The Common Sense Conservatives

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:02):
Welcome to the Common Sense Conservatives, a political discussion group
about current events and other government related matters, every Wednesday
evening from seven to eight pm right here on WUSMN
fifteen ninety AM, WUSMN ninety five point three FM, and
streaming live on WUSMN dot Live, making sense of the
inverted reality we are subject to you every day. The

(00:24):
Common Sense Conservatives are here to help bring.

Speaker 2 (00:26):
You back to reality.

Speaker 1 (00:28):
Now your host Chris Wyatt, Todd McKinley.

Speaker 3 (00:30):
And John Globy, and welcome back to folks. Wednesday evening.
It's the seventeenth of June twenty twenty six decades since
the Normandy landings on the sixth of June nineteen forty four.
My co host in the studio in National Hampshire, John Grovenor,
and out in East Tennessee, it's Todd McKinley looking like
what's the who's the outdoors guy from back in the day,

(00:55):
Grizzly Adams? Is that the guy looking like Grizzy Egger
a beer? Yeah, he did have a beer. Welcome back
to the program side, folks. You join us in WSM
and we appreciated those of you're watching us on as
Todd likes to call the interwebs out there the internet
listening to us on social media. A lot's going on.
The agreement has been signed, John, let me greet to
you first, then I'll greet Todd. John. How are you

(01:16):
doing this season?

Speaker 2 (01:17):
I am doing well, Chris. Yes, the agreement has been signed.
I don't know how well I believe that this is
going to happen, but I know they signed it. But
you know, oramb And notorious for renigging on their agreements
and doing what it is that they do. We'll see
how things go, I guess. But they got sixty days
to sort it out, and that's concerning not much time

(01:39):
and stuff. But they do have some details to work out,
I suppose. But yeah, here New Hampshire, things are going
pretty good. Ayat's I'm definitely going to be out spending
Warmington by looks of things, and we'll see how that
goes too.

Speaker 3 (01:52):
Well. It's a bit like Lucy and Charlie Brown there
that we were told it was gonna be signed on
the fourteenth, on Flag Day and the Armies Bird Day,
which is also Trump's eightieth birthday. It wasn't signed, and
we were told it's gonna be signed on Friday, and
now it's been signed tonight. Todd, you caught off guards
by the thing being signed today.

Speaker 4 (02:11):
Well, I didn't know exactly when it would be signed,
and of course I knew that they didn't want to give
it to Trump on his birthday. I knew that we're
going to play, like you said, Lucy with the football
and pull it away at the last second. They didn't
want to give him a win on his birthday, for sure.
But we'll see where it goes. Like like you said,
it's a temporary thing. It's a memorandum understanding of the
way I believe it right. It's not a full obviously,

(02:31):
a full treaty obviously that has to be ratified by
the Senate. But right now it's kind of a I
don't know, a glorified ceasefire, in my opinion at the moment,
kind of a wait and see where we go.

Speaker 3 (02:43):
Well, Todd, I think that's a fair description of it.
I have the text of each of the fourteen paragraphs.
We'll go through that a little bit later in the program.
But I like your description of it's glorified ceasefire. And
we see how much respect the Iranian Malas have for ceasefires,
they break them moments. Absolute appreciate it. So we'll see
where that goes. But a los of other things happening.
We're rapidly approaching the tur and at fiftieth anniversary of
our nation's decoration. Depend it's just days away now, we're

(03:06):
getting close less than a month, just three weeks away,
and we're all prepping for that. Well, some of us
are prepping for it. Most people can't be bothered with
you know, I got to tell you, Todd, it's a
strange situation compared to nineteen seventy six for the by centennial,
in which everybody was up for it. It was constantly
in the press, it was constantly in the news, was
all over the place. Every business was talking about it.

(03:29):
And you know, I walk around wearing this America two
fifty shirt, and I think most people don't even know
what the heck this thing is, Todd.

Speaker 4 (03:34):
Right, Yeah. They think it's probably a new brand or
something that they're seeing out there, you know, so they're like, oh,
let's get on board with this two fifty thing, whatever
that is, you know, because it's a cool thing to wear.

Speaker 3 (03:43):
I guess at the moment, well, I'm not even sure that, well,
it's kind of a brand, but I'm not even sure
people even get the whole point of the America two
fifty It's a shame. Go ahed John.

Speaker 2 (03:54):
You bring up a point, Chris. I've seen people on
social media going, yeah, it's a two hundred and fiftieth
anniversary the United States of America, But I don't feel
very patriot because Trump is president. It's like, dude, I
don't care who's president. I feel patriotic for this country.
I've always been excited for the two hundred and fifteenth anniversary.
I thought that the by SENTINEI the year was phenomenal.

(04:15):
I was just looking at a quarter here recently, remember
the quarter with the Patriot on the back of the quarter.
I was just looking at one of those here recently, thinking, yeah,
that was a great year, and these people out here
crying and won, and that they can't celebrate because Trump's president.
If you, if you really, if that bothers you that much,
that Trump's Trump's president, that you can't enjoy the celebrations

(04:35):
of the two hundred and fiftieth anniversary of the signing
of the Declaration of Independence, then you didn't love America
in the first place, you and I are not the same.

Speaker 3 (04:44):
Yeah, Now it's a different world. These people living I
don't understand that, you see. The thing is that is
that they never experienced what the rest of the world
is like, and they're experienced the horrors that most of
the world lives under. I've been there, I've done that
and so but to be honest with I didn't need this.
I was just as patriotic when I was a fifteen
year old as I am today and always felt this
country is important. You know. I took great pride in
winning the Daughters of the American Revolution contest in my

(05:06):
high school. When I was back in high school, I
was very proud of such an accomplishment, you know. And today,
if you mentioned dollars in America Revolution, a lot of
people be scratching the head. What's that? You know? It's
shocking to see. And this is why societies fail. This
is why empires collapse, this is why countries disappear from
the map. And if America is here's the map, it's
going to be chaos. Because we're not German or Irish,

(05:29):
or Greek or Slovene or Armenian. We're Americans. So we're black,
we're white, we're brown. We're Christians, were Jews, were Muslims.
We're predabably Anglo Saxon Christian. That's true. But what happens
to America when America is an America? If that happens,
That's the thing I don't even want to contemplate.

Speaker 4 (05:46):
Todd, No, I agree with you. You know, it's like,
what is the identity? Identity of so many things, But
it's a shared values around, you know, a collective idea
of what this country is. Reagan described it as you know,
shining city on the hill, whatever your description is. You know,
it's those things that we coalesce around. You know, it's
the Constitution. You know, it's again the values that we

(06:06):
share as a nation. You know, we put others first.
You know a lot of a lot of other nations
don't do things the way we do. We self sacrifice
on a lot of things. You know, that's what makes
the country great. And that's why we're celebrating two fifty
not because of Republican or democrat. It's because of what
makes the country great. And like John talked about, and
he talks about on a.

Speaker 2 (06:24):
Regular nothing nothing, but no other country has been like
the United States. I don't know when right. I mean,
even Rome wasn't like the United States the way it's
set up and stuff. And you know, the thing about
the freedoms the opportunities is because this country creates we
are criticized countries left at us because so many of
us have flags in our backyard, flying them off for garage,

(06:44):
our home, the side you know, the side of our house,
or some of us are driving round in our cars
flying flags representing our freedoms. And they think it's kind
of what's wrong with Americans why they feel the need
to fly flags, Because, bro, we are the greatest country
in the world. We've had established the of opportunity. People
wanted to be us. They wanted to be like us
in different countries for ever in a day. It wanted

(07:07):
the same opportunities we have. People used to migrate to
this country for the opportunities we offer, those freedoms that
we offer, the ability for them to start a new
business they couldn't do in their own home country because
they have a caste system there. You know, I mean,
this country represents a lot and it's been the backbound
for the globe, for the representative of freedom.

Speaker 3 (07:27):
Well, you could become a Roman citizen and have the
privileged roam even if you weren't Italian. And that in
some ways is similar to America. But in other countries
that's not the norm. You're not tie, you know. I
get a kick out of these people say they look
at me and they say they're German. I'm you're German.
You clearly look Pakistani to me, Yes, I'm German. How
could you be German? I have a German passport. That

(07:48):
doesn't make you German. That makes you a German national
subject to their laws and their sovereignty, doesn't make you German. Now,
if you are from Ireland and your mother is from Nigeria,
but your father is from Kilarney, you can be Irish
if you choose to be, because you have Irish DNA,
as long as you grow up in the culture. But
you cannot be you cannot be English. When you are
from Pakistan or from India or from Nigeria. You can

(08:11):
be a British national, whereas in America you can become
an American regardless of your origin. And it's a big
distinction which is lost in a lot of people. And
I take offense that people claim to be German who
are obviously not German, simply because they carried German passport.
You know, it's it's the same thing in Ireland. You're
not irish. My ancestors did not look, sound or behave
the way you do. My ancestors were Irish. And stop it,

(08:33):
stop the nonsense. Well, guys, it's been a busy week.
We've got this peace agreement. You know, we've got so
much on the table here. Marjorie Taylor Green is going
backcrap bonkers crazy. I think today she launched her new program,
The Grift is on for sure. You know, all these
people who claim that they care about the country then
stab the president of the back in a time of war,
and then run off and get their own little podcast.

(08:54):
Sounds like a familiar movie we've seen before, Todd.

Speaker 4 (08:56):
Yeah, well we regularly see it, don't we. You know,
you used to be back in the today, people would
go write the book, right, you know, they get the
op ed, they get the book deal. But now they
get the podcast deal, right, so they can spew nonsense
for I don't know sixty shows, one hundred shows, however, manuy,
they can get out, you know, and and of course
going to speaking circuit. And that's pretty much it at
this point, right. But you know it is it's a grift,

(09:17):
it's all it is. It's an opportunity to throw some
out of the bus. People go into government now, especially
for high office. And this isn't across the board, but
they go into high office so that they can go
out and it's about the next thing, the next big deal,
whether it's the book, whether it's the podcast, whatever, they
go into it, and a lot of people, a lot
of people go into it for the wrong reason. It's
not about selfless service, you know, about giving back and
of course serving something higher than yourself. For them, it's

(09:39):
about the almighty dollar well johnytition.

Speaker 3 (09:43):
Because I'm not going to say that we've been saddled
with Trump, because I'm not disappointed. But for those who
are unhappy Trump, they've been saddled with Trump in no
small way because of Marjorie Taylor Green and her her
endorsement of Trump and her her endless maga behavior. And
then suddenly she just sticks it. It's like brutus, She
just sticks the dagger in the back of the bag
of the movement. Does this woman make any sense to you?

(10:05):
I think she's backcrap crazy.

Speaker 2 (10:07):
No what you know. And I've said this before with
people like Nick Fuintez, Marjorie Taylor, Green, Tucker Can. It
feels yeah, Candice owns. It feels like they picked up
some narrative somewhere about anti Israel is real bad. I'm
not saying anti Jewish. I don't think they're being anti
Semitic as much as they're just now.

Speaker 4 (10:25):
They're not being anti Semitic.

Speaker 3 (10:26):
So Cad is anti Semitic.

Speaker 2 (10:28):
There's no question about she may she may be, but
I don't really listen to her enough to know.

Speaker 4 (10:33):
If she Tucker be anti Semitic. I've seen the anti Israel,
but not Semitic for sure.

Speaker 3 (10:39):
I've seen Tucker be anti America.

Speaker 2 (10:42):
Hey he's going to buy a home in Katar, don't
you know? So yeah, you know, these guys have got
a narrative coming from somewhere that they all they all
got on board with. I don't know if they thought
that was the fringe and they wanted to be in
front of it, or if they're getting paid, but for
some reason, they all have the same narrative, and the
narrative is against Trump.

Speaker 3 (11:02):
Yeah, they're just absolutely dement to with it when someone's look,
I mean, the president's doing things disappointing, this peace agreement,
very disappointed in this nonsense, his threat to take over
carg Island. Then he did nothing. Another disappointment. But that
doesn't mean you betrayed the country because you throw your
toys out of the crip because you're not getting your way.
I mean, these people, it's just juvenile. The behavior. It's
absolutely ridiculous. I mean, I mean, I don't know what

(11:24):
to say about them beyond that todd other than we're
really disappointed in the actions and behaviors some of these commentators, oh, for.

Speaker 4 (11:30):
Sure, because they're never going to satisfy anything that we
have to say or what we believe in, for sure,
because for them, it's one crisis to the next to
the next. It's one you know, I guess prediction to
the next to the next. Once it doesn't come through
or true, they go onto the next thing. They never
rectify or say why if something didn't come true that
they said the day before. It's on to the next thing,

(11:51):
the next big claim. And of course it's just an
ongoing grift.

Speaker 2 (11:55):
That's kind of funny. Yeah, you're right, because if you
make enough claims, sooner or letter, one of them is
going to come to you and you go see you
way back to him.

Speaker 4 (12:01):
For sure.

Speaker 3 (12:02):
If you throw them enough mud against the wall, something
stick on. One of my viewers commented in the social
media coment said that it's a member of understanding on
a piece to my self. Yes, I'm aware of that,
but it is Trump himself who has said this is
a peace deal over and over again. And that's my point,
over selling something. It's not a peace deal. That exactly
the point. That's why I called a piece deal, because
he called a piece deal. It is not a peace deal.

(12:22):
So I appreciate the comment, but trust me, we're tracking
with it. Well. Speaking of tracking things, John, the Federal
Reserve under Kevin Walsh, in his first meeting twelve to nothing,
decided to hold the prime landing rate or the Federal
Reserve rate even no change, not up or down. They
kept a study. They say they're two points higher than
the desired inflation target. So what do you think of that?
I mean, the rates didn't come out. Trump wanted washing

(12:44):
to get the rates lower, but I think given the
pressure of petroleum, which now by the way, is cheaper
than it was before Trump invaded Europe or a nine video. Yeah,
I wish you invade Europe. And cheaper than when Trump
invaded Iran. When Trump attacked Ron, it was seventy nine
dollars a barrel. Today it was seventy eight dollars a barrel.
So it's lower. And it's in summertime when the price
of fuel increases. We pay more for gasoline every summer

(13:04):
because demand is high. So now gasoline's gonna be well,
gasoline isn't yet, but oil is cheaper than it was
before he went into a run. I mean, go figure, John,
We were being told that Trump was going to push
the price of oil to two hundred dollars a bar
remember that.

Speaker 2 (13:15):
Yes, But you know, don't don't get too excited, because
as you said, it is summertime and the reserves are
down a little, and these things always take a while
to correct themselves when you know, for fuel prices to
come down. So it might be well in the fall
before we really see I mean, we may see some drop,
but I don't expect a huge drop until probably fall time.

(13:35):
We might notice the difference, but then you ramp it
up again for what winter and cold weather, So we'll
see how things go. But it's got to get way
below what it is.

Speaker 3 (13:43):
Bro.

Speaker 2 (13:44):
It can't be you know, four dollars four and a
half dollars a gallon off forever in a day. We
need to see some sort of relief.

Speaker 3 (13:50):
Well, I paid three forty nine in Spartanburg, South Carolina
a couple of days ago.

Speaker 2 (13:55):
Yeah, I think I've been paying a little over four.
But uh yeah, so man, I'm paying five dollars forty
nine point nine set.

Speaker 3 (14:02):
Yeah, yeah, but that's because of the restrictions the EPA
and others put on that out your finding standards. That's
exactly why. I mean, it's they make it so difficult
to use diesel, which sucks because all their stuff gets
shipped by trucks in their brander diesels. So it's terrible, terrible.

Speaker 2 (14:16):
Here you want. You brought up the interest rates though,
and what the interest rates people don't contemplate as it's compounding,
is when you have interest, you don't have a you
don't you have inflation, you don't have deflation. And when
you have inflation, it impacts us, you know, those of
us who work for a living. It impacts us because
we're losing value in our money are people's wages keeping
up with the rate of inflation, but when it exceeds

(14:38):
it normally it would expect to be about between two
two to two and a half percent a year would
be a normal inflation rate from my understanding, and when
it exceeds that and over time it becomes compounding. And
it seems to me since nineteen eighty to present day
it's just over four hundred percent. So a dollar today
is worth what a quarter was in nineteen eighty. That's

(14:58):
pretty scary when you think about it, right, right.

Speaker 4 (15:01):
Well, all of a sudden, mean, a trillion eire doesn't
look so great, right, Yeah.

Speaker 3 (15:05):
It looks pretty good to me, Still looked good.

Speaker 2 (15:08):
But yeah, he's got a point.

Speaker 3 (15:09):
This thing she wanted to make there is being a
millionaire twenty twenty six. Is not being a million nineteen
seventy six, I think, No, yeah, yeah, I know, but
yeah it's big. A trillionaire is still a big deal
unless you're in Buy our Germany in nineteenth Buy our
Germany in nineteen thirty three might be a different story.
You know, O bear loads full of cash and buy
a loaf of bread. Yeah, no, a hundred percent with
you there, John, It's it's crazy how people don't think

(15:32):
in the reality here. So a lot of people look
at they just look at numbers and go, oh, interest
rates three and a half it's four and a half percent.
You do realize that that thirty year loan for a
house at four and a half percent is hundreds of
dollars more per month in mortgage payments and tens and
tens and tens of thousand dollars interest paid her life
alone because that one percent increased. I don't think people
realize the big difference. So they go to buy a home,
They're like, wait a second, I can't afford this. You

(15:54):
can't because that three and a half percent is a
lot different than four and a half percent. That really
makes the difference. I think a lot of people people
don't pick up on that until they get hit with
that situation. John.

Speaker 2 (16:04):
Yeah, you know that million dollars home you have was
work two hundred and fifty thousand dollars in nineteen eighty.

Speaker 1 (16:09):
Uh.

Speaker 2 (16:09):
Basic, But you can't have you can't have gains in
the value of your house depending on marketing shifts and
stuff like that with them wherever it is you're living.
But it seems to me you can also lose gains,
but it looks like you have gains because of inflation.
So if I sell my house, I still have to
pay those taxes even though it was all just inflation. Right,
So I'm still going to pay the capital gains tax.

Speaker 3 (16:28):
Well yeah, and here's the other piece of that too.
It is an index so that you get the true
value back. See buy a home, American owned home. Oh,
it's the American dream. American dream. You got to replace
that hot water heater. You got to replace that AC unit,
you got to fix that that that that foundation that
slid because of this, that and the other. You've got
to deal with the flutter your base. You got to
pay for all that ad papers.

Speaker 2 (16:47):
Sure, it's thirty dollars for roof Chris, Yeah.

Speaker 3 (16:50):
Yeah, forth and when you and you have replaceers and
when you sell it, they don't index it to the
value of the house when you bought it forty years
ago or thirty years ago. It's not like this six
hundred thousand dollars today that you're going to get for
your house is actually one hundred and twenty five thousand dollars,
which is what you paid it for. It so you
haven't gained anything in thirty years, and they just hood
we people, oh, you're making money. Not really. If you
put that money investment account, you have a heck of

(17:12):
a lot more money today than you would have had
if you bought a house. I mean, people are gonna
argue with me all day of these financial planners, But
I'm telling you, owning a house is not the great
wonderus thing that people claim it is. It's not a
bad thing, But the thing is that you don't own
your house unless you own it out right. And if
you own an outright, you're still a slave. You're a
slave to the taxman. You have to pay property taxes
on property you already own. What kind of moron of

(17:32):
concept is that you pay taxes on something that's already
yours if it's paid off, there's no mortgage, it's yours.
But if I pay off my mortgage today, if I
magically win the lottery and pay off my mortgage, I'm
a slave to the township, to the state. I have
to pay them property taxes to the tune of about
ten thousand dollars year to live here. That's more money
than I made in a year for the first twenty

(17:53):
years or fifteen years I worked, and I'm not rich.
It's just an average loan bill. Come house.

Speaker 2 (17:57):
What should they do? Should they start charging us taxes
for services? So everybody pays them if you're a resident
within that city or that state. I mean, so basically,
you still have to play, pay for your law enforcement,
You still have to play pay for your fire firemen,
and uh, you still have to educate your children. And
that's what they base home taxes on. So how would

(18:19):
they gather taxes if we didn't pay them? I understand
your point. I'm not arguing against you. I'm saying, how
would they How would you change the system? How would
it be more fair?

Speaker 3 (18:28):
Well, it would be a fair, big question, more honest.
Instead of calling it a property to ax on your
property and try to take your property if you don't
pay a tax, they should have a per capita tax.
If they're going to do that to support local law enforcement,
fire departments and word repairs and things like that should
be a per capita tax for adults and then you
pay it. They should be more honest about it. I'm

(18:48):
not in favor of that. I'm just saying that that's
a much more honest way to do things, or you
can add to put a value out of tax. But
all of these things have loopholes. First off, anything that people. First,
if you're an area that's not with a large population,
you're gonna get much or consumption taxes or value out
of tax. You're not going to get a lot from it.
If you're a heavily popular area, you're gonna get a
lot more money from that. Also, if you have people

(19:09):
who leave the area and go to town in the
neighboring county, in every township to buy something because that's
where the big mall is, you lose all that revenue.
So there's there's negatives and there's positives to it all
the way around. But baking someone pay taxes on property
that they own it is criminal. I mean, you already
own the property. Why am I paying taxes because I
have property? What are you doing for my property? If

(19:31):
you want me to pay service fees for for sewage
or sewer, service fees for natural gas, or service fees
for the roads, that's a whole different story. But my
property is my property you're not maintaining and I have
to pay you for the privilege of owning property. That
is slavery.

Speaker 2 (19:45):
I'm not let's stop there, Chris. I mean, I go
register my car. I got to pay property tax on
my car, I remember one of us.

Speaker 3 (19:54):
Well, well, that's because you live in the Commonwealth, you know, unfortunately.

Speaker 2 (19:58):
Free estates of the Union, I promise you.

Speaker 3 (19:59):
But do I get a property tax on your car? Well,
Soda is Washington State run by leftist So who else
has that? There's a couple others in Arizona has that too.
There's no property tax here. I pay a registration fore
hundred dollars every tw years from my car. That's it.
In Ohio I paid twenty six dollars every year. In
Arizona paid thirteen dollars. That's all. Should cost a service fee.
There should be no property tax. Property taxes something you

(20:21):
own is insane. That means it's not your property. You're
paying for the right to own it.

Speaker 2 (20:26):
I like my friend who's a mechanic in Florida, who says, man,
I bought all these tools when I was working a job.
I have all these wrenches, I have these their tools.
I have all this expensive tools that I accumulated through
the years working a job. Now I turn around and
filed for a business. And now I've got to pay
taxes on all the tools I own outright because I
bought when I was working for a living.

Speaker 3 (20:47):
It's absolute ridiculous. It's not right, it's morally bankrupt. It's
your property. You have a right to own property, and
taxing someone's property is just I mean on a purchase, yes,
because you can make the argument that you're able to
buy this because of the roads and the electricity and
the public safety and all the things that come into
play that make it possible for that good or service
to be delivered to you. So attax on that to

(21:09):
support the infrastructure is reasonable. But attacks on something you
already owned, you've already paid for, that you have to maintain.
It's just ridiculous. It lacks common sense. But they do
it because they get away with it. Here in the
Commedywealth of Pennsylvania, guess what just happened. Now we have
a nonprofit for THEFW. We don't make any money, trust me,
we definitely don't make any money. We better to get
by and it takes the efforts of people out of

(21:30):
their pockets sometimes to keep it open. And we have
games of skill. These are little computer machines that you know,
you have to pick this or select that and select
this to the other. So they were categorized as games
of skill, not as gambling machines. Several years ago there
were several lawsuits because the state wants to get their
grubby fingers into it. For small, small games of chance,
that's the tickets people pull and win, you know, that's gambling.

(21:52):
It's small level gambling. We have to give sixty percent
of that revenue that comes out of it to nonprofits.
Sixty percent, so the best we can do is forty percent.
That's assuming that we are if someone doesn't steal, or
that the bartenders don't make mistakes, which they do and
we lose money. So we don't make much money, if anything,
on games, although it brings people in the door, but
that's not the purpose of it. We're nonprofit. The purpose

(22:13):
of giving is a license, so we can make money,
but we're not making money from it. So ale all
comes to games of skill, we're actually making money. All
the money that comes in the winnings go to the winners.
Then the revenue behind that is split with the men
are fifty to fifty. We don't pay tax on it.
We're we're nonprofit, and so now they want to they've
declared them illegal, saying they're slot machines. They're not slot machines.

(22:34):
That's Pennsylvania Supreme Court, run by Democrats five to two,
has said this, it's a ludicrous decision. I guess we'll
have to appeal to the Supreme Court. But I don't
know how that even it comes to the plan. I
don't know if there's even angle there because it's a
state thing. But what they're doing is now they want
to they want to tax those things. They want to
force us to give. So if they tax it, that's
going to cripple us and just attack. If they force

(22:55):
us to give a percentage to charities, then we're not
going to be a viable thing anymore. And these are
mostly in nonprofits and clubs and privateizations, so they're gonna
kill us. I mean, it's one thing if you go
to the gas station, you know, the commune store that
has it, and many of them haven't. They're for profit business.
They can afford for that machine to go away or
for them to pay attacks on it. We can't afford that.
And this is this is this is nothing that they

(23:16):
deserve money for it's just a money grab, and they're
gonna destroy so many different nonprofitorizations and they don't care.
They don't care because our budget went from thirty two
billion dollars when I moved here a decade ago to
fifty two billion dollars. These scumbags in Harrisburger out of control,
spending money don't have and burying us in debt. And
that's the money they take out of our pockets. That's
not even the money that Uncle Sugar gives them on

(23:38):
top of that.

Speaker 2 (23:39):
Show me a state that doesn't have a deficit, Wyoming, Wyoming.
Once they I was gonna say, I think New Hampshon's
running pretty good debt. It seems like all the states
I was looking at that years ago, it seems like, oh,
pretty much all the states were running off pretty good debt.
I mean, not as bad as the federal government is.

Speaker 4 (23:56):
Yeah, Tennessee, we also have the problem with the game
of chance. You know, the state loves to have that
monopoly over anything like that, you know, a power ball,
whatever the case may be, a lottery. The states love
to have that monopoly. But of course they'll come after
you and indict you, put you in jail. Put your
handcuffs if you decide to gamble to raise a little
bit of money for your organization. And like you said,

(24:18):
they don't care if you survive as an organization, because
that's less organ less people or less organizations. That's going
to give them a headache in Harrisburg or Nashville, wherever
the case may be. You're not there to be a
thorn in the side no more. You're you're you're no
longer organized, You're you're just a has been organization. That's it,
and that's what they want, I think in a lot
of cases, less of a headache for them, less of
a less of an advocacy problem, and they can just

(24:41):
basically dictate what they.

Speaker 3 (24:42):
Want well to be Todd, it's just a pure and
simple money grab. They are drunken sailors who cannot control
their spending. Republicans and Democrats, they just spend, spend, spend, spend,
And what's the outcome of that. I've got development out
of control of my township. Traffic is stronged, and these
morons can't even schedule construction projects between the county, the borough,

(25:02):
the state, and the townships. I mean, we've got the
main road shut down going to Carlisle. The bridge has
been out for a year while they repair it. I
don't I think he's being repaired by somalis. It's going
to take forever to be fixed. The bridge is out there.
Then they take another bridge out on this side, on
the other side of the road. Then they block off
this road and they put down May eighth. It's closed, well,
it's still closed. Apparently it's closed indefinitely while they tear

(25:23):
up the roads so they can put in these eight
hundred apartment buildings. They put there on an intersection was
a cornfield. It's out of control. The roads are falling apart,
infrastructures suffering. I notice my Internet now has dropped from
one gigabyte, which I'm paying for, down to a maximum
six hundred fifty megabytes of download at a time because
of all this demand that's been put here and no
additional capacity. We didn't ask for all these people to
move in here. We didn't authorize this, we didn't vote

(25:45):
for this. Yet they pull this crap, and all, by
the way, all these units are putting in, all pay
taxes more and more money. There have been over one
thousand houses built in this township since I moved here,
all of them north of five hundred thousand dollars of
value every year. So we're talking about eight ten thousand
dollars more of tax revenue coming into the school district
and into the township, and and it just never stops enough.

(26:08):
It's never enough. They just just just like they're like,
they're like, job of that.

Speaker 2 (26:12):
So, yeah, they got a term for this too. By
the way, it's called creative taxation. They love to. They
love to.

Speaker 3 (26:22):
I mean crazy sounds very very confiscatory to me, like
they're confiscating.

Speaker 2 (26:27):
My well yeah right, yeah right, they're trying to find
new ways to create taxes. That's my point. You're talking
about populate the area. We get more people, we get
more taxes, and then we have more money for schools.
But then we got more children to educate, we need
more taxes.

Speaker 3 (26:39):
They create a cyclical Yeah, I'm with you. So, guys.
I was just in South Carolina in just the past
couple of days and Georgia and South Carolina Homeowners Association
HA has shocked the residents by announcing they can no
longer be permitted to carry their firearms right coming for Yeah,

(27:00):
the management of forest Pine's condomity is announced that the
complex is pool, clubhouse, sidewalks and park areas would be
among the places where firearms, whether the open air concealed
would no longer be permitted. The band calls a backlash
residents or question of the legality of the decision. I agree,
where does the homeowner Association get off overruling the constitution?
I know it's private property and all this, but these
people already live there is.

Speaker 2 (27:21):
Don't know about that because if you think about it
as a private property, if you own a home and
you belong to the homeowners association, I mean I've seen
some places that a homeowner association. Because if some houses
are part of the association and some houses aren't part
of the association, so do they really have that authority
to make those sorts of dictates because you own your
home and you have a right to exercise your rights

(27:41):
on your property. Now, if they have a community pool
or something and they decided in a democratic process or something, maybe,
but when you own your own home, they can't say anything,
can they.

Speaker 3 (27:51):
No. Not in your own home, that's for sure, and
that's the argument here. But in public spaces, that's what
the argument's about too. Somebody said, it's not a department
building where you have a lobby you have to walk through.
It's my house. I own it, iron it. I mean,
I don't rent it. I own it. And South Carolina's
constitutional carry state, like, you can't do that. There's literally
no signage. It's full no signs, clubhouse, no signage anywhere,
and they can't tell somebody where you can or cannot

(28:13):
carry your gun in the neighborhood. I don't know if that's true,
but I certainly agree with the sentiment. But I mean,
this is a red state, so it just shows you
this red state, blue state is a bunch of nonsense.
Because you've got leftist whankers in every state, and they
get control of a homeowned association, this is how they
behave well.

Speaker 4 (28:27):
Most people who are in charge or part of homeowners
associations tend to be on the on the left anyway,
because they want that control, whether it's at a micro
level at a like a homeowners association, or whether it's
the federal government or it's the globe. They want that
power and control of every aspect of your life at
every level.

Speaker 2 (28:44):
Some people are horrible. You're right, they're horrible about it too.
They literally they watch everything going on and they'll be
knocking on your door. You got one blade of grass
that might be leaning against the concrete in your driveway
and to violates their rules or something, and they're there
banging on your door and writing with citations or something. Yeah,
I've heard stories.

Speaker 3 (29:00):
I know.

Speaker 2 (29:00):
I would never buying a homeowners association. I've never bought
planning on buying the condominiums or anything like that. I
have no use for that crap. I'd rather live in
a tent in the woods than belong to that nonsense.

Speaker 3 (29:12):
Well, I just have one thing to say. I am
the boss. You guys missed that entirely. Trump rocks up
at the G seven. Francis walks, Oh, yeah, yeah, I'm
the boss. That was classic. That was classic. Trump is hilarious. Yeah,
he's the boss. They're all waiting. Georgia Moloney comes in
a little bit late, and I think someone else came
a little bit late, and they're all sit around the table.

(29:33):
My crone is trying to entertain. He's not a funny guy,
but he's trying to be funny.

Speaker 2 (29:37):
Uh.

Speaker 3 (29:37):
And then Trump comes in. Welcome miss to President. It
comes over, he goes, I am the boss. That was
his classic. Sorry for Springsteen, apparently you're not the guy. Okay,
I'm in charge here. Yeah that's right, Cap Weinberger, and
what's his name.

Speaker 4 (29:50):
I'm in charge here now.

Speaker 2 (29:53):
Yeah, there's claiming it and there's doing it. I think
doing it.

Speaker 3 (29:57):
Yeah, yeah, al Haig said that, I char who's in charge.
I'm in charge here. Well, that did not have a
good look and look like a military coup to the reporters, right, And.

Speaker 4 (30:05):
Of course he didn't got the line of succession wrong too,
you know.

Speaker 3 (30:08):
Yeah, exactly, He's not in a line of succession anywhere.
That's yeah, yeah, that's the thing. Well, anyway, so uh,
some people don't know their civics. Even though they they
were former general officers, you know, it doesn't mean they
were brilliant, you know what I'm saying. He was a general.
So anyway, yeah, that's uh, I am the boss. That's
what Trump said when he walked in. I thought that
was hilarious, pretty darn funny.

Speaker 2 (30:28):
I did see that. I didn't see the video when
again I saw I saw a thing in the news
as I was flipping through it.

Speaker 3 (30:34):
Oh, I saw the video. The video was classic. Man,
it was brilliant. I gotta say that the president though,
I mean most eighty year olds, you know, they're getting
kind of frail, but dude is still eating those big
max because he is packing on the pals, right, He's
like Shrek the ore the president is he's getting I
thought I was getting a little chubby, but he's got
me put to shame.

Speaker 4 (30:50):
You know what's funny is you know, like I said,
I watch occasionally these lefty podcast and most of it's
just complaining about stuff that we talked about Biden. You know, uh,
cognitive decline and all this stuff. You know, now they're
all of a sudden growing that. You know, Trump has
cognitive decline, he has you know, this mental lapse, he
has this possibly it's like four years of Biden. You

(31:13):
said nothing. Now you've got a podcast talking about Trump.
Come on now.

Speaker 3 (31:17):
Well you know they like, yeah, they like to you.
They like at the G seven like he went the
wrong way. It was just like Biden. No, he walked
in the room and he was looking for a seat,
and they led him and they stopped and they said, oh,
we gotta go this way. So he turned and went
the other direction because he is going where they're directed
him to. You know, Biden had a big X on
the floor and they put him right in front of it.
Still couldn't find the X.

Speaker 2 (31:36):
Yeah, right, he'll fall on it eventually, you know.

Speaker 4 (31:39):
I've been to number of those events, like the G
seven and stuff like that, advancing a principle. It's it's
easy with different nations once, once things are happening, to
make a mistake in a room to go right when
he should go left.

Speaker 3 (31:51):
It happens.

Speaker 4 (31:52):
Trust me, I've led many principles a wrong way on
an occasion, and I usually walk ahead and head enough
so that way I can make sure that I'm going there.
Because in the heat of the moment, even though you
walk those corridors time after time, whenever you have security
other countries there, it gets tight and all of a
sudden you can miss something. So that's why you know
it does happen. It's a mistake. Has nothing to do

(32:12):
with Trump making a wrong turn though.

Speaker 3 (32:15):
No, absolutely. And it's a big difference between Trump and
what he does and what Bibe was doing. And he's
completely lost and everyone's walking this way off the stage,
and he's looking like.

Speaker 4 (32:23):
From the clouds. Yeah, oh, yeah, that's completely different.

Speaker 2 (32:27):
Obama was Obama couldn't find the door to the White House.

Speaker 3 (32:32):
I don't know about that. I don't recall that.

Speaker 2 (32:34):
Somebody I remember He's trying to get in and he
couldn't find the door. It was kind of humorous, but
here again disoriented. He was new and stuff.

Speaker 3 (32:41):
But well, if you're Obama's easy to get disoriented. He
don't know if he's actually, you know, a white guy
from Midwest or a black guy from a radical country.
He just doesn't know. So, folks, you're listening WSMN, the
Common Sense can service every Wednesday night fifteen ninety on
your AM DOW ninety five point three in the FM,
and he can catch us on EIREA, the Trucker's Independent
Broadcasting Network, or on my channel at Colonel Chris White
on YouTube and other places out there. Thank you for

(33:03):
joining us this and every Wednesday evening. We do this
every week, even when it's Christmas time. Guys, we were
here for Christmas, weren't we.

Speaker 2 (33:10):
Yes, we were yep, Christmas night.

Speaker 3 (33:12):
That's right. We sure we're here on Christmas night.

Speaker 2 (33:14):
These two of us were todd I think.

Speaker 3 (33:19):
That slide. But anyway, no, it.

Speaker 2 (33:22):
Was understandable yet obligations Christmas, Yeah.

Speaker 3 (33:26):
He had to open presence. That was obligation, right.

Speaker 2 (33:28):
Hey, you know, when you're getting the best of the
best out there, you got to be there to get.

Speaker 3 (33:32):
Them exactly anyway, So yeah, every Wednesday night, folks, thanks
for thanks for joining us tonight. We appreciate it as
we talk about topics that affect the United States in
the world. Wellsten, you know, if you ever want to
know about fake media, Todd, here's the perfect one one
about viewers. When I was on my program with my
South African colleague earlier today, said, did you hear what
the Goldberg said about the ref chief program said only

(33:54):
only three non white people have come over, which wasn't
exactly what happened. So I did a little research on
it after the broadcast. Turns out that on A Navarro,
the Nicaraguan who has a loud mouth and away size
bigger than you know, Shrek. There she sits in that
chair all day eating bombonds or something. Anyway, ooh, was
I fat shaming? I don't know, maybe I was. You
tell me anyway, but Anna Navarro opened up our cakel

(34:18):
and talking JD Vance on the Dystopian view and said
that there are six thousand and sixty eight refues come
over since October. She's off by one of six thousand
and sixty nine. And she didn't say that's from May
thirty first, which is was the case. But I know
because I read the monthly report that comes out from
the US government and then I do a video to
analyze it every month on the fifth and the month
when it comes out or the next working day. So

(34:39):
she said six thousand and sixty eight people cover, and
only three of them are non or not white South Africans.
In other words, she said six thousand, six hundred and
sixty six are white South Africans. Of course, that's utter
boldfaced lie. I was just in South Carolina and in Georgia,
and over the past few days I met three colored
people Indicator Georgia. Then I went to Greenville, South Carolina,

(35:05):
and met another handful of colored people. And then I
went to Spartanburg and I met two black South Africans.
And then I went to Monroe, Georgia, where I had
dinner two nights ago with an Indian family. Afore, we're
already up to double digits on people of color, and
I just did one little trip. Never mind the dozens
and hundreds I've already talk to. These people are so

(35:25):
wedded to their fake news, to their lives, their inability
to open their minds to the facts, that they'll lie
about anything. So, I mean, it's just unbelievable. She lies
and says only three people who aren't white came over.
That's an absolute lie. I don't know how many people
who aren't white came over, but I can tell you
about those people, and every one of those people I
talked to have come over since September, since the end
of the last fiscal year. These people, it's just it's demented. Todd. Well, John,

(35:47):
if you want to jump in, how much big a
liars in the media are.

Speaker 2 (35:50):
Oh, I was just thinking even if she wasn't lying,
So what the applications little put of everybody? It's not discretionary,
but the particular white people.

Speaker 3 (35:57):
You are correct, But the problem is they tell people
that they've believe it, and then people who are eligible
don't apply because they listen to these idiots, and then
they also try to paint it as racist. But she says, no,
bearing it's funny, Todd, how we took three hundred thousand
blonde haired, blue eyed Ukrainians in this country in less
than three years, and nobody bad it than I. But
we want to bring some South Africans over here. Suddenly
it's a racist program.

Speaker 4 (36:19):
Oh of course. I mean that's your narrative. And of
course that's the only thing the left has to hang on, right,
you know, rights, bad, Orange men, bad, Republican bad. Whatever
they do is racist, xenophob homophobe, whatever it is, transphobe
that they're gonna make it up. It's gonna be bad
for you, for I. Whatever the reality is, the fact
is it's not racist. It's working. It may not be perfect,

(36:39):
but it's working as it should. But you got to
figure out something to an angle to go after Jdvance
because he decided he's going to go on the View
as a guest, and you gotta go want one more
thing to dagger him on. I guess one more thing
to stab him on. And this was just one of
the low hangers that they went with.

Speaker 3 (36:55):
Yeah, well, I think the thing is slow hanging is
their intelligence quotion. That's what's having. It's not very not
you know.

Speaker 2 (37:01):
What I didn't see Trump doing. I didn't see Trump
falling children from foreign countries in the country and shipping
them away into cars late at night without paperwork.

Speaker 3 (37:09):
Yeah, well there's that the bond for sure. Yeah. No.
But the Dystopian View, I don't even watch it, but
one of my viewers mentioned to me, so I went
and looked at it, and I was like, I just
can't well, I want to say, I can't believe they
said that. I can't believe they said it. But I'm
not even surprised anymore. It's beyond disappointing the conduct of
these so called commentators. But these aren't real journalists. And

(37:30):
of course I guess we could thank Barbara Wabah for
setting up this stupid program in the Stopian View. And
it doesn't matter how many evil things these people say,
they still get to do it. I mean, look at
what the Goldberg. She had to apologize for being salting
towards Jewess just a couple of years ago, she got
suspended for a couple of episodes, and then she's back
spewing her same hatred. This whole thing started because oh,
white people, white people, black people wiped out history. What

(37:50):
do you tell me, I don't even wipe out history.
What do you talking there, sweetheart. You never heard the
fifty four masts us. You don't have Christmas addices. You
never heard of George Washington Carver, You don't know a
guy named Cleveland, and then the traffic lighters Black. Come on,
shut up, shut up, shut up. These people, Todd are
so nauseating. They're constant nonsense. It's not about equality, it's
not about history. It's about black supremacy. For her, she
thinks black people are better thane else. And she's as

(38:12):
bad as a clan, except she's in a different, you know,
different shade of tan. That's all.

Speaker 4 (38:17):
Well, the Southern Property Law Center had to keep the
Klan operational right, funneling millions of dollars to them. I
don't know how well the clan's doing these days. I
think they were almost out of business until some other
race hustlers decided the funnel money to them so they
can keep opposition going. Right, Come on, now.

Speaker 3 (38:33):
Well, I mean they've been caught, and now they try
to pretend like it didn't happen. I mean, look, the
American Criminal Liberties Union, the Souvereign Polity Law Center are
these are fellow travelers whose mission is to destroy America
from within and create a minority supremacy. That's what their
goal is here. Their goal is to you know, they
lie about everything. Oh white American, white fragility Americans and

(38:54):
disappearing white Americans. What are you talking about? Man? When
I was a kid, there's one hundred and thirty millions.
Now there's two hundred thirty six and white people in
this country two and forty million. That's that's one hundred
million more. How is that disappearing as a percentage of
population gone down? Sure? Because well that country be invaded
by foreign criminal alien vaders. And oh, by the way,
all those old white stiff dudes, the white guys back
in nineteen sixty five who created the current immigration law

(39:17):
that let all these people come in the country. Remember
that white men, Christian white men. Oh I thought we
were a country racist. Wait wait a second, So they
let all these brown people and these black yes, they're
the ones came up with that, yeah, fragility in my
butt and this whole thing about white replacement theory. Oh,
you know, they'd use that as a as a crutch,
They use that as a red hearing. So, John, you've
heard that phrase before, haven't you replacement. Oh yeah, yeah, okay,

(39:42):
I just wondered.

Speaker 2 (39:43):
I mean, there is a thing about I think white
people aren't reading as much as they used to. And
but that's choice, that's not it's not replacement, it's choice, right.

Speaker 3 (39:51):
Of course, the four hundred to six hundred thousand abortions
by white mothers every year is one reason why we
don't have a natural reproduction rate. And the three hundred
plus thousand abortions by black women to make up just
six percent of the population is another reason why almost
a million babies every year a board in this country.
That's why population isn't growing. God, you were jumping in there.

Speaker 4 (40:11):
No, that's that's right, for sure, for right. And of course,
you know, Margaret Singer push, you know, abortions pushed, you know,
playing parenthood on African America is on minorities in these
communities for a reason, because they're racist and wanted to
get rid of African Americans.

Speaker 3 (40:27):
Exactly right. And that's the heirine of of course, Hillary Clinton,
who now claims todd that that it was a big
mistake for Joe Biden run for reelection. You think, yeah, right,
she says, anyone else could be Trump. I don't think
this woman easy, even remotely cognizant of reality. No one
else would have beaten Trump. The country is angry. Trump

(40:47):
was coming back.

Speaker 4 (40:49):
She got it handed to her in twenty sixteen. She
has no leg to stand on on beating Trump on anything.

Speaker 3 (40:54):
Sorry, no, no, Todd stop. I mean, look, we all
know is Macedonian server farms. That's how they're was stolen.
Bit you you couldn't say that, but but you could
say that, but you couldn't say that, you know. So
I'm just curious that she wiped the hard drog what
you mean, like with the cloth.

Speaker 4 (41:10):
Yeah, she knew what she was doing, of course, you know.
And it's funny is we keep talking about, you know,
justice and all this stuff. We go one election to
the next. There needs to be this, There needs to
be justice, whether it's Epstein, whether it's this, whether it's
you know, whatever the case may be, Russia inclusion. Nothing
ever comes to fruition. It's just nonsense one election to

(41:30):
the next, and it's the same people election after an election,
you know, snow and the American people, I mean going
to get rid of them.

Speaker 3 (41:37):
Look at the pathological serial liar Adam Schiff. I have
the evidence. I can't show you this closset, but Trump
colluded with Russia. I have the evidence, and he rode
that to victory in the House. Now that demon rat
is a US Senator and he has the credibility of
a piece of cinder block. Yeah, he is a center

(42:00):
from California, the Junior Center. It's sickening how stupid people
could be, especially in California and New York.

Speaker 2 (42:05):
Right, I wouldn't I wouldn't write them off that quick,
you know. I mean we are seeing how they're counting
votes over there, so it may not all be on
the up and up.

Speaker 3 (42:14):
Well, well it's on the up and up that the
reality is he still got the slots, so you know,
but he's already in office. He's not even not for
elections year.

Speaker 2 (42:21):
Your vote don't count if they're going to make the
votes happen, right, I mean, that's all I'm saying. I
don't want to point in accusing fingers or anything, but
since they need know how many votes they need to
get their candidate in.

Speaker 4 (42:33):
Yeah, well you find boxes and boxes, tens of thousands
of boxes of votes and not one for the Republican.
You know, It's like it's hard to believe that not
one or two votes were in there for a Republican.
I mean, come on, if you threw like a thousand
votes his way and ten thousand another way, maybe we
could believe it. But in zero I'm sorry.

Speaker 2 (42:53):
Completely all statistically that can't be right yet.

Speaker 4 (42:56):
Right, it's not true. It's fraud.

Speaker 3 (42:59):
So I know that you got are just desperate to
hear about my next subject, because you know that I
always enjoy watching paint dry or watching FIFA World Cup action,
So any thoughts on that before you do, let me
just mention some of the highlights of this this competition
so far. On Monday, June fifteenth, Spain, supposedly one of
the favorites to win the World Cup, was held to

(43:19):
a draw by Cape ver and, the tiny collection of
islands speaking Portuguese off the west coast Africa. A neil
to nil dry. Ooh, that was an exciting game. Wow. Belgium,
which is won the World Cup before it was held
or the aphis one anyway, They were held to a
one one drawl with Egypt. Saudi Aby held powerful Orguay
to a one one drawl, and New Zealand in Iran

(43:39):
had a two two drawl so four games and nobody
won four one Cup games on the same day and
on a single country one. And then it got a
little bit better yesterday as Argentina's Lionel Messie got a
hat trick. He's like thirty eight or something like that,
got a hat trick against Algeria. I mean, look, it's
zero zero, one one one one too too. I mean,

(44:01):
come on, I suppose it was Monday. Maybe weren't ready
for the week todd, but I mean it's like watching
paint dry Man.

Speaker 4 (44:07):
Yeah for sure. Now that's something I've not watched. I
mean occasionally scroll through and see some of the scores,
but it's not nothing to pay attention to. So I
can't really comment too much on the World Cup. I mean,
it's just seems to be a bit of a joke
these days.

Speaker 2 (44:20):
I don't know, I didn't even know what a FIFA
World Cup was until recently.

Speaker 3 (44:24):
Well, FIFA is the French acronym for the International Federation
of Football International.

Speaker 2 (44:29):
And of course, when you're saying football, not to confuse
US American, you're talking about soccer.

Speaker 3 (44:35):
Yeah, you know, they call it football, but I mean,
and they make fun of us because they say we
throw with our hands, but they use their heads. So
is it headball?

Speaker 4 (44:44):
Right?

Speaker 3 (44:45):
Using everything but their hands, because you know everything else
in their body. They can use their body and use
their shoulders and use their hips, they can use their head,
they can use their foot, but they still call football.

Speaker 2 (44:54):
Well, the primary objective is to kick it, but down
down on the field.

Speaker 3 (44:58):
Now, the primary objective is to get the ball past
the goalie in the net. That could be with your
head or you're.

Speaker 2 (45:03):
Right, you're right. You can move the ball anyway back.

Speaker 3 (45:06):
One of the best goals, some of the best goals
are headers. You know, people like this. You know you
do that again. I mean, I know the audience on
the radio can't see that, but our viewing audience the
internet can watch this. You're ready for it. There you go.

Speaker 2 (45:19):
He's not in his head like he's gesturing to somebody.

Speaker 3 (45:22):
That was that was a strike. I'm a striker, Josie
out to do it anyway. But actually you had turned
it on TV last night as I wrapped up my
night broadcast, not the broadcast, walked in put it on
just to see and Austria is playing, so I can
support Austria. Except there weren't many Austrians out. There were
some Africans and some Arabs, some some Slavic people, but
not many Austrians. But the first guy to score in

(45:42):
the game was a brilliant goal by a guy named
Roman Schmitt. So that's that's an Austrian name. And he
scored an absolutely brilliant goal, just smoked the defenders and
the goalie. It was amazing. I was literally thirty seconds
after I sat down they scored a goal. So I
was like, hey, wow, goodness for Austria that they did
win last night. So there you go. There's your FIFA update.
I'm sure you guys are dying, you know all about
that feef update. Hey, we still got a game tonight,

(46:03):
got a game tonight Los Pakistan versus Colombia. Oh look,
God is playing Panama right now and they're at the
amazing score at halftime forty five minutes of the game
of zero to zero. Exciting, exciting. Hey, but the Portrait

(46:23):
Boys held to one one draw today too. This is
another team that's been very good in the past. What
are you gonna say, John Oh?

Speaker 2 (46:28):
I saw something on social media earlier just before the
show started where if Germany winsors three beers. If Mexico
windsors free tackles, come on Colombia. Oh you know, you
get it.

Speaker 4 (46:40):
I don't get it.

Speaker 3 (46:41):
I got it, Yeah, I got it. Yeah, respond.

Speaker 2 (46:51):
Excuse me, I'm a little slow on the on the
Miami nos candy.

Speaker 4 (46:55):
Right.

Speaker 3 (46:57):
The only game that might get people excited is tomorrow afternoon,
Tomorrow after Friday afternoon, I should say Friday afternoon. The
USA is playing Australia. Then the USA one convincing against
Paraguay in the first round. Australia also won, so this
sets up a match for who will win that pooling
group D So yeah, I mean, I'm not big football
soccer fans, but you know it's here in America, it's
in in Mexico, and it's in Kanadas. I suppose we

(47:18):
could talk about occasionally, but this one has got all
kinds of complaints. People complain about ticket prices, and rightly so,
they're outrageous. Also, I don't think all the venues the
best venues to do this, but nonetheless, people come in droves.
The stadiums are full, the television audiences are watching it,
and you know, people want to have National Prime. But
I have a hard time, you know, root for somebody.
If I'm German and the guy who is me and

(47:40):
my striker's name is Ahmed Abdul, I mean that's not German.
I'd rather see you know, Sebastian what's his name there,
Bustian Schwansneiger. I'd like to see him out there, something
like that. But I mean people are going, well, you
just don't like Muslim. It's not doing Muslims or Arabs.
I don't also don't want to see the Polish guy
there either. I want to see him play for poland
not for Germany. Just saying anyway, that's that's just kind

(48:01):
of how it goes. Yeah, So that's where we're sitting
with that. The F four World Cup. I mean, if
either of you watched any of it, John.

Speaker 2 (48:07):
No, No, not at all. But however, holding his concern
that maybe you gave yourself whiplash, are you coming back
in the second hour with a neck brace on.

Speaker 3 (48:15):
No, I'll just go the other way and loosen up
this way.

Speaker 2 (48:18):
Oh you're gonna compensate for it the other direction. No,
I didn't watch any I'm not I'm not a I'm
not big into sports, to be honest with you, If
you can't tell. So when it comes to soccer and stuff,
it's never been a highlight for me. Growing up as
a kid, street football was it.

Speaker 3 (48:32):
Man.

Speaker 2 (48:32):
I love playing street football. It was a great, great
deal of fun. If we had four people, we had
a ball going somewhere doing something, just passes or running
passes or something. But every once while watch a football game.
But getting into organized sports and stuff, I've always been
just too active doing my own stuff, my own things,
and never got really into it.

Speaker 3 (48:51):
I caught more passes with my outstretched arms from a
nerve football in my youth and Peyton Manister and passes
in his life, I'm sure it was Wow. That was something,
especially in Pennsylvania. We played all the time and I
was supposed to be touched. But Teddy Rice was a
little I won't use the word it's proper here, and
he was bigger than all of us and older than
all of us, and he would tackle even though its
a touch game. But you know, some of us were

(49:13):
faster and can out manive rooms, so we got around
the most of the time.

Speaker 2 (49:15):
But yeah, he gave you motivation, bro, But we always tackled.
We didn't want to keep that touch to yourself. You know,
we we tackled, we played rough.

Speaker 3 (49:24):
Well, we played rough too, especially considered it was a
touch game. But we're coming up at the top of
the hour. Before we do, I want to bring this
topic up. We probably you know, spend more time out
in the second hour, and that is the UK and
the US are on a clision course here. The UK
now has banned social media for sixteen year olds. I mean,
this is just a following example of the leftist paradise

(49:45):
of Australia. Now your children are now being dictated what
they can do by a government that's out of control,
rather than letting parents be in charge. And they think
this is going to solve the problem. I don't know
if they've ever met kids, but kids find ways around
everything and simply making a lot. They will punish parents
and take money away from or put people in prison
for the contact that the children, whether it's just simply

(50:06):
on social media. It's not something that's going to be helpful.
So we'll talk about that next hour. But ironically, Todd
England is the land of the Magna Carta. In twelve fifteen,
the King's authority was circumscribed and limited by the Magna
carta by the knights and nobles for their favor, not
for the whole country, but it began the process of
modern democracy today and respect for the rights of citizens.
But the UK seems to have no respect for the

(50:28):
rights of citizens whatsoever. No.

Speaker 4 (50:31):
I would agree with you for sure. If he writes
them on Twitter or social media for crying out loud,
especially if it's against the Muslim and for calling him
out on something that they've done, they're gonna come shut
you down. They're gonna come take you away.

Speaker 3 (50:42):
Be careful. Well, speaking of that, John, did you see
the young lady who sentencing was supposed to be Denay
in France? She was the one that was sexually assaulted,
nearly raped by a Tunisian criminal alien invader a couple
of years ago, and there's been nothing done to him.
Then a young woman was raped by a Central African
and Black Africa who raped her a French woman, and
ontelligence she said that, you know, basically the biggest threat

(51:04):
to French women is Arabs and Black Africans because their
attitudes towards us. And they convicted her of hate speech
and they're going to sentence her to jail for her words.

Speaker 2 (51:15):
Once she is here, here's what I got in.

Speaker 4 (51:18):
Your government is also a problem for white women as
well and other people, is your government France and England UK.

Speaker 2 (51:26):
My issue with that is if men in their countries
were sports so spineless, this wouldn't be happening. They need
to start standing up for their daughters, act like men,
you know, and get the job done for a change.

Speaker 3 (51:37):
Well, and with that we'll go into the next hour afternoons.
We'll be right back here folks on WSM Common Sense
Service in a few minutes. Oh Gaate City Monument. Welcome back, folks.

(52:03):
It's the second hour of common Sense Conserves right here
on June seventeenth, twenty twenty six, my co host in
Eastern Tennessee, Tom McKinley, and in the studio back in
National Hampshire, John Grove to John, I'm still plenty of
coming up there next Wednesday, but I may have to shift.
I'll let you know if that's the case, But as
it sits now, the plan is I'll join you in
the studio next Wednesday might wind up being the week
after the way things are going, but I'll let you.

Speaker 2 (52:23):
Know, all right, all right, whenever you get here and
you know how it goes. I mean, just make sure
you make a little time so you can visit with us,
so some or you know, go out for dinner with
the wife and I. I know you might be busy, but.

Speaker 3 (52:34):
I'm happy to let you buy me dinner. I have
no problem. Okay, all right, as long as it's not
Rby's or McDonald's, you know, well, okay, Wendy's. It is, okay, Wendy,
Yeah right, Oh my goodness, Okay, we're talking at the
end of the last hour when we got interrupted by
the news there that the United Kingdom is now is
censoring sixteen year olds, banning them from social media. Australia

(52:57):
set the precedent for this. These are the acts of
a totalitarian, fascist country, Todd. I recently saw a graphic
which illustrate the number of people who are currently in
prison around the world in different countries for their social
media comments. The United Kingdom has over twelve thousand people
in prison for saying something on social media. The next
highest country, I think is China with about one hundred
and forty six people. I mean, is this even something

(53:18):
you can imagine there, Todd, It's insane.

Speaker 4 (53:21):
Yeah, China with what nearly what a billion people roughly,
let's call it. You know, one hundred and forty six
people in prison, and it's a communist nation. You would
think that they would have like one hundred and forty
six thousand people, not one hundred and forty six people.
The numbers are upside down there.

Speaker 3 (53:38):
Well, I mean the United Kingdom, I mean this is
this is a fascist country. I mean, let's not pretend
just because it's its majority, you know, European origin, it's
a fascist country, John, I mean, these people are silencing
speech they're afraid of. If you rule legitimately, you don't
fear speech. I mean if people slander or defab you
or you know, you can go after them. I mean

(54:00):
if that's legit. But you shouldn't fear criticism. People. If
youar criticism are not legitimate. That means you're ruling your
legitimate because you fear that the truth will get out
and will undermine your grip on power. John, I mean
that's pretty sad.

Speaker 2 (54:12):
No slander. Yeah, you have to them if they cause
an your harm, like financial harm or something like a
reputational harm and things like that that are detrimental to you,
you can definitely bring up cases against people like that
here in the United States for sure. But don't think
it's not going to happen here. I mean we've seen
them with under Joe Biden. They did. They did censor us,
they did work with social media platforms and sensor us.

(54:34):
There's a difference. They'll never get away with passing a
law here, so they'll do it sneakily and underhandedly. Fortunately
we got somebody like Trump who says, oh no, I'll
create truth social make sure that people do have freem
of speech somewhere. So and then you got Rumbles, another
good one. They let people get away with a lot
of rumble. They're very very Yeah, what's the worst use liberated?

Speaker 4 (54:55):
Also good business sense too to set up these alternative
platforms u other than and just Twitter.

Speaker 3 (55:02):
Well, you know, Twitter of course just remains successible although
it was accessible with the exclusive domain and left is
who use it to attack anyone that wasn't far left,
And now everyone just gets attacked on Twitter. So it's
an equal out opportunity offender. Now that's what Twitter is
or X.

Speaker 2 (55:17):
I don't know what a Twitter is. I know what
an next platform is, but I don't know what a
Twitter is anymore.

Speaker 3 (55:23):
Well, X is a current platform. Yeah, that's not an
X platform.

Speaker 2 (55:26):
Twit. Yeah, Twitter's Twitter's a Yeah. I know Twitter is
still recognize. But it drives me nuts because it always did.
I thought a little birdie and tweeting and Twitter and yeah,
I like calling you X.

Speaker 3 (55:39):
But I think people get lost on this too. The
perspective we've talked about many times, these are private corporations
and they can deign to pick the standards they want
and have what's on their platform as long as they
don't break the agreement between you, which is what YouTube
and these companies did during the COVID scam. Is they
broke They broke the covenant, the agreement between the user
or the product consumer and the company by them doing

(55:59):
what they wanted. It will at the collusion, coersion, or
cajoling of the federal government, which was a violation of
the First Amendment of the Constitution. But to be fair,
there are private organizations. They can set standards and you
can abide by them or you don't have to be
part of it. The real thing and that a lot
of people have said about their free speech being censored,
and they're right, they were being censored, but The issue
there is it doesn't matter if a company censors you,

(56:20):
that's their prerogative. It does matter if they've done it
at the best of a federal official. That's a violation
of the constitution. And that's what they did. That's what
you were told about by going around the constitution. That's
what they did. So I always told people, I said,
you know, YouTube can say what they want. The problem
is I didn't break the rules. And if I was
in La Musk, I would have suited them into oblivion.
But I don't have millions of dollars sit around and
sue them because they broke the rules, not me, by

(56:40):
silencing me. And they did it the best of the
likes of you know, doctor Fauci, the fraud and Flicksen
and all these other losers in that that corrupt administration.
So you're right about that, John. It can happen here,
and it has happened here. We've had happen in the past.
We've had people censored. During the Second World War, you know,
we had we had we had sensors read the the
maile of soldiers in the field. I mean, that's just

(57:02):
that's just unbelievable. But they did it So the point
I'm making here about England and Australia is that they
the state are deciding that they are the ones they
should decide what your children can and cannot see, and
it's their responsibility to punish you should these kids get
a hold of something they shouldn't see. That is just wrong. Todd.
I mean, that's that's that is, that is something that's

(57:23):
not the state's preview, that is the private citizens preview
for their Producty would you agree, Todd?

Speaker 4 (57:28):
No, Yeah, you're absolutely correct. Should be the parents deciding.
Although I think there's a lot of just garbage of
it that's on social media, and I'm talking it just
the stuff that we spound off about. I mean, there's
just six stuff that's out there, for sure. But the
platforms should clean up the sickness that's out there, you know,
whether it's human trafficking or sexual exploitation, things like that.
The platform should clean that up. But most everything else

(57:50):
should be maintained by the parent for sure.

Speaker 3 (57:53):
Well, I mean the bottom line here, John, is that
is that these these organizations are responsible for reporting and
or monitoring or removing criminal content. Free speech, the free speech, John,
they should have no saying exactly.

Speaker 2 (58:07):
You know, okay, when when you talk about parents, there
is a such thing as parental rights. It's an actual
truth thing. It is your right as a parent to
oversee your child's educational upcoming, well being, health and stuff
like that. That's your right, and that's actually your obligation
as a parent. It's not a state right, it's not
a state responsibility unless you're negligent as a parent. And

(58:31):
what's become a problem is the courts are actually a
while back ago, I was reading that the courts or
some members in the courts were debating about reducing that right.
I don't know how you take a right and reduce
it to a privilege, but they wanted. They were looking
because due to the state of our country today, with
so many parents acting negligent, you know, drug addictions and

(58:53):
things like this, that they may actually have to reevaluate
that right. How do you reevaluate a right? Not exactly certain,
but it's ridiculous because the federal government has a job
to look over the welfare of the nation. Right. The
general welfare clause wasn't exactly about making sure you have
enough money to live on. The General Welfare Clause was
to look over the general general welfare of the nation.

(59:17):
Funny how follows defense, right, And so it seems to
me the federal government and state governments have a responsibility
to reduce the drug flow within the United States of America,
within state borders, to reduce human trafficking, to reduce black
market arms trafficking. And they fail at this time and

(59:38):
time again. But yet they want to blame the parents.
They want to blame the people that are having drug
addictions when it's their policies overall, directly or indirectly, doesn't matter.
Their policies lead up to drug addictions, like prescribing addictive
pills and hospitals and stuff. Without some sort of plan
about weaning people off these addictive pills. They pretty much

(59:58):
just say, eh, you're done. You no longer get this medicine.
You don't no longer get that minutes that was highly addictive,
and now to try to compensate by getting drugs on
the streets. So you got to get the darn drugs
off the streets. If you want people to be able
to live normal lives and raise children in normal manners
and ways.

Speaker 3 (01:00:15):
You know, well, there's three legs on that stool when
it comes to the opioid to crisis, and that's Congress,
the pharmaceutic industry, and physicians as well as the patients
themselves all better responsibility for that mess. But one of
the olds here, says Elizabeth Warren wants her ultra wealth
tax on eline to fund childcare for three to four
year olds as the government seeks to have infinite access

(01:00:35):
to confiscate private property weaponized legislation. Well, I don't disagree,
but Focahantas has zero credibility. First off, she had the
audassi to go after Elamas a couple years ago saying,
you know these ultra rich like Elamusk who don't pay
their fair share of taxes. Hey, sweetheart, Elon Musk paid
thirteen billion dollars in personal income tax a couple of
years ago after selling a steak of his in Tesla.

(01:00:57):
Thirteen billion dollars tax. That is more come tax than
any American has ever paid in their entire lifetime throughout
the history of this republic. Thirteen billion dollars in a
single year, and he paid every penny of it. And
she has the audacity to say he's not paying his
fair share. I mean, people will never make that kind
of money in a lifetime of lifetimes, a lifetime of lifetimes,
and he paid it in tax in a single year.

(01:01:17):
She needs to shutter cake and go home. Todd, you
have to comment on this, No, no, I agree.

Speaker 4 (01:01:22):
With you one hundred percent. Yeah, Elizabeth, Elizabeth Warren. I mean, like,
who is she to judge anybody for crying out loud?
And then the thing, you know.

Speaker 2 (01:01:29):
Go ahead, well, I just got to say. You know,
the thing about it is is they're trying to deflect
to Elon Musk and people like Elon Musk tax the
rich attitudes. But the fact of the matter is they're
not doing their responsibilities or financial responsibilities of managing the
money or the revenue streams they take in with taxes
to spend within their means. It's always we got a
tax for more, instead of just managing what you've got

(01:01:51):
and work within the boundaries of what you've got and
stop putting the burdens, the unnecessary burdens on the American people.

Speaker 3 (01:01:58):
Well, indition of this, but they lose of here is
that you know, they hate the rich. Of course, she
is rich and is loaded because she's a grifter. But
in some of bern standers, but what they lose sight
of here is Elon Musk and his initiative created wealth,
so that four thousand, four hundred current and former employees
are now millionaires instantaneously because of their investment and their

(01:02:19):
commitment to this company which is in a phenomenal venture.
So they just these are hateful people. They should never
be in government. We should just send them to you know,
mental institutions where they would drive those people nuts.

Speaker 4 (01:02:29):
But think about that, those forty four hundred people who
you know, come out of college or a military whatever,
got these jobs with SpaceX and its infancy, bought into it. Right,
We're buying shares as they went along. All of a
sudden they became instantaneous millionaires. These these are people who
work for a living nine to five ers, if you will,
career of personnel, and all of a sudden they're being

(01:02:49):
rewarded because this thing goes you know, goes public and
they're getting their dividends or getting their shares. Are they
all of a sudden evil people who need to pay
their fair share? Under Elizabeth Warren is her edict, if
you will, are they are the vilest worst people ever
because they're millionaires. Now they did better pay their fair share.

Speaker 3 (01:03:09):
Class envy is not a good look, especially in America,
where we value merit and individual effort. And this is just.
But this is what they want us to They want
us to be loser, Europeans to stagnate, and our economy
be burdened by illegal aliens. That's what they want here.
So let's shift it, guys. We got a little under
forty minutes left here. Let's talk about the US Iran Agreement.
I'm gonna read each paragraph and then I'll get your

(01:03:30):
take on this. You guys ready, sure, go ahead, all right?
Paragraph one, The United States of America and the Islamic
Republic of Iran and their allies in the current war,
by signing this memory of Understanding, declare the immediate and
permanent termination of military operations on all fronts, including in Lebanon,
an undertake from now on not to initiate any war
any military operation against each other, and to refrain from

(01:03:53):
the threat of use of force against each other, and
ensuring the territory, integrity and sovereignty of Lebanon. The final
deal will conform the permanent termination of the war on
all fronts, including in Lebanon. And other provisions this paragraph.
All right, seems like Lebanon is a big part of
this agreement. In the paragraph one there, Todd.

Speaker 2 (01:04:10):
Todd just made himself out all of a suddenly.

Speaker 3 (01:04:13):
Okay, John, it looks like they want to include leban
is a big part of this.

Speaker 2 (01:04:17):
My issue, my issue with what I'm seeing here, if
I'm not if I'm not mistaken, is that Trump is
speaking for his ally. So this this agreement is supposed
to be for the United States and Israel, and I'm
not hearing that. Not yeaho's getting a voice in this.
So I'm a little concerned that not yeah, Who's gonna
throw up a middle finger at some point in time

(01:04:37):
and say I have a right to defense, I have
a right to act, and i have a right to
defend my country, and I'm gonna do what I need
to do. Screw your agreement. It's going to throw a
wrench into the works and become a problem.

Speaker 3 (01:04:48):
Well, my problem with that, not with your comment at John,
which I agree with. My problem with this, now that
Todd's back, I'll get in before I forget it and
have a seenior moment here is that this tacitly endorses
that is a regional superpower. Iran has regional influence because
we are accepting that Iran demands in Lebanon, which has
nothing to do with Iran, be part of it. And

(01:05:09):
the reason Iran would want that is to support their
proxy which is used to murder Jews and Christians in Israel.
So by doing this, we have acknowledged that they have
a right to influence affairs and Lebin and they have
no right whatsoever. They must be punished for supporting that organization.

Speaker 4 (01:05:26):
Todd, Now, I would agree with you for sure, you know,
and like you said, tying in Lebanon like like, they're
not a local hedge of money, if you will, regional
hedge of money Iran, You're out on an island on
your own, if you will. You're surrounded by Arab nations
Israel's aside. You're surrounded. You don't get to push your
will around for crime out loud.

Speaker 2 (01:05:46):
But do do you guys feel like maybe Iran does
have quite a bit of influence with the Arab nations.
I mean they are funding terrorist organizations within their Arab
nations and keeping a lot of the conflict going so
and is well, we'll get the that in a bit
when we get through these paragraphs to determine whether that's
part of the agreement or not that they have to
stop funding terrorists.

Speaker 3 (01:06:06):
Well, it's a reality that the Iranians will side with
Shiites every time unless there's no site, useful idiot, then
they'll side up with Sunnis. So it's not a question
of Arabs, it's a question of religion.

Speaker 4 (01:06:22):
Yeah, yeah, you're correct. Yeah, so yeah, yeah, that's the
that's the biggest issue right there. From going back to the.

Speaker 3 (01:06:29):
Right. They're not above, you know, aligning themselves with with Sunnis.
If they have to to eliminate their enemy. That's what
they've done with with hes Belah. So hes Belah and
Hamas and the hutis the the the evil tryad of
H's it's Hqub, It's it's they'll they'll do what they
have to to murder and wipe out and destroy anyone

(01:06:50):
who is not Muslim.

Speaker 2 (01:06:51):
The old thing you're referring to is the enemy of
my enemy is my friend.

Speaker 3 (01:06:55):
Yes, it's it's a right out of the Arthur Shastra.
This is a a primer for your geopolitics from the
Indian subcontinent. The Arthur Shastra, which basically says I will
make allies when they went around me, so I can
attack this name. And when I've done that one, then
I'll abandon one of them and attack the other one
with all the allies until there's no one left and
I'm in charge. And that's the same approach that they'll take.
They don't have any compunction against using other useful idiots

(01:07:17):
to achieve their means, and that's what they do. They
absolutely do it. Okay, that's paragraph one of the agreement.
Let's go to paragraph two. Paragraph two. The United States
American Islambay Public Ron undertake to respect each other's sovereignty
and territory integrity and to refrain from interfering each other's
internal affairs. Okay, Todd, Yeah, right.

Speaker 4 (01:07:37):
I don't know how long that's gonna last. I mean,
even on its face, even though they can maybe do
it in the media, but it's not gonna happen. They're
gonna keep interfering. You have intelligence capabilities that are gonna
be interfering. So this is a ridiculous statement. It's nice,
it's not gonna happen.

Speaker 2 (01:07:55):
John sounds like the creation of confederation. But like Todd said,
it's you know, as confederations go many times the there's
a breakdown and there's a lack of respect, and so
you're going to you're going to, like, well reiterate what
Todd said. You're going to see violations of that agreement,

(01:08:16):
probably in a short period of time, I'm sure.

Speaker 3 (01:08:19):
Yeah. So my issue with this clause, this paragraph is
that it treats around as if it's an equal co belligerent.
It's not. It's a evaporated, destroyed belligerent, and we should
be pushing unconditional surrender terms on them or bombing them
with thistnians. This gives the appearance of legitimacy to Iran,
and they are an illegitimate terror state. And that's the

(01:08:39):
problem I have. President Trump is making a huge mistake
by having an agreement. So that's my take on it.
Paragraph three United States of America and the Islamic Public
of Ground commit to negotiating and achieving the final deal
in the maximum sixty days, extendable with mutual consent, extendable
mutual consent. So what's the point even given a deadline
of sixty days? Todd?

Speaker 4 (01:08:59):
Yeah, yeah, why put a timeline on it? I mean,
for crying out line like you said it should be unconditional. Uh,
you know, but I think we're to the point where
either we have to push it to where we bomb
them to the stone age and get on a conditional surrender.
But at what point are they going to surrender? You know,
years from now, decades from now, who knows. I think
they want to take what they can consider to win

(01:09:21):
and move on.

Speaker 3 (01:09:23):
John.

Speaker 2 (01:09:23):
So, uh, if you you guys heard me from time
and time again, I've said that we've got to wipe
out this regime, give a run a chance. I don't
know how that works entirely, how that constructs, but give
them a chance to redemocratize or come up with a
new sort of government in which they can be more
allied in the and uh in the globe with other
nations as opposed to this theocracy they've been living under

(01:09:47):
that's been of an apocalyptic mindset. So that's an issue
that's not being addressed here. But the timeline, Uh, you
do need some sort of deadline, right, and if you're
gonna extend it, you're gonna extend it. But you do
need some sort of timeline to work with. Otherwise it
becomes less and less important over time and you never
get your goals achieved. So I'm not I don't have
an issue with the timeline so much. But what I

(01:10:11):
have an issue with is what happens between now in
sixty days or if they extend it.

Speaker 3 (01:10:16):
Well, i'd be the fact that they can mutually extend
it shows that the timeline is a joke. That's my problem.
I I problem with the time I've been sixty days
or thirt days, nine days, or even six months. But
the fact that you can mutually extend it means that
you're not serious about it. You're just you're both playing
for time. You're playing a game. So that's my issue
with this here. But I mean, I do appreciate that
there is a timeline attached to it. I mean, after all,
we are still waiting for the piece accord for the

(01:10:38):
Korean War fifty three. We just have an armistice, we
don't have a peace agreement. So I appreciate that they
want to put a time limit to it, but I'm
not impressed by what they've done. All right, Paragraph four Gents,
Immediately upon signing of the MLU that would be today,
the United States and America begin to remove of its
naval blockade and any disturbances or impediments against Islamic pup

(01:10:59):
caron and fully in the naval blockade within thirty days.
During this period, the traffic of vessels will be in
proportion to the numbers of pre war traffic being restored
by the Republic of Islam public iron excuse me. The
United States of America further undertakes remove its forces from
the proximity. There's lomb of the public round within third
days after the final deal. I got all kinds of
problems with this one. Go ahead, Todd.

Speaker 4 (01:11:19):
No, No, I agree with you. I'll let you go ahead,
all right.

Speaker 3 (01:11:23):
Well, before John jumps in, the first thing is that
we'll end the naval blockade within thirty days. Well, why
the Iranians. Iranians, Well, they're going to watch some of deal.
But the Iranians around their knees. That's why they're even
coming to the table with this. The naval blockade is
clearly what has caused them the pain. Also, the number
of vessels will be portioned in the numbers. So Ron
is saying that we can't have more ships coming in.

(01:11:45):
Who are they to say that? And then the United
States will remove its forces from the proximity. What's the proximity,
Jordan Bachrain the Arabian golf what is proximity? So this
is going to be a point of debate and confusion
going forward and an excuse for Ron to break the
cease fire because your troops in UAE are too close.
That's within the proximity.

Speaker 2 (01:12:05):
John thoughts, Yeah, no, you you nailed it right when
you said that they because of the fact that they're
coming to this shows that they're inn a sign of
weakness and that we should probably be capitalizing off that
instead of trying to placate towards them. We weren't supposed
to be placating. We were supposed to be a show
of force or an active force against them for what

(01:12:26):
they've been doing. So playcating is not in our best interest,
I don't think so. Why do you think that we
are plaking? What do you guys? Is it that Trump
just wants out of this deal now, he wants to
close this up and get it wrapped up, or is
something else going on, is being influenced by our elections?
Or why would we take these sorts of course of

(01:12:49):
actions when it's not absolutely totally necessary? And I realize
there is a lot of public pressure, media pressure, and
political pressure on Trump, so that may be part of
it too.

Speaker 3 (01:12:59):
Well from a concern for losing votes in the midterm.
Trump should have no pressure put on whatsoever. He's the
lame duck president. He can't continue after this, so he
can do what he wants to do within the confines
of the law. He doesn't worry about an election campaign
unless he wants to be a Supreme Court justice, and
that's an appointed position where he wants to run for
vice president or governor of Florida or something like that.
So he should do what he wants to do as law,
as has been the confines of the law. And the

(01:13:20):
bottom line here is that we are giving legitimacy to
Iran that doesn't deserve it, and that that should be stopped.
All right, gentlemen. Paragraph five. Upon the signing this MoU
the Islamic Republic around will make arrangements using its best
efforts for the safe passage of commercial vessels with no
charge for sixty days only from the Persian Golf to
the CFO MIND and vice versa. The traffic commercial vessels

(01:13:42):
will immediately start and considering the need for removing the
technical mill chopsicles and the demining of his lomber propoll
ron will be in state in thirty days. Huh. This
lom of republic room will conduct dialogue with the Sultan
naive amant to define the future administration, maritime services and
the trade and foremost and discussed with other person golf
lictoral states in line with the applicable national law and
the sovereign rights of coastal states. That doesn't say that

(01:14:03):
they're going to put fees in there, but it certainly
implies that the key line here is no charge for
sixty days only after that or I may be able
to impose fees. I'm sorry, this is international waters and
they have no right to that's in clear violation of
national maritime norms. Todd And how the hell do we
have a fight a war where we destroy the Iranian
military capacity, put them on the brink of approperation, they

(01:14:23):
finally come to the table and we let them start
charging fees international waters.

Speaker 4 (01:14:28):
I'm confused, right, Yeah, so they can go back and
funding under you know, drones, nuclear technology and things of
that nature. And also, I don't even know if this
MoU addresses gets into the nitty gritty of any of
their rich uranium or anything like that out there. Weapons
great at the moment, I'll let you know.

Speaker 3 (01:14:45):
We're getting to that, we're working our way through that.
But the point here is that this is international waters.
That'd be like be charging ships to transit Antarctica. You
have to pay the Wyatt Defense Fund because you went
to Antarctica. They have no right to that, no right
to that. What it's international waters, that's not their territory waters.
And to charge ships at sea tolls, that's not normal.
That's what pirates do.

Speaker 2 (01:15:04):
This is a behavior. This is a behavior of Iran
during the course of this action, right, so they have
been trying to do this. So my take on what
I'm hearing so far is that during the course of
these sixty days they will not be allowed or tolerated
to do so I'm I'm going to bank on or
think that when the treaty comes to be signed, it
will be in there that Iran will not be allowed

(01:15:25):
to charge fees because, as you said, Chris, it violates
international law.

Speaker 3 (01:15:31):
International maritime.

Speaker 2 (01:15:32):
Yeah, exactly, so, yeah, I think it'll be in the
treaty within itself. This is just a standby until that
time comes.

Speaker 3 (01:15:39):
Well, I mean, this is an awful attilative radiance claim
that they've won here.

Speaker 2 (01:15:45):
I see you're not satisfied with what you've seen so
far in there.

Speaker 3 (01:15:47):
No, in fact, it's it's getting progressively worse. Paragraph six, gentlemen,
the United States America undertakes with regional partners to develop
a definitive, mutually agreed plan with at least three hundred
billion dollars US for the reconstruction economic development Islamic Republican
Morono mechanism for the inplantation as plan will be finalized
as part of a sixty day deal. All required licenses,

(01:16:08):
waiversu brissons needed for the relevant financial transactions will be
granted by the United States America.

Speaker 4 (01:16:14):
Todd, Yeah, seems to me like you poop pooed Obama's
deal and now all of a sudden you want to
give them three hundred billion dollars.

Speaker 3 (01:16:22):
It's just worse that Obama dave them.

Speaker 4 (01:16:24):
Not a win here. This is a major loss for
the US. Come on, what are we doing, John?

Speaker 2 (01:16:31):
That's a deal that should have been reserved for after
signing of the treaty. It we'd be more of an
incentive to get us there to the final goal to
do it now is giving them the ability to use
moneies to create more arms for themselves. I don't know
if they could do it to hidden fashion that we
would know about it. But it's meant to help them
rebuild for damages that were caused during the course of

(01:16:54):
these actions. I understand that, but keep it holding as
an incentive. Don't just toss up money out there like
it doesn't mean anything. I understand. Wait, man, he doesn't
have three hundred million dollars. He's not the trillionaire in
the world, So you think he'd be able to comprehend
us a little bit better. I mean, what has he
got four billion, three billion dollars to his name? I
mean he understood trust. Yeah, so you should understand ten Well,

(01:17:19):
he has been the president of a true.

Speaker 3 (01:17:21):
True social generated almost six billion dollars. Well for him?

Speaker 2 (01:17:24):
Oh nice, I see it turned into something I remember
at the beginning did yeah.

Speaker 4 (01:17:29):
Yeah.

Speaker 3 (01:17:30):
Well look, guys, I mean this is simply not acceptable.
We've defeated them. We should be giveing them three hundred
billion dollars and it's in support the Islamic Republic of
rod giving support to Iran under a Democrat elected government.
In the Western world to rebuild itself is one thing,
like we did with the Marshall Plan in Europe. But

(01:17:53):
we are going to upon attending Marshall Plan to raise
three hundred million dollars for the Mullus so they can
fund the Radium Revolutionary Guard Corps and attack their neighbors
and fund their proxies in Lebanon, in Israel and in Yemen.
Now now unacceptable. I've got nothing but problem with this
so far, all right? Paragraph number seven nine States of

(01:18:17):
America undertakes determinate all types of sanctions against the Islamic
Republican run, including Unit Nations Security Council resolutions which we
have no control over, the IAEA Board of Governments resolutions
which we have no control over, and all the unilatteral
US sanctions primary secondary in an agreed upon schedule as
part of the final deal. Islamic Republic of around United
States acknowledge the critical importance of the sanctions termin issue

(01:18:37):
above mentioned and express their intentions to immediately address those
issues in the negotiations in order to achieve mutual agreement
on them. So is it wise to remove the sanctions
in order to achieve peace there?

Speaker 4 (01:18:47):
Todd I don't think so. I think you're not going
to get anything there. You're going to allow them to
be able to rebuild their nuclear program, their drone program,
whatever the case may be, intelligence and infrastructure, and you're
going to give them three hundred billion dollars to fix
their own network, whatever the case may be, their own infrastructure,
be able to put more restrictions on their own people.

(01:19:08):
They killed forty some thousand recently, right in the past
couple of months, whenever they were protesting. It's gonna a lot,
it's gonna embolden them to be able to, you know, basically,
just destroy their people as if they as they see fit.
And we're not going to have a legacy, and we're
not gonna be able to say, hey to the people
of Iran, hey hold out, we're going to be right
there with you. We've tried that before, red line, red line,
red line in Obama's time. Now, all of a sudden,

(01:19:29):
during Trump's time, here's three hundred billion dollars. We're not
here to help you.

Speaker 3 (01:19:32):
You know, you're screwed, basically, well, I mean Trump was
upset for years and rightly so, complaining that Obama sent
one point seven billion to Iran. Yeah, we're gonna give
them three hundred billion after we beat them to death
and we spend twenty eight billion dollars of own money
fighting the war. It doesn't make any sense, John.

Speaker 2 (01:19:48):
No, it doesn't make sense. I see as a good
faith measure. But we can always resanction. I mean, we
can always put sanctions on them again if we need to.
And also this treaty he has to go through Congress
when it is agreed upon before it can be enacted.
So I don't know. There's still a lot to go here.
There's a long way to go. But all I see

(01:20:11):
here is maybe a good faith measure. And see, he
tried to create incentives right to get him to the table,
because that's what he wanted. He wanted them to come
to the deal. So I think these are incentives he's
created to get them to the table. Some of these
incentives should be held out for the treaty within itself,
I think. But yeah, I don't know, man, he's giving

(01:20:33):
a lot. Like you said, we've overpowered I Ron, I
think we should have held out for more. We're selling
ourselves short, Chris, that's basically what you're saying, And I
agree we're selling ourselves short with this mouth.

Speaker 3 (01:20:44):
I think he's selling the thirteen dead soldiers, sellers, marines,
and airman down the river. Yeah. I think this is ridiculous.
So again, we said we would hold the president accountable.
I think we're holding mccoutable tonight. None of us really
agree with his framework so far? All right. Paragraph eight,
the Islamic Republican RON reaffirms that it shall not procure
or develop nuclear weapons. Okay, our first win, Our first win,

(01:21:06):
United says American. The Islamic Propublic round have agreed to
resolve that this position of stockpiled enriched material pursuant to
the mechanism that we mutual agreed upon accordance with the
schedule mentioned in paragraph seven, with the minimal methodology to
be drawn down blending on a site under the supervision
the IAEA. Two parties also agreed to discuss the issue
of enrichment and other mutually agreed matters relates to Islamic
Republican rounds nuclear needs based on the statutory framework being

(01:21:29):
agreed upon the final deal. The final deal will confirm
the prousions of this paragraph. The United States, American Islamic
Republic RUND acknowledge the critical importance of the nuclear issues
mentioned above, and express their intention immediately addrest these issues
in negotiation in order to achieve mutual agreement on Well,
we have here John an agreement from Iran that they
will not procure or develop nuclear weapons. The problem with

(01:21:49):
that is we're talking about Iran and you can't trust
a word they say.

Speaker 2 (01:21:53):
No, I know you're right. As you were reading it,
I'm thinking to myself, so where do they go to
enriched uranium? Where do they hire to do that EID underground?
Or do they run to some remote islands somewhere where
they're not being observed so so harshly, or people are unaware.
I did notice the word procure was in there. I
was glad to hear that part of it. So that
means they're not supposed to be seeking it in any

(01:22:15):
regard as in whether somebody else enriched to forum and
they were purchasing it or however they were getting it.
They're not supposed to have it, So that part, that
part is good. But Trump said himself here just what
a week or two ago. They're not honorable people. They
never honor their agreements. We can't trust them, and so

(01:22:36):
he knows it, but yeah, he's trying to make deals
with them.

Speaker 3 (01:22:39):
So that I find that concerning, I also agree before
Tody gets a chance to respond to that question. Lest
we just Ryan, folks, you're listening to common sense conservice
right here on WSMN fifteen ninety on your AM down
ninety five point three in the FM dollar. You can
catch us on the Internet at place of the truck
like the truckers in Broadcast Network ad at Colonel Chris White,
also on x as on prefers to call it. You

(01:23:01):
can catch us on exit my account. So, Todd, what
are your thoughts about this nuclear agreement?

Speaker 4 (01:23:06):
No, that was the first paragraph that made in any
sense sort of You give them three hundred billion dollars
and then they say, we promised we won't enrich uranium.
Now we got three hundred billion dollars to spend a
little bit on rich and richie uranium, and now all
of a sudden, we can make it a little bit
more secretive because we have more money to do that. Yeah,
not a good idea here.

Speaker 3 (01:23:26):
So this is where it gets confusing and a bit contradictory.
In paragraph nine patting the final deal of the United States,
American Islamica PULK Arron agree to maintain the status quo.
The Islamic Republic Aroma will maintain the current status quote
it's nuclear program in the United States, will not impose
any new sanctions, and will not deploy any additional forces
in the region. Excuse me, and what does a rod

(01:23:48):
have to do with we have to go back to
war with Iraq or we have to fight Syria. We'll
put troops where we need to. So that's todd I'm
a little puzzle on this. When they just said their
nuclear program is way, now it's saying status well and
we won't take it away.

Speaker 4 (01:24:02):
Yeah, I'm sorry. That needs it needs to go away.
This idea of status quo where you have a secret
or program. No, I'm sorry, that needs to go away completely.
It needs to be verified that it's going away completely,
especially a weapons program. You want to talk in the
future about small reactors for actual you know, for civilian
purposes something like that. Not a problem. We can have

(01:24:22):
those discussions in the future, but now it needs to
be verified that you have no weapons grade it goes away.
And at the same time, there's three hundred billion dollars
I'm hanging up on that. That needs to be something
that's down the road, you know, three hundred billion dollars.
Once we verify all this stuff, you hold new elections,
whatever the case may be, you have a new regime
or whatever, a true democratic government, then we could talk

(01:24:44):
about three hundred billion dollars coming your way and actually
doing business with you. And then at that point, whenever
you're actually a free nation where you're reasonable, then maybe
we won't send troops over there, because what you don't
get a dictate where we've send troops in the world,
whether that means parking a carrier task force off of
your know, in the Gulf somewhere, whatever the case may be,
you don't get to dictate that. We decided that. You know,

(01:25:07):
that's for the President, the d officials, and of course
Congress to decide these things, not for Iran to dictate
it in some agreement. They don't have the hand here
we have hand. They have no power in this agreement.

Speaker 3 (01:25:18):
Well, that's the thing. They have no power. They're obliterated military.
Im They still got some missiles they can strike with, sure,
and they've proven that, but they have no ability to
go on the offensive against their neighbors. And they would
crumble under pressure for me and I said, so, who
are they to take terms? It sounds to me, John,
like the Iranians are dictating the terms here.

Speaker 2 (01:25:35):
Yeah, well that's what the issue has been, right. The
whdn't come to the table until they had a voice
in it. And so you bring up a good point.
Maybe they are kind of dictating terms. I think it
behooves Trump or whoever's working on this treaty agreement to
define what they mean by region, right, Uh, military force

(01:25:55):
in the region of Iran or military force in the
region of the Mid East. I mean, what do they
mean by region? So that definitely requires some form of definition,
so they have something to go by instead of just
playing plainly just saying the region, you.

Speaker 3 (01:26:08):
Know, because one could sider the region is the Middle East,
which extends all they cross North Africa to Morocco. We
send troops there every year in exercise. We send troops
into these an exercise. We do exercises in the Sinai
with the Egyptians. We have peacekeeping forces in the Sinai. Yeah,
they they're crazy. By the way, before I forget for
those who are curious into pay com is out, it's

(01:26:30):
once again what it was for seven decades. Pacific Command.
Pay Com is back.

Speaker 4 (01:26:35):
Just take care of Yeah, I I never changed my
I called it pay com the entire time, which is good.
It's bad.

Speaker 3 (01:26:40):
Yeah, Well, the end of pay comm nonsense is out, okay?
Paragraph ten. The United States of America undertakes that immediately
upon signing of the MLU and until the termination of sanctions,
the US Department Treasure will issue waivers from the export
of or any crude oil petroleum products in rudas and
all associated services, including banking transactions, insurances, transportation, and et cetera.
All right, John, any thoughts on that.

Speaker 2 (01:27:02):
Oh, it sounds to me like they're issuing waivers as
and what for fees and stuff so they don't have
to pay tariffs or fees or what were we talking
about when they say waivers?

Speaker 3 (01:27:11):
No, No, the waivers are okay. So we've sanctioned their
oil shipments and sanctioned those who buy their oil, so
they want every anything associated with take away. We're also
blocking you maritime insurance and transportation insurance and lots of
things like that, and we blocked them using banking transactions.
They want that all lifted so they can sell their oil.
That's the bottom line.

Speaker 2 (01:27:31):
Oh oh, okay, I got you. Now I'm more clear
on it. So, yeah, I don't know. That seems to me.
It seems if you're going to open up commerce again
for Iran, you got to open up commerce for Ron,
So it makes sense that it would be part of
the deal. Again, to Todd's point, you're enriching them because
they're going to sell oil again, and to it should

(01:27:52):
help to bring the global markets down as far as
getting a Ranian oil back into the markets. But at
the same time, uh, they're going to be profiting heavy
off it when we're still trying to make deals. And
so where's that going to drive them? Once they start
great creating wealth again for Iran? What's going to drive
their mindset in this negotiations? Is it gonna as you said, Chris,

(01:28:15):
is it going to push it off further and further
because now they're getting more comfortable and they feel like
they're in a good place and that we're just never
going to go back on it. It's just going to
be pushed off until Trump is out of office and
we're dealing with another president and he's picking up a mess.
I mean, who knows now.

Speaker 3 (01:28:30):
Toddy thoughts on this one.

Speaker 4 (01:28:32):
Yeah, I think it shouldn't be it should It shouldn't
be like a band aid. It should be little by little,
you know, a little goalpost. You reach this point, you've
done this, we lift this sanction. We give you a
little bit more. Don't give the three hundred billion dollars
all at once, you know, give little by little. If
you've meet certain things, you'll get. You'll get a little
carrot and stick if you will. I think that's the
way we should approach it, because we want them to

(01:28:52):
bring them into the global market. If you will want
them to be a peaceful nation. This is kind of
a way I think we could do it. If you
give it to them all at once, they're going to
be like a greedy kid in a candy store. Hey,
we got what we want. You know, we don't have
to do anything, you know, we don't have to live
up to aaron to the bargain.

Speaker 3 (01:29:08):
Yeah, I hear you on that one. So Paragraph eleven
of fourteen United States of America undertakes to make fully
available for use the frozen or restricted funds and assets
of the Islamic Republic of I Ran upon the implantation
of this MLU and I States American Islamic Republic of
Iran will usually agree on the procedures related to the
release of these funds during the negotiations. Such funds, whether
retain the original account or transferred, shall be made fully

(01:29:30):
usable for payment to any ultimate beneficiary designated by the
Central Bank of Islamic Republican of Iran. United States undertakes
issue all necessary license and authorizations accordingly. Before either of
you answer, we're talking about twenty four billion dollars in
frozen assets that we're going to release to Iran, a
terror state that funds Hamas, the Hutis and hez Belah. John,

(01:29:51):
does this one sound like a brilliant achievement here, given
the fact that Trump moaned extensively about Barry Obama giving
one point seven billion dollars, Now he wants a three
hundred million dollar reconstruction fund to benefit the malls, and
he's gonna let them have access to twenty four billion dollars.
John thoughts on that.

Speaker 2 (01:30:09):
So, to my understanding, the twenty four billion dollars is
Iran's money, rightfully, but it was withheld against them during sanctions.
So we're giving them three hundred and twenty four billion
dollars of the access of three hundred and twenty four
billion dollars in total. Now as we're getting further along
into this, and that goes right to Todd's point earlier
about what are they going to use this money for?

(01:30:30):
How's this money going to go? Is it just about
nation building or is it gonna be used nefariously?

Speaker 3 (01:30:39):
Yeah?

Speaker 2 (01:30:39):
No, I feel kind of concerned that we're just giving
up too as Todd was saying, too much too fast.

Speaker 3 (01:30:47):
Well, it's it's not just as too much too fast.
It's whether it's the money that belongs to run or not.
It's not the Mollel's money, it's the people who are
on or it's the chavens. And after Trump went on
forever about one point seven billion of by Obama, this
dwarf side amount. That's more than twelve fifteen times the amount,
roughly fifteen times the amount of what Obama gave them.
It's sickening, Todd, No.

Speaker 4 (01:31:08):
It absolutely is. You know, he talked a big game
about no more wars and all this stuff. You're going
to fund a nation who's going to be able to
have regional war for the next decades if they wanted.
I mean, you've just done that. With all this money
you're going to give to them, they can find a
war wars for decades.

Speaker 3 (01:31:24):
Well, I would argue, and I think fairly that Trump
didn't say no more wars, he said no more endless wars.
But by making this agreement, he is setting stage for
an endless war being prosecuted and executed by Iran against
other neighbors and against the world with terrorism. So that's
pretty frightening. He's done exactly what he said he was against.
All right, paragraph twelve, we're getting towards the end here.
The United States, American Islamic Republic viroon agree that an

(01:31:46):
executive mechanism will be established to monitor the successful implementation
of this MoU and the future compliance to the final deal.
Now that sounds reasonable, Todd, No.

Speaker 4 (01:31:56):
No, that's good. I don't have a major you there.
I don't think it's too statement for me to work
up a major issue.

Speaker 3 (01:32:04):
Sorry, well, I mean it's basically saying that someone has
to oversee this to make your book part feel Yeah,
I mean, John thoughts.

Speaker 2 (01:32:11):
Yeah, No, I was thinking that earlier. I mean, what's
going to hold them responsible to it? And what you're
talking about is possibly treaty within the United Nations or
something where they can have inspectors go in and quite
often most countries are all countries as a rule, as
far as I know, allow you and inspectors to come
in and inspect their nuclear sites and things like that.

(01:32:34):
So they need to be a global player if they're
going to act like a global player, so and held
accountable accordingly. So this is kind of vague language, and
I think we'll see more in it when the treaty
comes out to make determinations on how they plan on
moving forward with this.

Speaker 3 (01:32:53):
I think you one hundred percent correct. All right, folks,
bear with us. We're almost there. Two more paragraphs in
this agreement after such, I think I timed almost perfectly
for the rest of the hour. Here it looks like
after signing this MLU in subject to the beginning of
the implantation of paragraphs one, four, five, ten, eleven, I'm
not gonna read those back to you of the MLU
and the continuing the implantation, he's menaged the United States
of American in the Islamic Republic, RYN will start negotiations

(01:33:14):
regarding the final deal exclusively on the other paragraphs, so
that would be a graph two, three, six, seven, eight, nine, twelve, thirteen,
and fourteen. So most of the paragraphs are going to
work on deals after it's signed, so basically saying, once
we signed this, then we're gonna work on the things
we have unresolved. I mean, that just seems like a
no brainer. Why you have to have that in the deal? God?

Speaker 4 (01:33:36):
Yeah, Yeah, it just seems like it's a no brainer.
Like you said, to the point, but a lot of
these provisions in there. It's he went after Obama and
all his deal and now all of a sudden, you're
just giving away everything to this, I mean, regime for
crying out loud, and you're gonna tout it as as
some grand victory or if it backfires, I'm just wondering
if he's just gonna throw JD under the bus here.

(01:33:58):
I'm just curious.

Speaker 3 (01:33:59):
I think we should just send it an air wing
of seventeen Global Masters loaded up with Lamborghinis and Bentleys
and just delivered to them Allels. I mean, we're giving
them everything set the kitchen the same time.

Speaker 4 (01:34:12):
Yeah, I think you're right one ndred percent of this
and we've gained nothing out of it.

Speaker 3 (01:34:16):
You know, now, why why are thirteen service members dead?
Why are civilians dead? Why has so much stamia's been
done in the Middle East? Why aren't we just burying
these people and putting them in a hole.

Speaker 2 (01:34:27):
I mean thoughts, Well, I'm just kind of wondering where
the clause is that they're going to start reimbursing us
for the cost of having to go to take an
action against them. You know, I'm going, wait a minute,
where's our where's our regaining of our our our lost
funds and stuff. Because they brought us to this position,
we had to exert ourselves and spend a great deal
of money, and now we need to restock on armaments

(01:34:50):
that we spent. And so I think maybe we're given
as you said, Chris, we're given too much away and
we're not getting anything in return as far as getting
reimbursed for our cost to doing business.

Speaker 3 (01:35:02):
The only thing I see, John, that we're getting we
want to have this deal is the abandoned is the
nuclear program. But then the next paragraph says that they
maintained a status quo with the nuclear program, So they
conflict each other.

Speaker 2 (01:35:11):
Well, no, no, I mean there are two different things. Right,
We're talking about our enriching uranium for armaments as opposed
to using nuclear energy for electricity and things like that.

Speaker 3 (01:35:23):
They have been arguing that's what they're doing all along,
and we've caught them a riching uranium, so you can't
trust them. So I think they I still think they're
in conflict, all right, Jets. Final paragraph and this is
the shortest one, the final deal. Paragraph fourteen will be
endorsed by a binding Nine Nation Security Council resolution.

Speaker 4 (01:35:39):
Todd, Well, if you can get them to even agree
on it, for crying out loud, I mean you're gonna
have so many competing parties to try to get them
to even agree on this. I mean maybe a mood
point by the time you arrived to New York to
try to even get them to negotiate.

Speaker 3 (01:35:56):
Yeah, John, any thoughts on that.

Speaker 2 (01:35:58):
Yeah, DoD brings up a good point. But yeah, we
love up to this that it's going to definitely have
to be something that falls with it enough purview of
the United Nations and recognize globally. I mean, the United
States can't just police IRUN the rest of the time
after this, It's going to have to be a global
agreement or something within the globe that they have to

(01:36:18):
be held accountable on a global level. So I mean,
it's sensible, and we kind of knew that was coming, right.

Speaker 3 (01:36:25):
I don't well, I mean, I don't get the adherence
for UN Security Council. That's the demand of Oro, hon or,
demand of the United States. I suspect it was demand
of Iran because we don't hold much faith in the UN.
We know that their agreements are useless. So it is
to me an odd one here. And I guess it's
lucky for Iran that the United States is a pertment
of the Security Council, so we can push through things Otherwise,
at least they didn't say General Assembly, said Security Council.

(01:36:47):
So there are other friends and partners that have to
embarrass themselves voting against Iran. But look, I think this
deal sucks. Todd sucks.

Speaker 4 (01:36:56):
In short, who came up with it? And of course
who's going to get thrown under the bus? Is it Marco?

Speaker 3 (01:37:02):
Is it JD?

Speaker 4 (01:37:03):
Who do they teeing up? And I'm hearing that they're
teeing up JD to take the fall if it's a
big screw up.

Speaker 3 (01:37:09):
Well, to me, it seems like Trump has hired the
first person fired in every episode of The Apprentice to
negotiate the deal. Yeah. Right, it seems ridiculous.

Speaker 2 (01:37:19):
John, No, I'm in agreement with Chris. I'm not overly
thrilled about it. Like I said, you know, I've stood
my ground that we just need to finish what we
started with Iran and give them a chance for a
clean slate, new form of government and start over and
build a better Iran. Because I'm not sure we're going
to see that. Oh well, I feel confident we're not

(01:37:40):
going to see that. Well, we're going to see And
I've said this before, and I think I think you
guys agreed with me. If it isn't soon, sooner to
be a twenty years or sooner, we will see Iran
coming back against the United States. It won't. These people
are relentless. And as long as you're going to have
this type of theocracy in the globe, this type of
mind and said, and what did I hear? I think

(01:38:03):
the Islam Islam religion twenty five percent of them or jihadis.
That's a lot of people. Yeah, And so when they're
when they're taking an exception with us, I'm referring to
us as the White or the Great Satan. Then you know,
we we don't have a whole lot of hope that
we're going to see a great outcome out of this

(01:38:23):
in years to come, and we got to think about
our future generations. We made a vast investment doing what
is we're doing, and if we make agreements with them
that don't be greatly benefit us or create a circumstance
but we're not going to have to face this again
in the future, then we're doing ourselves a disservice.

Speaker 3 (01:38:43):
Well, guys, you know it's afropos that we talked about
this in this hour because as we were on air,
the media has begun writing about this and commenting on it,
and the Guardian, leftist rag or tabloid as I would
call it, from the uks's top Republican decries Trump's Iran deal.
Now that's pretty scary. The top Republican Reagan is rolling
over his grave. Of course, the top Republican is Senator
Bill Casty, who got Schlack and is on his way out.

(01:39:06):
He called it the worst foreign policy blundering decades. While
others are the party are skeptical over the deal. A
handful said at Republicans have sharply criticized agreement reach with Iran,
accusing thedministration committing the worst foreign policy blundering decades. Trump
Minstration released the text of the Internet deal between Washington, Iran,
and the Hunter and Tad and day conflict framing is
a major win for the US, even as the fourteen
Point of Court made significant political and financial concessions to

(01:39:27):
Ron to reopen straight hormones and permit a worldwide depression.
Reagan is rolling over in his grave, is what Cassie
said on x IRON'SUGRA ambitions are not curbed, and they
have learned that threatened the straight hormones works and won
doubtedly leverage it in the future. Now Ron gets to
build a brand new infrastructure under this deal. Yeah, guys,
I mean, look, I'm not a fan of Bill Cassie.
I think he's a toad, but he's not wrong here.

Speaker 4 (01:39:49):
Todd, No, I think he's probably spot on for sure.
You know, they need massive regime change and it's going
to be up to the people of Iran to want
it and we can't force it. And at the same time,
given money to the male is like, we're what we're
going to do. There's not going to be regime change
anytime soon unless there's a massive civil war there. And
we know that the government, the Islamic or Republic Guard

(01:40:10):
or whatever whatever they call them, right, the I or GC,
they have no problem killing their own people.

Speaker 3 (01:40:16):
Oh, they kill of them just earlier this year.

Speaker 2 (01:40:19):
Yeah, you know, I heard I heard another radio show
coming into this show tonight and she was bringing up
the idea, why aren't we asking for the disarmament of Iran?
Why why can't we do that? I mean, didn't we
do that Japan? Why can't we do that? You know,
and you don't hear anything about this in this still.
I mean, yeah, a sovereign nation has a right to
defend itself, but not when it's already shown. It's a

(01:40:41):
beautiful in the globe. They got to earn that, right.

Speaker 4 (01:40:44):
Iran's not going to surrender. They're not going to be
given it a conditional surrender. It's not going to happen.

Speaker 2 (01:40:50):
Well, because we didn't take it to the limit, right,
we know where we're cutting ourselves short.

Speaker 3 (01:40:57):
Well, you know this, it just stinks, guys, It just sucks.
It sucks. Buttermilk, I'm not happy about this at all.
You know, Trump saying it's averting a global depression. That's
nonsense too. United States economy is growing in the midst
of this. He said, We're gonna bomb the hell out
of them if they violate the agreement. Well, President Trump
has zero credibility on the issue now zero. I mean,

(01:41:20):
you know, look all this talk about the Republican Party
being divided and people not supporting Trump, Well, I think
most of us were still with the president because we
know that Ron started as war nineteen seventy nine, until
we just saw this agreement. I suspect an awful lot
of people are going to break ranks over this agreement.
I know I'm one of them. Yeah.

Speaker 2 (01:41:38):
I kind of thought that maybe part of going into
Venezuela was getting sanctions out of Venezuela, getting the oil
back into the market at normal rates, so China wasn't
getting us so cheap, so Russia wasn't benefiting off that
cheap oil. And I kind of feel like Trump saw
objective here in Iran was the same. And I think
this is what this shows us, is that if he

(01:41:59):
can out up Iron's market and get her on back
in the market without the sanctions, the oil rates will
come back up and level the plane killed in the globe.
And I can't help but say it. You know what
I'm saying. I can't help but say that's what I'm
seeing right now.

Speaker 3 (01:42:13):
Well, what I'm seeing is capitulation in the part of
the United States who won this conflict, and now we
look like we lost the conflict. I cannot cannot, for
a moment fathom what this means unless it's all just
a bluff for the agreement. But you know it's the
President has lost all credibility with me when it comes
to Iran because he said a lot of stuff. Look,
I mean, you know, he is bluster. When he ran
for office, was saying, you know, I could have solved

(01:42:35):
the Ukraine Russia thing in a day and they'll be
peace and day when I get back. I never believe that.
That's just campaign bluster. It's silly. There's no way I
know the underlying reasons for the conflict, and I've analyzed,
I'm explaining to people for I told you about this
years ago, and so that was never going to end
one day, and that's that's just bluster. But this, this
is on paper, This isn't bluster. This is a colossal

(01:42:56):
diplomatic failure in my view, Todd.

Speaker 4 (01:43:00):
Yeah, oh for sure. And I don't I don't understand.
Were these the best negotiators that we had out there
or is it the fact that Iran's just I don't know.
They're so ensconced that they're not going to give up,
you know, at any at any turn. They just maybe
want a little reprieve and maybe a little bit of
money at this point, you know, but they're not going
to give up. They're not quitting. They're going to come
back stronger. For sure.

Speaker 3 (01:43:21):
Well, President Trump says he wants to avoid economic catastrophe
for who for Iran? I don't care if they have
an economic castor ron.

Speaker 2 (01:43:28):
We're not going to there was the Globe has been complaining.
But the problem well no, I mean other nations complained
about our U They said it was hurting them, it
was hurting their economies, but they didn't want to step up.
So you know what, suck it up?

Speaker 3 (01:43:45):
Yeah, I think suck it up is right, And in
fact that none of them, if they'd all jumped in
it from beginning this conflict Wouldnsoner would have had a
global coalition to take her on down. But this just
this doesn't serve anybody's There's only one group of people
who are benefiting from this deal, the Mullahs in Iran.
Todd they benefit.

Speaker 4 (01:44:03):
I think you're right, correct. I mean, nothing happens here
other than we argue about Iran. Should we have went
there or should we have it? You know, is this
Iran deal going to create an issue during the midterms.
It's probably going to for sure, you know, And then
the finger pointing begins. Anew.

Speaker 3 (01:44:19):
I got back to my prediction at the outset. I
said that I would have done this work differently. I
would have prosecuted in the falling fashion. I would have
landed Delta and Seal teams on carg Island to take
out their security forces before the first bomb hit the
ground over Iran. And then I would have flown in
the Ranger Battalion or used a MEW marine expedition offshore

(01:44:41):
on ships and landed them there on an amphibious landing
to take over the island, and I would have secured it.
The Iranians aren't going to bomb their own oil terminals.
I don't how the money rebuild it. So that's what
I would have done a day one had they done
that from day one. They would have saved hundreds of
billions of dollars from getting into their tens of bits
dolls from getting into Iran. But nope, with pussy it around,
we we attacked them. Look at glitz and glam look us, Oh,

(01:45:03):
look at these dash you look at these you know
these uh, these cameras. And that's gonna go for this week, folks.
We'll see you next week here on the Commons. Censers
from my co host TODM McKinley and John Grover, we
thank you for your viewership and you're listening on w
s MN, God blessed. Have a good night,