Latest / Project 2028 / A Gift from Qatar, Golden Dome, Another 10 Commandments Bill, and More

Transcript

A Gift from Qatar, Golden Dome, Another 10 Commandments Bill, and More · Project 2028

0:08
Hello and welcome back to Project 2028. We have
0:11
a wide range of topics today from international
0:15
affairs to domestic issues and homeland security.
0:22
We are excited to have you with us and without
0:25
further ado, let's dive right in. Okay, the first
0:33
topic we are going to talk about, we're going
0:34
to start international and move. domestic so
0:38
the first thing we're going to talk about is
0:39
the qatar aircraft so there was a transfer of
0:42
this aircraft from qatar to the government to
0:48
the u .s department of defense but it's kind
0:50
of become a little scrutinized because reports
0:53
are is that the aircraft is being redirected
0:57
to the trump foundation and so you know the it's
1:02
not super clear on where the aircraft really
1:04
is and it's also you know, raising questions
1:07
on legality, transparency, and ethical governance.
1:13
Um, but yeah, I mean, look, from what I've read
1:17
at this point, it's going to be in the Defense
1:19
Department for the next, at least the upcoming
1:21
four years, where they're going to outfit it
1:23
and hopefully at least in retrofit it. And it'll
1:27
serve as Air Force One, hopefully for at least
1:29
the next two years after maybe. And then they
1:34
will transfer it to the nonprofit. or at least
1:36
I'm pretty sure it's a nonprofit Trump foundation,
1:38
uh, of which I think it might may preside in
1:41
his library. Um, but he won't use it personally.
1:44
Uh, the Trump foundations, it's like a presidential
1:46
foundation that, um, just like, you know, the
1:49
Reagan library, wherever, um, they, they have
1:52
planes, um, you know, it, it, they are the foundations
1:56
that presidents make after their, um, you know,
1:59
presidency and the plan, as far as I know, I
2:03
think, and obviously, you know, it's, it's up
2:05
to, What's going to happen in the future? Because
2:07
it's nothing. No papers have been signed to for
2:10
it to be transferred yet from the Defense Department.
2:12
I think it's going to go there. I think it'll
2:14
just sit there kind of as a as a memento of of
2:18
the presidency. From what I see. Yeah. Ryan,
2:22
why did they gift us a plane to begin with? Qatar's
2:27
public ministry, the foreign. I don't know his
2:31
titling. It's the foreign minister. I think he
2:34
said that it just had to go with strengthening
2:36
United States relations with Qatar. We have military
2:40
bases around and I think in Qatar. And obviously
2:45
the Middle East is a flashpoint for U .S. military
2:48
and economic interests with oil and all the natural
2:52
resources. So I think it is strategic both for
2:55
them and for us to have strong connections and
2:58
strong relations there. I think the more involved
3:03
we are in the region, not necessarily from a
3:06
military standpoint, but just economically and
3:08
socially, I think you could see at least a lot
3:12
of benefit for the United States, if not Qatar
3:14
and the other regions around it. You know, it's
3:16
unstable, to say the least. So it provides Qatar,
3:20
a small nation state with a small army that's
3:22
quite rich. You know, that's a recipe for invasion.
3:26
You know, hopefully some goodwill with the United
3:29
States. Sure. And how sorry, I have one more
3:32
question. Yeah. How often do we see in like past
3:36
presidencies have a country's government donated
3:40
something and then that is only serving for it's
3:43
like donated purpose for the length of the president's
3:46
term to then become part of that president's
3:50
legacy? As far as I know, obviously, a Boeing
3:54
747 is it. quite large and expensive um but presidents
3:59
have received diamonds and all that stuff and
4:02
you they obviously pay either pay for it or they
4:04
they give it to the foundation or whatever um
4:06
uh because you have to pay for it in the constitution
4:09
of fair market value or whatever if you want
4:11
to keep it um as a as a thing um so obviously
4:16
these things aren't unprecedented obama received
4:18
quite quite a few diamonds and stuff like that
4:20
um But obviously, I was assuming paid full market
4:24
price or they were given to either a foundation
4:26
or historical society. So look, a plane's quite
4:31
large and expensive. So on this magnitude, nothing
4:36
I don't think has ever been seen before, to my
4:39
knowledge. But, you know, I think it's going
4:42
to be interesting to say the least. I think there's
4:44
going to be a lot of memos and stuff written
4:47
inside the Justice Department that are going
4:48
to talk about this. They're going to come out.
4:51
And I think it'll be quite interesting seeing
4:52
how this is handled, especially from the president's
4:55
counsel. Yeah, Luciano, to me, this seems pretty
4:58
fine. It doesn't seem really like he's doing
5:01
anything out of the ordinary. How do you how
5:04
do you interpret this? I pretty much agree with
5:07
you with the one thing I did want to touch on
5:09
was you mentioned at the beginning, like, you
5:11
know, what could what are like the people are
5:13
like concerned about this or it has like possible
5:16
legal implications. Well, I don't think that
5:18
it's. Crazy wrong. I just wanted to touch on
5:20
why it has those, why it could potentially be
5:23
an issue. It's something called the Emoluments
5:26
Clause, which the acceptance of this aircraft
5:30
has sparked controversy because it could violate
5:33
the U .S. Constitution's Emoluments Clause, which
5:36
bars federal officials from accepting foreign
5:38
gifts without congressional approval. So while
5:40
I don't really think it's too big of an issue,
5:43
I just wanted to give some context on why it
5:45
could be considered one. Yeah. And I think that
5:48
argument's been made, and I think strategically,
5:51
and this is why I don't think it violates that
5:54
clause in specific, is because it's not going
5:56
to the president. Obviously, everything that
5:58
the president uses on a daily basis is owned
6:01
by an agency, Department of Defense. This is
6:07
going to be owned by the Department of Defense.
6:08
Trump will never have sole proprietorship over
6:12
the plane. He won't own it. So I think that's
6:16
where you can get past it. But if they were to
6:18
gift it directly to him or to Trump LLC or whatever,
6:21
I think that would be when that would get quite
6:24
interesting. All right. Do we want to move on
6:29
to the Golden Dome? Let's do it. All right. So
6:32
Golden Dome, you may have heard of an iron dome
6:36
that is in Israel. It's been quite incredible
6:38
at blocking Hamas rockets and other things flying
6:43
through there at fast speeds. Um, we model it
6:46
in Israel. We spent a lot of money on it. Um,
6:48
quite an incredible amount of money. And now
6:50
Trump is saying that we want not one that's iron,
6:53
but one that's golden. Um, you know, a golden
6:56
dome system, basically the same as Israel, just
6:58
a lot more spread out, a lot bigger. Um, it's
7:00
going to provide continental air and missile
7:03
defense. So I'm not sure if Hawaii and maybe
7:05
Alaska, maybe obviously Alaska has a lot of strategic
7:08
interest in nuclear and, um, weapons capabilities
7:12
because of its. proximity to Russia and parts
7:17
of the other. It can just fly over the top of
7:19
the world, but especially Hawaii may not be over
7:23
there. Long -term costs on it are projected to
7:27
exceed, I think it was half a trillion dollars.
7:31
Obviously, it's quite important. It's served
7:33
its tenure in Israel quite well. The high cost
7:39
is one thing that's been up for debate on this
7:42
kind of thing. We already have, obviously, missile
7:44
defense systems in the United States. We've had
7:46
them for a while since the Cold War to prevent
7:49
incoming nuclear warheads and missiles. It's
7:52
going to be under the Space Force. This is one
7:54
of the few things that they've done at all, it
7:58
seems. But, Elle, if I may ask, do you think
8:02
that the $500 billion is worth it? No. I think
8:07
$500 billion is an insane amount of money to
8:12
really be spending on anything, any singular
8:15
one thing. And I also think, you know, the Space
8:20
Force kind of is no hate to all our members and
8:24
people who are within the Space Force, but it
8:27
hasn't really done much. It's kind of a, you
8:30
know, unnecessary expansion. Yeah. They're during
8:38
that administration. Okay. But that is such an
8:42
insane amount of money. I also, you know, they're
8:45
creating something in the possibility that the
8:50
U .S. becomes part of an attack, which we're
8:53
most likely never going to be under, at least
8:57
not in the next. I don't know how many years,
9:00
probably not while I'm alive, just because of
9:03
our distance from other countries, like geographically,
9:07
but also our kind of power and our military force
9:13
aren't really tools that other countries want
9:17
to mess with. And so I don't think that this
9:21
will necessarily benefit us in the sense of protecting
9:25
us. It's more of a precaution that, It's a crazy
9:30
amount of money to be spending on for something
9:32
that has very little purpose as of right now.
9:36
Sorry, LaTrona, do you want to say something?
9:39
Oh, I was just maybe going to talk a little bit
9:42
about some of the international reactions, just
9:46
to give a little bit of context on what some
9:48
of the rest of the world thinks. So North Korea
9:50
has condemned the initiative, labeling it a nuclear
9:54
war scenario and a threat to global security.
9:58
We don't always want to be agreeing with North
10:00
Korea. I think it's interesting to hear what
10:03
they have to say. And China has expressed concerns
10:06
over the militarization of space and says that
10:09
the United States should halt developing this.
10:12
So I think that a lot of the other countries
10:13
are almost taking this as maybe more of an offensive
10:18
act than a defensive act, if that makes sense.
10:20
What do you think is going to happen? Are you
10:23
going to try and start something, which is why
10:25
you need protection? Does that make sense? That
10:27
totally makes sense. I also think the whole idea
10:30
that it's golden is kind of shocking to me, just
10:34
because that's such a reflective, bright surface
10:36
as it is. I mean, it's a joke if it's a thing
10:41
off the Iron Dome, right? Yes. I see what you're
10:45
saying. Gold is not the choice I would have made.
10:47
On the point about the United States being the
10:51
preeminent military power, though, the reason
10:54
that we are so powerful and the country's give
10:57
us deference and won't attack us and won't mess
10:59
with us is because of things like this. It's
11:01
because of the fact that we spend more on our
11:03
military than like everyone else. Like the five
11:06
people after us combined. We're the number one
11:09
contributor to NATO. I think that other countries
11:11
should probably step it up, but I digress. You
11:15
know, the reason that we are where we are today
11:17
is only because we spend this kind of money on
11:20
defense. And I think it's... Both helped. We've
11:23
gotten to where we are where we don't need to
11:25
be spending this much money on new... Go ahead.
11:30
Sorry. You can go. No, no, no. I was... Look,
11:34
if we had dropped the two atomic bombs in Hiroshima,
11:36
we had a few extras in the tank later, and we
11:38
were like, you know what? This is pretty nice.
11:39
And we got complacent, and we didn't develop
11:41
missile defense systems, the hydrogen bomb, all
11:44
these Cold Warrior inventions because we were
11:46
just, yeah, it'll work. We wouldn't be where
11:49
we are today, both from a defense standpoint
11:51
and I think from a country standpoint. I think
11:53
if we just get complacent with this kind of thing,
11:55
I think it's dangerous. No, and I get what you're
11:58
saying. We work to get to the top, so now let's
12:00
keep working to stay on top. That's what you're
12:05
hinting at here. At what point do you chill out?
12:10
And I'm not saying we need to stop funding our
12:13
military. I'm not saying that at all. I'm saying...
12:16
This is an insane amount of money to be spending
12:19
on something that really no other country has.
12:23
And I get the whole, like, we can be the first.
12:27
We can do super great things and have super great,
12:30
like, defense. We don't need it. We have worked
12:34
so hard and established our dominance over everyone
12:38
else that we don't need to put in a big giant
12:41
dome over our entire country. Yeah, I understand.
12:46
The right now costs, by the way, are $25 billion.
12:48
It's projected long -term to exceed $500 billion.
12:51
The Department of Defense, which manages Space
12:54
Force, they floss their teeth with $25 billion.
12:57
I mean, this is not crazy amounts. That's like
13:01
throwaway money for them when it comes to the
13:05
overall budget of the department. Yes, but we're
13:06
cutting funding for so many things, and then
13:10
we're going to spend $25 billion right now on
13:13
a... like some fun project i wouldn't say it
13:18
was fun but i would say it's it's imperative
13:21
for the defense it's comparative to like a child
13:23
doing paper mache like there's no need to do
13:26
it it's like a fun activity that you can do and
13:29
to like not like look what we can do yes it's
13:35
it's a show -off tool and i get that like being
13:37
showy is great like peacocks beautiful they have
13:40
really showy feathers but it also like kills
13:44
them in nature so like i think it's look i mean
13:48
it's proven itself in israel though i mean this
13:50
is not just a show but we're not under attack
13:52
we're never going to be under attack yes but
13:56
but the thing is is if you take that attitude
13:59
and you say we never need to develop really cutting
14:01
edge defense technologies i believe this isn't
14:04
cutting edge this has already been developed
14:07
this is cutting edge been done No, there's a
14:10
reason that only two or three countries have
14:12
this in the world. It's because it's hard to
14:14
install. And which countries are those? It's
14:16
Israel? Israel, and I think we've installed Patriot
14:19
missile silos and stuff, which is not exactly
14:21
Iron Dome, but similar in Ukraine. And it's worked.
14:25
And those are two countries that for the past
14:27
five years have been under constant military
14:30
attack, and their territory is constantly being
14:32
threatened. I mean, we installed it in Israel
14:35
prior to any war. Well, no, I know, but I'm saying
14:38
it has... proved to be useful in the past five
14:41
years because there have been, for the past century,
14:44
maybe more, issues within those two countries
14:49
and their land. Yeah, of course. There have been
14:52
non -military and military threats on that territory
14:58
and of those countries. We have not, well, we
15:01
have in the past century, but like... But like,
15:05
when North Korea throws an ICBM over here, I
15:09
think I'm not sure which one you said. Yes, we
15:12
do, as Vladimir Slensky would say, have a nice
15:14
ocean between us. But ICBMs don't care. They're
15:17
going to get here in 11 minutes, right? By the
15:20
time you're done listening to this podcast, you
15:21
would be dead, right? And if we don't have a
15:23
defense system, like, look, bad things can happen.
15:27
Luchano, what were you going to say? I was just
15:29
going to say I don't feel like that's, like,
15:30
an actual concern right now. Like, as much as
15:33
we have, like... almost sibling like rivalries
15:36
with other countries trying to see like who can
15:37
have the best technology who can be the best
15:40
it's not like oh my god what if they bomb us
15:43
you know like i just don't feel like that's a
15:45
real that's i don't think it's a big enough concern
15:48
to justify this amount of money all right yes
15:52
we used all right it's also we've seen trump
15:56
claim that they're gonna do these big building
15:59
projects and we've only gotten so far Space Forces
16:04
is, relative to the, say, Army, an incredibly
16:08
new agency, and we'll see what they do. But I
16:11
think it is imperative that we continue our stomp
16:16
to new technology and more defense. But to move
16:21
on to something that actually otherwise has to
16:24
do with Israel, the murder, sadly, of the other
16:28
day of two Israeli embassy officials. Elle, do
16:34
you want to take us to your... Do you want to
16:35
go? Yeah. Yeah, sure. So, just a little background
16:41
information before we jump right into it. This
16:43
happened May 21st at the Lillian and Albert Small
16:47
Capital Jewish Museum in Washington, D .C. And
16:50
the victims who were murdered are Yaron Lashinsky
16:54
and Sarah Milgram, staff members of the Israeli
16:58
embassy. And the current suspect is a man named
17:02
Elias Rodriguez, a 30 -year -old from Chicago
17:06
who yelled free, free Palestine during his arrest.
17:10
Pardon me. So right now, the Metropolitan Police
17:15
Department and the FBI are investigating the
17:18
incident together, saying that it's an act of
17:20
targeted violence. And I think it really shows
17:24
how much the tensions have escalated, that it's
17:28
not just affecting Israel and Palestine, but
17:31
it's now affecting people here in the United
17:35
States, costing them their lives. And one of
17:40
the things that raises concerns about is diplomatic
17:42
security and broader implications for U .S.-Middle
17:45
East relations. Yeah, this is a super interesting
17:49
situation, and I think we all just need to remember,
17:52
like, people have died, and it's super important
17:54
to stay super respectful. Like, these people
17:57
lost their lives for really no reason. They were
18:01
deaths that did not need to happen, which no
18:04
death really needs to happen, but that's a...
18:07
Morality issue in the whatever. Anyhow. A debate
18:10
for a different day. Yeah. But just very briefly,
18:16
these two people who were killed were together.
18:20
One of the victims had actually purchased a ring
18:22
and was planning to propose later. So that's
18:26
like just another personal layer that has been
18:28
added to this case. Ryan, you were going to say
18:31
something and then I cut you off. I'm sorry.
18:33
No, I was actually about to say the exact same
18:34
thing you said. I think it's sad. Look. From
18:36
a foreign policy standpoint, it may impact Israeli
18:39
diplomatic security here. I don't think, like,
18:43
obviously the loss of two lives is horrible,
18:45
but in the grand scheme of things, politically
18:47
and from a foreign policy standpoint, I don't
18:50
think it's that big of a deal, quote -unquote,
18:53
that's going to change any policy, especially
18:56
in the United States, the way we deal with that
18:59
kind of stuff. It was a freak accident. Not even
19:02
an accident, a horrible event. Freak horrible
19:04
event. You know, obviously, it's hard to prevent
19:08
that kind of thing. You know, that guy's innocent
19:12
until proven guilty. That's pretty clear that,
19:15
you know, he has the card stacked against him.
19:17
But, you know, it's sad. It's paramountly sad
19:21
over all other. But, you know, I don't think
19:24
it's going to change much policy in either country.
19:27
Now, I'm curious. This is more of like a question
19:29
for you guys. I just want to hear what you think.
19:36
I don't know how to describe this. I think one
19:38
side was actually more clearly in the right than
19:41
we have right now with Israel and Palestine.
19:43
But I still think there was, there's definitely
19:45
some like, I guess, activism here in the United
19:50
States. I think I saw a lot of like Ukrainian
19:53
flags. There were a couple protests, but definitely
19:55
nothing like we've seen now with the maybe Americans
19:59
involvement or Americans. I don't even know what
20:03
the right word is. But how much Americans have
20:07
been discussing and protesting the Palestine
20:11
-Israel conflict. So I'm curious to hear why
20:14
you guys think that is. Yeah, so when the war
20:18
between Russia and Ukraine broke out, it was
20:20
pretty much peak COVID here. And so the most
20:23
people could really do was wave a flag, hang
20:26
up a yard sign, something like that, or, you
20:29
know, donate money to aid. And it was pretty
20:33
much unanimously decided by not only US citizens,
20:37
but also people around the rest of the world
20:39
that Russia had really no need. There was, you
20:43
know, whatever you Ukraine was in the not the
20:48
right but had the right to defend themselves
20:50
yes they had the support from pretty much everyone
20:53
um even when my when COVID had kind of cleared
20:58
away cleared and people were able to travel we
21:00
went my family when we went on I believe spring
21:03
break like a two years later um we had met this
21:07
man who was you know traveling um he was from
21:12
russia and he basically was talking about how
21:14
much he did not agree and how none no one that
21:17
he's talked to that you know any of his russian
21:20
relatives and friends that still lived in russia
21:22
none of them supported putin and his um you know
21:27
attacks and his um military pressure on ukraine
21:30
so it was even a inter -country divide um But,
21:37
you know, since it happened during COVID, people
21:39
couldn't really go out and show their support
21:42
in this way. I completely forgot about the pandemic.
21:46
I was not even factoring that in. I was like,
21:47
huh, I wonder. No, but that was like a super,
21:50
it's definitely a very different, because, you
21:53
know, that war is also still going on. And we've
21:58
kind of, and even after COVID had ended, we were.
22:02
quarantine had kind of ended and people were
22:05
dispersing more and interacting more with others
22:07
in large groups um we didn't really revisit that
22:10
topic or that war in an activism standpoint i
22:15
think l has a good point there um but i think
22:18
to answer your question i think there's a different
22:22
reason and i think it has to do like if you look
22:24
at wars typically and if you look at conflict
22:27
a lot of it comes at the hands of race and ethnicity
22:30
historically And when you look at the difference
22:34
between the people in Russia and Ukraine, they
22:36
speak different languages, sometimes the same
22:38
language. There are a lot of Ukrainians that
22:40
speak Russian and the opposite. And they're quite
22:45
the same. They live in the same region. They
22:48
are quite similar. But when you look at Israel,
22:51
these are two very different types of people
22:53
with different languages, different customs,
22:55
most importantly, different religions. And they
22:58
look... Completely different. I think it's much
23:03
easier to pick sides when there's two very distinct
23:08
sides, two very, you know, diametric sides versus
23:14
when you have, I mean, Russia -Ukraine is also
23:16
just, it's much more polar and easy to see what
23:20
happened. Whereas, you know, the history of Israel
23:25
from 3 ,000 years ago. is it's much more 3D.
23:31
It's much more complex. And I think that's where
23:32
it makes it much easier to pick sides is when
23:34
you have this black and white difference between
23:39
everything. Whereas in Russia, you know, the
23:41
lines are a bit blurred. People consider themselves
23:43
Russian in Ukraine and some people, I'm not sure
23:46
if this is as much, but in Russia maybe consider
23:48
themselves Ukrainian if they live to the west.
23:51
And Ryan said just kind of add on to that to,
23:53
I guess, round us out here. There was also, it
23:57
was, the first attack was from Hamas, this presence,
24:01
this... Terrorist group. Yes, I, yeah, okay.
24:04
And so there's also now this, there's kind of
24:07
three parties involved in this two -country war.
24:12
So there's the terrorist group, the Palestinians,
24:15
and then the Israelis. And so people are separating
24:18
not only that the... Palestinians didn't necessarily
24:22
want this war, but they technically weren't the
24:24
ones to initiate it. So there's also that divide
24:26
where there is this clear third party who's being
24:29
affected by both sides that didn't per se start,
24:35
quote unquote, anything. Yeah. But also, and
24:40
this is kind of my take on this, is that when
24:45
you separate the people in Palestine and the
24:47
leaders of the nation, I think you have to ask,
24:52
I mean, these people are who represents you.
24:54
If they're democratically elected, and I'm not
24:56
sure if they are, then they've served your bidding.
25:00
And this is what you've gotten. You've gotten
25:02
a war because you elected them. And if they didn't,
25:04
if they're autocratic or whatever, I think you
25:07
have much more important problems domestically
25:08
in the West Bank and in Gaza than you do externally
25:13
with Israel. just trying to get, you know, a
25:16
democratic governance. And it goes both ways
25:19
for if they are, if the people did elect them
25:21
democratically or not, which is key to what I
25:25
kind of go back to. They won the 2006 Palestinian
25:28
legislative election, winning 74 of 300, or sorry,
25:36
of 132 seats. Did they just take power since
25:39
then? Or has there just not been another election
25:40
since 2006? 15 years. Okay, that sounds a bit
25:45
autocratic. I don't know. I mean, look, I think
25:52
either way, they have bigger problems to worry
25:55
about. But if they did elect this government
25:57
democratically, from what I'll say, it was 2006,
26:00
so they may have taken power since then. I think
26:04
that they ought to hold their leaders accountable
26:06
if they don't want this war. Oh, we lost Ryan
26:12
here. Just one more question for Elda, and before
26:16
we wrap this section up, I think the Israel -Palestine
26:20
conflict has been going on for as long as we've
26:23
had the podcast. There's been an Israel -Palestine
26:27
conflict, right, or no? Yes. Yes. Do you think
26:33
that by our two - or three -year anniversary
26:36
of the podcast, we'll still have this conflict,
26:38
or do you think it's going to... reach like an
26:41
official no more war we're all good sometimes
26:44
i guess we're all good is a little bit of a stretch
26:47
because they've had conflict for a very long
26:50
time but an official no war um i believe we will
26:54
have an official ceasefire and an official kind
26:58
of end to this part of this ongoing battle between
27:03
these two what that outcome will be. I'm not
27:07
super sure. I'm sure someone is going to, well,
27:10
everyone's going to be unhappy and there's going
27:12
to have to be compromise made. It's just to what
27:15
extent is the compromise. So, you know, it pretty
27:19
much will depend on the leaders who are helping
27:24
with moderating and, you know, kind of forcing.
27:33
this agreement but i think we will have one but
27:36
as you said this tension and the conflict has
27:40
been going on and i don't think it will resolve
27:42
i think there will forever be that kind of hatred
27:46
of each other and each other's leaders and everything
27:51
like that do you think we'll have um a ceasefire
27:55
between russia and ukraine or israel and palestine
27:58
first I believe we will have, well, we've already
28:02
technically had one for both. Neither has really
28:08
stayed, but I do think we will have one with
28:11
Russia and Ukraine first. Okay, very interesting.
28:14
Now I believe you were going to keep us abroad,
28:18
but pivot to South Korea. Right? Yes. We're going
28:22
to go to South Korea now. So they're having constitutional
28:26
reform after their earlier presidential crisis
28:29
that we talked about, where the president was
28:32
removed from office, called or declared martial
28:35
law, and then I think came back. All in the span
28:39
of 24 hours. Yes, it was. He like speed ran autocratic
28:42
government. It was quite impressive. It was a
28:45
great, you know, demonstration of how. government
28:49
can work. So the election is scheduled for June
28:52
3rd, so we will definitely talk about the results
28:55
later in, I don't know, a couple weeks. But there's
29:02
two major candidates, and so one is proposing
29:07
a four -year, two -term presidency with runoff
29:11
voting and a prime minister appointed by parliament.
29:15
So this is I'm going to butcher this name. Oh,
29:19
please say his name. I'm ready. Lee Jae Myung?
29:28
I can't factor in on that. I have no clue. And
29:32
then the other one, Kim Moon Soo, has a similar
29:35
plan, but he promises a shortened term to align
29:39
elections. And 67 % of South Koreans favor constitutional
29:43
changes. So, Ryan, I know when we were talking
29:48
about this, this was a topic that you said was
29:51
really interesting. So is there anything you
29:53
specifically want to talk about, add, bring up,
29:55
point out? Yeah. I mean, look, South Korea, as
29:59
I said in 24 Hours, quite quickly speedrun, or
30:02
spedrun, I'm not sure how you say that in the
30:04
past tense, but speedran, you know, the path
30:09
of a leader trying to maybe take power, and then
30:11
the... quote -unquote, Congress taking it back.
30:14
It was quite interesting, actually, the whole
30:16
event. But most importantly is today, like, look,
30:20
ever since the 27th Amendment, nothing's really
30:23
happened. You had the little ERA fight last year.
30:26
But, you know, it's very rare now, nowadays at
30:29
least, to see constitutional amendments in modern
30:33
democracies because modern democracies have now
30:35
existed for a while. They're pretty mature. And
30:38
they have the rules and they have set, especially
30:40
in the United States. We haven't had one amended
30:44
since 1980s or 1990s with the equal pay or the
30:48
not the equal pay, the pay for members of Congress
30:52
at the end of their terms, which was kind of
30:56
like pretty relatively like not big deal. So
30:59
I think it's gonna be interesting to see a modern
31:02
developed country, you know, deal with this constitutional
31:04
almost election. And see kind of where they bring
31:09
themselves, especially them being, you know,
31:11
quite a democratic country that's been democratic
31:13
for long enough, having constitutional changes.
31:16
So that's where I kind of see it to be the most
31:18
interesting. Yeah, to ask kind of an unrelated
31:23
but same. like, topic, I guess. I keep seeing
31:28
things about the border between South and North
31:32
Korea, and, you know, it's a heavier military
31:36
presence there, parts of it being closed off
31:38
more. So do you guys think that we are going
31:42
to see another war outbreak or attack from either
31:47
side in the near future? Well, you can go, you
31:53
can go. Oh, sorry. I was going to say, I think
31:55
that's a good question. I think that, I don't
32:00
know, I might personally take the higher border
32:03
security as more of a sign of tension than, like,
32:06
war. I feel like it would maybe need a couple
32:08
more steps to get there, you know? But I don't
32:12
think that it's, like, an impossible thing. But
32:17
I also, I'd have to read more about it, honestly.
32:22
Ryan? Yeah, I mean, look, this is the DMZ. In
32:28
the same conversation with the DMZ, you've got
32:30
Fort Knox, Area 51. I mean, these are the highest
32:34
security places in the world for reasons. Look,
32:39
I think there's always a military presence at
32:41
the DMZ between Koreas. I don't think this is
32:46
anything new. I think this is good, actually,
32:48
because the DMZ is made to not have war, to not...
32:53
starts war um obviously there's always outbreaks
32:56
and anything can happen between those two countries
32:58
in a matter of seconds um you know you could
33:02
have a moment like like just where sparks set
33:05
off and crazy stuff happens um there's always
33:07
every few years there's gunfire that's exchanged
33:10
um but look i think the dmc does its job i think
33:13
it's good for it to be highly militarized On
33:16
the on the outskirts, obviously, DMZ stands for
33:18
demilitarized zone. So that part of it is has
33:21
no military, but on the outside, it is very complicated.
33:24
But look, I think the DMZ does its job. It's
33:26
very secure. It's very safe. And I think it's
33:29
done quite a good job. Okay, perfect. And I think
33:34
that's going to round us out internationally.
33:37
And we are going to talk about Biden's political
33:40
fallout. So Ryan, if you want to take on this
33:44
one. Look, I was pointing to this last episode,
33:48
but it still remains quite interesting. Man,
33:51
the past two weeks, if I was part of the Biden
33:54
family or the Biden camp, whatever, man, it was
33:57
horrible. Look, you got Jake Tapper smearing
34:00
him on every station he came with this new book,
34:02
which is quite interesting about how, you know,
34:07
the fall from grace and how his advisors were
34:11
basically have said. They couldn't talk about
34:14
national security some days because he just couldn't
34:16
do it. That's remarkably bad. And whatever you
34:20
think about Joe Biden, that's a bad thing. And,
34:25
you know, just the mental incapacity at some
34:28
points for this. And then after Jake Tapper's
34:31
coming out, he's talking all this. Robert Herr
34:33
interview gets leaked to Axios. The Trump administration
34:36
then releases it fully. Five hours of tape of
34:40
Biden not being able to remember key important
34:42
events in his life. Again, only fuels the narrative.
34:48
And then a few days later, in accord with what's
34:52
been happening, it only gets worse, and they
34:54
announce that he has cancer. And look, he has
34:57
the best medical staff in the world. I hope he
34:59
gets better soon, and he has almost every tool
35:01
at his disposal. I don't think this cancer is
35:04
particularly rare. but I think it has gone quite
35:07
far. I'm not a doctor, so what I may be saying
35:10
might be completely wrong, but from what I've
35:11
read. So look, bad week for Biden, bad week for
35:17
his outlook, just post -mortemly. You know, I
35:23
feel bad, but then again, this is all easily
35:25
preventable. Not the cancer part, but the other
35:29
parts about, you know, covering up his, what
35:32
seems to be mental. at least during his term.
35:35
And I think, you know, I think it's left the
35:39
Biden and the Democrat Party in an uncomfortable
35:41
position to grapple with all this. Elle, do you
35:44
have any thoughts, like, on this? Yeah, I mean,
35:47
I think Biden is kind of in a sticky situation.
35:53
I think, you know, these videos coming out of
35:56
him and these reports coming out that he, you
35:59
know, couldn't remember things and didn't...
36:02
want to talk about basic presidential duties
36:05
such as foreign policy, which is pretty much
36:07
90 % of, 80 % of his job, is concerning and not
36:13
something you want from a leader. And it's definitely
36:16
making not only the Democratic Party, but also
36:19
American voters in general, a little more fearful
36:23
and a little more questioning of the age. of
36:28
someone that you choose to put in power. I will
36:31
also say there's an insane level of disrespect
36:36
that is coming. You know, when he got diagnosed
36:41
with his prostate cancer, his aggressive stage
36:45
four prostate cancer, there were countless polls,
36:50
countless, like, political bidding websites that
36:55
had... Oh, yeah. Something talking about when,
36:59
like, the likeliness of him surviving a year,
37:02
two years, and, like, basically, you know, making
37:05
money off of his death or his, like, future death,
37:11
which is insanely crazy. That is not something
37:14
you should be doing for anyone, let alone a man
37:17
who, before anything, is, like, a father, a grandfather,
37:23
like, he has family. Like, that's a crazy thing
37:25
to be doing. And it doesn't, it's the crazy line
37:29
where it is drawn between when it is something
37:33
that happens to you because you are a public
37:35
figure and something that is crazy and should
37:38
not be doing in any manner. It's the same thing
37:41
as like, you know, stalking. Like it's normal
37:44
to have, if you're a public figure, people taking
37:47
your picture and, you know, they know when you
37:50
go to restaurants and things like that. And then
37:52
there's the difference of like... going inside
37:55
of your like enclosed uh house property and like
38:02
that like that's crazy you don't do that to anyone
38:05
even if they're in the public eye you don't bid
38:08
on when someone is going to die that is absolutely
38:12
crazy there's markets for everything it's quite
38:15
incredible what people will make um and i find
38:20
the markets interesting actually i i obviously
38:22
don't bet on them but I find them interesting
38:24
because markets are, other than polling, they're
38:27
the most accurate source of opinion. Polling
38:29
has actually been proven to be less accurate
38:31
than betting websites, especially when it comes
38:33
to this most recent presidential election. And
38:37
they deliver instant news. These people are trying
38:40
to make money so you can see it. Obviously, their
38:44
key source of information is where I go, PolyMarket
38:47
and CalSheet and Manifold. When there's some
38:51
breaking news, I... You can see it there because
38:52
you can see some charts starting to spike. Look,
38:55
people will make markets for everything. I think
38:57
it's disrespectful, mostly. It's disrespectful.
39:03
But the public good that's provided by it is
39:06
not nearly as advantageous as how it is disrespectful.
39:11
But it exists, and it's going to exist. So people
39:15
have to either use it or not. Yeah, and I guess
39:18
one final thing from me is on Truth Social, Trump
39:21
said, quote, the pardons that sleepy Joe Biden
39:23
gave to the unselected committee of political
39:26
thugs and many others are hereby declared void,
39:30
vacant, and of no further force or effect because
39:33
of the fact that they were done by Autopen. In
39:35
other words, Joe Biden did not sign them, but
39:38
more importantly, he did not know anything about
39:40
them, end quote. Um, so he's basically saying
39:43
that a lot of pardons signed by Joe Biden are
39:46
void because he used Autopen, which is a device
39:49
that reproduces a person's signature instead
39:52
of them signing it by hand. Um, there's no, like,
39:56
law that says you can't use it. There was, I
40:00
think Ryan said there was a memo in 2008. Yeah,
40:03
the Justice Department issues internal memos.
40:05
Obviously, the Justice Department has legal counsel
40:07
that helps President. just on the issue of whether
40:11
or not you are allowed to use Autopen as the
40:14
president. It was found that, yes, you are allowed
40:16
to use Autopen. But, again, if the president,
40:19
if Trump is right in his assertion, and in the
40:21
book, Jake Tapper talks about how a lot of his
40:23
aides steered him to doing stuff that Biden barely
40:26
even recognized was happening. If Biden didn't
40:28
know that he was pardoning his people, like considering
40:31
that he didn't actually sign them, if he also
40:33
didn't know that these people were being pardoned
40:35
or didn't realize the extent, that is... grounds
40:38
obviously for them to be considered null and
40:39
void but there's no basis for that that's conspiracy
40:42
we don't that is conspiracy um and that would
40:46
be the only basis in which these would be void
40:48
is if he didn't a didn't sign them and b didn't
40:50
realize what they were because if he signed them
40:51
and didn't realize what they were that's a different
40:53
story because he signed them um obviously do
40:56
you guys oh sorry i know you mentioned wanting
40:58
to pivot but this i this will be quick i promise
41:01
um Do you guys think that in the future, just
41:04
almost in light of what people are realizing
41:07
about how, um, how, like, cognitively declined
41:11
Biden was by the end of his presidency, do you
41:14
think in the future people will be stricter about,
41:16
like, oh, we're noticing that this president,
41:19
like, isn't functioning the way he used to, like,
41:22
we have to do something about that? Or do you
41:24
think no? Um, I would say no. However, I'm...
41:30
Someone who is in big support of putting an age
41:33
cap on presidency and, you know, when you should
41:36
be eligible because, you know, there's a minimum
41:38
you have to be 35. So why wouldn't there be a
41:45
maximum? I'm not really sure. Obviously, people
41:48
back when we created the union, yeah, weren't
41:54
living to as old as we are now. And so they didn't
42:00
really understand the mental decline and when
42:02
that would happen and how fast that can happen
42:04
and how you can go from in one year fully cognitively
42:08
functioning to not knowing your own name. And
42:12
so I feel like that's where we need to take a
42:14
new look and a new kind of look at, you know,
42:19
medical reports. reevaluate how old a leader
42:25
can really be. And obviously it's person by person,
42:27
you know, someone can be fully super active,
42:31
have great cognitive function at 85 and someone
42:35
else can be, you know, not. And so, you know,
42:40
it's obviously person by person, but I think
42:41
we do need to put a cap on it. Look, last thing
42:45
before we move on, sorry, this is taking quite
42:46
a while. I actually... As much as I believe Elle
42:50
is right that there should be an age cap, I don't
42:52
believe that it should be artificial. I think
42:54
it should be the duty of the voters, right? If
42:56
the voters want a person and he's not within
42:58
the age cap, but maybe he's really fit or maybe
43:01
he's really unfit, the voters still want him.
43:02
They should be able to get him or her to the
43:06
position, whether it's president or senator or
43:09
whatever. The same thing should be argued in
43:11
the other way, though. If there's a 25 -year
43:13
-old who's really great and should be our president,
43:16
they can't run. No, of course. I actually think
43:20
you should be able to run for president. I don't
43:22
think there should be any age restrictions because
43:23
I think the age restriction is the voters. But
43:26
that was obviously written a while ago and it's
43:30
going to stay like that until it's amended. And
43:33
I don't think that's the first concern of anyone.
43:35
But, you know, either way, it takes a while to
43:37
send the president to the presidency. I doubt
43:40
anybody who's 25 would ever be able to have that
43:42
opportunity. But still, I do agree. I think people,
43:44
the voters should be. the main arbiters of who
43:47
takes office. Okay, we have two more things to
43:51
discuss, both of which are bills. Lutrona is
43:54
going to talk to us about one in Texas. Okay,
43:58
so this is kind of interesting because we talked
44:04
about something very similar happening in Oklahoma
44:06
almost a year ago, right at the start of our
44:09
podcast. And I remember us saying... oh, this
44:13
will be really interesting, like, I wonder if
44:15
it's gonna, like, be contested, and people are
44:19
gonna be like, wait, no, you can't do this, or
44:21
if it's gonna become more, like, adopted by states,
44:25
and, um, a bill just passed the Texas Senate,
44:29
um, and, oh, I got my dates wrong, um, A bill
44:34
is about to pass, my dates are completely off,
44:38
that mandates the display of the Ten Commandments
44:41
in every public school classroom in Texas. And
44:44
it's very, I think this is something that I just
44:46
noticed, they're very strict about how you display
44:50
the Ten Commandments. It has to be a durable
44:53
poster or framed copy, at least 16 inches wide
44:56
and 20 inches tall, and it has to be legible
44:58
from anywhere in the classroom, which, I don't
45:02
know, I think that's just something. Kind of
45:04
random, I wasn't expecting. I didn't think they
45:06
would be that nitpicky about the rules of it.
45:13
And then some civil liberties groups, including
45:16
the ACLU, argue that the bill violates the Establishment
45:20
Clause of the First Amendment. And I think this
45:24
is kind of the same thing that happened with
45:26
the Oklahoma. When this happened in Oklahoma,
45:30
there were a lot of groups that were against
45:31
it, but then nothing ever ended up coming of
45:34
them being against it. It just kind of happened
45:36
anyway. Yeah, so that's kind of what I have.
45:40
I personally don't think that we should have
45:46
the Ten Commandments in public schools, but I'd
45:49
be curious to hear what everyone else thinks
45:51
and if they think that this is constitutional.
45:55
I'm going to just go off and say that it's not
45:58
constitutional. Public schools are funded by
46:02
federal tax money. It's separation of church
46:05
and state. Yeah, but that's not explicitly mentioned
46:08
in the Constitution. Look, there is nothing in
46:14
the Constitution. If the voters wanted this,
46:16
if the voters want 10 commandments in every room
46:19
in the United States, and there's a constitutional
46:21
amendment that receives three -fifths, and all
46:24
that jazz, then there is, right? If the people
46:28
want it, the people want it in Texas. Same thing
46:31
on praying in public schools. So if you are allowing
46:34
for Christian prayer, you have to also allow
46:37
for Islamic prayer and Jewish prayer, and every
46:43
other religion needs to have the same opportunity
46:45
to do their prayers when everyone else is praying,
46:49
and they aren't giving that opportunity. So it's
46:51
not in the sense of, Everyone wants it. It's
46:54
in the sense of forcing religion upon another.
46:57
The Ten Amendments aren't specifically one religion.
47:01
Let me finish. If a family really wants their
47:05
child to be learning about the Ten Commandments,
47:07
to be participating in religious activities in
47:10
school, they need to send them to a school that
47:14
is Catholic or is a school specifically for Jewish
47:17
students. They need to send them to a religious
47:20
school. Or outside of school, say, little Timmy,
47:25
we go to church on Sundays because this is what
47:28
we believe. We read the Bible before bed because
47:30
this is what we believe. Your friend is Hindu,
47:33
and this is what he believes, but we don't have
47:36
to all practice the same thing and have that
47:38
enforced during school. Yes. Or there needs to
47:42
be equal teaching about the religions in school.
47:45
Because growing up... we didn't get much religion
47:49
teaching at all when we did it was pretty much
47:52
only christianity because that's what was happening
47:57
and then i went to this was when i was in um
47:59
i wasn't in public school but i wasn't in a religious
48:02
school um but you know they did discuss a little
48:06
bit about other religions however we chose to
48:10
go to a catholic school for middle school and
48:13
then i was learning about Catholicism, and that
48:15
was expected. Religion class was something that
48:18
my family knew was going to happen. We signed
48:20
up for me to take these religious classes, and
48:23
we sat through it. There were Jewish students
48:25
at our school. They also knew they were going
48:27
to be learning about Catholicism. Yeah, I don't
48:31
disagree with any of that, but most importantly
48:34
is that, A, these Ten Commandments, these are
48:38
the basis for, if you look at Judaism, Islam,
48:45
Christianity, all the different types of Christianity.
48:47
These are the bare. Yes, they are. And not only
48:52
that, the Ten Commandments are the basis for
48:56
common law. Think about the Ninth Amendment.
48:59
Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy
49:03
or one's neighbor. That's in our law. It's called
49:06
perjury. If you lie, you're going to go to jail
49:10
for it. The Ten Commandments are actually in
49:12
our laws more than anybody thinks. And also,
49:15
putting a Ten Commandments poster of things that
49:18
are very uncontroversial, right? Who says...
49:23
Worship any gods before me. Think of... No, no,
49:27
but think about that. Three religions obey this.
49:30
Three different gods, in fact. It's very pervasive.
49:35
And if you're, say you're Hindu, and I'm not
49:37
familiar with the Hindu God, there's actually
49:39
quite a few. Okay, how about thou shalt not cover
49:41
thy neighbor's wife? Do elementary school students
49:44
need to be hearing about being unfaithful to
49:46
your wife? No, but should they? Should they cover
49:50
their neighbor's wife? A six -year -old should
49:51
not be learning about unfaithfulness to your
49:54
partner. They shouldn't. Look, I think it should
49:58
be reinforced, right? I mean, what's the harm?
50:01
They're six. What's the harm? The harm is that
50:06
literally they're a child. I will say that I
50:11
just personally, this is kind of in line with
50:14
the topic but not directly on topic, but I think
50:16
it's very interesting that these schools are
50:20
so against books where there's, I don't even
50:27
know, there's children with two moms or... Harry
50:31
Potter where there's witchcraft and they think
50:32
that's what's going to corrupt the children,
50:34
but then they have no issue with a Bible where
50:37
it's like, oh, you can sell your daughter off
50:40
to be a slave and there's bestiality and rape
50:45
and incest and murder and there's no issue with
50:48
that. And you're putting like the Ten Commandments
50:51
up on the walls and encouraging the Bible, but
50:54
you're saying, no, we can't read these children's
50:57
books. They're not being required to read the
51:00
Bible. I agree with Luchana, and I think we can
51:03
go on a very lengthy debate. Yes, I think this
51:05
could be a very good event. And if you guys want
51:06
to see that, please let us know, and we will
51:09
do one, and maybe on this topic. It would be
51:13
super interesting. But I think to kind of just
51:16
round us out, they're trying to put the Ten Commandments
51:19
in Texas public schools. It's going to pass,
51:22
but it's also receiving challenging. Let's move
51:27
on to our last topic as we are pushing the hour
51:29
mark, and I think everyone is ready for us to...
51:32
I actually need to go soon, so hopefully we can
51:35
get this done. So the final thing we're talking
51:37
about is the Take It Down Act. It was signed
51:40
into law on May 19th of this year, and it was
51:44
championed by former... I don't know why it says
51:47
former, by First Lady Melania Trump. And so what
51:52
this does is it aims to combat non -consensual
51:55
distribution of intimate images, such as AI -generated
51:58
pornography, revenge porn, things like that.
52:03
So, you know, when other people are releasing
52:05
sexually explicit photos against your consent
52:10
or knowledge. And it protects victims of online
52:13
exploitation, particularly children and their
52:15
families. It makes it a federal crime to knowingly
52:21
share non -consensual intimate images. It requires
52:25
platforms to remove such content within 48 hours
52:28
of verified victim requests. It shields professionals
52:32
such as medical and law enforcement assisting
52:34
the victims, and it applies a reasonable person
52:37
test for AI -generated images to ensure authenticity
52:40
concerns are met. So this law was unanimously,
52:47
or not unanimously, but it was voted on and it
52:50
passed, obviously, with support from Republicans
52:52
and Democrats. It was a super well -received
52:55
bill, as it should be. It is something that is
52:59
put in place to protect children. It's mainly
53:02
there for women and teen girls. So it's nice
53:08
to see a little bit of support from this administration
53:11
for people such as Luchana and myself who are
53:15
growing up in a time where these are real concerning
53:18
issues and can really affect you and your future,
53:23
especially as a young girl. Yeah, I think this
53:28
is a very smart idea for a bill and I think it's
53:31
nice to see that it's being received by... people
53:34
on all sides yeah i think i think it's a great
53:40
kind of happy note where everyone was um agreeing
53:44
and it's a great place to end off here um so
53:47
ryan got cut off again that was not him being
53:51
silent um no no no that was me being silent oh
53:54
yeah no but i mean it kind of does illustrate
53:58
this is very not um Controversial, right? There's
54:02
nothing more to say about it than it's a common
54:05
sense bill for common sense legislation. And
54:09
that's kind of the extent of it. Yep. And I think
54:13
that'll close us off. So we're just under the
54:15
hour mark. And I'm going to push you all to the
54:20
outro. Thank you so much for listening to this
54:28
episode of Project 2028. I know it was a bit
54:31
of a long one, reaching almost an hour here,
54:34
so I'm going to try and keep it short. If you
54:37
have comments, questions, topics you would like
54:39
us to discuss, please email us at project2028
54:43
.pod at gmail .com. Go follow us on Instagram
54:46
for some exclusive interview content that Luchana
54:49
has done, and that would be at project2028 .podcast.
54:53
If you enjoyed our podcast, please go listen
54:57
to one of our other episodes, and if you feel
54:59
inclined to do so, leave us a review on whatever
55:02
listening platform you use. Thank you all so,
55:05
so much for listening, and I hope you have a
55:07
great rest of your day.