2 POGs Save the World Podcast
Two Army veterans—one left, one right—unite for the ultimate mission: tackling real-world problems with common sense, logic, and a healthy dose of military humor. 2 POGs Save the World isn’t your typical political podcast. Hosts Kj Bradley & Lance O'Neil bring unfiltered discussions, sharp debates, and tactical solutions to the chaos of modern society.
From politics and national security to sports and pop culture, no topic is off-limits. With battle-tested insights and zero tolerance for BS, these two POGs (Personnel Other than Grunts) prove that you don’t have to agree on everything to find real solutions.
Join the fight every Sunday at 8:30 PM EST, where the only thing sharper than the takes is the wit. Mission: Common Sense. Execution: Hilarious. Victory: Inevitable
🎙️ Listen. Debate. Disagree. Laugh. Take Notes.
2 POGs Save the World Podcast
LA Erupts Over ICE, JD Vance’s Quiet Power Move, and the Trump Musk Breakup
Tonight we examine the ICE protests sweeping through Los Angeles and what they reveal about growing tension around immigration enforcement and community resistance. We take a closer look at JD Vance and the growing buzz around his political style. Is he speaking with genuine concern, or is it the smooth delivery of a snake oil salesman? Then we turn to the unraveling relationship between Trump and Musk, a breakup that could reshape political and tech alliances. Join us at 8:30 for fearless commentary and sharp conversation on 2 POGs Save the World.
🚀 Join us on StreamYard and get $10 in credit! Once you spend $25, you'll earn us $25 in credit too. It's a win-win! Click the link and start streaming with us today. Let's create amazing content together! 🎥✨ https://streamyard.com/pal/d/6334885146132480
What do you want to do tonight? The same thing we do every night, pinky. Try to take over the world. All right, yo, let's get into it. Try to take over the world. You're preaching freedom. Try to take over the world and bring Chaplin in the world. Try to take over the world. How does KJ do this? Yo yo yo world. What's up? It's Sunday night.
Speaker 1:Do you know where your pogs are? Well, right now I know where one of the pogs is, and he's here. The other pog, or pogue if you prefer, is in a hotel room somewhere in America and his power just went out. So he is currently incommunicado, maybe for the whole night, I don't know. So I've got him on my messenger that I'm trying to find out what's going on with him and we'll see if he's able to come in and make this two pogs instead of one pog. But for now it's just me.
Speaker 1:So if you're tuning in to see KJ and see his opinions, I don't blame you. He's the reason you should be logging in. I'm just the soundboard in a lot of ways. So unfortunately, the co-host thing right now it's just me, and so I have to kind of just rant, and I could rant about a lot of different things. So if there's something you want to talk about or hear what my opinion is on something that maybe we wouldn't have talked about, drop a line. I believe KJ has it Now. I don't see Twitch and all that. All I really see are the comments. I believe KJ has it Now. I don't see Twitch and all that. All I really see are the comments. I believe you. I think the only place I see them may be Facebook. So if you see something and you want me to comment, somebody's watching right now.
Speaker 1:I also bought a new microphone. Oh, they were there for a second. They're not there anymore, so I don't know. Anyway, but what I wanted to talk to KJ about, well, I mean, it always centers around Trump, doesn't it? But the whole thing with the Trump and Musk fight. Now I don't know what the reality is on this fight outside of.
Speaker 1:At first I thought it was kind of BS fight outside of. At first I thought it was kind of BS. When I first saw the tweet that said, by the way, trump is in the Epstein files. I saw the first tweet and it only had like 2,000 views. So I thought it was kind of BS, because if Musk tweets, something like that, I thought, oh, come on, there's got to be more than that. And well, I was wrong. It was real, because in a matter of hours it became hundreds of thousands and then millions of views, and that made me think, okay, so this, this is real, this is a real fight.
Speaker 1:And then I thought, well, maybe, maybe Musk and Trump are having an issue because the staff doesn't like trump and what, or, I'm sorry, the staff doesn't like what musk is doing, and then it's going to be a situation where trump sits down with his staff and says, hey, back off, we need to fix this, and whatever's going on. Then the reports came out that said, no, this is, this is personal, this is between, uh, musk and trump, and the staff was actually trying to calm things down and make it a I really between trump and musk. Outside of these are two uh, very egocentric, driven people that are apparently at each other maybe not, I shouldn't say at each other's throats, but they definitely are not happy with what's going on with each other. And I don't know what the, what, the real reason behind that is, but it seems as is because of the big beautiful bill and, from what I can understand about the big beautiful bill is there are not many cuts in the big beautiful bill. It's more about the tax cuts going through to some degree, the previous Trump tax cuts becoming permanent, as well as a lack of cuts to pretty much across the board a lack of cuts, and so it seems as though maybe Musk was actually really on purpose doing what he needed to do or wanted to do with Doge and the whole point was to cut spending. The big beautiful bill doesn't cut spending, and so that to me sounds like an actual problem, because if that's true and that's what really led to this, this fight I'm team Musk at that point, because I think that you've got too much spending going on.
Speaker 1:I think, as America goes, we are, we are. I don't know when is the tipping point? $34 trillion, is it $35 trillion? Is it $40 trillion? Is it $50 trillion? Does it even matter? Is there a point where the United States government basically says, well, it doesn't matter, we can pay it off, or we won't pay it off or whatever, because whatever money is owed, we can either borrow more against it or we can basically just ignore it because it really doesn't matter, because we are the most important monetary base in the world at the moment, because the Chinese are coming and trying to get the UN going and making that the international monetary what the word is Item base, because if we switch to the UN, that's the, and the chinese, uh, chinese, that's their dollar, the un, so, and then you've? Then you're talking about a whole nother issue, because china, uh, manipulates your currency to a very significant degree, or has in the past. So then, are we ever going to go back to real currency with gold standard, silver standard? Probably not. I find that unlikely.
Speaker 1:But what you've got right now is you've got Trump, who is not acting like a fiscal conservative. Speaker of the House, johnson, the Speaker Leader, johnson, who is not acting like a fiscal conservative. You have the Republicans doing what Republicans have done again for the how many-enth time when the Democrats are in power, oh, we need to cut spending, oh, they're spending out of their minds and it's horrible for the economy and horrible for the country. But then, when Republicans get in charge, they turn around and they spend like drunken sailors as well. So it makes you wonder why. I have a big problem with Republicans when they do this, because Republicans can run all day long on being fiscally conservative and they can say, hey, we're going to cut things back, we're going to get control of this, we're going to try and make things better for the average person, the middle class person, but then, when they get in power, they don't cut spending and they don't do the things that they need to do to really make that happen. What they do is they turn around and they spend all the money that they seemingly can.
Speaker 1:I think that, with Trump having Doge, come in and try to say, hey, we're going to make these cuts and we're going to save this money. I thought that was a step in the right direction. Now, these cuts and we're going to save this money. I thought that was a step in the right direction. Now the question becomes how serious were they? How much did they actually try to? Or how much is the Trump administration willing to actually cut spending? Are they serious about deficit spending? It doesn't seem that they are. So now you have Musk who's saying, okay, I'm out, or Trump saying you're out, depending on which perspective you want to look at, but not without a shot fired. So as Musk is going out the door, he drops a bomb and says, well, trump's in the Epstein files. This reminds me of the movie American Beauty.
Speaker 1:If you haven't seen that, kevin Spacey is the lead. They don't really say I think he sells ads or he's in marketing or something. And basically he's brought in and told that he's getting fired. He's out the door for whatever reason, they're just laying him off. And Spacey basically says to the guy well, okay, fine, I've been here this long and if you're going to fire me, then what's the severance? And it's minor. And then he says well then, if you're not going to give me what I want, who's to say that? You didn't just ask me for a sexual favor, and that's why you're now firing me. And the guy's like well, what are you talking about? And so he threatens to go to HR. He says you can either give me a year of severance or I'm going to go to HR. So he basically blackmails the guy and by doing that he drops this bomb on him.
Speaker 1:And it seems like Musk might have kind of done that, but he did it in public. He didn't just threaten Trump, he said hey, trump's in the Epstein files. The funny part about that is, if you've been following anything with the Epstein files, it's not a surprise that Trump is named in there, it's zero surprise at all no-transcript underage girl who had been hired at Mar-a-Lago. She's the daughter of a member and she's babysitting, doing babysitting services for the members. And Epstein comes in and basically starts trying to contact her, groom, her whatever word you want to use and, as this is going on, she reports it. It goes up, hits Trump. Trump goes ballistic and calls the authorities and says, hey, this guy's a dirtbag, you need to investigate him. And so that's the start of the whole Epstein drama.
Speaker 1:Because then, if you know the story, epstein drama, because then, if you know the story, the powers that be went in and investigated quote unquote, investigated Epstein, and then they basically passed a sentence. It was a slap on the wrist, it basically wasn't anything. And when this all happened, then there was a second prosecution that came in and said whoa, wait a minute, why is he only getting this? He's being charged with something really serious and you guys are giving him a misdemeanor charge. And then it kind of blew up and we're now at the Epstein that we know. That includes Prince Andrew andrew. Uh, bill gates didn't want any of this out. That's why he was so opposed to trump, because trump was going to release the epstein files and so he was pushing against trump and etc. Etc.
Speaker 1:So what's in the epstein files? I don't know. I I think that we have a probably a pretty good percentage, but then you again you have kind of this weird backtracking, I guess, because the second, the guy, number two guy in the FBI, thinking on his name who was in charge of or had radio host, and he was a conservative radio guy I don't even know how to say his name, let me look it up. Who is and I love Grok for this, by the way deputy director of the FBI, who was a radio host. And I've had people say don't use Grok because it's biased, but Grok actually does a really good job of it.
Speaker 1:So, bagino, he if you've watched some of his old clips, he was on his radio show saying oh, there's all this stuff in there. We're being misled. And if anybody tells you that there's not this stuff against these guys like Gates and Clinton and more celebrities, they're just full of crap. We're not being told what we need to know. You know, know, it's being hidden. Then he gets put in as the deputy director of the fbi and last week I think it was he came out and said no, I've seen it all, there's nothing extra in there. Um, epstein killed himself. I I've seen the file that says they went in and he was checked and the guards didn't check him and when they did he was dead and it's all above board. So here's a guy who is making a career of being on the radio, tv podcasting whatever service. You watched him who says anybody who tells you that there wasn't more to the Epstein death and Epstein files is lying, is full of it. He gets into a position of power and remember, the Epstein files have not been released in 100%. We have a pretty good chunk of it. We have a lot of data that has been released by him. It still has stuff that has been censored. It's not everything. And so here's a guy who now is completely changing his tune and saying well, wait a minute, this is not what he was saying before. So I don't know what's in the Epstein files. So I don't know what's in the Epstein files.
Speaker 1:I know that, as my experience as a prison guard is limited. I was a guard at Guantanamo Bay, if you didn't know, for nine months, years and years, decades ago, and when we were there, we had very specific rules. Now, our facility was very different in that you could look in every cell. Uh, because of how, how the cells were, it was actually the diamond cut, uh plating, so you, so it was whole. So it was like a screen, a heavy duty screen, that you could see everything through the entire thing. The only place you didn't have that we had some isolation cells, that they were individuals, that you could look through the, the slot, and you could see them. But everywhere else you saw you, you could theoretically see from one end of the of the tier all the way through to the other side, and we had uh 48, so 24 on each side and we were on.
Speaker 1:You were told every half hour you had to walk, somebody had to walk down and back, down and back, and it was generally more than that, because if you went by, the really official and one of each person and there were four on a block, and so while we were there, you really you only needed to be able to see 12 down and you got bored. So you were walking back and forth pretty much all the time and even at nighttime you had to have somebody. You were supposed to have somebody up on the edge of the block on each side, but of course you didn't. But they were supposed to walk somebody up on the edge of the block on each side, but of course you didn't. But they were supposed to walk back and forth at least once every 10, 15 minutes and we did that consistently. We never had a.
Speaker 1:When I was there we didn't have anybody suicide. We had an attempted. That was not on my shift. That ended up at the Naval Hospital who had some pretty significant brain damage, but that was not on my shift. That ended up at the Naval hospital who had some pretty significant brain damage, but that was not on my shift.
Speaker 1:We had another guy on my shift who, specifically, he was up on, he tied, tied himself off, and he was hooked up on this cell and he was holding himself up on the bed where, if he had dropped, he would have started choking. If he had done it in a fabric he used. If I had dropped he would have started choking. If he had done it in fabric he used. If I remember right, he had torn his sheet, but it was not something. I don't think the fall would have broken his neck. So we had the guard come. We started to have the guard come down. We were all there ready to go in. I'm literally right there where the door opens. The door opens, I'm one or two number one or two inside Inside the cell would have been lifting him up. We had somebody come down, the psychologist come down, was able to talk him down, and so he did not attempt.
Speaker 1:That is a far cry from what happened with Epstein, because he was in a high security prison. He was also on suicide watch, right? So when you're on suicide watch at least in Guantanamo and I know from my prison guard friends when you're on suicide watch, the garment that they give you they take away your clothes, they take away your sheet. It is material, it's a smock, it's a suicide smock, anti-suicide smock, so you can't rip it, you can't tear it, you can't do anything to it so that you could use it to facilitate arming yourself. And I've got to presume that that's what Epstein was in was in a suicide prevention smock.
Speaker 1:So now you've got a guy who is in a cell by himself, which not really sure why he never should have been in a cell by himself. Two, the guards weren't watching. Three, the cameras go out. And four, and the biggest one is the conspiracy. Now I'm going conspiracy here, tin hat. The conspiracy is that he had broken bones in his neck that were inconsistent with a hanging and that's where you got to go, okay, well, wait a minute. So what happened here? Okay, do I think that Bill Clinton sent assassins? I don't know. I'm not claiming that. I'm not saying that. I'm saying that I don't know what happened in that cell because nobody knows. I'm not saying that. I'm saying that I don't know what happened in that cell because nobody knows. But it seems unlikely, from what I know about maximum security prisons and from suicide prevention in prisons, that he would have had the ability to hang himself on his own without anybody there. And the circumstances again camera goes out, the guards don't do their job. Well, look the guards. Oh no, they didn't do their job. Well, that's where the conspiracies start to come in.
Speaker 1:So for Musk to say that Trump is in the Epstein files okay, not a surprise, because he probably is again, but the reason why he's there. So now you have Trump turn around. And this is where I think it's kind of funny. Trump turns around and says, well, maybe we should explore canceling the different government contracts that Musk has, but not really thinking what that meant. And I think we all know President Trump likes to shoot off a tweet without necessarily thinking about all the consequences that go along with that tweet. Or I guess he doesn't tweet, he does it on true social, but it ends up as a tweet. So he says maybe we should do all this. And Musk kind of giggles and laughs and says, okay, well, I guess we should decommission Space Dragon.
Speaker 1:So the Musk corporations that have been flying the astronauts back up and down to the International Space Station, that's Musk, that's a Musk corporation. Those are all on federal governments through his corporations. And so he's like, okay, well, I guess we can just decommission that. And suddenly it's like, oh, wait, wait, that's a bad idea. We like our astronauts to be able to come back to Earth. Nasa currently is not very good at getting anything done, so maybe, just maybe, let's hold off on that. And that was musk actually turned around and said, yeah, okay, well, we won't decommission that, we'll, we'll keep it going.
Speaker 1:But I think that also was that was probably, if not trump, that was probably some uh, very high officials letting trump or letting musk know that they would very much like him to keep his contracts and keep the ability to go and get astronauts back and forth from the International Space Station, et cetera, in play. So now, where are we at? We're, at the staff now trying to get Musk to come in, or I'm not sure they're trying to get Musk to come in. They're trying to smooth whatever is going on between Trump and Musk. I think that Trump will likely I don't want to say swallow his pride, but I think Trump will likely come out with something that mends the fence, to whatever degree, and he'll do it in his way. That seems like he's not really backing down or he'll just ignore what happened. I think Trump has a way of just saying well, nope, that didn't happen, even though we all know something happened and so he'll do it that way. I think Musk will just continue on his merry way.
Speaker 1:But the thing I think that's going to be really interesting is the reaction from the left towards Musk. Now, remember, musk used to be a hero on the left because of the Tesla movement and the EVs and all the stuff that Musk was doing for what they believed were environmental reasons. I personally think Musk saw a market and he went for it, which I don't blame him. I think more than anything, he likes the idea of having as much money as he possibly can, which so be it. So it's going to be interesting to see how the left reacts to Musk now. Are they going to bring him back into? If not, his good graces? Just leave him alone.
Speaker 1:We saw how many acts of vandalism against Tesla owners which is, by the way, just absolutely ridiculous, because just because you own a car doesn't mean you're endorsing the owner. I just bought a Toyota. Well, not just Last year, I bought an old Toyota pickup truck. Does that mean I endorse? I don't know who the CEO of Ford is. I believe he actually is one of the grandchildren of Ford, though I think he's one of the family members, but the others I don't know. Honda, I don't know Nissan, no idea. Last I saw it, nissan was going to try to merge with one of them to become like number four. I don't remember who Nissan was thinking of merging with. It might have been Honda, but all this stuff just makes me laugh because it's just so ridiculous.
Speaker 1:Nobody's representing America at this point. You have the Republicans, who are being stupid with money, just like Democrats always are. Democrats have been even more recklessly. The Biden bill that was supposed to control inflation. Well, it did something to inflation. It wasn't controlling it, it made inflation go 10% and higher for certain quarters. And so Trump comes in and yeah, okay, if you like what trump's been doing. There are things about trump so far that I do like.
Speaker 1:Love that the border is, if not secure, legal people coming across the border has gone to a trickle. The people that have overstayed their welcome and their visas are being asked to leave. Those who came illegal are being given a quote, unquote, humanitarian way to leave. I believe the offer is we will fly you to your country, back to your country, and give you a thousand dollars. Ok, I mean, as far as economics go, that that does make sense. As far as economics go, that does make sense. So, okay, liberty, I don't know how to put your comment. Oh, there we go. I have not run this by.
Speaker 1:If the Republicans aren't stupid with money, they'll lose in the midterms and the next presidential election too. Yes, I think they will, and that's part of what's going on. But at the same time hey, by the way, liberty, shoot me if my sound is better. I got a new microphone. Sound is better, or I need to adjust. Let me know because KJ wasn't here where I could do it before the show. Yeah, a big part of it is oh, thank you. Okay, good, so the mic was worth it. So, yeah, that's a big problem.
Speaker 1:But here's the Republicans. Being bad with money is one of those things that just ticks me off, because they run as fiscal conservatives and then when they get in power, they spend like Democrats. But when Democrats are in power, they spend like drunken Democrats. And so would I rather have Republicans who are in and going to increase the deficit spending to a trillion dollars a year, more than it is already, or do I want Democrats who are in, who have spent two trillion more? Well, of course, the lesser of two evils is the Democrats and the Republicans in that case, but what frustrates me is they don't. Nobody wants to be real about the situation. This is a third rail situation, where they're not looking at the things that have to be spent on. Okay, you have these discretionary funds, things that you can choose, and you have entitlements which have to be spent, and nobody's being real. So Republicans have to spend or they'll get voted out as though we won't fix spending until we have a real financial disaster. I agree. It's as though we won't fix spending, and you're absolutely right.
Speaker 1:I think at some point, kj and I have talked about this you want to talk about a civil war in America. I don't think it's going to be racial. I don't think it's going to be white versus black or white versus non-white. It's going to be poor versus non-poor, because I think what's going to happen in the next 10 to 20 years, if not sooner, so within the next 20 years, you're going to have austerity.
Speaker 1:Somebody's going to come in and push the government for true austerity If you don't know what austerity is. Austerity is where you have to really tighten your belt and you really have to be serious about cutting spending. So you're going to have people that get there. Yes, I can see that, kj. So you're going to have people that are going to come in and legitimately say, hey, we need to fix this. And that's when they're going to say so instead of your benefits right now, consistently increasing COLA, cost of living allowance for retirees, for military, for Medicare, medicaid Now, of course, some of those are not directly. You know, medicaid is not a direct payment, but SNAP. You've already seen these different things of entitlement programs, when they say we have to go from 100% of what you're getting right now to 70% or else it's going to be insolvent.
Speaker 1:That's when you're going to have people freak out and that's when I think you might have some real violence in this country. We went through that. We saw it in Greece, I believe, about 20 years ago. They had to come in because they owed so much money to the EU and they still do and because they they went through austerity. There was a lot of violence, and I think that's where you're going to see a real trigger or a real the fuse that that is going to be lit Now. Until then, liberty is absolutely right the Republicans are going to keep spending when they're in power and when they're not in power, they're going to complain that the Democrats are spending and the Democrats are going to continue to spend, but they're going to fight, or at least act like they're fighting, against it, because right now they are looking at it saying, well, we don't like these tax cuts, because then only the rich get the tax cuts, which is not true. There's tax cuts across the board. However, if you're going to continue to spend, it doesn't matter if you're a Republican or a Democrat, you're still spending this country into the abyss and we're going to eventually go off the cliff and it's going to be a bad situation. Now there's one thing that, in my opinion, there's one thing that could happen that would keep that disaster from occurring, and it's actually out of somewhat dumb luck actually out of somewhat dumb luck In America, north America, specifically in the Colorado Rocky area, which goes from Arizona well into Canada up into Edmonton and those regions, there is more oil shale in North America than the rest of the world combined.
Speaker 1:In North America than the rest of the world combined. Now oil shale can be used to produce petroleum. Now petroleum is what you need for everything. Oil gets turned to petroleum. Petroleum gets turned into gas, into plastics, into asphalt, into pretty much your phone, the microphone, the headphones Everything that you use uses petroleum-based products. Unfortunately, there's petroleum-based product in food, in a lot of our food. Even so, if we are forced to actually go in and refine oil shale, that is something that, if we start to get good at it and we actually make a effort to progress the technology, then oil shale will be our saving grace because we'll be able to produce enough petroleum that we will be significant exporters. Right now we export a small amount of petroleum into the world market. But the other part is if we are able to go in and we're able to start using places like Anwar province up in Alaska which I kind of laugh, because every time you talk about Anwar province or the New York Times talks about Anwar province I saw this last week.
Speaker 1:It's one of the last pristine wilderness areas in America. Yeah, because you can't get there. It's almost impossible to get up there and during half of the year it's covered in ice and you can't get there at all. So of course it's a pristine wilderness because nobody goes there, nobody wants to go there, nobody can go there, nobody can go there. You might go there during the summer months and be able to get up there by plane a six or eight hour flight from Juneau land, be there for a little while in a few months and come back at most. So of course it's a pristine wilderness, but there's ways to drill and there's ways to make it efficient and you wouldn't be out deep in the shelf like you were with the Deepwater Horizon, where, if there's an accident, you're going to have billions of well, millions, if not billions of gallons of oil. You can build the pipeline, you can do it in a way that you could do it through the permafrost, et cetera. That would also again lead to US energy independence and being a major exporter. And if we become a major exporter, look at what Saudi Arabia, look at what Qatar, look at what the Middle Eastern countries. That is how they have their power, that is how they have the money to do what they're doing because of oil.
Speaker 1:If you're old enough to remember, or you've seen reruns, or I don't even think they have Nick at Night anymore there was a show, the Beverly Hillbillies. It's about Jed Clampett, who's a hillbilly in Southern America it doesn't really say where the accent would make you believe Kentucky, tennessee, louisiana, area and as the opening song goes, he's out shooting for some food, takes a shot and up through the ground comes bubbling crude. And in the very first episode he's talking to his I believe it's his sister or some family relation who is not as backwater redneck as he is. I think redneck is what Clampett is. He's definitely a redneck. And so they say, oh, so the oil companies come out and they're going to give you some money. He says, yeah, but they're going to pay me with something he's like what do you mean? A new kind of? There's no new dollars. He said something like a million dollar and she's gasping. Now, remember, this is supposed to be in the 60s. So millions and millions of dollars, and I believe at one point I could be wrong, but I believe they offer him somewhere. It's around 200 or $250 million, if I remember early on. I started re-watching it last year and so I got through there like the first season. I believe they say it's somewhere north of $200 million that he was given Moves to Beverly Hills.
Speaker 1:Well, that is how the Middle East has made their money is because oil production in the Middle East had had until recently is dwarfed everywhere else. Now America, if you don't know, america has enough oil to be energy independent and our biggest importers are two biggest importers we import from Canada and Mexico and then the Middle East. So there is a ton of oil here and that's the only way I think we're going to actually avert a financial disaster and a collapse economically is if we're able to start using those resources. If we start using the liquefied natural gas, lng, if we start really using oil shale and producing oil shale, we can avert both of those and convert those into energy and avert a financial crisis.
Speaker 1:They talk about fossil fuels. They, of course, hate fossil fuels. None of them want to talk to china, which puts out the majority of fossil fuel pollution in the world. They more than 50 percent of that fossil fuel pollution now is from china, and I believe india is a close second well, not a close second, but because they're not a majority also. But but India and China put out more pollution, I believe, than any other the rest of the world combined, right. So you have these environmentalists who come in and they're complaining to the US, but they'll never go to China. They'll never go to India and complain about there, because China will. Hey, you know what if Greta Thornburg think, if Greta Thornburg showed up and started protesting in China about their pollution, how fast would she be arrested? Yeah, that's why they don't go protest, because China is an authoritarian government. They don't put up with this crap. And so for anybody who says America is an authoritarian government, as soon as you start getting arrested because you're calling it an authoritarian, then you might have a bit of an argument. But until then, it's not authoritarian because you can complain about it. Authoritarian governments don't let you complain that they're authoritarian. So I think that that is one thing that is going to be potentially a lifesaver for America.
Speaker 1:Unintentionally or just out of dumb luck, but we do need nuclear power. If the technology advances, where we can start using solar to a larger degree, fine. If we can start using geothermic, great. If we can use hydroelectric, awesome. Hydroelectric. Is not going to happen, though, as our dams continue to get older, because we can't build new dams again because of environmentalists. Nuclear power all these environmentalists think that every power plant is another Chernobyl. That's not possible. Going to happen. It's going to happen is going to happen.
Speaker 1:While nuclear power is absolutely the most efficient and cleanest energy the world can produce. Now, remember efficient and clean, because if you start talking about just clean, well, there's some different things you can use between. Geothermic is extremely clean, wave power is extremely clean, but we're not there with the technology to be able to do that. So until we get the technology advances, then nuclear power is the way to go. And again, drill, baby drill. We need to go in and start doing that. So to get back to Musk and Trump. So to get back to Musk and Trump. So I think that you're going to have. Musk is going to be redeemed on the left to some degree, because, especially if he goes full anti-Trump, if he goes full Trump derangement syndrome, if he goes and full out TDS and starts not just saying things like, well, we disagree, but if he goes full on attack mode on Trump, I think the left will welcome him back with open arms, because it's not about Musk at that point, it's about being anti-Trump. And so we'll see what happens with Musk and Trump.
Speaker 1:I think Musk is in a very unique position, though. Musk sent out a poll and I believe the response was around 400, I'm sorry, 150,000 people. It might have been more, I didn't, I saw. When I clicked on it, I saw that that was the number, maybe more. And he said should a new political party be started in America that would represent the 80 percent of voters in the middle and overwhelmingly yes and and. Musk is actually in a very unique position. Musk could actually start that party. He can't run in that party for president. He could run as Senate or House or whatever, but he actually has the money that could promote what I would call something like the whether it's independent American party, whether it's just the American party, the American constitutional party, the reform American party, the American Constitutional Party, the Reform American Party, the Reform Party in England, just crushed. Whatever you want to call it, let's call it the Independent American Party. Iap has a nice ring to it.
Speaker 1:If Trump I'm sorry, not Trump, not Trump if Musk was willing to pump significant amounts of money into a new party and when I say significant, I'm talking about billions and billions of dollars annually, I think to get it off the ground, if he were to start a party today with the intent of having an independent American party candidate, a viable, viable person this is not just hey, the libertarians. Libertarians have been trying this for years. Libertarians haven't got about 3% of the vote, I don't think since 2016,. I think they came close to 3%, but it wasn't significant. They didn't win a single seat. They didn't win anything. So you have to get seats in the House, you have to get seats in the Senate and then you have to have a president.
Speaker 1:So if your plan is to run somebody for 2028, I'm not even sure if that's really possible, but you'd have to start initially today. My guess is somewhere around $5 billion. You'd have to invest in people and ground and infrastructure for a party, let alone the marketing. He has the marketing wing already on X. He could probably flood the market with pro-Independent American Party. I don't know what the financial laws would be for that, because there are some fair financial laws that if you give X amount of time to this party, you have to give to that party so he could promote maybe an Independent American Party before it even exists without having to do that. But once you do that, there are some finance campaign laws and such media laws that would make it difficult. But if he invested $5 billion this year, then next year probably get away with $2 billion and then $2 billion in 27 and then ramp it up. Well, okay, so we're counting this year as the election year, presidential election year. So let's say $5 billion this year, $2.5 billion next year, $2.5 billion the year after that and then another $15 billion of stock in Tesla, in whatever he owns, and set that aside specifically for a new independent party $15 billion.
Speaker 1:I think you could actually have viability in the 2028 election. Do I think they could win? I don't know, because really the only time we've ever had modern history, the only time we've had a third party, was Ross Perot got around 20% of the vote in 1992, and he actually took more from Bush Sr. I think most analysts agree that if Perot hadn't run, Bush Sr actually likely wins. Now that's all conjecture, so who knows?
Speaker 1:But I don't think that if Musk wanted to start a third party, he wouldn't want to do it as a spoiler. He would want somebody to come in and actually win. Then you would have the media freaking out and the right and the left I'm sorry, not the right and the left, the Democrats and the Republicans, not the right and the left the Democrats and the Republicans would freak out and the media would freak out that now the country is run by oligarchs. Here you have one oligarch, you have one guy in Musk who's coming in and basically creating a party that he is obviously in charge of. He's funding it. So of course anybody who's an independent American party is is in the pocket of Musk, et cetera.
Speaker 1:You would absolutely have that argument because, especially from the media, because the media is in the pocket of the Democrats. They are the Democrats in in large, in a large way. Yes, of course, for every Fox News, and I get it. Fox News is on the right. Yes, but Fox News is, and I get it. Fox News is on the right, yes, but Fox News is one outlet. Okay, for every one Fox News there's a CNN, a CNBC, an MSNBC, an NBC, an ABC, a CBS News, hln. Everybody else is hard left, middle to hard left, and Fox News, at best, is lean right. They are not a hard right. They are not a conservative news organization. They just seem like a hard right compared to everybody else, but they're really not. They're lean right.
Speaker 1:So if you had Musk come in and fund and I think Musk would obviously come out with other I'd like to see other billionaires come in and do that Okay, cool, make it a truly independent, but dump the money in and then step away and let it go. Won't happen. They want something out of it. Because if you're Bezos, let's say, if you're Bezos and what you've done with the Washington Post, which took a hard hard, if not the most hard left newspaper and made it just hard left and pissed off a bunch of your staff by not endorsing Harris If he could do that, would he be willing to actually put some money in and then step away? Would Zuckerberg be willing to put some money in and step away? Would Soros? I don't think Soros would. I think Soros wants to be that hard left guy and his son. He's passing that on to his son and hard left.
Speaker 1:But if you had these guys who are actually willing to come in Bill Gates, I don't know, he acts like a moderate. He says he's a moderate. I don't necessarily believe he's a moderate, but if you could literally have a middle of the road party, even if it was initially funded by oligarchs, well, what's different than what we have right now? If you don't think the Republican Party and the Democratic Party are run by oligarchs, you're insane. Where do you think the money's coming from? And you can say well, the Democrats. It's not really oligarchs, it's just Soros.
Speaker 1:First of all, soros, huge oligarch, right. But take it the next step and you can argue they are not oligarchs. But the unions act like oligarchs. Okay, the unions make hundreds of millions of dollars of donations to only one side of the aisle and they have billions of dollars in their coffers. So they're absolutely as oligarchs all right, as oligarchs, and it's the same. Don't get me wrong, it's the same.
Speaker 1:On the Republican side. The Republicans have corporations that are worth billions of dollars that are going in and funding everything the Republicans do the grassroots stuff. Yeah, okay, there's grassroots and there are people that go in and donate their grandmas, you know that go in and donate their $5 to this or $5 to that party, but that's not where the money's coming from. The money's coming from massive corporations, from oligarchs that have billions of dollars that they can use, and on both sides, is it the Adelman family that runs the casinos that was so pro-Trump? I believe that's the name. I could be wrong. I'm not doing great with names right now and if KJ is here I could actually look it up, but KJ is not here. So you have these different people that come in and they could fund absolutely they could fund an independent American party, and I would love to see Elon Musk do that. I think that he could actually get some really moderate people in the middle.
Speaker 1:Now, I am not a moderate. I will tell you right now. I am a conservative. People might label me as far right. I am a conservative, far right in terms of I believe in the Constitution.
Speaker 1:I am a constitutional literalist. I think what's in the Constitution was written into the Constitution. That's how it should be. I don't think there's a ton of room for interpretation of the Constitution. I think the Constitution was written pretty plainly, especially the Bill of Rights and the 27 amendments. I think they are written in a way that, for the most part, you can read them pretty clearly and when we get down into the weeds, that's where the problem is. I think if we had traditional literalists who are on the court, you wouldn't have a lot of the problems that we're having as far as what's constitutional or not, and I think that goes all the way down to the lowest level, federal and state courts. If they followed what the constitution actually said, I think we'd be doing a lot better as a country.
Speaker 1:Okay, so Soros again. Go back to Soros. He was pushing that. He's really smart and he went in, and he was pushing for a lot of people that were at the DA level DAs become judges. He's been trying to influence judges, judge elections which, by the way, is insane that judges can be elected, like in Wisconsin. You're voting for somebody to be a judge. How is that not based on merit? I think it's crazy that you vote on judges, but you could do it, and Musk is in a unique position that he could actually lead the charge for a independent American party, and I hope he does it. I hope he does, I hope he goes out and he gets everybody we talk about right now.
Speaker 1:The far right and the far left are the only ones that are actually listened to, and I don't know about the far right because the far right, to me, when you talk about the far right, the far right gets shunned as they should. When you're talking about people that are Nazis, when you're talking about people that are white supremacists, when you talk about people that KJ would say white Christian nationalists, yeah, absolutely. If you are so far right that you are okay with any type of violence against other people, yeah, I'm not okay, I'm not down with you. I'm not that far right. Again, I'm a conservative. If you're on the far left and you push for far leftists, you push for socialism, even communism. If you think the chas up in seattle was a great idea, they should block a, have, have block parties and let what happens in the chas stays in the chas, which included, by the way, if you don't know this seattle had had that section that was blocked off called the chas that didn't allow the police in. They had sexual assaults, rapes that were going on in the CHAZ that they were quote-unquote, dealing with it themselves. They wouldn't even call the police when a woman was getting raped, when women got raped. That's how out there that was. So the people on the far left that want things like that, they're the leaders of the Democratic Party.
Speaker 1:People are talking about AOC as a presidential candidate. She is about as far cuckoo left as you can get in this country. But is she a Maoist? Yeah, I think she. I think you could probably make some pretty good arguments that she is a Maoist communist, that she is right, in line with what the Chinese government is. Now, that is not a personal attack. I am not attacking AOC. I'm saying her policies, just to be very clear. I don't want to run into any of the issues that come in with being military and talking about people in Congress.
Speaker 1:So there is a significant difference in America between the far right and the far left. The far right gets shunned rightfully. The far left gets embraced strangely, which is crazy to me. Which is crazy to me Because if you want to say what is the most destructive form of not even government, just the most destructive thing in the last 150 years is communism. It's not even close between you know. People will say it's Nazi Nazism. It's not the Nazis. Yeah, the Nazis absolutely killed 10 million, 15 million people, maybe 20 million. If you include Russian war casualties and the numbers involved between everybody involved in World War II, it's probably somewhere north of 20 million no-transcript Because of communism in the world in the last hundred years. So it's not even close. And yet communism.
Speaker 1:If you had an elected official, somebody who's running to be an elected official in certain parts of this country, who said, yeah, I'm a communist, seattle, for example, okay, they're a viable candidate. They may or may not win, but there have been actual communists on the ticket that have run in Seattle, I'm sure in Portland there's some. I bet you dollars to donuts in San Francisco and other parts of the US that people have run as communists that are embraced. And I'm not talking to you know, 70 years ago the communists were getting hunted down and what was going on? There were not hunted down but they were trying to be exposed by McCarthy and some of those things. But nowadays they're being embraced. If somebody came out and said I'm going to run as a Nazi, they'd get nowhere. They'd get no votes. They might not even get their family to vote for them. So that's the difference On the left, the idea that communism, which again is the worst form of government that the world has seen, would get votes.
Speaker 1:Nazism, which is arguably the second worst form, would get no votes, which is crazy to me. How can people in this country vote and think communism is okay and somehow think Nazism and I'm not saying Nazism is okay, I'm saying Nazism is horrible absolutely the second worst of any choice of government you could go with would be Nazi. But the number one is communism. How anybody in this country thinks communism is okay and this argument, well, it hasn't been tried. Real communism hasn't been tried Then you are an absolute idiot. Absolute idiot. And the people that are saying that are sitting with communists with their apple computers, apple laptops, their levi's jeans, their birkenstocks, getting in ubers and driving around in in cars that are are volkswagen made in germany. So the idea is just. It blows me away what the far left in this country does.
Speaker 1:I hope that Trump and Musk are able to at least mend defenses to a degree that it doesn't become a distraction and it was a distraction to me. I've talked for almost an hour on Trump and Musk and I didn't even talk about what's going on in Los Angeles with the immigration raids, which is an absolute fiasco, which I think that the National Guard coming in is probably the right move. I have friends that are concerned that the National Guard, including KJ, could turn into a National Guard situation of Kent State or of the South from the civil rights era. I don't think so. Personally, I don't think that's the way it will go. So I only have about two minutes and I would click the loud thoughts button, but I don't know where it is. I think KJ might have, maybe. Oh no, that's not it. So let's not do that. I'm not, I am not going to change anything, but my final thoughts are this If you are going to come in this country illegally, you need to leave.
Speaker 1:If you are fighting law enforcement that is trying to remove people that are here illegally and you are actively committing violence against federal agencies such as ICE, department of Homeland Security, local police, the National Guard, you need to be arrested and you need to be thrown in jail. And if you're illegally here doing this, you need to be arrested and deported on the quickest way out. You should be dumped in whatever country you're from. Gtfo, get the family out, go back to the country that you're from. I don't care if you are from Mexico, guatemala, canada, ireland, sweden, african country. Insert African country here China. If you're here illegally and you are supporting any of these riots, you should be arrested and deported. If you're here legally and you're supporting it, I think you should be charged. I think this is basically a terroristic act If you are creating a mob against duly licensed and vetted law enforcement agents. So there you go.
Speaker 1:I don't know if KG will be next week. I hope KG is here next week. If not, if it's going to be me for another hour. I don't think any of us want that. For those of you that were watching tonight, love you, hope you're here. Liberty, thanks for the little bit of input. Glad, thank you for letting me know. The microphone works a little bit better too, and with that I will call it the end of the night. You guys all have a good night. Next week. Same bat time, same bat channel. Chief man, what do you want to do tonight? The same thing we do every night. Pinky, try to take over the world. All right, yo, let's get into it. Try to take over the world. Yep, preaching, take over the world. Chaplain in the world. Take over the world.
