Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Welcome to the idiots a Colorado. I get on the
two seventy westbound and there's a big SUV driving twenty
freaking miles an hour. I go past her and she's
freaking on the phone. So she's not even paying attention
to the note the hands free law.
Speaker 2 (00:20):
Good God almighty.
Speaker 3 (00:22):
Uh Dragon, I didn't hear anything she said after she.
Speaker 4 (00:30):
Said the two seventy. I'm on the two seventy. You
think we're not influential, baby, we are influential to some,
to some, the two seventy. That was fantastic. But of
(00:51):
course she's on her phone. Oh you know, wait, wait
before I I want to talk about energy for a minute.
Speaker 3 (00:56):
What Biden did yes say? But before I do? Speaking
of phones? So last week we talked about the new
stupid law about your phone. Uh, you can't touch your phone. Well, uh,
let's see if I can find that. What was this
an email? Or did someone text me?
Speaker 2 (01:20):
Do do do?
Speaker 3 (01:20):
Do?
Speaker 1 (01:20):
Do?
Speaker 3 (01:20):
Do do do? Well? I'll have to look for it.
I just I apologize. I just now thought about it.
Speaker 5 (01:27):
But someone, I'm going from a real fun phone thrilling
radio there, Michael, you know.
Speaker 3 (01:35):
What if if you want me to be stilted and
just formatic, like maybe some other places then you'd go
work for them. But here this is free flowing. This
is spur of the moment, and I'm responding to the goobers.
Speaker 5 (01:54):
I'm just saying what everybody's thinking. I'm just saying what
everybody's thinking.
Speaker 2 (01:59):
Yeah, well you know what too well.
Speaker 3 (02:02):
And right now they're busy looking at people driving with
their flashers in the right in the left lane while
talking on their phone, so they might as well just
listen to this too. So I think, actually I do
think it was a text message. I can't I don't
have time to find it right now.
Speaker 2 (02:20):
But a twenty eight year.
Speaker 3 (02:24):
Veteran of a certain police department, let's say near Us,
says that I got one thing wrong about.
Speaker 2 (02:36):
The new phone law, only one thing.
Speaker 3 (02:38):
Yes, And so of course I never liked being proven wrong,
so I did my own research and guess what I
was wrong.
Speaker 2 (02:49):
Well, look at you.
Speaker 3 (02:50):
But here's the point of let me first tell you
what I was wrong about. It's a secondary offense.
Speaker 6 (02:57):
You have.
Speaker 3 (02:58):
They can only ticket you for the phone violation if
at first they see you doing something else like wreckless
driving or careless driving or inattentive driving, or you know,
all the different things that you know you can get
ticketed for. But here's the point that he made that
(03:21):
I thought was brilliant. Nobody in the news locally has
been talking about that.
Speaker 2 (03:31):
He says, it's just like, are you ready for this?
Speaker 3 (03:36):
Just like the pullover law, because it's not the pullover law.
It's the either slow down or pullover law. But as
ce dot keeps trying to convince everybody, it's that it's
the pullover law.
Speaker 2 (03:53):
No, it is not.
Speaker 3 (03:55):
You should slow down. You should pull over if you can,
but if you can't, you should just slow down. But
see does want you to do. They don't want you
to understand that. They want you to all be so convinced.
Michelle's ow how easily this this state, and quite frankly,
this country is so brainwashed by government. Because now it
(04:16):
happened to me just the other day. I'm going down
the twenty five. I'm south a bandling the twenty five.
There is a wrecker, you know, one of those stupid
safety trucks, the one that crashing in the rear ended
me one time, is pulled over. They got somebody with
a flat tire and what's everybody doing. They're pulling over
(04:37):
causing a traffic jam as opposed to just slowing down.
The cop was making the point that they don't want
you to know. They want you to pull over, even
though the law says you can just slow down.
Speaker 5 (04:54):
I always find it funny with that pullover slow down
law that the flashers need to be on on that
car that is on the shoulder.
Speaker 2 (05:03):
Now, if they're not on, screw them.
Speaker 3 (05:07):
No. But if they're not, I agree with you, screw them.
But they're not on.
Speaker 2 (05:11):
What do people still do? They still?
Speaker 5 (05:12):
They're still pull But that was part of the law
that I was like, Hey, if their flashers are on,
then you must either pull over or slow down. So
you know, I'm I'm busy on the two twenty five
the other day. The sun's behind me and I see
a car that's pulled over on the shoulder and I'm like, oh,
the flashes. I can't quite tuck it that flashes are
I don't think those flashers are on. And by the
(05:34):
time I got, you know, within several cars, all those
flashers are on.
Speaker 2 (05:37):
Dang it, I did not get over.
Speaker 3 (05:40):
Oh, shame on you, Shame on you. So his point
about the phone law is that the cabal, the local cabal,
is pretty much ignoring that it's the secondary offense because
c dot is. You know, now today the signs were
watch out for snowplows. Really, I wonder why they want
(06:03):
you to. They're trying to convince you that you can't
even look at it. Don't touch your phone, don't look
at your phone. The secondary offense, secondary offense. That kind
of crab just drives me nuts, absolutely nuts. Now, Dubman
(06:25):
ever seek you to to eighty eight says seat belts
used to be secondary. Also, I call it temporary law.
I thought the seat belt law was still secondary. Is
it no longer secondary? Is it a primary offense?
Speaker 2 (06:38):
I don't know.
Speaker 3 (06:39):
Well, somebody else go look it up. I don't want
to look that up. Let's talk about what Biden did yesterday.
Let me rephrase that. Let's talk about what the Biden
White House said yesterday, because I'm not sure that he
did it, but they have. I've ordered huge swaths of
(07:03):
US federal waters off limits to futureless leasing and drilling
for oiling and natural gas. The ban includes the entire
off shortlanting offshore Pacific, the Eastern Gulf of Mexico and
the Northern Bering Sea. Now yet, all told, the region's
impacted by the band in compass six hundred and twenty
(07:25):
five million acres, an area larger than the states of
Texas and Alaska combine. That's big as big. It's also
significantly larger in scope than the Louisiana purchase, which spanned
about five hundred and thirty million acres. In the statement,
(07:46):
he said this, This is why I say it's not him.
It was a statement. My decision reflects what coastal communities,
businesses and beachgoers have known for a long time that
drilling off these coast could cause irreversible damage to places
we hold deer and it's unnecessary to meet our nation's
energy needs. It's not worth the risks.
Speaker 2 (08:10):
Huh.
Speaker 3 (08:12):
Now, I find that pretty fascinating. Do you know why, Because,
without any irony perceived by them whatsoever, the Biden Band
includes the Atlantic areas where his administration has spent billions
of dollars subsidizing the construction of massive, industrial sized wind
(08:37):
power facilities. Now those developments, the wind developments in the
same area they don't want. Oil and gas developments are
currently the source arising concerns related to impacts on sea mammals, seabirds,
and a once thriving commercial fishing industry. All are concerns
(08:59):
that this administration has refused to adequately or even remotely
address in any real significant way. Dan Kish, who is
the senior Fellow at the DC based Institute for Energy
Research to think Tank in DC, pointed to the quote,
(09:19):
irony of his proposed wind farms in the exact same
water as he is closing to American oil and gas
is that they are not going to be built. The
electricity they produce is so expensive. It is the industrializing
Europe and beginning to topple governments. The only question is
whether governments or the windmills will topple first. A lot
(09:44):
of the turmoil in the Middle East, I mean, there's
a lot of reasons for turmoil in Europe right now,
but a lot of the turmoil in Europe right now
is the exorbitant cost of power. Because even though Germany
still gets a scene seat for eas they're French, I
think are still a number one. But Germany and France
still get a significant amount of power from are you
(10:07):
ready dragging nuclear from nuclear power? But they're shutting them
down because they want green energy. The same guy. Dan
Cush characterized Biden's move yesterday as a petulant act of
(10:27):
a hard left establishment out to punish three hundred and
forty million Americans who rejected their calls to bow to
the climate religion and its vowels of poverty. This guy,
I love this guy. You need to read anytime you
can read anything from the Institute for Energy Research, you
need to do so because he's just he's spot on
(10:49):
about it. He also went on to say that Biden
and the White House quote couldn't care less about the
national security implications, as witnessed by their effectless record that
has lit fires around the world. Well, they tried to
extinguish our gas.
Speaker 2 (11:04):
Stoves at home.
Speaker 3 (11:06):
As we now know from yesterday, it's not just gas stoves,
it's also tankless gas water heaters. So Trump yesterday talked
to Hugh Hewitt and he said that he would reverse
Biden's orders on his first day in office. He where
(11:28):
do I have that? I've got that somewhere? Where'd you go? Hewett?
Where here he is? Take a listen to yes.
Speaker 6 (11:42):
That Biden has banned all oil and.
Speaker 7 (11:44):
Gas drilling across six hundred and twenty five million acres
of US coastal territory. It's ridiculous. I'll unbt it immediately.
I will unbt it. Have the right to unban it immediately.
What's he doing?
Speaker 6 (11:57):
Why is he doing it?
Speaker 7 (11:58):
You know, we have something nobody else has, I mean
nobody has to the extent we have it. And it'll
be more by the time we finish, because I'll be able.
Speaker 6 (12:06):
To expand you know, we're going to expand our country
and it'll be more.
Speaker 7 (12:10):
We have oil and gas, and whether you manufacture widgets
or gidgets or whatever you happen to be doing, some
countries have.
Speaker 6 (12:17):
To work very hard to do that. We do too,
and we will.
Speaker 7 (12:21):
But we have oil and gas at a level that
nobody else has, and we're going to take.
Speaker 6 (12:25):
Advantage of it.
Speaker 7 (12:26):
And when I see somebody saying he's going to ban
six hundred and twenty five million acres, he doesn't.
Speaker 6 (12:31):
Know what that is.
Speaker 7 (12:31):
He doesn't even know what six hundred and twenty five
million acres would look like.
Speaker 6 (12:36):
And we can't let that happen to our country.
Speaker 7 (12:38):
It's our greatest it's really our greatest economic asset, and
we're not going.
Speaker 6 (12:42):
To let that happen to our country.
Speaker 2 (12:44):
I saw that again. I don't believe he's making any
of these decisions.
Speaker 3 (12:47):
He might be citing, someone might be guiding his hand.
Speaker 7 (12:49):
But do you think he's competent for the last two weeks,
mister prettt.
Speaker 3 (12:52):
Now this is off the subject of natural gas, but
I still want you to hear this isn't it?
Speaker 6 (12:58):
Well?
Speaker 7 (12:58):
The things he's doing, Soros and other elements, giving very
very important you know, distinguished awards and medals and and
sort of you know, certifying that they are wonderful people
for a nation. These are people that have done tremendous
arm in cases. I don't know, I really don't believe
(13:18):
that this is the same man that I used to
watch twenty five years ago. He was sort of semi conservative.
I wouldn't call him conservative, but he was a little
bit in the middle at least.
Speaker 6 (13:28):
And now he's gone radical left.
Speaker 7 (13:30):
And they just lost an election because they were radical left,
and they're going to lose another one. They're going to
lose a lot of elections if they keep this calling.
Speaker 3 (13:37):
And he's exactly right. But back to the oil and gas. Now,
Trump went on to acknowledge that the same climate alarmis
the Church of the Climate science. They're behind the band,
and they're going to challenge any attempt to rescind it
(13:57):
in court. He said, they'll do everything they can to
make it as difficult as possible. They talk about a transition.
They always say they want to have a smooth transition
from Barty to party. Well, he said, they're making it
really difficult. They're throwing everything out they can in any
way they can. And then Trump concluded that whole interview
(14:17):
saying that Biden's orders amounts to the worst abuse of
power he's ever seen. I don't know this is the
worst abuse of power ever, but I do think he's
trying to he's just trying to burn things down. He
might as well just it's like the War of eighteen twelve.
Just just go ahead and lot, put a match to
the White House, Just put a match to the country.
(14:40):
Just burn it down on your way out. So here's
the details that I want you to understand about what
Biden did, or the the Biden White House did. They
invoked a drilling band under Section twelve of the nineteen
fifty three Outer Continental s Shelf Lands Act. That's the
(15:02):
section of the law that previous presidents, including Obama and
Trump himself, have used to authorize similar drilling bands. Now,
when you read that provision, it makes it clear that
Congress intended it to be used solely for reasons of
national security and during national emergencies. But unfortunately, for the
(15:23):
prospects of a Trump reversal, the law does not include
any provision for revoking such a ban. Now, Historically, previous
presidential bands have never been challenged all the way up
through the US Supreme Court, though there was a challenge
(15:44):
by the Trump Justice Department to Obama's ban in twenty
seventeen that resulted in the set inside being upheld by
an Obama appointed disrejudge. Back in twenty nineteen, Trump's doj
chose not to challenge that decision. This is clearly a
political move by the Biden White House. It's another payoff
(16:05):
to the Democrat Party's big climate alarm funders. Now, whether
Trump and his appointees can come up with an effective
strategy to challenge it, that remains to be seen. But
if Trump's comments to Hugh Hewett or any indication Trump
seems to be fully prepared to go full bore to
take on the fight, and I hope that he does.
(16:28):
Not only do I hope that he does, I think
that he needs to. I'm done seeing destruction from this
outgoing administration. We still have just under two weeks. We
have thirteen days to go. Now, keep in mind, it's
not just the department heads. Most of the staff has
(16:53):
to go to.
Speaker 4 (16:55):
Now.
Speaker 3 (16:55):
The president has a lot of leeway. Now, there are
some permanent members of the White House staff. Obviously you
know the chef. Well, I'm not the chef, but a
lot of the naval people from the Navy, they're assigned,
for example, of the White House mess to the White
House Calms. But those people are not dangerous in any way.
(17:18):
But in terms of the old Executive Office building, some
of the National Security staff, they got to go completely,
just completely, stop the burning down. That's what Biden's doing.
He's just burning everything down.
Speaker 6 (17:31):
Mike.
Speaker 5 (17:31):
I don't know about you, but I much rather a
whole bunch of wind mails from my midd at Landy
Beach than some hideous off or drilling.
Speaker 4 (17:42):
And by the way, get to say, like Carter new Gear, I.
Speaker 3 (17:48):
Don't remember how Carter said nuke hear, sure, Okay, you'd
rather have the windmills that are destroying fishing and causing
all these sea mammals to become disoriented and beach themselves
(18:11):
and to die and uh to completely screw up. So
we're reintroducing wolves in Colorado while we're killing the mammals
in you know, offshore of Massachusetts. And I think at
some point.
Speaker 2 (18:30):
Look.
Speaker 5 (18:32):
Forgive my ignorance on this, but are offshore drilling wells
Can you see them from the.
Speaker 3 (18:41):
Beach, but they're well, that's a great question.
Speaker 5 (18:45):
And with the windmills, can you see them from the beach?
Speaker 3 (18:49):
Yes, okay, the wind mills, you can't. The windmills that
they're building now, I don't think they're building any They
were gonna build some off Cape Cod and the residents
through a feces filled about that, so they move them elsewhere.
But I think you still can see those from whether
it's Maine for Mount New Hampshire that area, or it's
further south, you can see those because just because of
(19:14):
the size of them. But the the offshore drilling results
in I mean, when you first put together an offshore
uh rig a drilling platform that's ginormous.
Speaker 5 (19:30):
And I mean, again, sorry forgive my ignorance and all
this kind of stuff. But with a windmill that's permanent,
that is drilled into the ground, that's it. But as
for an offshore drilling rig, those can float away.
Speaker 3 (19:46):
They change, just hang on, they change. So originally, when
when you start doing the original drilling, you have a
you have a drilling platform. You have a rig platform,
and that is ginormous. I mean it's it's just it's
as big as this building. And it is I mean
you've got a helipad on it, you have living quarters
on it, you have you have to store pipe on it,
(20:08):
you have ships that are coming in and out. I mean,
you have helicopters flying in and out all the time.
It is a it's a little mini city, is what
it is.
Speaker 2 (20:18):
And you know, if you.
Speaker 3 (20:19):
Want to there's what what was that?
Speaker 2 (20:22):
There was a uh there was that Gulf blowout horizon. Yeah,
the deep.
Speaker 3 (20:30):
Deep water horizon. Yeah, that was it. If you watch
that movie, that's a fairly good representation of what a
drilling platform looks like offshore. But then once it's and
I'm biased, look, I think a and I've taken photographs
of this because I think they're beautiful. So once you've
(20:53):
finished all of the drilling and you've taken everything down
and you just have the pump jack. Even an offshore
pump jack, so to speak, is going to have an
apparatus because you still have once the once the pipe's
been dropped and you've hit pay dirt and you're now
(21:16):
pumping oil, you have to have something to pump that
oil out. But that the footprint of that becomes much smaller.
Now on land, you'll see these pump jacks that you know,
they go up and down, up and down. Yeah, little
rocking horses. They're pulling the oil in the natural gas
out of the ground. Well, that to me is a
(21:40):
beautiful sight. Uh you know, I I can remember uh
early childhood memories. In fact, to this day, it's still
nostalgic to me to see an old pump jack, uh,
you know, in front of a setting sun or you know,
a thunderstorm or whatever. It's just it's just part of
the land escape. Now some people may like not like it,
(22:03):
and that's fine. You know, everybody's tasting art or beauty
is different. So these giant platforms will be reduced in
size to a to a pumping platform so that they
can con continue to get it out. But I would
ask you this question, are we to not drill for
(22:26):
oil and gas so that a bunch of Elitis that
live in fancy homes on Cape cod or Santa Barbara,
or that live in you know, surfside, Texas on you know,
or somewhere along south and west of Galveston that know,
(22:47):
or that live live down in the Louisiana Bayou, that
they that they can't see anything. And then the expense
to everybody else for everything else that they use, electricity, clothes, computers, cars, batteries,
everything that we use that's produced by oil and gas.
(23:11):
You don't want that, then get rid of the high
lines that obscure. I can go out and look on
the back patio here, and if I on the clear day,
I can see high lines. Now they don't obscure the
tops of the Front Range because those mountains are you know,
fourteen thousand feet. But nonetheless, you see electrical power line
(23:36):
transmission lines everywhere you drive south of Denver. When I'm
going to undisclosed location. How many times are there gigantic
power lines and some windmills As I go to the
undisclosed location. I don't look at them and think about it.
I look at the windmills, I don't think, oh, I
(23:57):
think stupid. I don't look at the power lines. Now
I do wish that we could, particularly in urban areas.
I wish that we would bury more transmission lines and
power lines simply because it's not subject to windstorms or
ice storms or to fires. So, but it's expensive to
(24:21):
bury those lines. But back to back to what's happening here.
The Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act nineteen fifty three that
was originally designed to balance offshore resource development with environmental protections.
Nineteen fifty three. Section twelve A of the Act grants
(24:43):
the President the authority to withdraw lands from leasing. It
says this, the President of the United States may, from
time to time withdraw disposition any of the unleased lands
of the Outer Continental Shelf. Now, on the face of
just that language, it's plane and it's flexible from time
to time, suggests that the decisions that are made under
(25:08):
that section of the Act are dynamic, meaning that they're
subject to revision based on a country's or administration's evolving needs.
Nowhere does the statute imply withdrawals are permanent. Yet that
opening and phrasing has been weaponized by progressive administrations to
(25:32):
claim that they've got the right to enact sweeping, irreversible bands.
Speaker 2 (25:36):
I don't think they do.
Speaker 3 (25:38):
When Obama invoked the Act in twenty sixteen and he
withdrew one hundred and twenty five million acres of Arctic
waters and portions of the Atlantic boil and gas leasing,
a decision made just forty two days after Trump's victory
and a month before leaving office. That was a transparent
attempt to hamstring Trump's agenda and prevent him from unlocking
(25:59):
the estimation some ninety billion barrels of untapped oil and
three hundred and twenty seven trillion cubic feed and natural
gas in those areas. Now, historically presidents have exercised their
authority under the Act to both withdraw and to restore
lands for leasing. And I think that's a reflection of
(26:22):
the true meaning of the law, that priorities evolve, that
sometimes maybe you want to take those lands away while
you re establish fishery habitat, or maybe there's such a
shortage of oil and gas that you say, you know what,
the priorities of the nation, the national security of the nation.
(26:43):
Have you ever thought about this? It just hit me
as I said, this oil and gas production is a
necessary component of our national security, of our ability to
wage war, to defend ourselves, to a thriving and robust economy.
(27:08):
And wouldn't you rather have that oil and gas come
from US as opposed to nations that, oh, could we
just cut it off at any time? Looking at you Venezuela,
looking at you Saudi Arabia. So this dynamic ability that
(27:30):
you're going to hear from the left, you're going to
hear from the cabal that Trump cannot reverse this. Well,
wait a minute. If it's dynamic, if Section twelve A
of the Act is dynamic, do we have any examples.
Let's go back to nineteen fifty three Eisenhower, because shortly
(27:51):
after the passage, Eisenhower issued proclamations establishing offshore areas for
oil and gas leasing. When he did that, his executive
order often included adjusting those areas based on evolving federal priorities.
Nixon did it between nineteen sixty nine and nineteen seventy four.
(28:15):
Nixon revised some earlier designations and he opened certain offshore
areas for resource development, while he at the same time
withdrew other areas. Why because he was responding to some
environmental concerns and he was responding to the energy crisis
of the nineteen seventies. Oh my gosh, that evil nut job.
(28:39):
Ronald Reagan did it in nineteen eighty one, and from
nineteen eighty one to nineteen eighty nine, Reagan modified withdrawals
initiated by earlier administrations to expand oil and gas development.
He emphasized energy independence, and he revisited areas that previously
had been withdrawn from leasing. And George H. W. Bush
(29:01):
did it. He issued an executive order extending moratoria on
certain areas, but at the same time he revisited boundaries
established by earlier withdrawals, again based on shifting political and
environmental priorities. I think those examples alone demonstrate that the
(29:24):
presidential authority under the Offshore Act has always been a
tool of adaptability. A president the Trump ought to follow
as he seeks to restore access to lands that he
believes were unjustly withdrawn, and considering the current condition of
(29:45):
the economy, considering all of our national security concerns, that
he ought to open up whatever he can. And I
think he has the authority to do it, So what
happened with the Arctic? Because the Arctic is a great
example of, well, the necessity for judges that follow the law.
Speaker 4 (30:10):
Michael, just for clarification, I was being sarcastic about the windmills.
Speaker 3 (30:17):
Oh oh, well, we we kind of assume. So we
kind of assumed that if you listen to this program
and windmills come up, you kind of get it. So
I'm let's go back to twenty nineteen, because when Trump
sought to reverse Obama's Arctic withdrawal from leasing, he ended
(30:43):
up in this legal battle initiated by the nonprofit was
backed by, of all people, George Soros and Michael Bloomberg.
The case was lead You conservation voters versus Trump. The
judge was Sharon Gleeson, an Obama appoint e to the
US District for Alaska. She ruled against Trump, surprise, surprise.
(31:05):
She concluded that this section we're talking about permits presidents
to permanently withdraw lands, but does not explicitly grant him
the authority to reverse those withdrawals, despite sixty six years
of precedents suggesting otherwise. Her ruling defies both logic and
(31:25):
the statutory language. The very phrase from time to time
implies reversibility. If a president can withdraw lands, they can
restore lands. And that's a principle that's consistent with executive
authority over all federal lands for almost any reason. In fact,
I would say for every reason. So this judge ignored
(31:50):
this fundamental principle. She created a one way ratchet where
withdrawals are permanent but leases are temporary. But then you
look at the legislative intend theislature during the drafting of
this law, Congress discussed the importance of executive discretion in
(32:12):
responding to developments and technology, resource discovery, global markets, everything
on national security, all the things we've talked about. That
alone reinforces the idea that Congress intended the president to
have leeway and implementing and revising policies as necessary, and
that interpretation. Her interpretation not only conflicts with the statue's
(32:33):
plain language, but underminds its flexibility that Congress explicitly intended.
The problem is very simple. It'll end up being litigated now.
Hopefully this new Department of Justice will move rapidly, or
(32:55):
if we're lucky, they'll get it in front of a
federal judge that will initially rule in favor of the president.
The you know, the environmental wycka doodles will appeal and
you know, maybe they can get it. You know, maybe
they the administration, the new administration, can get an injunction
that allowed them to proceed while the case is pending appeal.
(33:19):
And I think they've got a good case to make
an argument to enjoin the environmental whack of doodles from
stopping them because of the needs of the economy and
national security. And remember what Obama did. He also did
at the eleventh hour. It was again a political trap.
(33:42):
You know, stop and think about this. If Obama did
it as a political trap back in twenty sixteen, what
do you think. What do you think Biden's trying to
do here? Biden's just trying to repeat the same strategy.
It's just on a larger scale. Six hundred and twenty
five million acres that would leave only a very limited
portion of the Gulf of Mexico open for any future drilling.
(34:06):
And it would remove while was it four hundred and
fifty billion barrels and over a trillion cubic feet of
natural gas. But have you ever stopped and thought about
what are the steaks for energy independence, not having to
rely on anybody else. That ought to be the mantra
(34:29):
of the Trump administration. Energy independence
Welcome to the idiots a Colorado. I get on the
two seventy westbound and there's a big SUV driving twenty
freaking miles an hour. I go past her and she's
freaking on the phone. So she's not even paying attention
to the note the hands free law.
Speaker 2 (00:20):
Good God almighty.
Speaker 3 (00:22):
Uh Dragon, I didn't hear anything she said after she.
Speaker 4 (00:30):
Said the two seventy. I'm on the two seventy. You
think we're not influential, baby, we are influential to some,
to some, the two seventy. That was fantastic. But of
(00:51):
course she's on her phone. Oh you know, wait, wait
before I I want to talk about energy for a minute.
Speaker 3 (00:56):
What Biden did yes say? But before I do? Speaking
of phones? So last week we talked about the new
stupid law about your phone. Uh, you can't touch your phone. Well, uh,
let's see if I can find that. What was this
an email? Or did someone text me?
Speaker 2 (01:20):
Do do do?
Speaker 3 (01:20):
Do?
Speaker 1 (01:20):
Do?
Speaker 3 (01:20):
Do do do? Well? I'll have to look for it.
I just I apologize. I just now thought about it.
Speaker 5 (01:27):
But someone, I'm going from a real fun phone thrilling
radio there, Michael, you know.
Speaker 3 (01:35):
What if if you want me to be stilted and
just formatic, like maybe some other places then you'd go
work for them. But here this is free flowing. This
is spur of the moment, and I'm responding to the goobers.
Speaker 5 (01:54):
I'm just saying what everybody's thinking. I'm just saying what
everybody's thinking.
Speaker 2 (01:59):
Yeah, well you know what too well.
Speaker 3 (02:02):
And right now they're busy looking at people driving with
their flashers in the right in the left lane while
talking on their phone, so they might as well just
listen to this too. So I think, actually I do
think it was a text message. I can't I don't
have time to find it right now.
Speaker 2 (02:20):
But a twenty eight year.
Speaker 3 (02:24):
Veteran of a certain police department, let's say near Us,
says that I got one thing wrong about.
Speaker 2 (02:36):
The new phone law, only one thing.
Speaker 3 (02:38):
Yes, And so of course I never liked being proven wrong,
so I did my own research and guess what I
was wrong.
Speaker 2 (02:49):
Well, look at you.
Speaker 3 (02:50):
But here's the point of let me first tell you
what I was wrong about. It's a secondary offense.
Speaker 6 (02:57):
You have.
Speaker 3 (02:58):
They can only ticket you for the phone violation if
at first they see you doing something else like wreckless
driving or careless driving or inattentive driving, or you know,
all the different things that you know you can get
ticketed for. But here's the point that he made that
(03:21):
I thought was brilliant. Nobody in the news locally has
been talking about that.
Speaker 2 (03:31):
He says, it's just like, are you ready for this?
Speaker 3 (03:36):
Just like the pullover law, because it's not the pullover law.
It's the either slow down or pullover law. But as
ce dot keeps trying to convince everybody, it's that it's
the pullover law.
Speaker 2 (03:53):
No, it is not.
Speaker 3 (03:55):
You should slow down. You should pull over if you can,
but if you can't, you should just slow down. But
see does want you to do. They don't want you
to understand that. They want you to all be so convinced.
Michelle's ow how easily this this state, and quite frankly,
this country is so brainwashed by government. Because now it
(04:16):
happened to me just the other day. I'm going down
the twenty five. I'm south a bandling the twenty five.
There is a wrecker, you know, one of those stupid
safety trucks, the one that crashing in the rear ended
me one time, is pulled over. They got somebody with
a flat tire and what's everybody doing. They're pulling over
(04:37):
causing a traffic jam as opposed to just slowing down.
The cop was making the point that they don't want
you to know. They want you to pull over, even
though the law says you can just slow down.
Speaker 5 (04:54):
I always find it funny with that pullover slow down
law that the flashers need to be on on that
car that is on the shoulder.
Speaker 2 (05:03):
Now, if they're not on, screw them.
Speaker 3 (05:07):
No. But if they're not, I agree with you, screw them.
But they're not on.
Speaker 2 (05:11):
What do people still do? They still?
Speaker 5 (05:12):
They're still pull But that was part of the law
that I was like, Hey, if their flashers are on,
then you must either pull over or slow down. So
you know, I'm I'm busy on the two twenty five
the other day. The sun's behind me and I see
a car that's pulled over on the shoulder and I'm like, oh,
the flashes. I can't quite tuck it that flashes are
I don't think those flashers are on. And by the
(05:34):
time I got, you know, within several cars, all those
flashers are on.
Speaker 2 (05:37):
Dang it, I did not get over.
Speaker 3 (05:40):
Oh, shame on you, Shame on you. So his point
about the phone law is that the cabal, the local cabal,
is pretty much ignoring that it's the secondary offense because
c dot is. You know, now today the signs were
watch out for snowplows. Really, I wonder why they want
(06:03):
you to. They're trying to convince you that you can't
even look at it. Don't touch your phone, don't look
at your phone. The secondary offense, secondary offense. That kind
of crab just drives me nuts, absolutely nuts. Now, Dubman
(06:25):
ever seek you to to eighty eight says seat belts
used to be secondary. Also, I call it temporary law.
I thought the seat belt law was still secondary. Is
it no longer secondary? Is it a primary offense?
Speaker 2 (06:38):
I don't know.
Speaker 3 (06:39):
Well, somebody else go look it up. I don't want
to look that up. Let's talk about what Biden did yesterday.
Let me rephrase that. Let's talk about what the Biden
White House said yesterday, because I'm not sure that he
did it, but they have. I've ordered huge swaths of
(07:03):
US federal waters off limits to futureless leasing and drilling
for oiling and natural gas. The ban includes the entire
off shortlanting offshore Pacific, the Eastern Gulf of Mexico and
the Northern Bering Sea. Now yet, all told, the region's
impacted by the band in compass six hundred and twenty
(07:25):
five million acres, an area larger than the states of
Texas and Alaska combine. That's big as big. It's also
significantly larger in scope than the Louisiana purchase, which spanned
about five hundred and thirty million acres. In the statement,
(07:46):
he said this, This is why I say it's not him.
It was a statement. My decision reflects what coastal communities,
businesses and beachgoers have known for a long time that
drilling off these coast could cause irreversible damage to places
we hold deer and it's unnecessary to meet our nation's
energy needs. It's not worth the risks.
Speaker 2 (08:10):
Huh.
Speaker 3 (08:12):
Now, I find that pretty fascinating. Do you know why, Because,
without any irony perceived by them whatsoever, the Biden Band
includes the Atlantic areas where his administration has spent billions
of dollars subsidizing the construction of massive, industrial sized wind
(08:37):
power facilities. Now those developments, the wind developments in the
same area they don't want. Oil and gas developments are
currently the source arising concerns related to impacts on sea mammals, seabirds,
and a once thriving commercial fishing industry. All are concerns
(08:59):
that this administration has refused to adequately or even remotely
address in any real significant way. Dan Kish, who is
the senior Fellow at the DC based Institute for Energy
Research to think Tank in DC, pointed to the quote,
(09:19):
irony of his proposed wind farms in the exact same
water as he is closing to American oil and gas
is that they are not going to be built. The
electricity they produce is so expensive. It is the industrializing
Europe and beginning to topple governments. The only question is
whether governments or the windmills will topple first. A lot
(09:44):
of the turmoil in the Middle East, I mean, there's
a lot of reasons for turmoil in Europe right now,
but a lot of the turmoil in Europe right now
is the exorbitant cost of power. Because even though Germany
still gets a scene seat for eas they're French, I
think are still a number one. But Germany and France
still get a significant amount of power from are you
(10:07):
ready dragging nuclear from nuclear power? But they're shutting them
down because they want green energy. The same guy. Dan
Cush characterized Biden's move yesterday as a petulant act of
(10:27):
a hard left establishment out to punish three hundred and
forty million Americans who rejected their calls to bow to
the climate religion and its vowels of poverty. This guy,
I love this guy. You need to read anytime you
can read anything from the Institute for Energy Research, you
need to do so because he's just he's spot on
(10:49):
about it. He also went on to say that Biden
and the White House quote couldn't care less about the
national security implications, as witnessed by their effectless record that
has lit fires around the world. Well, they tried to
extinguish our gas.
Speaker 2 (11:04):
Stoves at home.
Speaker 3 (11:06):
As we now know from yesterday, it's not just gas stoves,
it's also tankless gas water heaters. So Trump yesterday talked
to Hugh Hewitt and he said that he would reverse
Biden's orders on his first day in office. He where
(11:28):
do I have that? I've got that somewhere? Where'd you go? Hewett?
Where here he is? Take a listen to yes.
Speaker 6 (11:42):
That Biden has banned all oil and.
Speaker 7 (11:44):
Gas drilling across six hundred and twenty five million acres
of US coastal territory. It's ridiculous. I'll unbt it immediately.
I will unbt it. Have the right to unban it immediately.
What's he doing?
Speaker 6 (11:57):
Why is he doing it?
Speaker 7 (11:58):
You know, we have something nobody else has, I mean
nobody has to the extent we have it. And it'll
be more by the time we finish, because I'll be able.
Speaker 6 (12:06):
To expand you know, we're going to expand our country
and it'll be more.
Speaker 7 (12:10):
We have oil and gas, and whether you manufacture widgets
or gidgets or whatever you happen to be doing, some
countries have.
Speaker 6 (12:17):
To work very hard to do that. We do too,
and we will.
Speaker 7 (12:21):
But we have oil and gas at a level that
nobody else has, and we're going to take.
Speaker 6 (12:25):
Advantage of it.
Speaker 7 (12:26):
And when I see somebody saying he's going to ban
six hundred and twenty five million acres, he doesn't.
Speaker 6 (12:31):
Know what that is.
Speaker 7 (12:31):
He doesn't even know what six hundred and twenty five
million acres would look like.
Speaker 6 (12:36):
And we can't let that happen to our country.
Speaker 7 (12:38):
It's our greatest it's really our greatest economic asset, and
we're not going.
Speaker 6 (12:42):
To let that happen to our country.
Speaker 2 (12:44):
I saw that again. I don't believe he's making any
of these decisions.
Speaker 3 (12:47):
He might be citing, someone might be guiding his hand.
Speaker 7 (12:49):
But do you think he's competent for the last two weeks,
mister prettt.
Speaker 3 (12:52):
Now this is off the subject of natural gas, but
I still want you to hear this isn't it?
Speaker 6 (12:58):
Well?
Speaker 7 (12:58):
The things he's doing, Soros and other elements, giving very
very important you know, distinguished awards and medals and and
sort of you know, certifying that they are wonderful people
for a nation. These are people that have done tremendous
arm in cases. I don't know, I really don't believe
(13:18):
that this is the same man that I used to
watch twenty five years ago. He was sort of semi conservative.
I wouldn't call him conservative, but he was a little
bit in the middle at least.
Speaker 6 (13:28):
And now he's gone radical left.
Speaker 7 (13:30):
And they just lost an election because they were radical left,
and they're going to lose another one. They're going to
lose a lot of elections if they keep this calling.
Speaker 3 (13:37):
And he's exactly right. But back to the oil and gas. Now,
Trump went on to acknowledge that the same climate alarmis
the Church of the Climate science. They're behind the band,
and they're going to challenge any attempt to rescind it
(13:57):
in court. He said, they'll do everything they can to
make it as difficult as possible. They talk about a transition.
They always say they want to have a smooth transition
from Barty to party. Well, he said, they're making it
really difficult. They're throwing everything out they can in any
way they can. And then Trump concluded that whole interview
(14:17):
saying that Biden's orders amounts to the worst abuse of
power he's ever seen. I don't know this is the
worst abuse of power ever, but I do think he's
trying to he's just trying to burn things down. He
might as well just it's like the War of eighteen twelve.
Just just go ahead and lot, put a match to
the White House, Just put a match to the country.
(14:40):
Just burn it down on your way out. So here's
the details that I want you to understand about what
Biden did, or the the Biden White House did. They
invoked a drilling band under Section twelve of the nineteen
fifty three Outer Continental s Shelf Lands Act. That's the
(15:02):
section of the law that previous presidents, including Obama and
Trump himself, have used to authorize similar drilling bands. Now,
when you read that provision, it makes it clear that
Congress intended it to be used solely for reasons of
national security and during national emergencies. But unfortunately, for the
(15:23):
prospects of a Trump reversal, the law does not include
any provision for revoking such a ban. Now, Historically, previous
presidential bands have never been challenged all the way up
through the US Supreme Court, though there was a challenge
(15:44):
by the Trump Justice Department to Obama's ban in twenty
seventeen that resulted in the set inside being upheld by
an Obama appointed disrejudge. Back in twenty nineteen, Trump's doj
chose not to challenge that decision. This is clearly a
political move by the Biden White House. It's another payoff
(16:05):
to the Democrat Party's big climate alarm funders. Now, whether
Trump and his appointees can come up with an effective
strategy to challenge it, that remains to be seen. But
if Trump's comments to Hugh Hewett or any indication Trump
seems to be fully prepared to go full bore to
take on the fight, and I hope that he does.
(16:28):
Not only do I hope that he does, I think
that he needs to. I'm done seeing destruction from this
outgoing administration. We still have just under two weeks. We
have thirteen days to go. Now, keep in mind, it's
not just the department heads. Most of the staff has
(16:53):
to go to.
Speaker 4 (16:55):
Now.
Speaker 3 (16:55):
The president has a lot of leeway. Now, there are
some permanent members of the White House staff. Obviously you
know the chef. Well, I'm not the chef, but a
lot of the naval people from the Navy, they're assigned,
for example, of the White House mess to the White
House Calms. But those people are not dangerous in any way.
(17:18):
But in terms of the old Executive Office building, some
of the National Security staff, they got to go completely,
just completely, stop the burning down. That's what Biden's doing.
He's just burning everything down.
Speaker 6 (17:31):
Mike.
Speaker 5 (17:31):
I don't know about you, but I much rather a
whole bunch of wind mails from my midd at Landy
Beach than some hideous off or drilling.
Speaker 4 (17:42):
And by the way, get to say, like Carter new Gear, I.
Speaker 3 (17:48):
Don't remember how Carter said nuke hear, sure, Okay, you'd
rather have the windmills that are destroying fishing and causing
all these sea mammals to become disoriented and beach themselves
(18:11):
and to die and uh to completely screw up. So
we're reintroducing wolves in Colorado while we're killing the mammals
in you know, offshore of Massachusetts. And I think at
some point.
Speaker 2 (18:30):
Look.
Speaker 5 (18:32):
Forgive my ignorance on this, but are offshore drilling wells
Can you see them from the.
Speaker 3 (18:41):
Beach, but they're well, that's a great question.
Speaker 5 (18:45):
And with the windmills, can you see them from the beach?
Speaker 3 (18:49):
Yes, okay, the wind mills, you can't. The windmills that
they're building now, I don't think they're building any They
were gonna build some off Cape Cod and the residents
through a feces filled about that, so they move them elsewhere.
But I think you still can see those from whether
it's Maine for Mount New Hampshire that area, or it's
further south, you can see those because just because of
(19:14):
the size of them. But the the offshore drilling results
in I mean, when you first put together an offshore
uh rig a drilling platform that's ginormous.
Speaker 5 (19:30):
And I mean, again, sorry forgive my ignorance and all
this kind of stuff. But with a windmill that's permanent,
that is drilled into the ground, that's it. But as
for an offshore drilling rig, those can float away.
Speaker 3 (19:46):
They change, just hang on, they change. So originally, when
when you start doing the original drilling, you have a
you have a drilling platform. You have a rig platform,
and that is ginormous. I mean it's it's just it's
as big as this building. And it is I mean
you've got a helipad on it, you have living quarters
on it, you have you have to store pipe on it,
(20:08):
you have ships that are coming in and out. I mean,
you have helicopters flying in and out all the time.
It is a it's a little mini city, is what
it is.
Speaker 2 (20:18):
And you know, if you.
Speaker 3 (20:19):
Want to there's what what was that?
Speaker 2 (20:22):
There was a uh there was that Gulf blowout horizon. Yeah,
the deep.
Speaker 3 (20:30):
Deep water horizon. Yeah, that was it. If you watch
that movie, that's a fairly good representation of what a
drilling platform looks like offshore. But then once it's and
I'm biased, look, I think a and I've taken photographs
of this because I think they're beautiful. So once you've
(20:53):
finished all of the drilling and you've taken everything down
and you just have the pump jack. Even an offshore
pump jack, so to speak, is going to have an
apparatus because you still have once the once the pipe's
been dropped and you've hit pay dirt and you're now
(21:16):
pumping oil, you have to have something to pump that
oil out. But that the footprint of that becomes much smaller.
Now on land, you'll see these pump jacks that you know,
they go up and down, up and down. Yeah, little
rocking horses. They're pulling the oil in the natural gas
out of the ground. Well, that to me is a
(21:40):
beautiful sight. Uh you know, I I can remember uh
early childhood memories. In fact, to this day, it's still
nostalgic to me to see an old pump jack, uh,
you know, in front of a setting sun or you know,
a thunderstorm or whatever. It's just it's just part of
the land escape. Now some people may like not like it,
(22:03):
and that's fine. You know, everybody's tasting art or beauty
is different. So these giant platforms will be reduced in
size to a to a pumping platform so that they
can con continue to get it out. But I would
ask you this question, are we to not drill for
(22:26):
oil and gas so that a bunch of Elitis that
live in fancy homes on Cape cod or Santa Barbara,
or that live in you know, surfside, Texas on you know,
or somewhere along south and west of Galveston that know,
(22:47):
or that live live down in the Louisiana Bayou, that
they that they can't see anything. And then the expense
to everybody else for everything else that they use, electricity, clothes, computers, cars, batteries,
everything that we use that's produced by oil and gas.
(23:11):
You don't want that, then get rid of the high
lines that obscure. I can go out and look on
the back patio here, and if I on the clear day,
I can see high lines. Now they don't obscure the
tops of the Front Range because those mountains are you know,
fourteen thousand feet. But nonetheless, you see electrical power line
(23:36):
transmission lines everywhere you drive south of Denver. When I'm
going to undisclosed location. How many times are there gigantic
power lines and some windmills As I go to the
undisclosed location. I don't look at them and think about it.
I look at the windmills, I don't think, oh, I
(23:57):
think stupid. I don't look at the power lines. Now
I do wish that we could, particularly in urban areas.
I wish that we would bury more transmission lines and
power lines simply because it's not subject to windstorms or
ice storms or to fires. So, but it's expensive to
(24:21):
bury those lines. But back to back to what's happening here.
The Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act nineteen fifty three that
was originally designed to balance offshore resource development with environmental protections.
Nineteen fifty three. Section twelve A of the Act grants
(24:43):
the President the authority to withdraw lands from leasing. It
says this, the President of the United States may, from
time to time withdraw disposition any of the unleased lands
of the Outer Continental Shelf. Now, on the face of
just that language, it's plane and it's flexible from time
to time, suggests that the decisions that are made under
(25:08):
that section of the Act are dynamic, meaning that they're
subject to revision based on a country's or administration's evolving needs.
Nowhere does the statute imply withdrawals are permanent. Yet that
opening and phrasing has been weaponized by progressive administrations to
(25:32):
claim that they've got the right to enact sweeping, irreversible bands.
Speaker 2 (25:36):
I don't think they do.
Speaker 3 (25:38):
When Obama invoked the Act in twenty sixteen and he
withdrew one hundred and twenty five million acres of Arctic
waters and portions of the Atlantic boil and gas leasing,
a decision made just forty two days after Trump's victory
and a month before leaving office. That was a transparent
attempt to hamstring Trump's agenda and prevent him from unlocking
(25:59):
the estimation some ninety billion barrels of untapped oil and
three hundred and twenty seven trillion cubic feed and natural
gas in those areas. Now, historically presidents have exercised their
authority under the Act to both withdraw and to restore
lands for leasing. And I think that's a reflection of
(26:22):
the true meaning of the law, that priorities evolve, that
sometimes maybe you want to take those lands away while
you re establish fishery habitat, or maybe there's such a
shortage of oil and gas that you say, you know what,
the priorities of the nation, the national security of the nation.
(26:43):
Have you ever thought about this? It just hit me
as I said, this oil and gas production is a
necessary component of our national security, of our ability to
wage war, to defend ourselves, to a thriving and robust economy.
(27:08):
And wouldn't you rather have that oil and gas come
from US as opposed to nations that, oh, could we
just cut it off at any time? Looking at you Venezuela,
looking at you Saudi Arabia. So this dynamic ability that
(27:30):
you're going to hear from the left, you're going to
hear from the cabal that Trump cannot reverse this. Well,
wait a minute. If it's dynamic, if Section twelve A
of the Act is dynamic, do we have any examples.
Let's go back to nineteen fifty three Eisenhower, because shortly
(27:51):
after the passage, Eisenhower issued proclamations establishing offshore areas for
oil and gas leasing. When he did that, his executive
order often included adjusting those areas based on evolving federal priorities.
Nixon did it between nineteen sixty nine and nineteen seventy four.
(28:15):
Nixon revised some earlier designations and he opened certain offshore
areas for resource development, while he at the same time
withdrew other areas. Why because he was responding to some
environmental concerns and he was responding to the energy crisis
of the nineteen seventies. Oh my gosh, that evil nut job.
(28:39):
Ronald Reagan did it in nineteen eighty one, and from
nineteen eighty one to nineteen eighty nine, Reagan modified withdrawals
initiated by earlier administrations to expand oil and gas development.
He emphasized energy independence, and he revisited areas that previously
had been withdrawn from leasing. And George H. W. Bush
(29:01):
did it. He issued an executive order extending moratoria on
certain areas, but at the same time he revisited boundaries
established by earlier withdrawals, again based on shifting political and
environmental priorities. I think those examples alone demonstrate that the
(29:24):
presidential authority under the Offshore Act has always been a
tool of adaptability. A president the Trump ought to follow
as he seeks to restore access to lands that he
believes were unjustly withdrawn, and considering the current condition of
(29:45):
the economy, considering all of our national security concerns, that
he ought to open up whatever he can. And I
think he has the authority to do it, So what
happened with the Arctic? Because the Arctic is a great
example of, well, the necessity for judges that follow the law.
Speaker 4 (30:10):
Michael, just for clarification, I was being sarcastic about the windmills.
Speaker 3 (30:17):
Oh oh, well, we we kind of assume. So we
kind of assumed that if you listen to this program
and windmills come up, you kind of get it. So
I'm let's go back to twenty nineteen, because when Trump
sought to reverse Obama's Arctic withdrawal from leasing, he ended
(30:43):
up in this legal battle initiated by the nonprofit was
backed by, of all people, George Soros and Michael Bloomberg.
The case was lead You conservation voters versus Trump. The
judge was Sharon Gleeson, an Obama appoint e to the
US District for Alaska. She ruled against Trump, surprise, surprise.
(31:05):
She concluded that this section we're talking about permits presidents
to permanently withdraw lands, but does not explicitly grant him
the authority to reverse those withdrawals, despite sixty six years
of precedents suggesting otherwise. Her ruling defies both logic and
(31:25):
the statutory language. The very phrase from time to time
implies reversibility. If a president can withdraw lands, they can
restore lands. And that's a principle that's consistent with executive
authority over all federal lands for almost any reason. In fact,
I would say for every reason. So this judge ignored
(31:50):
this fundamental principle. She created a one way ratchet where
withdrawals are permanent but leases are temporary. But then you
look at the legislative intend theislature during the drafting of
this law, Congress discussed the importance of executive discretion in
(32:12):
responding to developments and technology, resource discovery, global markets, everything
on national security, all the things we've talked about. That
alone reinforces the idea that Congress intended the president to
have leeway and implementing and revising policies as necessary, and
that interpretation. Her interpretation not only conflicts with the statue's
(32:33):
plain language, but underminds its flexibility that Congress explicitly intended.
The problem is very simple. It'll end up being litigated now.
Hopefully this new Department of Justice will move rapidly, or
(32:55):
if we're lucky, they'll get it in front of a
federal judge that will initially rule in favor of the president.
The you know, the environmental wycka doodles will appeal and
you know, maybe they can get it. You know, maybe
they the administration, the new administration, can get an injunction
that allowed them to proceed while the case is pending appeal.
(33:19):
And I think they've got a good case to make
an argument to enjoin the environmental whack of doodles from
stopping them because of the needs of the economy and
national security. And remember what Obama did. He also did
at the eleventh hour. It was again a political trap.
(33:42):
You know, stop and think about this. If Obama did
it as a political trap back in twenty sixteen, what
do you think. What do you think Biden's trying to
do here? Biden's just trying to repeat the same strategy.
It's just on a larger scale. Six hundred and twenty
five million acres that would leave only a very limited
portion of the Gulf of Mexico open for any future drilling.
(34:06):
And it would remove while was it four hundred and
fifty billion barrels and over a trillion cubic feet of
natural gas. But have you ever stopped and thought about
what are the steaks for energy independence, not having to
rely on anybody else. That ought to be the mantra
(34:29):
of the Trump administration. Energy independence
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Special Summer Offer: Exclusively on Apple Podcasts, try our Dateline Premium subscription completely free for one month! With Dateline Premium, you get every episode ad-free plus exclusive bonus content.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.