Dr. Bruce Abramson: Trump's Historic Middle East Trip, Biden's Cancer & Rising Threats at Home

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
And we're live, and we are live. Is it live
or is it memory x? You know, I mean, one
of these days someone will call me out on that line.
At least I didn't say it was an a track
tape player.

Speaker 2 (00:09):
I mean, is even still a business? Do they still exist?
I'm going to google that right now.

Speaker 1 (00:15):
Okay, So, you know Erica under the heading of they
just can't help themselves. Yeah, you know, this whole basket
of deplorables thing, even in the era of Trump, they
can't get over it. So former Senator Claire McCaskill is
on MSNBC, of course, right, and she's talking to Nicole Wallace,

(00:38):
another rocket scientist and all this, and she she basically
says that quote, Americans were not smart enough to keep
Trump away from the White House.

Speaker 2 (00:47):
Oh oh, so now we're all stupid, got it?

Speaker 1 (00:52):
Excuse me? We've always always been, according to the stupid.
So but what she said that was interesting to me
was there's a huge swath of Americans that don't know
about what's going on because the algorithms are purposely not
feeding them politics because they don't want to hear about it.
And you would think that after the shellacking they took

(01:13):
in November that they would try to get the message,
but they still don't understand why they lost. And now
they're banking So you're stupid. I'm stupider if there is
a word, Is there a word stupider? Yeah? And you
just sit there and they just you know, it's almost
like they just cannot help themselves, you know, from the

(01:36):
bank basket of deplorables. And by the way, Hillary Clinton
was on some show and she said, well, rather, oh no, no,
you're gonna love this. She goes, well, if if president
if Trump is going to run for a third term,
then we should have Are you ready for this, a
Clinton Obama ticket to run for a third term?

Speaker 3 (02:00):
To have mercy?

Speaker 2 (02:01):
I am I'm speechless. I am flabbergasted.

Speaker 1 (02:10):
You know, it's like, come on, Hillary, You've made enough money.
You know, there's the body countess high enough.

Speaker 2 (02:16):
Just go away, go away, all the corruption with your
foundation and oh my god, like like take a win,
bro and go away like good And oh.

Speaker 1 (02:30):
Excuse me, I don't care whether she takes a win
or loss as long as she goes away. But Claire
mccaskell and you just sit there and go And by
the way, Claire mccaskell was the same person who said
after the Trump election, this time that Trump obviously understood
the American public better than the Democrats. But here the
other comment she said I thought was really interesting. She
said back in the day, she said that I think

(02:50):
we have to acknowledge that Donald Trump knows our country
better than we do. And then anger and frankly, fear.
We're way more powerful or than appealing to people people
better angels. So the Democrats, according to former Senator of
mcask will, have appealed to people's better angels. But that
wasn't good enough because only anger and fear amongst obviously

(03:13):
the stupid people who were just you know, well not
smart enough to keep jump out of the White House.

Speaker 2 (03:18):
It let it there and go okay, well, and Robert,
who do we have to thank for America being stupid?
The Democrats who control the public education system. So you
know what, miss Claire Haskell, you only have yourself to blame.

Speaker 1 (03:35):
Oh she's not blaming, he's not blaming. Anyways, stay with us.
We have author, technologist, economists, attorney, policy analyst overall, I mean,
smartest guy in DC I've ever met, doctor Bruce Abram
stor as Levi. I like to call him doctor America,
joining us on the other side of the break in
the monologue. So let's roll the intro because I got

(03:57):
a lot to say today. Hello, and welcome to of

(04:21):
the people. Trump's carrot and stick diplomacy is redrawing the
Middle East. In just a matter of days, President Trump
has done what every so called foreign policy expert said
could never be done. It was impossible, and in the
process he shattered decades of failed US policy in the

(04:41):
Middle East and redrawn the strategic map of the region
with nothing but one American strength, two clarity of purpose,
and three a fearless new approach to the Middle East.
And the old playbook. Thankfully, that two state solutions nonsense
is dead. Also, the end appeasement of the Obama Biden

(05:02):
administration also dead. Right, that's not to mention the midnight
palots of cash you know, to terror sponsoring regimes like
Iran is also over. But most importantly, the fantasy that
peace comes from either moral equivalents or UN resolutions is
also dead, because in just a matter of days, Trump

(05:23):
has shown that peace and progress comes from bold leadership,
smart leverage, and strength. Frankly so that This new carrot
and stick diplomacy strategy honestly is simple, but it's also groundbreaking,
which is reward those who want prosperity in partnership and
isolate those who don't and who want to export chaos.

(05:46):
Trump has orchestrated a rapid alignment of the Sunni Arab States,
the Gulf States, and even some of the reluctant moderates,
all coalescing around sort of an informal anti Iran alliance
that was always there for the making, right because they've
seen the writing on the wall. The US is back,

(06:07):
and this time we're not looking the other way. When
Turan funds terrorism, trains militias, or tries to destabilize countries,
We're not doing it anymore. Trump's approach acknowledges one simple
truth that the Middle East countries have always and only
respected strength and power. Iran is, of course the biggest
loser in all of this, and is starting to be

(06:30):
boxed in like never before. But the important point here
it wasn't done through war. It was done through strength,
economic deals, military assurances, and clear consequences for bad actors.
Saudi Arabia is once again leaning hard towards normalization with Israel.
We'll see what happens there, because Trump gave them a

(06:52):
choice either join the future or get left behind. Same
thing for Egypt and Jordan, who are now re engaging,
not through guilt, not through pressure, but through investment and
mutual respect. The Gulf States are also coming around to
this new alignment. But let's be clear, it doesn't make
Cutter our new best friends. They're not. And there may

(07:15):
be some missteps and miscalculations along the way, as there
is with all foreign policies. But the Abraham Accords are
no longer just a footnote of the first Trump term.
They are now the framework in the Middle East, and
Trump is expanding that in real time. And as for Israel,
they're now going to be at the heart of this
regional realignment which will strengthen their legitimacy and their security

(07:41):
as opposed to weaken it. And it's also clear that
Trump is not tiptoeing around Iran's terror proxies of the
Houthis or Hezbollah. He's calling in them what they are,
which is basically the extensions of a rogue regime. Ladies
and gentlemen, this is not diplomacy as usual. This is
a tectonic shift in US foreign policy away from weakness,

(08:03):
away from endless concessions, and towards a doctrine that's rooted
both in moral clarity and most important, strategic realism. And
here's the kicker. The world is quickly falling in line
with all of this, because, unlike the useless politicians and
Ivy League jar heads and diplomats who really jug heads,

(08:24):
not jar heads, not to insult the Marines who chase
headlines and nobel prizes, Trump understands that power, not banal platitudes,
is what shapes history. Power shapes history. And this is
the beginning of the end of Around's regional hegemony. And

(08:45):
it's thankfully, as I said earlier, the final nail in
the coffin of the Obama Biden policies of appeasement that
have been here for far too long. This is the
dawn of a new Middle East, a region that's going
to be shaped by strength, secured through American leadership, and
re drawn by a president who refused to be hemmed
in by past policy failures or political decorum. And that's

(09:09):
the monologue Erica, I'm all back.

Speaker 2 (09:15):
In, well, well, well, mister Trent.

Speaker 1 (09:18):
Well well, well, and I want to quickly bring in
the You know, there's always a guy in your world
that you know is the smartest guy in the room,
and when you bring him in, you go, okay, good,
I don't have to say much because he's way smarter
than me, like by just by eons. And that's doctor
America or doctor Bruce Abramson, author of five books, now
hundreds of articles technologists, economist, attorney. I'm sure I'm missing stuff, Bruce,

(09:43):
doctor Bruce. Welcome back to the people, my friend.

Speaker 4 (09:48):
You alert Perica. Always a pleasure to be here. And
one of the nice things about doing doing this stuff
remote is that when you introduce me as the smartest
guy in the room, I am, in fact the only
guy in this room. I will I will take a compliment.

Speaker 3 (10:04):
No, it's true.

Speaker 2 (10:05):
You're you are one of my favorite guests to have
on you know, in all the years I've been doing this. Uh,
you know, you're just super fun to talk to. You're
really smart and like big brain people, you make these
connections and it's cool. It's like you're like a top
you just like Robert said, wind you up and let

(10:26):
you go.

Speaker 3 (10:26):
It's so much fun.

Speaker 1 (10:27):
So we're gonna wind him up and let him go.
Let's talk about Trump remaking the Middle East? Do you
heard the monologue, Because there's some a term I heard,
and I love to have said that I've coined it.
I didn't. But there's a new term called Trump speed, right,
I mean, everything is happening at Trump speed, like Iran,
the anti Semitism. What's your take on on all this?
And you know, obviously you know, I certainly don't claim

(10:51):
to have all the answers, but I think, I mean,
what's your takeaway from just this incredible rapid realignment or
just redoing a Middle East policy?

Speaker 4 (11:02):
So there are two questions there, right, there's the Trump
speed question, which quite frankly is unfolding more clearly to
most people on a domestic front in the foreign front.
And then there's the Middle East question, the Trump speed question.
I think that there's something very important happening in this country. Okay,
And this is actually is a little piece little thought

(11:23):
I posted last night, something I came up with when
I was in graduate school. I started doing my research,
and I came up with a time allocation for research,
which I subsequently learned actually applies to life. And because
like this. You spend forty nine percent of your time
trying to frame the right question, two percent of your
time answering it, because if you're asking the right question,

(11:45):
the answer is obvious, and forty nine percent of your
time convincing the people around you that the obvious answer
is correct.

Speaker 1 (11:53):
Wait, wait, give that to me again, slowly, wait, slowly.

Speaker 4 (11:57):
Okay, all right. Forty nine percent of your time I
think the question, yeah, two percent of your time coming
up with the answer, because if you've asked the right question,
the answer will be obvious, and then forty nine percent
of your time convincing the people around you that the
obvious answer is correct. Now, what what has happened since
Trump came into office the second time is something that

(12:19):
some of us have known, and many people knew instinctively,
but most people really didn't get. And that is that
America is waking up to the fact that across the board,
our problems are obvious, the solutions are straightforward, yes, and
there is an incredibly complex system with enormous resources put

(12:41):
in place to prevent any problems from ever getting fixed.

Speaker 2 (12:46):
Correct, okay, or from the power being dismantled.

Speaker 4 (12:49):
Now, the number you know that has gone from something
that a tiny number of people knew and they were
called paranoid. Yeah, something that are conventional wisdom, right, and
and that and that that is huge, Okay, that is
that is an enormous thing. The people understand that. The

(13:11):
reason that we can't, I mean, the reason we can't
fix any of our problems is this a bureaucracy in place.
The status clone places procedures in place, there are resources
in place. There are people that don't want it to
be fixed.

Speaker 2 (13:22):
That's I mean, this is and this is what is
what I love so much about what's happening right now
is the Democrats cannot help themselves. They are so anti Trump,
they are so they have such bad TDS that they're
out there being like, oh, how dare you cut millions

(13:44):
and billions of waste, fraud and abuse. I mean literally,
they're literally going out there and saying, you know what,
it's fine that illegal immigrants are getting uh, social Security
and Medicaid benefits. It's fine that there's all these people
defrauding the government.

Speaker 3 (13:59):
Oh my god, how dare you even look under the hood.

Speaker 2 (14:02):
And then people go, what reasonable people look at that
and go that's crazy.

Speaker 4 (14:12):
Well, this is why they're harping on procedure. I'm like, well,
you know, sure, he was in the country illegally. He's
a gang member. He killed a bunch of people and
raped a few children. But it would be unfair to
just make them leave without at least letting them tell
his side of your story.

Speaker 2 (14:30):
I again, they cannot help themselves.

Speaker 1 (14:35):
Wait a minute, so, Bruce, Yeah, here's the constitutional question,
because you know, in the Constitution they use terms like
person versus citizen. Right, So if someone I have maintained,
and I am certainly not a constitutional scholar, but I've
read the Constitution many times, I would maintain that someone
who enters breaks the law entering the country and is

(14:58):
not a citizen is not an titled the full due process,
even though the term they used the term a person.
But it has to be taken within context and the
structure with which the question, the Constitution was written and
established and sort of original intent. Where are you on
all this? And if I'm wrong, happy to be so.

Speaker 5 (15:17):
So.

Speaker 4 (15:17):
I mean it's a very complicated question. In large parts
that complicated. No, no, no, it is because the concept of
citizenship is a relatively new concept. Okay, You've got to
remember that there was no concept of citizenship three hundred,
four hundred, five hundred years ago, right, there were subjects,

(15:38):
people weren't I mean, there weren't citizens that weren't formal
national boundaries. I mean, all of this stuff is relatively new.
And the note that the concept of a citizen in
the eighteenth century, in the nineteenth century, in the twentieth century,
we're just very different things. And so you know, it's very.

Speaker 2 (16:01):
Saying the language wouldn't match.

Speaker 4 (16:04):
Well, yeah, I'm saying that the stuff that was written
about citizens you know, even the the post Civil War amendments.
The concept of citizenship then and the concept of citizenship now,
not just in the United States but around the world,
they don't mean the same thing. And so now the
question is, well, if the concept of citizenship has evolved,

(16:26):
should all of the rights that were assigned to it
when when when citizen meant you know, thing A, still
apply when it means thing B. And that, you know,
even from an originalist, even from an originalist perspective. On
the other hand, if the if the idea is well,
citizenship meant something different. So now we've got this constitutional
provision that doesn't apply at all because the concept to

(16:51):
which it originally applied has been changed.

Speaker 1 (16:55):
A minute. I have two issues. I have two issues
with this issue. Number one is, if you break the
law to get into this country, right, does that entitle
you to full rights as a person under the constitution?
Because we can you know, that's my first question.

Speaker 4 (17:14):
Hang on, Second, let's differentiate between full rights as a
person and process and due process equivalent to that of
a citizen.

Speaker 1 (17:28):
Hang on, Abraham Lincoln suspended habeas corpus during the war. Yeah, okay,
let's see Roosevelt interurned Japanese during World War two. Right,
so there are instances in this country where when there's
a national emergency or national security issues that you can

(17:50):
suspend certain rights. Because my other issue is when I
hear the Democrats argue, because I think they're trying to
weaponize the constitution, right, like they've tried to weaponize the
judicial system in general. Is when I hear them talk
about the constitution. Not that they're constitutional experts, I'll admit
I'm not, but they certainly won't. But I hear Bill
Clinton going, well, it depends on what the meaning of

(18:11):
the word is, is right, I mean, it's the same
bullshit in parsing words.

Speaker 4 (18:18):
It is, but it's also a matter of looking at facts, right,
And this is this is where things get really hairy,
which is that it seems pretty obvious to me that
we have an immigration crisis in this country. Right. We
got twenty million people report across the border illegally. A
lot of them are gang members, some of them are terrorists.
We don't know who they are, where they are. We
got to we got to push them out right. That

(18:40):
strikes me as a crisis. Okay. Somebody else says, oh,
you know, COVID was a new virus that came out
of China. It looks like, you know, that produced some
bad graphics. That's a crisis. Next guy comes and says,
the climate is a to you know, the climate is

(19:01):
about to turn the earth into an inferno. That's a crisis.
And I'm like, well, yeah, okay. The difference is that
I have facts on my side. You get people talking
about systemic racism, systemic racism real. I'm like, well, I
don't know. If you're standing on the Edmund Pettis Bridge
with people trying to knock you down, you got a

(19:22):
decent you know you're making a point. If you're standing
around in a summer at twenty twenty in Minneapolis. No, okay,
So you know the problem is that a lot of
these things depend on the underlying facts. And now as
long as there's disagreement over the underlying facts, it comes
down to who gets to decide. Who gets to decide

(19:44):
that the United States today does in fact have an
immigration crisis but does not have a climate crisis. Who
has to make that decision?

Speaker 2 (19:56):
Yeah, well apparently moping it's mean order.

Speaker 4 (20:01):
I know, I know the right answer.

Speaker 1 (20:04):
But you know, you have my vote, Bruce, if you're
running in twenty if you're running in twenty twenty eight,
you have my vote. But I want to come back
to Trump in the Middle East this whole so Erica,
pull up that video or the montage of Trump being
greeted to the Middle East, because I think that's a
good a good setup. So this is a royal welcome

(20:25):
of people who understand power. I mean when you look
at all the countries that welcomed him, and look, I'm
a realist, but I believe in real politics. You know
old German concept, right, capital R small K an enemy
of my friend. I don't think that these guys all
love America. I think they're going to like any other country,
is going to do what's in their best interest. But
they understand the game has changed, and they understand that

(20:47):
that now is the time to move away from Iran
because that was always the fear based factor right to
destabilize the regime. But tell me about the Abraham of courts.
Where do we go next? And how do you see
Iran moving on the chessboard? Now that Israel has stripped
them of their ability to defend themselves. Trump is trying
to cut a deal which is not going to work.
Where do we go from here?

Speaker 4 (21:08):
So there's a lot of stuff, And I would say
that people who found this trip confusing were the wise
ones because I believe that the real action happened behind
the scenes. And there's a lot of speculation as to
what happened behind the scenes, but it's all speculation. There
are a large numbers now. Having spent my entire life

(21:29):
as a proud Zionist inside the pro Israel lobby, I
will tell you that for as long as I can recall,
everybody said, why can't those Arab countries just worry about
themselves and leave us alone? Why does everything always have
to focus on Israel. Well, guess what. Trump made a
trip to the Middle East. He went to a bunch
of Arab countries. They focused on themselves to the extent

(21:52):
that anything was said about Israel it was more likely
to be positive than negative. Israel was way off on
a sideline. And now all the people, the pro Israel
out we are going, hey, wait a minute, look, he
sidelined Israel. That's bad for us.

Speaker 1 (22:04):
And all he did he didn't sideline ISRAELI what Israel
first on this trip?

Speaker 4 (22:10):
You know? The Jewish reaction to this trip reminds me
of did you see the South Park episode a couple
of years ago where Harry and Meghan go on a
worldwide respect our Privacy tour?

Speaker 3 (22:23):
Yes?

Speaker 4 (22:24):
Yeah, well that's that. That's you know, that's how I
feel about the reaction from them. From the pro Israel sides,
people have been saying for decades, why can't they focus
on themselves? Are now complaining how dare they focus on themselves?
Why aren't they gating more attention to us?

Speaker 3 (22:42):
It's never good enough?

Speaker 4 (22:44):
This is this is good now, you know? Iran okay,
Iran is obviously the elephant in the room. Trump has
a problem Trump has a problem. Okay, Trump has to
decide he is going to become one of two things.
He is either going to become the president that actually

(23:06):
participated in the bombing and destruction of Iran's nuclear sites,
or he is going to become the president on whose
watch Iran became a nuclear power. Now, he doesn't want
to be either of those things. I think that's fair.
Most of us wouldn't. He doesn't want to be either

(23:26):
of those things, so you want.

Speaker 2 (23:28):
To or he's trying to avoid He's actually trying diplomacy,
which trying.

Speaker 4 (23:34):
Very hard to create a third option. Now, the problem
is the rationale behind that third option is the same
rationale it's been there forever we have had there has
been bipartisan, long running policy on Iran, which is every
president we've had has hoped that they could defer the

(23:58):
war with Iran until they were out of office, which
means that each president makes it more likely that the
war with Iran will involve a nuclear exchange.

Speaker 2 (24:10):
Yeah, dude, you're just kicking it down the can, kicking
the can down the road.

Speaker 4 (24:14):
And this is this is fundamentally the problem. The hope is, well,
maybe if we can kick it down the road, it'll
collapse beneath its own weight, and they'll be a new
regime in Iran. And of course the problem is that
every time the protesters come up, the people we have
in power say who aproach. The best protests have happened

(24:35):
when Democrats were in powered, and the democrats have always
said correctly, well, if the regime fell, then there would
be a black market on nuclear technology and there would
be massive chaos in this centrally located country of eighty
million people, both of which are accurate. And we have

(24:56):
this fundamental problem in that if we do bomb the
Iranian nuclear ses, it is likely that the Iranian regime
will fall. Iran is the only thing holding Iraq together,
And all of a sudden you have a zone of
instability that goes from Lebanon through Syria, through Iraq to Iran.

(25:16):
And by the way, Pakistan may restarted shooting war with India.
You've got a battlefield bigger than the European theater of
World War two.

Speaker 2 (25:27):
So forgive me, if you could, for my ignorance, and
maybe for anybody in the audience. When you say that
Iran is holding Iraq together, can you say more about that?

Speaker 4 (25:40):
Yeah? So, Iraq, like Syria, isn't a real country. It
was never a real country, that's right. Okay. There were
a bunch of people living there. They were tribal, they
were Sunni Arabs, they were Kurds, they were she Eyed Arab,
there were Zeros. There are a bunch of people living there.

(26:02):
The European powers pulled apart the Ottoman Empire, drew a
bunch of lines on the ground and declared to the state. Okay,
it was a very poorly run state. It was held
together as long as you had a totalitarian who could
hold it together. Okay. Saddam Hussein was many, many terrible things.

(26:23):
He was also instrumental to holding a rack together.

Speaker 3 (26:25):
Wow.

Speaker 4 (26:26):
Okay. The minute we deposed Saddam, Iraq fell apart. And ironically,
the one guy who said let it fall apart. Let's
recognize the said state in the south, a Sunni state
in the middle, and a Curtis state in the north
was Senator Joe Biden.

Speaker 1 (26:43):
Okay, there are a couple others, but yes.

Speaker 4 (26:47):
Yeah, he was the one best identified with it. There
was nothing holding a rack together. And that was what
you know, I mean, the idea that they were all
going to want you know, the end of history I did.
All we have to do is get rid of totalitarian
and everybody will want to be a liberal democracy. No, okay,

(27:09):
so you know what that was. It took it took
me thirty five years to figure out what that was. Okay.
For listeners who don't remember, there was a very popular
and important theory in the early nineteen nineties at the
end of the Cold War called the end of history theory.
It was a name from first an essay that a
book written by Francis Pukayama. But basically the hypothesis was

(27:31):
that history's most vexing question had been answered. The question
was how best to organize society, and the answer was
liberal democracy, and now all of the world's you know,
everybody would eventually become a liberal democracy. It would take
a little more work in some places than others. Adoption
would be uneven, but this is where the world was heading.

(27:53):
That was a theory, and that was the theory that
underpins so cute pulling down. So it sounds that cute,
but here's what it is, Okay. This is the political
science version of saying what people have been saying from
time immemorial. You look at the Cold War, and we said,
we didn't use this language because we would never use
this language. But here's what we said. We looked at

(28:14):
the Cold War and said, we have one surprisingly bloodless
victory over a truly fearsome folk. Clearly, our God is great.
Now all of the people's worlds will see the glory
of his ways and convert to our lifestyle. Not well,
you know what, you know what, And we were exactly

(28:37):
as successful as everybody else ever said that, right, that
was the theory. But Iraq isn't a country. So we
went in and.

Speaker 1 (28:47):
We based Mesopotamia.

Speaker 4 (28:50):
But you know, yeah, we held it together with scotch tape,
and it's not really a country because quite frankly, you know,
the Kurds have pretty much been operating autonomously the past
forty years now, okay, you know, in the north and
of the country. So we held it together with scotch tape.
When we pulled out, the Iranian supplied the scotch tape. Okay,

(29:11):
Iraq right now is a very weak central government, largely
an Iranian puppet or largely an Iranian client state. The
force necessary to hold it together is mostly provided by Iran.
Other than the Kurdish region in the north. So if
the Iranian you know, if Iran falls, there's nothing holding

(29:31):
the rack together.

Speaker 3 (29:32):
Wow. Well, speaking of.

Speaker 2 (29:36):
Tragedy in the Middle East and insanity over there, you guys,
let's take a minute to hear from our sponsor Israel
Appreciation Day. Let's remember that Israel is the one functioning
democracy in the Middle East. It's the one shining light
of freedom that is over there, ladies and gentlemen.

Speaker 3 (29:55):
And that's why.

Speaker 2 (29:57):
Israel Appreciation Day exists to you know, to shine a
light there. And so go go to the website. Yell,
go check out our sponsor, get some merch and let's
hear your message from them.

Speaker 4 (30:13):
Hello, and thank you for being here.

Speaker 6 (30:15):
This is the first ever Israel Appreciation Day.

Speaker 7 (30:19):
I believe in the words of Israel's first leader, David
Ben Gurion, who said one does not write history, one
makes history.

Speaker 2 (30:31):
The history of the Jewish people is one of rising
and flourishing despite thousands of years.

Speaker 4 (30:37):
Of being attacked, exiled and scapegoat, you know.

Speaker 8 (30:40):
And I'm honored to join all of you in celebrating
the first annual Israel Appreciation Day. And there are many
reasons to appreciate Israel. It's one of America's closest allies
in the world. It's a safe haven to persecuted people,
and it's a well sprint of innovation.

Speaker 2 (30:53):
But the Land of Visual was given to the Jewish people,
not by the United States nations, but by God.

Speaker 4 (30:59):
In so well.

Speaker 2 (31:00):
No one wants to find our love, not to have
this weapon, to be in a bullet group best to
serve in the idea.

Speaker 4 (31:06):
We cannot allow the worst instincts in our society to win.
We must stand proud, and we must stand tall.

Speaker 5 (31:12):
This is the Jewish moment, when the Jewish people stands
for life over death and shows the lost and confused
West how to.

Speaker 2 (31:23):
Survive from the hollow.

Speaker 4 (31:25):
See the Pioneers, the original and early inhabitants of the land, even.

Speaker 6 (31:30):
Before the official creation of the State of Israel in
nineteen forty eight.

Speaker 1 (31:35):
In my mind, one does not have to be Jewish
to support Israel in their battle against the evil that
is a mass. One only has to be human. Our
Jewish community is stronger than ever.

Speaker 3 (31:47):
In Israel's two days.

Speaker 4 (31:50):
It's not just a place, it's also a keep all well.

Speaker 1 (31:52):
We generation away from a holocaust and understanding, yes, it
could happen again.

Speaker 4 (31:58):
My daughter came home and said, is there going to
be an the Holocaust? I couldn't live with myself if
I didn't stand with Israel and the Jewish people at
this moment in time when they most need us a treat.

Speaker 8 (32:10):
Press during the Israel Hama's conflict has provided real time
updates on terror attacks.

Speaker 4 (32:17):
And if we don't learn from those conflicts in the wars.

Speaker 1 (32:19):
We're doing to repeat the same mistakes.

Speaker 6 (32:21):
All and it takes a lot of courage and a
lot of strength to come out and be a voice
of one. Sometime.

Speaker 8 (32:28):
What did you do professionally prior to October seventh?

Speaker 6 (32:33):
It is your duty ever do to shine the last
Go on to social media. Why would you flourish under persecution?
In the answerance, that's our nature. That's always been our nature.
When our enemies to terrorize us and they come after us,
what you see is a direct correlation to innovation.

Speaker 1 (32:51):
The nation of Israel lives.

Speaker 2 (33:08):
All right, You guys, go get your merch. Support our
sponsor merch.

Speaker 1 (33:12):
O get the merch and legit.

Speaker 2 (33:14):
This water bottle makes your stuff stay cold like all day.

Speaker 1 (33:19):
It's legit. It makes your junk stake cold. All day.
What yeah, correct, just kidding, never mind, let's move let's
move on. So, ladies and gentlemen, we have still doctor
Bruce Abramson, with US author, technologist, economist, attorney, published five
books all sorts of things. So Bruce, let's jump to domestic, right, because.

Speaker 4 (33:43):
The Middle East later, but let's let's go do mestic.

Speaker 1 (33:45):
Okay, So let's go domestic because one of the other
things I think that Trump is doing is not only
remaking the Republican Party, but he's really stealing some ideas
from the Democrats. Right, So it's an interesting thing domestically,
whether it's lowering drug prices right then you know, increasing
tax credits for children, you know, for the you know,
children for education. He's even hinted at, you know, quote

(34:07):
unquote taxing the rich, although he said he wouldn't do it,
but that you know, because he thinks that you know,
you'd get that. No, you know, read my lips, no
new taxes, George Bush, think George Herbert Walker Bush. But
isn't he really stealing some of the policies and by
the way, trying to normalize relations with Syria as well.
I mean, you know a lot of things that would

(34:29):
have been Democrat at least talking points. I mean, how
long has Bernie Sanders talked about, you know, bringing down
drug prices all that stuff. So isn't he really remaking
the GOP into he calls it the common Sense Party.
I would call it a working class party.

Speaker 4 (34:46):
Yeah, he is. And I got to say, you know,
first of all, I think there's some really great stuff
that he's bringing in. You know, both parties have a
tendency to say, oh, well, you know, we've kind of
lost this issue because the other side knows how to
talk about it, so I walk away from important stuff, Okay,
And that's that's a terrible mistake. I was actually, I

(35:07):
was at a I was at an event. It's called
Conversations across the aisle was basically me and a bunch
of leftists. But I'm sitting the I'm sitting at the
table with a bunch of people and we're talking about
sort of work policies and why I don't like them.
And there's a bunch of people they're focused on, you know,
sort of inner city policies. And I said to him, look,

(35:27):
if I were I said, you know, I have an
agenda to help inner city communities. Particularly those left behind,
particularly black communities. Okay, here's what I would do. I
would improve education by putting in school choice. I would
make sure there were enough police to keep the streets safe.
I would promote investment in the community. I would have
large scale internship and apprenticeship opportunities. I would look for

(35:51):
ways to rebuild the black family, and I would reinvigorate
the Black church. I go to, here's the problem. The
left is opposed to every plank of that. You know,
they're all going, I don't know, there's all sound like
great ideas, and I go, you're opposed to all of them.
There's a group called Black Lives Matter. They are opposed
to every plank of what I just put forward. And
these people are arguing with me. Know they aren't. Okay,

(36:13):
this is this is the problem. The agendat that I
just outlined is antithetical to everything that the left wants
to do. And yet it's a leftist issue.

Speaker 5 (36:24):
Right.

Speaker 4 (36:24):
If somebody stands up and says, you know, the most
important thing on my agenda is to help our inner
city black communities, you go, it's a left wing issue, right. No,
it's a question of how you do it. So you
know this is a lot of the stuff that you say.
He's taken a page from their book. Now, there are
ideas that I don't like. I will tell you. I

(36:45):
don't like the no tax on tip idea. I don't
like the no tax on Social Security idea. And the
reason that I don't like them is because it's something
that I've been saying for a long time. I am
opposed to anything that increases the distortions or the comple
flexity of the tax code.

Speaker 2 (37:02):
Right, yes, yes, basically.

Speaker 4 (37:05):
I want a simple tax code.

Speaker 3 (37:07):
As an account text flat tax.

Speaker 2 (37:10):
You know, I am happy to advocate for that as
an accountant.

Speaker 3 (37:15):
I am telling you right now, our tax.

Speaker 2 (37:17):
Code is absolutely stupid and there are so many Sorry
for interrupting you, broops.

Speaker 3 (37:23):
I just oh, if I.

Speaker 1 (37:24):
Could punch it, if I could use a hot button.

Speaker 2 (37:27):
The tax code in the face, like it were a person,
I'd be like, you give it an elbow.

Speaker 4 (37:33):
It's worse than that. Okay. Too many people don't pay
any taxes under the current system. Yes, and that means
if the question is should we increase or to increase taxes,
there's no trade off. From their perspective, it's like, wait,
should you charge. I mean, you know, look, if you
say so, I've got a proposal on the table. I'm
going to charge other people more to give you stuff.

Speaker 2 (37:56):
Yeah, I go.

Speaker 4 (37:57):
You know what, give me six months to study the
issue and I'll back you with the reason. No, No,
it sounds like a good plan.

Speaker 2 (38:04):
I'll take it, thank you. I mean, they have no
skin in the game. Actually, they do have a skin
in the game. Their skin in the game is to
continue to extract money out.

Speaker 3 (38:16):
Of your pocket. What is it? What is it like?
Only five percent? Is it ten?

Speaker 1 (38:22):
Five?

Speaker 2 (38:22):
Or ten percent of the American people pay all net taxes?

Speaker 4 (38:27):
I mean what what whenever? Whenever in the number is?
The problem is that increasing distortions makes it worse. Okay,
if you stop taxing tips, then you reduce the number
of people for whom the annual tax bill is a
big deal. And that means you are that much further

(38:48):
away from putting into a play.

Speaker 1 (38:50):
Real you're moving in the wrong directions. What're saying? So?

Speaker 4 (38:54):
I don't like that. On the other hand, good way
to pick up a few votes, right, I mean.

Speaker 1 (39:02):
But let's go back to Trump. Let's go about though.
I want to go back to Trump sort of co
opting what would be traditionally democratic issues. Like I said,
you know, whether it's prescription drug prices, you know that
that kind of thing, right, because really it seems to
me he's remaking. He is remaking. I mean, it's no
longer you know, the Grand Old Party, The Grand Old
Party is now sort of a working class Reagan Democrat party,

(39:26):
is it not?

Speaker 4 (39:26):
Well? Well, yeah, but I mean again, and part of it, right,
part of it is because on most so on most issues,
everybody lies because everybody has a story they want to tell,
and the truth usually doesn't conform to anyone's story. So
when you talk about he's taking a page from the
left with lowering prescription drug prices, Okay, this is basically

(39:48):
because you've got this debate. On the left, you got
people who say prescription drugs are way too expensive, and
therefore we need regulators to set lower prices. The right,
you got people who say regulators should never interfere in
the free market, and therefore, you know, prescription drugs are
by definition rightly priced because they're at the market price. Right,

(40:12):
Except that I'm looking and I go, yeah, I don't
believe we have a free market in prescription drugs. No,
I don't believe it's a free market.

Speaker 2 (40:22):
That's Yeah. Similarly, that's why I argue with my libertarian
friends who are like, oh, we should have open borders,
free markets, and I'm like, it's not a free market
when I'm competing with slave labor, Okay, that that is
not a free market. When we're talking about indentured servitudes.
I mean, I mean, I guess you could say that,

(40:44):
but that is not Oh how do they say it, Benjamin,
voluntary transaction with another voluntary transaction or whatever the crap.

Speaker 3 (40:55):
There's some stupid yeah, yeah, yeah.

Speaker 2 (40:59):
So like what does that even mean? What do those
words even mean anymore?

Speaker 4 (41:05):
And this is this is the problem in very very
large swants of our economy that we don't have a
frame market. Okay, And so now the question is, all right, fine,
given that we don't have a frame market, what are
the proper interruptions or corrections and what we do have.

Speaker 1 (41:27):
And what and what's your answer?

Speaker 2 (41:29):
It's always going to be uncomfortable. That's what people don't understand.
Any correction is going to I'm sorry, I'm sorry, Bruce,
that question was for you.

Speaker 4 (41:37):
You're the no, no, no, I I agree it is
going to be uncomfortable. So my answer, my answer is
I am an anti ideology ideologue.

Speaker 1 (41:51):
Come in with that.

Speaker 4 (41:52):
Yeah, I'm an anti ideology ideologue. See, I think that
people think that they're explained. People think that there's a
that I can tell you what the right way to
fix the problem is, And I'm like, no, maybe I
can tell you what the right way to fix today's
problem is, but I guarantee that whatever we do will
create tomorrow's problem.

Speaker 2 (42:12):
Thomas Soule says, it's it's only trade offs, right, It's
only trade offs.

Speaker 4 (42:18):
It's only trade offs, and policy tends to go on autopilot.
One of the big problems we have in this country
is we only learn the autopilot lessons. So if I
say there's a problem with prescription drugs, you know there's
a problem with prescription drugs, and it's not a terrible
idea to have regulators come in and adjust the prizes downwards.

(42:41):
Then you think you can come back to me in
twenty years and say, Aha, how dare you complain that
there's too much regulation? Twenty years ago you said we
needed more of it, And I'm like, well, maybe we did.
Now a place that this debate is going on. Most obviously,
by the way, is with our elections. We had in
the mid twentieth century. We had an election crisis in

(43:05):
this country. It was legitimate. The Jim Crow Laws said
that very large numbers of American citizens in many states
could not vote. This is a voter suppression crisis. Once
the solution to a voter suppression crisis increase balot access.
And so in the nineteen sixties we put in a

(43:25):
whole bunch of procedures that were designed to increase balot access. Now,
the proper lesson to have learned would have been, when
faced with a suppression crisis, increased ballot access. The lesson
that America learned was increasing balid access is good. Today
we have a radically different problem. We have an overwhelming

(43:47):
fraud problem and very minimal suppression problems. But the lesson
is increasing balid access was good. Therefore, anything that decreases
balid access must be bad, or to learn that you
turn it. You know, many of our policy debates, should
we regulate the price of prescription drugs? It's really like

(44:08):
he Robert, is the water two hot or too cold?
Come on, man, what's the answer. And don't think you
can change it tomorrow.

Speaker 1 (44:17):
And it depends. Yeah, right, well what is the It's
relative And this is this.

Speaker 3 (44:23):
Is am I taking a bath or drinking it.

Speaker 4 (44:25):
This is what I mean by I'm an anti ideology ideologue.
It's like, what is the biggest problem today and how
do we fix it? And by the way, you know,
it's the question I mean, I get this question all
the time with some of the stuff that Trump is doing. Okay,
I assume that on every single policy area they will
overcorrect and we'll have to swing back. It would be

(44:47):
nice to think we could look at problems that are
way the hell off on the left side of the
pendulum in crazy territory, bring it back to the center
and have a dead stop there.

Speaker 1 (44:59):
We that never, that doesn't look, that doesn't look we
know what the height we know at the height of
the Obama Biden, I don't know. Kleptocrasy, you know political,
you know racketeering, right, which is what I would call it,
which we'll get to in a second. Is the pendulum

(45:19):
from DEI in Wochism and Black Lives Matter and social
justice movements and all that nonsense went way over here
for a variety of reasons that we all know about now. Look,
the pendulum is swinging back right of center, and it
will invariably swing, maybe not as far to the right
as it did to the left, but it's going to
swing a little further. And there in lies, you know,
the there in lies sort of the dialectic of it all.

Speaker 4 (45:43):
Eventually on right, we've got this immigration crisis. We really
have no choice. We have to get the illegals out
of the country. Unfortunately, some of the people in the
country illegal really are the best people on the planet, okay,
and we pick them up. It makes with terrible sob stories.
There are really wonderful people who happen to be in

(46:05):
this country illegally, and and you know, if it were
just them, I'd be fine saying, yeah, leave them alone.
The problem is we have a crisis that we need
to address, and you can't just leave the good people alone.
So you know that they're going to get.

Speaker 1 (46:20):
Hurt well well, and you can't figure out who just
the good people are.

Speaker 2 (46:24):
That's the point, right, And there's a lot like a
lot of times people think about our immigration crisis as
just being people crossing the southern border or the northern border,
but there's also lots of people here who have overstayed visas,
overstayed green cards, like didn't you know that?

Speaker 3 (46:44):
And that it is a systemic issue, and the way.

Speaker 2 (46:51):
To fix it is not what AOC suggested, which is
that we just hire more judges so that we can
process everyone. That's not the solution, it's nonsense.

Speaker 4 (47:02):
But we all have to understand that if there are
twenty million people in the country illegally, there are easily
hundreds of thousands of decent people that make for very sympathetic.

Speaker 3 (47:11):
Se correct yes, okay, and and not the Florida.

Speaker 4 (47:15):
And we would prefer not to hurt them.

Speaker 1 (47:22):
Unfortunately, we don't know how to do that, right. The
problem is that. And by the way, if you look
at the numbers, even though it's in the news more
Trump has at this point deported one tenth of what
Obama deported, right, I mean in terms of numbers. So
right now they're going after the bad guys as much
as they can spot them. No one's talking about putting

(47:43):
them in in tournament camps here. I know. There's this
whole thing with alsalvat our prisons all that. By the way,
you should have seen Secretary of State Rubio on Capitol
Hill today with what's his name, van Holland in Senator
van hollen In in Maryland. That was quite quite an exchange.
I'm sorry, we don't have we don't have it up.

Speaker 4 (48:00):
But was that the clip where von Holland says, I
knew what you were going to do, I wouldn't voted
for you. That's the clip, and Rubio says, and Rubio says, uh,
if you're if you regret having voted for me, I
must be doing a good job something.

Speaker 1 (48:15):
You must be doing a good job, you know, And
any referenced you know, I'm having a margarita with whatever
the guy's name was from El Salvador. But no, absolutely,
So I want to bring up one other day I
brought up.

Speaker 2 (48:28):
I can't play it and I have it just a browser.

Speaker 3 (48:31):
Let me try it.

Speaker 1 (48:32):
You can try It's a great clip.

Speaker 3 (48:36):
Entire screen. Please on audio. Here we go.

Speaker 2 (48:40):
There's the first one that came up. Don't judge me
that it's seeing to judge you.

Speaker 1 (48:44):
I promise.

Speaker 4 (48:44):
I do want to get back to the Midi's trip
before we before.

Speaker 2 (48:47):
Okay, we will, Oh is it going to play?

Speaker 1 (48:53):
Get rid of it? Get rid of it? You're killing me. Okay,
before we get back, I'll bring.

Speaker 3 (49:00):
It up when the AD's done.

Speaker 4 (49:02):
I want to know how to lose sixty five pounds.
There wouldn't be much you and me both.

Speaker 1 (49:06):
I took a hair I got a haircut. That's how
come I heart right of all the way. So I
looked up the definition of political racketeering. He says political
racketeering involves using political positions or influence to engage in
illegal or unethical activities for personal gain, often through bribery, extortion, fraud,
or other corupt practices. It's essentially a form of corruction

(49:27):
and where power is abused to exploit others in enrich oneself.
So when you look at the whole Biden situation, you
know the sinility, the cancer stuff that's going on with Biden,
the auto pen. You look at Robert now that we
get to hear Robert hirs report, right, and and the
and the interviews, is it is there not a political

(49:48):
racketeering kleptocracy on the left starting from Biden, all started
from Obama all the way to Biden. I mean I
realized that there's there's no you know, no one's you
know Lilly White in politics. Right, you want friends in
politics by a dog. But the collusion between the media
and you know, the politics and the and the deep state,
isn't that political racketeering? Or am I missing something?

Speaker 4 (50:12):
You know? I I don't think you're missing anything.

Speaker 1 (50:15):
But we cost Bruce have to think for a second.

Speaker 4 (50:19):
Well, I mean, you know I So it's actually it's
a dangerous and interesting point something that was going through
with my students, and that there's so much stuff happening
in the world and people keep looking at it and saying, oh,
you know, there must have been a plan, someone must
have been in charge. And what scares me is that

(50:41):
going down that path and I was seeing a plan
leads you into conspiracy.

Speaker 1 (50:46):
I don't think there was a plan. I think there was, right,
it was decentralized.

Speaker 4 (50:52):
That's that's the point. Okay, this is centralized, and this
is this is really the critical message out there. Most
of this stuff, most things these days in particular, really
isn't planned and it isn't orchestrated. It's what you call
an emerchant property. It's what happens when you study graphs

(51:12):
or networks that essentially there are bad incentives in place
and everybody is making what you call locally irrational decisions.
So it's not as if there is some you know,
organization of reporters out there saying, okay, everybody do your part.
It's essentially a matter of all right. So I'm sitting
here on White you know, White House Press Corps, and

(51:34):
I mean, I've got my political political inclinations, and I
almost certainly lean to the left. How heavily I lean
to the left is another matter. But what really drives
me is a professional success. Right, I want to be
known as a good member at White House Press Corps,
and I want to get a promotion. I want to
get a raise, and I want to get opportunities to
do other things. Well, what's the reward system. Well, if

(51:57):
the reward system, you know, if the idea is break
a story about Biden, how about how Biden is hiding
an illness, and I will probably become immensely unpopular in
my newsroom and fired an export.

Speaker 1 (52:11):
You become excommunicated from the faith.

Speaker 4 (52:14):
Or report on how robust he is and maybe when
a bulletzer.

Speaker 3 (52:19):
And how he likes chocolate chips.

Speaker 4 (52:21):
Well, I mean, you know, then it doesn't have to
be you know, there doesn't have to be a plan
in place. Right, I'm going to do what's rational for me,
and you're gonna do it's rational for you. And you
got the same incentive structure in place. And so all
of a sudden, we have a whole bunch of people
making completely independent decisions subject to the same incentive structure.
They're all going in the same direction. And then he says, look,

(52:43):
there's an overwhelming consensus. And the one guy sitting there saying,
you know what, I'm going to take career risks and
be a contrarian. I was like, what are you nuts?
There were forty people sitting in a room with you.
Thirty nine of them saw a robust, elderly man. You
saw a hiding dementia. Who are we going to believe? Okay,

(53:04):
so now I've got no credibility, no job, no friends,
And all I had to do was say, yeah, you know,
I think you read in the ap uh. You know,
by the way, I noticed, you know, not only did
you have all the stuff that everybody else reported, I'm
the only one who noticed that he was soaked together
that he flicked lint off his jackets.

Speaker 1 (53:26):
I'm gonna I'm gonna believe the guy. I'm gonna believe
the guy that talked about the dog bites and the
cocaine in the White House. I'm gonna believe that guy.

Speaker 3 (53:33):
Oh but wow.

Speaker 1 (53:36):
As we're running out of time here, I want to
end on the Middle East. You want to come back
to the Middle East, I'm going to give you. All right,
let's tart slate.

Speaker 2 (53:44):
Well, okay, so wait are we talking about? Wait though,
are we talking about music festivals in the Middle East.

Speaker 4 (53:49):
I wasn't going to.

Speaker 1 (53:50):
We weren't going to.

Speaker 3 (53:52):
Oh okay, no, never mind, my man.

Speaker 4 (53:54):
You know so, I think this is very important because
I'm not I'm not, I'm not.

Speaker 1 (53:58):
We love I love Erica's anticipation ability to anticipated.

Speaker 2 (54:03):
I needed to make sure that meme got out there today,
regardless of what else we talked about.

Speaker 4 (54:09):
Go ahead, go ahead, I'll give you a deal. I
will sing a song that will be so effective you
will banish me to the Middle East.

Speaker 1 (54:17):
Oh, Bruce, not that song, Bruce, not that song. All right.

Speaker 4 (54:24):
So one of the things that I think is very
important for every god to understand. I don't know how
many of you you know viewers know this, but you know,
going to cern your Arabia, the Ua and Katara I mean,
from our perspective, they're all a bunch of Arab sheaths, okay,
and it looks like three very similar countries. In fact,

(54:44):
it's kind of like doing a European tour to England,
France and Russia. Different these are these are very different countries. Now,
Saudi Arabia and UAE are allies, but they differ on
a lot of things. It's kind of like, you know,
the US in France, all right, since since since the
days of our revolution, it's been hard to think of

(55:05):
a more consistent download in France, and yet we seem
to disagree on everything. Saudi Arabia in the UA, you're
kind of like that. Kattar is an entirely different world,
an entirely different world. I mean to the extent that
in twenty seventeen the rest of the Gulf Cooperation Council

(55:28):
boycotted katter And this is particularly significant because Kantar has
one land border with Saudi Arabia and it couldn't use
its land border and it had an airspace problem. I mean,
for the Saudi, for Saudi Arabia to you know, to
boycott Katar is tremendous right. These countries do not get along,

(55:54):
and they do not get along over a fundamental issue,
and that is the future of Islam. Okay, And this
is this is crucial. I mean again, as with so
much else in the modern Middle East, you have to
go back to the end.

Speaker 1 (56:08):
Of World War One.

Speaker 4 (56:10):
At the end of World War One, two things fell.
The Ottoman empires fell and two years later at a
Turk abolished the caliphate.

Speaker 1 (56:19):
And you had the and you had the Sykes Peako
agreement that divvied up the remains.

Speaker 4 (56:24):
The Sykes Peak Agreement was adding was adding insult to injury.
But but the significant significance is so the empire from
the days of the prophet, from the days of Muhammad
through World War One, there had always been an Islamic empire.
There had always been an emperor, and there had always
been a caliphate. So one hundred years ago, for the

(56:48):
first time in the history of Islam, you have gotten
rid of the two major institutions that governed the Muslim world. Wow,
they're gone, right, And so so not surprisingly you get
this big discussion and debate going on inside Islam of
what does this mean and what is our future? And

(57:10):
those are exactly the questions that everybody would ask if
they were in those sutch of circumstances. One set of
answers that came out is what has become known as Islamism. Okay,
and the Islamist answer again is not unreasonable to anyone
of faith, of any faith. Was they said, Well, clearly
God is punishing us. God has removed our most important

(57:33):
institutions because we have disappointed God. And this is a punishment.
When was God viewing us most favorably back in the
times of the Prophet. So what we must do for
the future of Islam is we commit to recreating what
Islam was like during the times of the Prophet, which
is of course now shrouded mystery and legend and history,

(57:56):
so whatever they perceive it to be. And this is
where you get the Islamist movement. The most important Islamist
organization from the Sunni world is the Muslim Brotherhood and
this debate is raging on today and probably about a
fifth of the Muslim world is Islamist. Now, there are
plenty of other theories about the future of Islam. The

(58:19):
Islamists are the angriest and the most violent, that are
most enraged at the ones that left likes they're ones
who've put all the money into leadership of Muslim organizations
across you, across the United States and Europe. Now here's
the thing. Different rulers have taken different views on it.

(58:43):
The UAE decided thirty forty years ago to turn hard
against Islamism and move into de radicalization and reformation. And
this is why they've moved further. They've moved very far
in that direction. Soudi Arabia had always been in Islamis country.
It was part of the relationship between Hibn saudenibin Wahab,

(59:07):
dating back hundreds of years. Mohammad bin Saliman came in
as crown Prince. Now, much as we talk about how
Americans have a short horizon because everybody's always worried about
coming in four years, Mohammed bin Salman came in so
young that his goal when he came in was first
of all, consolidate your power is crown prince, you become king.

(59:29):
But second of all he is looking at a potential
fifty year reign. Wow, okay, this guy could still be
running Sordi Arabia in the year twenty seventy five.

Speaker 3 (59:39):
Well beyond okay.

Speaker 4 (59:42):
He is not locked into a four year time horizon.
He is literally thinking about the future. Okay. He sees
himself as the guy who was running the center of
the Islamic world through the twenty first century. He's positioning
himself to be the most important Islamic leader. And he
a strategic decision, and that is to go to de

(01:00:02):
radicalization route. And he is really he has pulled so
many money out of the worst radical organizations. He has
turned around a bunch of very important organizations from being
part of the problem to being part of the solution.
This is what he's done. But of course this is secondary.
Primary is staying in a consolidating power. And if he

(01:00:23):
wakes up in five years and decides that the Islamists
to rescend it, he could flip. Yeah, okay, well now
the Kataris.

Speaker 2 (01:00:32):
Well wait, hold on, Bruce, speaking of flipping, we got
to flip this show over. So I love, I love
where you're going. I want you to bring it home.

Speaker 3 (01:00:44):
Say it again.

Speaker 4 (01:00:45):
The Kataris are hard as Lombists. The Kataris are are
entirely in the Islamist camp unless Trump convinced them to
move out of it, because they are more likely tactical
Islamists and ideological Islamists that could be wrong, so very
different countries.

Speaker 2 (01:01:02):
Yep, that is the facts, all right, Robert, take us home,
ladies and gentlemen.

Speaker 1 (01:01:08):
We have been listening and talking with doctor Bruce Abramson,
clearly the smartest guy in the room. Bruce, Where can
they find you? And where can they find your books?
Because I'm sure you're going to have a lot of
people to want to hear more.

Speaker 4 (01:01:19):
So, the best place to look on to my substack
is BDA seventeen seventy six dot substack dot com. You
can find my books on Amazon if you look me up.
And I am, by the way, this hat I'm wearing
make debate great again. I am promoting my friends who
are in a group called Think You Bake Debate Terrific
High School Debate Society. We are hosting their championship at
New College of Florida next week. Look them up online.

(01:01:42):
Terrific organization.

Speaker 1 (01:01:43):
Where you are the dean of admissions to the graduate
school if I remember correctly.

Speaker 4 (01:01:47):
Yeah, they keep making up silly titles for me exactly
and Erica.

Speaker 1 (01:01:53):
Where can they find us?

Speaker 2 (01:01:54):
Well, you guys, you can find us on everywhere you
watch your podcasts and your Face Rich shows. Make sure
to check out our shorts that get posted after the
live broadcast. Now, you guys, a lot of our live
broadcasts aren't staying up. We're just where you got to
come live and then you can see the shorts after.
But if you miss it live, you miss all the juice.

(01:02:16):
So I'm just saying, like, make sure you mark your calendar. Okay,
seven pm Eastern, six pm Central, watch US Live. You
get doctor Bruce.

Speaker 1 (01:02:29):
And next week we have Kaya Jones formerly the Pussycat
Dolls as our guest, a couple of new songs she's
released as well. You don't want to miss that episode
as well, especially Erica. If they want to get US
Live or if they want to see they want to
see Kaya Jones.

Speaker 3 (01:02:44):
That's what I'm saying.

Speaker 2 (01:02:44):
Go support our sponsor is Real Appreciation Day, and ladies
and gentlemen, you know, make sure you all come

Speaker 1 (01:02:53):
Back all right, Thanks and thank you Doctor Bruce

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Stuff You Should Know

Dateline NBC

On Purpose with Jay Shetty

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}Dr. Bruce Abramson: Trump's Historic Middle East Trip, Biden's Cancer & Rising Threats at Home

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

.css-r6mb8g{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:1;overflow:hidden;}Stuff You Should Know

Dateline NBC

On Purpose with Jay Shetty

All Episodes

Dr. Bruce Abramson: Trump's Historic Middle East Trip, Biden's Cancer & Rising Threats at Home

Stuff You Should Know