of the
MAHA agenda while at the same time embracing some of
these very dangerous chemicals as a four of virtue signaling oh.
Speaker 15 (40:03):
One hundred percent. And it's very strange as well, because
I have testified four bills in Arizona and at the
Texas State Capital that we're trying to remove sodas and
candies and chips from the foodstamp program. And I was
called a racist for doing this because I was trying
to help remove these products that are, by the way,
(40:25):
the number one purchase commodities under the foodstamp program and
that are essentially just being used to fuel the obesity
epidemic that we're seeing in our country.
Speaker 1 (40:35):
Wait, wait, hold on, I don't understand this. How could
that be racist? What is even the accusation that that
is racist?
Speaker 15 (40:41):
That is a fantastic question. It's because I'm taking away
apparently soda from low income families by doing this, which
is not at all the goal. The goal is to
have taxpayer dollars stop subsidizing the over consumption of nutrient void,
high sugar water that then we are having to pay
(41:03):
in the long run for whenever these people get on
Medicaid because of the chronic diseases, that it's increasing the
risk for down the line. That is what the case was.
But instead I was getting criticized in being called a
racist because I'm not allowed to apparently try to want
to help people in low income areas when my mom
was literally raised on food stamps and I totally understand
(41:26):
that food deserts are real. It's why I'm so committed
to trying to help a lot of these different kinds
of foods that are more whole nutrient dens become more
available for other people. But yeah, it's crazy what the
arguments have come.
Speaker 10 (41:39):
To at this point.
Speaker 1 (41:40):
We've seen recent polling suggesting that RFK Junior is the
most popular member of President Trump's cabinet. Who do you
think those voters are who might not be on board
with every feature of the Make America Great Again agenda,
but who have a high view of Secretary Kennedy.
Speaker 15 (41:58):
Well, I actually think that a lot of Generation Z
is building a much higher view of Secretary Kennedy in general,
and I think that this is one of the most
significant points of the MAHA movement as a whole, which
is that the whole focus is actually on the future
of our country and our future generations, and it's about
helping people feel good who have felt terrible for a
(42:20):
really long time, and the government has simply just swept
all of those issues under the rug. And I think
that Generation Z is actually waking up to this, and
I do hope that in the future, whenever it comes
to going to the polls, we are able to actually
follow through and really support Kennedy in his entire bipartisan movement,
which is to make Generation Z and the entirety of
(42:42):
America healthy again like how.
Speaker 10 (42:44):
We used to be.
Speaker 1 (42:45):
Yeah, it does seem like there is an enlightenment around
food and around health and around inputs with Gen Z.
Speaker 2 (42:51):
That's probably a great thing for humanity.
Speaker 1 (42:54):
And there are really two arguments being presented right now
from the right and the left.
Speaker 2 (42:58):
You got the right saying.
Speaker 1 (43:00):
These systems of big food and big pharma have been
poisoning you and we have to fundamentally change those systems.
And then the left is saying that if a few
people quit at the CDC, we're all gonna like die
of monkey pocks.
Speaker 2 (43:14):
You know.
Speaker 1 (43:14):
Do you see one of those messages ultimately prevailing or
is this just the battle we're going to continue to
have to have through the midterms.
Speaker 15 (43:23):
I obviously hope that the first one is the one
that ends up coming through to the top. But I
do think that one of the reasons why there was
so much controversy today around what RFKA Junior was trying
to talk about and all the changes that he's trying
to make is for a long time, actually for the
past fifty years, we have not been able to strike
(43:43):
a balance between regulation and innovation within the food industry
and even the pharmaceutical industries as well. And we see
that drug prices are way too high right now, which
makes them inaccessible for a.
Speaker 14 (43:55):
Lot of people.
Speaker 15 (43:56):
Then we also see with the food industry, because we
haven't kept enough tabs on them, they've basically just been
continuously making exceptions that put their own profits and own
interests above the actual interests of Americans and our own
public health and welfare. And so I think that we
are trying to figure that out right now and see
(44:17):
what kind of policies still allow for innovation in our
country and on the entrepreneurialism that we have, but at
the same time still prioritizing American's.
Speaker 1 (44:27):
Health because it's such a good point about curating that balance,
and we've been out of balance for so long, and
obviously the rates of chronic disease bear that out.
Speaker 2 (44:36):
Grace Price, thanks as always for joining us and sharing
your expertise.
Speaker 15 (44:39):
Thank you so much.
Speaker 1 (44:41):
And coming up, there is a right wing political party
in Germany. There members and candidates have died at an
alarmingly high rate. One of the members of the German
bunderest Dog is here to discuss after a quick break.
Speaker 7 (44:58):
Hey everyone, here's a question for you.
Speaker 6 (45:00):
What does Roku TV, AppleTV, and Amazon fireTV all have
in common. The answer is that all three platforms offer
you the ability to live stream One America News Network
from your Roku TV, AppleTV or Amazon Fire device. Simply
go to the app store, search out foran then enjoy
(45:21):
all the great programming offered by on including my show
Real America. Hey, did you know that video clips from
my program Real America and all the other talk shows
offered by One America News Network are available to you
for free on oaan.
Speaker 7 (45:40):
N dot com.
Speaker 6 (45:41):
You can also enjoy the latest in breaking news videos
by visiting oaan n dot com. Make sure you stay
informed and visit oann dot com daily. And if you'd
like to show support and wear some support for One
America News Network, then visitor online store for the latest shirts,
hats and mugs. Viewers are always asking me how can
(46:03):
they watch OAN live?
Speaker 7 (46:05):
The solution is simple.
Speaker 6 (46:07):
It's a streaming platform called cloud tv Now it's spelled KLOWDTV.
Simply go to cloudtv dot com and subscribe to watch
twenty four to seven live feeds of OAN. The live
package is only two dollars and fifty cents per month
for all you can watch. Again, simply go to cloudtv
(46:29):
dot com and do it today. Hey, did you know
that One America News Network has launched a twenty four
to seven Twitter like social media replacement. We're calling it
free Talk forty five. So why is it branded free
talk forty five? Well, free talk because you will not
be censored for expressing your opinion there, and forty five
(46:52):
because forty five is a really lucky number. So join
us at free Talk forty five and express yourself with
no fear of cancelation.
Speaker 1 (47:02):
Ever, did you know that there is a right wing
political party in Germany where.
Speaker 2 (47:09):
People keep ending up dead.
Speaker 1 (47:11):
Multiple news outlets report that six Alternative for deutsch Land
or AfD candidates died within a short span leading up
to the September fourteenth local elections in North Rhine Germany.
The United States is a far larger country than Germany,
with more political candidates, and we've never seen anything like this.
So let's look at the politics of the AfD and
maybe we'll find some clues. The AfD started in twenty thirteen.
(47:35):
They had hard right immigration views and had more liberal
economic views. They opposed bailouts for the EU, favoring more
nationalistic economic policies, but with assistance for their fellow Germans.
The AfD is politically on the upswing with voters. In
February of this year, they scored their largest result at
the ballot box yet, with a pretty sporty twenty one
(47:56):
percent of the vote, they became the largest opposition party
in Germany.
Speaker 2 (48:00):
Can't beat them, kill them.
Speaker 1 (48:01):
It's not the most epicurean of political messages, and in fact,
authorities say there's no evidence of foul play. Most of
the deaths have been attributed to natural causes or private
health matters. With one confirmed suicide and several others withheld
for privacy, the cluster of deaths has triggered speculation on
social media. The economist Stefan Homberg described the pattern as
(48:22):
statistically almost impossible, a claim amplified by AfD co leader
Alice Wydel and the deputy leader k Gottschdal, who'll be
with us in moments. They urged caution and said that
there may be political pressure just affecting the general well
being of their members. I'd say so the deaths disputed
or I'm sorry. The death's disrupted election logistics. Ballots had
(48:45):
to be reprinted and in some cases the mail votes
were invalidated if they were cast for candidates who are
no longer alive. We wanted to check in and see
how these recent clusters of death have impacted our friends
across the pond. Here to hopefully tell us what's happening
is a member of the German Bundestag and deputy federal
spokesperson for the AfD K Gottschock. So tell us what
(49:10):
are you concerned about with all of these folks seemingly
meeting their maker right on the eve of an election.
Speaker 16 (49:18):
Yeah, right now, we have a very critical situation and
I'm very proud to be here and to join your
show and with great admiration my follower, So your political
work here in Germany, it's right now very critical situation
because the old parties are fearing to lose power and
they maybe we take talk about this.
Speaker 3 (49:38):
They take each action they could.
Speaker 16 (49:41):
Against us, for example with a domestic intelligence services working
against us. Now some mayoral candidates are not allowed to
participate in an election. So it's a horrible situation right
here in Germany.
Speaker 1 (49:56):
Right now, we are glad there are people standing up
for nash populist policies. It's very concerning to us that
the enterprise of the state, the security apparatus of the state,
is engaged in surveillance against the AfD. Can you let
my viewers know what was the basis for your government
using its surveillance powers to target an opposition political movement.
Speaker 3 (50:20):
Yeah.
Speaker 16 (50:21):
Some people take a reason for our historical heritage like
this to avoid that left or right wing parties come
in power or something like that, or parties being against
our constitution. And right now the left parties and I
would also count the cducs or say a so called
(50:41):
conservative parties are now using our intelligence service to fight
against the opposition. It was maybe a good purpose when
Germany was rebuilding, you after the Second World War, but
now a lot of things in Germany are abused by
the parties being a power to avoid that a new
(51:02):
party with conservative values is coming back in power. Indeed,
the left parties and left thinking is in all institutions,
in all walks of life, and that's our critical situation here.
So they abuse this power the same they do in
our so called constitutional court.
Speaker 3 (51:25):
There are six city.
Speaker 16 (51:29):
Judges, six SPD judges, one of the FDP, one of
the Greens, but now judge of the AfD. So it's
all representing political stages. We have really a politic against
us to avoid that we cannot power power because there
is much work, much things to lose for the parties.
(51:52):
And of course the left parties hate our positions like
they fight. Maybe we can talk about this also later
they fight again your president against the public.
Speaker 1 (52:02):
We've seen stuff and in our country the security apparatus
was used to surveil President Trump, and so we're very
sensitive to that.
Speaker 2 (52:11):
We see the dangers that.
Speaker 1 (52:13):
Causes President Trump had to survive two assassination attempts to
return to the presidency. There are some in your party
who have not survived to the election. The authorities have
said that there's no evidence of foul play in any
of the deaths of the members of your party who
were preparing for election. Do you believe the authorities.
Speaker 16 (52:35):
I was the investigator for our party because it happened
in my state, and we also in a campaigning for
this borough and special regional elections in Los Angelesphalia. And
I regret really in this time the cases are clear
for me, they are normal because one of some of
(52:55):
the people I know by myrself one and had an
problems with the heart. Another one was eighty three and
he had a lot of other Yeah. I don't like
to talk because of data, but really we prove that
we checked that and in this case still I think
(53:17):
it's normal.
Speaker 3 (53:18):
But of course we observe it.
Speaker 16 (53:20):
We are an investigation, and I say always we can trust,
but controlling the thing is a better one.
Speaker 1 (53:27):
What is going to be your core message to voters
in the upcoming election.
Speaker 16 (53:32):
We want to change, We want to come back to
conservative values. We want to bring people the illegal immigration.
We want to stop that. We want to bring people
which are not allowed to be and to stay in
Germany must come back. We must really push back the
influence of a lot of Muslim organizations here about us
in my home country, so we have a lot of
(53:55):
influence of that.
Speaker 3 (53:56):
We want to stop.
Speaker 16 (53:58):
Really the superstate of Judah coming in all walks of life,
try to control everything, try to dominate everything. We want
to come back to our values. We want to live
our heritage, our culture, and we don't like to have
a super super natural and culture of the European community.
(54:22):
And especially we want to save money. We spend so
much money for foreign interest, for the EC we spend
so many money. We spend for development in other countries
much money, and of course to influence your country by NGOs.
Speaker 3 (54:38):
We spend money.
Speaker 16 (54:39):
And really the last ten years or fifteen years we
forget our people and we've forgotten our people in Germany.
You are working very hard and sometimes it's better.
Speaker 3 (54:47):
In Germany. Social welfare is very high.
Speaker 16 (54:49):
We as a socialistic country right now, so sometimes it's
better to have social transfer instead of working. So people
when they start working have sometimes less money instead when
they say okay, I get my money by social transfer compensation.
So it's horrible what's happening and what happened here in
(55:10):
Germany during the last ten years, especially under Merkel and
ol Off Schultz when he was Genelor of the Federal Republic,
and the same we have on our level.
Speaker 1 (55:20):
And let me ask you this question because I don't
have a few minutes, but you are a very rapidly
growing party. You've taken the spot of the principal opposition
in Germany. Now how long do you think it will
take for your party to potentially have the role of
the governing coalition?
Speaker 16 (55:38):
I think, and my great hope I think in the
future it will happen. Maybe in Saxonia Anhal. We have
state elections there in the autumn next year. And yesterday
that Paults say we are now the strongest party in
this eastern.
Speaker 3 (55:53):
Part of Germany.
Speaker 16 (55:54):
It's called we have also a little bit in comparison
with the United States stay and this date is Saxonia
Anheid and now we became really the strongest party. So
my hope is we start with governing in a state
and then we can also stop a lot of things,
for example, the public broadcasting system.
Speaker 3 (56:17):
It's a little bit compared. You can compare it.
Speaker 16 (56:19):
As a BBC in Great Britain when they.
Speaker 3 (56:22):
Minimize the ins.
Speaker 1 (56:24):
We're having our own wrestles with the public broadcasting system
here in the United States, and we all hope to
be liberated from our public broadcasting masters. Kay Gotchag, thank
you so much for joining us from the German Wunderstog.
We wish you well and we wish safety and health
to all of your candidates on the trail.
Speaker 16 (56:42):
I really hope and maybe you can help us bring
us back democracy and hope to see you again on
the Galla in New York. When I saw you there
first in twenty twenty three, I enjoyed your speech really.
Speaker 2 (56:54):
Thank you very much.
Speaker 1 (56:54):
We'll have to play some highlights for that for folks
sometimes appreciate.
Speaker 2 (56:57):
You being on the program.
Speaker 3 (56:59):
Thank you, bye, have a good time.
Speaker 2 (57:01):
Thank you. That's all the time we have.
Speaker 1 (57:02):
We'll be back tomorrow, nine Eastern six specific Make sure
to sign up for the OA N Live app if
you haven't already, Just go to O A n N
dot com, follow me on ex at Matt Gates, and
email us the Matt Gates Show at OA n N
dot com.
Speaker 2 (57:13):
Stay right here fine point. What Shanelle Riyhon is up next.
Let's go get them
A National Convention of Conservatism met recently in Washington, d C.
We have coverage from Kurt Mills, one of the gathering's
biggest newsmakers. Is it a good idea for the American
government to take ownership interest in the nation's most iconic companies.
We'll debate it tonight. The streets of Chicago are a
war zone. We'll chat with someone who's done exceptional and
(00:21):
rare journalism from the ground. And the HHS Secretary RFK.
Junior gave testimony today in the Senate. There are some
strange political debts going on in Germany.
Speaker 2 (00:31):
We'll cover it all. Next to the Macads show. Let's
do this shaking up Washington, d C. We're breaking the fever.
Do you haven't watch this guy on television.
Speaker 3 (00:40):
It's like a machine.
Speaker 2 (00:42):
He's great. Matt Gates as we join you tonight.
Speaker 1 (00:49):
There is major fallout in the conservative movement following some
big clashes and a key gathering of conservative voices in
our nation's capital.
Speaker 2 (00:57):
Nat Con.
Speaker 1 (00:58):
It's a gathering of thought leaders on the right to
discuss key issues. It's usually a bit of a boar
with lots of bow ties and pocket protectors, but this
year things got spicy over the issue of the US
Israel relationship. Kurt Mills, executive director of the American Conservative,
appeared in a breakout session titled America and the Israel
(01:18):
Iran War a debate he delivered a very provocative talk
named Israel First or America First. During the debate, Mills
challenged the US Israel dynamic. He described Israel as quote
perhaps the world's historic case of the tail wagging the
dog close quote. He implied that Israel's influence over US
foreign policy often overrides America's strategic interests. He argued that
(01:41):
the US should not treat Israel's security priorities automatically.
Speaker 2 (01:44):
As our own. The exchange grew tense.
Speaker 1 (01:47):
Mills had Max Abrams in that debate and discussion, and
he's a pro Israel academic. He dismissed the realistic US
strategic arguments as isolationist. Abrams pushed back, labeling isolation Israelists
as insane.
Speaker 2 (02:02):
We disagree with that.
Speaker 1 (02:04):
Joramazani is Natcon's founder and a staunch supporter of Israel.
He watched the debate and later warned that such internal divisions,
especially over Israel, could fracture the broader nationalist movement if
not handled carefully. The session revealed a growing ideological fault
line within the nationalist conservative movement. On one side, Mills
and like minded realists push for a more restrained sovereignty
(02:27):
first foreign policy. On the other, traditional supporters like Abrams
and Azani advocate for continued robust US alignment with Israel.
Hazani signaled that the debate was permitted, not suppressed, yet
he cautioned that unchecked dissent could harm up political figures
aligned with the coalition like Jade Vance or Marco Rubio,
and even threaten the larger America First project. Mills emphasized
(02:51):
he wasn't discussing tactics, but strategy. He questioned why America
adopts Israel's conflicts as its own when doing so is
often in conflict with our national interests. Kurt Mills uses
NatCom platform to forcefully argue that American foreign policy should
prioritize US sovereignty and strategic interests, not those of its allies.
The debate with Max Abrams illuminated a growing divide within
(03:13):
the movement over the US Israel relationship. The split is
now more visible than ever. Kurt Mills is with us now.
So you gave a provocative talk at NOTT Con. What
was the main message you wanted to convey to the audience?
Speaker 4 (03:27):
Yeah, I mean it was a group that was gathered
to talk about the intellectual underpinnings I think that have
inspired President Trump's movement the last ten years. And I
just sort of laid down the gauntlet and said, although.
Speaker 5 (03:41):
The US and Israel can have.
Speaker 4 (03:44):
Coordinating interests, that their interests are not the same and
if there is ever a choice between America and Israel,
it's not a close call.
Speaker 1 (03:53):
And when you offered this just absolutely hyperbolic theory that
were two separate countries with two separate sets of interests.
Speaker 2 (04:01):
How was that received?
Speaker 5 (04:03):
I think there was a divide within the audience.
Speaker 4 (04:06):
I think there were a group of, if I may speculate,
older Americans in the front row who cheered for my
opponent frankly, and then the vast majority of the room
was younger, and by younger, I mean under fifty. And
the reception towards my message was pretty rapturous.
Speaker 1 (04:23):
And what do you think drives that generational divide on
this question?
Speaker 4 (04:28):
I mean, I'm born in nineteen ninety, so you know
the formative experience was the Iraq War the two thousands.
But I think even for the generation younger than me,
so the people, the Zoomers, people born after twenty ten,
even I mean, these people are online. This stuff seems
so unbelievably anathema to what anything could be called America First,
(04:50):
that it's not even rooted in experience. It's just so
obvious that US and boldman in the Middle East on
behalf of Israel is not something to the US should
be doing.
Speaker 5 (05:00):
So.
Speaker 1 (05:00):
One of the organizers founders of this conference, you know,
was was quick to pat himself on the back for
allowing the debate, but also proffered this theory that the
divide on the Israel question really could threaten the utility
of the conservative movement, the America First movement, and really
we all ought to figure out a way to not
have that happen. You know, I've been very involved in
(05:23):
this debate, and I don't get the sense that it's
that way from the realism side, Like I don't believe
people who are pro Israel should be driven out of
the church, Like maybe you don't let them preach the
sermon at the front, But I don't know that they're
like to be shunned and cast away.
Speaker 2 (05:42):
Do you get the sense that.
Speaker 1 (05:43):
It's the same on the converse side, where the pro
how the pro Israel groups kind of think about the
message you were conveying.
Speaker 4 (05:51):
No, I mean, look, first of all, I have to
thank mister Zoni for having me, But as far as
I gather from his opening statement, I'm not really sure
what he was off. HAZONI is in Israeli and you know,
I do know that he is a former staffer for
the now Prime Minister of Israel, Benjamin Netnaho. And if
his offer is get in line and do whatever the
(06:13):
net Yahoo administration djure you know wants, Uh, that's not
much of an offer, if the I think, I think
this is what the frustration here is.
Speaker 5 (06:24):
There's not actually much of a coalition here.
Speaker 4 (06:28):
No matter what Republican candidates talk about in every election cycle,
it seems like the ones who get the policy wins
are the people who want the tax cuts, never mind
how we pay for them, and new wars in the
Middle East. Everything else seems very very tertiary.
Speaker 1 (06:45):
And do you think that is a consequence of people
who embrace foreign policy realism having a challenge getting credentialed
by some of these gatherings, organizations and things think tanks.
Speaker 4 (06:56):
To an extent, But I actually think there's a real
counter elite on foreign policy of an administration wants to
plug them in. And so yeah, I think there are
you know, John Miersheimer is obviously the most namous realists going,
but there are a ton of people who are not
household names that could staff an administration. And so yeah,
I'm not so sure it's a it's a platforming issue
(07:17):
as much anymore. Ron Paul, the you know, the heroic
former congressman and presidential candidate, also covered this event and
talked about my address, you know, earlier today, and he said,
there really is. You know, it was sort of fun
for him to say a vibe shift going on where
they did.
Speaker 5 (07:33):
The reality is they can't deplatform us because they would
look so ridiculous.
Speaker 2 (07:38):
So what should be our offer to them?
Speaker 1 (07:41):
Like, what offer can foreign policy realists make to the
israel first crowd to say, look, you know, you probably
align with our border policies, with some of our economic policies,
our regulatory policies don't allow the fact that we want
to be we want to have the type of friendship
where you can be honest with your friends and critical
of your friend ends. And we think those folks should
(08:02):
stay aligned with the conservative movement.
Speaker 5 (08:05):
I mean, I think this should be a beautiful divorce.
Speaker 4 (08:08):
I don't think the U s should be funding Israel's military,
and I don't think Israel should be funding the America's military.
And I think from there you can have an actual
alliance of where it interests intersects that we can partner.
But the US is an enormous contributor to Israel's military,
and the US constantly provides diplomatic cover.
Speaker 5 (08:29):
To the Israeli government. That's the big one.
Speaker 4 (08:31):
I mean, the State Department itself is trying to bar
Palestinian representative, successfully trying to bar Palestinian representatives for coming
to the UN. Now, look, you don't have to be
a huge fan of the UN, but it's probably not
going anywhere, and it's probably not leaving New York City.
And the idea that the State Department should spend one
second of its political capital or attention on doing the
(08:51):
bidding of a foreign government as opposed to pressing America's
case of the UN, I think is a joke.
Speaker 1 (08:56):
I do want to spend a moment to reflect on
where you think the left is on this question, Like
you were at the center of this debate and how
the right is confronting it, but there is a similar
confrontation going on on the left.
Speaker 2 (09:09):
Who do you think ultimately prevails out of that?
Speaker 4 (09:12):
I think that the Democrats are moving away from Israel,
or at least this current Israeli government. I think it's
also a generational story. But I think this is the reality.
I mean, I think the net Yahoo address to Congress
in twenty fifteen, where you know, basically most members of
Congress clapped like seals for a foreign government. I think
(09:34):
that was a seminal moment because the critique of net
Yahoo ten years ago was this, if net Yahoo sided
with one party, as he sided with the Republican Party
against Barack Obama, say wis you will, he would risk
losing both parties within a generation. And I think it's
complex on both sides. It depends who the standard bear
is in twenty twenty eight, but you saw, you know,
(09:56):
Pete Boutajez is probably a fairly serious presidential candidate. He
gave a garbled, horrendous answer on Israel policy questions and
he got absolutely clauded. So you're going to need someone
either more sophisticated or more hard line on this question.
And I think this is going to spill out twenty
twenty eight. People talked about this issue like, ah, you know,
(10:16):
the Republicans might turn on Israel five, ten, fifteen years.
I think this is coming in the presidential primary in
twenty eight. It thinks it's a big issue, especially if
the war's going on.
Speaker 1 (10:24):
And so let's forecast the twenty twenty eight presidential debate
stage between the ultimate Republican nominee and the ultimate Democrat nominee,
which one do you think is most willing to prostrate
themselves for the interests of Israel over the United States.
Speaker 4 (10:39):
I mean, that's a possible situation. It depends you know
who the nominee is on each side, you know.
Speaker 2 (10:46):
Well, of course, that's why I'm asking you to prognosticate.
Speaker 5 (10:48):
I'm not going to predict it.
Speaker 4 (10:49):
I'm not sure if to predict that. I think we
know a lot of the people who are going to
be on the stage in twenty eight. So I don't
want to premptively offend anybody here, but I think there's
there's a real chance though, as what I'll say, the
Republicans have less of a sort of humanitarian right as
opposed to the humanitarian left, and so if the Republicans
(11:11):
break the link of Israel, I think it's going to
be unsentimental versus the left will always be sort of
dogged by, you know, this sort of argument that we
need to do x X foreigner or Y foreigner. Now
that there's no argument towards it, but it's just it's
less likely to have currency. And you know, I think
there's is a real fight also within the American Jewish
(11:31):
community itself, and two thirds of American Jews vote Democratic,
and so I think it's if that debate could be
more protracted. I know it seems very contrariant, but the
break on the right could happen.
Speaker 1 (11:42):
Quicker Kurt Mills has called for a beautiful divorce and
this type of an unsympathetic separation. Kurt Mills, the executive
director of the American Conservative Thanks for Jonas, thank you,
and coming up, Jeff Dornick will be here to discuss
the ten stake in intelally taken by the US government.
Speaker 2 (12:01):
We'll debate it after a quick break.
Speaker 6 (12:07):
Viewers are always asking me how can they watch OAN live?
Speaker 7 (12:11):
The solution is simple.
Speaker 6 (12:13):
It's a streaming platform called cloud tv. Now it's spelled KLOWDTV.
Simply go to cloudtv dot com and subscribe to watch
twenty four to seven live feeds of Oan. The live
package is only two dollars and fifty cents per month
for all you can watch. Again, simply go to cloudtv
(12:35):
dot com and do it today. Hey, did you know
that One America News Network has launched a twenty four
to seven Twitter like social media replacement. We're calling it
free Talk forty five. So why is it branded free
Talk forty five? Well, free talk because you will not
be censored for expressing your opinion there, and forty five because.
Speaker 7 (13:00):
Is a really lucky number.
Speaker 6 (13:02):
So join us at free Talk forty five and express
yourself with no fear of cancelation. Ever, Hey, if your
cable provider doesn't offer One America News Network, you should
give them a call and kindly demand that they carryan Now,
(13:22):
you're the customer, and without your feedback, your cable provider
will not know that there is a strong demand across
this country for One America News Network. So please call
your cable company today and kindly ask or demand that
they ADDANN to their channel lineup.
Speaker 7 (13:45):
Hey everyone, here's a question for you.
Speaker 6 (13:47):
What does Roku TV, Apple TV, and Amazon fireTV all
have in common. The answer is that all three platforms
offer you the ability to live stream One America News
Network from your Roku TV, Apple TV.
Speaker 7 (14:02):
Or Amazon Fire device.
Speaker 6 (14:04):
Simply go to the app store, search out FORAM then
enjoy all the great programming offered by OEN, including my
show Real America.
Speaker 8 (14:19):
Biden gave away eleven billion dollars and Donald Trump took
back right an equity stake for the money that Biden
had given away. If we are adding fundamental value to
your business, I think it's fair for Donald Trump to
think about the American people. If you need, need, require,
and need the United States of America, Donald Trump is
(14:42):
going to think about it, but he's going to make
sure that benefit of the bargain is earned by the
American people, not just.
Speaker 7 (14:47):
Giveaways all the time. Lockheed Martin makes ninety.
Speaker 8 (14:51):
Seven percent of their revenue from the US government. They
are basically an arm of the US government. There's a
a lot of talking that needs to be had about
how do we finance our munitions, acquisitions, I think a
lot of that is talking, and now you have the
right people in the jobs and Donald Trump at the
(15:13):
head thinking about what is the right way to do it.
I tell you the way it has been done has
been a giveaway.
Speaker 1 (15:19):
That was US Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnik explicitly defending
nationalizing portions of US companies to give taxpayers a stake
in the action. Many call it patriotic capitalism. Lutnik framed
these discussions as part of a broader strategy. Rather than
giving away grants, the government actually wants equity, allowing taxpayers
to share in a potential upside. He suggested this goes
(15:41):
beyond tech, pointing to companies like Boeing or Palanteer. If
we're adding fundamental value to your business, could be that
the American people own a part of that business. Separately,
Lutnik defended the Trump administration's plan to convert previously committed
Chips Act grants into a ten percent equity stake in Intel,
arguing it's about ensuring taxpayers actually benefit from their investments.
(16:04):
Not socialism, but a return on investment. That's how the
argument goes. The shift is partly response to concerns over
US dependence on foreign supply chains, especially for semiconductors and
rare earth minerals. Critics warn that this trajectory could erode
market flexibility and corporate autonomy, hinting at implications for free
market norms. This is playing out in a global ecosystem
(16:25):
where China and other rich countries are pouring government cash
into business enterprise. So how will America keep up with
China if we don't compete under the same rules, And
how can we preserve the innovative features of the free
market with government ownership of private companies. Joining us tonight
(16:45):
to discuss is Jeff Dornick, the CEO of Pickaxe. He's
got a piece up in PJ Media taking the position
that the government should not have an ownership stake in Intel.
Jeff joins us, Now, so tell us what are the
great scourges that befall society with the government holding a
ten percent stake and Intel?
Speaker 9 (17:02):
Yeah, I mean you're you're dealing now with kind of
the merging together of a private company with with the
federal government, which you know, takes the government out of being,
you know, truly a neutral arbiter of you know, between
you know, whether it comes to a court case, whether
it comes to legislation, gives an unfair advantage to the
private corporation as well. So there's a variety of issues,
(17:26):
especially from a from a constitutional perspective. I believe it's
the tenth Amendment that specifically states that, you know, if
any any power that's not enumerated to the federal government,
that it doesn't have the authority to actually do that.
And I know a lot of our founding fathers were
very concerned about the blending together of private entities with
the federal government as well, that we could dive into
as well.
Speaker 1 (17:45):
Yeah, and I think that, you know, someone would have
a robust view of the Commerce Clause to hang some
sort of federal authority on. But one might also argue, Jeff,
that the government already shows this favoritism when we look
at the issuance of grant or the way certain definitions
are constructed around who can get loans at preferential rates.
(18:05):
And so if the taxpayer is going to give that
upfront benefit to a company, why should it only be
the shareholders of that company that benefit on the back end?
Speaker 9 (18:15):
Yeah, I mean, and in all reality, there are there
are arguments, you know, even against some of the some
of those concessions from the federal government to these private companies,
you know, and I think really one of the main
issues that were truly coming down to is should the
government have equity stake in a private company? I mean,
you know, you know, you could argue it's only it's
(18:36):
only ten percent, it's a minority stake. But if it's
ten percent, now what about fifteen percent? What about fifty percent?
What about the work?
Speaker 1 (18:43):
So we should nationalize? I'll grow I'll take the maximalist position.
The number of times the taxpayer has bailed out Boeing,
we should just nationalize Boeing, like the way that we
the way that we prop up some of these entities,
and we use the apparatus of government to wrap around
their business model functionally?
Speaker 2 (19:03):
Does it anyway? You own all the downside?
Speaker 1 (19:06):
If Lockheed Martin were to go bankrupt tomorrow and say
we can't make stuff anymore, I guarantee you there would
be a line of Democrats and Republicans lining up.
Speaker 2 (19:15):
To bail them out.
Speaker 1 (19:16):
But even if that happened and then they soared to
great heights, like, there would be no payoff on the
back end. I get your point. About disruptions of the
of the marketplace. It would offend the libertarian sensitivities of
all of us. But I just wonder like whether or
not it is a corrective measure for the grift that
so many of these corporations have run for decades.
Speaker 2 (19:38):
Yeah.
Speaker 9 (19:38):
Well, you know, the thing is that if we continue
along along that line of reasoning, then we're basically enabling
enabling the grift to a certain degree, you know, And
I think that that's that's part of the that's part
of the problem. So when we go back and we
look at American history, we didn't have this type of
issue until the early nineteen hundreds when we saw the
massive expansion of the federal government getting involved in private
(20:00):
and we began to see this, you know, through over
the decades, throughout the throughout the throughout the nineteen hundreds.
When we go back to the foundation of our country,
what we actually saw the only time that we really
saw a debate over this with our founding fathers was
dealing with the First and Second Bank. Specifically, the federal
government ended up having a twenty percent stake in that.
George Washington had to be convinced by Alexander Hamilton in
(20:20):
order to allow this to happen. But people like James Madison,
people like Thomas Jefferson, strongly opposed the federal government having
any kind of stake on any kind of private entity.
And then Andrew Jackson even even went so far as
to lead the dismantling of the Second Bank because he
completely opposed the corruption that happened when you had this
kind of a stake where the federal government had equity
(20:43):
over this this private company.
Speaker 2 (20:45):
That was indeed the debate.
Speaker 1 (20:46):
But let's fast forward about a quarter of a century,
or let's let's fast forward about two hundred and fifty years,
with China now making so many state sponsored investments into enterprise,
do you think that, uh, this is a competition issue,
and how is the United States States supposed to compete
with China if they're if they're engaging this type of
(21:07):
market manipulation and we unilaterally disarm that tool.
Speaker 9 (21:12):
Yeah, you know, I I don't think that that that
two wrongs make make a right. And I think that
that that's the issue is, like we look at China.
China is obviously communists, right, So I don't think that
the that the response to you know, communist you know,
investment and private ownership or public ownership into these companies
should be responded responded to by the United States basically
(21:35):
doing the exact same thing we're supposed to be, you know,
bringing about freedom, bringing about liberty, bringing about true capitalism.
I think there's lots of things that the federal government
could do without actually having an equity stake in a
lot of these companies, which, you know, really really when
you take it to us nth degree leads to socialism
and communism.
Speaker 1 (21:53):
Yeah, and that you know, it's it's interesting that the
communist countries are getting more capitalistic. We seem to have
been on a trend of becoming more socialist, and you
wonder where it all intersects and how it infects the
competitive dynamic. Jeff Dornic, CEO of Pickax, thanks so much
for joining me and chopping it up.
Speaker 2 (22:10):
Thank you.
Speaker 1 (22:10):
And coming up, we take to the streets of Chicago,
where YouTuber Nick Shirley has been talking with local residents
ahead of the battle for the Windy City, which is
sure to come with President Trump promising we're going in.
Speaker 2 (22:22):
Nick Shirley's here after a quick break.
Speaker 6 (22:28):
Hey, did you know that one America News network has
launched a twenty four to seven Twitter like social media replacement.
We're calling it free Talk forty five. So why is
it branded free Talk forty five. Well, free talk because
you will not be censored for expressing your opinion there,
and forty five because forty five is a really lucky number.
(22:50):
So join us at free Talk forty five and express
yourself with no fear of cancelation. Ever, Hey, if your
cable provider doesn't offer one America News Network, you should
give them a call and kindly demand that they CARRYAN. Now,
(23:11):
you're the customer, and without your feedback, your cable provider
will not know that there is a strong demand across
this country for one America News Network. So please call
your cable company today and kindly ask or demand that
they add OANN to their channel lineup.
Speaker 7 (23:33):
Hey, everyone, here's a question for you.
Speaker 6 (23:36):
What does Roku TV, Apple TV, and Amazon fireTV all
have in common? The answer is that all three platforms
offer you the ability to live stream One America News
Network from your Roku TV, Apple TV, or Amazon Fire device.
Simply go to the app store search out FORAAN, then
(23:56):
enjoy all the great programming offered BYN, including my show
Real America.
Speaker 7 (24:06):
Hey, did you know that?
Speaker 6 (24:06):
Video clips from my program Real America and all the
other talk shows offered by One America News Network are
available to you for free on OA and N dot com.
You can also enjoy the latest in breaking news videos
by visiting OA and N dot com. Make sure you
stay informed and visit O an N dot com daily.
(24:27):
And if you'd like to show support and wear some
support for One America News Network, then visit our online
store for the latest shirts, hats and mugs.
Speaker 10 (24:40):
Living here in Chicago, we've been talking with these guys
right here. Is it pretty dangerous to be walking around
these streets?
Speaker 2 (24:44):
Hey?
Speaker 7 (24:44):
Yeah, I ain't gonna bro?
Speaker 2 (24:45):
Is that why you're walking down?
Speaker 6 (24:47):
I got up thrown by faux pipes in one day
and that was That was the first day I ever
even knew.
Speaker 7 (24:52):
How to hit a lead on Margoma.
Speaker 9 (24:54):
Don't come through playing.
Speaker 2 (24:55):
Were gonna leave you right here in his line?
Speaker 3 (24:57):
That threat, however you want to take it?
Speaker 11 (25:00):
Oh, the ore the kids out here when they first
get their first guns initiated like that. And now if
you've really got shot, how do you feel about gun bynance?
Speaker 2 (25:08):
You're ready for the gun vinance to stop.
Speaker 7 (25:11):
Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa whoa.
Speaker 1 (25:13):
That was YouTuber Nick Shirley walking the streets of Chicago.
So you don't have to Illinois Governor and Pillsbury Doboy
gone wrong. JB. Pritzker is taking a rather indefensible position
that the people of Chicago don't need help. Several of
them die as a result of violence. Seemingly every weekend.
Criminals have exploited bonehead policies like cashless bail. Law enforcement
(25:34):
has seen their hands tied. Illegal aliens have made the
Windy City their sanctuary as many friendly Midwesterners have had
to abandon the once mighty Chicago. Former Illinois Senator Darren
Bailey told us last night the Trump administration's moves have
finally given people hope.
Speaker 10 (25:50):
Overall.
Speaker 5 (25:51):
People are or they really are. They're overjoyed.
Speaker 10 (25:53):
I does's National Guard troops show up in Chicago.
Speaker 12 (25:56):
They are going to restore order to that city, and
people are going to be grateful.
Speaker 1 (26:01):
So how are things going on the streets of Chicago?
Just a little before the battle for Shytown begins. Joining
us now is independent YouTube journalist Nick Shirley. So, Nick,
you were out on the streets of Chicago we just
showed some of your stuff.
Speaker 2 (26:15):
What did you learn from the experience.
Speaker 11 (26:17):
You know, Chicago it's a very interesting place. I was
down on the West Side, and I mean everything you
hear about Chicago is true.
Speaker 10 (26:23):
It is a dangerous place. It is a dangerous location.
Speaker 11 (26:27):
There's lots of love from the people inside Chicago, and
there's also a lot of things happening that maybe might
not be the most legal per se. But I mean
everyone treated me with a lot of respect out there.
Speaker 1 (26:38):
Do you think they know they don't have to live
this way?
Speaker 10 (26:42):
I mean it's a choice obviously, right, Like they liked
living like that. The people I was with.
Speaker 1 (26:48):
Like they like living among gunshots. I mean I was
watching your videos and I saw people pointing out the
bullet holes and their abdomens to you.
Speaker 10 (26:57):
Yeah, I mean, it's definitely a different culture.
Speaker 11 (27:00):
I mean that's what they They're all proud to show,
and that's why they That's why I was able to
go in there and talk with them, because it's stuff
they want to show to the world.
Speaker 10 (27:08):
But I personally wouldn't want to live in that. But
to each their own.
Speaker 1 (27:12):
When the National Guard arrives, when federal presence is there,
what do you think those folks will how do you
think they'll react?
Speaker 11 (27:22):
Yeah, I think the reaction, if it does happen, the
reaction will be the illegal activities and such.
Speaker 10 (27:29):
The shootings will obviously go down. Nobody's gonna want to shoot.
Speaker 11 (27:32):
Or do anything illegal knowing that the National Guard is
right there, and so you'll see what happened to Washington,
DC as well. Crime will go down and the residents
will be live in a lot more peace per se.
Speaker 1 (27:45):
I mean, are these people who have jobs and families
and other things they do or are they just kind
of hanging out on the street, And if so, how
are they able to sustain themselves?
Speaker 10 (27:56):
You know, a lot of the would probably say they're
hustlers entrepreneurs.
Speaker 11 (28:00):
In their own way, and I don't go too into
detail with them about what they're doing, but Ye'll allow
them to say they're hustlers entrepreneurs, and some of them
do have normal jobs as well.
Speaker 10 (28:11):
We met a lot of.
Speaker 11 (28:12):
People that also have jobs where they work, whether it
be at the shop in the street, or the shop
inside of the community, or.
Speaker 10 (28:21):
Any other job that you can think of.
Speaker 1 (28:23):
So I was watching you out there during the daytime
having these great discussions and as the sun went down,
I thought, well, surely he's gonna be not out there
doing this stuff, and you persisted. Was there ever a
point you were scared or concerned for your safety?
Speaker 3 (28:39):
Yeah.
Speaker 11 (28:39):
At one point I was walking on the side of
the sidewalk closest to the road, and I was like, oh,
maybe I probably shouldn't be on that side, and some
cars slowed down and they told me I was all
state inside of their neighborhood, so I was protected.
Speaker 1 (28:55):
It looks like you made some lifelong friends. Where are
you headed next to get more of this type of
great content?
Speaker 10 (29:01):
The world may never know.
Speaker 11 (29:02):
They'll have to check it out, but maybe overseas in
the next few weeks or so.
Speaker 1 (29:06):
All right, Well, I'm eager to see if you find
other circumstances and dynamics less safe, more safe, How the
different laws and regulations impact what you're able to gather
about how people are living. Independent journalist YouTuber Nick surely thanks.
Speaker 2 (29:21):
For joining us on the program.
Speaker 1 (29:23):
Thank you and coming up. RFK Junior has testifying in
the Senate. He has had some combative exchanges with folks
on the left, and we see there's also some additional
support coming from the White House, backing RFK, backing his
testimony and the decisions that will make America healthy again.
Grace Price is an independent journalists following the story.
Speaker 2 (29:44):
And she will join us next.
Speaker 6 (29:51):
Hey, if you're a cable provider doesn't offer One America
News Network, you should give him a call and kindly
demand that they carry away in. Now you're the customer,
and without your feedback, your cable provider will not know
that there is a strong demand across this country for
One America News Network. So please call your cable company
(30:13):
today and kindly ask or demand that they add OANN
to their channel lineup.
Speaker 7 (30:23):
Hey, everyone, here's a question for you.
Speaker 6 (30:25):
What does Roku TV, Apple TV, and Amazon fireTV all
have in common? The answer is that all three platforms
offer you the ability to live stream One America News
Network from your Roku TV, Apple TV, or Amazon Fire device.
Simply go to the app store search out forn, then
(30:46):
enjoy all the great programming offered by including my show
Real America. Hey, did you know that video clips from
my program Real America and all the other talks offered
by One America News Network are available to you for free.
Speaker 7 (31:05):
On oaan n dot com.
Speaker 6 (31:07):
You can also enjoy the latest in breaking news videos
by visiting OA and N dot com. Make sure you
stay informed and visit oann dot com daily. And if
you'd like to show support and wear some support for
One America News Network, then visit our online store for
the latest shirts, hats, and mugs. Viewers are always asking
(31:28):
me how can they watch OAN live? The solution is simple.
It's a streaming platform called cloud tv now it's spelled
klowd TV. Simply go to cloudtv dot com and subscribe
to watch twenty four to seven live feeds of OAN.
The live package is only two dollars and fifty cents
(31:49):
per month for all you can watch. Again, simply go
to cloudtv dot com and do it today.
Speaker 12 (32:02):
We are the sickest country in the world. That's why
we have to fire people at CDC. They did not
do their job. This was their job to keep us
healthy than you. I need to fire some of those
people to make sure this doesn't happen again. You're saying
the Biden administration politicize all the day.
Speaker 6 (32:20):
Go back to all I can't well g fire doctor
from surgeon General.
Speaker 12 (32:25):
They fired doctor grad. They fired all the people who
questioned the orthodoxy. Most Americans will be able to get
it from their pharmacy.
Speaker 2 (32:32):
Question is everyone who wants it?
Speaker 13 (32:34):
That was your promise.
Speaker 14 (32:36):
I know I never promised that I was going to
recommend products with which there is no indication. Wait, you said,
and I know you've taken eight hundred and fifty five
thousand dollars from pharmaceutical company. Senator, you are the one
who said you would not take them away. Now, Senator,
I'm not taking them away from a secretary.
Speaker 12 (32:58):
You want me to indicate a product for which there
is no clinical data?
Speaker 10 (33:03):
What you want?
Speaker 5 (33:04):
What you said were live.
Speaker 9 (33:06):
You just use plator moving the type.
Speaker 15 (33:11):
Are you using that?
Speaker 12 (33:12):
M R and vaccine has never been associated myocard items
or para card items.
Speaker 9 (33:17):
The people that you have put on that panel after
firing the entire of.
Speaker 7 (33:23):
Aiding the question.
Speaker 12 (33:24):
The industry makes the studies and they could not provide
a study that said that it is effective for healthy guilts.
Speaker 13 (33:31):
Where when have you produced the data that you relied
on and that this FDA relied on to change those parameters?
Speaker 7 (33:38):
You did it behind the dat doors of the data public.
Speaker 13 (33:41):
Now, parents who decide that they do want their children
down which stuff?
Speaker 7 (33:46):
I'm not just making stuff up.
Speaker 13 (33:47):
When were you lying, sir, when you told this committee
that you were not anti vax or when you told
Americans that there's no safe and effective.
Speaker 5 (33:54):
Vaccine both English and trail.
Speaker 13 (33:57):
Oh, so more of denial, more back and forth. I mean,
here's what I know, here's what I need to explain.
Why you'll actually I want you to listen to me.
Speaker 12 (34:08):
Okay ahead, you went on.
Speaker 13 (34:09):
Fox News blaming school shootings on antidepressants.
Speaker 12 (34:14):
I never said that you're making it up. Interesting, Yeah
you are.
Speaker 14 (34:19):
You want to talk, You want to harangue, and you
want to solically.
Speaker 12 (34:24):
You want to have partisan politics. I want to actually
solve these problems.
Speaker 1 (34:31):
Who it's just Secretary RFK Junior had combative and dazzling
testimony in the United States Senate today.
Speaker 2 (34:37):
Vice President JD.
Speaker 1 (34:38):
Vance had the hottest take posting on social media. He said, quote,
when I see all those senators trying to lecture and
gotcha Bobby Kennedy today, all I can think is you
all support off label, untested and irreversible hormone therapies for children,
mutilating our kids, and enriching big pharma.
Speaker 2 (34:58):
You're full of blank and everyone knows it.
Speaker 1 (35:01):
Indeed, we do Republicans are leaning into the Maha movement.
Democrats say they're scared because they think it will kill them.
We think they might be scared because the politics are
very powerful with us. Now for more on RFK Junior's testimonies,
investigative journalist Grace Price.
Speaker 2 (35:16):
So, Grace, there were.
Speaker 1 (35:17):
Fireworks and insults and praise all kind of meshed in together.
What was your reaction to the day's testimony in the Senate?
Speaker 15 (35:26):
Well, to be quite honest with you, Matt, I was
just absolutely appalled by the slander that RFK Junior was
met with from some of our country's senators. Like I
thought it was extremely honestly, just everything about it was
extremely not right for what RK Junior is trying to
do for our country, and considering that they were supposed
(35:49):
to be talking about President Trump's twenty twenty six healthcare agenda,
and they instead spent the majority of the time chastising
ARK Junior for saying that he wasn't going to recommend
vaccines when in reality they really mean push vaccines on
the majority of Americans just because the science that is
made available to the public doesn't encourage him to do so.
Speaker 1 (36:13):
I thought it was really interesting when he pointed out
the amount of money that Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts
had taken from Big Pharma. That is a way to
peel off the veil in a compelling manner. Do you
find that to be persuasive when showcasing the motivations behind
some of these senators who were slandering the secretary one percent?
Speaker 15 (36:38):
I think that if we don't continue to look at
the corporate capture of a lot of Americans' most trusted
health institutions, and we're actually not going to get anywhere
with our health crisis that we are facing. We already
know that children are sicker than ever, and it just
drives me insane that every time our k Junior would
mention that goes to seventy six percent of Americans now
(37:01):
are extremely sick and ill, and they instead would just
brush that off and move on to the next point
about vaccines, when in reality, the senators that were poking
at him for that were actually paid off, like we
saw with Elizabeth by Pharma with their own kinds of
donations that they had made. And so it's very much,
I think a case of common sense, where, of course,
(37:22):
if you have any kind of ties to these big
food companies or big pharmaceutical companies, then you're going to
want them to succeed. And you're not going to like
what RK. Junior is doing with all of the HHS stuff.
Speaker 1 (37:34):
You mentioned big Food, and we heard some of their
talking points regurgitated by Democrat senators.
Speaker 2 (37:41):
One is that we can't take.
Speaker 1 (37:43):
Dies and bad oils out of food that is present
in food deserts. That these convenience stores that are highly
subsidized by EBT and food stamps just have to continue
to have high processed foods.
Speaker 2 (37:57):
And I'm sitting there and thinking to myself.
Speaker 1 (37:58):
Like, why is the away assists in a food desert
have to be poison We are the most powerful country
in the world. We can't get high quality food and
calories without all of that processed fat into the poor
places of our country. Like, when people make those arguments,
do you think their voters will hold them accountable for
the stupidity?
Speaker 15 (38:20):
I sure would hope so. And I can only speak
from my own experience, which is even on college campuses,
which are arguably some of the largest food deserts. I
would say, if you're just talking about nutrient density of
the food, you can actually super easily get different products
into your local seven eleven or food mart or whatever
it is that the college students are going to get
their food from. They just do it based on what
(38:42):
is being requested. And there are different products that use
non carcinogenic chemicals in their own processed food you can get.
I think I saw a hot pocket the other day
that didn't have any kind of artificial dyes. It didn't
have any kind of strange chemical solvent in it that
is un necessary and adds no nutritional value. But that's
(39:03):
how absurd these arguments have become. People are arguing to
keep these chemicals inside of foods that are actually completely
useless for humans, and our necessity of some kind of
good energy instead is just slowly killing us and poisoning us.
Speaker 1 (39:21):
Yeah, I needed to go to a food desert when
I was in college when I was putting on the
Freshman fifteen.
Speaker 2 (39:26):
But we did see the vice president JD.
Speaker 1 (39:28):
Vance Way in on this, and he pointed to the
great irony of those who embrace, like, you know, injecting
some sort of gender depriving mystery juice into the next
generation of children. They defend that, but then they want
to criticize what RFK is doing to deploy the scientific
method absent politics at the CDC, do you see a
(39:51):
rub between those who want to be critical of the
MAHA agenda while at the same time embracing some of
these very dangerous chemicals as a four of virtue signaling oh.
Speaker 15 (40:03):
One hundred percent. And it's very strange as well, because
I have testified four bills in Arizona and at the
Texas State Capital that we're trying to remove sodas and
candies and chips from the foodstamp program. And I was
called a racist for doing this because I was trying
to help remove these products that are, by the way,
(40:25):
the number one purchase commodities under the foodstamp program and
that are essentially just being used to fuel the obesity
epidemic that we're seeing in our country.
Speaker 1 (40:35):
Wait, wait, hold on, I don't understand this. How could
that be racist? What is even the accusation that that
is racist?
Speaker 15 (40:41):
That is a fantastic question. It's because I'm taking away
apparently soda from low income families by doing this, which
is not at all the goal. The goal is to
have taxpayer dollars stop subsidizing the over consumption of nutrient void,
high sugar water that then we are having to pay
(41:03):
in the long run for whenever these people get on
Medicaid because of the chronic diseases, that it's increasing the
risk for down the line. That is what the case was.
But instead I was getting criticized in being called a
racist because I'm not allowed to apparently try to want
to help people in low income areas when my mom
was literally raised on food stamps and I totally understand
(41:26):
that food deserts are real. It's why I'm so committed
to trying to help a lot of these different kinds
of foods that are more whole nutrient dens become more
available for other people. But yeah, it's crazy what the
arguments have come.
Speaker 10 (41:39):
To at this point.
Speaker 1 (41:40):
We've seen recent polling suggesting that RFK Junior is the
most popular member of President Trump's cabinet. Who do you
think those voters are who might not be on board
with every feature of the Make America Great Again agenda,
but who have a high view of Secretary Kennedy.
Speaker 15 (41:58):
Well, I actually think that a lot of Generation Z
is building a much higher view of Secretary Kennedy in general,
and I think that this is one of the most
significant points of the MAHA movement as a whole, which
is that the whole focus is actually on the future
of our country and our future generations, and it's about
helping people feel good who have felt terrible for a
(42:20):
really long time, and the government has simply just swept
all of those issues under the rug. And I think
that Generation Z is actually waking up to this, and
I do hope that in the future, whenever it comes
to going to the polls, we are able to actually
follow through and really support Kennedy in his entire bipartisan movement,
which is to make Generation Z and the entirety of
(42:42):
America healthy again like how.
Speaker 10 (42:44):
We used to be.
Speaker 1 (42:45):
Yeah, it does seem like there is an enlightenment around
food and around health and around inputs with Gen Z.
Speaker 2 (42:51):
That's probably a great thing for humanity.
Speaker 1 (42:54):
And there are really two arguments being presented right now
from the right and the left.
Speaker 2 (42:58):
You got the right saying.
Speaker 1 (43:00):
These systems of big food and big pharma have been
poisoning you and we have to fundamentally change those systems.
And then the left is saying that if a few
people quit at the CDC, we're all gonna like die
of monkey pocks.
Speaker 2 (43:14):
You know.
Speaker 1 (43:14):
Do you see one of those messages ultimately prevailing or
is this just the battle we're going to continue to
have to have through the midterms.
Speaker 15 (43:23):
I obviously hope that the first one is the one
that ends up coming through to the top. But I
do think that one of the reasons why there was
so much controversy today around what RFKA Junior was trying
to talk about and all the changes that he's trying
to make is for a long time, actually for the
past fifty years, we have not been able to strike
(43:43):
a balance between regulation and innovation within the food industry
and even the pharmaceutical industries as well. And we see
that drug prices are way too high right now, which
makes them inaccessible for a.
Speaker 14 (43:55):
Lot of people.
Speaker 15 (43:56):
Then we also see with the food industry, because we
haven't kept enough tabs on them, they've basically just been
continuously making exceptions that put their own profits and own
interests above the actual interests of Americans and our own
public health and welfare. And so I think that we
are trying to figure that out right now and see
(44:17):
what kind of policies still allow for innovation in our
country and on the entrepreneurialism that we have, but at
the same time still prioritizing American's.
Speaker 1 (44:27):
Health because it's such a good point about curating that balance,
and we've been out of balance for so long, and
obviously the rates of chronic disease bear that out.
Speaker 2 (44:36):
Grace Price, thanks as always for joining us and sharing
your expertise.
Speaker 15 (44:39):
Thank you so much.
Speaker 1 (44:41):
And coming up, there is a right wing political party
in Germany. There members and candidates have died at an
alarmingly high rate. One of the members of the German
bunderest Dog is here to discuss after a quick break.
Speaker 7 (44:58):
Hey everyone, here's a question for you.
Speaker 6 (45:00):
What does Roku TV, AppleTV, and Amazon fireTV all have
in common. The answer is that all three platforms offer
you the ability to live stream One America News Network
from your Roku TV, AppleTV or Amazon Fire device. Simply
go to the app store, search out foran then enjoy
(45:21):
all the great programming offered by on including my show
Real America. Hey, did you know that video clips from
my program Real America and all the other talk shows
offered by One America News Network are available to you
for free on oaan.
Speaker 7 (45:40):
N dot com.
Speaker 6 (45:41):
You can also enjoy the latest in breaking news videos
by visiting oaan n dot com. Make sure you stay
informed and visit oann dot com daily. And if you'd
like to show support and wear some support for One
America News Network, then visitor online store for the latest shirts,
hats and mugs. Viewers are always asking me how can
(46:03):
they watch OAN live?
Speaker 7 (46:05):
The solution is simple.
Speaker 6 (46:07):
It's a streaming platform called cloud tv Now it's spelled KLOWDTV.
Simply go to cloudtv dot com and subscribe to watch
twenty four to seven live feeds of OAN. The live
package is only two dollars and fifty cents per month
for all you can watch. Again, simply go to cloudtv
(46:29):
dot com and do it today. Hey, did you know
that One America News Network has launched a twenty four
to seven Twitter like social media replacement. We're calling it
free Talk forty five. So why is it branded free
talk forty five? Well, free talk because you will not
be censored for expressing your opinion there, and forty five
(46:52):
because forty five is a really lucky number. So join
us at free Talk forty five and express yourself with
no fear of cancelation.
Speaker 1 (47:02):
Ever, did you know that there is a right wing
political party in Germany where.
Speaker 2 (47:09):
People keep ending up dead.
Speaker 1 (47:11):
Multiple news outlets report that six Alternative for deutsch Land
or AfD candidates died within a short span leading up
to the September fourteenth local elections in North Rhine Germany.
The United States is a far larger country than Germany,
with more political candidates, and we've never seen anything like this.
So let's look at the politics of the AfD and
maybe we'll find some clues. The AfD started in twenty thirteen.
(47:35):
They had hard right immigration views and had more liberal
economic views. They opposed bailouts for the EU, favoring more
nationalistic economic policies, but with assistance for their fellow Germans.
The AfD is politically on the upswing with voters. In
February of this year, they scored their largest result at
the ballot box yet, with a pretty sporty twenty one
(47:56):
percent of the vote, they became the largest opposition party
in Germany.
Speaker 2 (48:00):
Can't beat them, kill them.
Speaker 1 (48:01):
It's not the most epicurean of political messages, and in fact,
authorities say there's no evidence of foul play. Most of
the deaths have been attributed to natural causes or private
health matters. With one confirmed suicide and several others withheld
for privacy, the cluster of deaths has triggered speculation on
social media. The economist Stefan Homberg described the pattern as
(48:22):
statistically almost impossible, a claim amplified by AfD co leader
Alice Wydel and the deputy leader k Gottschdal, who'll be
with us in moments. They urged caution and said that
there may be political pressure just affecting the general well
being of their members. I'd say so the deaths disputed
or I'm sorry. The death's disrupted election logistics. Ballots had
(48:45):
to be reprinted and in some cases the mail votes
were invalidated if they were cast for candidates who are
no longer alive. We wanted to check in and see
how these recent clusters of death have impacted our friends
across the pond. Here to hopefully tell us what's happening
is a member of the German Bundestag and deputy federal
spokesperson for the AfD K Gottschock. So tell us what
(49:10):
are you concerned about with all of these folks seemingly
meeting their maker right on the eve of an election.
Speaker 16 (49:18):
Yeah, right now, we have a very critical situation and
I'm very proud to be here and to join your
show and with great admiration my follower, So your political
work here in Germany, it's right now very critical situation
because the old parties are fearing to lose power and
they maybe we take talk about this.
Speaker 3 (49:38):
They take each action they could.
Speaker 16 (49:41):
Against us, for example with a domestic intelligence services working
against us. Now some mayoral candidates are not allowed to
participate in an election. So it's a horrible situation right
here in Germany.
Speaker 1 (49:56):
Right now, we are glad there are people standing up
for nash populist policies. It's very concerning to us that
the enterprise of the state, the security apparatus of the state,
is engaged in surveillance against the AfD. Can you let
my viewers know what was the basis for your government
using its surveillance powers to target an opposition political movement.
Speaker 3 (50:20):
Yeah.
Speaker 16 (50:21):
Some people take a reason for our historical heritage like
this to avoid that left or right wing parties come
in power or something like that, or parties being against
our constitution. And right now the left parties and I
would also count the cducs or say a so called
(50:41):
conservative parties are now using our intelligence service to fight
against the opposition. It was maybe a good purpose when
Germany was rebuilding, you after the Second World War, but
now a lot of things in Germany are abused by
the parties being a power to avoid that a new
(51:02):
party with conservative values is coming back in power. Indeed,
the left parties and left thinking is in all institutions,
in all walks of life, and that's our critical situation here.
So they abuse this power the same they do in
our so called constitutional court.
Speaker 3 (51:25):
There are six city.
Speaker 16 (51:29):
Judges, six SPD judges, one of the FDP, one of
the Greens, but now judge of the AfD. So it's
all representing political stages. We have really a politic against
us to avoid that we cannot power power because there
is much work, much things to lose for the parties.
(51:52):
And of course the left parties hate our positions like
they fight. Maybe we can talk about this also later
they fight again your president against the public.
Speaker 1 (52:02):
We've seen stuff and in our country the security apparatus
was used to surveil President Trump, and so we're very
sensitive to that.
Speaker 2 (52:11):
We see the dangers that.
Speaker 1 (52:13):
Causes President Trump had to survive two assassination attempts to
return to the presidency. There are some in your party
who have not survived to the election. The authorities have
said that there's no evidence of foul play in any
of the deaths of the members of your party who
were preparing for election. Do you believe the authorities.
Speaker 16 (52:35):
I was the investigator for our party because it happened
in my state, and we also in a campaigning for
this borough and special regional elections in Los Angelesphalia. And
I regret really in this time the cases are clear
for me, they are normal because one of some of
(52:55):
the people I know by myrself one and had an
problems with the heart. Another one was eighty three and
he had a lot of other Yeah. I don't like
to talk because of data, but really we prove that
we checked that and in this case still I think
(53:17):
it's normal.
Speaker 3 (53:18):
But of course we observe it.
Speaker 16 (53:20):
We are an investigation, and I say always we can trust,
but controlling the thing is a better one.
Speaker 1 (53:27):
What is going to be your core message to voters
in the upcoming election.
Speaker 16 (53:32):
We want to change, We want to come back to
conservative values. We want to bring people the illegal immigration.
We want to stop that. We want to bring people
which are not allowed to be and to stay in
Germany must come back. We must really push back the
influence of a lot of Muslim organizations here about us
in my home country, so we have a lot of
(53:55):
influence of that.
Speaker 3 (53:56):
We want to stop.
Speaker 16 (53:58):
Really the superstate of Judah coming in all walks of life,
try to control everything, try to dominate everything. We want
to come back to our values. We want to live
our heritage, our culture, and we don't like to have
a super super natural and culture of the European community.
(54:22):
And especially we want to save money. We spend so
much money for foreign interest, for the EC we spend
so many money. We spend for development in other countries
much money, and of course to influence your country by NGOs.
Speaker 3 (54:38):
We spend money.
Speaker 16 (54:39):
And really the last ten years or fifteen years we
forget our people and we've forgotten our people in Germany.
You are working very hard and sometimes it's better.
Speaker 3 (54:47):
In Germany. Social welfare is very high.
Speaker 16 (54:49):
We as a socialistic country right now, so sometimes it's
better to have social transfer instead of working. So people
when they start working have sometimes less money instead when
they say okay, I get my money by social transfer compensation.
So it's horrible what's happening and what happened here in
(55:10):
Germany during the last ten years, especially under Merkel and
ol Off Schultz when he was Genelor of the Federal Republic,
and the same we have on our level.
Speaker 1 (55:20):
And let me ask you this question because I don't
have a few minutes, but you are a very rapidly
growing party. You've taken the spot of the principal opposition
in Germany. Now how long do you think it will
take for your party to potentially have the role of
the governing coalition?
Speaker 16 (55:38):
I think, and my great hope I think in the
future it will happen. Maybe in Saxonia Anhal. We have
state elections there in the autumn next year. And yesterday
that Paults say we are now the strongest party in
this eastern.
Speaker 3 (55:53):
Part of Germany.
Speaker 16 (55:54):
It's called we have also a little bit in comparison
with the United States stay and this date is Saxonia
Anheid and now we became really the strongest party. So
my hope is we start with governing in a state
and then we can also stop a lot of things,
for example, the public broadcasting system.
Speaker 3 (56:17):
It's a little bit compared. You can compare it.
Speaker 16 (56:19):
As a BBC in Great Britain when they.
Speaker 3 (56:22):
Minimize the ins.
Speaker 1 (56:24):
We're having our own wrestles with the public broadcasting system
here in the United States, and we all hope to
be liberated from our public broadcasting masters. Kay Gotchag, thank
you so much for joining us from the German Wunderstog.
We wish you well and we wish safety and health
to all of your candidates on the trail.
Speaker 16 (56:42):
I really hope and maybe you can help us bring
us back democracy and hope to see you again on
the Galla in New York. When I saw you there
first in twenty twenty three, I enjoyed your speech really.
Speaker 2 (56:54):
Thank you very much.
Speaker 1 (56:54):
We'll have to play some highlights for that for folks
sometimes appreciate.
Speaker 2 (56:57):
You being on the program.
Speaker 3 (56:59):
Thank you, bye, have a good time.
Speaker 2 (57:01):
Thank you. That's all the time we have.
Speaker 1 (57:02):
We'll be back tomorrow, nine Eastern six specific Make sure
to sign up for the OA N Live app if
you haven't already, Just go to O A n N
dot com, follow me on ex at Matt Gates, and
email us the Matt Gates Show at OA n N
dot com.
Speaker 2 (57:13):
Stay right here fine point. What Shanelle Riyhon is up next.
Let's go get them
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!
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.