Latest / The Chuck ToddCast / Chuck’s Commentary - What Is America’s Role In The World? + Democrats Shouldn’t Fall Into The “Abolish ICE” Trap

Transcript

Chuck’s Commentary - What Is America’s Role In The World? + Democrats Shouldn’t Fall Into The “Abolish ICE” Trap · The Chuck ToddCast

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: This episode of the Chuck Todcast is brought to you
• 0:02
  Speaker 1: by Wild Grain. Wild Grain is the first bake from
• 0:06
  Speaker 1: frozen subscription box for sour dough breads, artisonal pastries, and
• 0:11
  Speaker 1: fresh pastas, plus all the items conveniently baked in twenty
• 0:14
  Speaker 1: five minutes or less. Unlike many store brought options, Wild
• 0:18
  Speaker 1: Grain uses some simple ingredients you can pronounce and a
• 0:22
  Speaker 1: slow fermentation process that can be a lot easier on
• 0:25
  Speaker 1: your belly, little gut health there right, and richer in
• 0:28
  Speaker 1: nutrients antioxidants. There's also no preservatives and no shortcuts. The
• 0:32
  Speaker 1: Wild Grain boxes are fully customizable. In addition to their
• 0:35
  Speaker 1: variety box, they have a gluten free box, a vegan box,
• 0:39
  Speaker 1: and a new protein box. I will tell you I
• 0:42
  Speaker 1: have done the gluten free box. I have done it
• 0:44
  Speaker 1: a second time. I have also used the code, the
• 0:48
  Speaker 1: todcast code. If you use the promo code toodcast at checkout,
• 0:52
  Speaker 1: you get thirty dollars off. I've already used it as
• 0:55
  Speaker 1: a gift to somebody else who loves this bread. It
• 0:58
  Speaker 1: is hard to find good gluten free bread. It is fantastic.
• 1:02
  Speaker 1: They give you step by step instructions. I really dig this.
• 1:06
  Speaker 1: There is nothing like having an artesion bakery in your
• 1:09
  Speaker 1: freezer to chase away the winter chill. Now is the
• 1:12
  Speaker 1: best time to stay in and enjoy some comforting homemade
• 1:15
  Speaker 1: meals with Wildgrain. I obviously highly recommend it. It is
• 1:19
  Speaker 1: worth giving Wild Grain to try. Right now. Wildgrain is
• 1:22
  Speaker 1: offering my listeners thirty dollars off your first box plus
• 1:25
  Speaker 1: free croissants for life. Come on when you go to
• 1:28
  Speaker 1: wildgrain dot com slash podcast to start your subscription today.
• 1:33
  Speaker 1: That's thirty dollars off your first box and free croissants
• 1:36
  Speaker 1: for life when you visit wildgrain dot com slash podcast,
• 1:39
  Speaker 1: or simply use the promo code podcast at checkout. This
• 1:43
  Speaker 1: is a sponsor I absolutely embrace, so use that code. Hello, Aaron,
• 1:51
  Speaker 1: Welcome to my Thursday episode of the Chuck Podcast. Word
• 1:55
  Speaker 1: of warning, this is gonna feel a bit foreign policy heavy.
• 1:59
  Speaker 1: We know things could be moving already. For instance, you
• 2:03
  Speaker 1: have President Trump walking back threats on Iran. He says
• 2:09
  Speaker 1: he's got assurances that the killing of protesters has stopped.
• 2:13
  Speaker 1: He doesn't say where he got those assurances, how he
• 2:16
  Speaker 1: got those assurances, But what it really tells me is
• 2:19
  Speaker 1: he wanted to walk back the threat because he knew
• 2:22
  Speaker 1: it was very complicated. What were you going to strike?
• 2:24
  Speaker 1: Where were you going to strike? He already did the
• 2:26
  Speaker 1: nuclear hit. Are you're going to go after more of
• 2:29
  Speaker 1: the nuclear sites? What were you going to do to
• 2:31
  Speaker 1: send that message? What were you going to do that
• 2:33
  Speaker 1: would not And you know, of course, people got really
• 2:35
  Speaker 1: nervous a couple of hours before I'm taping this because
• 2:38
  Speaker 1: suddenly our basin cutter. We were moving folks basically preparing
• 2:45
  Speaker 1: for a retaliation, potential retaliation from Iran. So it was
• 2:51
  Speaker 1: making people think this was imminent and that something was
• 2:56
  Speaker 1: about to happen. And then literally an hour after that report,
• 2:59
  Speaker 1: we had the President come out indicating that he had
• 3:01
  Speaker 1: gotten this assurance. But look, there's a lot of moving parts.
• 3:05
  Speaker 1: We also know that the administration met with Danish officials
• 3:08
  Speaker 1: and it's a stalemate. I should read you. I think
• 3:12
  Speaker 1: this is it is. This is Donald Trump, real estate negotiator. Here.
• 3:19
  Speaker 1: I will read you this tweet. The United States needs
• 3:21
  Speaker 1: greenland for the purpose of national security. It is vital
• 3:25
  Speaker 1: for the Golden Dome that we are building. This idea
• 3:27
  Speaker 1: that the so called dome that protects Israel, that we
• 3:31
  Speaker 1: helped of course fund, and that has been fairly successful
• 3:34
  Speaker 1: at keeping Israel safe from missile attacks, that somehow this
• 3:38
  Speaker 1: is something that can essentially be built and if you're
• 3:42
  Speaker 1: old enough, you'll start Hey, this has the feel of
• 3:44
  Speaker 1: Star Wars too, right, which was what Reagan called it
• 3:47
  Speaker 1: back in the day. It felt like more like a
• 3:50
  Speaker 1: financial boondoggle that was only going to make a bunch
• 3:52
  Speaker 1: of defense contractors rich. And even the Golden Dome feels
• 3:57
  Speaker 1: like it's a boondoggle that's likely only going to make
• 3:59
  Speaker 1: a bunch defense contractors rich. But I digress, So he
• 4:03
  Speaker 1: brings up his Golden Dome, and then he adds this
• 4:05
  Speaker 1: NATO should be leading the way for us to get it.
• 4:08
  Speaker 1: Referring to Greenland, he says, if we don't, Russia or
• 4:10
  Speaker 1: China will, and that is not going to happen. And
• 4:13
  Speaker 1: then he continues to argue Militarily, without the vast power
• 4:15
  Speaker 1: of the United States, much of what I've built during
• 4:17
  Speaker 1: my first term and am now bringing to a new
• 4:19
  Speaker 1: and even higher level, NATO would not be an effective
• 4:22
  Speaker 1: force or deterrent, not even close. They know that, and
• 4:24
  Speaker 1: so do I. NATO becomes far more formidable and effective
• 4:27
  Speaker 1: with Greenland in the hands of the United States, anything
• 4:29
  Speaker 1: less than that is unacceptable. Thank you for attention to
• 4:32
  Speaker 1: this matter. Okay, so what is he really saying here?
• 4:37
  Speaker 1: If you want to read between the lines, he's basically saying,
• 4:39
  Speaker 1: so North America Treaty Organization, it's a mighty fine multilateral
• 4:47
  Speaker 1: agreement you got. There be a shame if it was destroyed.
• 4:53
  Speaker 1: So here are my terms if you want the single
• 4:57
  Speaker 1: most important member of NATO to stay in NATO. Now
• 5:03
  Speaker 1: is he serious on this? We know he's serious about Greenland?
• 5:07
  Speaker 1: Is he serious about pulling out a NATO? Is he
• 5:10
  Speaker 1: really serious about that? Would the US Senate you know
• 5:13
  Speaker 1: that that would be a line in the sand the
• 5:16
  Speaker 1: idea that he's you know of, And he's not quite
• 5:19
  Speaker 1: saying it, but he certainly is implying it that he
• 5:22
  Speaker 1: wants to hold NATO membership hostage in exchange for control
• 5:25
  Speaker 1: of Greenland. I would say this is a non starter, except,
• 5:34
  Speaker 1: as we all know, it has been astonishing how many
• 5:39
  Speaker 1: countries have been to his will at times. Whether Europe
• 5:44
  Speaker 1: will do this, I don't think they will. I think
• 5:51
  Speaker 1: this is going to be their line in the sand.
• 5:55
  Speaker 1: But and I'm not sure just buying Greenland is going
• 5:59
  Speaker 1: to be considered or something that is feasible, if you will.
• 6:06
  Speaker 1: But let's talk about the reality. You know, this might
• 6:12
  Speaker 1: be easier to make happen if people that lived in
• 6:15
  Speaker 1: Greenland wanted to leave the Kingdom of Denmark, but they
• 6:18
  Speaker 1: do not. And of course the more Donald Trump saber
• 6:22
  Speaker 1: rattles about Greenland, the more apparently it has made Greenlanders
• 6:26
  Speaker 1: more defiant about this, and it has made Danes more
• 6:29
  Speaker 1: defiant about this, and it's likely to make Europeans more
• 6:32
  Speaker 1: defying about this. So this Greenland situation, I think is
• 6:36
  Speaker 1: a lot more serious. And I'll fully confess that I
• 6:40
  Speaker 1: vacillate between snickering when I hear about this Greenland thing
• 6:44
  Speaker 1: and then realizing, my god, is this the thing that's
• 6:46
  Speaker 1: going to completely sever our relationship with Europe for good?
• 6:51
  Speaker 1: Vladimir Putin couldn't have asked for a better scenario, right,
• 6:56
  Speaker 1: What does Putin want more than anything else? The end
• 6:58
  Speaker 1: of NATO. So that is why even uttering a sort
• 7:06
  Speaker 1: of threat like this, essentially the old that's a mighty
• 7:10
  Speaker 1: nice it's a mighty nice military pact. You got there,
• 7:14
  Speaker 1: defense pack, they got there. Be ashamed of something happened
• 7:16
  Speaker 1: to it that he's dangling that And then trying to say, hey,
• 7:21
  Speaker 1: if you put it in our hands, then hey, then
• 7:22
  Speaker 1: NATO's going to be in great shape. Then you're going
• 7:25
  Speaker 1: to get everything you want there. So look, I don't
• 7:29
  Speaker 1: think we're taking Greenland militarily, right, that seems to be
• 7:32
  Speaker 1: off the table. But it does seem as if he's
• 7:34
  Speaker 1: trying to find a way to buy it. Right, either
• 7:38
  Speaker 1: you buy it directly or you buy it indirectly via
• 7:42
  Speaker 1: threats in NATO, but essentially it becomes some sort of
• 7:46
  Speaker 1: financial transaction. But this is this is on a level
• 7:51
  Speaker 1: that you're just sitting there going what are we doing?
• 7:56
  Speaker 1: And this is not going to be good for the
• 8:00
  Speaker 1: long run for the United States, but it sort of
• 8:01
  Speaker 1: gets it to a larger issue. Right, the American bubblic
• 8:04
  Speaker 1: isn't gonna you know, politically, everything he's doing here is
• 8:08
  Speaker 1: not good politics for him, not because the country doesn't
• 8:11
  Speaker 1: want Greenland, or not because people think Maduro is a
• 8:14
  Speaker 1: good guy, or not because they What it really is
• 8:17
  Speaker 1: is anytime presidents are more focused on anything that's not
• 8:21
  Speaker 1: in the United States of America, while you have an
• 8:25
  Speaker 1: economy that most people don't like, like the economy we
• 8:28
  Speaker 1: currently have, you're setting yourself up for while he's focused
• 8:34
  Speaker 1: on this, you know, he's not focused on grocery prices.
• 8:37
  Speaker 1: While he's focused on this, he's not focused on lowering
• 8:40
  Speaker 1: electric bills. So all you know, the more time that
• 8:43
  Speaker 1: he spends on Greenland, the more time that he spends
• 8:47
  Speaker 1: saber rattling with Iran, the more time he spends even
• 8:51
  Speaker 1: talking about toppling the regime in Cuba. It is. It
• 8:56
  Speaker 1: is the message being sent to everybody outside the state
• 9:00
  Speaker 1: of Miami, which for those of you that wonder what
• 9:02
  Speaker 1: I refer to as the state of Miami, it is.
• 9:04
  Speaker 1: It's an old Howard Schnellenberger ism. Yes, I have hurricanes
• 9:08
  Speaker 1: on the brain. Deal with it. Where he used to
• 9:12
  Speaker 1: say those three counties in South Florida, Palm Beach County,
• 9:14
  Speaker 1: Broward County, in Dade County, as far as football recruiting
• 9:17
  Speaker 1: purposes were, that's the state of Miami. Well as far
• 9:21
  Speaker 1: as caring about Latin American politics, that's the state of
• 9:25
  Speaker 1: Miami too. And so where's Donald Trump's vacation home in
• 9:30
  Speaker 1: the state of in the in the in the Palm
• 9:33
  Speaker 1: Beach District, in the state of Miami. So you know,
• 9:38
  Speaker 1: he's got a feedback loop of essentially former ex you know,
• 9:44
  Speaker 1: Cuban exiles, Venezuelan exiles, all big money people who have
• 9:49
  Speaker 1: been working him at mar A Lago. So you know,
• 9:52
  Speaker 1: he hears that and thinks what he's doing is really
• 9:54
  Speaker 1: popular over there. But in the rest of the country
• 9:57
  Speaker 1: it may not be unpopular getting rid of Maduro, but
• 9:59
  Speaker 1: it is not seen as a priority on that front.
• 10:05
  Speaker 1: But it does you know what, what what this really
• 10:08
  Speaker 1: begs for is a longer conversation about, all right, what
• 10:14
  Speaker 1: we're really having here, and we haven't. And I wish
• 10:16
  Speaker 1: we would have this debate, and I don't even think
• 10:20
  Speaker 1: we're going to have it in our next presidential campaign.
• 10:22
  Speaker 1: I wish we would, but I don't see it coming.
• 10:25
  Speaker 1: Which is what should be America's role in the world.
• 10:29
  Speaker 1: And I want to share with you some highlights of
• 10:32
  Speaker 1: an extraordinarily important i'd call it a policy paper that's
• 10:39
  Speaker 1: been put out by the Council on Foreign Relations, authored
• 10:43
  Speaker 1: by one of their senior analysts, the Henry Kissinger Fellow
• 10:48
  Speaker 1: for Foreign Policy. It's a gentleman by the name of
• 10:50
  Speaker 1: Robert Blackwell. I've known him a long time. He's one
• 10:53
  Speaker 1: of the he is he's basically, you know, part of
• 10:58
  Speaker 1: that circle of you know, I've always said, you know,
• 11:01
  Speaker 1: before Trump, much of American form policy was fairly bipartisan,
• 11:07
  Speaker 1: meaning Clinton's national security advisor, you know, Clinton's national security advisor,
• 11:12
  Speaker 1: George W. Bush's national security advisor, Barack Obama's national security advisor,
• 11:16
  Speaker 1: would agree on ninety percent of the of the goals,
• 11:18
  Speaker 1: even agree on eighty percent of the tactics to use.
• 11:20
  Speaker 1: There'd be disagreements on what to do here and what
• 11:22
  Speaker 1: to do there, but there was generally agreement. These are priorities,
• 11:26
  Speaker 1: These are not we should be this free trade alliance
• 11:29
  Speaker 1: over here, et cetera. And Robert Blackwell is from that
• 11:32
  Speaker 1: school more on the Republican side for a while, has
• 11:35
  Speaker 1: sort of shifted over as a lot of sort of
• 11:38
  Speaker 1: ex Republicans, if you will, have shifted over in the
• 11:42
  Speaker 1: Trump era, because this is you know, it's not just
• 11:45
  Speaker 1: it's less you know, it's not just the character and
• 11:47
  Speaker 1: ethics of Trump in the foreign policy community. I mean,
• 11:51
  Speaker 1: Trump's an isolationists, right, and he is believing in this
• 11:56
  Speaker 1: Great Powers debate that that's what this is, and then
• 11:59
  Speaker 1: that's what our RN policy should be. He's not a multilateralist,
• 12:03
  Speaker 1: right and by the way, he's never been a multilateralist.
• 12:05
  Speaker 1: Even when he was first dabbling in politics back in
• 12:08
  Speaker 1: the late eighties, he was upset about trade agreements with Japan.
• 12:13
  Speaker 1: So he's never been big on any kind of multilateralism
• 12:17
  Speaker 1: in general. So this is why we should take his threat.
• 12:21
  Speaker 1: He doesn't care about the future of NATO, right, he
• 12:24
  Speaker 1: could take it or leave it. And that is why
• 12:29
  Speaker 1: in his sort of why his willingness. Right, when you
• 12:32
  Speaker 1: speak to any gambler, if you're willing to gamble something,
• 12:35
  Speaker 1: if you're willing to gamble your house, gamble your car
• 12:36
  Speaker 1: means you really don't love your house. You really don't
• 12:38
  Speaker 1: love your car. He's willing to gamble this NATO alliance
• 12:43
  Speaker 1: over Greenland. It's less about his desire for Greenland and
• 12:46
  Speaker 1: more I think telling that he just doesn't care whether
• 12:50
  Speaker 1: NATO lasts. He doesn't view it because he doesn't view
• 12:53
  Speaker 1: Russia as a threat that is to be contained, where
• 12:57
  Speaker 1: NATO obviously does, and considering what Russia's been doing in Ukraine,
• 13:02
  Speaker 1: I think that it is certainly that. But I want
• 13:05
  Speaker 1: to give you a few highlights of this. You should
• 13:07
  Speaker 1: go read it. It's on the Council on Foreign Relations.
• 13:11
  Speaker 1: But it's a tour to force, and I'm just giving
• 13:14
  Speaker 1: you some top lines here of it. Let me just
• 13:17
  Speaker 1: lay out his sort of you know, he sort of
• 13:19
  Speaker 1: sets the table, and I think this line here sort
• 13:22
  Speaker 1: of sums it up pretty well. Mister Blackwell writes, we
• 13:27
  Speaker 1: throw around the phrase foreign policy chaos a lot, but
• 13:31
  Speaker 1: what we're really living through right now is something more fundamental,
• 13:34
  Speaker 1: a collapse of consensus about what America's role in the
• 13:37
  Speaker 1: world even is. He you know, that says what I
• 13:42
  Speaker 1: was just trying to explain better than how I just
• 13:45
  Speaker 1: explained it. Right, We had a consensus, right frankly, from
• 13:49
  Speaker 1: Nixon to Carter, from Carter to Reagan, from Reagan to
• 13:53
  Speaker 1: Bush Bush to Clinton, Clinton to Bush Bush to Obama.
• 13:56
  Speaker 1: It was and if I had a President Romney it
• 14:00
  Speaker 1: would have been similar. If you had a President carry
• 14:02
  Speaker 1: it would have been similar. If you had a President
• 14:04
  Speaker 1: Hillary Clinton it would have been similar. And you saw
• 14:07
  Speaker 1: it sort of some similarities with Biden. So because there
• 14:14
  Speaker 1: was a consensus, the consensus being multilateralism is good. Free
• 14:19
  Speaker 1: trade for the most part, has only been more positive
• 14:22
  Speaker 1: and negative. Now obviously it's that globalization. It's been free
• 14:26
  Speaker 1: trade that has been seen as as it has been
• 14:31
  Speaker 1: weaponized politically internally, we can have a longer debate about
• 14:36
  Speaker 1: free trade. But what has not worked for you know,
• 14:39
  Speaker 1: the expansion of free trade has helped America's bottom line
• 14:43
  Speaker 1: hard stop. More people are doing well. All of that
• 14:46
  Speaker 1: is true. The problem is places like Ohio and Iowa
• 14:49
  Speaker 1: have been gutted while places like Texas and Alabama have thrived. Right,
• 14:54
  Speaker 1: it's it's you know, so it has been uneven and
• 14:58
  Speaker 1: then when that has overlaped with our competitive political arena,
• 15:03
  Speaker 1: it is perhaps made the trade issue almost higher up
• 15:10
  Speaker 1: and sort of made the idea of America first a
• 15:13
  Speaker 1: bit more appealing. So I understand why it has gone.
• 15:17
  Speaker 1: So let me sort of outline the stakes he sets.
• 15:21
  Speaker 1: As we've got China is rising, Russia is destabilizing Europe,
• 15:25
  Speaker 1: there's still Middle East volatility, we have this fragmentation in
• 15:28
  Speaker 1: the global trade environment, and there's just domestic exhaustion in
• 15:34
  Speaker 1: the United States with leadership in general, the institutional leaders,
• 15:38
  Speaker 1: all of our leaders of institutions. It's not just politics,
• 15:42
  Speaker 1: but it's all around. So as he points out what's
• 15:47
  Speaker 1: missing as a grand strategy, right, we don't really have
• 15:51
  Speaker 1: currently an operating system underneath our foreign policy because we
• 15:55
  Speaker 1: don't have a consensus on what it should be. And
• 15:57
  Speaker 1: in fact, what this really means is we're going to
• 16:00
  Speaker 1: go back a little bit to how to the rudimentary
• 16:04
  Speaker 1: form policy of the late nineteenth century early twentieth century,
• 16:07
  Speaker 1: where it's going to change depending on who the president
• 16:09
  Speaker 1: is a lot, not a little where starting with starting
• 16:14
  Speaker 1: really with FDR and going forward, it didn't change much
• 16:18
  Speaker 1: from Truman to Eisenhower, Eisenhower to Kennedy and so on
• 16:22
  Speaker 1: and so forth, because we had a theory of the case,
• 16:25
  Speaker 1: we operated under it and we proceeded. Obviously, ever since
• 16:29
  Speaker 1: the fall of the Berlin Wall coupled with nine to eleven,
• 16:32
  Speaker 1: there have been cracks in this theory of the case
• 16:35
  Speaker 1: going forward, hence the situation we're in now. So grand
• 16:42
  Speaker 1: strategy right, what we need is an agreement on how
• 16:47
  Speaker 1: a country uses all of its power military, economic, diplomatic, technological,
• 16:52
  Speaker 1: and yes, moral right. This is not necessarily coming up
• 16:55
  Speaker 1: with a doctrine or a slogan or a campaign promise.
• 16:59
  Speaker 1: It is simply trying to come up with a theory
• 17:02
  Speaker 1: of how a nation stays safe and prosperous over time.
• 17:06
  Speaker 1: That's ultimately why you need a foreign policy to support
• 17:10
  Speaker 1: the safety, security, and prosperity of your nation, pure and simple. Okay,
• 17:18
  Speaker 1: And you know what, You're not going to have a
• 17:19
  Speaker 1: grand strategy without trade offs, right? Can your nation build everywhere?
• 17:24
  Speaker 1: Can you spread democracy everywhere? When do you pick and
• 17:27
  Speaker 1: choose rights? That's what your trade offs are. Currently, as
• 17:34
  Speaker 1: he puts it, that there are five competing schools of
• 17:37
  Speaker 1: thought of what the grand strategy should be. He calls
• 17:41
  Speaker 1: one the primacy strategy. That America is the undisputed global superpower.
• 17:46
  Speaker 1: We should prevent any peer competitor from emerging. That means you, China,
• 17:51
  Speaker 1: we should have heavily heavy military dominance and do nation
• 17:55
  Speaker 1: building if it's necessary. Now, one could argue that this
• 17:59
  Speaker 1: kind of is actually what Trump would prefer, right, that
• 18:02
  Speaker 1: he's less an isolationist and more of a believer in
• 18:05
  Speaker 1: the primacy right, great powers if you will. Now. Blackwell
• 18:11
  Speaker 1: argues that the reason that view is a faltering view
• 18:15
  Speaker 1: is that China already is a peer competitor and the
• 18:19
  Speaker 1: idea of a unipolar moment is over right. That moment
• 18:23
  Speaker 1: seemed the end of history. Right after the fall of
• 18:26
  Speaker 1: Berlin Wall. It seemed like we were head to do
• 18:28
  Speaker 1: a unipolar moment. But as it turns out, we will not.
• 18:31
  Speaker 1: Then there's the idea of liberal internationalism, which is arguably
• 18:34
  Speaker 1: the world we did live in for about the last
• 18:37
  Speaker 1: fifty years of the twentieth century. The rules based order, alliances, institutions,
• 18:41
  Speaker 1: promotion of democracy. Military use is robust, but a last resort.
• 18:48
  Speaker 1: This is struggling because this hasn't stopped the rise of
• 18:52
  Speaker 1: China and what China's done in the South China Sea.
• 18:55
  Speaker 1: It didn't stop Russia from invading Ukraine, and it didn't
• 18:59
  Speaker 1: stop up in Iran from building this regional proxy group
• 19:05
  Speaker 1: of terrorists that sort of terrorized the Middle East, and
• 19:10
  Speaker 1: it didn't These institutions didn't have the power to stop
• 19:15
  Speaker 1: these things. This episode of the Chuck Podcast is brought
• 19:21
  Speaker 1: to you by Quints, and I love me some Quints.
• 19:24
  Speaker 1: New Year, Colder Days. This is the moment your winter
• 19:27
  Speaker 1: wardrobe really has to deliver. If you're craving a winter reset,
• 19:30
  Speaker 1: start with pieces truly made to last season after season.
• 19:34
  Speaker 1: Quint springs together premium materials, thoughtful design, and enduring quality
• 19:38
  Speaker 1: so you stay warm, look sharp, and fill your best
• 19:40
  Speaker 1: all season long. Quints has everything you need Men's Mongolian
• 19:44
  Speaker 1: cashmere sweaters I have one. I have to say, really
• 19:48
  Speaker 1: into it. They have wool coats, leather, and swede outerwear
• 19:51
  Speaker 1: that actually hold up to daily wear and still look good.
• 19:54
  Speaker 1: Their outerwear is especially impressive. Think down jackets, woolf coats,
• 19:58
  Speaker 1: and Italian leather outer that keep you warm when it's
• 20:02
  Speaker 1: actually cold. Each piece made from premium materials. Quints delivers
• 20:06
  Speaker 1: the same quality as luxury brands at a fraction of
• 20:09
  Speaker 1: the price. The result is classic styles you'll love that
• 20:12
  Speaker 1: hold up year after year. You know me, I love
• 20:15
  Speaker 1: me my quarter zips. Quinn says quite a few of them.
• 20:17
  Speaker 1: They're great. They're both light and warm. There's nothing harder
• 20:22
  Speaker 1: than business casual. Right, you get these things? What can
• 20:24
  Speaker 1: I wear? What can you wear at the meeting? What
• 20:26
  Speaker 1: do you wear on a zoom? I have to say
• 20:28
  Speaker 1: it's as if Quinn sort of says, hey, look, we've
• 20:30
  Speaker 1: got the modern sort of working wardrobe ready for you,
• 20:34
  Speaker 1: clothing that looks stylish, looks good, but is actually practical
• 20:38
  Speaker 1: and isn't going to break the bank. So refresher winter
• 20:42
  Speaker 1: wardrobe with Quint's Go to quints dot com, slash chuck
• 20:45
  Speaker 1: for free shipping on your order and three hundred and
• 20:47
  Speaker 1: sixty five day returns, and it's also available in Canada.
• 20:50
  Speaker 1: That's qui nce dot com slash chuck free shipping and
• 20:55
  Speaker 1: three hundred and sixty five day returns quints dot com slash. Then,
• 21:05
  Speaker 1: of course there's the idea of some form of isolationism
• 21:10
  Speaker 1: or restraint, if you will, pulling back, reduce commitments overseas.
• 21:17
  Speaker 1: Let this be more regional, Let these regions balance themselves,
• 21:20
  Speaker 1: fewer wars, lower costs. The problem with that is security
• 21:25
  Speaker 1: vacuums as Blackwell rights, rarely stay empty. And whenever the
• 21:31
  Speaker 1: US steps back, rival step forward, allies hedge, or they
• 21:35
  Speaker 1: arm themselves. Right, that's not good. Then there's the American nationalism,
• 21:40
  Speaker 1: which is another sort of thing what Trump's kind of doing,
• 21:43
  Speaker 1: which is focusing inward Western hemisphere first, which is how
• 21:46
  Speaker 1: they're getting the isolationist crowd into Venezuela or Greenland right now.
• 21:51
  Speaker 1: But that means protectionism, bilateral trade agreements, alliances are more liabilities. Well,
• 21:57
  Speaker 1: the problem with that is you have to assume that US,
• 22:01
  Speaker 1: that America's prosperity and security can somehow be separated from
• 22:04
  Speaker 1: the global order. Right, if we separate ourselves, are we
• 22:08
  Speaker 1: going to be the economic superpower anymore. And then he
• 22:12
  Speaker 1: throws out one and he calls trump Ism. So it's
• 22:14
  Speaker 1: basically cherry picking all of them, right, which is it's
• 22:17
  Speaker 1: personalized transactional form, policy deals, over alliances, tariffs, our leverage,
• 22:23
  Speaker 1: spheres of influence. The institutions, we don't need them because
• 22:28
  Speaker 1: you've got I alone can fix it. Man. The problem
• 22:33
  Speaker 1: with that, of course, is it's not a strategy. It's
• 22:35
  Speaker 1: literally the president's whims. We're going to help the protesters
• 22:40
  Speaker 1: in Iran. Up, I've been assured that protesters are no
• 22:43
  Speaker 1: longer being killed. Okay, I'm out. So it's a it's
• 22:50
  Speaker 1: it's you know, we're not in a So the question is,
• 22:53
  Speaker 1: can you come up with a grand strategy that in
• 22:56
  Speaker 1: it that can somehow united divided America to to sort
• 23:01
  Speaker 1: of the same goal, right, to support America's security and prosperity,
• 23:10
  Speaker 1: and at the same time help create a stable world.
• 23:16
  Speaker 1: So his answer, Blackwell's answer is resolute global leadership, right,
• 23:20
  Speaker 1: And this is really the heart of his report. He
• 23:23
  Speaker 1: calls it a hybrid strategy that he simply accepts reality. Right,
• 23:27
  Speaker 1: So it borrows from the military seriousness of his outline
• 23:32
  Speaker 1: of primacy. It does believe we should strengthen certain alliances
• 23:37
  Speaker 1: and institutions that were hallmarks of the liberal internationalism. But
• 23:45
  Speaker 1: we wouldn't get into nation building hint, hint, Venezuela. There
• 23:51
  Speaker 1: wouldn't be you know, disengagement is not cost free, and
• 23:55
  Speaker 1: it wouldn't have performative deal making. But you you have
• 24:00
  Speaker 1: to accept some And this is where I think Trump
• 24:03
  Speaker 1: is leaning, and I think you've seen arguably this is
• 24:06
  Speaker 1: where Barack Obama was, but it wasn't politically politically popular
• 24:11
  Speaker 1: to say it at the time. But in this case,
• 24:14
  Speaker 1: what Blackwell is saying, you've got to just assume the following.
• 24:17
  Speaker 1: China is a peer competitor. This is not a temporary
• 24:20
  Speaker 1: problem that can that can be changed, that can be democratized.
• 24:24
  Speaker 1: It's not going to happen yet. What you know, there's
• 24:27
  Speaker 1: nothing the United States can do to to sort of
• 24:31
  Speaker 1: to sort of reshape how China deals with its population.
• 24:35
  Speaker 1: It's not going to matter. But his core assumptions are
• 24:39
  Speaker 1: China's a peer competitor, deal with it. Power does still matter.
• 24:43
  Speaker 1: Alliances do matter because it multiplies power. The institutions matter
• 24:48
  Speaker 1: as long as it's backed by strength. And don't promote democracy,
• 24:53
  Speaker 1: don't use the military as an attempt to promote democracy.
• 24:58
  Speaker 1: I e. Iraq, as he writes, forces justified to to
• 25:04
  Speaker 1: protect vital interests, not to remake societies. And what's interesting
• 25:09
  Speaker 1: here is is that Trump kind of stumbles into this.
• 25:13
  Speaker 1: I think this is where Jade Vance really is. I
• 25:16
  Speaker 1: think he's one of the purest This is not where
• 25:18
  Speaker 1: Marco Ruby is, right. Marco Rubio, you know, talked Trump
• 25:23
  Speaker 1: into doing Venezuela because he does want to remake a society.
• 25:29
  Speaker 1: He does want to remake Venezuela, he does want to
• 25:33
  Speaker 1: remake Cuba. And by the way, Donald Trump and a
• 25:36
  Speaker 1: whole bunch of others would like to remake Aram. So
• 25:44
  Speaker 1: it is I think this is I do think this
• 25:49
  Speaker 1: is a key point though, because every time we've tried
• 25:51
  Speaker 1: to involve ourselves in remaking society, particularly if we're on
• 25:55
  Speaker 1: our own doing it, it has not going well. Right.
• 25:58
  Speaker 1: I mean, Iraq's the best example. But frankly, the reason
• 26:01
  Speaker 1: why there's so much skepticism of what America is doing
• 26:04
  Speaker 1: in the western hemospheres. You know, we have a history
• 26:07
  Speaker 1: of trying to do this in Latin America and it
• 26:09
  Speaker 1: is not gone well. Now you still think what the
• 26:14
  Speaker 1: reason Blackwell thinks that America essentially still can can control
• 26:20
  Speaker 1: the rules of the global order is as follows. The
• 26:25
  Speaker 1: United States alone is twenty six percent of the globe's GDP.
• 26:29
  Speaker 1: We still are the world's most powerful military. We still
• 26:33
  Speaker 1: are leading the world in AI, in advanced tech. The
• 26:36
  Speaker 1: dollar is the dominant currency, despite what all these kill
• 26:40
  Speaker 1: the FED people are trying to do. Though, if you
• 26:42
  Speaker 1: want to kill the FED, that would weaken the dollar
• 26:44
  Speaker 1: and weaken the United States. And China could never create
• 26:49
  Speaker 1: a global alliance network quite like how the United States
• 26:54
  Speaker 1: could do it right. China couldn't create an alternative block. Yes,
• 26:57
  Speaker 1: there are the Brick Nations of Brazil, Brick b r C,
• 27:01
  Speaker 1: which was this loose confederation that was trying to establish
• 27:06
  Speaker 1: itself as a counter to the g G seven back
• 27:09
  Speaker 1: in the day. It's the Bee is Brazil, the R
• 27:11
  Speaker 1: as Russia, the I as India, the Sea is China.
• 27:14
  Speaker 1: But as we've seen, India and China are not necessarily
• 27:17
  Speaker 1: ready to be to be on the same page. Perhaps
• 27:20
  Speaker 1: Russia and China are for military strategic purposes, but I
• 27:26
  Speaker 1: think there's a lot of truth to that. There's only
• 27:29
  Speaker 1: the United States can create some alliances that could stick. Uh.
• 27:35
  Speaker 1: You know, the TPP, that Transpacific Partnership that Obama and
• 27:41
  Speaker 1: Hillary Clinton were trying to create as a counterweight in
• 27:45
  Speaker 1: Asia to China, that became suddenly both Bernie Sanders and
• 27:50
  Speaker 1: Donald Trump just sort of attacked it, and then Hillary
• 27:52
  Speaker 1: Clinton backed away from it. The Republican Party backed away
• 27:54
  Speaker 1: from it. This was going to be Asian NATO. Now
• 27:59
  Speaker 1: we were going to call it a trade pack, but
• 28:02
  Speaker 1: it was going to be the building blocks of essentially
• 28:06
  Speaker 1: a security pact as well. Right, once you're aligned on economics,
• 28:09
  Speaker 1: you're going to be aligned on security because you both
• 28:12
  Speaker 1: have the same things to lose there. It was. It
• 28:16
  Speaker 1: is probably one of the greatest missed opportunities, and perhaps
• 28:20
  Speaker 1: in forty years, fifty years, we will go back and
• 28:22
  Speaker 1: point to it as one of the just biggest mistakes
• 28:26
  Speaker 1: that we made, one of the you know, there's a
• 28:29
  Speaker 1: lot of bad consequences of the fork on the road
• 28:32
  Speaker 1: of the twenty sixteen election. This could be a much
• 28:36
  Speaker 1: bigger one than we ever talk about. So he concludes,
• 28:44
  Speaker 1: you know, he's with the following. He says, he judges
• 28:47
  Speaker 1: the strategies. You got to judge each strategy on these
• 28:50
  Speaker 1: three things. Prosperity, security, and legitimacy. Right, open trade still matters,
• 28:55
  Speaker 1: and it's better for the United States to have open trade.
• 28:58
  Speaker 1: It's worse for our economy when we don't. Innovation will
• 29:01
  Speaker 1: always trump protectionism. You can't protect an industry from competitors.
• 29:08
  Speaker 1: You can't do that. You think you can, but you can't.
• 29:10
  Speaker 1: And if you try. I mean, look, we're finding out
• 29:13
  Speaker 1: an AI, right. We were trying to hoard all these
• 29:15
  Speaker 1: chips here in the United States, trying to make it
• 29:17
  Speaker 1: harder for China to move to compete with US on AI,
• 29:21
  Speaker 1: and yet their deep seek model is doing what competing
• 29:23
  Speaker 1: with our guys on AI. Tariff's weak and long term growth.
• 29:29
  Speaker 1: That's just a fact, right. The higher the tariffs are,
• 29:32
  Speaker 1: weaker the economies get in both countries that are having
• 29:37
  Speaker 1: a terrified I'm the security front. If you have a
• 29:41
  Speaker 1: forward defense, you're more likely to prevent war. Right. The
• 29:45
  Speaker 1: more alliances we have around the world. That that was
• 29:49
  Speaker 1: the whole point of NATO, that hopefully it would never
• 29:52
  Speaker 1: have to get involve itself in a hot war with Russia,
• 29:56
  Speaker 1: that there were so many bases strewn throughout no Europe
• 30:02
  Speaker 1: that Russia wouldn't dare right, which is why there is
• 30:06
  Speaker 1: a fair what if question, which is as follows, what
• 30:10
  Speaker 1: if the United States, when they got Ukraine to get
• 30:15
  Speaker 1: rid of its nuclear weapons after the fall of the
• 30:17
  Speaker 1: Soviet Union, had also invited Ukraine into NATO, then Russia
• 30:24
  Speaker 1: never invades and we would have already had military bases
• 30:27
  Speaker 1: inside of Ukraine. Just something to think about on that front.
• 30:33
  Speaker 1: But he also believes the next grand strategy of sort
• 30:37
  Speaker 1: of a foreign policy that perhaps left and right can
• 30:39
  Speaker 1: all agree on, is that we're going to have to
• 30:42
  Speaker 1: accept that the Indo Pacific region is the central theater
• 30:47
  Speaker 1: of this essentially great power competition. So, as he argues,
• 30:56
  Speaker 1: trump Ism has burned legitimacy faster than it is aimed leverage. Right,
• 31:01
  Speaker 1: he may have some short term wins with these tariff threats.
• 31:05
  Speaker 1: He may be using the end of NATO as a
• 31:08
  Speaker 1: way to try to get Greenland, but what is he doing.
• 31:11
  Speaker 1: He's eroding the relationship the United States has with Europe,
• 31:16
  Speaker 1: and the next time we ask try to get Europe
• 31:18
  Speaker 1: involved in something, they're going to be skeptical to get
• 31:21
  Speaker 1: involved with the United States because hey, maybe President x
• 31:25
  Speaker 1: is work wants to work with the Europeans. But the
• 31:28
  Speaker 1: next president may not. So here's the uncomfortable truth that
• 31:36
  Speaker 1: this paper does leave us with, which is America doesn't
• 31:39
  Speaker 1: get to choose whether it shapes the world. All we
• 31:44
  Speaker 1: get to choose is whether we get to shape it
• 31:46
  Speaker 1: deliberately or not, or is it accidentally or is it chaotically.
• 31:51
  Speaker 1: If the US retreats, someone else fills the vacuum. I've
• 31:54
  Speaker 1: used the phrase, you may not want America to be
• 31:57
  Speaker 1: the world's beat cop, but you're If we're not the
• 32:00
  Speaker 1: world's beat cop, you're somebody else is going to try
• 32:03
  Speaker 1: to be, and you're not going to like that. That's
• 32:08
  Speaker 1: what filling a vacuum means there. And if the US blusters,
• 32:12
  Speaker 1: allies hedge and we've now got allies hedging all over
• 32:16
  Speaker 1: the place. If the US leads with more resolutely and
• 32:21
  Speaker 1: with sort of a strategy that makes sense and doesn't
• 32:23
  Speaker 1: come across as chaotic, then suddenly we get to preserve
• 32:28
  Speaker 1: our leverage without having overreach. So look, I think I
• 32:33
  Speaker 1: think Blackwell's Deep Dive is something that everybody running for
• 32:38
  Speaker 1: president needs to read. They don't have to agree with
• 32:42
  Speaker 1: all of his recommendations, but I think the larger vision
• 32:46
  Speaker 1: he's trying to to to to share here is that look,
• 32:53
  Speaker 1: we you know, I think putting it out when he's
• 32:56
  Speaker 1: doing it is is essentially saying, look, this needs to
• 33:00
  Speaker 1: be the next presidential election. We need presidential candidates that
• 33:05
  Speaker 1: at least accept the premise we need a strategy because
• 33:08
  Speaker 1: Trump doesn't have one, and Trump's never going to have one. Right,
• 33:13
  Speaker 1: the story is Trump, It's always been Trump. The show
• 33:16
  Speaker 1: is Trump. It's just personalized. You know, he could be
• 33:24
  Speaker 1: right now, he's running a country, but he could be
• 33:25
  Speaker 1: running a gas station. It doesn't matter right like he's
• 33:28
  Speaker 1: that's everything is personalized here. So the reason we need
• 33:35
  Speaker 1: a grand strategy is for our even mid and long
• 33:38
  Speaker 1: term security, both physical security and economic security. So a
• 33:47
  Speaker 1: grand strategy isn't about dominance or virtue. It's about deciding
• 33:52
  Speaker 1: which risks you choose to manage and which risks you
• 33:57
  Speaker 1: absolutely absolutely cannot afford to ignore. Right now, we don't
• 34:02
  Speaker 1: have one. Trump Ism is in some ways undoing a
• 34:06
  Speaker 1: bunch of stuff. But the next president is going to
• 34:09
  Speaker 1: have to put humpty dumpty back together again. No one
• 34:12
  Speaker 1: is saying we need to go backwards, but we need
• 34:17
  Speaker 1: something better than what we have now, and we need
• 34:19
  Speaker 1: something more realistic than what we have now. This just
• 34:24
  Speaker 1: literally Robert Blackwell's piece just hit, and you know I'm
• 34:29
  Speaker 1: a geek for this stuff, so I dove right into it.
• 34:32
  Speaker 1: Do check it out on the Council on Foreign Relations site.
• 34:36
  Speaker 1: It's the type of a sort of rigorous scholarship that
• 34:41
  Speaker 1: is necessary in this kind. Look, you're not getting this
• 34:43
  Speaker 1: in your day to day news feeds and all this stuff.
• 34:46
  Speaker 1: You're not going to get something like this, But the
• 34:50
  Speaker 1: importance of an essay like this. Robert Blackwell is somebody
• 34:53
  Speaker 1: that presidential candidates for years have gone to for frankly,
• 35:00
  Speaker 1: to get educated about the world right. He's one of
• 35:02
  Speaker 1: many of these folks in this sort of in this
• 35:05
  Speaker 1: foreign policy space that have served that role. So this
• 35:10
  Speaker 1: is why this is one of those pay attention to it.
• 35:13
  Speaker 1: I promise you things you read in here today you're
• 35:16
  Speaker 1: going to hear out of the mouths of presidential candidates
• 35:19
  Speaker 1: come twenty twenty seven or twenty twenty eight. As you
• 35:24
  Speaker 1: might imagine. I've got a few notebook items that I've
• 35:28
  Speaker 1: been sort of holding a bit, and also a few
• 35:33
  Speaker 1: things that I think are worth highlighting. Look about late
• 35:37
  Speaker 1: last month, I had a guest on named Adam Gentilsen.
• 35:40
  Speaker 1: He was starting a new democratic think tank that was
• 35:44
  Speaker 1: a bit trying to be frankly more mainstream, a little
• 35:48
  Speaker 1: less progressive. It's called the Searchlight Institute. So they put
• 35:52
  Speaker 1: out a memo about the issue of what happened in
• 35:57
  Speaker 1: Minneapolis to renee Good, and it was basically a recommendation.
• 36:04
  Speaker 1: And the recommendation is don't fall for the abolish ICE messaging.
• 36:10
  Speaker 1: Let me read from the memo and then I'll give
• 36:12
  Speaker 1: you my two cents after it. But I want to
• 36:14
  Speaker 1: read a bit from the memo so that you get
• 36:16
  Speaker 1: the full perspective. Here. Look at they lay out what
• 36:21
  Speaker 1: happened to renee Good, and the memos rights as follows.
• 36:25
  Speaker 1: This is not an incident that happened in isolation. The
• 36:27
  Speaker 1: Trump administration has been deploying ICE agents, often in conjunction
• 36:31
  Speaker 1: with law enforcement personnel from other agencies like the FBIA CPB,
• 36:37
  Speaker 1: to cities all over the country in a concerted effort
• 36:39
  Speaker 1: to instill fear and immigrant communities. American citizens have been
• 36:43
  Speaker 1: collateral damage in this campaign. DHS personnel have fired their
• 36:46
  Speaker 1: weapons at least sixteen times this year during immigration enforcement actions,
• 36:50
  Speaker 1: and ICE has erroneously detained at least one hundred and
• 36:53
  Speaker 1: seventy US citizens. This comes even as DHS is significantly
• 36:58
  Speaker 1: relaxed training and vetting requirements for new hires at ICE.
• 37:01
  Speaker 1: This is something I've been obsessing over, guys, and it's
• 37:04
  Speaker 1: sprint to double the size of the agency. Those horrendous
• 37:08
  Speaker 1: recruiting ads I've been highlighting and telling you about. And
• 37:11
  Speaker 1: then this memo notes reducing the time they spend learning
• 37:13
  Speaker 1: the law on how to apply it safely at the
• 37:16
  Speaker 1: Federal Law Enforcement Training Center from six months to six weeks.
• 37:20
  Speaker 1: That's right, these new ICE agents instead of getting six
• 37:24
  Speaker 1: months of training, they're getting six weeks of training. You
• 37:28
  Speaker 1: think that's gonna You think that's good, You think that helps.
• 37:31
  Speaker 1: And it's placed. And of course they've also placed as
• 37:35
  Speaker 1: the memo rights unqualified political operatives and key positions that
• 37:38
  Speaker 1: have historically been designated for career law enforcement officials. Now
• 37:43
  Speaker 1: they get into the politics of this. Confronted by these excesses,
• 37:46
  Speaker 1: some on the left have renewed their calls to quote
• 37:48
  Speaker 1: abolish ICE. Then the Searchlight folks write this, but let's
• 37:52
  Speaker 1: be clear that advocating for abolishing ICE is tantamount to
• 37:55
  Speaker 1: advocating for stopping enforcement of all of our immigration laws
• 37:59
  Speaker 1: in the interior the United States, a policy position that
• 38:03
  Speaker 1: is both wrong on the merits and at odds with
• 38:05
  Speaker 1: the American public on the issue. Instead, Democrats should embrace
• 38:08
  Speaker 1: an aggressive plan to rebuild ICE based on two concepts
• 38:12
  Speaker 1: reform and retrain. I'm going to cut through a little
• 38:19
  Speaker 1: bit further here. First of all, they go through and
• 38:21
  Speaker 1: they believe that in some ways, the Trump administration is
• 38:24
  Speaker 1: setting a trap for Democrats because they have used lawless
• 38:29
  Speaker 1: tactics in their attempts at enforcing immigration policy. But as
• 38:36
  Speaker 1: they write, responding to this kind of lawlessness by saying
• 38:40
  Speaker 1: you want to abolish ICE is exchanging one kind of
• 38:43
  Speaker 1: lawlessness for another. It means that you support getting rid
• 38:47
  Speaker 1: of the agency responsible for enforcing immigration and custom laws,
• 38:51
  Speaker 1: creating a lawless system where people who enter the country
• 38:53
  Speaker 1: illegally can stay here indefinitely, leaving no agency charged with
• 38:57
  Speaker 1: finding and removing them. This will inevitably incentive others to
• 39:00
  Speaker 1: come to the United States illegally. Abolish ICE is not
• 39:03
  Speaker 1: some proxy for more humane immigration enforcement, or to change
• 39:07
  Speaker 1: ICE's culture to adhere to do process, or to impose
• 39:10
  Speaker 1: accountability on rogue officers. Is It's advocating for an extreme
• 39:15
  Speaker 1: and then they continue, unless you truly believe that the
• 39:18
  Speaker 1: United States should not have an agency that enforces immigration
• 39:21
  Speaker 1: and customs laws within our borders, and you want to
• 39:24
  Speaker 1: increase illegal immigration, you should not say you want to
• 39:27
  Speaker 1: abolish ICE. And then it goes on to say, look,
• 39:32
  Speaker 1: this should be a moment learn from the defund mistake.
• 39:37
  Speaker 1: So when it comes to ICE, they're saying, say what
• 39:39
  Speaker 1: you mean. And the point was during the whole defund
• 39:42
  Speaker 1: the police, that is actually not what those that were
• 39:46
  Speaker 1: accused of wanting to defund the police were actually advocating.
• 39:49
  Speaker 1: They weren't advocating to get rid of the police. They
• 39:51
  Speaker 1: were advocating a reallocation of resources. They were advocating a
• 39:55
  Speaker 1: better sense of training. But that isn't what people were hearing.
• 39:59
  Speaker 1: They were just simply hearing defund. So this is their alternative.
• 40:07
  Speaker 1: An aggressive plan can be summed up in two words.
• 40:09
  Speaker 1: They argue reform and retrain. Reform ice, root and branch,
• 40:15
  Speaker 1: including reminding people we are a nation of laws that
• 40:18
  Speaker 1: there shouldn't be they should these guys shouldn't be allowed
• 40:21
  Speaker 1: to wear masks, that no one is above the law.
• 40:23
  Speaker 1: There is not indiscriminate enforcement, which this is clearly politically
• 40:28
  Speaker 1: motivated indiscriminate enforcement, and there should be an outside oversight
• 40:32
  Speaker 1: to this. It should not be done internally. And then
• 40:35
  Speaker 1: retrain What do they mean by retrain? ICE officers need
• 40:39
  Speaker 1: to undergo rigorous and recurring use of training on use
• 40:43
  Speaker 1: of force policies so that they can understand the law.
• 40:48
  Speaker 1: I should be trained on community policing practices, they advocate,
• 40:52
  Speaker 1: they should identify and weed out the bad apples, rescind
• 40:56
  Speaker 1: Trump administration of policies that have significantly relaxed vetting and
• 40:59
  Speaker 1: stay for new employees of ICE, and then right size ICE.
• 41:02
  Speaker 1: One could argue it is it is suddenly becoming too big,
• 41:06
  Speaker 1: because it does look like it's becoming some sort of
• 41:08
  Speaker 1: personalized law enforcement agency. Anyway, look these you know, I
• 41:15
  Speaker 1: understand the passion of this. You heard me the other
• 41:17
  Speaker 1: day saying, you know, I'm I'm not you know, be
• 41:21
  Speaker 1: careful of the abolished ICE messaging because this is the issue,
• 41:25
  Speaker 1: isn't Ice. The issue is who's in charge of it.
• 41:28
  Speaker 1: The issue is who's in charge of policy, who's in
• 41:31
  Speaker 1: charge of training? We've gone we're the recruiting videos are
• 41:36
  Speaker 1: using the wrong language. Recruiting the wrong type of person.
• 41:40
  Speaker 1: They're incentivizing a certain type of muscularity in law enforcement
• 41:46
  Speaker 1: that actually comes across as pretty unconstitutional. But I'm very
• 41:53
  Speaker 1: curious to see if these you know, this was this
• 41:56
  Speaker 1: was the whole point of why Gentleson started this. He
• 41:59
  Speaker 1: felt this, if that the a lot of the advocacy
• 42:03
  Speaker 1: groups messaging we're leaning too far to the left and
• 42:09
  Speaker 1: not really talking to the center, that's sort of you know,
• 42:14
  Speaker 1: person that says, yeah, I don't I don't want you know,
• 42:17
  Speaker 1: it goes to what I've been saying, where they they
• 42:21
  Speaker 1: agree with the goal of what Trump is advocating, but
• 42:24
  Speaker 1: they don't like his tactics, and right now they think
• 42:27
  Speaker 1: that the Democrats don't share some of those goals. And
• 42:32
  Speaker 1: what what obviously what search license argument is is is
• 42:37
  Speaker 1: make it about the tactics, don't make it about whether
• 42:42
  Speaker 1: or not we should have enforcement of our borders. I'll
• 42:48
  Speaker 1: be curious to see if this tamps down the abolish
• 42:53
  Speaker 1: Ice rhetoric, or because of the passion and because of
• 42:56
  Speaker 1: the frankly, the awfulness of what happened, do more voters
• 43:02
  Speaker 1: and more lawmakers think that Ice is irredeemable. All I
• 43:06
  Speaker 1: would say is if you get rid of ICE, I
• 43:08
  Speaker 1: promise you you're just gonna want to have an agency
• 43:10
  Speaker 1: that's similar to it. Look, we've had periods of time
• 43:13
  Speaker 1: where the FBI was not trusted at all, and we've
• 43:17
  Speaker 1: had periods of time when you've had better leadership with
• 43:19
  Speaker 1: the FBI that it has been pristine and really trusted.
• 43:23
  Speaker 1: Ditto with the NYPD, dido with you know. The point
• 43:26
  Speaker 1: is is that I don't think these institutions are irredeemable.
• 43:30
  Speaker 1: You just need to have better leadership, better training, and
• 43:35
  Speaker 1: better accountability. It's it's again, I'm curious to see we're
• 43:43
  Speaker 1: going to have some growing democratic primaries. Do we you
• 43:47
  Speaker 1: know is this used as a wedge inside democratic primaries.
• 43:52
  Speaker 1: We'll find out in Texas, we may find out in Michigan.
• 43:54
  Speaker 1: We may find out in Maine. Or do you start
• 43:58
  Speaker 1: having copycats? Right? Or look, the all of a sudden,
• 44:01
  Speaker 1: all the primaries in Minnesota are going to be fascinating
• 44:04
  Speaker 1: to hear it. May it may be something that primary
• 44:09
  Speaker 1: voters they want the passion and the anger of abolish ICE. Right,
• 44:13
  Speaker 1: It's like I'd say, that's the equivalent of punching a
• 44:18
  Speaker 1: hole in drywall. Feels good. For the moment, but then
• 44:21
  Speaker 1: you've got to go to home depot and figure out
• 44:22
  Speaker 1: how to patch up the hole in your wall. So
• 44:28
  Speaker 1: something to do on something to think about. And I'm
• 44:30
  Speaker 1: curious of your reaction here if you think, hey, you
• 44:33
  Speaker 1: know what, Chuck, let me tell you why they're wrong
• 44:37
  Speaker 1: and you're wrong about this and I should be abolished.
• 44:40
  Speaker 1: I'd love to hear from me on this. Remember ask
• 44:42
  Speaker 1: Chuck at thechucktokcast dot com. Having good life insurance is
• 44:49
  Speaker 1: incredibly important. I know from personal experience. I was sixteen
• 44:53
  Speaker 1: when my father passed away. We didn't have any money.
• 44:56
  Speaker 1: He didn't leave us in the best shape. My mother,
• 44:58
  Speaker 1: single mother, now widow, myself sixteen trying to figure out
• 45:02
  Speaker 1: how am I going to pay for college and lo
• 45:04
  Speaker 1: and behold, my dad had one life insurance policy that
• 45:08
  Speaker 1: we found wasn't a lot, but it was important at
• 45:11
  Speaker 1: the time, and it's why I was able to go
• 45:14
  Speaker 1: to college. Little did he know how important that would
• 45:17
  Speaker 1: be in that moment. Well, guess what. That's why I
• 45:21
  Speaker 1: am here to tell you about Etho's life. They can
• 45:23
  Speaker 1: provide you with peace of mind knowing your family is
• 45:26
  Speaker 1: protected even if the worst comes to pass. Ethos is
• 45:30
  Speaker 1: an online platform that makes getting life insurance fast and easy,
• 45:34
  Speaker 1: all designed to protect your family's future in minutes, not months.
• 45:37
  Speaker 1: There's no complicated process and it's one hundred percent online.
• 45:41
  Speaker 1: There's no medical exam require you just answer a few
• 45:44
  Speaker 1: health questions online. You can get a quote in as
• 45:47
  Speaker 1: little as ten minutes, and you can get same day
• 45:49
  Speaker 1: coverage without ever leaving your home. You can get up
• 45:53
  Speaker 1: to three million dollars in coverage and some policies start
• 45:55
  Speaker 1: as low as two dollars a day that would be
• 45:57
  Speaker 1: billed monthly. As of March twenty two, twenty five, Business
• 46:01
  Speaker 1: Insider named Ethos the number one no medical exam instant
• 46:04
  Speaker 1: life insurance provider. So protect your family with life insurance
• 46:08
  Speaker 1: from Ethos. Get your free quoted ethos dot com slash chuck.
• 46:13
  Speaker 1: So again, that's Ethos dot com slash chuck. Application times
• 46:18
  Speaker 1: may vary and the rates themselves may vary as well,
• 46:21
  Speaker 1: but trust me, life insurance is something you should really
• 46:24
  Speaker 1: think about it, especially if you've got a growing family.
• 46:30
  Speaker 1: I hope you enjoyed that. And while while we've been taping,
• 46:35
  Speaker 1: you know, and as just to be full disclosure here
• 46:38
  Speaker 1: reports of airspace being cleared on the border of Iraq
• 46:42
  Speaker 1: and Iran. Who knows what kind of headfakes are going
• 46:46
  Speaker 1: on with Trump, but it whether this is simply a
• 46:52
  Speaker 1: threat to see if it really does work with the
• 46:54
  Speaker 1: Iranian regime. Look, I think the bottom line is is
• 47:02
  Speaker 1: one thing you need to remember with these with these dictatorships,
• 47:09
  Speaker 1: it takes forever for them to fall, and then all
• 47:11
  Speaker 1: of a sudden, it happens in a blink of an eye.
• 47:18
  Speaker 1: I go back to the Siria example. Right, we knew
• 47:21
  Speaker 1: Asad was going to fall, it ended up happening a
• 47:24
  Speaker 1: few years later than anybody thought it would. And then
• 47:27
  Speaker 1: when it happened, he was gone, and it happened super quickly,
• 47:30
  Speaker 1: and all of a sudden, somebody who we once deemed
• 47:32
  Speaker 1: a terrorist is having an Oval Office sit down with
• 47:36
  Speaker 1: the President of the United States. Right, So you know,
• 47:42
  Speaker 1: it's it's just one of those things where I don't
• 47:46
  Speaker 1: know if the fall of the Islamic regime there is
• 47:54
  Speaker 1: going to be happened in the next few weeks, but
• 47:58
  Speaker 1: it's certainly clear they're close to the end. In the beginning,
• 48:01
  Speaker 1: all right, let's do a few questions here, ask Chuck.
• 48:07
  Speaker 1: This one comes from JR. He goes Daily listener here.
• 48:10
  Speaker 1: Thanks for taking questions. Appreciate that my question is about Mississippi.
• 48:15
  Speaker 1: It seems like every chance you get, you include Mississippi
• 48:17
  Speaker 1: as a state DEMS should focus on, or a state
• 48:19
  Speaker 1: you'd like to see Dems out put on the map.
• 48:21
  Speaker 1: I know s p Presley and Hunt were legit Democratic candidate,
• 48:24
  Speaker 1: but I'm curious where your bullishness comes from. What signs
• 48:26
  Speaker 1: of hope have you seen that gives you confidence at
• 48:30
  Speaker 1: a state like Mississippi could legitimately be competitive in the
• 48:32
  Speaker 1: next few years. Look, I'll say, and I don't. You
• 48:35
  Speaker 1: might have caught I can't. I will confess. One of
• 48:41
  Speaker 1: the things I've learned in this independent media space is
• 48:43
  Speaker 1: you think you've said something in one place and you
• 48:46
  Speaker 1: think I'm going to repeat myself, but you never know
• 48:48
  Speaker 1: where people hear this. So I may have repeated this
• 48:51
  Speaker 1: in this space, but maybe not. With Mississippi. It's simply
• 48:56
  Speaker 1: numbers and the number of of inactive potential voters African
• 49:05
  Speaker 1: American voters in Mississippi, unregistered African American voters or inactive
• 49:10
  Speaker 1: African American voters meaning registered but they don't, and it
• 49:13
  Speaker 1: goes down. I think I was making this point the
• 49:15
  Speaker 1: other day that the Democratic parties slow retreat from rural
• 49:22
  Speaker 1: America wasn't just from white rural America. Right. Democrats have
• 49:27
  Speaker 1: struggled in black rural America and in Hispanic America. Right.
• 49:32
  Speaker 1: We saw it in South Texas. And the reason why
• 49:36
  Speaker 1: Democrats keep coming up short just about in every competitive
• 49:39
  Speaker 1: election in North Carolina but one in two thousand and eight,
• 49:43
  Speaker 1: when when Obama carried the state and brought a Senate
• 49:45
  Speaker 1: seat with them, was under performance in majority black rural
• 49:50
  Speaker 1: counties in the South. There's a lot of majority rural
• 49:56
  Speaker 1: African American counties that feel as if they're ignored, that
• 50:01
  Speaker 1: feel as if their issues essentially there. You know, the
• 50:05
  Speaker 1: issues of urban African Americans are different than the issues
• 50:08
  Speaker 1: from rural African Americans. So it's been, however you want
• 50:12
  Speaker 1: to look at it, it's been a lack of focus.
• 50:15
  Speaker 1: But I think, you know, Mississippi and to a lesser extent,
• 50:21
  Speaker 1: South Carolina, there is an under activated population of African
• 50:26
  Speaker 1: Americans who in my talks with organizers in those states
• 50:31
  Speaker 1: over time, they just simply says it's more out of
• 50:34
  Speaker 1: do they really care, it's they feel they have felt
• 50:38
  Speaker 1: passed over for a long time they have felt ignored.
• 50:40
  Speaker 1: So I'm not saying Democrats don't have work that they
• 50:44
  Speaker 1: need to do, but the opportunity is sitting there. Part
• 50:48
  Speaker 1: of it is showing up, and then once you show up,
• 50:50
  Speaker 1: you might have a shot at registering voters. But when
• 50:53
  Speaker 1: you look at the simple demographics of Mississippi, Democrats should
• 50:59
  Speaker 1: be much much more competitive than they are, and it
• 51:01
  Speaker 1: all goes to essentially a big population of underactivated and
• 51:08
  Speaker 1: unregistered African American voters. All right, Joanna Hey Chuck, as
• 51:16
  Speaker 1: a lifelong Minnesota and former journalist, I was troubled by
• 51:18
  Speaker 1: your recent comment suggesting isis conduct stems primarily from poor training.
• 51:23
  Speaker 1: What we're witnessing here feels far more deliberate, violent, and
• 51:26
  Speaker 1: discriminate enforcement actions carried out without due process, including against
• 51:29
  Speaker 1: you as citizens. This isn't a training failure. It reflects
• 51:32
  Speaker 1: a deeper history of government sanctioned violence. I hope you'll
• 51:34
  Speaker 1: reconsider how this issue is framed, given the weight of
• 51:36
  Speaker 1: your voice carries. Thank you for what you do, respectfully, Joanna, Well,
• 51:39
  Speaker 1: this is great, and I hope she took a listen
• 51:42
  Speaker 1: to that political memo I was quoting earlier in this podcast,
• 51:47
  Speaker 1: and I actually called I wanted folks to look. I
• 51:50
  Speaker 1: guess I do believe this is a And if you
• 51:53
  Speaker 1: go into the details of the lack of training these
• 51:56
  Speaker 1: new ICE officers are getting or not getting, essentially that
• 52:02
  Speaker 1: they don't understand what the law is or isn't. They've
• 52:06
  Speaker 1: gone down from six months down to six weeks of training,
• 52:11
  Speaker 1: the type of recruitment videos they've done. So the point
• 52:13
  Speaker 1: is is that this is I think the what were
• 52:18
  Speaker 1: the actions on the ground reflect the recruitment strategy and
• 52:23
  Speaker 1: the training that they've done. So that's why it's it's
• 52:27
  Speaker 1: it's not that I am defending the existence of ICE,
• 52:32
  Speaker 1: but the we're going to have an immigration, customs and
• 52:35
  Speaker 1: Enforcement agency. If you don't, you don't have borders, you
• 52:39
  Speaker 1: don't have sovereignty, you don't have a country. The issue
• 52:42
  Speaker 1: is bad training, bad policy, bad leadership. Uh. And if
• 52:49
  Speaker 1: that's why, I think that ultimately that's what this is about.
• 52:57
  Speaker 1: And that's and I think that that is sort of
• 52:59
  Speaker 1: when you take a step back, and now that said,
• 53:02
  Speaker 1: you know, living in the community is a different I
• 53:06
  Speaker 1: get it. It's a different experience. It's very personalized, and
• 53:10
  Speaker 1: I understand it. I understand the anger. I understand that,
• 53:12
  Speaker 1: but ultimately, in order to get a policy change, I
• 53:18
  Speaker 1: think that that I think you got to frame it
• 53:22
  Speaker 1: at this because I guess I do believe this that
• 53:25
  Speaker 1: this is this is Look, I think it's an intentional
• 53:29
  Speaker 1: targeting of Minnesota. This is not. There is not This
• 53:32
  Speaker 1: has been selective enforcement of our immigration laws based on
• 53:37
  Speaker 1: political targeting by the White House. So look, I'm not
• 53:41
  Speaker 1: trying to legitimize any of this. Well, what I am
• 53:45
  Speaker 1: saying is that I, you know, be careful blaming the agency.
• 53:49
  Speaker 1: It's the leadership above it. It's how it's being run,
• 53:52
  Speaker 1: It's how it's being hired, how folks are being hired,
• 53:54
  Speaker 1: and how they're being trained. So, by the way, Joanne,
• 53:59
  Speaker 1: I'd love to hear your reaction to the memo that
• 54:02
  Speaker 1: I quoted from from the folks at search Light in
• 54:06
  Speaker 1: my earlier comments as well. Appreciate you listening and appreciate
• 54:10
  Speaker 1: the thoughtful the thoughtful critique. I'm all for it. Mojack
• 54:16
  Speaker 1: ninety nine checks in and he says, Hey, I'm increasingly
• 54:19
  Speaker 1: concerned about the potential polarization of law enforcement and the
• 54:23
  Speaker 1: military potential. I think I might drop the word potential, Mojack,
• 54:27
  Speaker 1: but anyway, But I digress. If Democrats were to win
• 54:30
  Speaker 1: both chambers, how realistic do you think it is that
• 54:32
  Speaker 1: Trump might attempt to declare martial law citing election fraud
• 54:35
  Speaker 1: or another pretext. And how might Republicans respond given the
• 54:37
  Speaker 1: historical president of martial law at the state level. Could
• 54:40
  Speaker 1: such actions be selectively targeted at Democratic led states. I'd
• 54:43
  Speaker 1: love to hear your take on the likelihood of this
• 54:45
  Speaker 1: and what guardrails exists. So you know, one of the
• 54:49
  Speaker 1: things that I'm well aware of the human brain is
• 54:52
  Speaker 1: when you've not seen something happen, you don't believe it will,
• 54:56
  Speaker 1: right and while and this stuff has happened, but it
• 55:01
  Speaker 1: happened over one hundred years ago in certain states. Right,
• 55:07
  Speaker 1: I am nervous about the right. We've had the Justice
• 55:12
  Speaker 1: Department trying to get its hands on voter rolls, and
• 55:15
  Speaker 1: they've specifically been going to blue states to do this,
• 55:19
  Speaker 1: and states that have not complied they have threatened to sue.
• 55:24
  Speaker 1: So this is going to show up in court. So
• 55:25
  Speaker 1: we'll see what kind of how important the Tenth Amendment
• 55:29
  Speaker 1: is on this front. You have a recent directive where
• 55:34
  Speaker 1: I think the President plans to try to deny certain
• 55:39
  Speaker 1: funding to blue states if they have a quote sanctuary
• 55:43
  Speaker 1: city policy, meaning you know, where there are laws in
• 55:47
  Speaker 1: the books that direct local law enforcement not to cooperate
• 55:51
  Speaker 1: with ice or immigration enforcement that is not criminal, you know.
• 55:57
  Speaker 1: And so you know, I vacillate on this one. I
• 56:05
  Speaker 1: think that, you know, I don't want to be like, look,
• 56:11
  Speaker 1: Jonathan last over the bulwark is like, you know, the
• 56:14
  Speaker 1: dark days are here and it's only going to get worse. Right,
• 56:18
  Speaker 1: It's always darkest before it goes all black. An old
• 56:21
  Speaker 1: McCain joke about that. He used to quote of Maw.
• 56:29
  Speaker 1: I do think that what we've watched with the current
• 56:32
  Speaker 1: iteration of the Republican Party, that there are enough folks
• 56:36
  Speaker 1: that are constitutionalists. No matter how much they support many
• 56:40
  Speaker 1: of the of the populist policies of the MAGA movement,
• 56:43
  Speaker 1: they're still constitutionalists at the end of the day and
• 56:46
  Speaker 1: respectful of the Constitution and leary, you know, whether it's
• 56:50
  Speaker 1: and right we so I do. I think somebody inside
• 56:56
  Speaker 1: that administration may whisper ideas like this in his ear.
• 57:02
  Speaker 1: If it is you know, it is, if he is
• 57:06
  Speaker 1: routed right, if it's a route, if everything is, I
• 57:10
  Speaker 1: guess my fears are the super close elections that might
• 57:13
  Speaker 1: actually need recounts. That's where I think this interference could
• 57:19
  Speaker 1: get rationalized and justified in the minds of some in
• 57:24
  Speaker 1: this administration. So I think the super close elections are
• 57:29
  Speaker 1: ones that I would keep an eye on that I
• 57:31
  Speaker 1: could see suddenly him feeling motivated to do this. I'm
• 57:35
  Speaker 1: mostly bullish that there's enough Republicans that would just you know,
• 57:43
  Speaker 1: not go down this road with him, and that Congress
• 57:47
  Speaker 1: would be a bulwark. Right. Look, just you know, I
• 57:51
  Speaker 1: if Democrats win both chambers, it means Trump's approval ratings
• 57:57
  Speaker 1: likely in the mid to high thirties at best, so
• 58:00
  Speaker 1: that unpopularity will matter, Okay, ultimately in order to I
• 58:08
  Speaker 1: think convince those that aren't totally devoted to the MAGA
• 58:14
  Speaker 1: movement because it's the only way they had a political career,
• 58:17
  Speaker 1: We'll suddenly start to realize, Hey, there's a there's a
• 58:22
  Speaker 1: The public is just done with Trump. And so that's
• 58:29
  Speaker 1: why I guess I think ultimately, even if he wants
• 58:34
  Speaker 1: to do it, he's he's rained in from doing it.
• 58:37
  Speaker 1: So I'm not going to sit here and rule out
• 58:39
  Speaker 1: that he wouldn't. I don't considering his behavior as I've
• 58:42
  Speaker 1: said in a previous podcast. Great, I think the greatest
• 58:45
  Speaker 1: risk we have right now as a country is the
• 58:48
  Speaker 1: fact that the president is feeling is feels like he's
• 58:52
  Speaker 1: got the virus of Yolo, the Yolo virus, right, you
• 58:58
  Speaker 1: only live once virus. The ease with which he bombed
• 59:03
  Speaker 1: a ron without consequences. He got Maduro without what he
• 59:07
  Speaker 1: believes are consequences. You know, sometimes these consequences are delayed, right,
• 59:12
  Speaker 1: So I don't want to say we haven't we've escaped
• 59:15
  Speaker 1: consequences out of Venezuela yet. But in his mind it
• 59:19
  Speaker 1: went easier than than all the you know, maybe maybe
• 59:23
  Speaker 1: those that were give were preaching caution around him. You
• 59:28
  Speaker 1: couple that with his you know, he's been he talks
• 59:33
  Speaker 1: a lot about his demise now right, He's been talking
• 59:35
  Speaker 1: about m I going to get into heaven, all this stuff. It's,
• 59:38
  Speaker 1: frankly one of the pieces of circumstantial evidence that's gotten
• 59:41
  Speaker 1: a lot of us wondering, huh is this have something
• 59:46
  Speaker 1: to do with you having to do three annual visits
• 59:48
  Speaker 1: to three annual physicals in the calendar You're twenty twenty
• 59:52
  Speaker 1: five at Walter Reed, right, is there something you know?
• 59:56
  Speaker 1: Is there something that they fear is coming. He has
• 1:00:00
  Speaker 1: been sort of behaving as if the end is nearer
• 1:00:03
  Speaker 1: than he wants it to be, which would then explain
• 1:00:06
  Speaker 1: why his obsession with his personal legacy, right hurrying up
• 1:00:09
  Speaker 1: and getting his name on the Kennedy Center, trying to
• 1:00:12
  Speaker 1: see if he can get his name on currency, you know,
• 1:00:15
  Speaker 1: trying to literally physically. You know, there's a there's some
• 1:00:19
  Speaker 1: who think that Trump's only obsession with Greenland is because
• 1:00:23
  Speaker 1: it looks big on a map and it will make
• 1:00:24
  Speaker 1: the United States look bigger than China and Russia. And
• 1:00:30
  Speaker 1: as much as we want to laugh and snicker that
• 1:00:33
  Speaker 1: that's the way he thinks, guess what, that's the way
• 1:00:36
  Speaker 1: he thinks. So my concern is that state of mind
• 1:00:43
  Speaker 1: of his, and that there are certainly fewer people that
• 1:00:47
  Speaker 1: would stop him. But remember Bill Barr, his last Attorney
• 1:00:54
  Speaker 1: general on the first term or second to lascense, he resigned.
• 1:00:58
  Speaker 1: Now he resigned frankly because I think he didn't want
• 1:01:01
  Speaker 1: to have to confront Trump when Trump wanted to use
• 1:01:04
  Speaker 1: the justice weaponis of Justice Department during the twenty twenty election.
• 1:01:11
  Speaker 1: You know, he's the one out there that questioned whether
• 1:01:14
  Speaker 1: he should ever be near power again. Don't take my
• 1:01:18
  Speaker 1: word for it, right, let me get to Ron sass
• 1:01:22
  Speaker 1: from Phoenix, Arizona, he writes. While I won't shed tears
• 1:01:25
  Speaker 1: over Maduro's extraction, this Venezuela oil grab will likely haunt
• 1:01:28
  Speaker 1: Trump and the GOP well beyond his term. More concerning
• 1:01:30
  Speaker 1: our his threats to seize Greenland attacking a NATO ally
• 1:01:33
  Speaker 1: could unravel the alliance and embolden Russian in China. If
• 1:01:36
  Speaker 1: you're responded with a naval blockade like Kennedy's in Cuba,
• 1:01:38
  Speaker 1: would our military really follow illegal orders to fire without
• 1:01:41
  Speaker 1: congressional war authorization? Are there still adults in Washington who
• 1:01:44
  Speaker 1: can reign in these impulses and remind Trump we already
• 1:01:47
  Speaker 1: have long standing defense packs with Denmark and Greenland. Well, Ron,
• 1:01:51
  Speaker 1: I think everybody has put their eggs in the Marco
• 1:01:53
  Speaker 1: Rubio basket on this one. And speaking of Marco Rubio,
• 1:01:56
  Speaker 1: there's a fascinating massive profile all of him in the
• 1:02:00
  Speaker 1: New Yorker. If you're a New Yorker subscriber, you'll and
• 1:02:04
  Speaker 1: you get the physical print copy. I think when you
• 1:02:07
  Speaker 1: get it, you're going to be like, Oh, I got
• 1:02:08
  Speaker 1: a book on Marco Rubio with a few cartoons surrounding it.
• 1:02:12
  Speaker 1: It's a massive I think some forty thousand works. Mike
• 1:02:15
  Speaker 1: Pesca did a whole deep dive on it and all
• 1:02:18
  Speaker 1: this sourcing and stuff, But it really it's a Dexter
• 1:02:23
  Speaker 1: Filkins piece. And for those of you that didn't hear
• 1:02:27
  Speaker 1: my interview with Dexter Filkins six or eight weeks ago,
• 1:02:29
  Speaker 1: I encourage you to do it. We really talked about
• 1:02:31
  Speaker 1: the future of war a previous piece he wrote, but
• 1:02:34
  Speaker 1: this was a deep dive on Rubio and it really
• 1:02:38
  Speaker 1: does paint a portrait of essentially that he is the
• 1:02:43
  Speaker 1: Trump whisperer right on foreign policy. Look, I've said this
• 1:02:48
  Speaker 1: a million times without Marco Rubio, Venezuela doesn't happen. Marco Rubio,
• 1:02:52
  Speaker 1: going back to the first Trump term when he was
• 1:02:53
  Speaker 1: trying to work his when he made the decision. You know,
• 1:02:57
  Speaker 1: he was pretty anti Trump obviously in the sixteen campaign,
• 1:03:01
  Speaker 1: and then he made the he decided to seek re election,
• 1:03:03
  Speaker 1: and he decided to stay in politics and evolve with
• 1:03:07
  Speaker 1: Trump to be generous there, and he became Trump's Latin
• 1:03:12
  Speaker 1: American whisper in that first term and he made sure
• 1:03:15
  Speaker 1: and then when during the during Trump's four years in
• 1:03:18
  Speaker 1: exile there at mar A Lago. You know, Rubio was
• 1:03:21
  Speaker 1: a frequent visitor and a frequent sidekick, and somebody who
• 1:03:25
  Speaker 1: would bring along the Bay of Pigs veterans and the
• 1:03:29
  Speaker 1: Cuban exile community, the Venezuelan exile community. You know, if
• 1:03:34
  Speaker 1: you want to understand that, remember there's that. I point
• 1:03:38
  Speaker 1: you to an interview I did with Billy Corbyn about
• 1:03:40
  Speaker 1: a documentary he did, Man of War, about sort of
• 1:03:43
  Speaker 1: a failed attempt to overthrow Maduro that had its origins
• 1:03:49
  Speaker 1: with former Trump bodyman Keith Schiller. Again, it would be
• 1:03:56
  Speaker 1: hilarious if if it wasn't sadly true. The point is
• 1:04:01
  Speaker 1: is that what was interesting about this piece in the
• 1:04:05
  Speaker 1: New Yorker is how many unnamed European diplomats viewed Marco
• 1:04:09
  Speaker 1: Rubio as sort of their lifeline. When something goes really
• 1:04:14
  Speaker 1: south with Trump, they go to Rubio and see how
• 1:04:18
  Speaker 1: can they sort of fix this right? And look, without
• 1:04:22
  Speaker 1: Marco Rubio Trump would have already abandoned Ukraine. So if
• 1:04:29
  Speaker 1: you're wondering, I think he's that adult. I think there
• 1:04:35
  Speaker 1: are enough Republican senators who use Rubio as a conduit
• 1:04:39
  Speaker 1: and frankly go to him to try to strengthen Rubio's
• 1:04:42
  Speaker 1: backbone on this. So it may not be a guard
• 1:04:48
  Speaker 1: you know, it's sort of like you go to war
• 1:04:50
  Speaker 1: with the guardrails you have, not the guardrails you want
• 1:04:52
  Speaker 1: to paraphrase a former a defense secretary named Donald Rumsfeld.
• 1:04:59
  Speaker 1: So I think that that's you know, I think that
• 1:05:05
  Speaker 1: that's who's if you're looking for, who would prevent what
• 1:05:09
  Speaker 1: you're describing. Now. I don't think we're going that far.
• 1:05:12
  Speaker 1: I don't think this is going to get to military.
• 1:05:14
  Speaker 1: I think I do fear, though, that Trump may really
• 1:05:18
  Speaker 1: use US financial contributions to NATO in an attempt to
• 1:05:25
  Speaker 1: leverage this. Whether it works or not, I don't want
• 1:05:29
  Speaker 1: to presume it won't work, but I'm skeptical that it will.
• 1:05:33
  Speaker 1: All right. Next question comes from Lucas and he asks
• 1:05:36
  Speaker 1: why do Americans broadly find the far left more repugnant
• 1:05:39
  Speaker 1: than the far right. I say this because I don't
• 1:05:41
  Speaker 1: ever hear about Republicans needing to moderate in order to
• 1:05:44
  Speaker 1: grow their base, Yet this repeatedly seems to be a
• 1:05:46
  Speaker 1: theme for Democrats. Well, part of it is numbers, right
• 1:05:50
  Speaker 1: that you know, those self described conservatives still outnumber self
• 1:05:53
  Speaker 1: described liberals. So I think part of it is a
• 1:05:55
  Speaker 1: base is sort of just one size, you know. The
• 1:05:59
  Speaker 1: Republicans start with a larger base, so they don't need
• 1:06:02
  Speaker 1: as many swing voters as Democrats do. So it's just
• 1:06:06
  Speaker 1: a simple numbers game. There are more self described conservatives
• 1:06:09
  Speaker 1: than self described liberals. Now. Is the self described liberal
• 1:06:13
  Speaker 1: numbered growing, Yes it is. Is the gap smaller today
• 1:06:16
  Speaker 1: than it was in a long time? Yes it is.
• 1:06:19
  Speaker 1: But the fact is that Democrats need a larger share
• 1:06:25
  Speaker 1: of independent voters to get a majority than Republicans do
• 1:06:29
  Speaker 1: at the moment. By the way, it wasn't that long
• 1:06:35
  Speaker 1: ago that Republicans were told they needed to moderate if
• 1:06:38
  Speaker 1: they wanted to win national elections. Again, go back to
• 1:06:40
  Speaker 1: the RNC twenty thirteen autopsy, which said, hey, it needed
• 1:06:45
  Speaker 1: to pull back on its rhetoric on immigration. Now it
• 1:06:48
  Speaker 1: turns out Trump had had an entirely different theory of
• 1:06:51
  Speaker 1: the case on how to win over Latino voters, but
• 1:06:55
  Speaker 1: at the time that was the prevailing conventional wisdom. So
• 1:07:00
  Speaker 1: it really this is very recency biased. It's the moment
• 1:07:03
  Speaker 1: we're living in now when it looked like it was
• 1:07:06
  Speaker 1: the Democrats that had the larger base to start from
• 1:07:09
  Speaker 1: and that they needed a smaller sheriff swing voters. Yeah,
• 1:07:12
  Speaker 1: it was Republicans that were being urged to moderate, which
• 1:07:18
  Speaker 1: is the entire twenty thirteen, twenty fourteen conversation after the
• 1:07:24
  Speaker 1: Romney defeat, so when he was a severe conservative right
• 1:07:29
  Speaker 1: and all of those things. So I would remind you
• 1:07:31
  Speaker 1: that this stuff's a bit cyclical one, but it's right now.
• 1:07:36
  Speaker 1: It's a simple numbers issue. And yes, the Republican base
• 1:07:41
  Speaker 1: is I mean part of it. You know, I've always
• 1:07:45
  Speaker 1: thought some of this is also gender related. If Democrats
• 1:07:55
  Speaker 1: could cut into the Republican advantage among men, I think
• 1:07:59
  Speaker 1: they would all so generally. So it's sort of like,
• 1:08:02
  Speaker 1: how do you And this gets at the whole manisphere
• 1:08:05
  Speaker 1: debate and all this or that, But I think that's
• 1:08:09
  Speaker 1: the look. I think the opening here to picking off
• 1:08:15
  Speaker 1: more sort of is to is to sort of rebrand
• 1:08:21
  Speaker 1: liberalism as pro constitution and as sort of And I
• 1:08:26
  Speaker 1: think that conservatives did a better job of branding themselves
• 1:08:29
  Speaker 1: constitutionalists and that they were making the case that it
• 1:08:33
  Speaker 1: was the liberals that we're trying to overread the Constitution. Well,
• 1:08:37
  Speaker 1: now I think that's in reverse. And I think a
• 1:08:39
  Speaker 1: lot of people feel as if their privacy and all
• 1:08:42
  Speaker 1: this stuff. I think there's a lot of just basic
• 1:08:46
  Speaker 1: protection of rights, not even expansion of rights. Right. I think,
• 1:08:50
  Speaker 1: you know, arguably the divide between just on the rights front,
• 1:08:55
  Speaker 1: right conservatives generally were trying to protect rights that they
• 1:08:58
  Speaker 1: believed already existed, and liberals for fighting to expand rights
• 1:09:03
  Speaker 1: for Americans that we're not getting what they deserve. I
• 1:09:08
  Speaker 1: think now we have a situation where conservatives are no
• 1:09:11
  Speaker 1: longer in the protecting rights category. Trump has sort of
• 1:09:15
  Speaker 1: driven them in a different direction. He's trying to redefine
• 1:09:19
  Speaker 1: what right, what the interpretation of the Constitution in ways
• 1:09:23
  Speaker 1: that I think a majority of the public isn't going
• 1:09:25
  Speaker 1: to like. So I do think there's an opportunity to
• 1:09:27
  Speaker 1: redefine liberalism as being more protecting of individual rights and
• 1:09:36
  Speaker 1: getting finding a way into that, into that messaging I
• 1:09:43
  Speaker 1: think could help rebrand liberalism right now. I think it is.
• 1:09:47
  Speaker 1: It is, it's too you know, it's not seen as strong.
• 1:09:54
  Speaker 1: Maybe unfair to say that, but I think that that's
• 1:09:56
  Speaker 1: that's that's one of the key critiques there. Let's see here,
• 1:10:01
  Speaker 1: last question and then I've got a I've got a
• 1:10:04
  Speaker 1: few sports rants to share with you. Last question comes
• 1:10:07
  Speaker 1: from Nick Smith of Denver, Colorado, and he said, should
• 1:10:09
  Speaker 1: we be concerned that the market's shrugged off further loss
• 1:10:12
  Speaker 1: of FED independence, especially under a presidency that treats the
• 1:10:15
  Speaker 1: stock market as a scoreboard. I fear the lack of
• 1:10:17
  Speaker 1: reaction only emboldens the administration is institutional norms aroad. On
• 1:10:21
  Speaker 1: a lighter note, if you had to had to staff
• 1:10:24
  Speaker 1: a presidential cabinet with former NFL players, who would you
• 1:10:26
  Speaker 1: choose and why? I'm thinking Joe Thomas for ex Secretary,
• 1:10:29
  Speaker 1: Pat Tillman for Defense. Yeah. The problem with Pat Dillman
• 1:10:31
  Speaker 1: is you're not there. But it's a fun exercise on that.
• 1:10:38
  Speaker 1: You know, growing up a Packer fan, I think I
• 1:10:40
  Speaker 1: wanted Ray Nichke at Defense, right. You know, if he
• 1:10:42
  Speaker 1: was our defense secretary, would anybody attack us right with
• 1:10:45
  Speaker 1: that menacing face? You know? But let me answer the
• 1:10:50
  Speaker 1: first question there. I actually think the market reaction and
• 1:10:56
  Speaker 1: Scott Besson's reaction and Senate Republic reaction has totally gotten
• 1:11:02
  Speaker 1: them to back off. And in fact, Janine Piro suddenly like,
• 1:11:08
  Speaker 1: well I didn't I just was. It's just fact finding,
• 1:11:11
  Speaker 1: and it's just this. I mean, I kind of think
• 1:11:15
  Speaker 1: that they did walk back. So I don't see it
• 1:11:19
  Speaker 1: as a shrug. I see as that there's some guardrails
• 1:11:23
  Speaker 1: quickly were erected, and it quickly got Trump to back
• 1:11:27
  Speaker 1: off because notice, and I don't know when you sent
• 1:11:32
  Speaker 1: in this question, you know, but I would perhaps between
• 1:11:36
  Speaker 1: then and now you might see what I'm talking about here.
• 1:11:41
  Speaker 1: And I think that when Scott Bessett very loudly said
• 1:11:45
  Speaker 1: that he told Trump this was a bad idea, I
• 1:11:48
  Speaker 1: think that was an attempt to speak to the bond
• 1:11:50
  Speaker 1: markets to keep them calm, that said, you know, and
• 1:11:55
  Speaker 1: those that have been whispering in his ears, noting that hey,
• 1:11:57
  Speaker 1: this is weakening the dollar, this is doing this. So
• 1:12:03
  Speaker 1: I think the most important development is the fact that
• 1:12:08
  Speaker 1: Jay Powell was willing to be so public. To me,
• 1:12:13
  Speaker 1: that's another crack in in sort of Trump script on power. Right,
• 1:12:18
  Speaker 1: there isn't this you know, A Komi couldn't felt like
• 1:12:22
  Speaker 1: he couldn't do it for a variety of reasons. Leticia
• 1:12:25
  Speaker 1: James has you know, been cautious and how much he's
• 1:12:28
  Speaker 1: publicly pushed back the fact that Jay Powell felt so
• 1:12:31
  Speaker 1: comfortable doing that. He didn't do it because he didn't
• 1:12:34
  Speaker 1: have support within the within the finance community. That's just
• 1:12:39
  Speaker 1: something that he's thinking about there. But sort of other
• 1:12:44
  Speaker 1: NFL players here, man, you've you've you've got me thinking
• 1:12:48
  Speaker 1: of other former NFL players, you know, I think I
• 1:12:54
  Speaker 1: would want I think you definitely have to have Bill
• 1:12:57
  Speaker 1: Belichick and Tom Brady at the c I a right gate,
• 1:13:01
  Speaker 1: So that's a that's a natural you want them in
• 1:13:04
  Speaker 1: the counterintelligence space. They were pretty good at it on
• 1:13:08
  Speaker 1: that front. I can't wait. You know, this is one
• 1:13:10
  Speaker 1: of those that I wish I had a laugh track,
• 1:13:12
  Speaker 1: right because I know that's a good line. I know
• 1:13:14
  Speaker 1: that's gonna land okay with some people now, right. Hating
• 1:13:17
  Speaker 1: on the Patriots is fun right on that front. Let
• 1:13:22
  Speaker 1: me think of what other what other places I would
• 1:13:27
  Speaker 1: go with that. I think i'd put Kirk Cousins as
• 1:13:32
  Speaker 1: Secretary of Treasury. Why am I saying that? Because this
• 1:13:35
  Speaker 1: dude figured out how to make money at all these stocks.
• 1:13:38
  Speaker 1: He's a good quarterback, but got paid like a great quarterback.
• 1:13:42
  Speaker 1: So give me that guy for fine for treasury. Let's
• 1:13:49
  Speaker 1: see who would be our best former football player as diplomat? Hmmm?
• 1:13:59
  Speaker 1: Maybe on Sanders. I know he's loud, right, I know
• 1:14:02
  Speaker 1: he's painting bright colors if you will. But he has
• 1:14:07
  Speaker 1: a way of getting along with everybody, and ultimately you
• 1:14:11
  Speaker 1: want that with diplomacy, So maybe i'll put Dion there.
• 1:14:19
  Speaker 1: You got to find a place for the rock. I
• 1:14:22
  Speaker 1: think that's a given, you know. I know he basically
• 1:14:26
  Speaker 1: only had a cup of coffee in the NFL, but
• 1:14:28
  Speaker 1: I think he'd qualify on that front. So you got
• 1:14:31
  Speaker 1: to find a place for the rock. All right, I've
• 1:14:36
  Speaker 1: I'm I'm now. I feel like I'm babbling here and
• 1:14:39
  Speaker 1: I've spitball too much. So I will, I will, I
• 1:14:43
  Speaker 1: will put a pin in this. But if I think
• 1:14:45
  Speaker 1: of some more ideas, Nick, I will, I will shoot
• 1:14:49
  Speaker 1: it to you anyway, appreciate the questions. Remember ask Chuck
• 1:14:54
  Speaker 1: at the Chuck podcast dot com. I got a few
• 1:15:05
  Speaker 1: sports rants I want to get off my chest. First
• 1:15:07
  Speaker 1: of all, this will be my last sort of full
• 1:15:09
  Speaker 1: podcast before I hopefully witness the University of Miami's six
• 1:15:15
  Speaker 1: national title, or at least six national title that everybody recognizes.
• 1:15:19
  Speaker 1: I know there's all sorts of weird national titles that
• 1:15:22
  Speaker 1: used to be handed out. The New York Times computer
• 1:15:25
  Speaker 1: used to hand out a national title. I think Miami's
• 1:15:27
  Speaker 1: won two or three extra those over the years and
• 1:15:30
  Speaker 1: years that they didn't win it other places. I remember
• 1:15:34
  Speaker 1: reading Ole miss has claimed three national titles, but only
• 1:15:36
  Speaker 1: one was one of those that was sort of considered
• 1:15:38
  Speaker 1: a consensus national title. But that is sort of the
• 1:15:41
  Speaker 1: craziness and the fun of college football. But just sort
• 1:15:46
  Speaker 1: of a quick note. My Miami wins the game. If
• 1:15:52
  Speaker 1: they win the game, my guess is they don't score
• 1:15:54
  Speaker 1: more than twenty four points that it is a for
• 1:15:58
  Speaker 1: Miami to win the game. They turn it into a
• 1:16:00
  Speaker 1: rock fight, and I think Miami can win a rock fight.
• 1:16:03
  Speaker 1: I also think Indiana can win a rock fight, but
• 1:16:06
  Speaker 1: ultimately I think the winning formula is rock fight. Indiana
• 1:16:11
  Speaker 1: wins the game if they get to a quick they
• 1:16:16
  Speaker 1: get to an early lead, and Miami has to play ketchup.
• 1:16:21
  Speaker 1: I am. I'm also curious what happens to Mendoza if
• 1:16:27
  Speaker 1: he has to play ketchup if Miami can get an
• 1:16:30
  Speaker 1: early lead. So ultimately, I think the first quarter it's
• 1:16:36
  Speaker 1: one of those I know this is I think the
• 1:16:38
  Speaker 1: first quarter is going to be very decisive in this
• 1:16:41
  Speaker 1: game in who you know, who gets to set the
• 1:16:45
  Speaker 1: tone of the of the game. Right If it's slow
• 1:16:49
  Speaker 1: in plotting. This is one of those cases where do
• 1:16:52
  Speaker 1: I want, you know, I think you always want to
• 1:16:54
  Speaker 1: have the ball in the second half. But if Miami
• 1:16:56
  Speaker 1: did get the ball first, I wouldn't mind because I
• 1:17:01
  Speaker 1: think if they could methodically, even if they only get three,
• 1:17:06
  Speaker 1: you eat up eight to ten minutes and get points.
• 1:17:09
  Speaker 1: You just sort of shortened the game. And the shorter
• 1:17:11
  Speaker 1: the game is I think advantage advantage Miami. But another
• 1:17:16
  Speaker 1: big part of this is how well is it? If
• 1:17:18
  Speaker 1: went well is a strong word, what kind of officiating
• 1:17:22
  Speaker 1: does this game have? Those big ten officials were kind
• 1:17:26
  Speaker 1: of flag happy. Those SEC officials, my word, we had
• 1:17:31
  Speaker 1: SEC officials for that Ohio State game, but they didn't
• 1:17:34
  Speaker 1: want to they they let they did the old let
• 1:17:37
  Speaker 1: them play. If these two teams are allowed to play,
• 1:17:40
  Speaker 1: they quote, let them play, officials. That's also advantage Miami
• 1:17:45
  Speaker 1: on this front. And so you know, we'll say, I
• 1:17:49
  Speaker 1: am I'm clearly hopeful. I think Miami's being way underrated
• 1:17:55
  Speaker 1: here on this front. I get it. Indiana's story is
• 1:17:59
  Speaker 1: the end a story. I saw a fun little comparison
• 1:18:03
  Speaker 1: that the best corollary to Indiana twenty twenty five is
• 1:18:07
  Speaker 1: actually Miami nineteen eighty three. Right, if Miami doesn't win
• 1:18:11
  Speaker 1: that first national title against Nebraska, are they a flash
• 1:18:14
  Speaker 1: in the pan that never goes anywhere again? Or And
• 1:18:19
  Speaker 1: you know, because what people forget about the eighty three
• 1:18:22
  Speaker 1: Miami team is the eighty three Miami team had maybe
• 1:18:24
  Speaker 1: two pros. Okay, it had some NFL talent, but it
• 1:18:28
  Speaker 1: was not like the teams in eighty seven, eighty nine
• 1:18:30
  Speaker 1: to ninety one that just dominated recruiting in South Florida.
• 1:18:35
  Speaker 1: And if Indiana wins, right, they suddenly are get to
• 1:18:41
  Speaker 1: flex like Ohio State and Michigan and they become a
• 1:18:44
  Speaker 1: destination program. Miami winning in eighty three made them a
• 1:18:47
  Speaker 1: destination program. This is why why I think a Miami
• 1:18:51
  Speaker 1: victory here, you know, pays huge dividends because it basically
• 1:18:56
  Speaker 1: brings the South Florida high school football community sort of
• 1:19:00
  Speaker 1: back into focus for the University of Miami. But I
• 1:19:06
  Speaker 1: do think, you know, I do think there's something to
• 1:19:07
  Speaker 1: be said that Indiana twenty twenty five Miami nineteen eighty three,
• 1:19:12
  Speaker 1: that it's a fascinating book ind there, but for Miami
• 1:19:16
  Speaker 1: to be back into sort of the elite of college football.
• 1:19:21
  Speaker 1: I do like the other part of this that they
• 1:19:25
  Speaker 1: were unlike that Miami nineteen eighty three team Indiana is
• 1:19:29
  Speaker 1: not the underdog anymore. Indiana is the heavy favorite. Miami
• 1:19:32
  Speaker 1: is the one that's the underdog. So just realize. And
• 1:19:35
  Speaker 1: if you're playing point spread games, the team with more
• 1:19:39
  Speaker 1: NFL talent and the team playing at home is getting
• 1:19:43
  Speaker 1: eight and a half points. And a point I made
• 1:19:46
  Speaker 1: with my friend Tony Corneiser on his show when I
• 1:19:49
  Speaker 1: was picking games, Miami hasn't lost by more than seven
• 1:19:53
  Speaker 1: but more than eight points in three years. Mario Cristobal
• 1:19:59
  Speaker 1: does not Mario Crystobal. Teams just don't play the type
• 1:20:03
  Speaker 1: of game to get blown out. If it happens, God
• 1:20:08
  Speaker 1: bless them. Good for you, Indiana. But that's the part
• 1:20:13
  Speaker 1: of this that I'm extraordinarily skeptical of. I obviously think
• 1:20:16
  Speaker 1: we're going to win this game. You know, it's not
• 1:20:18
  Speaker 1: just that I want to win this game. I really
• 1:20:20
  Speaker 1: think they're going to win this game. I think they're
• 1:20:21
  Speaker 1: the better team, but we're going to find out on
• 1:20:24
  Speaker 1: the field. But I certainly believe they're a team that's
• 1:20:28
  Speaker 1: not going to get blown out. There's a few other thing,
• 1:20:35
  Speaker 1: two quick rants that I want to get off my
• 1:20:37
  Speaker 1: chest one. So over the holidays, I may I spend
• 1:20:43
  Speaker 1: a little bit of time in a casino. And you know,
• 1:20:47
  Speaker 1: we have this income inequality problem all over the map,
• 1:20:50
  Speaker 1: right and you see it show up in ways sometimes
• 1:20:53
  Speaker 1: that are not obvious. But one of the pet peeves.
• 1:20:57
  Speaker 1: You know this has been happening. You know, it's been
• 1:20:59
  Speaker 1: happening in Vegas for a while. I like to play blackjack,
• 1:21:03
  Speaker 1: and you know, one of the things you really have
• 1:21:05
  Speaker 1: to be careful of with blackjack right there is number
• 1:21:08
  Speaker 1: one is those roto dealer machines that look like rollodex
• 1:21:12
  Speaker 1: is back in the day that just spit out cards.
• 1:21:14
  Speaker 1: There's never even you know, I'll take an automatic shuffler
• 1:21:17
  Speaker 1: as long as we're using a shoe, right and that
• 1:21:20
  Speaker 1: you see the cards go in. You know, I'm you know,
• 1:21:23
  Speaker 1: et cetera. But the ones that just automatic, right, I
• 1:21:26
  Speaker 1: you know that that is designed to help the house,
• 1:21:30
  Speaker 1: not help the player. And then you've had the chipping
• 1:21:32
  Speaker 1: away of how much money you win on a blackjack
• 1:21:37
  Speaker 1: And in all of these places that I've been, it
• 1:21:39
  Speaker 1: doesn't matter whether you're in Las Vegas, the Bahamas, a
• 1:21:42
  Speaker 1: casino in Miami, at casino in Oklahoma that in order
• 1:21:47
  Speaker 1: to chip away at at the and help the house,
• 1:21:52
  Speaker 1: that they now pay six to five for blackjack rather
• 1:21:56
  Speaker 1: than three to two. So, to give you an example
• 1:21:59
  Speaker 1: of what that is is, if you play a ten
• 1:22:00
  Speaker 1: dollars blackjack table, you get blackjack and you're getting paid
• 1:22:04
  Speaker 1: six to five, you get twelve dollars. But if you
• 1:22:06
  Speaker 1: get blackjack at a table that plays pays three to two,
• 1:22:09
  Speaker 1: you get fifteen dollars. That adds up and it actually
• 1:22:13
  Speaker 1: changes the overall odds. Right. The reason blackjack ultimately is
• 1:22:18
  Speaker 1: one of the one of the table games in theory
• 1:22:21
  Speaker 1: that you have the best odds is because you know
• 1:22:23
  Speaker 1: if you play for a long enough time, you're going
• 1:22:25
  Speaker 1: to get a certain amount of blackjacks. And you know
• 1:22:28
  Speaker 1: that's why playing consistently is the way to at least
• 1:22:32
  Speaker 1: give yourself the best chance to beat the house at
• 1:22:35
  Speaker 1: any give them time. But here's where this income inequality
• 1:22:40
  Speaker 1: aspect comes into this. If you want better odds, if
• 1:22:44
  Speaker 1: you want the old odds for blackjack, you can get
• 1:22:47
  Speaker 1: them at all of these casinos. If you're willing to bet,
• 1:22:51
  Speaker 1: to go to higher tables one hundred dollars, tables two
• 1:22:55
  Speaker 1: hundred dollars a hand tables. Well, not a lot of
• 1:22:58
  Speaker 1: people want to bet. I want to play blackjack at
• 1:23:01
  Speaker 1: one hundred dollars a hand, but they literally are giving
• 1:23:06
  Speaker 1: those that can afford to bet one hundred dollars or
• 1:23:08
  Speaker 1: ad better odds. And if you want to only play
• 1:23:12
  Speaker 1: you can only afford a ten to fifteen dollars, you
• 1:23:14
  Speaker 1: get lesser odds. So, you know, it's a small thing,
• 1:23:19
  Speaker 1: but it sort of is a part. It's this, you know,
• 1:23:22
  Speaker 1: it's like all these different ways where we are creating
• 1:23:26
  Speaker 1: two sets of rules. If you have money, you get
• 1:23:30
  Speaker 1: better odds, and if you don't have money, you get
• 1:23:32
  Speaker 1: worse odds. If that's not a metaphor for right now
• 1:23:36
  Speaker 1: life in America, I don't know what else is. Right.
• 1:23:40
  Speaker 1: I mean again, it's I know it's quote unquote just
• 1:23:44
  Speaker 1: about blackjack, but it really does is an example of
• 1:23:50
  Speaker 1: you know, if you have money, you get treated better,
• 1:23:55
  Speaker 1: and if you don't, you don't. That's not what America
• 1:23:58
  Speaker 1: was supposed to be premised on. Right in some ways, right,
• 1:24:03
  Speaker 1: if you were a friend of King George, you got
• 1:24:04
  Speaker 1: treated better than if you you weren't a friend of
• 1:24:07
  Speaker 1: King George. It's the world that feels like we're living
• 1:24:11
  Speaker 1: in now. Right, it's pay to play here in Washington,
• 1:24:14
  Speaker 1: d C. Right, if you've got if you want access
• 1:24:18
  Speaker 1: to King Trump, you got to pay to get it.
• 1:24:22
  Speaker 1: You've got to be of a certain status, and you've
• 1:24:24
  Speaker 1: got to be of a certain amount of money. It's just,
• 1:24:30
  Speaker 1: you know, it is it's a small thing, but it's emblematic, right,
• 1:24:36
  Speaker 1: And you know I would just urge these casino companies.
• 1:24:42
  Speaker 1: You're already making a shitload of money. Do you really
• 1:24:46
  Speaker 1: got a nickel and dime? Your ten dollars customers, you
• 1:24:50
  Speaker 1: got a nickel and dime. You're working class and middle
• 1:24:53
  Speaker 1: class folks that want to enjoy a casino. You're already
• 1:24:57
  Speaker 1: taking advantage of them with the ridiculous slot machine business. Right,
• 1:25:02
  Speaker 1: You've already sort of goosed the odds there. But now
• 1:25:04
  Speaker 1: you're going to nickel and dime people that are smart
• 1:25:07
  Speaker 1: about cards, but maybe don't have the bankroll to go
• 1:25:10
  Speaker 1: into the private room, or they don't have the bank
• 1:25:12
  Speaker 1: roll to afford one hundred dollars hand or fifty dollars.
• 1:25:15
  Speaker 1: It's just it's it's really, it's like it's in your
• 1:25:18
  Speaker 1: face and it sending a message that, oh, you know,
• 1:25:25
  Speaker 1: you get treated better if you have more money, and yeah,
• 1:25:28
  Speaker 1: that is a fact of life that that happens. But
• 1:25:32
  Speaker 1: can we not like embed it, right can you know?
• 1:25:37
  Speaker 1: You know, maybe that's the way human nature is, but
• 1:25:40
  Speaker 1: let's not embed it as policy, you know. And again
• 1:25:43
  Speaker 1: it's a small thing, but it is symbolic of a
• 1:25:49
  Speaker 1: larger problem we're dealing with in society, and it's not
• 1:25:53
  Speaker 1: just in America, and it's arguably why we're in the
• 1:25:56
  Speaker 1: polarized situation that we're in. So again, small thing, it's
• 1:26:01
  Speaker 1: an example on blackjack, but it is, but it is
• 1:26:07
  Speaker 1: emblematic of this mindset too often that we have, which
• 1:26:11
  Speaker 1: is you reward people that already have and you punish
• 1:26:15
  Speaker 1: people that don't. One other rant that's sports related, so
• 1:26:20
  Speaker 1: I get this. The Nationals are one of these teams
• 1:26:23
  Speaker 1: that don't have a TV right now, do not have
• 1:26:28
  Speaker 1: a TV provider, They don't have a channel that they're
• 1:26:31
  Speaker 1: on locally. We used to be on something called Masson.
• 1:26:35
  Speaker 1: It was something that was owned by the Orioles. It
• 1:26:37
  Speaker 1: was all designed is sort of to compensate the Orioles
• 1:26:41
  Speaker 1: for taking the DC market away from away from Peter
• 1:26:44
  Speaker 1: Angelo's back when he owned the team at some point
• 1:26:47
  Speaker 1: it was supposed to end. It's been an absolute nightmare
• 1:26:50
  Speaker 1: for the Nationals. It is arguably what is sort of
• 1:26:53
  Speaker 1: tied the hands of this current ownership group. And I
• 1:26:56
  Speaker 1: think they would would have sold the team a couple
• 1:26:59
  Speaker 1: of years ago if an owner thought that they weren't
• 1:27:03
  Speaker 1: tied up in this mass and mess. So we're getting
• 1:27:06
  Speaker 1: out of the mass and mess. So I get this
• 1:27:09
  Speaker 1: email a new way to watch National Games introducing a
• 1:27:13
  Speaker 1: new way to watch National Games in twenty twenty six
• 1:27:15
  Speaker 1: right stream all games, and it says click here to
• 1:27:18
  Speaker 1: learn more. All right, So I'm excited. I'm clicking here
• 1:27:21
  Speaker 1: to learn more. And it says beginning this season, fans
• 1:27:25
  Speaker 1: can watch Nationals dot TV on cable, satellite, or in
• 1:27:28
  Speaker 1: the MLB APP. I'm like great, and then it says
• 1:27:33
  Speaker 1: click click to view in market streaming faq and then
• 1:27:37
  Speaker 1: click to view satellite, cable or MVPD viewing options faq. Okay,
• 1:27:43
  Speaker 1: So I'm like, all right, let me figure out this
• 1:27:45
  Speaker 1: satellite cable aspect. Can I still watch Nationals games through
• 1:27:50
  Speaker 1: my satellite or cable provider? The answers says yes, Nationals
• 1:27:54
  Speaker 1: dot TV will be available on select cable and satellite providers.
• 1:27:58
  Speaker 1: Specific providers in cable channel locations will be announced closer
• 1:28:01
  Speaker 1: to the start of the season. Next question, what channel
• 1:28:05
  Speaker 1: will NATIONALSTV dot TV Beyond Specific channel locations and cable
• 1:28:09
  Speaker 1: and satellite providers will be announced later this offseason. We
• 1:28:13
  Speaker 1: expect that the channel locations will be located near other
• 1:28:15
  Speaker 1: sports programming. How do I watch Nationals Baseball if I
• 1:28:18
  Speaker 1: live outside of the local area MLB dot tv subscribers, well,
• 1:28:22
  Speaker 1: we already knew that. The point is, they make this announcement,
• 1:28:26
  Speaker 1: they have nothing to announce. They don't know if the
• 1:28:29
  Speaker 1: Nationals dot TV where it's airing. They've made no deals
• 1:28:33
  Speaker 1: with YouTube TV, made no deals with DirecTV, with Dish,
• 1:28:36
  Speaker 1: with Comcast, with Exfinity, whatever, you know, Charter cocks, whatever
• 1:28:40
  Speaker 1: is left on how this works. And they still put
• 1:28:45
  Speaker 1: this out come on guys, We're all wondering. Oh, and
• 1:28:50
  Speaker 1: it got It got even worse here because this gets
• 1:28:52
  Speaker 1: at the whole because this really chat. It's gonna chap
• 1:28:56
  Speaker 1: a lot of fans. You know what, First, it's a
• 1:29:01
  Speaker 1: will I be able to stream Nationals games? The answers Yes.
• 1:29:04
  Speaker 1: Nationals dot TV on MLB dot tv includes access to
• 1:29:07
  Speaker 1: all local Nationals games on a variety of devices. Then,
• 1:29:10
  Speaker 1: as it's how will it work and how much will
• 1:29:12
  Speaker 1: it cost? Nationals dot TV and market streaming packages will
• 1:29:16
  Speaker 1: be purchased for a discounted rate at ninety nine dollars
• 1:29:19
  Speaker 1: per year or nineteen ninety nine per month, So you're
• 1:29:22
  Speaker 1: going to have to pay directly to the Nationals to
• 1:29:26
  Speaker 1: get access locally. But wait, there's more. Are there any
• 1:29:31
  Speaker 1: blackouts in market? Nationals dot TV subscribers can stream all
• 1:29:35
  Speaker 1: local Nationals broadcasts with no blackouts in market Nationals dot TV,
• 1:29:41
  Speaker 1: So you're asking local fans now to pay, and I
• 1:29:45
  Speaker 1: guess this is the future of television. But you know,
• 1:29:48
  Speaker 1: when you've lived in a world where you already have
• 1:29:50
  Speaker 1: a cable subscription or you know, you just you hope
• 1:29:53
  Speaker 1: your local baseball and your local MBA and your local
• 1:29:56
  Speaker 1: NHL is just going to be on your cable system.
• 1:29:58
  Speaker 1: Well now you know they're just going to cut it
• 1:30:01
  Speaker 1: out and you're going to have to have a So
• 1:30:03
  Speaker 1: we go from having a specific subscription for our streaming
• 1:30:06
  Speaker 1: platforms and our cable subscribers, so now we're gonna have
• 1:30:10
  Speaker 1: to have direct subscriptions to to the team in order
• 1:30:17
  Speaker 1: to watch the team locally. I mean, my goodness, even
• 1:30:20
  Speaker 1: the NFL is not making you do this, right the NFL.
• 1:30:23
  Speaker 1: If you're a Commander's fan here in Washington, the Washington
• 1:30:26
  Speaker 1: game is going to be on local TV and you're
• 1:30:28
  Speaker 1: not gonna have to pay extra money for it. But
• 1:30:31
  Speaker 1: you are if you're a Nationals fan. I have to say, Look,
• 1:30:34
  Speaker 1: I understand they're in a box here, and it's kind
• 1:30:37
  Speaker 1: of we're going to live in this temporary It's like
• 1:30:39
  Speaker 1: you're living out of a suitcase as a franchise at
• 1:30:42
  Speaker 1: the moment. With not having a devoted sort of TV partner,
• 1:30:48
  Speaker 1: which they don't, they're basically outsourcing this to MLB. You know,
• 1:30:52
  Speaker 1: I know this is a total mess, the Sinclair matt
• 1:30:56
  Speaker 1: regional mess, and that this whole thing is just screwed up.
• 1:31:01
  Speaker 1: I empathize to a point, But there is some alternatives here, right,
• 1:31:06
  Speaker 1: And you have a Nationals organization that may may or
• 1:31:09
  Speaker 1: may not want to sell to ted Leonsis, who owned
• 1:31:11
  Speaker 1: something called Monumental Sports, which is sort of the local
• 1:31:14
  Speaker 1: sports around here. That would be the easy way to
• 1:31:18
  Speaker 1: cut a deal. For whatever reason, they don't want to
• 1:31:21
  Speaker 1: do that. But you're doing a disservice to your fans. Look,
• 1:31:25
  Speaker 1: they already are doing a disservice to us by no
• 1:31:27
  Speaker 1: longer being interested in building a winning baseball team for
• 1:31:30
  Speaker 1: the next two or three years. They're actually doing more
• 1:31:32
  Speaker 1: of a teardown in order to extend this five year
• 1:31:35
  Speaker 1: rebuild another five years. So you know, that's what happens
• 1:31:39
  Speaker 1: when you have ownership that doesn't want to spend any money.
• 1:31:43
  Speaker 1: But now we're going to get nickel and dimed in
• 1:31:45
  Speaker 1: order to watch our triple A franchise on the major
• 1:31:47
  Speaker 1: league level. We're going to have to pay more money
• 1:31:50
  Speaker 1: to do this. Now, I'm an addict. I love my Nats.
• 1:31:55
  Speaker 1: I'm still going to be hopeful because that's what we
• 1:31:57
  Speaker 1: baseball fans are. But you know, this is just a
• 1:32:01
  Speaker 1: communications one on one. If you have nothing to announce,
• 1:32:05
  Speaker 1: don't announce it. They put out this huge release to say,
• 1:32:10
  Speaker 1: here it is. You're gonna be able to watch Nationals
• 1:32:12
  Speaker 1: dot TV on cable. But we can't tell you where
• 1:32:15
  Speaker 1: on cable, We can't tell you where on satellite. We
• 1:32:17
  Speaker 1: can't really tell you anything about it other than we're
• 1:32:20
  Speaker 1: gonna if you if you don't want to find it.
• 1:32:23
  Speaker 1: If we don't come up with a cable or satellite partner,
• 1:32:26
  Speaker 1: and we don't cut a deal with a local TV affiliate,
• 1:32:29
  Speaker 1: We're gonna make you pay to watch the Nationals on TV. Anyway,
• 1:32:37
  Speaker 1: Baseball is an incredible game that has a lot of
• 1:32:41
  Speaker 1: messed up business practices, and this is just a reminder
• 1:32:47
  Speaker 1: of just how screwed up the entire media ecosystem has come.
• 1:32:53
  Speaker 1: And you know how much we're all being charged to
• 1:32:57
  Speaker 1: watch sports and we're all being you know, it's I
• 1:33:00
  Speaker 1: will say this, I worry that we are we you know,
• 1:33:04
  Speaker 1: just like I was ranting about what we're doing to
• 1:33:08
  Speaker 1: working class people like casinos, that we're essentially going to
• 1:33:11
  Speaker 1: start pricing people out of being able to watch sports
• 1:33:14
  Speaker 1: at home. Is that really what you want? Rob Manfred? Seriously,
• 1:33:21
  Speaker 1: is that what you want? Is that good for the game.
• 1:33:23
  Speaker 1: Don't you want the biggest possible audience to be watching
• 1:33:26
  Speaker 1: baseball and not put it behind a velvet rope? Anyway?
• 1:33:32
  Speaker 1: All right, brandt over hopefully the next time I come
• 1:33:37
  Speaker 1: to you, Actually that's not true, because I'm going to
• 1:33:38
  Speaker 1: drop an episode on Monday before the game, so you
• 1:33:43
  Speaker 1: will hear there'll be one more episode before then. I
• 1:33:48
  Speaker 1: know we're all I'm I'm I've had a hard time
• 1:33:51
  Speaker 1: focusing on all sorts of other things because of this moment.
• 1:33:54
  Speaker 1: It's been a wonderful distraction, but for me it has
• 1:33:57
  Speaker 1: meant the holiday season extends all the way to you
• 1:34:00
  Speaker 1: Aanuary nineteenth, and it will end about eleven thirty Eastern
• 1:34:05
  Speaker 1: Time at hard Rock Stadium. So hopefully I'm in a
• 1:34:09
  Speaker 1: good mood after that. So with that, enjoy your weekend.
• 1:34:14
  Speaker 1: Thanks for supporting this both audio and video podcast. I
• 1:34:18
  Speaker 1: appreciate it. If you've got any comments, questions, queries, or complaints,
• 1:34:23
  Speaker 1: shoot them to Aschuck at LeChuck podcast dot com and
• 1:34:27
  Speaker 1: with that, I'll see in about ninety six hours.