September 25, 2025 • 37 mins
The specter of authoritarianism looms large in this riveting discussion between veterans Dick Wilkinson and Adam Gillard as they unpack Secretary Pete Hegseth's unprecedented recall of 800 general officers to the Pentagon. What appears to be a simple administrative meeting reveals itself as potentially something far more sinister—a loyalty purge designed to reshape military leadership in the administration's image.
Drawing on their military backgrounds, the hosts decode the significance behind renaming the Department of Defense to the Department of War—a seemingly symbolic change that signals a fundamental ideological shift. They highlight the staggering waste of resources this rebranding represents while examining the troubling pattern of dismissals targeting women generals, painting a picture of an institution being reshaped along Christian nationalist lines.
The conversation shifts to media freedom as they analyze Jimmy Kimmel's brief suspension and return to ABC following his Trump jokes. Despite his comeback, approximately 30 stations across America still refuse to air his show—a telling indicator of political pressure on media outlets. The hosts commend Kimmel for immediately hosting Gavin Newsom, who voiced the alarming concern shared by many: Will America even have elections in 2028?
Most chilling is their theory about Trump's possible strategy for securing an unprecedented third term through manufacturing an international crisis. By encouraging escalation with Russia while undermining democratic institutions at home, the groundwork for emergency powers that could suspend normal constitutional processes appears to be taking shape. As veterans who've sworn to protect the Constitution, their perspective offers a uniquely informed warning about the fragility of democracy when military loyalty is redirected from the nation to an individual.
Ready to join the conversation? Connect with us at the Veterans Lunch, where candidates regularly engage with our community about the issues that matter most. Your voice and perspective are essential in these critical times.
https://bsky.app/profile/leftfaceco.bsky.social
https://www.facebook.com/epccpv
www.EPCCPV.org or info@epccpv.org
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Hello everyone and welcome to another episode of
Left Face.
This is the Pikes Peak Regionpodcast, where we talk about
politics with a veteran's pointof view.
I am your co-host, dickWilkinson, and I'm joined this
morning with Adam Gillard.
Good morning, adam.
Hey buddy, how you doing?
I'm doing well and I'm excitedto do the show today.
Thursdays are usually my dayoff as far as work goes, so I've
(00:23):
got a pretty chill day and Ialways enjoy this.
I get to like it's a mentalexercise of a totally different
type of stuff to come do thepodcast, so I like that.
Speaker 2 (00:32):
Yeah, these days are the one day where I kind of
focus on this type of stuff too,where you just kind of try to
knock out as much as you can inthis area of your life.
Yeah, because after this, go dothe Vets lunch and you know
we're going to have a candidatefor the Secretary of State there
.
Yeah, you know, this time, andactually next time, their
opponent's going to be there.
So, yeah, we're getting a lot of, you know, good folks coming
(00:54):
down to talk to us and, you know, have our folks ask them some,
you know, good tough questionsto see where they stand.
Speaker 1 (01:05):
You know I'll take that moment to briefly just
encourage anybody that'slistening um, overcome your
hesitation to go to any eventwhere there might be a political
candidate, right, I know somepeople are like, oh, it'll be a
big crowd, or there could be, itcould be part of a protest, or
like there's different reasonswhy people don't go to political
stuff, right, um, but for themost part, candidate engagement
type things are very low key,very chill, not super crowded,
(01:28):
not overly intense, right.
And so, just for somebody likeme, there's like man, it sounds
like I'm going to be like abunch of people there and
somebody might be outside withsigns, yelling and stuff.
It's like some people avoid that, yeah, but I want to encourage
people that this is the phase,like you know, in between
election cycles is the chancewhere you really get to talk to
a candidate and get to hear,like, what's their real idea,
(01:49):
have more than a one minute longconversation with them, because
once it gets in the next yearand closer to their race, you
know, coming down to the wire,they're doing four or five
events a day.
They're there for an hour and ahalf and then they have to
leave.
Yeah, and they're talking.
You know it.
It's one way messaging a lotmore in that situation.
This is your chance to tellsomebody what you care about.
Right, and you could easily betalking to the next secretary of
(02:10):
state or the next governor,right, and, uh, you know they'll
remember you, right.
They'll say oh, I remember lastyear when I talked to this
person, this woman, and she toldme what was going on in her
life and I'm doing somethingabout it.
Yeah, you don't get access tothem unless you come to events
like this.
So I just want to encouragepeople to come you know, come
out whenever there's anopportunity.
Speaker 2 (02:29):
Yeah, and these are, you know t-shirt and hoodie
events yes, yes, so it's a lotmore relaxed, not.
Speaker 1 (02:34):
Sunday church kind of yeah yeah.
Speaker 2 (02:37):
So it's a lot more relaxed and it's easy to catch
their ear.
Catch their ear and once you docatch it, you're in contact
with them and they want to reachout and they and they, they
want that, you know.
So, yeah, yeah, you'reabsolutely right.
The more people would get out,the better.
Speaker 1 (02:50):
Well, uh, I'll.
I'll even flip it around.
Adam and I both ran for officebefore, and there is when, when
you're in the candidate side ofit, you are looking for
inspiring stories from yourconstituents.
You want to know how yourpolicy ideas or changes might
impact somebody and, if you can,you want to.
You want to promote andchampion the things that are
(03:11):
aligned with.
You know what you're trying todo, and the only way to me, you
know the only way to doconstituents have to show up
Right, and so there's a desirefor, there's an appeal on the
other side of that conversationto hear and genuinely, genuinely
listen to your story.
Right, because it fills in someof the puzzle pieces for the
candidate of like, I know why Icare about this, but I really
need to understand more why myconstituents care about this.
(03:33):
And yeah, you can't serve yourcommunity unless you are in
talking to your community andknow what their know their
stories Right, Exactly, and andget past the headline and
superficial aspect of somechallenge and get to the real
personal level of it right, yeah, yeah, it's easy to hit the
talking points.
It's something else.
When somebody says my sondisappeared in an ice raid,
right, yeah, you go oh, oh, yeah, oh, I'm a parent too.
(03:55):
Right, I'm not going todisrespect this person and I'm
not going to repeat a headline.
I'm going to listen to them,right, yeah, because this is a
real thing to be upset about,right, even if you think it was
totally legal and think it's agood idea.
When a parent comes to anotherparent and makes an appeal and
says I'm worried about my kid,you're going to pay attention to
that.
So, it's your chance to do that.
So thanks for the side trickthere.
(04:18):
But the thing that people don'tunderstand is political action
happens at the lowest level inthe most simple ways, every day.
Every day.
It's not always abillion-dollar campaign.
Speaker 2 (04:30):
Right, yeah, so yeah, and that's what I think, coming
out of the military and gettinginvolved in the community, I
was so kind of to take forgranted what happens on a
day-to-day basis in offices.
Yeah, the day-to-day basis inoffices.
You know around the, you knoweverywhere and you know people's
homes as they're planning andorganizing, like just making our
communities better.
But, yeah, it happens every day.
Speaker 1 (04:51):
Every action, yeah, Yep, Well, we're going to jump
into a veteran topic today thatAdam told me about, and it's
Pete Hegseth, the secretary ofwar, which we're going to talk
about, of defense slash war.
Adam says that he has done acallback for most of the general
officers in the military tocome and have a summit at the
(05:14):
Pentagon or something.
Speaker 2 (05:18):
Yeah, so like 800 general officers site like
Washington Post or somethingsays it'd be about 800 GOs got
the message, or flag officersgot the message and not
including staff officers.
For some reason, I don't knowwhy, he just wants those
(05:39):
operational commands to come inand so folks who are sitting in
seats that are making decisionshave to drop everything to come.
Listen to a Secretary of Warthat never went to war college,
like he was in the militaryright but like he was a
lieutenant colonel.
Speaker 1 (05:57):
Yeah, he doesn't have the same education and
experience he never made it toeven have go to war college.
He's not qualified to givedirectives to these folks, is
what you're saying yes, that isexactly what I'm saying yes,
yeah.
Speaker 2 (06:10):
They understand the subject matter and the
challenges at hand orders ofmagnitude better than he does,
right, yeah, so what could he becalling them back there for?
Speaker 1 (06:20):
So from when you first told me before the episode
to now, I know, I know.
Speaker 2 (06:24):
You got it, you figured it out.
Speaker 1 (06:26):
I'm going to make a bold statement, because I'm just
going to repeat what he saidPete Hegseth has a desire to
reduce the general officer cadreby about 20, 30%, yep, and so I
think what he's doing ischopping heads, yo.
Honestly, the 800 are going toshow up and 600 are going to
leave.
Not joking, some people areabout to get fired, like
(06:47):
100-plus general officers areabout to get retired.
Speaker 2 (06:50):
That was kind of in that article also, where it
talks about how many heads haverolled since Trump has taken
over, even the latest.
Speaker 1 (06:57):
Well, they've got to come do their loyalty checks
right.
They've got to step in line andgo into the confession box and
say are you feels?
I swear to.
Speaker 2 (07:04):
God, have you seen the Trump pins going around?
If any of our military folks.
Speaker 1 (07:09):
Yeah, the little lapel pins with his Trump 2028
on them, caesar-like pins.
Speaker 2 (07:14):
Yeah, if our military folks start having to wear
those In uniform, yeah, oh myGod, but yeah.
So I think the same thing.
I think the ax is coming for alot of folks, yeah, and if
there's any disruption, I thinkthey're getting arrested and I
think they're getting chargedwith treason.
Speaker 1 (07:31):
Oh yeah, you know what I mean.
That's probably why he wants todo it at a specific place,
right Like inside the Pentagonor inside the Capitol or
something like that Exactly.
Speaker 2 (07:39):
Yeah, it's like breaking up with somebody, yeah,
yeah, yeah, it's like breakingup with somebody.
Yeah, yeah, yeah, they're doingit the other way.
Speaker 1 (07:44):
Yeah, right, bring them into the danger zone so we
can get real hostile?
Yeah, exactly, and then they'llleave with their mouth shut.
Or, you know, these folks arethe general officers that we're
talking about have, most of them, around 30 years of experience
in the military, sworn to theirallegiance and duties, and so I
(08:10):
think a lot of them wouldprobably not.
You could threaten theirbenefits, right, their benefits,
their status, their rank, theirretirement package, their
whatever.
Even if it's not a like we'regoing to throw you in jail, but
like you need to leave here andkeep your mouth shut.
Or we're going to threaten yourbenefits, right.
And I wonder, would that workwith these folks?
(08:31):
Right, like, would that matter?
Or would they say well, I'mwilling to divest of my military
benefits to stand up against?
You know what I see as illegal?
Or tyranny or whatever Right, Ithink most of them would, is my
point I.
Or tyranny or whatever right?
I think most of them would, ismy point.
I hope so.
If they genuinely believethere's a problem, I think they
would stand up against it right.
Speaker 2 (08:50):
And along with this order, it's not just the
generals coming into town, it'stheir top, enlisted with them
also.
Okay, so they're having theirwhole little cadre, their
leadership team, right there.
So, yeah, if they're going tobe cutting folks out, they're
going to be cutting off bothsides and that's going to damage
so much of our readiness acrossthe spectrum.
Yeah, you know, if you loseleadership like that just gone,
(09:14):
I don't know, it's scary times.
Speaker 1 (09:17):
Well, you just brought up an interesting point
that you can't have a commandsergeant major if there's no
commander at that level.
Right, and so if he's going toflatten some of the pyramid and
get rid of some of these subcommanders and vice commanders
and double vice, you knowadjuncts and all that shit, you
know down to the one star, wherethey're four layers deep under
a four star, and he's like, no,there needs to be one like two
(09:39):
star and all the rest of thatstuff can go away.
Well then, yeah, that means ifthree generals are going away,
three associated commandsergeant major or chief master
sergeant type people are goingwith them, right, Right.
So that reduction in force doesmake sense in that there's no
need for a senior enlistedadvisor to a person that doesn't
have a job anymore.
Speaker 2 (09:58):
Yeah, and all those folks are also in retirement.
Yeah, they're all well past the20.
Yeah, either swear allegianceor take your paycheck or go home
.
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (10:07):
And if you leave here and say anything sideways that
was my point, If you you mightleave here and say I'll shut up,
but then as soon as you gethome, you decide you got a fire
in your pants and you want totell people about what happened
here.
Your benefits are going todisappear.
Right, we're going to comeafter you.
We're going to strip you down.
You're going to get put out asan E1 with a general discharge,
right?
Speaker 2 (10:25):
Well, they've already said that only authorized.
Their press corps is onlyauthorized to release
information.
Yeah, it has to be screenedthrough a lot, even unclassified
information.
Yeah, so they've taken away alljournalistic integrity there.
There's nobody going andfighting and looking for
information and releasing thingsfor us to know about.
(10:49):
It's such a gross consolidationand this kind of will lead us
into what's going on next here.
Speaker 1 (10:55):
Well, department of War, we can't skip that, let's
talk about the name and ourpersonal thoughts about the
Department of War.
While we're on this topic, yougo first, so that's another part
of the callback.
If it're on this topic, you gofirst.
So that's another part of thewhat, the what the callback.
If it's not about choppingheads, maybe it's just about
resetting the culture and thetone and saying, hey, like we're
going into F, fy 26, that'sgoing to be the year of the
(11:17):
department of war, right, and somaybe that's the intention here
is, let's reset the culture,right?
Um, I've, you know, peteHegseth, saying I've been in
this position for more than sixmonths, which means I'm going to
be here for a little while,right, and?
And the president has asked meto set policy and to change,
just change things, right.
And so this department of warthing, like he, may be calling
(11:38):
everyone back just so he canbeat that drum and say this is
the difference between adepartment of defense and a
department of war.
Speaker 2 (11:45):
But how idiotic is that to take commanders off the
line.
Speaker 1 (11:49):
If you think that resetting culture is very
important, it's not idioticright, that is their whole thing
is culture, yeah.
And so you know, to them itserves the perfect, it makes the
perfect purpose in that if youcan reset the foundation of how
a commander thinks about theirtroops and makes decisions by
changing the name of thedepartment, and then you know,
trickle that down from top levelvision down to next level
(12:10):
vision, down to how does thetroops do the work, right, then
that that could be part of it.
So my personal take on it, um,I I guess if it was a perfect
world we would have it would.
We would have never changed thename to the department of
Defense, it would have alwaysbeen the Department of War,
because I am a total waradvocate.
(12:30):
I am a raise the earth in about10 days and make sure everyone
apologizes and surrenders.
I don't do humane wars, right.
And so I'm down with theDepartment of War sounding ugly
and scary, because war should bethe ugliest, scariest thing
humans do, and it should beshort, brief, fucking terrible,
(12:51):
right.
And so I like the name for thatreason.
Um, that if we're gonna let thedog off the chain, it's gonna
kill everything it touches,right, and and so let, I'm okay
with that.
I'm also okay with the idea of awarfighter mentality or ethos
being the the baseline of whatthe military is.
It's not humanitarian, it's notto go out and be nice to the
rest of the world and deliverbags of rice, it's to kill
(13:11):
people, right?
So let's call it that.
And if we need a smaller forceto be able to kill all those
people, and there's someseparation or concentration
between one type of mission setand another, which we got rid of
, usaid.
So you know, all the defensetype stuff that was really more
humanitarian would have madesense under some other header.
So, culturally, I'm okay withit, um, but now we did change
(13:36):
the Department of Defense andit's been 60 years plus since we
did that, so I don't see thevalue in changing it now.
I will say that I don't see thevalue in changing it now.
I don't believe it leads to thecultural shift that is desired.
I think any amount of moneyspent on it is a waste.
Amount of money spent on it isa waste, um, and so it's uh at
(14:03):
for the.
My final statement on it is itis a declaration of conservative
thought to say we're goingbackwards in time, and we're
going backwards in time to thelast time that this looked, felt
and sounded like what presidenttrump wanted it to look, feel
and sound like, and so that'swhat we're going to rename it,
because that will turn it backinto this thing from history,
from this bygone era, and it'lljust turn back into that.
(14:25):
The clock will roll backwardsand it will become that thing
again.
I think that's what's at play.
I think that's foolish and Idon't understand the value of it
.
I don't think it's going todeliver the value they think
it's going to deliver.
There you go Very long run,like a three, four-minute run,
right yeah.
Speaker 2 (14:41):
So another thing that they talked about with Hegseth
and the generals is coming outwith a new national security
thing and really focusing onhomeland.
Oh yeah, like really turninginto a homeland thing into a
homeland thing.
So now, when we talk aboutturning into the department of
(15:01):
war, which I think is disgusting, but like, honestly, like being
the the biggest, strongest,baddest nation in the world, we
can't solve things with rice.
Sure, we can't, like makepeople better with giving them
humanitarian aid.
Yeah, um, the fact that we relyon death and destruction and we
sell it and you know we'reproud of it um, it just tells us
where we are as, like humanityyou know what I mean like it,
(15:25):
like we're probably never goingto get past this.
Like we'll blow.
We'll blow each other up.
The only way we get rid ofnuclear weapons is if we find a
better way to kill each other.
Yeah, yeah, um, yeah so, butlike when I joined, I joined
straight after September 11thand it was out of defense.
You know we got hit, it was timeto go and a lot of, you know,
(15:47):
folks in my generation had thesame just patriotic calling
where we weren't going to bringdeath and destruction around the
world.
We ended up doing that.
You know a lot.
Yeah, sure, but that wasn't thegoal.
We were there to serve Americaand protect you know, ourselves.
And now, you know, we look atchanging it to the Department of
(16:10):
War.
And we look at, you know,kicking out folks that have
shaving waivers for more than ayear, which means kicking out
black people.
You know, we look at.
You know, kicking women out ofthe force, all the top generals.
Speaker 1 (16:23):
They all have shaving waivers Jokes, uniform jokes
for only the deep track veteranswill understand.
Speaker 2 (16:33):
Oh, no, you three.
But you know it's been adisproportionate number of women
generals that have been gettingfired lately too.
Oh yeah, you know, when 20percent of your workforce is
women but 80 percent of yourfirings are women.
Yeah, you know, they're makingit very clear who they want to
be in this Department of War.
Yes, that is true, and it's adisgusting and you know we'll
(16:57):
keep coming back to it.
It, this Christian nationalismthat keeps coming out.
It's going to come right intopeople's faces.
Now, there's no hiding it.
Now we have a talking head asthe Secretary of War, again not
qualified to shine these men'sboots, men and women's boots
(17:18):
that he's calling in, yeah, buthere he is saying that you know,
we got to do this, we got tokill everything we got to.
You know, and they're startingfake wars in Venezuela, blowing
up, you know, civilian vesselsthat we have no idea what's
going on.
Speaker 1 (17:33):
Okay, so Pete Hegseth talking head, and yes, he is a
white nationalist.
So Pete Hegseth talking head,and yes, he is a white
nationalist.
Yes, he is a member of thatchurch where the dude is gaining
all this media attention ofhaving these churches that says
women should submit to men andthat Pete Hegseth explicitly
invites that dude to militaryceremonies and things like that
(17:56):
because he's his pastor.
And so he's like here are myadvisor and his advisor follows
him around and says get rid ofthese women, Right?
Yeah, Things will work a lotbetter around here, when you get
rid of these women.
Speaker 2 (18:05):
It can't be more clear.
Speaker 1 (18:06):
Right.
Speaker 2 (18:07):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (18:09):
The uh, because God said so yeah.
Speaker 2 (18:12):
Another funny data point is like at the uh charlie
kirk memorial, how, like all theuh grinder sites and stuff like
that like crashed again.
Oh, like at any big republicanevent, like all the all the apps
get together.
Yeah, all the lgbt apps andstuff like that, yeah, like yeah
, they just crashed all thesites, but they want to take
away all the rights and hurtpeople for being themselves.
(18:33):
Yeah, in public.
Speaker 1 (18:34):
Yeah, yep well, the department of war is, uh, I I
get the feeling, since it's asecondary name, and it requires
uh renaming from congress andand what that really comes down
to, why you say, why does itrequire that?
And it should?
I mean it shouldn't from, uh,just a face value perspective,
but funding lines.
If we funded things under thedepartment of Defense and then
(18:56):
you change the name toDepartment of War, you can't
redirect that money as easily,and so there could be ombudsman
and accounting issues, and sothat's really what it comes down
to.
Don't even get me started onthe waste of money.
Speaker 2 (19:08):
it is to relabel everything and move signs and
there's so much millions andbillions of dollars that are
going to go into Brass plaqueson every building and on every
base, just so you can have a newbusiness card.
Speaker 1 (19:22):
Yeah, yeah, uh well, we see the around here in this
local community and I I get agood chuckle out of this and I I
don't.
I just think it's funnypeterson air force base with an
afb on the green sign on thehighway right.
The department of coloradodepartment of transportation has
signs that say go green sign onthe highway right.
The department of Coloradodepartment of transportation has
signs that say go this way tothe military base Right.
(19:42):
And so when it became a spaceforce base, they just rolled
through and literally put SFBstickers over the AFB stickers
and they're like check it out,it's a new place now.
Speaker 2 (19:52):
So they're going to get a bunch of places with a W
stickered over the B.
Speaker 1 (19:55):
Uh, that's, you know, because somebody said, well, we
got to change it.
And then, of course, we allknow the way culture works is if
once all these general officersgo back and they tell everybody
, like we're the Department ofWar now, then every sub
commander underneath of them hasto perform.
They have to show how hardthey're part of the movement and
that's how they get promotedright.
(20:16):
It they're part of the movementand that's how they get
promoted right.
Speaker 2 (20:23):
It's like check me out I clapped the loudest.
You heard me clapping first andloud right.
And so, man, we dow toeverything around here.
I bought t-shirts for thetroops I repainted everything.
Speaker 1 (20:27):
You know what I'm saying.
Like everything's dow top tobottom.
Speaker 2 (20:29):
Every day we go out and we run and we sing cadence
about department of war.
Speaker 1 (20:33):
We're the most dow war dogs around here.
That that's happening.
Yeah, like next week you knowwhat I'm saying, there's going
to be a 04, 05 out there.
That's like, here's my chance.
Speaker 2 (20:43):
I'm going to get some attention.
When I was at the Senior NCOAcademy, the chief of the Air
Force came through and saidsomething about how much he
loved PT, and the next day therewere so many hoorah folks out
there Like oh, how about it?
It was many hoorah folks outthere like oh yeah, just oh, it
was that so much like, yeah, heknew, they knew that he was
working out in the in thesession with them.
Yeah, you know so like.
Speaker 1 (21:02):
So they came out, he knows he's in the air force,
right?
You know what I'm saying.
People join the air force tonot do pt.
Right, and I'm not bagging onyou guys.
Speaker 2 (21:13):
If I had known I would have done that you know,
these knees have been bad for along time.
Speaker 1 (21:17):
The thing that I hated about the military the
most was PT.
And the Army knows you hate PTand says do more of it, right
Like do it more and that's fine.
That's what the Army's about andI'm not mad about that.
But if I could go all the wayback in time and tell that young
man, you'll run half as manymiles in the Air Force than you
will in the army, well I wouldhave done that.
So, yeah, uh, all right.
(21:40):
So that's enough on thedepartment of war.
Wow, man, we spent a lot onthat.
I thought that was just gonnabe a little little bump bump
intro there and we we spent thelast 15 minutes on that.
Yeah, it was well.
On to the next uh topic isjimmy kimmel and what we talked
about last week with, uh, youknow, freedom of speech and and
what's under threat as far asthe press and everything else.
So quick turnaround that jimmygot taken off the air and he's
(22:06):
back already.
Speaker 2 (22:06):
It was just one week really yeah, yeah, really a
extended weekend for him.
Yeah, wasn't too bad.
Yeah, probably went to cabo andthat's what they said when they
first took him off.
The air was.
Speaker 1 (22:14):
The show's not canceled and he's not fired yeah
, they just kind of put him onpause or whatever.
But like we joked about, youknow, you gotta, we gotta figure
out what's on fire and how toput it out, and then we're gonna
, you know, repatriate you backto the you know department of
war, and then you'll understandyou know, but but a few uh
nations or stations, uh didn'tcarry them.
Still I can't remember what,what they are, but uh, sinclair
(22:35):
broadcasting and like new nextstar media or something like
that.
Yeah, yeah in you know localbroadcasters carried in red
areas.
Yeah, you know, but uh, butthat's almost 30 of abc, though
it was 30 of the stations acrossthe united states.
We're not going to carry it.
Yeah, it's not.
Uh, yeah, it's notinsignificant, right you know
yeah, you know.
Speaker 2 (22:56):
So there's still some pushback, so it'll be
interesting to see how long thatgoes.
And you know, I heard hismonologue.
What were your thoughts on hismonologue?
Speaker 1 (23:04):
Well, his very the first one they did that was
supposed to be offensive wasn'toffensive, let's just start
there.
And so his apology was notrequired, and so his monologue
was I mean, they did exactlywhat they were, what they had to
do, right, which was justaddress the elephant in the room
and try to be a little bitlighthearted about it.
So I thought he did that justfine.
(23:25):
I feel like he has been alittle bit of a whipping boy,
slash pawn in the biggerargument of everything.
You know it's the presidentversus the owner of ABC and
Disney right, you know likeJimmy's, a couple pay grades
down from that, you know.
So I feel like he went out andjust tried to make a point.
Speaker 2 (23:45):
Yeah, yeah.
Speaker 1 (23:47):
And I didn't.
You're telling me that I didn'trealize that he had Gavin
Newsom on.
Yeah, that is more of astatement to me than the
monologue.
I'm back and I'm going to talkto people that don't agree with
you.
Mr President, I'm going to donothing but air out what's going
on, of where the rest of theworld not just me thinks that
you're full of it, right, yeah?
Speaker 2 (24:07):
So I think he missed an opportunity in his monologue
because he said, like you know,he kind of went on a little
tired and said you know allbecause you can't handle the
joke, and like I get it Like youknow all because you can't
handle the joke, and like I getit, like you know, you're using
humor to address the situation.
But like calling somebody apedophile and a fascist isn't,
you know, a joke when it's realand it's true.
Speaker 1 (24:28):
You know what I mean.
Speaker 2 (24:29):
So, like you know, you sit there and try and hide
behind it as it being a joke but, like you know, use humor to
call them out, like call for therelease of the list, like you
did.
It's not always a joke, youknow what I mean.
It's a little different.
Speaker 1 (24:41):
Tongue in cheek, because there's reality behind
the message, right yeah?
Speaker 2 (24:47):
Stand up and believe what you say.
Speaker 1 (24:49):
It's not just a ba-doom-boom moment that has
been the case with all latenight satire and comedy and
anybody that has a, an adultaudience with a mouthpiece,
right, and so that's been thecase for a long time now of, oh
well, this person shouldn't betaken seriously because they're
(25:09):
a comedian, and the comedians, Imean I would fall into this
category.
I'd like to do, you know, I'dlike to be in this position
where you do get to tap, dancearound on both sides of the line
as a comedian.
You get to go, oh, I'm justmaking jokes.
And then sometimes you get tobe real pejorative and go, oh,
I'm just making jokes, right.
And so you know they.
They do get to live in a weirdlittle bubble where sometimes
(25:29):
they can be totally serious,sometimes they can make a joke
the audience can never tell thedifference and so they get to.
They get to step back and forthyeah, it's disingenuous, and
that's the unfortunate part, andthat's kind of what you're
getting at is like no, either,own it and say hey, you're,
you're gross, you're a pedophile, you're bad for whatever.
Right, release the list.
Speaker 2 (25:47):
Go ahead and say it right, yeah.
Speaker 1 (25:49):
If you hide behind a joke with it, then we don't get
the same.
You know, the truth in the jokeis lost in the joke, right, and
sometimes the truth just needsto be said.
But that's not what they getpaid to do.
Speaker 2 (26:01):
Yeah, exactly.
Speaker 1 (26:03):
He wanted it back on the air, yeah, and so, yeah,
instead of just coming out.
But see, and that's the thingthat we've been watching, I've
been watching.
I know both of us have beenwatching the Daily Show and, man
, when Jon Stewart went off atthe end of last season about the
parent companies just beingtotally corrupt, then he made
the joke.
When they came back he was likethey let us back in the
building.
We weren't sure if they FU tohis parent company.
(26:38):
And so still, though they'relike hey, the big dogs and the
broadcast people and themultibillion-dollar brands have
to be afraid of Disney, but we,whatever they have to go out of
their way to burn us down right,like we don't make enough money
and have enough.
We can't be a national headlinelike the way these other things
are, yeah, and so we get tooperate with some impunity.
(27:00):
But that's been, um, the theissue with.
You know he's, he's a good johnstewart's a good example of
that comedian who people say,well, don't take him seriously
because he's a comedian, butthen sometimes he picks up
serious issues and gets it'shard.
Speaker 2 (27:15):
Yeah, the work he did for the 9-11 first responders
and stuff like that.
It was heart-wrenchinglistening to him talk to
Congress.
He was so good at taking thosestories from the community and
putting it out there.
Yeah, it's just at a time whenwe need voices to stand up and
say the truth.
I'm glad that he had GavinNewsom on there, Because Gavin
(27:36):
Newsom came out and said Get totransfer the mouthpiece from me
to a real political opponent.
Yeah, because he came out andsaid I worry about the 2028
elections.
And this is at a time where wesee generals getting called back
, military getting fired,Congress getting weakened.
Loyalty checks yeah, all theseloyalty checks.
Speaker 1 (27:55):
The circuit or the judges are getting thrown under
the bus for everything Reliefs,lawyers, prosecutors that work
for the administration.
If they won't go after somebodybecause it's just unjust,
they'll find somebody who willExactly.
Speaker 2 (28:06):
We see all of these authoritarian grabs for power,
all while trump hawksmerchandise for 2028 from the
yes, yeah, like, and gavinnewsom came out and said I'm
worried that we're not going tohave elections in 2028.
Yeah and like.
I think that's the highestlevel person I've heard say that
say the the quiet part out loud.
Speaker 1 (28:25):
Yeah, so I'll.
I'm gonna share a little uh inbetween donald trump's terms.
In office, I would haveconversations with people who,
um, were january 6 deniers, whobelieved that it was a peaceful
walk through the park.
That included, you know,shitting on people's desks and
beating cops and stuff likethat's what I do when I go to
the park everybody does what Ido and so I would have
(28:50):
conversations with these peopleand I would say listen, if we
want to throw out every singlething, because their argument
would be well, you don't likeDonald Trump because he's a
dirty person, not because he hasbad politics Right, his
policies are good for America.
Him as a person is bad foreverything.
But I, as a voter, that personcould tell me I can separate the
two and I can see Donald Trumpas a good politician and a bad
(29:11):
person, and I want America tosucceed.
So I'm going to vote for a goodpolitician and I just I heard
him and I heard the logic theywere trying to apply and I said
everybody could see my headshaking right now had not
(29:33):
happened, which is the closestexample of a straight up coup
that America has everexperienced, outside of civil
war and actual attempts tooverthrow the government Like
that.
You know how can you notbelieve that?
And they say, well, what's good?
You know, I can, I can separatethis good thing from this bad
thing.
And I said, but doesn't thatmake you concerned that if he
ever gets back in office hewon't leave?
Yeah, from this bad thing.
And I said, but doesn't thatmake you concerned that if he
ever gets back in office hewon't leave?
(29:53):
That's what he already tried todo.
It's not a guess, it's not ahyperbolic fantasy.
It happened.
And they say, no, it didn't,that didn't happen.
And he loves the Constitution,he is a die-hard federalist and
he would never try to run foranother office.
He would never try to do.
(30:14):
You know, he knows the rulesand he's going to play by the
rules no, no they say that youknow, and I'm like he doesn't
know what the word federalist is.
Speaker 2 (30:21):
We have no any of the rules.
Speaker 1 (30:22):
We have departed reality when they're like no,
he's the most constitutional,loving president that we've ever
had and I I'm like he can'tpronounce the word.
That's what you want.
That's the type of cipher thathe fills in for you.
You want, you know you want themost constitution loving person
ever, so that's what he is foryou.
You want the most, uh, whitenationalist president that there
ever was.
Maybe that's what he is for you, right?
(30:44):
You want the person who saysimmigrants are terrible, even if
it's not about racism.
That's what he is for you,right?
And so it depends on who you'retalking to.
He's the champion superman iseverything to everybody, right?
And in their mind, if he'ssuperman, he's everything to
everybody.
Speaker 2 (31:00):
So, um, here's my yeah, go ahead so, even with the
policy stuff, though, that thefarmers now are are saying you
know, oh, you know, we saw thesame thing back in 2017 that
we're seeing now.
Yeah, the last time you votedfor this guy, and there's just a
cognitive dissonance therewhere they're just not putting
the real consequences of theirvote.
Speaker 1 (31:19):
Yeah, like the bad things that happen to our
economy and to our daily livesSomehow exist in a vacuum
outside of their vote for thisperson, like their life only
sucks when there's a Democrat inand, and yeah, you're right,
that same person that would tellme he, he is, uh, you know,
he's the best president onpolicy would also say would be
they're.
(31:39):
They're the same people thatare the whatabouters, right,
well, what about what aboutbiden?
What about this?
What about that?
What about obama?
What about obamacare?
And I was like whoa, we're noteven having a conversation about
that.
Speaker 2 (31:50):
You know what I'm saying.
Speaker 1 (31:51):
I'm talking about whether Donald Trump would
willingly leave office, and healready did not willingly leave,
he had to unwillingly leaveoffice.
Speaker 2 (31:59):
And now Lindsey Graham's come out and said that
he would support a third termand like just disgusting.
Speaker 1 (32:05):
So a couple of weeks ago I said I have a conspiracy
about and I had this conspiracybefore this second term.
I said if Donald Trump evergets back into office, he won't
leave.
And you got to figure out whatgrand scheme could he hatch or
execute to make that a reality.
Right, and most um governments,when they have fallen to
(32:34):
someone who becomes a multi-termpresident or dictator or
autocrat, the playbook is clearand it always involves a
national crisis, some kind ofwar, some kind of um.
It's can be fabricated by them,right, but it's.
I have to do this drasticmeasure, yeah, to save the
country, to save the culture, tosave the economy, to save your
kids.
Yeah, and if you don't allow meto overstep this boundary,
(32:56):
we're all going to die.
Speaker 2 (32:58):
Yeah, man, trump will absolutely pick that fiddle you
know, like he plays that noteright yeah, and what's funny is
folks know about that becausethey use that same argument
against Zelensky.
You know what?
Speaker 1 (33:11):
I mean.
Speaker 2 (33:12):
So they recognize all these things and like the steps
towards authoritarianism, butthey don't ever reflect it back
towards themselves.
Speaker 1 (33:18):
Yeah, very true, which is kind of crazy.
And so my conspiracy that Ididn't divulge last time was I
have always thought that theRussia situation has been Donald
Trump's ace in the hole.
Even in his first term therewasn't a war going on, direct
fights with Ukraine, but therewas that always bubbling,
(33:38):
simmering problem with Russiaand the Eastern Front of Europe
and NATO and who can and can'tjoin NATO.
And Trump's always been a bigyou know NATO, you suck right,
russia, you're cool.
But he knows that America andthe American people are really
on the side of NATO, and so Ifeel like he has played the
Ukraine conflict exactly the wayhe wanted to throughout this
(34:02):
term, this second term, so thatthere can be this stagnating war
, that he can pull the pin outof the grenade when he thinks
it's politically expedient.
Speaker 2 (34:13):
It's interesting.
Speaker 1 (34:15):
I mean and so I feel like the Russia thing has always
been a part of his plan that ifWorld War III, or if the US
versus Russia and without othercountries involved, if we're
really executing the end of theCold War now, I can't leave
office.
While we do that Right, I haveto take up the mantle of Reagan,
which you all, I can't leaveoffice while we do that right, I
have to take up the mantle ofReagan, which you all hired me
to be as Reagan 2.0, and I haveto seal the deal.
(34:36):
It's coming.
It's coming right Shooting warwith Russia to save his third
term or create an emergencywhere he stays in office.
It's coming.
Speaker 2 (34:46):
So I think it was just yesterday.
I heard him talking abouttelling Ukraine that they need
to go in and take they can taketheir country, take all their
country back a little bit more.
Speaker 1 (34:55):
go further if you want to, yeah, and he also told
NATO country start attacking theRussian air aggression.
Yeah, If they come close toyour border, don't let them
cross it.
Shoot at them.
Yeah.
And we got your back yeah,estonia, shoot at him right.
Uh, what are all those northernbaltic states?
Take shots, go for it.
We got your back, it's.
He's got a dragon in the canand he's waiting.
(35:17):
He can pop that can open at anytime and distract the everybody
exactly, and stay in office.
Speaker 2 (35:22):
Yeah, that's always been part of the plan right,
always well, and so I was alwaysthinking he was just kind of.
That's why he was poking atvenezuela down down there.
But Venezuela probably wouldn'tbe a big enough war to.
Speaker 1 (35:31):
No it's gotta be big world powers, to make it seem
like literally everything is atcost Right.
Speaker 2 (35:37):
Yeah Well, that's a terrifying thought.
And that's another great way towrap up this episode.
Yeah, yeah.
Speaker 1 (35:45):
And for our, you know .
Hey, this gives you some reasontoo, if you're a listener, to
stay tuned, because you neverknow, right, when you get to
come back and hear, like therest of the story, right.
So if you listened a coupleweeks ago, you go, man, I really
want to hear what thatconspiracy theory is.
Speaker 2 (35:58):
Yeah, we're appealing this onion.
Thanks for tuning back in.
Speaker 1 (36:04):
Yeah, we're appealing this onion together.
Well, I want to hear it me,because Adam told me that he's
more thinks in the conspiracycircles and reads about it more
than I do, oh geez.
So I want to hear from you nexttime on if you ever had any
ideas around what would be theway to pull off the coup or to
shift the balance and change.
Speaker 2 (36:20):
Oh God, no, there's no way I'm recording that.
No, all right.
Speaker 1 (36:25):
Well, again, the SEC can't come for us, right.
Speaker 2 (36:30):
We'll have that conversation.
The SEC can't come for us right.
We'll have the conversationlike in the mountains, somewhere
where nobody can listen.
Speaker 1 (36:33):
Our parent corporation is going to take us
off the air.
Speaker 2 (36:35):
Yeah, there you go.
Speaker 1 (36:37):
Fair Well I'll air out my dirty laundry.
So, yeah, thanks everybody forlistening this week and we hope
you enjoyed the episode andwe'll catch you all again next
week on Left Face All right Takecare.
Hello everyone and welcome to another episode of
Left Face.
This is the Pikes Peak Regionpodcast, where we talk about
politics with a veteran's pointof view.
I am your co-host, dickWilkinson, and I'm joined this
morning with Adam Gillard.
Good morning, adam.
Hey buddy, how you doing?
I'm doing well and I'm excitedto do the show today.
Thursdays are usually my dayoff as far as work goes, so I've
(00:23):
got a pretty chill day and Ialways enjoy this.
I get to like it's a mentalexercise of a totally different
type of stuff to come do thepodcast, so I like that.
Speaker 2 (00:32):
Yeah, these days are the one day where I kind of
focus on this type of stuff too,where you just kind of try to
knock out as much as you can inthis area of your life.
Yeah, because after this, go dothe Vets lunch and you know
we're going to have a candidatefor the Secretary of State there
.
Yeah, you know, this time, andactually next time, their
opponent's going to be there.
So, yeah, we're getting a lot of, you know, good folks coming
(00:54):
down to talk to us and, you know, have our folks ask them some,
you know, good tough questionsto see where they stand.
Speaker 1 (01:05):
You know I'll take that moment to briefly just
encourage anybody that'slistening um, overcome your
hesitation to go to any eventwhere there might be a political
candidate, right, I know somepeople are like, oh, it'll be a
big crowd, or there could be, itcould be part of a protest, or
like there's different reasonswhy people don't go to political
stuff, right, um, but for themost part, candidate engagement
type things are very low key,very chill, not super crowded,
(01:28):
not overly intense, right.
And so, just for somebody likeme, there's like man, it sounds
like I'm going to be like abunch of people there and
somebody might be outside withsigns, yelling and stuff.
It's like some people avoid that, yeah, but I want to encourage
people that this is the phase,like you know, in between
election cycles is the chancewhere you really get to talk to
a candidate and get to hear,like, what's their real idea,
(01:49):
have more than a one minute longconversation with them, because
once it gets in the next yearand closer to their race, you
know, coming down to the wire,they're doing four or five
events a day.
They're there for an hour and ahalf and then they have to
leave.
Yeah, and they're talking.
You know it.
It's one way messaging a lotmore in that situation.
This is your chance to tellsomebody what you care about.
Right, and you could easily betalking to the next secretary of
(02:10):
state or the next governor,right, and, uh, you know they'll
remember you, right.
They'll say oh, I remember lastyear when I talked to this
person, this woman, and she toldme what was going on in her
life and I'm doing somethingabout it.
Yeah, you don't get access tothem unless you come to events
like this.
So I just want to encouragepeople to come you know, come
out whenever there's anopportunity.
Speaker 2 (02:29):
Yeah, and these are, you know t-shirt and hoodie
events yes, yes, so it's a lotmore relaxed, not.
Speaker 1 (02:34):
Sunday church kind of yeah yeah.
Speaker 2 (02:37):
So it's a lot more relaxed and it's easy to catch
their ear.
Catch their ear and once you docatch it, you're in contact
with them and they want to reachout and they and they, they
want that, you know.
So, yeah, yeah, you'reabsolutely right.
The more people would get out,the better.
Speaker 1 (02:50):
Well, uh, I'll.
I'll even flip it around.
Adam and I both ran for officebefore, and there is when, when
you're in the candidate side ofit, you are looking for
inspiring stories from yourconstituents.
You want to know how yourpolicy ideas or changes might
impact somebody and, if you can,you want to.
You want to promote andchampion the things that are
(03:11):
aligned with.
You know what you're trying todo, and the only way to me, you
know the only way to doconstituents have to show up
Right, and so there's a desirefor, there's an appeal on the
other side of that conversationto hear and genuinely, genuinely
listen to your story.
Right, because it fills in someof the puzzle pieces for the
candidate of like, I know why Icare about this, but I really
need to understand more why myconstituents care about this.
(03:33):
And yeah, you can't serve yourcommunity unless you are in
talking to your community andknow what their know their
stories Right, Exactly, and andget past the headline and
superficial aspect of somechallenge and get to the real
personal level of it right, yeah, yeah, it's easy to hit the
talking points.
It's something else.
When somebody says my sondisappeared in an ice raid,
right, yeah, you go oh, oh, yeah, oh, I'm a parent too.
(03:55):
Right, I'm not going todisrespect this person and I'm
not going to repeat a headline.
I'm going to listen to them,right, yeah, because this is a
real thing to be upset about,right, even if you think it was
totally legal and think it's agood idea.
When a parent comes to anotherparent and makes an appeal and
says I'm worried about my kid,you're going to pay attention to
that.
So, it's your chance to do that.
So thanks for the side trickthere.
(04:18):
But the thing that people don'tunderstand is political action
happens at the lowest level inthe most simple ways, every day.
Every day.
It's not always abillion-dollar campaign.
Speaker 2 (04:30):
Right, yeah, so yeah, and that's what I think, coming
out of the military and gettinginvolved in the community, I
was so kind of to take forgranted what happens on a
day-to-day basis in offices.
Yeah, the day-to-day basis inoffices.
You know around the, you knoweverywhere and you know people's
homes as they're planning andorganizing, like just making our
communities better.
But, yeah, it happens every day.
Speaker 1 (04:51):
Every action, yeah, Yep, Well, we're going to jump
into a veteran topic today thatAdam told me about, and it's
Pete Hegseth, the secretary ofwar, which we're going to talk
about, of defense slash war.
Adam says that he has done acallback for most of the general
officers in the military tocome and have a summit at the
(05:14):
Pentagon or something.
Speaker 2 (05:18):
Yeah, so like 800 general officers site like
Washington Post or somethingsays it'd be about 800 GOs got
the message, or flag officersgot the message and not
including staff officers.
For some reason, I don't knowwhy, he just wants those
(05:39):
operational commands to come inand so folks who are sitting in
seats that are making decisionshave to drop everything to come.
Listen to a Secretary of Warthat never went to war college,
like he was in the militaryright but like he was a
lieutenant colonel.
Speaker 1 (05:57):
Yeah, he doesn't have the same education and
experience he never made it toeven have go to war college.
He's not qualified to givedirectives to these folks, is
what you're saying yes, that isexactly what I'm saying yes,
yeah.
Speaker 2 (06:10):
They understand the subject matter and the
challenges at hand orders ofmagnitude better than he does,
right, yeah, so what could he becalling them back there for?
Speaker 1 (06:20):
So from when you first told me before the episode
to now, I know, I know.
Speaker 2 (06:24):
You got it, you figured it out.
Speaker 1 (06:26):
I'm going to make a bold statement, because I'm just
going to repeat what he saidPete Hegseth has a desire to
reduce the general officer cadreby about 20, 30%, yep, and so I
think what he's doing ischopping heads, yo.
Honestly, the 800 are going toshow up and 600 are going to
leave.
Not joking, some people areabout to get fired, like
(06:47):
100-plus general officers areabout to get retired.
Speaker 2 (06:50):
That was kind of in that article also, where it
talks about how many heads haverolled since Trump has taken
over, even the latest.
Speaker 1 (06:57):
Well, they've got to come do their loyalty checks
right.
They've got to step in line andgo into the confession box and
say are you feels?
I swear to.
Speaker 2 (07:04):
God, have you seen the Trump pins going around?
If any of our military folks.
Speaker 1 (07:09):
Yeah, the little lapel pins with his Trump 2028
on them, caesar-like pins.
Speaker 2 (07:14):
Yeah, if our military folks start having to wear
those In uniform, yeah, oh myGod, but yeah.
So I think the same thing.
I think the ax is coming for alot of folks, yeah, and if
there's any disruption, I thinkthey're getting arrested and I
think they're getting chargedwith treason.
Speaker 1 (07:31):
Oh yeah, you know what I mean.
That's probably why he wants todo it at a specific place,
right Like inside the Pentagonor inside the Capitol or
something like that Exactly.
Speaker 2 (07:39):
Yeah, it's like breaking up with somebody, yeah,
yeah, yeah, it's like breakingup with somebody.
Yeah, yeah, yeah, they're doingit the other way.
Speaker 1 (07:44):
Yeah, right, bring them into the danger zone so we
can get real hostile?
Yeah, exactly, and then they'llleave with their mouth shut.
Or, you know, these folks arethe general officers that we're
talking about have, most of them, around 30 years of experience
in the military, sworn to theirallegiance and duties, and so I
(08:10):
think a lot of them wouldprobably not.
You could threaten theirbenefits, right, their benefits,
their status, their rank, theirretirement package, their
whatever.
Even if it's not a like we'regoing to throw you in jail, but
like you need to leave here andkeep your mouth shut.
Or we're going to threaten yourbenefits, right.
And I wonder, would that workwith these folks?
(08:31):
Right, like, would that matter?
Or would they say well, I'mwilling to divest of my military
benefits to stand up against?
You know what I see as illegal?
Or tyranny or whatever Right, Ithink most of them would, is my
point I.
Or tyranny or whatever right?
I think most of them would, ismy point.
I hope so.
If they genuinely believethere's a problem, I think they
would stand up against it right.
Speaker 2 (08:50):
And along with this order, it's not just the
generals coming into town, it'stheir top, enlisted with them
also.
Okay, so they're having theirwhole little cadre, their
leadership team, right there.
So, yeah, if they're going tobe cutting folks out, they're
going to be cutting off bothsides and that's going to damage
so much of our readiness acrossthe spectrum.
Yeah, you know, if you loseleadership like that just gone,
(09:14):
I don't know, it's scary times.
Speaker 1 (09:17):
Well, you just brought up an interesting point
that you can't have a commandsergeant major if there's no
commander at that level.
Right, and so if he's going toflatten some of the pyramid and
get rid of some of these subcommanders and vice commanders
and double vice, you knowadjuncts and all that shit, you
know down to the one star, wherethey're four layers deep under
a four star, and he's like, no,there needs to be one like two
(09:39):
star and all the rest of thatstuff can go away.
Well then, yeah, that means ifthree generals are going away,
three associated commandsergeant major or chief master
sergeant type people are goingwith them, right, Right.
So that reduction in force doesmake sense in that there's no
need for a senior enlistedadvisor to a person that doesn't
have a job anymore.
Speaker 2 (09:58):
Yeah, and all those folks are also in retirement.
Yeah, they're all well past the20.
Yeah, either swear allegianceor take your paycheck or go home
.
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (10:07):
And if you leave here and say anything sideways that
was my point, If you you mightleave here and say I'll shut up,
but then as soon as you gethome, you decide you got a fire
in your pants and you want totell people about what happened
here.
Your benefits are going todisappear.
Right, we're going to comeafter you.
We're going to strip you down.
You're going to get put out asan E1 with a general discharge,
right?
Speaker 2 (10:25):
Well, they've already said that only authorized.
Their press corps is onlyauthorized to release
information.
Yeah, it has to be screenedthrough a lot, even unclassified
information.
Yeah, so they've taken away alljournalistic integrity there.
There's nobody going andfighting and looking for
information and releasing thingsfor us to know about.
(10:49):
It's such a gross consolidationand this kind of will lead us
into what's going on next here.
Speaker 1 (10:55):
Well, department of War, we can't skip that, let's
talk about the name and ourpersonal thoughts about the
Department of War.
While we're on this topic, yougo first, so that's another part
of the callback.
If it're on this topic, you gofirst.
So that's another part of thewhat, the what the callback.
If it's not about choppingheads, maybe it's just about
resetting the culture and thetone and saying, hey, like we're
going into F, fy 26, that'sgoing to be the year of the
(11:17):
department of war, right, and somaybe that's the intention here
is, let's reset the culture,right?
Um, I've, you know, peteHegseth, saying I've been in
this position for more than sixmonths, which means I'm going to
be here for a little while,right, and?
And the president has asked meto set policy and to change,
just change things, right.
And so this department of warthing, like he, may be calling
(11:38):
everyone back just so he canbeat that drum and say this is
the difference between adepartment of defense and a
department of war.
Speaker 2 (11:45):
But how idiotic is that to take commanders off the
line.
Speaker 1 (11:49):
If you think that resetting culture is very
important, it's not idioticright, that is their whole thing
is culture, yeah.
And so you know, to them itserves the perfect, it makes the
perfect purpose in that if youcan reset the foundation of how
a commander thinks about theirtroops and makes decisions by
changing the name of thedepartment, and then you know,
trickle that down from top levelvision down to next level
(12:10):
vision, down to how does thetroops do the work, right, then
that that could be part of it.
So my personal take on it, um,I I guess if it was a perfect
world we would have it would.
We would have never changed thename to the department of
Defense, it would have alwaysbeen the Department of War,
because I am a total waradvocate.
(12:30):
I am a raise the earth in about10 days and make sure everyone
apologizes and surrenders.
I don't do humane wars, right.
And so I'm down with theDepartment of War sounding ugly
and scary, because war should bethe ugliest, scariest thing
humans do, and it should beshort, brief, fucking terrible,
(12:51):
right.
And so I like the name for thatreason.
Um, that if we're gonna let thedog off the chain, it's gonna
kill everything it touches,right, and and so let, I'm okay
with that.
I'm also okay with the idea of awarfighter mentality or ethos
being the the baseline of whatthe military is.
It's not humanitarian, it's notto go out and be nice to the
rest of the world and deliverbags of rice, it's to kill
(13:11):
people, right?
So let's call it that.
And if we need a smaller forceto be able to kill all those
people, and there's someseparation or concentration
between one type of mission setand another, which we got rid of
, usaid.
So you know, all the defensetype stuff that was really more
humanitarian would have madesense under some other header.
So, culturally, I'm okay withit, um, but now we did change
(13:36):
the Department of Defense andit's been 60 years plus since we
did that, so I don't see thevalue in changing it now.
I will say that I don't see thevalue in changing it now.
I don't believe it leads to thecultural shift that is desired.
I think any amount of moneyspent on it is a waste.
Amount of money spent on it isa waste, um, and so it's uh at
(14:03):
for the.
My final statement on it is itis a declaration of conservative
thought to say we're goingbackwards in time, and we're
going backwards in time to thelast time that this looked, felt
and sounded like what presidenttrump wanted it to look, feel
and sound like, and so that'swhat we're going to rename it,
because that will turn it backinto this thing from history,
from this bygone era, and it'lljust turn back into that.
(14:25):
The clock will roll backwardsand it will become that thing
again.
I think that's what's at play.
I think that's foolish and Idon't understand the value of it
.
I don't think it's going todeliver the value they think
it's going to deliver.
There you go Very long run,like a three, four-minute run,
right yeah.
Speaker 2 (14:41):
So another thing that they talked about with Hegseth
and the generals is coming outwith a new national security
thing and really focusing onhomeland.
Oh yeah, like really turninginto a homeland thing into a
homeland thing.
So now, when we talk aboutturning into the department of
(15:01):
war, which I think is disgusting, but like, honestly, like being
the the biggest, strongest,baddest nation in the world, we
can't solve things with rice.
Sure, we can't, like makepeople better with giving them
humanitarian aid.
Yeah, um, the fact that we relyon death and destruction and we
sell it and you know we'reproud of it um, it just tells us
where we are as, like humanityyou know what I mean like it,
(15:25):
like we're probably never goingto get past this.
Like we'll blow.
We'll blow each other up.
The only way we get rid ofnuclear weapons is if we find a
better way to kill each other.
Yeah, yeah, um, yeah so, butlike when I joined, I joined
straight after September 11thand it was out of defense.
You know we got hit, it was timeto go and a lot of, you know,
(15:47):
folks in my generation had thesame just patriotic calling
where we weren't going to bringdeath and destruction around the
world.
We ended up doing that.
You know a lot.
Yeah, sure, but that wasn't thegoal.
We were there to serve Americaand protect you know, ourselves.
And now, you know, we look atchanging it to the Department of
(16:10):
War.
And we look at, you know,kicking out folks that have
shaving waivers for more than ayear, which means kicking out
black people.
You know, we look at.
You know, kicking women out ofthe force, all the top generals.
Speaker 1 (16:23):
They all have shaving waivers Jokes, uniform jokes
for only the deep track veteranswill understand.
Speaker 2 (16:33):
Oh, no, you three.
But you know it's been adisproportionate number of women
generals that have been gettingfired lately too.
Oh yeah, you know, when 20percent of your workforce is
women but 80 percent of yourfirings are women.
Yeah, you know, they're makingit very clear who they want to
be in this Department of War.
Yes, that is true, and it's adisgusting and you know we'll
(16:57):
keep coming back to it.
It, this Christian nationalismthat keeps coming out.
It's going to come right intopeople's faces.
Now, there's no hiding it.
Now we have a talking head asthe Secretary of War, again not
qualified to shine these men'sboots, men and women's boots
(17:18):
that he's calling in, yeah, buthere he is saying that you know,
we got to do this, we got tokill everything we got to.
You know, and they're startingfake wars in Venezuela, blowing
up, you know, civilian vesselsthat we have no idea what's
going on.
Speaker 1 (17:33):
Okay, so Pete Hegseth talking head, and yes, he is a
white nationalist.
So Pete Hegseth talking head,and yes, he is a white
nationalist.
Yes, he is a member of thatchurch where the dude is gaining
all this media attention ofhaving these churches that says
women should submit to men andthat Pete Hegseth explicitly
invites that dude to militaryceremonies and things like that
(17:56):
because he's his pastor.
And so he's like here are myadvisor and his advisor follows
him around and says get rid ofthese women, Right?
Yeah, Things will work a lotbetter around here, when you get
rid of these women.
Speaker 2 (18:05):
It can't be more clear.
Speaker 1 (18:06):
Right.
Speaker 2 (18:07):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (18:09):
The uh, because God said so yeah.
Speaker 2 (18:12):
Another funny data point is like at the uh charlie
kirk memorial, how, like all theuh grinder sites and stuff like
that like crashed again.
Oh, like at any big republicanevent, like all the all the apps
get together.
Yeah, all the lgbt apps andstuff like that, yeah, like yeah
, they just crashed all thesites, but they want to take
away all the rights and hurtpeople for being themselves.
(18:33):
Yeah, in public.
Speaker 1 (18:34):
Yeah, yep well, the department of war is, uh, I I
get the feeling, since it's asecondary name, and it requires
uh renaming from congress andand what that really comes down
to, why you say, why does itrequire that?
And it should?
I mean it shouldn't from, uh,just a face value perspective,
but funding lines.
If we funded things under thedepartment of Defense and then
(18:56):
you change the name toDepartment of War, you can't
redirect that money as easily,and so there could be ombudsman
and accounting issues, and sothat's really what it comes down
to.
Don't even get me started onthe waste of money.
Speaker 2 (19:08):
it is to relabel everything and move signs and
there's so much millions andbillions of dollars that are
going to go into Brass plaqueson every building and on every
base, just so you can have a newbusiness card.
Speaker 1 (19:22):
Yeah, yeah, uh well, we see the around here in this
local community and I I get agood chuckle out of this and I I
don't.
I just think it's funnypeterson air force base with an
afb on the green sign on thehighway right.
The department of coloradodepartment of transportation has
signs that say go green sign onthe highway right.
The department of Coloradodepartment of transportation has
signs that say go this way tothe military base Right.
(19:42):
And so when it became a spaceforce base, they just rolled
through and literally put SFBstickers over the AFB stickers
and they're like check it out,it's a new place now.
Speaker 2 (19:52):
So they're going to get a bunch of places with a W
stickered over the B.
Speaker 1 (19:55):
Uh, that's, you know, because somebody said, well, we
got to change it.
And then, of course, we allknow the way culture works is if
once all these general officersgo back and they tell everybody
, like we're the Department ofWar now, then every sub
commander underneath of them hasto perform.
They have to show how hardthey're part of the movement and
that's how they get promotedright.
(20:16):
It they're part of the movementand that's how they get
promoted right.
Speaker 2 (20:23):
It's like check me out I clapped the loudest.
You heard me clapping first andloud right.
And so, man, we dow toeverything around here.
I bought t-shirts for thetroops I repainted everything.
Speaker 1 (20:27):
You know what I'm saying.
Like everything's dow top tobottom.
Speaker 2 (20:29):
Every day we go out and we run and we sing cadence
about department of war.
Speaker 1 (20:33):
We're the most dow war dogs around here.
That that's happening.
Yeah, like next week you knowwhat I'm saying, there's going
to be a 04, 05 out there.
That's like, here's my chance.
Speaker 2 (20:43):
I'm going to get some attention.
When I was at the Senior NCOAcademy, the chief of the Air
Force came through and saidsomething about how much he
loved PT, and the next day therewere so many hoorah folks out
there Like oh, how about it?
It was many hoorah folks outthere like oh yeah, just oh, it
was that so much like, yeah, heknew, they knew that he was
working out in the in thesession with them.
Yeah, you know so like.
Speaker 1 (21:02):
So they came out, he knows he's in the air force,
right?
You know what I'm saying.
People join the air force tonot do pt.
Right, and I'm not bagging onyou guys.
Speaker 2 (21:13):
If I had known I would have done that you know,
these knees have been bad for along time.
Speaker 1 (21:17):
The thing that I hated about the military the
most was PT.
And the Army knows you hate PTand says do more of it, right
Like do it more and that's fine.
That's what the Army's about andI'm not mad about that.
But if I could go all the wayback in time and tell that young
man, you'll run half as manymiles in the Air Force than you
will in the army, well I wouldhave done that.
So, yeah, uh, all right.
(21:40):
So that's enough on thedepartment of war.
Wow, man, we spent a lot onthat.
I thought that was just gonnabe a little little bump bump
intro there and we we spent thelast 15 minutes on that.
Yeah, it was well.
On to the next uh topic isjimmy kimmel and what we talked
about last week with, uh, youknow, freedom of speech and and
what's under threat as far asthe press and everything else.
So quick turnaround that jimmygot taken off the air and he's
(22:06):
back already.
Speaker 2 (22:06):
It was just one week really yeah, yeah, really a
extended weekend for him.
Yeah, wasn't too bad.
Yeah, probably went to cabo andthat's what they said when they
first took him off.
The air was.
Speaker 1 (22:14):
The show's not canceled and he's not fired yeah
, they just kind of put him onpause or whatever.
But like we joked about, youknow, you gotta, we gotta figure
out what's on fire and how toput it out, and then we're gonna
, you know, repatriate you backto the you know department of
war, and then you'll understandyou know, but but a few uh
nations or stations, uh didn'tcarry them.
Still I can't remember what,what they are, but uh, sinclair
(22:35):
broadcasting and like new nextstar media or something like
that.
Yeah, yeah in you know localbroadcasters carried in red
areas.
Yeah, you know, but uh, butthat's almost 30 of abc, though
it was 30 of the stations acrossthe united states.
We're not going to carry it.
Yeah, it's not.
Uh, yeah, it's notinsignificant, right you know
yeah, you know.
Speaker 2 (22:56):
So there's still some pushback, so it'll be
interesting to see how long thatgoes.
And you know, I heard hismonologue.
What were your thoughts on hismonologue?
Speaker 1 (23:04):
Well, his very the first one they did that was
supposed to be offensive wasn'toffensive, let's just start
there.
And so his apology was notrequired, and so his monologue
was I mean, they did exactlywhat they were, what they had to
do, right, which was justaddress the elephant in the room
and try to be a little bitlighthearted about it.
So I thought he did that justfine.
(23:25):
I feel like he has been alittle bit of a whipping boy,
slash pawn in the biggerargument of everything.
You know it's the presidentversus the owner of ABC and
Disney right, you know likeJimmy's, a couple pay grades
down from that, you know.
So I feel like he went out andjust tried to make a point.
Speaker 2 (23:45):
Yeah, yeah.
Speaker 1 (23:47):
And I didn't.
You're telling me that I didn'trealize that he had Gavin
Newsom on.
Yeah, that is more of astatement to me than the
monologue.
I'm back and I'm going to talkto people that don't agree with
you.
Mr President, I'm going to donothing but air out what's going
on, of where the rest of theworld not just me thinks that
you're full of it, right, yeah?
Speaker 2 (24:07):
So I think he missed an opportunity in his monologue
because he said, like you know,he kind of went on a little
tired and said you know allbecause you can't handle the
joke, and like I get it Like youknow all because you can't
handle the joke, and like I getit, like you know, you're using
humor to address the situation.
But like calling somebody apedophile and a fascist isn't,
you know, a joke when it's realand it's true.
Speaker 1 (24:28):
You know what I mean.
Speaker 2 (24:29):
So, like you know, you sit there and try and hide
behind it as it being a joke but, like you know, use humor to
call them out, like call for therelease of the list, like you
did.
It's not always a joke, youknow what I mean.
It's a little different.
Speaker 1 (24:41):
Tongue in cheek, because there's reality behind
the message, right yeah?
Speaker 2 (24:47):
Stand up and believe what you say.
Speaker 1 (24:49):
It's not just a ba-doom-boom moment that has
been the case with all latenight satire and comedy and
anybody that has a, an adultaudience with a mouthpiece,
right, and so that's been thecase for a long time now of, oh
well, this person shouldn't betaken seriously because they're
(25:09):
a comedian, and the comedians, Imean I would fall into this
category.
I'd like to do, you know, I'dlike to be in this position
where you do get to tap, dancearound on both sides of the line
as a comedian.
You get to go, oh, I'm justmaking jokes.
And then sometimes you get tobe real pejorative and go, oh,
I'm just making jokes, right.
And so you know they.
They do get to live in a weirdlittle bubble where sometimes
(25:29):
they can be totally serious,sometimes they can make a joke
the audience can never tell thedifference and so they get to.
They get to step back and forthyeah, it's disingenuous, and
that's the unfortunate part, andthat's kind of what you're
getting at is like no, either,own it and say hey, you're,
you're gross, you're a pedophile, you're bad for whatever.
Right, release the list.
Speaker 2 (25:47):
Go ahead and say it right, yeah.
Speaker 1 (25:49):
If you hide behind a joke with it, then we don't get
the same.
You know, the truth in the jokeis lost in the joke, right, and
sometimes the truth just needsto be said.
But that's not what they getpaid to do.
Speaker 2 (26:01):
Yeah, exactly.
Speaker 1 (26:03):
He wanted it back on the air, yeah, and so, yeah,
instead of just coming out.
But see, and that's the thingthat we've been watching, I've
been watching.
I know both of us have beenwatching the Daily Show and, man
, when Jon Stewart went off atthe end of last season about the
parent companies just beingtotally corrupt, then he made
the joke.
When they came back he was likethey let us back in the
building.
We weren't sure if they FU tohis parent company.
(26:38):
And so still, though they'relike hey, the big dogs and the
broadcast people and themultibillion-dollar brands have
to be afraid of Disney, but we,whatever they have to go out of
their way to burn us down right,like we don't make enough money
and have enough.
We can't be a national headlinelike the way these other things
are, yeah, and so we get tooperate with some impunity.
(27:00):
But that's been, um, the theissue with.
You know he's, he's a good johnstewart's a good example of
that comedian who people say,well, don't take him seriously
because he's a comedian, butthen sometimes he picks up
serious issues and gets it'shard.
Speaker 2 (27:15):
Yeah, the work he did for the 9-11 first responders
and stuff like that.
It was heart-wrenchinglistening to him talk to
Congress.
He was so good at taking thosestories from the community and
putting it out there.
Yeah, it's just at a time whenwe need voices to stand up and
say the truth.
I'm glad that he had GavinNewsom on there, Because Gavin
(27:36):
Newsom came out and said Get totransfer the mouthpiece from me
to a real political opponent.
Yeah, because he came out andsaid I worry about the 2028
elections.
And this is at a time where wesee generals getting called back
, military getting fired,Congress getting weakened.
Loyalty checks yeah, all theseloyalty checks.
Speaker 1 (27:55):
The circuit or the judges are getting thrown under
the bus for everything Reliefs,lawyers, prosecutors that work
for the administration.
If they won't go after somebodybecause it's just unjust,
they'll find somebody who willExactly.
Speaker 2 (28:06):
We see all of these authoritarian grabs for power,
all while trump hawksmerchandise for 2028 from the
yes, yeah, like, and gavinnewsom came out and said I'm
worried that we're not going tohave elections in 2028.
Yeah and like.
I think that's the highestlevel person I've heard say that
say the the quiet part out loud.
Speaker 1 (28:25):
Yeah, so I'll.
I'm gonna share a little uh inbetween donald trump's terms.
In office, I would haveconversations with people who,
um, were january 6 deniers, whobelieved that it was a peaceful
walk through the park.
That included, you know,shitting on people's desks and
beating cops and stuff likethat's what I do when I go to
the park everybody does what Ido and so I would have
(28:50):
conversations with these peopleand I would say listen, if we
want to throw out every singlething, because their argument
would be well, you don't likeDonald Trump because he's a
dirty person, not because he hasbad politics Right, his
policies are good for America.
Him as a person is bad foreverything.
But I, as a voter, that personcould tell me I can separate the
two and I can see Donald Trumpas a good politician and a bad
(29:11):
person, and I want America tosucceed.
So I'm going to vote for a goodpolitician and I just I heard
him and I heard the logic theywere trying to apply and I said
everybody could see my headshaking right now had not
(29:33):
happened, which is the closestexample of a straight up coup
that America has everexperienced, outside of civil
war and actual attempts tooverthrow the government Like
that.
You know how can you notbelieve that?
And they say, well, what's good?
You know, I can, I can separatethis good thing from this bad
thing.
And I said, but doesn't thatmake you concerned that if he
ever gets back in office hewon't leave?
Yeah, from this bad thing.
And I said, but doesn't thatmake you concerned that if he
ever gets back in office hewon't leave?
(29:53):
That's what he already tried todo.
It's not a guess, it's not ahyperbolic fantasy.
It happened.
And they say, no, it didn't,that didn't happen.
And he loves the Constitution,he is a die-hard federalist and
he would never try to run foranother office.
He would never try to do.
(30:14):
You know, he knows the rulesand he's going to play by the
rules no, no they say that youknow, and I'm like he doesn't
know what the word federalist is.
Speaker 2 (30:21):
We have no any of the rules.
Speaker 1 (30:22):
We have departed reality when they're like no,
he's the most constitutional,loving president that we've ever
had and I I'm like he can'tpronounce the word.
That's what you want.
That's the type of cipher thathe fills in for you.
You want, you know you want themost constitution loving person
ever, so that's what he is foryou.
You want the most, uh, whitenationalist president that there
ever was.
Maybe that's what he is for you, right?
(30:44):
You want the person who saysimmigrants are terrible, even if
it's not about racism.
That's what he is for you,right?
And so it depends on who you'retalking to.
He's the champion superman iseverything to everybody, right?
And in their mind, if he'ssuperman, he's everything to
everybody.
Speaker 2 (31:00):
So, um, here's my yeah, go ahead so, even with the
policy stuff, though, that thefarmers now are are saying you
know, oh, you know, we saw thesame thing back in 2017 that
we're seeing now.
Yeah, the last time you votedfor this guy, and there's just a
cognitive dissonance therewhere they're just not putting
the real consequences of theirvote.
Speaker 1 (31:19):
Yeah, like the bad things that happen to our
economy and to our daily livesSomehow exist in a vacuum
outside of their vote for thisperson, like their life only
sucks when there's a Democrat inand, and yeah, you're right,
that same person that would tellme he, he is, uh, you know,
he's the best president onpolicy would also say would be
they're.
(31:39):
They're the same people thatare the whatabouters, right,
well, what about what aboutbiden?
What about this?
What about that?
What about obama?
What about obamacare?
And I was like whoa, we're noteven having a conversation about
that.
Speaker 2 (31:50):
You know what I'm saying.
Speaker 1 (31:51):
I'm talking about whether Donald Trump would
willingly leave office, and healready did not willingly leave,
he had to unwillingly leaveoffice.
Speaker 2 (31:59):
And now Lindsey Graham's come out and said that
he would support a third termand like just disgusting.
Speaker 1 (32:05):
So a couple of weeks ago I said I have a conspiracy
about and I had this conspiracybefore this second term.
I said if Donald Trump evergets back into office, he won't
leave.
And you got to figure out whatgrand scheme could he hatch or
execute to make that a reality.
Right, and most um governments,when they have fallen to
(32:34):
someone who becomes a multi-termpresident or dictator or
autocrat, the playbook is clearand it always involves a
national crisis, some kind ofwar, some kind of um.
It's can be fabricated by them,right, but it's.
I have to do this drasticmeasure, yeah, to save the
country, to save the culture, tosave the economy, to save your
kids.
Yeah, and if you don't allow meto overstep this boundary,
(32:56):
we're all going to die.
Speaker 2 (32:58):
Yeah, man, trump will absolutely pick that fiddle you
know, like he plays that noteright yeah, and what's funny is
folks know about that becausethey use that same argument
against Zelensky.
You know what?
Speaker 1 (33:11):
I mean.
Speaker 2 (33:12):
So they recognize all these things and like the steps
towards authoritarianism, butthey don't ever reflect it back
towards themselves.
Speaker 1 (33:18):
Yeah, very true, which is kind of crazy.
And so my conspiracy that Ididn't divulge last time was I
have always thought that theRussia situation has been Donald
Trump's ace in the hole.
Even in his first term therewasn't a war going on, direct
fights with Ukraine, but therewas that always bubbling,
(33:38):
simmering problem with Russiaand the Eastern Front of Europe
and NATO and who can and can'tjoin NATO.
And Trump's always been a bigyou know NATO, you suck right,
russia, you're cool.
But he knows that America andthe American people are really
on the side of NATO, and so Ifeel like he has played the
Ukraine conflict exactly the wayhe wanted to throughout this
(34:02):
term, this second term, so thatthere can be this stagnating war
, that he can pull the pin outof the grenade when he thinks
it's politically expedient.
Speaker 2 (34:13):
It's interesting.
Speaker 1 (34:15):
I mean and so I feel like the Russia thing has always
been a part of his plan that ifWorld War III, or if the US
versus Russia and without othercountries involved, if we're
really executing the end of theCold War now, I can't leave
office.
While we do that Right, I haveto take up the mantle of Reagan,
which you all, I can't leaveoffice while we do that right, I
have to take up the mantle ofReagan, which you all hired me
to be as Reagan 2.0, and I haveto seal the deal.
(34:36):
It's coming.
It's coming right Shooting warwith Russia to save his third
term or create an emergencywhere he stays in office.
It's coming.
Speaker 2 (34:46):
So I think it was just yesterday.
I heard him talking abouttelling Ukraine that they need
to go in and take they can taketheir country, take all their
country back a little bit more.
Speaker 1 (34:55):
go further if you want to, yeah, and he also told
NATO country start attacking theRussian air aggression.
Yeah, If they come close toyour border, don't let them
cross it.
Shoot at them.
Yeah.
And we got your back yeah,estonia, shoot at him right.
Uh, what are all those northernbaltic states?
Take shots, go for it.
We got your back, it's.
He's got a dragon in the canand he's waiting.
(35:17):
He can pop that can open at anytime and distract the everybody
exactly, and stay in office.
Speaker 2 (35:22):
Yeah, that's always been part of the plan right,
always well, and so I was alwaysthinking he was just kind of.
That's why he was poking atvenezuela down down there.
But Venezuela probably wouldn'tbe a big enough war to.
Speaker 1 (35:31):
No it's gotta be big world powers, to make it seem
like literally everything is atcost Right.
Speaker 2 (35:37):
Yeah Well, that's a terrifying thought.
And that's another great way towrap up this episode.
Yeah, yeah.
Speaker 1 (35:45):
And for our, you know .
Hey, this gives you some reasontoo, if you're a listener, to
stay tuned, because you neverknow, right, when you get to
come back and hear, like therest of the story, right.
So if you listened a coupleweeks ago, you go, man, I really
want to hear what thatconspiracy theory is.
Speaker 2 (35:58):
Yeah, we're appealing this onion.
Thanks for tuning back in.
Speaker 1 (36:04):
Yeah, we're appealing this onion together.
Well, I want to hear it me,because Adam told me that he's
more thinks in the conspiracycircles and reads about it more
than I do, oh geez.
So I want to hear from you nexttime on if you ever had any
ideas around what would be theway to pull off the coup or to
shift the balance and change.
Speaker 2 (36:20):
Oh God, no, there's no way I'm recording that.
No, all right.
Speaker 1 (36:25):
Well, again, the SEC can't come for us, right.
Speaker 2 (36:30):
We'll have that conversation.
The SEC can't come for us right.
We'll have the conversationlike in the mountains, somewhere
where nobody can listen.
Speaker 1 (36:33):
Our parent corporation is going to take us
off the air.
Speaker 2 (36:35):
Yeah, there you go.
Speaker 1 (36:37):
Fair Well I'll air out my dirty laundry.
So, yeah, thanks everybody forlistening this week and we hope
you enjoyed the episode andwe'll catch you all again next
week on Left Face All right Takecare.
Popular Podcasts
CrimeLess: Hillbilly Heist
It’s 1996 in rural North Carolina, and an oddball crew makes history when they pull off America’s third largest cash heist. But it’s all downhill from there. Join host Johnny Knoxville as he unspools a wild and woolly tale about a group of regular ‘ol folks who risked it all for a chance at a better life. CrimeLess: Hillbilly Heist answers the question: what would you do with 17.3 million dollars? The answer includes diamond rings, mansions, velvet Elvis paintings, plus a run for the border, murder-for-hire-plots, and FBI busts.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
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.