April 9, 2025 • 43 mins
The Supreme Court just handed Trump a victory, but it was interesting to see who sided with the minority. Jesse Kelly dissects this most recent decision. This comes as foreign policy talk heats up, particularly with China and Iran. Jesse is joined by both Gordon Chang and Lee Smith to discuss. Plus, JD Vance celebrates an important milestone at the White House.
I'm Right with Jesse Kelly on The First TV | 4-8-25
Choq: Visit https://Choq.com/JesseTV for a 17.76% discount on your CHOQ subscription for life
Ramp: Get $250 when you join Ramp. Go to https://ramp.com/JESSE.
Pure Talk: Go to https://www.puretalk.com/JESSE to make the switch
Follow The Jesse Kelly Show on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@TheJesseKellyShow
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:02):
We're going to talk about the Supreme Court. Why do
the communists use violence? We have Brandon Gill here, what's
going on with China? All that more coming up on
im right. Okay, let's have a discussion, shall we about
(00:25):
communists in their use of violence and threats of violence?
Why is that always how it goes? Okay, but you
know what, put that in your back pocket for a moment.
Let's talk about something good because it's going to lead
us there. First of all, Supreme Court finally stepped in.
They stepped in and they said, hey, uh, Justice Boseburg,
(00:45):
this commune justice in DC, can't you can't just step
in and rule the United States of America. Sorry, you're
being removed from this. We're going to deport people from Trent, Okay.
So we had to jump through a thousand hoops in
order to get the Supreme Court to finally put this
judge in his place. And the Supreme Court ruled, and
(01:07):
it should be noted Senator Eric Schmidt says he was tipped.
Speaker 2 (01:10):
Off Judge Bosberg over the weekend. It came out he's
not the emergency judge in DC. He inserted himself in
that role. He was on vacation. The case was filed
at two thirty in the morning. Somehow he ended up
with that case. He wasn't the emergency judge on duty,
so I think this requires a further investigation and legislation.
(01:32):
He's the chief judge and he inserted himself. That doesn't happen.
The emergency judges one hundred percent of the time get
those cases. So he was He could have been tipped
off that this was going to be filed, and while
on vacation he took the case. So again, this speaks
to I think the very aggressive, unusual and unprecedented measures
(01:52):
that these activist judges are taking to insert themselves. Ultimately,
they're not going to be right. The Supreme Court's going
to slap them down.
Speaker 1 (02:00):
Okay, look, I'll be honest with you, just you and
me talking. I'm in an absolutely terrible, terrible mood today,
so I am not going to go off on what
it probably means for the country that it took like
three months and a bunch of hoops to jump through
in order to justify legally deporting a bunch of barbarians
(02:22):
the Biden administration brought in. I'm not even going to
go there, right now I'm going to focus on the
Supreme Court because the vote today was interesting. You see,
it was five to four, and guess who voted against
us again and me, Cony Barrett. So just let's pause
on this and let's dwell on this for a moment.
A communist pose bird, he wears the judge's robes. He
(02:46):
has very obviously, it's obvious to anybody paying attention at all.
He has decided he's going to be the vanguard protecting
the communist revolution from President Donald Trump. And so every
chance he's gotten, he is assumed the mantle of leadership
of the United States of America and stopped the lawful
things Donald Trump was doing. Anybody who's a reasonable actor
(03:11):
would look at this and say this is it's got
to be criminal. This is way over the top, this
can't be done. And yet Amy Coney Barrett sided against us. Why? Okay, well,
let's talk about the why shall we? Amy Cony Barrett.
I don't know her personally, but I can't help but
(03:32):
think back to something she said during the confirmation hearing.
Remember when she said this about her family.
Speaker 3 (03:41):
As I said, when I was nominated to serve as
a justice, I'm used to being in a group of nine.
My family. Nothing is more important to me, and I'm
very proud to have them behind me. The confirmation process
and the work of serving on the Court, if confirmed,
requires sacrifice, particularly from my family. I chose to accept
(04:04):
the nomination because I believe deeply in the role of
law and the place of the Supreme Court in our nation.
Speaker 1 (04:14):
Right, you probably don't have any problem with what she
just said, and now they do. I She's a wife,
she's a mother, nothing more important than my family. Frankly,
I'd be disappointed if she didn't feel that way. She
feels that way. But this brings me back to a
topic we opened up the segment with the communists and
(04:35):
his love of violence, his unending love of violence. We
can look back on quote after quote after quote after
quote of communist leaders saying violence is necessary. They've never
once called for it to stop. In fact, they've repeatedly
encouraged their followers whatever country it takes holden to commit
(04:57):
acts of violence.
Speaker 4 (04:58):
Revolution without and and.
Speaker 1 (05:00):
Now talking about all political power comes from the barrel
of a gun. Violence, violence, violence. This is programmed into them.
It's programmed into America's communists. I saw a poll this
morning that said fifty five percent of people on the
left think it's not a big deal if Donald Trump
gets assassinated. Assaults, violence, murder, vandalism. Why what is it
(05:25):
about communists that this just becomes second nature to them.
You've probably seen this, maybe you've even experienced this in
your life. Maybe you've been online or something like that
and you saw a Democrat, a leftist say something along
the lines of somebody should post his address, post his address.
What's that? Post his address, post her address. It's a
(05:49):
call for violence. You don't have to men's words. That's
what that is. It's a threat. It's a very obvious threat.
Somebody put up where this guy lives so we can
go threaten him. Maybe even why is this second nature
to them? Because it's attactic, you see, it's planned. It's
why representatives like Jaya Powell speak like this.
Speaker 5 (06:13):
We might call this getting strike ready. I think of
it as getting us strike ready or street ready. And
part of that is understanding our own strength, and as
we develop that strength, being able to assess our risk tolerance,
because we know that risk tolerance increases as the severity
of the situation increases, and as our own understanding of
(06:34):
what's happening increases. So overall, the more we understand what's effective,
what the risks are, and who's ready to participate, the
more impact we can have.
Speaker 1 (06:46):
The strike ready portion of that's getting all the publicity.
You heard what you just said. That was a very
very academic, very proper way to say. Our strength is
in the mob of rabid street animals. We have at
our disposal, willingness to be arrested, to be punished by
the law.
Speaker 4 (07:02):
That will determine what our strength is.
Speaker 1 (07:05):
They don't have the office of the Presidency, they don't
have the Senate, they have they don't have the House,
but they do have a willingness to commit acts of violence,
and their leaders encourage them.
Speaker 4 (07:15):
To do so. People like this savage.
Speaker 1 (07:19):
My name is Gresa.
Speaker 4 (07:21):
I am an immigrant.
Speaker 6 (07:23):
I am a weird, not a shame.
Speaker 1 (07:32):
Could you even imagine if that animal came at you
outside of your weight class? Anyway, back to Amy Cony
Barrt Back to the communists. Why are they so in
love with violence? Why do they encourage it? Why do
they commit violent acts wherever they can get away with it?
Because of people like Amy Coney Barry. Because it works
(07:55):
on her. Here's what I believe. I believe Amy Coney
Barrt is afraid. I believe she is a mother, a
wife with a family she adores, and that's good. That's
good for I want to be clear about that. That
is good. But the communist doesn't see that. In things
to himself, well, that's really good. The communist sees that,
and he sees an opportunity. So when Chuck Schumer is
(08:18):
out there giving speeches threatening justices with reaping the whirlwind,
when an assassin flies from California with a gun ready
to blow Brett Kavanaugh's head off, you may be mortified.
I may be mortified, But American Democrats sit back and
love it because they understand the threat of violence equals
political power for them. Why does the Supreme Court keep
(08:42):
getting wishy washy? Why do people like Amy Cony Beard
seem not on our side? Because Amy Coney Bart is afraid.
She has been made to be afraid, as any parent
is when they look at their children and think about
all the bad things that will happen to them. What
if Amy Cony barrd votes against the Communists?
Speaker 4 (09:05):
What might they do? Well?
Speaker 1 (09:06):
The Communists have said and shown repeated over and over
and over again. They will kill, it will hurt you.
It's why it was such an incredibly big deal. Do
you remember, Do you remember when the protests started happening
in front of the Supreme Court justices homes. That's platinly
against the law. By the way, it's against federal law.
You're not allowed to intimidate federal the Supreme Court in
(09:29):
order to make rules. It's against It's a federal law.
For a reason. They don't want the communists to be
allowed to do that. So why did the Biden administration.
Speaker 4 (09:37):
Allow that to happen.
Speaker 1 (09:38):
Why Because they knew full well that the threat of violence,
feeling physically afraid for yourself, your husband, your wife, your children,
your sister, your brother, your parents.
Speaker 4 (09:52):
Is a benefit to them.
Speaker 1 (09:54):
It is something they can always keep in their back
pocket and pull out when necessary. Now, they don't have
any power, including the Supreme Court.
Speaker 4 (10:03):
But the power they do have, as you just heard
from Jaya Powell.
Speaker 1 (10:07):
Is the willingness to commit acts of violence on behalf
of the revolution. And for weaklings like Amy Cony Barrett,
the pressure is simply too much. So she has to
sit at home and night. She knows what the right
thing to do is. She has to sit at home
at night when these ridiculous cases are laid on her desk,
and she's not sitting there thinking about what is legal,
what is lawful, what is constitutional. She's sitting there picturing
(10:29):
her children and saying to herself, what might happen to
them if I go a sprill. That's the kind of
country we have now. All that may have made you uncomfortable,
but I am right. We have a huge show for
you tonight, a gigantic show. Congressman Brandon gil has been
(10:49):
all over this stuff. We'll talk to him, and just
a moment before we get to him, you need to
remain unafraid. Chock chock will get a stack in your body.
Natural herbal supplements from chop a male vitality stack, a
female vitality stack. You want to feel good, prepped, ready
to go, strong and unafraid. You want to feel full
(11:13):
of energy, clarity of the mind. Try some natural herbal supplements.
Stop sticking needles in your arms, stop ignoring the fact
that you're out of energy at three in the afternoon,
and get a chalk subscription chalk dot com slash jessetv
gets you a seventeen point seven six percent discount, So
go try it.
Speaker 4 (11:34):
We'll be back, Okay.
Speaker 1 (11:42):
So I wanted to touch on something that I teased
it a little bit in the opening, but I just
wanted to talk about something really quickly here when it
comes to deportations and things like that, and I say
something repeatedly, and I know you hate it when I
say it, but it's one hundred percent true if your interest,
and I assume it is the same as mine. That's
(12:03):
saving the country, right, saving and preserving a wonderful country
for our children and their children and their children after them,
for generations I will never meet. I want the same
country that I've enjoyed. I'm assuming you probably agree with
me on that. Right. If we want to save the
country long term, we must have a different Democrat party.
(12:23):
The Democrat Party must change, and that's hard for us
to talk about, and except because we don't have any
control over that. I'm not a Democrat and I never
will be. Unless you're one of the commedist who hate watches,
You're not a Democrat. You never will be.
Speaker 4 (12:36):
But there's a great example of this.
Speaker 1 (12:39):
Jasmine Crockett's out there talking about illegals.
Speaker 4 (12:41):
Here's what she said.
Speaker 6 (12:43):
So I had to go around the country and educate
people about what immigrants do for this country or the
fact that we are a country of immigrants.
Speaker 1 (12:51):
Right.
Speaker 6 (12:53):
The fact is, ain't none of y'all trying to go
in farm right now? Ok, raise your hands, you not?
Speaker 1 (13:08):
You not?
Speaker 6 (13:10):
We done picking cotton?
Speaker 1 (13:14):
We are.
Speaker 5 (13:14):
You can't pay us enough to find a plantation.
Speaker 4 (13:21):
We done picking cotton.
Speaker 1 (13:24):
She represents the Democrat Party today quite well. Keep all
the illegals here. And I mentioned in the opening, we
are what is the day today, April eighth, yep April eighth,
April eighth, and we are still having to jump through
this hoop and that hoop, and this hoop and that hoop.
And we're waiting on this ruling from the Supreme Court
(13:44):
and that rule. Why are we having to jump through
so many hoops? Because after spending four years bringing as
many rapists and murderers into your country as humanly possible,
every single Democrat, from judges to media people to elected people,
are trying to keep them here. It really doesn't matter
how great Trump is or how great the Senate is
(14:05):
or the House is or whatever. You can't survive long
term as a country. Sharing a country with people like this,
we can't deport them fast enough. Goodness says, we have
to bank on the Supreme Court stepping in and ruling
to allow us to deport the Venezuelan prison gang Joe
Biden flew into the country. Think about that for a moment.
(14:29):
We have twenty million people to deport, and the worst,
absolute worst, the tiniest little sliver of that we are
having to jump through endless hoops and contort ourselves to
get them out.
Speaker 4 (14:42):
We haven't even started with the other people.
Speaker 1 (14:45):
Cannot save a country unless Democrats change. It's what weighs
so heavy on my arm because I don't control them.
You don't control them. We can't fix it. You cannot
share a home with somebody trying to burn it down.
Speaker 4 (15:01):
It doesn't work.
Speaker 1 (15:02):
You may stop him once, twice, You may stop him
for a month, maybe a year. Eventually your home's going
to go up in flames. He can't share a country
with people like that. A reform Democrat party is a muster.
We can't save the place there. It's sad to share
that with you. I know we were supposed to have
Congressman Brendan Gill on the show. He flaked on us
(15:23):
right before. So I just felt like we should do
a little open Borders interview or open borders. That'll ramp.
So how about that? All right, let's talk about something else.
Let's talk about expense reports. Shall we?
Speaker 4 (15:37):
Sucks, doesn't it? You have to do your expenses.
Speaker 1 (15:40):
It's awful. Ramp knows that. Ramp came up with a
credit card. You see the Ramp corporate card. How much money?
How much time do you spend on expenses? Well, do
you have the receipt? I'm not really what category.
Speaker 4 (15:53):
Is this one's stop living like that.
Speaker 1 (15:57):
Ramp dot com slash jesse is where you go and
you get a Ramp corporate card. It dolls all that
for you. Realize that it does all that for you.
You don't have to spend the time, you don't have
to spend the money. You don't have to We did
a board meeting. No more of that ramp dot com
slash jesse. We'll be back with China.
Speaker 7 (16:26):
As you know, against my statement, they put a thirty
four percent tariff on above what their ridiculous tariffs were already.
We're putting a fifty percent tariff on above the tariffs
that we put on. We lose hundreds of billions of
dollars a year on trey to China. It's just not
(16:47):
gonna happen. And hopefully we'll get along with China. If
we do, that's greater. If we don't, that's okay, too right.
Speaker 1 (16:54):
It's that serious about it. He's been serious about China
for a long time. Let's talk to Gordon about it.
Gordon Chang knows more about China than anybody I know.
Author of a book it should probably be reading called
Plan Read.
Speaker 4 (17:06):
Okay, Gordon.
Speaker 1 (17:07):
Donald Trump has been hot on the Chinese issue for
a long time, and he's been speaking lately a lot
about how they're ripping us off. Can you give us
more depth on that? What does that mean? How are
they ripping us off? What are they doing?
Speaker 8 (17:21):
They're running persistent merchandise trade surpluses against the US. So,
for instance, last year, the merchandise trade surplus that China
had was two hundred and ninety five point four billion dollars.
That was up something like five point eight percent from
twenty twenty three. And this is the result of predatory
trade practices but also criminal acts. So China's been stealing
(17:45):
hundreds of billions of dollars of US intellectual property each year,
perhaps as much as half trillion dollars annually. And so, yes,
President Trump is right, they've been ripping us off.
Speaker 1 (17:58):
Can you elaborate a little bit more on stealing intellectual
property because people don't understand how giganic this issue is
and how pervasive China is when it comes to it.
It's like a national pastime over there. Yes.
Speaker 8 (18:13):
Just to give you an example, Deep Seek, which is
the Chinese open Ai platform. They trained their large language
model by chat GPT four and by doing so, they
violated open AIS terms of service. That's a US company,
and this has implications because deep Seek looks like a
(18:37):
Chinese Chinese government lab project, even though it's supposed to
be a private company. The claims that they made for
deep Seek, which were intended to injure the United States,
those claims appear to be false. But what they're trying
to do is to destroy American business and they do
it very well, and they take intellectual property in so
(18:58):
many different ways. But this is pervasive and it's going
on over the course of decades.
Speaker 1 (19:05):
Okay, Gordon, what's China's financial situation like and I asked,
because it's clear, at least from their rhetoric over there,
that they're not going to back off on this little
trade war dust up thing. They're going to engage. But
their economy isn't exactly going gangbusters either, is it.
Speaker 8 (19:23):
No, they reported five point zero percent growth for twenty
twenty four. That was an obvious exaggeration. It was probably
about one or one and a half percent. There's been
an obvious deterioration between then and now, so China's probably
around zero. But even if China were growing at five zero,
(19:43):
it would not be growing fast enough to pay back
all the debt that China's accumulated, especially since two thousand
and eight. And if you want to put this in
simple terms, I think that China's experiencing its two thousand
and eight now. The reason why this is so critical
for China is because C. Jimping has turned his back
on consumption as the fundamental basis of the Chinese economy,
(20:05):
which means his only way out of a serious situation
is to export more. And President Trump, with his tariffs
that have gone into effect today and before now, has
on more than one hundred percent tariff rate on Chinese goods.
That means shutting off the US market for many, if
not most, of China's products.
Speaker 1 (20:27):
Okay, Gordon, could you elaborate what that means for the
American consumer? There are people understandably nervous right now, having
a hard time making ends meet and thinking about the
prospect of everything in their life getting more expensive.
Speaker 8 (20:40):
Yeah, there's certainly it's going to get a little bit
more expensive, but not to the extent that people think.
Speaker 7 (20:47):
So.
Speaker 8 (20:47):
For instance, in twenty eighteen, when Trump put his first
round of elevated China tariffs in place, China picked up
somewhere between seventy five to eighty one percent of the
cost of those tariffs to various means through weakening currency,
through increased subsidies, So American consumers didn't feel that. Now
this time, China has more incentive to pay for Trump's tariffs,
(21:11):
and they're starting to do that again by allowing the
remn B to go to lower levels, but also by
increased subsidies to exporters to the US. Ultimately, you know,
at one hundred and four or one hundred and fifteen
percent tariff level, American consumers will feel some of it.
But we got to remember that tariffs at those levels
redirect trade to other countries where the tariff rates aren't
(21:34):
so high. So I don't think the American consumer is
going to notice it, and in any event, it's not
going to be substantial.
Speaker 1 (21:42):
Okay, What other countries? And this is a completely loaded question,
because China controls a lot of other countries.
Speaker 8 (21:51):
What other countries want?
Speaker 1 (21:54):
What other countries? Where's the trade going to go? Meaning
is they going to drive it into a country? Yeah?
Speaker 8 (22:00):
Yeah, basically everywhere. So you're talking Bangladesh, Vietnam, maybe India, Mexico,
a lot of other different places, Central America, especially if
we trade, if we amend our trade agreement with the region.
These are places where there's low cost and manufacturing and
(22:23):
countries that are not nearly as hostile to the US
as China is. So if you were to go let's
say fifteen years ago, and you were to go to
a Walmart and look at where their apparel was made,
it was almost all China. If you went there like
about five to seven, maybe even ten years ago, it
was almost not at all China. And we're going to
(22:46):
see the same thing for a lot of other products
as these tariffs are put in place. Which encourage countries
to move their supply chains to different locations.
Speaker 1 (22:58):
Okay, so countries like Vietnam. Vietnam is a communist country,
China is a communist country. Vietnam has shown a willingness
already to work with us, at least they've talked about that.
But I would assume China is going to have some
say so in that.
Speaker 8 (23:14):
Well, China will have some say so because a lot
of the new factories in Vietnam are actually Chinese owned.
But you know, Vietnam, although it is a communist country,
is quite friendly to the United States, and so Vietnam
has its own issues with China which are in many
(23:36):
ways more serious than ours. So and in fact, Vietnam
is a friend of the United States because we both
have a common enemy. And when we all look at it,
these other places are going to be much better for us,
especially for countries that are close to us. So if
we're talking about countries in our region, this is a
(23:57):
win for the United States from many different perspectives, because
not only do we get factories out of our enemy China,
but we also put them in places where our supply
chains are much shorter. And by the way, for people
who are worried about climate change. That's a really good
thing to have a factory in Mexico rather than on
the other side of the Pacific.
Speaker 1 (24:18):
Yeah, I'm not worried about climate change at all.
Speaker 7 (24:20):
Though.
Speaker 1 (24:20):
All right, let's talk about militaries. Trump said this.
Speaker 7 (24:25):
China is a massive surplus that they take and they
spend on their military.
Speaker 4 (24:29):
Well, we don't want that.
Speaker 7 (24:31):
I don't want them to take five hundred six hundred
billion dollars a year and spend it on their military.
Speaker 1 (24:39):
Gordon. How strong is China's military? Not where it's going,
but where is it? I know they put a lot
of attack subs in the water. I know they're building
up in navy. I know they're supposedly building up in
amphibious for US. Everyone thinks that's about Taiwan. I'm sure
it probably is. But where are they compared to US?
Speaker 8 (24:56):
China's military, even though for instance, navy is larger, and
despite all the real problems in the American Navy and
Air Force, their military is not nearly as capable as ours.
But remember, if it's a war in Taiwan or the
Philippines or Japan, they're a lot closer, and their supply
chains are a lot supply lines are a lot shorter
(25:18):
than ours. The problem that with the Chinese military two
of them. First of all, the Chinese military right now
is fighting with itself. We see these purges and counter purges,
and it appears that the enemies of Sigimping are purging
Sie Jimping's loyalists at the top of the Chinese military,
which means that that military is a mess. But even
(25:40):
in the best of times when they're not trying to
kill each other, China's got a communist military, which means
it's got two separate reporting lines, one political, one military,
and the political one is more important, and that's no
way to run a war. China will do very well
well in the first week of war because everything's been
played out, nobody has any discretion. It all goes according
(26:03):
to plan more or less. But the problem for China
is the second week of war when they are attacked,
because that type of military is not flexible and cannot
make the decisions that are necessary to react to an attack.
Speaker 1 (26:20):
Gordon, I know it's kind of a nerdy wonky military detail,
but it matters. What do we know about their officer corps.
Are they capable sharp. You make it sound like it looked.
Sounds like a standard communist army where everyone's too afraid
to put peanut butter on a cracker, so no one
can make a decision.
Speaker 4 (26:40):
What are they.
Speaker 8 (26:42):
Well, they've been rehearsing a lot, as we've seen with these,
for instance, exercises off Taiwan, which look like rehearsals for war.
So they're very good at low level provocations. But I
don't think that they are ready right now to launch
hostilities with an invasion of the main island Taiwan. And
there are a number of reasons for that. First of all,
(27:03):
their officer corps at the top is not unified. But
there's another reason, and that is if Siegimping were to
launch a major operation, he'd have to give some general
or admiral almost complete control over the Chinese military, which
makes that flag officer the most powerful person in China.
(27:25):
Even in the best of times. Siegimping is not willing
to do that, and he's certainly not willing to do
it now where the large portions of the military are
opposed to him. So it's got a lot of tanks,
it's got a lot of ships, a lot of planes,
it's got some weapons that we don't have, like Harperson
and cruise missiles. But the point is that the Officer
(27:48):
Corps I don't think is ready to go to war.
Remember these guys have not gone to war since nineteen
seventy nine. And in nineteen seventy nine Vietnam, which we
just talked about, Vietnam kicked China's first string military and
humiliated it with Vietnam's third string. That shows you that
(28:09):
China is not really that good.
Speaker 4 (28:13):
Oh well, that's inspiring. Are they going to take Taiwan?
Speaker 8 (28:21):
I don't think that they're going to launch an invasion
within one of the main island of Taiwan, But that
doesn't mean the Chinese military won't be fighting in Taiwan.
And the reason is that I think that there could
very well be a low level provocation in places such
as the South China. See that spiral out of control.
(28:41):
I don't think Cjon pain can control escalation. And once
a war starts someplace, and it can be any place,
it will spread throughout the entire region because America and
its friends will all gang up, and China will then
bring in Russia and North Korea. You are going to
have regionwide war if it starts someplace. Remember C Jmping
(29:05):
has configured his political system so that only the most
belligerent answers are considered acceptable, which means they can't be
able to deal with an incident. So that's the reason
why I think it's a small provocation that spirals into
a major war, not C Jmping waking up someday and
saying I'm invading Japan.
Speaker 4 (29:28):
Gordon, we appreciate your wisdom as always.
Speaker 1 (29:30):
Thank you, sir.
Speaker 4 (29:32):
All right, speaking of.
Speaker 1 (29:36):
One event leading to another, Are we going to invade Iran?
I don't think so. Are we going to bomb I
don't know. Let's talk to Lee Smith about that next.
Before we talk to Lee Smith, let me talk to
you about peer talk. We need to stop funding the
people who hate us, and we need to stop assuming
(29:59):
that that culture war has been one, because it has
not been one, not by a long shot. You see,
we have to stop funding people who hate us. And
Verizon hate your guts AT and T hates you. TEAMO
will hate you. Pure Talk loves you. Pure Talk is
the patriotic cell phone company. Their CEO did two tours
in Vietnam. They're so pro America. They hire Americans. When
(30:22):
you speak to them at pure Talk, they speak English.
It's glorious. Same network too, you don't sacrifice service. It's
easy to switch Puretalk dot com, slash Jesse TV. We'll
be back.
Speaker 9 (30:44):
We're having direct talks with Iran. Doing a deal would
be preferable to doing the obvious. And the obvious is
not something that I want to be involved with, or
frankly that is your wants to be involved with if
they can avoid it. So we're going to see it.
We avoid it, but it's getting to be very dangerous territory.
(31:05):
And hopefully those talks will be successful, and I think
it would be intern's best interest if they are successful.
We hope, we hope that's going to happen.
Speaker 1 (31:16):
Well, it doesn't exactly take a member of MENSA to
read between the lines on that. Joining me now, he
probably is part of MENSA. Lee Smith, my friend, author,
wonderful writer. Okay, Lee apparently of MENA.
Speaker 10 (31:30):
But but but thank you, Okay, a member of anything
no one? No one wants to be in their clubs,
definitely not ments.
Speaker 1 (31:41):
Well, what's going on with Iran. Let's set the stage
for me. What's happening here.
Speaker 10 (31:46):
Well, I think the President has made it pretty clear
that that Iron's not gonna have a bomb, and he
says that, you know, he says that he'd much prefer
that Iran abandoned its nuclear project through negotiations. But they're
not going to have a bomb one way or another.
And he's given them pretty clear options. Either Iran is
(32:08):
going to wind up back in the Stone Age he's
going to bomb them so much, or they're going to
give it up through negotiations. But I do not believe.
I think again, Trump has been very clear. I don't
think we're going to see fake negotiations or a fake
deal like Barack Obama's fake nuclear deal and twenty fifteen.
I don't think we're going to say anything like that.
(32:29):
So he's been very clear, right, not just about Iran
but North Korea. Nuclear weapons are bad, nuclear weapons are
really dangerous. We don't want this. What did he say
when Biden warned the Israelis not to retaliate after a
missile strike. You know, when Biden said, yeah, don't hit
their nuclear facilities, Trump was perplexed. He said, don't hit
(32:51):
their new facilities. That's exactly what you want to go after, right,
so Trump is the president, has been extremely straightforward. There
are two options going forward for Iran, whether they give
up the program through negotiations or they lose it through
something else.
Speaker 1 (33:09):
Okay, before we get to how a war like that
would shake out, can you help me understand as best
you can lead Iran's perspective on this on why they
wouldn't just make a deal. Right, They're economically not in
great shape. They're forced to work with countries like Russia
which are not as reliable.
Speaker 4 (33:29):
You know, Trump, because he's Trump.
Speaker 1 (33:31):
Is going to sweeten the pot of this deal and
make it, will make it financially beneficial.
Speaker 4 (33:36):
Why not just do it?
Speaker 1 (33:39):
Well?
Speaker 10 (33:39):
Because they want the they want their nuclear weapons program.
I mean, this has been an Iranian project for decades.
So it's very important to them. Because the crucial thing
to understand here is we talk a lot about Israel,
we talk a lot about Saudi Arabia, and Iran's enmity
toward both of these powers, which happen to be US allies.
The big deal here since nineteen seventy nine is Iran's
(34:03):
project is to drive the United States out of the
Persian Gulf. That's the big deal, right, it's not about
Israel primarily, it's not about Saudi Arabia. It's about the
United States because the Persian Gulf is considered an American
leg right. The amount of energy that goes through that
goes through that vital waterway. Now I know that while
(34:24):
we're not exactly energy and dependent we are, we are
not tied down the way we were, say twenty years ago,
by Persian golf energy. Nonetheless, it's extremely important the President
recognizes this, and that's not only why he's close to
the close to the government of Israel, but also the
(34:47):
Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Remember this was his first his
first foreign trip in twenty seventeen, during his first term.
He realizes how important the Persian golf is to American prosperity,
and how important and keeping stability and that part of
the world is to American prosperity. So this is the
(35:07):
major issue for the United States. And the reason that
that nuclear weapons program is so important for Iran is
so that Iran has leverage to destabilize that part of
the world. Iran can make these threats and it's very
different Iranian terror groups whether they're in Lebanon, whether they're
in Gaza, whether in the West Bank, whether they're in Rock,
(35:29):
whether they're to the extent they still exist in Syria,
it's very different when they're operating under a nuclear umbrella.
So this is why the nuclear weapons program has been
so important for the Islamic Republic for many decades. Now
Donald Trump is saying, okay, En, it's not going to happen.
Nuclear weapons are bad all around, and they're especially bad
(35:51):
in the hands and bad guys like you. Just to
put it in and a little bit more context, I
think it's important remember that this was the classical American
position until Barack Obama. Right, not just about Iran. The
United States has historically been against nuclear proliferation, whether it
was with Israel, whether it was Taiwan, all these different powers,
(36:14):
allied powers that wanted to have a nuclear weapons program,
and the US was against it. It was Barack Obama
who said, well, let's make a deal with the Iranians
over their nuclear weapons program that effectively legalizes their nuclear
weapons program and puts it under the protection of an
international agreement backed by the United States of America. So
(36:36):
what Trump is doing here is not something radical. What
Trump is doing is restoring American policy and American non
proliferation policy to the way it's always been until Barack Obama.
Speaker 1 (36:50):
Lee, if these negotiations go poorly, and I mean, feel
free to shoot me down on this, it seems obvious
that they could easily go.
Speaker 4 (36:58):
Very, very poorly.
Speaker 1 (37:00):
What would be the goal of joint strikes against Iran?
Are we talking regime change? Because you'll have to forgive me,
I'm out on that. It never seems to work out.
Even though I hate the Ayah Tolas as much as
say anyone else, that never works for us.
Speaker 4 (37:13):
What would be the goal of it?
Speaker 10 (37:16):
Well, I mean, the goal is to eliminate the Iranian
the Iranian nuclear program, and these are in specific sites.
They have a pretty good idea where everything is. And look, Jesse,
I mean that this this ruling regime is is very weak.
And just because the regime falls doesn't mean that the
United States is responsible for picking up the pieces. So
(37:38):
what the Bush administration want George W. Bush wanted to
do an Iraq in Afghanistan is very different from the
fact that you know, brittle regimes fall and some of
the times US actions, US actions, though not intentionally, will
nonetheless bring them down. I mean, let's talk about the
tariff regime right now, right, I mean what the United
States and what Donald Trump wanted in it first term
(38:00):
and what Donald Trump wants now from the Chinese are
no more currency manipulation, right, no more theft of US
intellectual property, no more forced technology transfers from American companies
even at the trade deficit. Now, what are these? These
are vital for the survival of the Chinese Communist Party.
(38:22):
And if Trump says no, sorry, unless you're going to
do that, we don't have a deal, and we're going
to keep the tariffs on you, and we don't care
how much pain it puts on you. What happens if
that brittle regime? What happens if that brittle regime breaks?
And again the fact that they will not make a
deal over this. The Chinese didn't make a deal during
(38:44):
Trump's first term over this, what if they don't do
it over the second during the second term as well.
So there's a lot of brittle regimes around the world
that the United States deals with. And it's not as
if the United States has to be responsible for picking
up the pieces of the Chinese Communists. Already an adversarial
regime that has hounded Americans for the last half century plus.
Speaker 1 (39:09):
No doubt it's been gosh seventy years. Well, speaking of
hostile regimes, let's switch gears and go to Ukraine Russia.
We now have a story out Ryan Routh, the would
be Trump assassin Numero Dos. He was apparently out there
trying to buy rocket launchers. And look, Lee, I don't
want to run with internet rumors, but some very reliable
(39:31):
people were out there talking about how this guy was
able to get people papers as he was recruiting for
the Ukrainian military. At the same time, He's on a
golf course ready to blow Donald Trump's head off. Lee.
Speaker 4 (39:43):
This thing looks ugly.
Speaker 10 (39:46):
Well, I'm hopeful that the new that the new leadership
at the FBI are our you know, are our friends,
people that we admire and respect a tremendous amount. We
hope that the uh Cash Bettel Dan Bongino, director and
deputy director. We certainly hope that they get to the
(40:06):
bottom of this and find out what was going on.
And we still want to know exactly. We want some
more details. We have some more details. We want the
details on what happened at bilber Pennsylvania and why this
entire episode was buried almost immediately. We understand about ongoing investigations,
but you know, we'd still like to have some sort
of sense of what's going on here. And so this
(40:28):
is another story, the Ryan Routh story, something else we
need to know more about.
Speaker 1 (40:35):
Yeah, it would actually be nice to know some details
about the fact that the president was shot in the
head and someone all goes killed him on the golf course,
and we don't know Bubkiss at this point in time. Lee,
thank you, my friend, as always appreciated. Light the mood. Next,
(41:00):
all right, it is time to lighten the mood. And
let me just say really quickly before we get to
jd Vance and its mother, that I know a lot
of people struggle with addiction, addictions of various things. Addiction
is one of these things that plagues human beings. It
just does. And maybe you have struggled, maybe you are
(41:20):
struggling with it, whatever it is, drugs, alcohol, I don't know,
whatever it is.
Speaker 4 (41:24):
I'm not your priest. You don't have to tell me.
Speaker 1 (41:26):
But I just want to encourage you that you can
keep struggling and when eventually it feels insurmountable at times,
I know it does feels like you'll never get out
of it. You can get out of it. Jd Vance's
mother is actually a wonderful example this. Remember when he
said this at the RNC.
Speaker 11 (41:46):
And I'm proud to say that tonight my mom is here,
ten years clean and sober. I love you, Mama, And
you know, Mom, I was thinking, it'll be ten years
(42:11):
officially in January of twenty twenty five, and if President
Trump's okay with it, let's have the celebration in the
White House.
Speaker 1 (42:28):
Turns out President Trump was okay with it, and jd
Vance made good on the promise to his mother, celebrating
her and her ten years of sobriety at the White House.
Speaker 4 (42:40):
It's pretty cool.
Speaker 1 (42:42):
And let it serve as an inspiration to you. You
don't have to be the mother of the Vice president
to overcome. Just keep struggling even if you fail today.
If you're struggling, you're winning. You'll get there, all right,
Seitable
We're going to talk about the Supreme Court. Why do
the communists use violence? We have Brandon Gill here, what's
going on with China? All that more coming up on
im right. Okay, let's have a discussion, shall we about
(00:25):
communists in their use of violence and threats of violence?
Why is that always how it goes? Okay, but you
know what, put that in your back pocket for a moment.
Let's talk about something good because it's going to lead
us there. First of all, Supreme Court finally stepped in.
They stepped in and they said, hey, uh, Justice Boseburg,
(00:45):
this commune justice in DC, can't you can't just step
in and rule the United States of America. Sorry, you're
being removed from this. We're going to deport people from Trent, Okay.
So we had to jump through a thousand hoops in
order to get the Supreme Court to finally put this
judge in his place. And the Supreme Court ruled, and
(01:07):
it should be noted Senator Eric Schmidt says he was tipped.
Speaker 2 (01:10):
Off Judge Bosberg over the weekend. It came out he's
not the emergency judge in DC. He inserted himself in
that role. He was on vacation. The case was filed
at two thirty in the morning. Somehow he ended up
with that case. He wasn't the emergency judge on duty,
so I think this requires a further investigation and legislation.
(01:32):
He's the chief judge and he inserted himself. That doesn't happen.
The emergency judges one hundred percent of the time get
those cases. So he was He could have been tipped
off that this was going to be filed, and while
on vacation he took the case. So again, this speaks
to I think the very aggressive, unusual and unprecedented measures
(01:52):
that these activist judges are taking to insert themselves. Ultimately,
they're not going to be right. The Supreme Court's going
to slap them down.
Speaker 1 (02:00):
Okay, look, I'll be honest with you, just you and
me talking. I'm in an absolutely terrible, terrible mood today,
so I am not going to go off on what
it probably means for the country that it took like
three months and a bunch of hoops to jump through
in order to justify legally deporting a bunch of barbarians
(02:22):
the Biden administration brought in. I'm not even going to
go there, right now I'm going to focus on the
Supreme Court because the vote today was interesting. You see,
it was five to four, and guess who voted against
us again and me, Cony Barrett. So just let's pause
on this and let's dwell on this for a moment.
A communist pose bird, he wears the judge's robes. He
(02:46):
has very obviously, it's obvious to anybody paying attention at all.
He has decided he's going to be the vanguard protecting
the communist revolution from President Donald Trump. And so every
chance he's gotten, he is assumed the mantle of leadership
of the United States of America and stopped the lawful
things Donald Trump was doing. Anybody who's a reasonable actor
(03:11):
would look at this and say this is it's got
to be criminal. This is way over the top, this
can't be done. And yet Amy Coney Barrett sided against us. Why? Okay, well,
let's talk about the why shall we? Amy Cony Barrett.
I don't know her personally, but I can't help but
(03:32):
think back to something she said during the confirmation hearing.
Remember when she said this about her family.
Speaker 3 (03:41):
As I said, when I was nominated to serve as
a justice, I'm used to being in a group of nine.
My family. Nothing is more important to me, and I'm
very proud to have them behind me. The confirmation process
and the work of serving on the Court, if confirmed,
requires sacrifice, particularly from my family. I chose to accept
(04:04):
the nomination because I believe deeply in the role of
law and the place of the Supreme Court in our nation.
Speaker 1 (04:14):
Right, you probably don't have any problem with what she
just said, and now they do. I She's a wife,
she's a mother, nothing more important than my family. Frankly,
I'd be disappointed if she didn't feel that way. She
feels that way. But this brings me back to a
topic we opened up the segment with the communists and
(04:35):
his love of violence, his unending love of violence. We
can look back on quote after quote after quote after
quote of communist leaders saying violence is necessary. They've never
once called for it to stop. In fact, they've repeatedly
encouraged their followers whatever country it takes holden to commit
(04:57):
acts of violence.
Speaker 4 (04:58):
Revolution without and and.
Speaker 1 (05:00):
Now talking about all political power comes from the barrel
of a gun. Violence, violence, violence. This is programmed into them.
It's programmed into America's communists. I saw a poll this
morning that said fifty five percent of people on the
left think it's not a big deal if Donald Trump
gets assassinated. Assaults, violence, murder, vandalism. Why what is it
(05:25):
about communists that this just becomes second nature to them.
You've probably seen this, maybe you've even experienced this in
your life. Maybe you've been online or something like that
and you saw a Democrat, a leftist say something along
the lines of somebody should post his address, post his address.
What's that? Post his address, post her address. It's a
(05:49):
call for violence. You don't have to men's words. That's
what that is. It's a threat. It's a very obvious threat.
Somebody put up where this guy lives so we can
go threaten him. Maybe even why is this second nature
to them? Because it's attactic, you see, it's planned. It's
why representatives like Jaya Powell speak like this.
Speaker 5 (06:13):
We might call this getting strike ready. I think of
it as getting us strike ready or street ready. And
part of that is understanding our own strength, and as
we develop that strength, being able to assess our risk tolerance,
because we know that risk tolerance increases as the severity
of the situation increases, and as our own understanding of
(06:34):
what's happening increases. So overall, the more we understand what's effective,
what the risks are, and who's ready to participate, the
more impact we can have.
Speaker 1 (06:46):
The strike ready portion of that's getting all the publicity.
You heard what you just said. That was a very
very academic, very proper way to say. Our strength is
in the mob of rabid street animals. We have at
our disposal, willingness to be arrested, to be punished by
the law.
Speaker 4 (07:02):
That will determine what our strength is.
Speaker 1 (07:05):
They don't have the office of the Presidency, they don't
have the Senate, they have they don't have the House,
but they do have a willingness to commit acts of violence,
and their leaders encourage them.
Speaker 4 (07:15):
To do so. People like this savage.
Speaker 1 (07:19):
My name is Gresa.
Speaker 4 (07:21):
I am an immigrant.
Speaker 6 (07:23):
I am a weird, not a shame.
Speaker 1 (07:32):
Could you even imagine if that animal came at you
outside of your weight class? Anyway, back to Amy Cony
Barrt Back to the communists. Why are they so in
love with violence? Why do they encourage it? Why do
they commit violent acts wherever they can get away with it?
Because of people like Amy Coney Barry. Because it works
(07:55):
on her. Here's what I believe. I believe Amy Coney
Barrt is afraid. I believe she is a mother, a
wife with a family she adores, and that's good. That's
good for I want to be clear about that. That
is good. But the communist doesn't see that. In things
to himself, well, that's really good. The communist sees that,
and he sees an opportunity. So when Chuck Schumer is
(08:18):
out there giving speeches threatening justices with reaping the whirlwind,
when an assassin flies from California with a gun ready
to blow Brett Kavanaugh's head off, you may be mortified.
I may be mortified, But American Democrats sit back and
love it because they understand the threat of violence equals
political power for them. Why does the Supreme Court keep
(08:42):
getting wishy washy? Why do people like Amy Cony Beard
seem not on our side? Because Amy Coney Bart is afraid.
She has been made to be afraid, as any parent
is when they look at their children and think about
all the bad things that will happen to them. What
if Amy Cony barrd votes against the Communists?
Speaker 4 (09:05):
What might they do? Well?
Speaker 1 (09:06):
The Communists have said and shown repeated over and over
and over again. They will kill, it will hurt you.
It's why it was such an incredibly big deal. Do
you remember, Do you remember when the protests started happening
in front of the Supreme Court justices homes. That's platinly
against the law. By the way, it's against federal law.
You're not allowed to intimidate federal the Supreme Court in
(09:29):
order to make rules. It's against It's a federal law.
For a reason. They don't want the communists to be
allowed to do that. So why did the Biden administration.
Speaker 4 (09:37):
Allow that to happen.
Speaker 1 (09:38):
Why Because they knew full well that the threat of violence,
feeling physically afraid for yourself, your husband, your wife, your children,
your sister, your brother, your parents.
Speaker 4 (09:52):
Is a benefit to them.
Speaker 1 (09:54):
It is something they can always keep in their back
pocket and pull out when necessary. Now, they don't have
any power, including the Supreme Court.
Speaker 4 (10:03):
But the power they do have, as you just heard
from Jaya Powell.
Speaker 1 (10:07):
Is the willingness to commit acts of violence on behalf
of the revolution. And for weaklings like Amy Cony Barrett,
the pressure is simply too much. So she has to
sit at home and night. She knows what the right
thing to do is. She has to sit at home
at night when these ridiculous cases are laid on her desk,
and she's not sitting there thinking about what is legal,
what is lawful, what is constitutional. She's sitting there picturing
(10:29):
her children and saying to herself, what might happen to
them if I go a sprill. That's the kind of
country we have now. All that may have made you uncomfortable,
but I am right. We have a huge show for
you tonight, a gigantic show. Congressman Brandon gil has been
(10:49):
all over this stuff. We'll talk to him, and just
a moment before we get to him, you need to
remain unafraid. Chock chock will get a stack in your body.
Natural herbal supplements from chop a male vitality stack, a
female vitality stack. You want to feel good, prepped, ready
to go, strong and unafraid. You want to feel full
(11:13):
of energy, clarity of the mind. Try some natural herbal supplements.
Stop sticking needles in your arms, stop ignoring the fact
that you're out of energy at three in the afternoon,
and get a chalk subscription chalk dot com slash jessetv
gets you a seventeen point seven six percent discount, So
go try it.
Speaker 4 (11:34):
We'll be back, Okay.
Speaker 1 (11:42):
So I wanted to touch on something that I teased
it a little bit in the opening, but I just
wanted to talk about something really quickly here when it
comes to deportations and things like that, and I say
something repeatedly, and I know you hate it when I
say it, but it's one hundred percent true if your interest,
and I assume it is the same as mine. That's
(12:03):
saving the country, right, saving and preserving a wonderful country
for our children and their children and their children after them,
for generations I will never meet. I want the same
country that I've enjoyed. I'm assuming you probably agree with
me on that. Right. If we want to save the
country long term, we must have a different Democrat party.
(12:23):
The Democrat Party must change, and that's hard for us
to talk about, and except because we don't have any
control over that. I'm not a Democrat and I never
will be. Unless you're one of the commedist who hate watches,
You're not a Democrat. You never will be.
Speaker 4 (12:36):
But there's a great example of this.
Speaker 1 (12:39):
Jasmine Crockett's out there talking about illegals.
Speaker 4 (12:41):
Here's what she said.
Speaker 6 (12:43):
So I had to go around the country and educate
people about what immigrants do for this country or the
fact that we are a country of immigrants.
Speaker 1 (12:51):
Right.
Speaker 6 (12:53):
The fact is, ain't none of y'all trying to go
in farm right now? Ok, raise your hands, you not?
Speaker 1 (13:08):
You not?
Speaker 6 (13:10):
We done picking cotton?
Speaker 1 (13:14):
We are.
Speaker 5 (13:14):
You can't pay us enough to find a plantation.
Speaker 4 (13:21):
We done picking cotton.
Speaker 1 (13:24):
She represents the Democrat Party today quite well. Keep all
the illegals here. And I mentioned in the opening, we
are what is the day today, April eighth, yep April eighth,
April eighth, and we are still having to jump through
this hoop and that hoop, and this hoop and that hoop.
And we're waiting on this ruling from the Supreme Court
(13:44):
and that rule. Why are we having to jump through
so many hoops? Because after spending four years bringing as
many rapists and murderers into your country as humanly possible,
every single Democrat, from judges to media people to elected people,
are trying to keep them here. It really doesn't matter
how great Trump is or how great the Senate is
(14:05):
or the House is or whatever. You can't survive long
term as a country. Sharing a country with people like this,
we can't deport them fast enough. Goodness says, we have
to bank on the Supreme Court stepping in and ruling
to allow us to deport the Venezuelan prison gang Joe
Biden flew into the country. Think about that for a moment.
(14:29):
We have twenty million people to deport, and the worst,
absolute worst, the tiniest little sliver of that we are
having to jump through endless hoops and contort ourselves to
get them out.
Speaker 4 (14:42):
We haven't even started with the other people.
Speaker 1 (14:45):
Cannot save a country unless Democrats change. It's what weighs
so heavy on my arm because I don't control them.
You don't control them. We can't fix it. You cannot
share a home with somebody trying to burn it down.
Speaker 4 (15:01):
It doesn't work.
Speaker 1 (15:02):
You may stop him once, twice, You may stop him
for a month, maybe a year. Eventually your home's going
to go up in flames. He can't share a country
with people like that. A reform Democrat party is a muster.
We can't save the place there. It's sad to share
that with you. I know we were supposed to have
Congressman Brendan Gill on the show. He flaked on us
(15:23):
right before. So I just felt like we should do
a little open Borders interview or open borders. That'll ramp.
So how about that? All right, let's talk about something else.
Let's talk about expense reports. Shall we?
Speaker 4 (15:37):
Sucks, doesn't it? You have to do your expenses.
Speaker 1 (15:40):
It's awful. Ramp knows that. Ramp came up with a
credit card. You see the Ramp corporate card. How much money?
How much time do you spend on expenses? Well, do
you have the receipt? I'm not really what category.
Speaker 4 (15:53):
Is this one's stop living like that.
Speaker 1 (15:57):
Ramp dot com slash jesse is where you go and
you get a Ramp corporate card. It dolls all that
for you. Realize that it does all that for you.
You don't have to spend the time, you don't have
to spend the money. You don't have to We did
a board meeting. No more of that ramp dot com
slash jesse. We'll be back with China.
Speaker 7 (16:26):
As you know, against my statement, they put a thirty
four percent tariff on above what their ridiculous tariffs were already.
We're putting a fifty percent tariff on above the tariffs
that we put on. We lose hundreds of billions of
dollars a year on trey to China. It's just not
(16:47):
gonna happen. And hopefully we'll get along with China. If
we do, that's greater. If we don't, that's okay, too right.
Speaker 1 (16:54):
It's that serious about it. He's been serious about China
for a long time. Let's talk to Gordon about it.
Gordon Chang knows more about China than anybody I know.
Author of a book it should probably be reading called
Plan Read.
Speaker 4 (17:06):
Okay, Gordon.
Speaker 1 (17:07):
Donald Trump has been hot on the Chinese issue for
a long time, and he's been speaking lately a lot
about how they're ripping us off. Can you give us
more depth on that? What does that mean? How are
they ripping us off? What are they doing?
Speaker 8 (17:21):
They're running persistent merchandise trade surpluses against the US. So,
for instance, last year, the merchandise trade surplus that China
had was two hundred and ninety five point four billion dollars.
That was up something like five point eight percent from
twenty twenty three. And this is the result of predatory
trade practices but also criminal acts. So China's been stealing
(17:45):
hundreds of billions of dollars of US intellectual property each year,
perhaps as much as half trillion dollars annually. And so, yes,
President Trump is right, they've been ripping us off.
Speaker 1 (17:58):
Can you elaborate a little bit more on stealing intellectual
property because people don't understand how giganic this issue is
and how pervasive China is when it comes to it.
It's like a national pastime over there. Yes.
Speaker 8 (18:13):
Just to give you an example, Deep Seek, which is
the Chinese open Ai platform. They trained their large language
model by chat GPT four and by doing so, they
violated open AIS terms of service. That's a US company,
and this has implications because deep Seek looks like a
(18:37):
Chinese Chinese government lab project, even though it's supposed to
be a private company. The claims that they made for
deep Seek, which were intended to injure the United States,
those claims appear to be false. But what they're trying
to do is to destroy American business and they do
it very well, and they take intellectual property in so
(18:58):
many different ways. But this is pervasive and it's going
on over the course of decades.
Speaker 1 (19:05):
Okay, Gordon, what's China's financial situation like and I asked,
because it's clear, at least from their rhetoric over there,
that they're not going to back off on this little
trade war dust up thing. They're going to engage. But
their economy isn't exactly going gangbusters either, is it.
Speaker 8 (19:23):
No, they reported five point zero percent growth for twenty
twenty four. That was an obvious exaggeration. It was probably
about one or one and a half percent. There's been
an obvious deterioration between then and now, so China's probably
around zero. But even if China were growing at five zero,
(19:43):
it would not be growing fast enough to pay back
all the debt that China's accumulated, especially since two thousand
and eight. And if you want to put this in
simple terms, I think that China's experiencing its two thousand
and eight now. The reason why this is so critical
for China is because C. Jimping has turned his back
on consumption as the fundamental basis of the Chinese economy,
(20:05):
which means his only way out of a serious situation
is to export more. And President Trump, with his tariffs
that have gone into effect today and before now, has
on more than one hundred percent tariff rate on Chinese goods.
That means shutting off the US market for many, if
not most, of China's products.
Speaker 1 (20:27):
Okay, Gordon, could you elaborate what that means for the
American consumer? There are people understandably nervous right now, having
a hard time making ends meet and thinking about the
prospect of everything in their life getting more expensive.
Speaker 8 (20:40):
Yeah, there's certainly it's going to get a little bit
more expensive, but not to the extent that people think.
Speaker 7 (20:47):
So.
Speaker 8 (20:47):
For instance, in twenty eighteen, when Trump put his first
round of elevated China tariffs in place, China picked up
somewhere between seventy five to eighty one percent of the
cost of those tariffs to various means through weakening currency,
through increased subsidies, So American consumers didn't feel that. Now
this time, China has more incentive to pay for Trump's tariffs,
(21:11):
and they're starting to do that again by allowing the
remn B to go to lower levels, but also by
increased subsidies to exporters to the US. Ultimately, you know,
at one hundred and four or one hundred and fifteen
percent tariff level, American consumers will feel some of it.
But we got to remember that tariffs at those levels
redirect trade to other countries where the tariff rates aren't
(21:34):
so high. So I don't think the American consumer is
going to notice it, and in any event, it's not
going to be substantial.
Speaker 1 (21:42):
Okay, What other countries? And this is a completely loaded question,
because China controls a lot of other countries.
Speaker 8 (21:51):
What other countries want?
Speaker 1 (21:54):
What other countries? Where's the trade going to go? Meaning
is they going to drive it into a country? Yeah?
Speaker 8 (22:00):
Yeah, basically everywhere. So you're talking Bangladesh, Vietnam, maybe India, Mexico,
a lot of other different places, Central America, especially if
we trade, if we amend our trade agreement with the region.
These are places where there's low cost and manufacturing and
(22:23):
countries that are not nearly as hostile to the US
as China is. So if you were to go let's
say fifteen years ago, and you were to go to
a Walmart and look at where their apparel was made,
it was almost all China. If you went there like
about five to seven, maybe even ten years ago, it
was almost not at all China. And we're going to
(22:46):
see the same thing for a lot of other products
as these tariffs are put in place. Which encourage countries
to move their supply chains to different locations.
Speaker 1 (22:58):
Okay, so countries like Vietnam. Vietnam is a communist country,
China is a communist country. Vietnam has shown a willingness
already to work with us, at least they've talked about that.
But I would assume China is going to have some
say so in that.
Speaker 8 (23:14):
Well, China will have some say so because a lot
of the new factories in Vietnam are actually Chinese owned.
But you know, Vietnam, although it is a communist country,
is quite friendly to the United States, and so Vietnam
has its own issues with China which are in many
(23:36):
ways more serious than ours. So and in fact, Vietnam
is a friend of the United States because we both
have a common enemy. And when we all look at it,
these other places are going to be much better for us,
especially for countries that are close to us. So if
we're talking about countries in our region, this is a
(23:57):
win for the United States from many different perspectives, because
not only do we get factories out of our enemy China,
but we also put them in places where our supply
chains are much shorter. And by the way, for people
who are worried about climate change. That's a really good
thing to have a factory in Mexico rather than on
the other side of the Pacific.
Speaker 1 (24:18):
Yeah, I'm not worried about climate change at all.
Speaker 7 (24:20):
Though.
Speaker 1 (24:20):
All right, let's talk about militaries. Trump said this.
Speaker 7 (24:25):
China is a massive surplus that they take and they
spend on their military.
Speaker 4 (24:29):
Well, we don't want that.
Speaker 7 (24:31):
I don't want them to take five hundred six hundred
billion dollars a year and spend it on their military.
Speaker 1 (24:39):
Gordon. How strong is China's military? Not where it's going,
but where is it? I know they put a lot
of attack subs in the water. I know they're building
up in navy. I know they're supposedly building up in
amphibious for US. Everyone thinks that's about Taiwan. I'm sure
it probably is. But where are they compared to US?
Speaker 8 (24:56):
China's military, even though for instance, navy is larger, and
despite all the real problems in the American Navy and
Air Force, their military is not nearly as capable as ours.
But remember, if it's a war in Taiwan or the
Philippines or Japan, they're a lot closer, and their supply
chains are a lot supply lines are a lot shorter
(25:18):
than ours. The problem that with the Chinese military two
of them. First of all, the Chinese military right now
is fighting with itself. We see these purges and counter purges,
and it appears that the enemies of Sigimping are purging
Sie Jimping's loyalists at the top of the Chinese military,
which means that that military is a mess. But even
(25:40):
in the best of times when they're not trying to
kill each other, China's got a communist military, which means
it's got two separate reporting lines, one political, one military,
and the political one is more important, and that's no
way to run a war. China will do very well
well in the first week of war because everything's been
played out, nobody has any discretion. It all goes according
(26:03):
to plan more or less. But the problem for China
is the second week of war when they are attacked,
because that type of military is not flexible and cannot
make the decisions that are necessary to react to an attack.
Speaker 1 (26:20):
Gordon, I know it's kind of a nerdy wonky military detail,
but it matters. What do we know about their officer corps.
Are they capable sharp. You make it sound like it looked.
Sounds like a standard communist army where everyone's too afraid
to put peanut butter on a cracker, so no one
can make a decision.
Speaker 4 (26:40):
What are they.
Speaker 8 (26:42):
Well, they've been rehearsing a lot, as we've seen with these,
for instance, exercises off Taiwan, which look like rehearsals for war.
So they're very good at low level provocations. But I
don't think that they are ready right now to launch
hostilities with an invasion of the main island Taiwan. And
there are a number of reasons for that. First of all,
(27:03):
their officer corps at the top is not unified. But
there's another reason, and that is if Siegimping were to
launch a major operation, he'd have to give some general
or admiral almost complete control over the Chinese military, which
makes that flag officer the most powerful person in China.
(27:25):
Even in the best of times. Siegimping is not willing
to do that, and he's certainly not willing to do
it now where the large portions of the military are
opposed to him. So it's got a lot of tanks,
it's got a lot of ships, a lot of planes,
it's got some weapons that we don't have, like Harperson
and cruise missiles. But the point is that the Officer
(27:48):
Corps I don't think is ready to go to war.
Remember these guys have not gone to war since nineteen
seventy nine. And in nineteen seventy nine Vietnam, which we
just talked about, Vietnam kicked China's first string military and
humiliated it with Vietnam's third string. That shows you that
(28:09):
China is not really that good.
Speaker 4 (28:13):
Oh well, that's inspiring. Are they going to take Taiwan?
Speaker 8 (28:21):
I don't think that they're going to launch an invasion
within one of the main island of Taiwan, But that
doesn't mean the Chinese military won't be fighting in Taiwan.
And the reason is that I think that there could
very well be a low level provocation in places such
as the South China. See that spiral out of control.
(28:41):
I don't think Cjon pain can control escalation. And once
a war starts someplace, and it can be any place,
it will spread throughout the entire region because America and
its friends will all gang up, and China will then
bring in Russia and North Korea. You are going to
have regionwide war if it starts someplace. Remember C Jmping
(29:05):
has configured his political system so that only the most
belligerent answers are considered acceptable, which means they can't be
able to deal with an incident. So that's the reason
why I think it's a small provocation that spirals into
a major war, not C Jmping waking up someday and
saying I'm invading Japan.
Speaker 4 (29:28):
Gordon, we appreciate your wisdom as always.
Speaker 1 (29:30):
Thank you, sir.
Speaker 4 (29:32):
All right, speaking of.
Speaker 1 (29:36):
One event leading to another, Are we going to invade Iran?
I don't think so. Are we going to bomb I
don't know. Let's talk to Lee Smith about that next.
Before we talk to Lee Smith, let me talk to
you about peer talk. We need to stop funding the
people who hate us, and we need to stop assuming
(29:59):
that that culture war has been one, because it has
not been one, not by a long shot. You see,
we have to stop funding people who hate us. And
Verizon hate your guts AT and T hates you. TEAMO
will hate you. Pure Talk loves you. Pure Talk is
the patriotic cell phone company. Their CEO did two tours
in Vietnam. They're so pro America. They hire Americans. When
(30:22):
you speak to them at pure Talk, they speak English.
It's glorious. Same network too, you don't sacrifice service. It's
easy to switch Puretalk dot com, slash Jesse TV. We'll
be back.
Speaker 9 (30:44):
We're having direct talks with Iran. Doing a deal would
be preferable to doing the obvious. And the obvious is
not something that I want to be involved with, or
frankly that is your wants to be involved with if
they can avoid it. So we're going to see it.
We avoid it, but it's getting to be very dangerous territory.
(31:05):
And hopefully those talks will be successful, and I think
it would be intern's best interest if they are successful.
We hope, we hope that's going to happen.
Speaker 1 (31:16):
Well, it doesn't exactly take a member of MENSA to
read between the lines on that. Joining me now, he
probably is part of MENSA. Lee Smith, my friend, author,
wonderful writer. Okay, Lee apparently of MENA.
Speaker 10 (31:30):
But but but thank you, Okay, a member of anything
no one? No one wants to be in their clubs,
definitely not ments.
Speaker 1 (31:41):
Well, what's going on with Iran. Let's set the stage
for me. What's happening here.
Speaker 10 (31:46):
Well, I think the President has made it pretty clear
that that Iron's not gonna have a bomb, and he
says that, you know, he says that he'd much prefer
that Iran abandoned its nuclear project through negotiations. But they're
not going to have a bomb one way or another.
And he's given them pretty clear options. Either Iran is
(32:08):
going to wind up back in the Stone Age he's
going to bomb them so much, or they're going to
give it up through negotiations. But I do not believe.
I think again, Trump has been very clear. I don't
think we're going to see fake negotiations or a fake
deal like Barack Obama's fake nuclear deal and twenty fifteen.
I don't think we're going to say anything like that.
(32:29):
So he's been very clear, right, not just about Iran
but North Korea. Nuclear weapons are bad, nuclear weapons are
really dangerous. We don't want this. What did he say
when Biden warned the Israelis not to retaliate after a
missile strike. You know, when Biden said, yeah, don't hit
their nuclear facilities, Trump was perplexed. He said, don't hit
(32:51):
their new facilities. That's exactly what you want to go after, right,
so Trump is the president, has been extremely straightforward. There
are two options going forward for Iran, whether they give
up the program through negotiations or they lose it through
something else.
Speaker 1 (33:09):
Okay, before we get to how a war like that
would shake out, can you help me understand as best
you can lead Iran's perspective on this on why they
wouldn't just make a deal. Right, They're economically not in
great shape. They're forced to work with countries like Russia
which are not as reliable.
Speaker 4 (33:29):
You know, Trump, because he's Trump.
Speaker 1 (33:31):
Is going to sweeten the pot of this deal and
make it, will make it financially beneficial.
Speaker 4 (33:36):
Why not just do it?
Speaker 1 (33:39):
Well?
Speaker 10 (33:39):
Because they want the they want their nuclear weapons program.
I mean, this has been an Iranian project for decades.
So it's very important to them. Because the crucial thing
to understand here is we talk a lot about Israel,
we talk a lot about Saudi Arabia, and Iran's enmity
toward both of these powers, which happen to be US allies.
The big deal here since nineteen seventy nine is Iran's
(34:03):
project is to drive the United States out of the
Persian Gulf. That's the big deal, right, it's not about
Israel primarily, it's not about Saudi Arabia. It's about the
United States because the Persian Gulf is considered an American
leg right. The amount of energy that goes through that
goes through that vital waterway. Now I know that while
(34:24):
we're not exactly energy and dependent we are, we are
not tied down the way we were, say twenty years ago,
by Persian golf energy. Nonetheless, it's extremely important the President
recognizes this, and that's not only why he's close to
the close to the government of Israel, but also the
(34:47):
Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Remember this was his first his
first foreign trip in twenty seventeen, during his first term.
He realizes how important the Persian golf is to American prosperity,
and how important and keeping stability and that part of
the world is to American prosperity. So this is the
(35:07):
major issue for the United States. And the reason that
that nuclear weapons program is so important for Iran is
so that Iran has leverage to destabilize that part of
the world. Iran can make these threats and it's very
different Iranian terror groups whether they're in Lebanon, whether they're
in Gaza, whether in the West Bank, whether they're in Rock,
(35:29):
whether they're to the extent they still exist in Syria,
it's very different when they're operating under a nuclear umbrella.
So this is why the nuclear weapons program has been
so important for the Islamic Republic for many decades. Now
Donald Trump is saying, okay, En, it's not going to happen.
Nuclear weapons are bad all around, and they're especially bad
(35:51):
in the hands and bad guys like you. Just to
put it in and a little bit more context, I
think it's important remember that this was the classical American
position until Barack Obama. Right, not just about Iran. The
United States has historically been against nuclear proliferation, whether it
was with Israel, whether it was Taiwan, all these different powers,
(36:14):
allied powers that wanted to have a nuclear weapons program,
and the US was against it. It was Barack Obama
who said, well, let's make a deal with the Iranians
over their nuclear weapons program that effectively legalizes their nuclear
weapons program and puts it under the protection of an
international agreement backed by the United States of America. So
(36:36):
what Trump is doing here is not something radical. What
Trump is doing is restoring American policy and American non
proliferation policy to the way it's always been until Barack Obama.
Speaker 1 (36:50):
Lee, if these negotiations go poorly, and I mean, feel
free to shoot me down on this, it seems obvious
that they could easily go.
Speaker 4 (36:58):
Very, very poorly.
Speaker 1 (37:00):
What would be the goal of joint strikes against Iran?
Are we talking regime change? Because you'll have to forgive me,
I'm out on that. It never seems to work out.
Even though I hate the Ayah Tolas as much as
say anyone else, that never works for us.
Speaker 4 (37:13):
What would be the goal of it?
Speaker 10 (37:16):
Well, I mean, the goal is to eliminate the Iranian
the Iranian nuclear program, and these are in specific sites.
They have a pretty good idea where everything is. And look, Jesse,
I mean that this this ruling regime is is very weak.
And just because the regime falls doesn't mean that the
United States is responsible for picking up the pieces. So
(37:38):
what the Bush administration want George W. Bush wanted to
do an Iraq in Afghanistan is very different from the
fact that you know, brittle regimes fall and some of
the times US actions, US actions, though not intentionally, will
nonetheless bring them down. I mean, let's talk about the
tariff regime right now, right, I mean what the United
States and what Donald Trump wanted in it first term
(38:00):
and what Donald Trump wants now from the Chinese are
no more currency manipulation, right, no more theft of US
intellectual property, no more forced technology transfers from American companies
even at the trade deficit. Now, what are these? These
are vital for the survival of the Chinese Communist Party.
(38:22):
And if Trump says no, sorry, unless you're going to
do that, we don't have a deal, and we're going
to keep the tariffs on you, and we don't care
how much pain it puts on you. What happens if
that brittle regime? What happens if that brittle regime breaks?
And again the fact that they will not make a
deal over this. The Chinese didn't make a deal during
(38:44):
Trump's first term over this, what if they don't do
it over the second during the second term as well.
So there's a lot of brittle regimes around the world
that the United States deals with. And it's not as
if the United States has to be responsible for picking
up the pieces of the Chinese Communists. Already an adversarial
regime that has hounded Americans for the last half century plus.
Speaker 1 (39:09):
No doubt it's been gosh seventy years. Well, speaking of
hostile regimes, let's switch gears and go to Ukraine Russia.
We now have a story out Ryan Routh, the would
be Trump assassin Numero Dos. He was apparently out there
trying to buy rocket launchers. And look, Lee, I don't
want to run with internet rumors, but some very reliable
(39:31):
people were out there talking about how this guy was
able to get people papers as he was recruiting for
the Ukrainian military. At the same time, He's on a
golf course ready to blow Donald Trump's head off. Lee.
Speaker 4 (39:43):
This thing looks ugly.
Speaker 10 (39:46):
Well, I'm hopeful that the new that the new leadership
at the FBI are our you know, are our friends,
people that we admire and respect a tremendous amount. We
hope that the uh Cash Bettel Dan Bongino, director and
deputy director. We certainly hope that they get to the
(40:06):
bottom of this and find out what was going on.
And we still want to know exactly. We want some
more details. We have some more details. We want the
details on what happened at bilber Pennsylvania and why this
entire episode was buried almost immediately. We understand about ongoing investigations,
but you know, we'd still like to have some sort
of sense of what's going on here. And so this
(40:28):
is another story, the Ryan Routh story, something else we
need to know more about.
Speaker 1 (40:35):
Yeah, it would actually be nice to know some details
about the fact that the president was shot in the
head and someone all goes killed him on the golf course,
and we don't know Bubkiss at this point in time. Lee,
thank you, my friend, as always appreciated. Light the mood. Next,
(41:00):
all right, it is time to lighten the mood. And
let me just say really quickly before we get to
jd Vance and its mother, that I know a lot
of people struggle with addiction, addictions of various things. Addiction
is one of these things that plagues human beings. It
just does. And maybe you have struggled, maybe you are
(41:20):
struggling with it, whatever it is, drugs, alcohol, I don't know,
whatever it is.
Speaker 4 (41:24):
I'm not your priest. You don't have to tell me.
Speaker 1 (41:26):
But I just want to encourage you that you can
keep struggling and when eventually it feels insurmountable at times,
I know it does feels like you'll never get out
of it. You can get out of it. Jd Vance's
mother is actually a wonderful example this. Remember when he
said this at the RNC.
Speaker 11 (41:46):
And I'm proud to say that tonight my mom is here,
ten years clean and sober. I love you, Mama, And
you know, Mom, I was thinking, it'll be ten years
(42:11):
officially in January of twenty twenty five, and if President
Trump's okay with it, let's have the celebration in the
White House.
Speaker 1 (42:28):
Turns out President Trump was okay with it, and jd
Vance made good on the promise to his mother, celebrating
her and her ten years of sobriety at the White House.
Speaker 4 (42:40):
It's pretty cool.
Speaker 1 (42:42):
And let it serve as an inspiration to you. You
don't have to be the mother of the Vice president
to overcome. Just keep struggling even if you fail today.
If you're struggling, you're winning. You'll get there, all right,
Seitable
Host
Jesse Kelly
Popular Podcasts
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.
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!