Scott Horton (3:26)

Well, thanks very much for saying that, man. It was, you know, it was very nerve wracking, like, leading up to the thing. It's been something I've been anticipating for a very long time and then, okay, you know, finally worked out. But I had my hash oil vape pen thing, so I hit that a bunch of times and kind of mellowed out a little bit at the risk of my losing my short term memory, which thankfully I didn't have any terrible losses of, of train of thought during the thing. But then, you know, so he was very kind to me. He had me for dinner the night before, so I think we became really good friends and got along really great the night before. And so put me at ease. And then he said, well, let's just walk through enough already. We just do the whole book and start in 53, right? And I'm like, oh yeah, let's do it. So he basically, like, in other words, beforehand was like, hey, the floor is yours to do the, the 40 year history here, the 70 year history here, however you want to do it, you know, call it mostly from 79 on. It's the story, you know. And then so he, he just gave me room to, to give the same speech I've given a bunch of times. And then I just had to try very hard to not screw it up and leave anything important out. And I think I hit all the Important points all the way through that I was trying to. I did leave, you know, quite a few things on the table that I wish that I had a chance to talk about. You know, I really should have. You know, I. I've always been like this. Like when I was a kid doodling on the back of my homework in school, I always have in mind this big picture, and I get way too bogged down in the details of the little part of the thing, and I never get in time before the bell rings. So that's me, right? So I maybe could have left out some of those details and got to some broader strokes. I mean, one thing I really did want to talk about that I really just wouldn't. I just. We just switched to Iran's nuclear program. But, like, I really could have emphasized the Steelman argument of, like, look, Iran's role in the region is not benign. The worst thing you can say about him, it really is true. I mean, I like picking on W. Bush, but it's also just true. The worst thing they did was accept George W. Bush's gift of Baghdad. He said to Tehran, hey, you want Baghdad? And they were like, yeah. And so then they put their agents in there. And I mean, I don't want to overstate it, because the Supreme Islamic Council in the Dawah Party, they're their own people. They're very close to Tehran, clearly. And we essentially fought that whole war for them. And they helped those Shiite militias brutally wages civil, the sectarian civil war against the Sunnis to cleanse them out of Baghdad and create essentially a new Iraqi Shia stand in. In eastern Iraq. I mean, that's a real son of a thing to do. You know what I mean? They didn't have to do that, although the Sunnis also made very bad choices during that time period. But it still was W. Bush's fault, really. And then, you know, who could, like, champion their support for Hezbollah? The Houthis or anyone else, or Hamas. Although I think their support for Hamas has been curtailed in recent years because Hamas cited against them in the Syrian war back 15 years ago.

Dave Smith (6:41)

Right.

Scott Horton (6:42)

But, you know, Hezbollah in southern Lebanon sort of is Iran's 51st state there. Although, you know, if you go back, it was Israel's fault because they were attacking the poor Palestinians there and then also just started ruthlessly persecuting the local Shiite population. That really had nothing to do with it. And they formed Hezbollah in reaction to that. And in fact, Gerald Cooper is the real expert on how it was, because Ariel Sharon was Doing all these truck bombings, trying to start a civil war between the Shiites and the palest Palestinians and, and in southern Lebanon, the refugees there. And that this was all part of the lead up to the creation of Hezbollah in reaction to Israel, not just invasion, but all this nefarious covert activity and stuff going on at the time. So not that that justifies whatever about Hezbollah. It doesn't. But it is a monster of Israel's own creation in a blowback sense there. Whereas Hamas, they deliberately helped, of course, to create Hamas, as I know we've talked about on your show in the past. And they've helped to sustain Hamas at the Palestinians expense this whole time. When they point their fingers at Qatar, boy, that's four fingers pointed back at them. They're the ones demanding Qatar finance Hamas for them.

Dave Smith (7:59)

The former defense secretary, former Israeli defense secretary's quote was baked that Netanyahu begged Qatar to continue the funding when it was drying up.

Scott Horton (8:08)

Yeah.

Dave Smith (8:09)

All right, guys, let's take a moment and thank our sponsor for today's show, which is the Wellness Company. I don't know if you guys have been keeping up with the latest about the water supply and fluoride, but let's just say the future of oral care isn't fluoride, it's peptides. And the Wellness Company just launched the first ever peptide paste that regenerates gum tissue, strengthens enamel and naturally whitens your teeth. It's called Smile, a doctor formulated breakthrough that works with your body's natural repair process. The advanced formula blends targeted peptides with blue, blue spirulina, aloe vera and powerful remineralizers to boost blood flow, stimulate collagen and help rebuild lost gum tissue, all while gently whitening without sensitivity. No fluoride, no peroxide, no artificial dyes. Just real clean ingredients that fight bad bacteria and support a healthier mouth from the inside out. If you're ready to upgrade your oral health and experience the future of oral care, check out Smile plus, you can get 10% off and free shipping just by going to TWC Health Problem and using the promo code PROBLEM. That's TWC Health Problem. Promo code PROBLEM for 10% off plus free shipping. All right, let's get back into the show.

Scott Horton (9:27)

And so, but yeah, like I, it would have been proper for me to steelman the argument that like the Shiite Crescent of power over there, Tyron's alliance system over there, what they call the axis of resistance, is it some virtuous thing? No, it isn't. Is it America's Fault really for pushing all these powers together and, and instead of just negotiating with everybody in good faith like they could have this whole time. Yes, and a lot of that is at Israel's behest. But it doesn't just like go without saying, you know, it's worth also bringing up the Beirut bombing in 1983, which is a major talking point of the pro Israel side, which was sort of proto Hezbollah that did that or you know, there are others who say it was, you know, equivalent about which Shiite militia did that. And I don't know whether they were really acting under orders from Tehran, but it was Tehran was certainly backing all those groups at that time that did it. And so. But America was selling missiles. Ronald Reagan sold missiles to Iran just a couple of years after that, like a year and a half after that or something in Iran contrast.

Dave Smith (10:35)

Right.

Scott Horton (10:35)

So like that was horrible as 241 marines dead and all that. But that was a long time ago. And when you're dealing with nation states, business is business. We got to be able to move forward. We can't just say, oh you, you blew up our Marines in 1983, the year Dave Smith was born. And we get to keep this grudge against you forever after that and never normalize relations under that excuse. That's a fake excuse.

Dave Smith (10:58)

Well, also, also just, sorry, I just want to like re. Emphasize your point there, but there seems to me to be some, I'm not saying this is like completely morally or log logically perfect, but if the current president, as you're saying, Ronald Reagan, if his response to that is to go, you know what, we're going to pull out of the region. This is the, the example Ron Paul always liked to, to use that he said in his memoir that he said, you know, we just don't understand the irrationality of Middle Eastern politics. We shouldn't have gotten involved in this. We're going to pull out and then you can sell weapons to the Iranian regime a couple years later, then by definition you've let it go. The President of the United States at the time decided this is not worth pursuing a war over. You don't get like a justified war forever free card that you can pull up 40 years later and go, it's just too ridiculous.

Scott Horton (11:46)

And especially when it's Ronald Wilson Reagan.

Dave Smith (11:48)

Right.

Scott Horton (11:48)

Wasn't Walter Mondale Ayatollah's gimp on a chain. This is Ronald Reagan decided, hey, it's in America's national interest to move forward. And of course we were back in Saddam against them at the time, but still.

Dave Smith (12:00)

Right.

Scott Horton (12:01)

I mean goes to show that we can deal with the. As Dick Cheney said in 1998 when he was still the CEO of Halborn, we can deal with these people. Bill Clinton should lift these sanctions and let us do business.

Dave Smith (12:10)

You know, by the way, is there, is there a more evil on its face impossible to justify policy than backing both sides of a war? Like is there anything that you could do that is just, I mean look, I'm not saying like, like just justifying a war or backing a war of aggression I guess is as evil. But is there anything more indefin defensible than backing both sides of a war? It's just so appalling. Like so you're just like you're throw. You're just want more people to die. It's just unbelievable. But yes, but they're the great evil.

Scott Horton (12:47)

Yeah. And that, and that is the right answer. I mean the way they would put is well, weaken the Ayatollah and Saddam, but yes, killing by killing their men. Right. And and yet like a show in fool's, Aaron, where the policy even when we talk about, well, America was backing Iraq and Israel was backing Iran. Well, with American support and acquiescence and sometimes even orders. Okay, we want you to increase support for Iran now because Iraq is getting a little too far ahead and then we balance back the other way. I mean that's some real ugly stuff to do. Then the other major one. And I bet we probably talked about this on your show before, but it really bears repeating because hardly anyone ever contradicts this because the knowledge is just not widespread enough. You'll hear a lot of times, especially on Fox News, they will say Iran killed 600Americans in the Iraq war, meaning Iraq war two 2003 through 8 or 9 or 11, however you count that there. So that's not true. First of all, the number's 500. Out of 4, 500Americans who died, 500 died fighting the Iraqi Shiites. And yes, the Muqtad Al Saudr's army, which was called the Mahdi army, was mildly supported by Iran, but not compared to the other major factions that we were also fighting for. Sauder was part of the United Iraqi Alliance. That's why were killed by the Sunnis because we were fighting to ensconce this Shiite grouping in power. And it was the Sarist, the Dawa Party and Skiri were the three major pillars. And he's still a big kingmaker in the country to this day. But when David Petraeus turned and attacked him. In 2007, they had this big fight in. Down in Najaf and in eastern Baghdad where, yes, 500Americans were killed. And the Shiite Iraqis were using what were called EFPs. Instead of just a IED, an improvised explosive device. These were EFPs, the explosively formed penetrator. They had a copper core and a shaped charge that would cut right through armor and kill our guys. Are much more effective roadside bombs. Homemade landmines, essentially, but well made. And the propaganda campaign was to just pretend that every single one of those bombs came from Iran and came from the Iranian Koods Force and they were all given over to Mutad Aladr to use against our guys. That was never true, and it was certainly never proven to be true because it wasn't true. And as I cite in the book, I got like 10 or 12 major sources who all talk about being embedded with American forces in Iraq War two in. In those Shiite areas and finding these machine shops and garages where these bombs were being made by local Iraqi Shiites. And. And then I also have military officers that I know who were, you know, intelligence officers who knew for a fact that this wasn't true at the time and knew what was actually happening instead. And, you know, could speak authoritatively to that. And I quote them by name in the book. So. And we knew at the time the great Gareth Porter and many other great reporters were on this story. Andrew Coburn was another. Many people were on the story. It was simply a conspiracy between Vice President Cheney, General David Petraeus, and Michael Gordon of the New York Times. The same guy who was the partner with Judith Miller on all the stories about Saddam seeking a bomb parts and the rest. Same guy, he's now at the Wall Street Journal. And they were just lying, and they were proven to be lying. And the whole story ended up falling apart by the summertime. And so then they go, well, Iran killed 600 of our guys in Iraq, but nobody knows anything about that complicated story I just told about America attacking the guy that they were fighting for for a few months and how they were trying to start a war with Iran. And then it didn't. They held a press conference and they had to admit it was all. Now they don't nobody. Well, not enough of y' all have read enough already. And so. So the lie tends to stand. And that's something I wish I could have had time to bring up to also people. But. And I'm. But I'm not Iran's lawyer and I'm not Here sitting. I wasn't there or here to say that, you know, all hell, the Ayatollah is great theocracy or anything over there. It's just the reality is just like with David Koresh and just like with Saddam Hussein, they have to say, oh, this guy's crazy. Oh, he's so. His religion controls his thought patterns so deeply that he's totally irrational and cannot be negotiated with, must only be threatened and. Or dealt with violently. And that's just clearly not true. Has been demonstrated repeatedly not to be true. The Ayatollah, I'm sure, is a terrible leader if you live in Iran, but he's been essentially cautious in foreign policy other than when America gave him Baghdad, he took it. And when America. When Barack. That was W. Bush. And when Barack Obama forced Syria to become much more dependent on him for help in. During his dirty war there, then, yeah, they took the opportunity to provide security services to Syria and to make Syria more dependent on their aid and their control of their country and. Or their influence. I shouldn't say control, but increase their influence in the country and, and all that. And they did support Hamas. I think it's completely ridiculous this hoax that Iran launched the attack of October 7th. It's not true. American intelligence told the newspapers they don't believe that that's true. I know no reason to believe that there was American.

Dave Smith (18:07)

They said that they were shocked by this is American intelligence said that Iran. All of their evidence suggested that Iran was shocked by the October 7th attack. And then people say like they'll use this. Like, well, what do you think they were given those weapons to Hamas for? But again, you know, I just want to make just a couple points on what you just said before you continue because I do think it's really important. And obviously, as you said, point of this isn't to be Iran's lawyer. The point of this is to be the American people's lawyer. And as they're using this as a. As a. A justification for war to just point out how. And it, it really is amazing because as you said correctly, I see this repeated a lot. The 600Americans were Iran killed. 600. Nobody ever challenges it. It's. It's wrong on every level. It's not just that the claim is wrong and so right. Like it wasn't 600, it was 500. They weren't Iranian weapons. They were made in Iraq. Like every level of it's wrong. But even on top of that, even if it were true, it's like it's. It's the only standards that D.C. and Tel Aviv have are double standards. Because, like, even if this were true, if you're arguing that if Iran were to sell weapons to Shiites in Iraq or give weapons to Shiites in Iraq and they use them against US Soldiers, they are for Iran is a legitimate target for military action, well then also Russia has the right to start bombing America right now. And also, you know, I mean, I don't know, Israel and, and Turkey and the United States of America backed the jihadists against Assad. So I guess we are now legitimate targets for all of the, you know, head choppers who went and killed a bunch of Shiites at villages all throughout Syria and Iraq. It's just, even if it were true, it's not a justification for war and the whole thing's a lie anyway. But obviously, I think, think at this point, it is as close to a universal consensus as any issue ever is that George W. Bush lied us into an aggressive war of choice. If you launch an aggressive war, the responsibility for these young, dead Americans is on George W. Bush and Dick Cheney. Like, no matter who it was who made the bombs. Anyway, just saying. I think all of that is important.

Scott Horton (20:21)

Well, yeah, and you're totally right. And in specific here is David Petraeus, who launched this attack against Muktad al Sadr.

Dave Smith (20:29)

Right?

Scott Horton (20:29)

Not because Muktad Al Sauder was the cat's paw of Tehran. That was the alibi. In fact, it was Skiri and Dawa were the two Shiite groups that were more tied to Iran. They had been the traitors who had fled Iraq and lived in Iran for 20 years and fought on Iran side in the Iran Iraq war. Solder had stayed and Sadder was telling America and Iran to go to hell and leave Iraq to the Iraqis. So the Americans preferred the pro Iran Shiite parties, hoping that ultimately they would need us, our money and our guns more than they would need their Iranian friends next door. Because the guy, the Shiite leader, who was least favorable toward Iran was also unfavorable toward the United States. And so instead of saying, okay, well at least this guy's a nationalist, he wants to compromise with the Sunnis, let the Iraqis have Iraq, and let's get the hell out of here. And at least he wants to kick the Iranians out too. At least to some degree wants to limit their influence. That's good. No, instead it was, we have to stay, we have to marginalize him and in, in fact, in, you know, de facto empower the pro Iranian factions at his expense. Because we hope that we'll have our way with them more better later, which is not how it worked out. So the whole thing was completely crazy. And by the way, speaking of W. Bush, he did not go for it it this giant conspiracy between Cheney and Petraeus and Michael Gordon to lie us into, to lie him into striking Iranian Quds force targets inside the country and, and dragging us into a war. He said forget it. And so did the commander of Central Command, Admiral William Fallon said over my dead body are we going to war with Iran Right now we got 300,000 troops in Iraq who are all dead meat order 66 style. If we do this, we're not doing it it and, and Bush backed down. And I know this one sounds crazy, Dave, but I got three good sources for it. David Wormser, the author of the Clean Break, Dick Cheney's Middle east advisor, was going around blabbing in Washington that what we're going to do is we're going to work with the Israelis. That would be the Ehud Olmert government and we're going to have them start the war against Iran and drag Bush into the thing. He'll have no choice but to get into it because the Iranians will hit back at American targets and then will be dragged into the war. Bush will be dragged into the war. And they were making that publicly known. And that story was broken by a guy named Stephen Clemens who is not a fabulous. He's sort of a center left Bill Clinton knight or whatever. But he is not radical or the kind of guy who makes up garbage, you know what I mean? He had this on very good authority and then the New York Times also verified it. And then so did journalist named Barton Gelman in his book the Angler. And he's the guy who got the Snowden leak from the Washington Post along with Glenn Greenwald and them. And he's a decent guy. I mean his book Angler on Dick Cheney is pretty good and that's in there too. He verified that story as well, that this was a full court press at the time to try to even do an end run around the present to do whatever they could to drag him into war with Iran then. And he resisted it. And then it was just a couple months later that the National Intelligence Council put out the NIE saying Iran isn't even trying to make a nuclear weapon so that never mind their route to the bomb, the war party's route to a war with Iran over their pretended race to a bomb is canceled because the CIA says it's all bunk, which.

Dave Smith (23:55)

Is always, you know, I wanted to ask you about this more because I was, I was brought this up on, on the show the other day and I think. Did you, was it in the Tucker interview that you did get into this a little bit. But the, the like focus group testing where they decided that nuclear is the, is the way to get the American people behind joined a war.

Scott Horton (24:15)

I forgot if I said that to Tucker, who I say a lot of things, but yes, that's right. And that is in the book in enough already. It was, it was on the eve of Iraq War One. It's in the fall of 1990. So it's Operation Desert Storm and they're building up toward the war, but the American people are against it. And so I forgot like what date they debuted the babies in incubators hoax. You know, I should have that titer on my timeline where in the story that comes in. But they had, you know, the supposed threats to Saudi Arabia and the incubators hoax, but Americans were still like I don't know man, I thought we were cashing our peace dividend and all that. Like Cold War's not even, the Soviet Union's not even gone yet. Right. Still early 90 or you know, 90 and to early 91.

Dave Smith (24:59)

And yeah, the Berlin Wall came down. The Berlin Wall came down six months ago or whatever a year ago or something like that. Yeah, right.

Scott Horton (25:05)

Yeah. One year before. And so here we are again on this new mission now the USSR and in our way so we can go do whatever we want on and but the American people overall were unenthusiastic. And so then they did focus groups and you know, polls and they found that when they mentioned the potential of a nuclear weapons threat from Iraq, then the, the people turn the dial hard to the right that okay, I'm listening now you say we got to stop this madman, you know, who you call Hitler from getting atomic weapons, then yeah, we can't have that or else as they claimed at the time, he'll be the new Hitler and conquer the entire Middle east, monopolize control over the entire Middle east resources, you know, oil resources. And then what are we going to do? And all this stuff. And so that what they just figured out to beat that drum for the weapons of mass destruction and, and.

Dave Smith (25:58)

Like just to like to really drive the point home. It's, it's really important to understand just like how cynical and dishonest these people are. Because if you read as, as you always talk about and I, I talk about quite a bit too on like big platforms. If you read the Clean Break document or Coping with Crumbling States or really anything out of the Project for a New American Century or any of this stuff, they're constantly talking about regime change in Iraq over and over and over again. This is their, the one that they have their eye on. And they never, or at least never, certainly not in Coping with Crumbling states or the Clean Break and not in the stuff I've read in the Project for a New American Century. They never mentioned nuclear threats. Like, that's just not even part of it. They're honest about. In those days, they were like, we're doing this to break from the peace process so we don't have to give the Palestinians their own state. And it's not till after 9, 11. And when they have their opportunity and they go, okay, we got to sell this war now, then all out of nowhere, oh, Saddam has weapons of mass destruction. And I, I gotta say, it does seem like the thing with Iran is exactly the same. Like, everybody knows they don't have nuclear weapons. They're not pursuing nuclear weapons. It's just all. So it's like you spe whole time arguing with the thing that isn't even the reason why they want to go to war. It has nothing to do with it. And even as I've pointed out a few times, as I know, you know, but one of the most interesting things about what's being dubbed the 12 Day War now is immediately hours after Trump dropped the bunker busters on Iran, Israel started just bombing regime sites that had absolutely nothing to do with their nuclear capacity. They just started bombing, you know, the sites that were important to the regime. And so you're like, okay, what's really going on here? Like, it doesn't seem like it's like everybody's sitting here fighting over what 60% enriched uranium means. Meanwhile, that actually has nothing to do at all with the real story.

Scott Horton (27:55)

Yeah, well, okay, so. And now the irony of the 1980s policy where Israel bombed Iraq's nuclear reactor at Osirak in 1981, which Ronald Reagan denounced, that actually drove Saddam Hussein's nuclear program underground. And when those focus group pollsters were figuring out this propaganda, they didn't know that they weren't lying. In fact, Saddam was working on nuclear weapons, and they only found it, which he was way behind. It's like he was on the verge of it, but he was enriching uranium, I think, to weapons greater. He's trying to figure out how to. And had at least a rudimentary nuclear weapons program that they only found when they occupied the south of Iraq in the aftermath of the first Iraq war. And then. So that there's lessons from that. Geez, this is what happens when you bomb a safeguarded program sometimes. Right. But then also this became part of Dick Cheney's narrative that, well, if the CIA says there's not a nuclear program there, eh, the CIA said that before and they were wrong. So we don't have to listen to them when they say that now. And all right, so there's. Friends say that there is so many.

Dave Smith (29:03)

Right, so. So you are extrapolating the lesson that like a sane human being might learn from that. But then there's another lesson that a Dick Cheney might learn from that, which is that like, oh, we just did this focus group testing and now we found the secret nuclear. Oh, look at that. This is the perfect way to sell a war in the future. Yep.

Scott Horton (29:20)

And it works. And because even mustard gas, I mean, it sounds bad, but like when they. I don't know, you might be too young to remember this, but. But right after September 11, Tom Ridge, the leader of the Department of Homeland Security, put out a thing recommending that people cover their houses in plastic and duct tape to protect from a chemical weapons attack because Saddam Hussein might give chemical weapons to Al Qaeda or use his remote controlled UAVs to attack the East Coast. And the thing is about it is a lot of people laughed at that. But guess what? A lot of people kind of went nuts and bought into that. And I actually saved some pictures of especially like Washington, D.C. professional women, Democrat types like, cleaning out the Home Depot with their arms full of plastic and duct tape to protect from the imminent chemical weapons attack. But anyway, I'm just making fun of them. That is true. But the vast majority of the people are like, come on, Saddam's going to attack me in my suburb with, with mustard gas or whatever. Like, probably not. Right. And then Conor Rice and Colin Powell and George W. Bush, all three with their rehearse, you know, Carl Rove rehearsed from the White House Iraq group. Little, you know, again, focus group tested slogans. We can't wait for the proof to come in the form of a mushroom cloud. You could lose your whole hometown all at once. If we wait around for Saddam to attack us, we got to attack him first. And that was what convinced people to it because you wouldn't lie to me, a lie that big, would you, that we're trying to stop Saddam from nuking the United States? Oh, no. Oh, okay. I heard we're bringing them a democracy, which means we're putting the supreme Islamic council in power or something.

Dave Smith (31:09)

All right, guys, let's take a moment and thank our sponsor for today's show, which is Brunt. I love Brunt Brunt workwear. You got to check it out. They've cracked the code on work boots. No more choosing between comfort and durability. Brunt. Brunt Brunt boots are built to handle the gnarliest job sites while feeling like your favorite sneakers from day one. No break in needed. You're. You put the shoe. They literally. They sent me a pair of boots. I put them on that day. They felt great. And these are. These are work boots. You could take this to any job site and you're going to be comfortable and prepared. And here's the deal. For a limited time, part of the problem, listeners get $10 off at Brunt with the promo code problem at checkout out. Just head to bruntworkware.com and use the promo code problem and you're all set. And after you buy, let them know that part of the problem sent you. It helps to keep our show going. So get work gear that works as hard as you do@bruntworkware.com promo code problem for $10 off. All right, let's get back into the show. Jeez. All right. Is there anything else in the interview that you were like, oh, I should have said this, or I wish I had brought this.

Scott Horton (32:16)

I didn't say the great Ron Paul anything, which is a total demerit. Like, that's just. God forgive me, everyone. Forgive me for that. I should have said something. Something. As the great Ron Paul teaches us, peace be upon him.

Dave Smith (32:29)

You'll have to. We'll have some type of pet patents set up at his. His 90th birthday party that will. We'll have you go through or something like that.

Scott Horton (32:37)

Exactly. And then also, I didn't talk about my show. I talked about my new show with Daryl Cooper, which is called Provoked and which is. Is number eight on the new podcast Apple ranking list.

Dave Smith (32:47)

Oh, I don't know, by the way. Huh. I don't know how I have not mentioned this yet, but I'll make sure to post about it today. But I just, you know, I was on vacation last week, and then, you know, I've been busy since coming back, so I just, I just listened to both of the first two episodes yesterday. They were fantastic. And just. Yeah, guys. I mean, there's literally my two favorite people in America to listen to are Scott Horton and Daryl Cooper. So make sure you go check out Provoked, of course, named after Scott's most recent recent book there.

Scott Horton (33:17)

But it's a great podcast, by the way. I would not have dared to name it that, but he said we should, so.

Dave Smith (33:22)

Okay, well, you know, it is, it's a, it's a very good title that is, is vague enough that it could apply to most of you and Daryl's work. So it really is a good time. And then I guess just for marketing purposes, not a bad idea to have the same name for the book and the, the podcast. But. Yeah, well, that's good that you, you promoted that one there. But yeah, okay, you should have, should have mentioned your show too.

Scott Horton (33:45)

Show. Yeah, so I've been really slacking on my show lately. I got so many projects going on and I haven't even done an interview in like a month. But I just did two Matt Williams, the Australian war analyst, and Oren McIntyre, the new right leader and, and great podcaster and author. So. But that's the Scott Horton show. I've done 6, 000 of those interviews. I just kind of got way behind because I sort of slowed it all down to write all these books instead. But I'm sort of kind of relaunching that show and should be in video form here coming up soon and all that. And that's just at Scott Horton show, if anybody's interested in my interview. Show. And then, let's see, I said Beirut, I said EFPs, I talked about their role in the region and Israel as a strategic liability. I should have said that. Oh, here's something that I should have said. At the end, this will be my last thing about catching up from the Tucker show. He asked me about, like, the Hope for the future and the sort of domestic scene and what we're all to make of this and that kind of stuff. And I really dropped the opportunity to explain that the real opposite of the current American political and economic system is free market capitalism. And what the problem is, people associate so many of our economic problems with freedom. And it's the same thing as in my junior high school class. It was freedom that caused the Great Depression. So they needed the New Deal to smooth out the booms in the busts and to fix all the problems that too much excessive, you know, uncontrolled decision making by people out in the world had caused, which is not true. I mean, it's the same thing that they push every time. And that's just, you know, what are you going to do? And it's the Way people think about it, this is capitalism. Prices are really high. We're at war all the time. Apparently in capitalism, prices are really high or we're at war all the time.

Dave Smith (35:39)

Time. And more billionaires than ever. And more. There's more billionaires than ever before. So like, and more people living outside.

Scott Horton (35:45)

Who actually aren't wos but for some reason can't afford to live inside. Like it's a real crisis and, and, and everybody's feeling it, but sort of like, I'm pretty sure it was Haslet who talked about inflation, said not one man in 10,000 understands what's really happening. Right. So you see people blame themselves for their economic problems when there are major forces at work that they don, that are undermining the role of their job, their business, their community, whatever. And there's so much of that and that ends up causing people to move, especially younger people, of course, further to the left. And like, as bad as Hillary Clinton's economics are, Bernie Sanders is, are way worse, man. You don't want that. And then, and it's the same thing on the nationalist right. We need more protection, we need more intervention. We need to the government to stop people from making the economic decisions that we don't want. When the real problem isn't the freedom, it's not the free trade. The problem is the empire destroying, say, I don't know, $20 trillion worth of our wealth since the end of the Cold War, completely unnecessarily. And on top of that, of course, requiring an economic system where we have first of all income taxation which might, I don't know, the communist didn't invent it, but it's in the Communist Manifesto because it's the greatest way to punish people for earning money and, and being free. And then right next to that is inflationary money. You need a central bank so the central bank can backstop endless new money creation. Not wealth creation, currency creation, which debases the value of the savings of anyone trying to denominate their savings in, in the local currency. Right. And so it makes people, it, it causes it, it becomes the cause of all kinds of, of demand for the welfare state on all levels from the left and the right and for economic protection. You know, why did everybody reject Hillary Clinton? There's so many great reasons that I would have brought up, but a huge part of it, her and Jeb Bush both, where they were standing on free trade. And Bernie Sanders was promising to, to inaugurate protectionism to protect workers, and Donald Trump was promising to inaugurate protectionism mostly to help American business. But he would frame it in terms of the workers. And that was why you had a lot of what they called Reagan Democrats, which is union employees, working guys who are culturally kind of right wing but they usually vote with the Democratic Party and then switch sides to vote for Trump because they don't want to go as far as socialist as Sanders. And plus he lost the primary anyway. And so they switched to Trump because Trump was promising protection. But, but Dave, we don't know how hard all that or how badly all that offshoring from dropping of the trade barriers would have hurt in a free market because we didn't have one. We had all the dropping of those trade barriers in a way where our government had deals with these com. These countries that they could keep their trade barriers on us as long as they let us have military bases in their countries. Well that's not free trade. That's a whole other rig game at the American people's expense and our government's benefit. Right, but at the expense of American workers. And we also just had had just the pure expense of the wars, all the opportunity costs there and then plus the inflationary monetary system that is necessary to backstop it all which causes such disruption and problems in the economy. So I don't blame any was for, for leftists and liberals like I gotta just shake my head like I, whatever. I, I can understand why I can, I can empathize with, with any person who thinks we need national economic policies to protect us from whatever the hell is happening to us. Right. When it's the national government's policies who that have really caused this problem for us in the first place. Empires at the core of that. Because look at just the corruption and the profit taking at Lockheed and Raython, Raytheon and North Grumman. It's enough to make a college student believe in Marxism, you know.

Dave Smith (39:57)

Oh yeah. And, and look on top of that just a couple. Look, look. The having fiat currency in a central bank and particularly like easy money policies which have been the norm for you know, since 2001 or 2002, something like that for now. I mean when I say the norm, even when we are like right now might feel like we're in a high interest rate environment because we were at zero for so long, we're still pretty relatively low interest rates right now. So we've had ease. And what ends up happening with this is it creates this huge industry of people becoming multi millionaires off speculating. Because when you have low Money, you're always speculating, what can you get more interest on because you're losing value in the currency. Also, our tax laws, of course, as every working person knows, our tax laws push you into putting your money on Wall Street. Like, you're going to have to pay full taxes if you don't put some of this in a retirement account. What's a retirement account? It's handing your money to the big banks to go gamble with. And so these people who are making millions of dollars on Wall street are really just extracting the money out of the real economy. I mean, they're not producing anything, and yet the money that they have, they take and they go buy real things that were produced by people working. And so they're just extracting the money out. Then on top of that, you have this giant regulatory state, which is an incredible burden for, for existing businesses and an incredible disincentive for new production to, to come along. And on top of that, I think the dynamic that you're really getting at, which is an interesting one, one is that I think one of the best microcosms of this was this, this primary that just wrapped up in the New York City mayoral race, where you have Andrew Cuomo, you know, just like the, the poster child of the failed, humiliated establishment. And then you have this young Mamdani guy. And so Mamdani is sitting there talking about the unaffordability of New York City, and he's doing all these videos where he's like, hey, did you know, like these food on the street carts, which New York City is known for, you know, chicken Nova rice used to be like 7 bucks and now it's 16 bucks. Or I don't remember the exact price, but it's like something like that. And Andrew Cuomo's sitting there and going, you haven't even pledged to visit Israel. And like, so just right away, as backward as the socialist policies are, you can see this, like, tremendous advantage that they give to the leftist who's like, hey, he's talking about an issue that actually matters to somebody who lives in Brooklyn. Whereas this other guy said what the big controversy was, that he favored a one state solution rather than a like, who what? Obviously who would care about that as much as this? Then the other part that really ties into what you're saying, I don't know if you saw this, but it really is quite funny. But Mamdani does this video about why chicken over rice from the street carts is skyrocketing up in price. And he's interviewing the Guys, why is it that you're charging more money now than you were there? And what he comes, what he finds from the guys is that, oh, see, they don't own, own the street carts or they don't own the permit. The right that the government gives you to set up a food cart on the street, it's not a food truck exactly, they're like little carts. But you need a permit to be there. And guess what? You're not even paying the government for it. You're paying somebody who the government sold a permit to. And then his conclusion is like, capitalism, you know, but you're like, hey, dude, it was right there in your own video that the problem isn't capitalism at all. The problem is this, this commons property that the government is now like turning into a racket and you're getting screwed. But like, even in his own video right there, it's like, no, clearly the problem here isn't capitalism. Why the hell should the system be that the government gets to sell these permits and then you're basically a slave to the permit holder class. Which by the way is true for the. Not so much with Ubers anymore. But it was true in New York City with the taxi medallion system too, where these guys take out mortgages to buy a medallion and are now a debt slave to some guy who just was connected to some someone at Capitol Hill in New York City. It's all. Anyway.

Scott Horton (44:05)

Yeah. And on top of that, the price of chicken and rice has doubled because they devalued the money by half.

Dave Smith (44:12)

Right? That's the deal. Yeah. All right, guys, let's take a moment and thank our sponsor for today's show, a brand new sponsor who we're thrilled to have on board and that is Stopbox. If you own a handgun for self defense, your storage likely fits into one of two frustrating categories. It's either locked away, safe, but out of reach in an emergency, or it's unsecured, leaving it vulnerable to anyone. Stopbox USA saw the problem and designed a groundbreaking solution, the Stopbox Pro. With the Stopbox Pro, you'll never have to choose between security and readiness again. Its ingenious push button locking system gives you fast, reliable access when every second matters. Without the hassle of keys or resilience of batteries. It's 100% mechanical, so it works every time. No power needed. I will tell you something, okay? I owned a Stop box before they came on as a sponsor. This thing is great. It's literally, it's, it's really does solve this problem of Having your gun that the kids couldn't get access to because you need a very specific way to open it. But you don't have to worry. It's like once you do it, you get it and you could get it out in a second if God forbid you're ever an emergency where you need it, which is part of the reason why you have the thing thing to begin with. With StopBox USA you can finally have both security and readiness. The Stockbox Pros mechanical keyless system allows for fast, secure access without the risk of fumbling for keys when every second counts. It's also battery free, so you never have to worry about your lock not working. Also, you don't have to worry about tariffs because everything is sourced right here in the USA. All StopBox products are proudly made in the USA in their own facility. And for a limited time time, our listeners are going to get a crazy deal on stopbox. Get 10 off your entire order when you use the promo code problem. Just go to stopboxusa.com and don't forget to use that promo code problem for 10 off stopboxusa.com promo code problem. Discover a better way to balance security and readiness with Stopbox. All right, let's get back into the show. Okay, let me. So I wanted to ask you because this has been really, and I want to ask you about the, the act cover up itself, but then also kind of like the political ramifications of this. But this really has been the story that's been dominating the last few days here has been the COVID up of the Jeffrey Epstein scandal. I say scandal sounds like quite a euphemism. The, the systematic rape and torture of children and then the blackmail operation that followed. But there is something real. I, I, from what I've seen like on social media and on political talk shows, like, this is just really, even the most hardcore Trump loyalists are just not buying this. I mean, a lot of them are just trying to throw Pam Bondi and Cash Patel under the bus and maybe not pointing the finger at Donald Trump where it obviously belongs. Donald Trump really hurt himself by responding the other day and putting himself right in the front. And the most ridiculous we were talking about on the last show that you're going to ask me this question when there's a storm, you know, like, it's just too absurd. But it does seem to me that there's something about this Epstein thing that I just think is such a devastating blow for Donald Trump because it's not just, it's not just a broken campaign promise. It's breaking Donald Trump's political raison d'. Etre. You know what I mean? Like his. The whole thing was drain the swamp. And in one one, you know, moment, he's letting you know I choose the swamp over you. Like, this is very clear. Like, this is. We're. We're here to protect the real swamp. But so what do you. I don't know, what are Scott Horton's thoughts as you. As you watch this ridiculousness?

Scott Horton (48:04)

Well, look, I mean, it's a atrocity, of course, with a good silver lining to it, right? In that, you know, I sit here and go on and on for 10 minutes about this EFP hoax and nobody cares, whatever, but this is like. Like Joe Biden, man. I probably told you on your show two years ago that. See, the thing is with Joe Biden is he's just too old for this. And your next door neighbor's auntie's cousin knows it too. Everybody knows it. You don't have to be political at all to know what a too old for this work person looks like. And that's what they look like. It's just too apparent. Well, EFPs and Quds forces and Mutata alads are all complicated things. This guy's a child rapist who was allowed to be one somehow for 30 or 40 years or something, and then either killed himself or is on vacation in the Swiss Alps right now. Like, nobody even knows whatever happened to him was murdered by hitman, silencing him forever or paying an inmate to do it or whatever it is. But. And everybody knows you. It's just like Biden's age in front of your eyes. Why then was this man allowed to get away with it? Well, because he belongs to intelligence, according to the federal prosecutor who was told. And by the way, I think I heard you say that he said intelligence told him that. I'm not sure it was clear who it was that he said told him that. I think he just kind of said, I was told he belongs to Intelligence, and I'm not sure. And double check me. I don't mean to double check you. We should and make sure. But I'm not sure if anyone said, well, who told you that? And what's his phone number? Let's get him in here. You know what I mean? But it was under oath, I believe, to Congress that he said that. And so, and then. So look, if somebody says somebody in. In America belongs to Intelligence, then obviously the first conclusion is the agency, the CIA, that he works for them. But then obviously the question is raised here very quickly considering who this guy is and who all his connections are. That. Well then if, that if intelligence means the agency, then what exactly is the difference between the CIA and the Mossad at this point? Because it sure looks like he was a Mossad guy and that his job was compromising people for Israel. And, and it, it's the most obvious thing in the world. In fact, if he took Israel out of the thing, if the guy wasn't friends with Ehud Barack and he just was a domestic intelligence guy, it seems like they probably would have burned him and at least some of his co conspirators in the country by now. We all know what the third rail is here. It's, you know, sorry, but Randy Weaver had it right, man. It's the Zionist occupied government. Government that this parasitical thing that controls the United States of America to a terrible degree. And who could deny it? It's like saying Joe Biden is sharp as attack. I'm just gonna say that to you a hundred times and then you'll believe me. No, I'm sorry, man, this is just too obvious on the face of it. This guy was allowed to get away with it because his job was raping. Helping American children to compromise American citizens to serve the interests of this enemy foreign country.

Dave Smith (51:40)

Yeah, I mean it's, you know, when Dan Bongino, who's now the deputy FBI director, when he said that he had it on good of this before he was in. Of course. But when he said he had it on good authority that Jeffrey Epstein was connected to Middle east intelligence. And you're just like, yeah, this does, yeah, this does have Jordanian footprints all over it. Right. That's why. Yeah. Ehud Barack was staying at his house and his, you know, he was his partner in crime, was the daughter of a Mossad connected guy is sure does have the United Arab Emirates written all over it or what? You know, it's just too. But the thing is, I think you're right. You know, I've made this point about the Joe Biden thing before too. Where of all the. It's not that the COVID up for Biden's senility or cognitive decline was. It's not that it was the worst scandal. I mean you could argue. But you know, to know essentially everybody knows that Donald Trump wasn't really a Russian agent at this point. Maybe, maybe there's still some Democrats who believe it, but basically everybody knows that. But in order to know that they actually lied about this, this, that like that they lied and framed him, you have to read a little bit and in order to know, you know, how the extent of the COVID up of COVID and how many different lies they told and like to know that, that Andrew Cuomo really did force these nursing homes against their will to take in COVID positive patients and killed all these old people. And to know that Fauci was actually in his private emails, which we have some of that, he was basically saying that they knew the lab leak was a possibility, but then they went out and said you're a bigot if you don't, you know, like you got to read a little bit, know that. But the Joe Biden one, you don't have to do nothing. Like you have to have turned on your TV once and where Epstein may not quite be that obvious. All you really need, like you don't, you don't even need to, to like listen to Daryl Cooper's three part series on it. You need to know like three or four of the basic facts. If you know, if you know three or four of the basic facts about Jeffrey Epstein that we know for sure, you're already in an area where you like. The question isn't whether or not this is a conspiracy. The only question is what exactly was the conspiracy? Which, you know, I'll grant there's some, like, there's some aspects to this that we don't know for sure. But there's no question it's a conspiracy. Like you just can't, you can't look at the basic things here and not know that like, you know, this, this whole like story that is so wild ends in the cameras going out and it's just too ridiculous to try to convince people like oh, it turns out, studied it very carefully and it turns out it was nothing, nothing at all.

Scott Horton (54:29)

You know, so speaking of Russiagate and Jeffrey Epstein raping children for Israel, what about James Comey now he's apparently under criminal investigation.

Dave Smith (54:39)

Well, that's the other thing. That was the next, the next question I wanted to ask you. So it just, they same guy was.

Scott Horton (54:46)

The head of the FBI not stopping Epstein from raping children that whole time when he was in charge of counterintelligence in this country for years and years and years and years. And so what about that? How about we take him and Louis free and we just smash their heads to together until they start squealing and admitting what they knew and how big of bribes that they took in order to let this continue?

Dave Smith (55:09)

Well, I should say because I, Robert.

Scott Horton (55:12)

Mueller was the director of the FBI between those two.

Dave Smith (55:15)

So I should say because I really have been, you know, about as harsh as you could be on Donald Trump for the last, the last month or so. And I think rightfully so. But then it does get announced just yesterday which really did seem to be like, I don't know, I mean my spidey senses were going off like, oh, is this something to like please the base who's you know, uprising over Jeffrey Epstein right now? So like is the idea that. So they announced essentially that they're. The FBI is investigating. There's a criminal investigation of both James Comey and John Brennan who certainly are two of the worst people people, two of the worst members of the deep state over the last 10 years.

Scott Horton (55:54)

Punishment again, I'm sorry.

Dave Smith (55:56)

Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. Well, so look, I mean I, since I've been bashing Donald Trump for everything, I will say, okay, that's great. I mean these guys both clearly committed like the highest of crimes in the, the Russiagate hoax. And you know, if you really want to get mad at John Brennan, go read Enough already. If you haven't already. It's, I mean he really is one of the absolute worst criminals in D.C. over the last few years.

Scott Horton (56:19)

So.

Dave Smith (56:20)

Okay, that's great. It does kind of seem like there's a little bit of like listen, Jeffrey Epstein just went a little bit too high. But maybe we could throw you these two guys who you sure do seem to hate a lot. But I gotta say after everything else going on, I just have, I've just lived through this too many times where there's these investigations that end up being cover ups. Right. Like the Warren investigation, the 911 investigation. And I don't even mean the 911, I'm not implying like some crazy conspiracy here. I'm just saying that the whole thing was basically designed to be like we are going. Yep. Essentially the establishment has it. Right. And there's, even though there were a couple of good nuggets in the 911 investigation, like there were a couple of points where they admit what the motives of the terrorists were.

Scott Horton (57:06)

Its real purpose was to recommend the creation of the Department of Homeland Security.

Dave Smith (57:10)

That's right. That's right. Yes. Yeah. So it's like, and then of course we, we had this, this whole thing with Bob Barr where he was going to get to the bottom of what. And it just all feels like, you know, it's, it's a, you know, we're going to investigate George W. Bush torturing everybody and it, although I have to.

Scott Horton (57:30)

Say, you know, so in the, in Trump's first term after the Mueller report fell apart and he appointed John Durham. I mean, yeah, this is the guy who helped let the CIA get away with torture and murder when Obama had him do a slight review of Bush administration policies before for.

Dave Smith (57:49)

Right, but, but the Durham report was pretty good.

Scott Horton (57:51)

It was pretty good. Although there are obviously severe limits on how far he was allowed to go. And he, of course, was never allowed to interview Jim Comey or any of these people. But I, for anyone interested in Russiagate at all, first of all, buy my book provoked. I got 75 pages on it. But also read the Durham report. It's a lot of fun. In other words, it's an absolute outrage and you'll freak the hell out. Yes, it's, it's really something to be behold. And there's clearly the basis, I don't know about the statute of limitations and all that, but there's clearly the basis to go after these guys for a criminal conspiracy to frame the guy. And I was going to joke that, like, I guess I really do owe an apology to Joe Rogan because when we did go out to dinner that time last time Daryl was in town, really, like, the one conversation I had with Rogan was quibbling with him over whether Trump is going to prosecute his enemies or not. And I was like, nah, I wish, but he ain't got gonna. And Rogue's like, I don't know, he seems pretty pissed off. Like, hey, all right, dude, you were right and I'm glad, too. And you know what? I know nothing's really going to happen, but I do enjoy thinking that John Brennan and Jim Comey are at least a little bit fearful today and maybe.

Dave Smith (58:58)

Some truth, some more truth will come out and maybe some things that make them look really bad, you know, like, look, the Durham report didn't leave lead to anyone any consequences or anyone being held responsible, but it still was kind of valuable, particularly, like, from my perspective, like, as somebody who had. I was so focused on Russiagate on, on this show for, for years, and there was something like very vindicating about that. And I think it, it's, it, it helps to have something to point to and be like, no, look, it's all here. Like, we were right about this. And look, I mean, this, this thing is so damning.

Scott Horton (59:33)

You know what I really like?

Dave Smith (59:34)

So maybe we'll get something like, like that I debunked.

Scott Horton (59:37)

I had a computer security expert named Jeffrey Carr on my show and debunked the claims from Crowd Strike that Russia must have done the DNC hack two days before they ever even launched Crossfire Hurricane.

Dave Smith (59:51)

Wow.

Scott Horton (59:52)

You can find that in the archives. It was April Glassby Day. I'm pretty sure July 25th of 2016. I was already debunked. And they didn't launch Crossfire Hurricane for another two days after. After that. I think I have that.

Dave Smith (60:04)

Yeah, it's. Yeah, it's. It is important because people almost like there, there were like these two. The. The two essential building blocks of Russiagate were two claims. Like, the first claim was that Russia interfered in our election. And then the second claim was that Donald Trump was in a conspiracy with them to do it. That he was. That, you know, they had overthrown our democracy and Trump was in on it in order to install him. And it is a lot of times the people on TV who started being good on this issue three years after it mattered, you know what I mean? Like way after it was all over there, they were like, oh, yeah, they, Donald Trump wasn't really a Russian spy. They concede the first plot part and then just say, oh, Donald Trump just didn't collude with them to overthrow democracy. But it is important to mention that the first part is every bit as much as the second part. They have nothing. What was it they have like there. There was a face Facebook farm and one of the people responsible was at a dinner with Vladimir Putin once was like the most substantial evidence I ever saw to back it up.

Scott Horton (61:04)

It's all, well, it was Prigozan, the same guy that ended up being the mercenary leader who ran that troll farm. That's all it was, was a clickbait troll farm making money. And as the government eventually admitted, most of the posts in question were posted after the election and the super majority of all of them had nothing to do with politics whatsoever. However, and then the ones that did have anything to do with politics were all a bunch of crap like the this along the same lines as what the Macedonian kids were doing and most of that so called fake news. During that time, it was a neighborhood of kids in Macedonia who figured out that Boomer Trump voters will click on anything. So they made all these fake sites and said pope endorses Trump. And then they went click, click, click. And then they put up Google Ads, right? And then they. So they're just getting a ton of revenue by posting on Facebook and leading people to click on their pages and whatever had nothing to do with the Russians. And then even the Russian troll farm thing, it was all just clickbait. And it was all like, what Bernie Sanders arm wrestling the devil and, like, Jesus telling me, stop masturbating. And, like, what? It had nothing to do with anything whatsoever. And. And Gareth Porter did a great review in Consortium News about the malpractice of the New York Times, where they go, well, according to Twitter, these tweets or Facebook, whichever, got this many impressions. And. But, you know, hey, that's how many voters there are in America or where. And Gareth Porter's like, oh, come on, that's not the ratio, dude. The ratio is compared to overall numbers of tweets and Facebook posts during that period of time, which is in the tens or hundreds of trillions. Right? And so these posts are absolutely nothing. There's. It's like, there's nothing with a thousand zeros after. After it east of the decimal point before you get to a one. In terms of whatever sway this would have over anyone at all, what would even be seen by anyone or taken.

Dave Smith (62:59)

It'd be on the level of. If you were to say that, it's like, I. I don't know. If you were to say, like, oh, I. I had a Tweet that had 2 million impressions, and therefore I was the difference in this last election. So you're like, wait, wait, what? No, it doesn't. Just because someone like you viewed my tweet does not mean that I flipped your vote. Like, this is. It's just so goofy. And of course we know, right? Just as being human beings, you don't need a scientific study or anything like this to convince you, but 99% of the people who are clicking on anything have already made up their minds who they're going to vote for. It does. 99% of people were either going to vote against Donald Trump or for Donald Trump, which is really what it always was. Never really about Hillary Clinton or Joe Biden or whatever. But, um. But they had already made up their mind. How many, like, how many real people do you know who's like, ah, my Fox News watching conservative dad. Like, if he clicked on a post, is there a shot that he's a Hillary Clinton supporter now? Like, no, that's not how it works. No Russian can just manipulate you that easily, even if they are posting a Facebook ad. All right, guys, let's take a moment and thank our sponsor for today's show, which is blackout coffee. As you guys know, I am a huge coffee consumer and a bit of a coffee snob, so take it from me when I tell you that blackout coffee is just excellent. I drink their cold brew all the time. I Love their roasted coffee. It's really just quality coffee that's roasted right here in the USA by people who believe in liberty, personal responsibility and the Constitution. So you're, you're get sending your money to a good US based company and you're going to get excellent coffee. Highly recommend it. Go to blackout coffee.com problem and use the promo code problem and you're going to get 20% off your first order. One more time. That's blackout coffee.com problem. Promo code problem for 20% off. All right, let's get back into the.

Scott Horton (64:56)

Show and just real quick. All the accusations about the, the hack of the DNC and of the emails and attributed to Russia, the WikiLeaks and all attributed Russia is completely false. There's no proof of that whatsoever. The case against Jeff Sessions, against Mike Flynn, against Carter Page, against George Papadopoulos, against all of the people who were accused there, all of that was false. 100 of it was false. And then all like the extraneous claims like, oh, the Russians hacked C Span and made it put out RT for half an hour. Every one of those silly things. Oh, they hacked the electric grid in Vermont. They were going to freeze all the poor people of Vermont. Every single one of those little things. It was just the same thing they did to Saddam Hussein. It's the same thing they did to Donald Trump. Trump is told a thousand lies in a row and you're supposed to just not be able to keep up. You're supposed to assume that, man, where there's smoke, there must be some fire there, even when no, it's all just a bunch of steam. It's hot air. There's nothing to it at all. The end of the day, all of the accusations against Saddam Hussein were false. All of the accusations against Donald Trump on Russiagate were just completely false. And as, as Ray McGovern said at the time and Trump just didn't have anyone around him sophisticated enough to tell him this. But Ray McGovern said at the the time, what Trump should do is he should severely go in there and absolutely fire the top 25 or even 50 guys at Justice, CIA and FBI and potentially even NSA. Fire all of them, have security march them the hell out the door and that includes the entire Special Council investigation. Any and all of that while at the same time, and he should do it publicly, in a speech, announce it while they're being frog marched out, but at the same time time he should completely and totally, without any reservation declassify any and everything that justice, FBI, CIA, NSA have on him and his campaign team, all of it about anything, regards to Russia, regards to anything else. And have all of it copied in quadruplic and dropped off at the Post, the Times, the Journal and National Public Radio. Come on, Mara Lus, and give me your worse. Bring it on. And, and, and let them have at it. Because. And then that way they'd all scream bloody murder. That at Saturday Night Massacre he fired all the people. But then he gives them all of the evidence for them to prosecute the case themselves. Go ahead, Washington Post, with your best shot. The whole thing would have been over because we know the truth. There was nothing there. Carter Page was an American patriot who debriefed the CIA. Anytime he met an important Russian businessman or government official of any kind kind, he would tell. He would come and debrief them.

Dave Smith (67:38)

No, it's the only person, the only person who actually got convicted in the whole thing was the FBI lawyer who lied about Carter Page and said that he. That, you know, had. Or omitted that. That he lied through a huge omission, which is that he said the CIA confirmed what we said, which is true. The CIA did confirm that they had met with the Russians, but he omitted the part that they came right back and told us because he's one of our guys. An asset or not. Not an agent, but, you know, an informant. Listen, dude, we do, we do have to wrap up there, but man, it is at the end there. It is fun to play those counterfactual games where. What if Donald Trump was smart or wise or courageous enough to have the.

Scott Horton (68:17)

He could have stopped the Ukraine war. That's the answer, right? If he'd been able to kill Russia gate in its crib in 2017, he would have implemented Minsk too by 2018 or 19, and then the War of 22 would have never happened.

Dave Smith (68:31)

That's right. Well, he was running on detente with Russia and this is what ultimately killed that. So anyway, Donald Trump, please, sorry for all the mean stuff I said about you over the last month. Please put John Brennan and James Comey in jail. Please don't launch aggressive wars on behalf of foreign countries. Explode the debt and cover up child rapist rings going forward. That would be great. That's our constructive criticism of the last month.

Scott Horton (68:55)

Sounds completely reasonable to me, Dave.

Dave Smith (68:57)

Honestly, I, I know, I, I know I'm a political radical, but really it does. It, it sounds pretty common sense when I say it. Anyway, Scott, dude, thank you so much again, as always, for. It's always so, like, beneficial for all of us when you. Come on. Congratulations on all the recent success with Provoked and with the Tucker interview and all of that. And, of course, we'll be talking a lot more real soon. I'll see you at Ron Paul's birthday out in out in Texas there. I'll be coming to that. Scott's going to be at as well. Ninth August 9th. And I believe there are there are tickets you can get for it. Right? Aren't they?

Scott Horton (69:29)

That's right. Ron Paul, BBQ.com.

Dave Smith (69:31)

All right. Hope to hope to see some of you guys out there. And of course, see you guys in in Denver tomorrow night and this weekend. All right. Thank you again, Scott. Thanks, everybody, for listening. Catch you next time. Peace.