January 20, 2026 • 23 mins
(January 20, 2026)
With President Trump’s eye on Greenland, Davos morphs into emergency diplomatic summit. The U.S. military faces a reckoning on Greenland. Explaining California’s billionaire tax: the proposals, the backlash, and exodus. Why does San Diego lead California in approval of apartments.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:01):
You're listening to Bill Handle on demand from KFI AM
six forty. I was born angry.
Speaker 2 (00:08):
Yeah, yeah, I was born angry.
Speaker 1 (00:13):
And then we'll be a.
Speaker 2 (00:13):
By EM six forty Bill Handle Here. It is a
Taco Tuesday, January twentieth. A whole lot going on every
year in Davos, Switzerland. It's a resort town in Switzerland.
Every year it becomes one of the most important places
on the planet as the world's elite comes to meet
(00:36):
for a week of fun, for volity, great food.
Speaker 1 (00:39):
And just sitting down and schmoozing.
Speaker 2 (00:41):
We're talking about world leaders, senior administration officials throughout the world,
the economic elite, I mean, major players ahead of I
don't even know who is there, but inevitably it would
be along the lines of heads of Apple and heads
of City Bank. That's a kind of people that are
(01:01):
there and they just schmooze and talk to one another.
Speaker 1 (01:04):
Now, it's not a summit.
Speaker 2 (01:05):
Nothing comes out of it as in treaties or whatever.
But they getting to know each other is pretty important
stuff and that's what this is about. Well, as you
can imagine, President Trump is there. He's the first president
since Bill Clinton to go there, and the whole thing
has become the US in Greenland, I mean the whole thing,
(01:28):
and the European leaders have no idea, the economic leaders
have no idea which.
Speaker 1 (01:35):
Way Trump's going to go.
Speaker 2 (01:37):
They're already reeling from the tariffs, and now we have
tarriffs on top of tariffs.
Speaker 1 (01:43):
Where it's real simple. If this is Trump saying to Europe,
if you.
Speaker 2 (01:49):
Don't agree with me in terms of either buying or
annexing Greenland, I'm going to tear a few up the
ying yang And that's exactly what he is doing. And
Europe is absolutely reeling on this. I mean, how do.
Speaker 1 (02:02):
They respond, Well, do they hold firm?
Speaker 2 (02:08):
Do they tell the president go pound sand and yes,
if you attack Greenland, if you send in the military force,
we are going to defend, which, of course, not only
would rupture of NATO, of which Denmark at Greenland is
a territory of Denmark. Not only would it rupture NATO,
one country of NATO invading going to war with another country,
(02:30):
But now is it possible that we actually would have
war with France and Germany.
Speaker 1 (02:38):
And England. I mean, it looks like that's where we're going.
Speaker 2 (02:48):
If President Trump is not held back, If He says,
if the President says Greenland is going to be ours,
come hell or high water, and I'm willing to do
whatever it takes. And by the way, he's the one
president that I believe would do that, would say that
and do that. Now, is Europe going to cave and
that is forced Denmark to turn Greenland over the United
(03:11):
States and maybe a purchase. I don't know how much
is Greenland worth. I mean, it's do you get it
on a discount? Is there a prime day sale where
you get Greenland?
Speaker 1 (03:23):
I have no idea.
Speaker 2 (03:25):
But if Europe doesn't cave in and effectuate help the
United States get Greenland, then the rupture is going to
be complete and it's going to go on for a while.
Now is I think Trump is willing to negotiate. There's
probably going to be some negotiation where the United States
is going to have far greater influence and maybe Greenland
(03:47):
will only be in name part of Denmark and the
United States will have complete and total control as far
as a military ally. Greenland has been in Denmark has
been a lunch ally from the US from the get go.
It was one of the founding members of NATO. I
mean since after world War Two. Denmark was a matter
(04:10):
of fact, he even during World War Two. And here
is the problem with Europe. Okay, we go back in
history to Europe. There are a bunch of gutlass wonders Europe.
What happened in nineteen thirty eight when Hitler was on
his move and he demanded Czechoslovakia the Sue Dayton Land. Now,
(04:31):
I am not at all comparing I don't want to
make that clear because I know I'm going to get
the emails. I am not comparing Donald Trump to Hitler.
I am saying that Europe has a habit of caving.
And what they did is they agreed to force Czechoslovakia
to give up its su Dayton Land, a chunk of
(04:53):
Czechoslovakia and give it to Hitler because Hitler said, you
either give it to me or I go to war.
And at that time Europe, France particularly was much stronger
than much stronger than Germany was. Germany had not really
re armed the way of course it later did when
the attack started at the end of nineteen thirty nine
(05:15):
and the World War two really got going. The point
is is Europe going to cave? Well, there may be
some kind of a compromise because Europe, well they want
a compromise. It's that simple, went in doubt compromise. And
then the posts that are going back and forth, the.
Speaker 1 (05:39):
Posts that Trump put up.
Speaker 2 (05:42):
You know, for example, Great Britain is seeding back the
island of Diego Garcia, for example, it's going to be
I guess independent. It also seeding sovereignty over the archipelago
to Mauritius, and that's which is an independent country, and
they're gonna get the Garcia Trump nailed into Britain.
Speaker 1 (06:06):
How dare you do that?
Speaker 2 (06:07):
I mean, how dare you give up one of your possessions,
one of your territories and give up sovereignty to another country.
Speaker 1 (06:17):
I'll tell you what you do. I'll tell you what
you do.
Speaker 2 (06:21):
In terms of what Britain should do internationally. I mean,
the hubris of this thing is insane. And with the
tariffs and the military. Okay, guys, you voted for him.
I didn't. Okay, Oh, I know, I'm not looking at you,
(06:44):
but people have.
Speaker 1 (06:45):
I'll tell you. It was really sweating bullets.
Speaker 2 (06:46):
In Colorado, there was a unanimous bill that was passed
by both houses in which water was is to be
dispersed from the Colorado River among several of the communities.
Speaker 1 (07:00):
And this is deep red Colorado. Trump just vetoed it.
Speaker 2 (07:06):
And the communities are spinning and saying, my god, I
voted for the man.
Speaker 1 (07:11):
Look what he did to me. Well, I gotta tell
you lot's gonna happen. All right.
Speaker 2 (07:16):
There is an article in The Atlantic written by a
guy named Tom Nichols, who is a staff writer, professor
emeritus of the US Naval War College, teaches at Harvard.
And here's his real claim to fame. He was a
five time undefeated Jeopardy champ, which just kind of neat. Anyway,
he wrote this article and he talks about and this
(07:38):
is what he teaches. He talks about NATO, and the
President says, this is a case we've never considered how
to betray and attack our own allies. We did not
ask what to do if a president becomes a threatening
meglomaniac who tells one of our oldest friends Norway that
because the Nobel Committee in Oslo refuse to give him
(08:01):
a Peace Prize or the Peace Prize, he no longer
feels an obligation to think purely of peace and can
instead turn his mind towards planning to wage war against NATO,
all because he didn't get the Peace Prize. By the way,
Norway does not give the Peace Prize as a Nobel
committee which gives the Peace Prize, which is based in Norway.
(08:23):
And he goes on to say the US military is
obligated by law to refuse to follow illegal orders. Mark Kelly,
who is now going to be brought up on charges,
or Pete Hetzek is going to reduce his rank and
his and his pension just because well, or because he
(08:44):
went and videoed with five Democratic Congress people that to
the military, do not you do not have to follow
illegal orders. Well, as Nichols writes, the US military is
obligated by law to not follow illegal orders.
Speaker 1 (09:00):
But how about.
Speaker 2 (09:01):
Orders that may not be illegal, okay, one way or
the other, but are clearly immoral and illogical. For example,
planning for the invasion of Greenland. If it is not
sold to the United States, it is not given to
the United States, or it is not annexed to the
(09:21):
United States, there may very well be an attack Denmark,
which Greenland is a territory of the quasi independent territory
was our ally during both wars in the twentieth century.
Speaker 1 (09:37):
All through World War II.
Speaker 2 (09:40):
They were there against our fight against the Taliban in
nine to eleven and suffered real losses for a small nation.
The bottom line is, according to Nichols, their soldiers bled
and died on the same battlefields as Americans. And American
officers know what Trump is planning, we all do, and
the world knows it. Trump won't stop saying it. And
(10:00):
their minds are going to rebel at directives because they're
being asked to do exactly the opposite of what they've
been pared, prepared to do for years and apply it
backwards against the people that they're trained to work and protect.
In other words, the president is ordering them or will
order them, or threatens to order them to do something
(10:23):
they have been trained never to do. And this is
the possibility of the United States becoming the aggressor against NATO.
And these are countries that have been our friends for centuries.
And so here's and it makes a really interesting point.
(10:44):
The military's training will have to be shattered, reassembled into
a destructive version of itself. And here's the analogy he makes,
as if doctors were asked to take their life saving
medicines reconstitute them as poison and then give those that
poison to their patients.
Speaker 1 (11:07):
That's a hell of an analogy. But it is that scary.
Speaker 2 (11:12):
Why because does anybody believe, let's say, Trump doesn't get
his way.
Speaker 1 (11:17):
I mean, look what happened with Maduro.
Speaker 2 (11:18):
Although there's some practicality now because they realize that Delsi Rodriguez,
the vice president of Venezuela, who's part of the Maduro regime,
is sitting down and talking. And in the end that
may have been a great idea. And his how about Canada,
He's made it very clear Canada will be the fifty
first state and we will annex Canada.
Speaker 1 (11:42):
What does that mean?
Speaker 2 (11:44):
Canada says no, Now what the choice is, does the
US invade Canada? I mean, which you ever thought in
your wildest dreams. That's a sci fi picture. And here's
what he said. In the end, senior officers, starting with
the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the
heads of each service will follow Trump. The President gives
(12:09):
an order and that order will be followed no matter.
Speaker 1 (12:12):
What they think.
Speaker 2 (12:15):
I mean, they'll resign, they'll give up their commission in
many places, but they are always people that will do
exactly what the president orders them to do, even to
the point of invading Greenland. You know, a staunch ally
of ours, Denmark, I mean for centuries. I mean, the
world has turned completely on his head. It really has.
It's just it's a heartbreaker. Okay, let's move over to California.
(12:39):
This is not an international although in some cases it is.
One of the things about California is we tax the
hell out of everybody. We have the highest gas tax,
among the highest property tax, income tax, the highest. I mean,
it's just really expensive. So what's going on now is
(13:00):
there is a battle over a new tax, and this
is the billionaire's tax. And what it would do is
take five percent, so one time tax until the next
one that comes around.
Speaker 1 (13:14):
One time tax.
Speaker 2 (13:15):
That would tax billionaires five percent of their worth excluding property,
excluding pensions, although you know who has zillions of dollars
in pensions, exclude a virtually everything other than retirement accounts,
pensions and real estate, mainly stocks. So if you have
(13:38):
someone that has let's say you have three billion dollars
in stocks, write anything over a billion, so two billion
dollars year now, and by the way, a lot of
these big time billionaires have a lot more than that.
We've got two hundred billionaires in California. Well, take five
percent of fifty billion dollars one time tax. That's excluding
(14:04):
the income tax that they pay on their earnings. This
is just what they're worth at any given time. And
so I got to tell you there's a lot of
blowback here, and one of them is how about billionaires
leaving the state, And a lot of them threatened to
do so, but they when you look at the numbers,
(14:28):
maybe not. There's another ballot measure that is going to
is looking to be passed, and this is labor unions.
They're proposing a ballot measure to raise taxes on companies
whose chief executive earns fifty times more than their medium
paid employees. Will tell you how much you can pay
(14:49):
your employees, and if you don't pay the amount that
we think is appropriate, we're going to hit you with
an additional tax. This is to the corporations, you know,
in reality is first of all, even getting out of
the ballot. No one knows if that's going to happen.
Because one of the things about Gavin Newsom, who likes taxes,
(15:10):
he shuts these downs all of these additional crazy taxes
he just shut down, and his historically shut those down.
So that's a big deal for those that are proposing taxes.
These are unions, by the way, who are backing this up.
You would think so. And one of the issues is
why billionaires don't.
Speaker 1 (15:30):
Leave is because they're worth billions.
Speaker 2 (15:34):
You know, if someone is worth twenty billion dollars and
five percent of that, what is that one hundred million?
I don't even have the math here. Whatever it is,
is it going to change their lifestyle? No, But I
think there is an issue where they just don't want
(15:55):
to pay this tax. They don't want to underwrite the
cost of living for everybody else in California if they
pay an enormous amount of tax. Anyways, I mean, obviously
there are loopholes like crazy and as a percentage, maybe
they pay less than me, because that's the way our
(16:15):
tax system works. You can deduct expenses. If you're an employee,
you can't, and you pay more as a percentage. But
in the end, the billionaires are saying, hey, we're paying
We are paying not as a percentage, but certainly in
terms of actual dollars. And so it depends on which
way you're going to go. The bottom line is that
(16:37):
there's going to be a fight. Newsom's going to fight it.
Our billionaire is going to actually leave. One of the
things that's pointed out is billionaires already have residences in
other states. I mean, billionaires have a place in Manhattan,
if they have a place in Aspen, they have a
place in Malibu, up in the Hamptons. I mean, people
(16:58):
have four or five six houses, and it is not
hard to just up and move the corporation, move your companies.
And that's going to be fear So the Legislative Analysts
Office says, yeah, we can. This is going to be
a short term gain. Long term, we have no idea
what it's going to do to the state. And do
(17:18):
we just keep on pushing tax after tax after tax
until it breaks. My favorite line is Bernie Sanders, and
this was now analogous to Justice Stuart Potter when there
were pornographic cases that were brought up at Supreme Court
and he said, there's no way I can define pornography,
(17:42):
but I know it when I see it.
Speaker 1 (17:45):
Great line.
Speaker 2 (17:46):
And Bernie Sanders was asked much the same thing about taxes,
income taxes. Is there any tax income tax. That is
too much money for you. Is it sixty percent, is
it seventy percent? Is it eighty percent? He said, I'll
know how much it is when it breaks people. Until
(18:09):
then there is no limit to what taxes would be.
I wish I was in this position, billionaire tax position.
Speaker 1 (18:19):
But you know, go figure.
Speaker 2 (18:22):
Okay, let me get local for a moment and talk
about apartments and the apartment builders and governments and individuals
who actually like to house people or looked at San
Diego because San Diego is leading the approval of apartment
buildings leads California. More already being built in San Diego
(18:43):
than any other place, certainly per capita.
Speaker 1 (18:46):
So let me give you a stat.
Speaker 2 (18:48):
As of last quarter, the number of new apartments under
construction in San Diego County went up ten percent.
Speaker 1 (18:57):
From three years you're earlier.
Speaker 2 (18:59):
In Los Angeles, the new apartment construction went down thirty
three percent over the same period. So San Diego is
expanding its apartment pool twice the rate of LA and
other major cities within the cluster. Cities in Orange County
are somewhere in the middle of all of that. So
(19:21):
I use the best and then I go to the worst,
the best being any place other than LA, the.
Speaker 1 (19:26):
Worst being LA.
Speaker 2 (19:28):
And in which category are we talking about where LA
is the worst? Oh, I don't know, insert name here
of any gatic category out there, and LA is the worst.
So LA's vacancy rate is among the lowest in the country,
rental rates among the highest, because there ain't anything being built.
(19:49):
So what is it all about. Well, it's a simple
question of philosophy. LA hates developers. LA does not like
people to come in and build apartment Well, it says
it does. But we need homeless housing, We need people,
we need shelters, and we get that from developers.
Speaker 1 (20:07):
Okay, so we'll pay developer.
Speaker 2 (20:09):
We'll charge developers up ying yang even to the point
where they stop developing.
Speaker 1 (20:14):
Rent control.
Speaker 2 (20:15):
In the city of Los Angeles, new apartment buildings are
rent controlled, and LA just made it more rent controlly.
Speaker 1 (20:26):
And so what ends up happened?
Speaker 2 (20:27):
Why? Because well, they want to keep renters and not
being rented out of their apartments.
Speaker 1 (20:33):
And I understand that. But is.
Speaker 2 (20:38):
There a magic number? Is there an in between? Is
there a sweet spot?
Speaker 1 (20:43):
Not?
Speaker 2 (20:43):
As far as LA officials are concerned, there is no
sweet spot. It's let's see what we can get developers
pay for so much. And they're saying, wait a minute,
if we have rent control like this, if you make
it this difficult for us to build because the permitting
process take years, They go through so many commissions. It
goes through planning commission, I mean, it goes back at
(21:06):
the city council has to okay projects that it just
becomes untenable. And the builders say, we're done, we're not gonna.
Speaker 1 (21:15):
Deal with this.
Speaker 2 (21:15):
And by the way, we got rent control, So how
do we build apartment buildings and make any money?
Speaker 1 (21:24):
Well that's your problem.
Speaker 2 (21:25):
Well no, okay, that's our problem and your problem that
we're just not gonna build. So it's we have a
mess on our hands. And what San Diego done is
gone the other way, and they've made it much easier
to build. They've made the permitting process much easier, the
fees far less. And guess what's happening builders and rent
(21:48):
controls sort of just it's the cap in California, which
is ten percent and ten percent fee rent increases for builders.
Speaker 1 (21:58):
For owners is pretty healthy, just fine. For renters. You
can get rented right out at ten percent.
Speaker 2 (22:04):
It doesn't take very long to no longer be able
to afford the rent's. There has to be a happy
medium in there someplace, and I don't know what the
figure is.
Speaker 1 (22:14):
I have no idea.
Speaker 2 (22:17):
You know, the one time I was a landlord, I
was there for a period of time and I gave
that up because I had these two great duplexes in
the Hancock Park area of Los Angeles that were built
in nineteen twenty seven, and they all almost museum places
to live in. And what I did is I bought
(22:38):
these and I brought them back to the nineteen twenty
seven version. It's like when you walked in the door,
it was a brand new nineteen twenty seven duplex. Cost
me a fortune, and I rented him, made no money.
So I'm an idiot, but I just thought I would
throw that at you. Have nothing to do with this story,
which I do on a regular basis. So coming up,
(23:03):
tech Reporter, we're going to talk to Rich Demureau, and
we got a lot of topics, none of which have
anything to do with Rich or Tech. I just thought
i'd throw them at you. Neils nodding, Yes, that's true.
How unusual for a hand all morning, This is KFI
am sixty.
Speaker 1 (23:22):
You've been listening to The Bill Handle Show.
Speaker 2 (23:24):
Catch My Show Monday through Friday six am to nine am,
and anytime on demand on the iHeartRadio app
You're listening to Bill Handle on demand from KFI AM
six forty. I was born angry.
Speaker 2 (00:08):
Yeah, yeah, I was born angry.
Speaker 1 (00:13):
And then we'll be a.
Speaker 2 (00:13):
By EM six forty Bill Handle Here. It is a
Taco Tuesday, January twentieth. A whole lot going on every
year in Davos, Switzerland. It's a resort town in Switzerland.
Every year it becomes one of the most important places
on the planet as the world's elite comes to meet
(00:36):
for a week of fun, for volity, great food.
Speaker 1 (00:39):
And just sitting down and schmoozing.
Speaker 2 (00:41):
We're talking about world leaders, senior administration officials throughout the world,
the economic elite, I mean, major players ahead of I
don't even know who is there, but inevitably it would
be along the lines of heads of Apple and heads
of City Bank. That's a kind of people that are
(01:01):
there and they just schmooze and talk to one another.
Speaker 1 (01:04):
Now, it's not a summit.
Speaker 2 (01:05):
Nothing comes out of it as in treaties or whatever.
But they getting to know each other is pretty important
stuff and that's what this is about. Well, as you
can imagine, President Trump is there. He's the first president
since Bill Clinton to go there, and the whole thing
has become the US in Greenland, I mean the whole thing,
(01:28):
and the European leaders have no idea, the economic leaders
have no idea which.
Speaker 1 (01:35):
Way Trump's going to go.
Speaker 2 (01:37):
They're already reeling from the tariffs, and now we have
tarriffs on top of tariffs.
Speaker 1 (01:43):
Where it's real simple. If this is Trump saying to Europe,
if you.
Speaker 2 (01:49):
Don't agree with me in terms of either buying or
annexing Greenland, I'm going to tear a few up the
ying yang And that's exactly what he is doing. And
Europe is absolutely reeling on this. I mean, how do.
Speaker 1 (02:02):
They respond, Well, do they hold firm?
Speaker 2 (02:08):
Do they tell the president go pound sand and yes,
if you attack Greenland, if you send in the military force,
we are going to defend, which, of course, not only
would rupture of NATO, of which Denmark at Greenland is
a territory of Denmark. Not only would it rupture NATO,
one country of NATO invading going to war with another country,
(02:30):
But now is it possible that we actually would have
war with France and Germany.
Speaker 1 (02:38):
And England. I mean, it looks like that's where we're going.
Speaker 2 (02:48):
If President Trump is not held back, If He says,
if the President says Greenland is going to be ours,
come hell or high water, and I'm willing to do
whatever it takes. And by the way, he's the one
president that I believe would do that, would say that
and do that. Now, is Europe going to cave and
that is forced Denmark to turn Greenland over the United
(03:11):
States and maybe a purchase. I don't know how much
is Greenland worth. I mean, it's do you get it
on a discount? Is there a prime day sale where
you get Greenland?
Speaker 1 (03:23):
I have no idea.
Speaker 2 (03:25):
But if Europe doesn't cave in and effectuate help the
United States get Greenland, then the rupture is going to
be complete and it's going to go on for a while.
Now is I think Trump is willing to negotiate. There's
probably going to be some negotiation where the United States
is going to have far greater influence and maybe Greenland
(03:47):
will only be in name part of Denmark and the
United States will have complete and total control as far
as a military ally. Greenland has been in Denmark has
been a lunch ally from the US from the get go.
It was one of the founding members of NATO. I
mean since after world War Two. Denmark was a matter
(04:10):
of fact, he even during World War Two. And here
is the problem with Europe. Okay, we go back in
history to Europe. There are a bunch of gutlass wonders Europe.
What happened in nineteen thirty eight when Hitler was on
his move and he demanded Czechoslovakia the Sue Dayton Land. Now,
(04:31):
I am not at all comparing I don't want to
make that clear because I know I'm going to get
the emails. I am not comparing Donald Trump to Hitler.
I am saying that Europe has a habit of caving.
And what they did is they agreed to force Czechoslovakia
to give up its su Dayton Land, a chunk of
(04:53):
Czechoslovakia and give it to Hitler because Hitler said, you
either give it to me or I go to war.
And at that time Europe, France particularly was much stronger
than much stronger than Germany was. Germany had not really
re armed the way of course it later did when
the attack started at the end of nineteen thirty nine
(05:15):
and the World War two really got going. The point
is is Europe going to cave? Well, there may be
some kind of a compromise because Europe, well they want
a compromise. It's that simple, went in doubt compromise. And
then the posts that are going back and forth, the.
Speaker 1 (05:39):
Posts that Trump put up.
Speaker 2 (05:42):
You know, for example, Great Britain is seeding back the
island of Diego Garcia, for example, it's going to be
I guess independent. It also seeding sovereignty over the archipelago
to Mauritius, and that's which is an independent country, and
they're gonna get the Garcia Trump nailed into Britain.
Speaker 1 (06:06):
How dare you do that?
Speaker 2 (06:07):
I mean, how dare you give up one of your possessions,
one of your territories and give up sovereignty to another country.
Speaker 1 (06:17):
I'll tell you what you do. I'll tell you what
you do.
Speaker 2 (06:21):
In terms of what Britain should do internationally. I mean,
the hubris of this thing is insane. And with the
tariffs and the military. Okay, guys, you voted for him.
I didn't. Okay, Oh, I know, I'm not looking at you,
(06:44):
but people have.
Speaker 1 (06:45):
I'll tell you. It was really sweating bullets.
Speaker 2 (06:46):
In Colorado, there was a unanimous bill that was passed
by both houses in which water was is to be
dispersed from the Colorado River among several of the communities.
Speaker 1 (07:00):
And this is deep red Colorado. Trump just vetoed it.
Speaker 2 (07:06):
And the communities are spinning and saying, my god, I
voted for the man.
Speaker 1 (07:11):
Look what he did to me. Well, I gotta tell
you lot's gonna happen. All right.
Speaker 2 (07:16):
There is an article in The Atlantic written by a
guy named Tom Nichols, who is a staff writer, professor
emeritus of the US Naval War College, teaches at Harvard.
And here's his real claim to fame. He was a
five time undefeated Jeopardy champ, which just kind of neat. Anyway,
he wrote this article and he talks about and this
(07:38):
is what he teaches. He talks about NATO, and the
President says, this is a case we've never considered how
to betray and attack our own allies. We did not
ask what to do if a president becomes a threatening
meglomaniac who tells one of our oldest friends Norway that
because the Nobel Committee in Oslo refuse to give him
(08:01):
a Peace Prize or the Peace Prize, he no longer
feels an obligation to think purely of peace and can
instead turn his mind towards planning to wage war against NATO,
all because he didn't get the Peace Prize. By the way,
Norway does not give the Peace Prize as a Nobel
committee which gives the Peace Prize, which is based in Norway.
(08:23):
And he goes on to say the US military is
obligated by law to refuse to follow illegal orders. Mark Kelly,
who is now going to be brought up on charges,
or Pete Hetzek is going to reduce his rank and
his and his pension just because well, or because he
(08:44):
went and videoed with five Democratic Congress people that to
the military, do not you do not have to follow
illegal orders. Well, as Nichols writes, the US military is
obligated by law to not follow illegal orders.
Speaker 1 (09:00):
But how about.
Speaker 2 (09:01):
Orders that may not be illegal, okay, one way or
the other, but are clearly immoral and illogical. For example,
planning for the invasion of Greenland. If it is not
sold to the United States, it is not given to
the United States, or it is not annexed to the
(09:21):
United States, there may very well be an attack Denmark,
which Greenland is a territory of the quasi independent territory
was our ally during both wars in the twentieth century.
Speaker 1 (09:37):
All through World War II.
Speaker 2 (09:40):
They were there against our fight against the Taliban in
nine to eleven and suffered real losses for a small nation.
The bottom line is, according to Nichols, their soldiers bled
and died on the same battlefields as Americans. And American
officers know what Trump is planning, we all do, and
the world knows it. Trump won't stop saying it. And
(10:00):
their minds are going to rebel at directives because they're
being asked to do exactly the opposite of what they've
been pared, prepared to do for years and apply it
backwards against the people that they're trained to work and protect.
In other words, the president is ordering them or will
order them, or threatens to order them to do something
(10:23):
they have been trained never to do. And this is
the possibility of the United States becoming the aggressor against NATO.
And these are countries that have been our friends for centuries.
And so here's and it makes a really interesting point.
(10:44):
The military's training will have to be shattered, reassembled into
a destructive version of itself. And here's the analogy he makes,
as if doctors were asked to take their life saving
medicines reconstitute them as poison and then give those that
poison to their patients.
Speaker 1 (11:07):
That's a hell of an analogy. But it is that scary.
Speaker 2 (11:12):
Why because does anybody believe, let's say, Trump doesn't get
his way.
Speaker 1 (11:17):
I mean, look what happened with Maduro.
Speaker 2 (11:18):
Although there's some practicality now because they realize that Delsi Rodriguez,
the vice president of Venezuela, who's part of the Maduro regime,
is sitting down and talking. And in the end that
may have been a great idea. And his how about Canada,
He's made it very clear Canada will be the fifty
first state and we will annex Canada.
Speaker 1 (11:42):
What does that mean?
Speaker 2 (11:44):
Canada says no, Now what the choice is, does the
US invade Canada? I mean, which you ever thought in
your wildest dreams. That's a sci fi picture. And here's
what he said. In the end, senior officers, starting with
the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the
heads of each service will follow Trump. The President gives
(12:09):
an order and that order will be followed no matter.
Speaker 1 (12:12):
What they think.
Speaker 2 (12:15):
I mean, they'll resign, they'll give up their commission in
many places, but they are always people that will do
exactly what the president orders them to do, even to
the point of invading Greenland. You know, a staunch ally
of ours, Denmark, I mean for centuries. I mean, the
world has turned completely on his head. It really has.
It's just it's a heartbreaker. Okay, let's move over to California.
(12:39):
This is not an international although in some cases it is.
One of the things about California is we tax the
hell out of everybody. We have the highest gas tax,
among the highest property tax, income tax, the highest. I mean,
it's just really expensive. So what's going on now is
(13:00):
there is a battle over a new tax, and this
is the billionaire's tax. And what it would do is
take five percent, so one time tax until the next
one that comes around.
Speaker 1 (13:14):
One time tax.
Speaker 2 (13:15):
That would tax billionaires five percent of their worth excluding property,
excluding pensions, although you know who has zillions of dollars
in pensions, exclude a virtually everything other than retirement accounts,
pensions and real estate, mainly stocks. So if you have
(13:38):
someone that has let's say you have three billion dollars
in stocks, write anything over a billion, so two billion
dollars year now, and by the way, a lot of
these big time billionaires have a lot more than that.
We've got two hundred billionaires in California. Well, take five
percent of fifty billion dollars one time tax. That's excluding
(14:04):
the income tax that they pay on their earnings. This
is just what they're worth at any given time. And
so I got to tell you there's a lot of
blowback here, and one of them is how about billionaires
leaving the state, And a lot of them threatened to
do so, but they when you look at the numbers,
(14:28):
maybe not. There's another ballot measure that is going to
is looking to be passed, and this is labor unions.
They're proposing a ballot measure to raise taxes on companies
whose chief executive earns fifty times more than their medium
paid employees. Will tell you how much you can pay
(14:49):
your employees, and if you don't pay the amount that
we think is appropriate, we're going to hit you with
an additional tax. This is to the corporations, you know,
in reality is first of all, even getting out of
the ballot. No one knows if that's going to happen.
Because one of the things about Gavin Newsom, who likes taxes,
(15:10):
he shuts these downs all of these additional crazy taxes
he just shut down, and his historically shut those down.
So that's a big deal for those that are proposing taxes.
These are unions, by the way, who are backing this up.
You would think so. And one of the issues is
why billionaires don't.
Speaker 1 (15:30):
Leave is because they're worth billions.
Speaker 2 (15:34):
You know, if someone is worth twenty billion dollars and
five percent of that, what is that one hundred million?
I don't even have the math here. Whatever it is,
is it going to change their lifestyle? No, But I
think there is an issue where they just don't want
(15:55):
to pay this tax. They don't want to underwrite the
cost of living for everybody else in California if they
pay an enormous amount of tax. Anyways, I mean, obviously
there are loopholes like crazy and as a percentage, maybe
they pay less than me, because that's the way our
(16:15):
tax system works. You can deduct expenses. If you're an employee,
you can't, and you pay more as a percentage. But
in the end, the billionaires are saying, hey, we're paying
We are paying not as a percentage, but certainly in
terms of actual dollars. And so it depends on which
way you're going to go. The bottom line is that
(16:37):
there's going to be a fight. Newsom's going to fight it.
Our billionaire is going to actually leave. One of the
things that's pointed out is billionaires already have residences in
other states. I mean, billionaires have a place in Manhattan,
if they have a place in Aspen, they have a
place in Malibu, up in the Hamptons. I mean, people
(16:58):
have four or five six houses, and it is not
hard to just up and move the corporation, move your companies.
And that's going to be fear So the Legislative Analysts
Office says, yeah, we can. This is going to be
a short term gain. Long term, we have no idea
what it's going to do to the state. And do
(17:18):
we just keep on pushing tax after tax after tax
until it breaks. My favorite line is Bernie Sanders, and
this was now analogous to Justice Stuart Potter when there
were pornographic cases that were brought up at Supreme Court
and he said, there's no way I can define pornography,
(17:42):
but I know it when I see it.
Speaker 1 (17:45):
Great line.
Speaker 2 (17:46):
And Bernie Sanders was asked much the same thing about taxes,
income taxes. Is there any tax income tax. That is
too much money for you. Is it sixty percent, is
it seventy percent? Is it eighty percent? He said, I'll
know how much it is when it breaks people. Until
(18:09):
then there is no limit to what taxes would be.
I wish I was in this position, billionaire tax position.
Speaker 1 (18:19):
But you know, go figure.
Speaker 2 (18:22):
Okay, let me get local for a moment and talk
about apartments and the apartment builders and governments and individuals
who actually like to house people or looked at San
Diego because San Diego is leading the approval of apartment
buildings leads California. More already being built in San Diego
(18:43):
than any other place, certainly per capita.
Speaker 1 (18:46):
So let me give you a stat.
Speaker 2 (18:48):
As of last quarter, the number of new apartments under
construction in San Diego County went up ten percent.
Speaker 1 (18:57):
From three years you're earlier.
Speaker 2 (18:59):
In Los Angeles, the new apartment construction went down thirty
three percent over the same period. So San Diego is
expanding its apartment pool twice the rate of LA and
other major cities within the cluster. Cities in Orange County
are somewhere in the middle of all of that. So
(19:21):
I use the best and then I go to the worst,
the best being any place other than LA, the.
Speaker 1 (19:26):
Worst being LA.
Speaker 2 (19:28):
And in which category are we talking about where LA
is the worst? Oh, I don't know, insert name here
of any gatic category out there, and LA is the worst.
So LA's vacancy rate is among the lowest in the country,
rental rates among the highest, because there ain't anything being built.
(19:49):
So what is it all about. Well, it's a simple
question of philosophy. LA hates developers. LA does not like
people to come in and build apartment Well, it says
it does. But we need homeless housing, We need people,
we need shelters, and we get that from developers.
Speaker 1 (20:07):
Okay, so we'll pay developer.
Speaker 2 (20:09):
We'll charge developers up ying yang even to the point
where they stop developing.
Speaker 1 (20:14):
Rent control.
Speaker 2 (20:15):
In the city of Los Angeles, new apartment buildings are
rent controlled, and LA just made it more rent controlly.
Speaker 1 (20:26):
And so what ends up happened?
Speaker 2 (20:27):
Why? Because well, they want to keep renters and not
being rented out of their apartments.
Speaker 1 (20:33):
And I understand that. But is.
Speaker 2 (20:38):
There a magic number? Is there an in between? Is
there a sweet spot?
Speaker 1 (20:43):
Not?
Speaker 2 (20:43):
As far as LA officials are concerned, there is no
sweet spot. It's let's see what we can get developers
pay for so much. And they're saying, wait a minute,
if we have rent control like this, if you make
it this difficult for us to build because the permitting
process take years, They go through so many commissions. It
goes through planning commission, I mean, it goes back at
(21:06):
the city council has to okay projects that it just
becomes untenable. And the builders say, we're done, we're not gonna.
Speaker 1 (21:15):
Deal with this.
Speaker 2 (21:15):
And by the way, we got rent control, So how
do we build apartment buildings and make any money?
Speaker 1 (21:24):
Well that's your problem.
Speaker 2 (21:25):
Well no, okay, that's our problem and your problem that
we're just not gonna build. So it's we have a
mess on our hands. And what San Diego done is
gone the other way, and they've made it much easier
to build. They've made the permitting process much easier, the
fees far less. And guess what's happening builders and rent
(21:48):
controls sort of just it's the cap in California, which
is ten percent and ten percent fee rent increases for builders.
Speaker 1 (21:58):
For owners is pretty healthy, just fine. For renters. You
can get rented right out at ten percent.
Speaker 2 (22:04):
It doesn't take very long to no longer be able
to afford the rent's. There has to be a happy
medium in there someplace, and I don't know what the
figure is.
Speaker 1 (22:14):
I have no idea.
Speaker 2 (22:17):
You know, the one time I was a landlord, I
was there for a period of time and I gave
that up because I had these two great duplexes in
the Hancock Park area of Los Angeles that were built
in nineteen twenty seven, and they all almost museum places
to live in. And what I did is I bought
(22:38):
these and I brought them back to the nineteen twenty
seven version. It's like when you walked in the door,
it was a brand new nineteen twenty seven duplex. Cost
me a fortune, and I rented him, made no money.
So I'm an idiot, but I just thought I would
throw that at you. Have nothing to do with this story,
which I do on a regular basis. So coming up,
(23:03):
tech Reporter, we're going to talk to Rich Demureau, and
we got a lot of topics, none of which have
anything to do with Rich or Tech. I just thought
i'd throw them at you. Neils nodding, Yes, that's true.
How unusual for a hand all morning, This is KFI
am sixty.
Speaker 1 (23:22):
You've been listening to The Bill Handle Show.
Speaker 2 (23:24):
Catch My Show Monday through Friday six am to nine am,
and anytime on demand on the iHeartRadio app
The Bill Handel Show News
Popular Podcasts
Two Guys, Five Rings: Matt, Bowen & The Olympics
Two Guys (Bowen Yang and Matt Rogers). Five Rings (you know, from the Olympics logo). One essential podcast for the 2026 Milan-Cortina Winter Olympics. Bowen Yang (SNL, Wicked) and Matt Rogers (Palm Royale, No Good Deed) of Las Culturistas are back for a second season of Two Guys, Five Rings, a collaboration with NBC Sports and iHeartRadio. In this 15-episode event, Bowen and Matt discuss the top storylines, obsess over Italian culture, and find out what really goes on in the Olympic Village.
iHeartOlympics: The Latest
Listen to the latest news from the 2026 Winter Olympics.
Milan Cortina Winter Olympics
The 2026 Winter Olympics in Milan Cortina are here and have everyone talking. iHeartPodcasts is buzzing with content in honor of the XXV Winter Olympics We’re bringing you episodes from a variety of iHeartPodcast shows to help you keep up with the action. Follow Milan Cortina Winter Olympics so you don’t miss any coverage of the 2026 Winter Olympics, and if you like what you hear, be sure to follow each Podcast in the feed for more great content from iHeartPodcasts.