A (2:28)

Yeah, that's right. So we had a little bit of a. There was a mini bulwark slack crisis over the weekend when as all of us were trying to just eek the last few hours of time out with our families. The, the President of the United States. Kidnapped. Sorry. Arrested through a law enforcement operation that he won't brief the Senate Judiciary Committee anyway through some sort of operation. I guess it's called the guerilla operation, the operation of the strong went into Venezuela and abducted the sitting president, the illegitimate but sitting president of Venezuela, the criminal Nicholas Maduro and his wife and whisked him back up to, to New York City to face criminal charges and kind of just put his, his number two in charge. So not like democracy stuff. He declined to put the lady Machado who, who, who stupidly had left the country to go collect her Nobel Prize, said no she's not going to be in charge. She doesn't have it. What did she. She doesn't have the support I think was his or the respect. The respect. Doesn't have the respect. And you know, so now Dely Rodriguez is, is running things and I don't know. I mean there's so many ways to go with this. My conspiracy theory was that actually Delcey Rodriguez is like Cersei Lannister and she was behind the entire thing.

B (4:02)

Her brother seems like.

A (4:05)

Her brother's just a pawn. She's the real master.

B (4:08)

That's her.

A (4:09)

But we can talk about all the sideshows. It does seem to be kind of a problem maybe to. For the rules based international order that America's position is just that we can.

B (4:23)

The what now?

A (4:27)

I don't know, you guys, I'm floundering here. Somebody talk.

C (4:30)

I got a lot of different things to run through. Let's talk about the sideshow. You know who we haven't heard from just to jump off here?

B (4:40)

Liz Chambers.

C (4:40)

Tulsi Gabbard.

A (4:41)

Oh, oh, Tulsi. Well, she's been doing yoga on a beach.

C (4:45)

Yeah. She's, she's completely out of the game. What, what do we think if Tulsi Gabbard ran in a Republican primary, do we think. And she runs hard on this sort of like America first, no foreign wars. What do you, what percentage of the vote do you think she gets? Like, do you think that just like she did in the Democratic primary. Now she runs in a Republican primary entirely against on her, her platform. Does she. Is she viable in a Republican primary?

B (5:19)

I don't think Tulsi seems that impressive or strong. I don't know. Sure. But I think that. Are you asking if somebody running to like the foreign policy left of Trump would do well in a primary? I think probably I'm trying to.

C (5:32)

I'm walking myself into a bigger point about an overall split in the Republican firmament right now, which I'm going to demonstrate thusly.

B (5:43)

I can't believe I didn't walk you into the chart. If you, you should have given me the leash so I can. Whatever the pig walking thing.

C (5:49)

I'm trying. I was back. Okay, so, so this is America first versus Trump First. Actors. Okay, so the first issue in which we saw the main cleavages between America first and Trump first was Epstein. And, and the Trump first is really sort of like just Trump always. And let me read you the names because I think this will start to become clear because I actually think the like Epstein angry people and the angry about Venezuela people line up kind of well. And so this is a theory that I'm sent that I'm sort of swirling around that I would like to posit to you guys. So on the America first side, which means they are against what Trump is doing, we have our first out of the gate today with Megyn Kelly who is saying, I've got a 16 year old and a 14 year old and an 18 year old. Those are the boots on the ground that Trump is talking about. What does this do for America First? And you've got Tucker Carlson who, who right now is kind of like soft America first. Right? Like he was on with Chernovich or Cernovich or whatever that guy's name is. And they were like, because there's a strain, there's a, there's a strain of the America first that, that is like pod bro domination types, right?

B (7:09)

Where's like the only person out there taking the position. I've heard that's like, this is good only if Delcey Rodrigo stays in charge.

C (7:16)

That's right.

B (7:17)

Yeah. That's the only situation in which I'm for this, which was, I was like, okay, well that's a take.

C (7:22)

If, if, if we are able to go in and like take the oil, right? This is like America first is about us dominating other countries and extracting their natural resources. That's like a strain of the America first that's a little bit different from the American isolationists, but they both live under the same America first kind of umbrella. So that's your Megyn Kelly, Tucker Carlson, Nick Fuentes, you're going to Find there's something else that a lot of these people have in common. As I listen.

A (7:50)

Megyn Kelly on Epstein. Wasn't she a Trump defender on Epstein.

C (7:53)

Or no, you know, good point. It's a good point. It doesn't map 100%. But let me go.

A (7:57)

And I don't know where Tucker was on Epstein.

C (7:59)

Tucker has. He just doesn't talk about Epstein that much. But like your Nick Fuentes, Tim Pool, Candace Owens, Matt Gates, Milo Yopoulos, Steve Bannon's a little bit of a tricky one in here and Candace Owens there. It doesn't map entirely. But there's like a lot of the American firsters also. Are your anti Semites andor super anti Israel types. The Trump only Trump first people are. You're like Benny Johnson, Matt Walsh, Jack Posobiek, Fox News Newsmax Turning Point, your Laura Loomers and your Dave Rubin. And they also tend to be like MAGA establishment. Right. And so, and when you get your Daily Wire guys, they're one. They're one of the few that kind of tips over to when they break with Trump. It's for Normie Republican stuff.

B (8:49)

Yeah.

C (8:50)

Unlike when like a Tucker breaks with Trump. It's like hard America first stuff. The other person on the America first list is like Marjorie Taylor Greene. She would be. Right. So this is an interesting part of what I like. What do you. Yes, your girl. What I'm. What I'm interested in in Venezuela, because we can talk about the foreign policy of it all, but I think we would all agree as sense makers, as part of our job, we are in an interregnum right now where what we know is that we've taken out a dictator which people have various feelings about because I think we're all anti the dictator. We all think Maduro bad guy, not sad. He's gone.

B (9:33)

Tulsi.

A (9:34)

No, no, I mean throw the dictator.

C (9:35)

Sorry, I meant us. I meant us on this podcast, Right. That all of us are like, we're not sad Maduro's gone. We have questions about the basis of legality, how it was done, those things. And I, But I also. But the point was what the point.

B (9:52)

Of the action to take out Maduro was. I had additional questions I was adding.

C (9:56)

Just. But the interregnum that we're in is, is the question which the administration does not seem to know the answer to. So we cannot sort of form a real basis of opinion on it, which is what are we doing now with Venezuela? Right. What is the goal? What is the aim? And so it's going to be interesting while we're in this interregnum where people are like, okay, we took out the dictator and like, let's say the, the, the libs and the pro democracy types are concerned about the legality of it, concerned about what the foreign policy implications are. But let's just stick with MAGA for a second. For them it is a question of do people hold Trump to his America first promises, no foreign wars versus the people who are like, yeah, let's go, we're going to dominate the Western hemisphere now. And like, does that become a schism on the right? Because the reason, the whole reason I'm bringing it up is because JD Vance has a difficult time sitting atop both these coalitions as the what I based on all the focus groups, when I ask people like, who do you think is next post Trump? It's just sort of a, I guess J.D. vance, like. Right. But if you're Tulsi, like I guess I'm wondering for the future of the Republican Party that no longer that has sort of this. And this goes to JVL's triad that has this like legacy kind of of neoconservatism, but that was based on democracy, that was based in democracy building. This is a might makes right. I'm with Trump stampeding all over the globe, which are your Benny Johnson's, you know, your Matt Walsh or Jack Prosobiak versus the people who are like, actually this is bad and we shouldn't be doing this. Which is your America first coalition, does it divide them in a way that is super meaningful for the Republican Party and lead them to a greater intraparty war over this?

B (11:51)

I don't think so.

C (11:52)

Oh, okay.

B (11:54)

I mean, I'm sure maybe a little bit, but I don't, I don't, I don't, I don't know.

C (11:57)

You don't think it depends on which way this starts, I guess.

B (12:00)

Yeah, it depends on how bad it ends up going. If it becomes a total quagmire, it could make a difference. Yeah. And if they end up just putting in, leaving the Maduro regime in there, leaving the Chavistas in there and it's just we get some of their oil now and like there are some random skirmishes. I just, I don't, I go to the JVL that nobody cares about foreign policy. I just don't know how much people care about this. And I agree with you. I think it's interesting like as an academic matter to like look at how things are breaking down and it's like, funny to watch, you know, everybody's trying to grab their part of the Trump crown, you know, like, and like, define MAGA by them. And Trump said this thing yesterday. It's like, isn't MAGA just what I think? He didn't say it like that, but it was like essentially that and a.

C (12:44)

Guy that I, I am maga.

B (12:46)

He said, yeah, I am maga. Like Rand Paul's advisor, who's a guy that's. It's pretty, it's pretty savvy. He tweeted like, Trump's. There's Trump saying the quiet part out loud because, you know, he is trying to position MAGA as being like, America first anti interventionist. And I refer to him. I was like, no, that's, that's the loud part out loud. Like, MAGA is just whatever Trump wants, like, for now and then in the future, you see everybody trying to like, redefine it and reposition it as something, as whatever they think it should be, you know, and, and so I do think that is interesting and I agree with your analysis of kind of breaking it all out. Like, it was funny, the people attacking us. Like, like, like just. I got on, like, there was like a, the, it's the Daily Wire people, right? Like the Daily Wire people who want this sort of intervention and they're like, bill Kristal finally found an intervention. He doesn't, like, you know what I mean? Like, this kind of shit is like what they're, you know, is what they're talking about with like some, you know, homophobia. Tim looks like he has aids. You know what I mean? Like, that kind of stuff. And, and like, I don't think so. I look, I look great. It's fine. I just, I'm just saying that that's. That. Sorry, that's. That's the angle. That is the, like, that is the area, right? Like, the homophobic social conservative interventionists are like, see, Trump is with us actually. Like, we're, we're going after people. And like, I don't, I think that that feels like a stretch to me. I like, I think that MAGA is whatever Trump wants. Like, if you get into an entanglement in Venezuela, it's going to be very bad. You can say all the momentum moving away to JBL's newsletter point from the more interventionist, more neoconservative fight. And I guess that there's an inter party dispute a little bit over, like, whether that means that our country should do nothing or whether it means that our country should rape and pillage I'm not sure if that's that big of a distinction.

A (14:35)

Here's my question for you. To what extent is the no more wars aspect of maga Sincere. Sincere that I, I don't think it is.

B (14:47)

Well, that's a split. I think that's a split.

C (14:49)

That's why I asked about Tulsi Gabbard.

A (14:50)

So Tulsi's a separate case because she's basically a Russian asset. Allegedly. Allegedly, like, so is Tim Pool.

C (14:58)

So are half those podcasters that are funded by the Russians.

A (15:01)

Well, here's, here's what I'm trying to get at. So when they say no more wars, they don't want boots on the ground, they don't want to be in Iraq. Right. But if it's just blowing shit up from a distance and killing other people, I don't know that they're opposed to that. And here I'm going to qualify because I'm going to point to the Iran thing. There was real pushback over the Iran strike from some people who, who did the like, no more wars stuff. But I think that was very Israel related. It's because the, the dropping bombs was seen as helping Israel and that's why. So I think that's probably going to hit a little differently within the MAGA sort of base of actual voters. And I guess there's a question between, like, what are the elites here? We're talking about the elites or are we talking about a voting constituency? But I think that as long as it's just dropping bombs on Venezuela.

B (15:57)

Ryan Graham did such a good post on this, I have to shout him out. Me and Ryan don't agree on a lot of stuff, but he was spot on on this one. He goes, most of the right wing folks claim to be non interventionists, were actually only opposed to the US losing, but they're very much on board for the idea of dominance of other people through violence. If they think they can pull it off, I think that's like basically. Right. I do think that unless it helps.

A (16:19)

Israel and they don't like that.

B (16:21)

Right. Yeah. And then you throw that on top of it. Yeah. And I think that there's a segment of that that's earnest but not a majority.

C (16:29)

Okay, so here's my. But then, but then when I'm saying, okay, well then isn't, doesn't it depend. Part of what it depends on to me is is this our foreign policy? Because now they're talking about Cuba, talking about taking over Greenland. Right. Okay, so as, as we basically this theory unfolds which is we are going to dominate the Western Hemisphere. Which by the way, guys, is a downgrade for America.

A (16:55)

Sure, isn't it?

C (16:56)

We are supposed to downgrade.

A (16:57)

Thank you for saying that.

B (16:58)

Yes.

A (16:59)

Once upon a time we were like, hey, are we sure we can still impose our will in the South China Sea? And now we're like, we gotta make sure we get Cuba.

C (17:07)

Yeah, it's good work, guys. We are Cracker Jack team. It is funny when people are like, yeah, you guys are just the neocons. I am trying to be like, okay, what does that mean now actually. And maybe JBL can answer this because he was writing about it in his triad. But the idea that America was the world's largest superpower wasn't a statement of foreign policy. It was an objective fact. Right. And so if you knew that we were the world's largest and greatest superpower and that in the. And the sphere of influence, then that could take that from us were China or Russia. That our job was to be like, we're going to remain the world's greatest superpower because we are better at ensuring the safety and like. And global prosperity. Slash safety. We don't like to see genocide places, whereas China is. Gen does genocide themselves. Right now we have downgraded ourselves to a foreign policy that says, no, we're just going to dominate the Western hemisphere. And as we dominate the Western hemisphere, we're going to do it like Russia, which means we are going to walk around and just grab people as we want them. And the idea of us downgrading to the Western hemisphere does two things, right? It says, well, China now gets to do whatever it wants in its hemisphere. Russia gets to do whatever it wants in its hemisphere. And we no longer believe that there is a global world order that needs tending to. And I would say that to the extent that I have this letter today. Yeah.

A (18:35)

Because you're. You're preaching, I love.

C (18:37)

Well, well, I skimmed it. But. But I, but I think that.

B (18:43)

It was long. It was long.

C (18:45)

I got the first part.

B (18:46)

Just. Can we, for one second we just do me a quick solace because every. Everybody wants to argue about neoconservatism. You can tell Sarah's got big thoughts about it. JVL's big thoughts about it. I'm ready to do it with you. But just say one more thing, just really quick about like the practical case about what is happening right now so far in Venezuela. I feel a little bit like I'm taking crazy pills because it's like Stephen Miller wants to like you Know, make this part of some grand doctrine about a new post World War II order and all this. And, and we're talking and JL's writing about the end of neoconservatism, and obviously Sarah's talking about the implications for the party. But it's like, this is just fucking stupid. Like, what we're doing is just stupid. Like, do they. Like these. You think these guys can execute? Like, whatever is in Stephen Miller's deranged brain? It's like it's pointless. Like what we're going to. But we're going to control and bully all of Central and South America. Like, that's the, that's the idea. And then. And then control Greenland so we. It can be like a risk board that looks pretty, that has Don's face on it. It's like it's. It's the R word is what this is. Like, this is so dumb. Who is this for?

A (19:53)

Right? I mean, they should.

C (19:55)

Them. Them.

B (19:56)

I don't think that. Right. Yeah. Like Trump and Miller.

A (19:58)

For Trump.

C (19:59)

Yeah, yeah. For Trump and Trump and Miller.

A (20:02)

If Maduro had given bribes to Trump, like, if Maduro had gone and bought $300 million of the Trump coin or the Trump NFT, do you think he'd be in jail right now? The answer is no. It's because he decided he was going to, like, posture for domestic considerations and continue the chaff Bismo and, you know, keeping America and Trump as a foil.

B (20:21)

And that's why I just. Yeah, and I'm happy, and I'm happy to kind of get into the. No, no, it's good to get into the whole, like, geopolitical and ideology and, like, where things are going about all this. But it's like, that's why I just kind of reject the premise of, like, if you still believe in democracy promotion and neoconservatism or shouldn't you be for this? Or if you're still anti communist. And it's kind of like, this is. This is moronic what we're doing. There's nothing to it. Like, this is. This is. This is Trump having a tantrum about somebody he doesn't like. And it's like, okay, well, I don't know, maybe we'll put in the other communists or maybe we'll do something else or Marco Rubio will run at. Or should I go into Greenland? I don't know. We'll see if the people in Nuke are nice to me. Like, it's not, you know, like, it's not a doctrine.

A (21:00)

Hard agreeing. Hard agree no, you've got to hold your point. Write it down.

B (21:07)

Write it down.

A (21:07)

I'm writing it down because first you've got to give us a word from our first sponsor.

C (21:12)

Oh, you know, I'll never remember my point if I don't write it down. Yes, that's why I got a sponsor. And our sponsor is One Skin. Can we talk about New Year's resolutions for just a sec? January used to be about totally reinventing yourself. Now it's more like doing an honest audit of what's actually working and doubling down on that. For me, that means taking my skin health seriously, which for me has meant using one skin. At the core is their patented OS1 peptide, the first ingredients proven to target senescent cells, the root cause of wrinkles, crepiness, and loss of elasticity, which are all key signs of aging. And these results have been validated by five different clinical studies. Certified safe for sensitive skin, which is what I have. One Skin products are free from over 1500 harsh or irritating ingredients. Dermatologists tested and have been awarded the National Eczema association seal of acceptance by the nea. Delivering powerful results without irritation. Customers consistently rave about how their skin is smoother, firmer and healthier looking, with results that get better over time, improving both the appearance and the overall health of their skin. No wonder Oneskin's products have over 10,000 5 star reviews. Born from over 10 years of longevity research, OneSkin's OS1 peptide is proven to target the cells that cause the visible signs of aging, helping you unlock your healthiest skin now and as you age. And for a limited time, Oneskin is making it even easier to stay consistent with up to 30% off your first three subscription orders when you use the code. The next level at OneSkin co. The next level, that's up to 30% off with the code. The next level after you purchase the ask where you heard about them. Please support our show and tell them that we sent you. Thanks, Oncekin. Okay, back to Tim's point. I remembered it the whole way through that ad read. Which is this? This is about whether or not words have meaning. People are always like, sarah, are you still a Republican? And what's crazy about that question is, do I still believe in limited government, free markets, and American leadership in the world? Yes. Am I a Republican? No. Okay, now, those two things used to be the same thing. Now they're not. Because people just say that things are Republican or conservative, and what they mean is they're Trump, they're Trump and Trump adjacent. And whatever Neoconservatism is very similar where if what you say is, do I think the world is a better place if more people live in democracies, if more power is in the hands of people to make their own choices, be self determinative with their governments and not have leaders who murder people, commit genocide, attack other countries and to, to more ensure global stability. Yes, I believe that. Now a big part of that though is who is in the hand. Who's like where is who in what hands is the American government doing the thing? So up until this point I, I had always trusted that America was going to act both with some self interest but also with an eye toward human dignity, human self determination and democracy as like the leading light in the world.

A (24:44)

Okay, we're going to go down there and take the oil out of the ground.

C (24:47)

That's right. That is not neoconservatism, guys. This is just, it is the Trump Road doctrine or whatever. Yeah, that's nothing. And so like this, every time we have one of these fights about like.

B (24:58)

We'Re not even gonna do that by the way. We're gonna go who's Chevron's going down there to take, who's taking their oil.

C (25:05)

They're not gonna do the, that requires infrastructure and stability.

A (25:09)

I mean Potemkin anyway.

B (25:12)

Yeah, they might be fake, they might be lying about how much oil they have. They don't even fucking.

A (25:16)

The oil is the WMDs.

B (25:18)

Yeah.

C (25:20)

Anyway, so my point is, is like this is not neoconservatism by, in any of the ways that we've ever thought about it. And that Ian, neoconservatism itself has kind of lost meaning because people view it as like just what Afghan and Afghanistan and Iraq, what they were. That was not, that's not what neoconservatism was at its roots. Like we have lost the sense of what it is. And so for us, certainly for me, I'm going to speak for myself. I still believe that it is better for the world to have more democracies rather than fewer. But I do not think America should be going and just grabbing anyone that it wants.

B (25:57)

But neoconservatism and Iraq were failures. Are we going to do that right now or do it that at the very end?

A (26:00)

No, no, no, we're going to wait, we're going to wait till one minute left in the show and that's when I will bring that up as is our want. This is a very real question. What is the difference between what America did with Maduro and what Russia attempted to do? With Zelensky in the opening days of the Ukraine war. So the Russia sent a team of Spetsnots into Kiev. The idea was to capture Zelensky and arrest him for all of his many alleged crimes. They did not succeed. We did succeed. Is there a. Again, just from the point of view of how the rules based order functions.

B (26:46)

From the point of the rules based order functions, there's some distinctions that aren't that big of a difference. The manner in which they carried it out. Sure. And again, it's how limiting are we talking about this operation. Around the time they tried to go to Zelensky, they were also bombing and killing just plain civilian targets, kidnapping children. Like the manner in which Russia carried out that action was very. Was. It's both distinct and different. But like the notion that they could get rid of Zelensky and replace them with a leader that was more pliable to Russia is like literally what we just did. Literally just that. Just that little.

A (27:27)

This is the meme with Pam. They're the same thing.

C (27:31)

No, they're not. They're not quite. And the main difference is, is that Russia, they invaded a democracy. Right. And we, a democracy, invaded a dictator who was oppressing his people.

B (27:45)

Democracy is less on the point, though, than legitimate. Like Zelensky is a legitimate.

C (27:50)

Like we. We did have. And this is the point where I tried to kind of argue this with. With Bill and I realized I was a little out of my depth as I was doing it because I had been trying to figure out the legality question. And I was saying to Bill that I'm not sure it's as. As obviously illegal as everyone sort of says it is, but I was basing that on this idea. I was. I can explain it better now because I've thought more about it, but it is essentially, here's how people talk about the legality of it, which is the intern in terms of international law, like the UN Code of conduct, it is illegal. Like what we have done is illegal based on the international code, based on the American, like American precedents and how we have allowed our executive to make unilateral foreign policy decisions over time. We have created precedents in which if you tried to challenge, like America will, our Department of Justice will certainly write an opinion that relies on precedence of unilateral executive power in the United States that will likely hold water in the United States, but absolutely violates like the UN Charter. And so like, that is a deeply complicated thing to wrestle with. And it's one of those things where, like creating More power for the executive. This is why the War Powers act matters so much. Like we needed. We need a new. We need a new understanding of what our executive in the United States is able to do unilaterally with war powers because we now have a madman in charge and we should now have a government. I know, but.

A (29:25)

So let's talk about Greenland then. So we got. No, Tim, no, I just can say.

B (29:29)

Really quick, this is. Again, I do want to talk about Greenland a bit. So I just want to say, because I haven't had a chance to talk about. The other podcast is on the this again where I get like more into the stupidity side of it than like what, like what where this technically is in the rules based order. It's like you said, jvl, like maybe the oil is Potemkin. Like maybe it's not even there. They might be lying about how much oil they have. That is possible. I was reading an article about that yesterday. But it's also like, even if they have all the oil that they say, and even if US Companies do want to go in and rebuild their decaying, decrepit commie infrastructure and get it into the ground by the time it's coming out, it's like China's fucking running circles around us. What are we do. Donald Trump is like a caveman from 1984 still. It's like, we don't need. We. The world is electrifying. Like the, the competition for, you know, energy is like, it's completely different now. It's like we're building all these fucking data centers. Like, it's not like we don't need oil in seven years, but like the whole, the whole thing is stupid. I mean, at least going into Iraq and taking that oil and what Donald Trump said he wanted to do allegedly 22 years ago, like, at least potentially we could have gained some benefit from that because it's before we fucking like had our natural gas boom and before, like, you know what I mean? Like so much stuff changed. Yeah, Right. Yeah. Anyway, sorry, I'm.

C (30:57)

No, I'm glad you brought that up because actually one of the things. So my guy Barry over here went and found all these old clips of Trump talking about how we should be going into places. It's. He talks about it like tariffs. It's. It's like this, this groove in his brain where he's been talking about tariffs for 30 years as like we need this as this mechanism. He's done that about war for oil too. Like for Trump, it is about the.

A (31:20)

Oil up in the 70s.

B (31:21)

Yeah, right. He's unfrozen caveman Talk radio fallen host.

A (31:25)

It's the same way he thinks about New York as this crime ridden city because he thinks about New York of 1975. He thinks about oil as like the oil shocks.

B (31:36)

Yeah, yeah.

A (31:37)

Anyway, this is where we are and he's.

B (31:39)

And another thing. Sorry, no.

A (31:41)

And another thing. So our. Our friend Stephen Miller went on who is what, the third most powerful person in the American government? Fourth maybe Went on Jake Tapper show.

B (31:55)

Third or fourth.

A (31:56)

Asked about whether or not the United States would use military force to take Greenland. And he said, nobody's going to fight the United States militarily over the future of Greenland. We live in a world. In the real world, Jake is governed by strength, is governed by force, is governed by power. These are the iron laws of the world since the beginning of time. And now I'm going to bust. I mean, it's. It was an amazing performance. I guess this is like Return to the. No, Nobody's amused by this. Fine, we'll just drop the clip in and we won't do.

B (32:37)

I was laughing.

C (32:38)

No, I. I will tell you. Well, because I thought you were going to do a better voice for Stephen.

A (32:43)

I've never heard him talk, so I can't.

C (32:45)

You know, he sounds like a mother strangled. And if I could go back in time in a time machine, I would go find the people who beat him up in elementary school and be like, just be nice to this guy. Because if you keep. He's going to grow up to be the most broken individual who's so desperate for power and relevance that he will say, sit around talking about, like, what big bullies we are and how great we are. But listen, the thing about the Stephen.

B (33:11)

Miller going on, I do something different. If I had a time.

C (33:13)

I know, I know. I was. Yeah, I got it. The. What was interesting is he was the reason Stephen Miller was having to respond. That is because his wife tweeted, because this is how our diplomacy happens, is that Stephen Miller's wife tweeted an image of Greenland with a big American flag on it that just said soon, meaning we're soon going to invade Greenland. She is married to the fourth most powerful muppet in this administration and that has real foreign policy implications. Like, this is what we're going to do. We're going to stamp all over the place and rattle our sabers until they just give us what we want. And that is why I was leading.

A (33:53)

With the art of the deal. Sarah, this.

C (33:55)

This isn't Part of the deal. This cannot be what people thought they were getting. But these guys don't care like, they are. They are operating like people who do not have accountability to the American people. Like, they don't care who's mad at them. They don't care what the results are. They don't care if public opinion is firmly against this, which it is. They just, that's how they're operating. Like they have no accountability whatsoever to the American people.

B (34:21)

The interesting thing about the Greenland thing for me, and what is, like, there are rational people that I speak to who are on our side who kind of are of the view that this is just a farce. And this would be the thing that would really surprise me that Trump did. And it's like, I like to check my own self from time to time, being like, you haven't gone crazy, right, Tim? Like, you're still in reality and in touch with things. And I've been doing that over this Greenland situation because I think it's possible. Like, I think that it's really possible. And I just, and so I'm just curious what you guys think, because, what, 1 in 10?

A (35:02)

3 in 10? Give me, give me. When you say possible, like, how 2% change?

B (35:08)

3 and 10. Look, let me just say this. Of the things that Trump has said, where it's like Trump saying it and talking about it over and over again, like, there's this thing that's happened over the last 10 years. Like, some journalists will be like, would you rule out deporting all never Trump podcasters? And Trump's like, I don't rule anything out. And then like, the headlines, like, Trump, maybe I'll deport. You know what I mean? Like, that happens. Like that's, it's happening less now because journalists have kind of learned that game. Like, that happened for a while. I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about things like he brings up, like, in his speeches that he brings up off the cuff that he brings up repeatedly. Not stuff that, like, he had this little thing that he talked about the sharks or whatever they stopped talking about. You know, I, I, I. It's hard for me to think of another thing that he's talked about as much as Greenland that he hasn't tried to do. And so that's my only basis of all of this, where I'm kind of like, I, I think that he's going to try to do it. Am I, am I insane? That's my question. Am I insane?

C (36:06)

One of the lessons of the Venezuela thing Is that if you look backwards now, a whole bunch of things make sense that didn't make sense at the time. Like Machado giving her dedicating her Nobel prize to Trump. And like the way that they were talking about Venezuela and like we were all like, why are they bombing these boats? And it's yeah, Trent Agua. Like if you look back, you're like, oh, it was all there. Like he was going to do this. He wanted, he was building a case to get to this. Why would that be different for Greenland?

B (36:38)

That's what I'm asking.

C (36:40)

No, I think you're right. I wouldn't disagree with that.

B (36:42)

I guess what is different is that like the answer I think that people would give would be that Denmark has, you know, does have legitimate leader. It's Europe. Like the backlash should be much greater. You know, he doesn't like, you know, he's a bit of a hot stove toucher himself and you know, he likes to push as far as he can push until, you know somebody. He's kind of a Paco. Right. This doesn't go against the taco view. Yeah. The taco point of view would be that like he can get away with Venezuela, but he'll taco on Greenland because he'll get pushback from other, other leaders, world leaders. I, I, that would be, he's getting.

C (37:19)

Push back for most of the world leaders on Venezuela.

B (37:21)

I, I, I agree. I don't. Jv, you seem more skeptical.

A (37:25)

I think it's unlikely but not impossible.

B (37:27)

Yeah.

A (37:28)

So like, you know, I, I'd say three in 10 feels a little high to me, like one in 10 feels a little more. But you know, 10% chance is still a 10% chance. Those sorts of things happen all the time. I want him to do it. I'm, I'm in full because you want Greenland. No, I'm writing about this for tomorrow. But the short version of which is, so when we talk, you know, we often use the phrase like, you know, the rest of the free world. And I don't think we should like say it anymore. We just now just say the free world. It is important that the free world figure out what time it is and figure out what America is. And like the free world is going to need a bunch of nuclear proliferation pretty fast. And that is more likely to happen if the mask goes all the way off. And taking Greenland would be mask all the way off in ways that I think nobody could possibly deny.

B (38:18)

Yeah, right.

A (38:19)

I think every single political leader in Europe would understand. Oh shit. Okay, well, we need Our own nuclear umbrella. We need to treat America as if it is Russia across an ocean and we need to move on to a different world order. And that's where we're going to go eventually. The sooner we get there, the better.

B (38:42)

Okay. I'm not as there for you on the rooting, but on the, like, I think that the Europeans are closer to that than it might seem. Oh, I do too. Especially just a rank people because like everything, it's hard. Just think about what you would be thinking about if Germany was doing this. You know what I mean? Like, I got him. Yeah. I got a message from a friend who, you know, from who, like, I was just like, what is happening? Right? Like, who's like, lives over overseas and was like, it was like a link to an article about Trump, like looking into Colombia and Mexico and Greenland, you know, and he's like, is this real? And I just, I do think that the way it reverberates, particularly not maybe among the highest information people overseas, but among people that read the news and just look at this. It's hard to. We made the distinction. There is a real distinction between what Putin is doing and what Trump is doing. And I don't want to lie that, but if you're not paying that close of attention and you live in Estonia or whatever and you're like, and they're just like looking at the news, you're like, well, Trump's has taken out the leader of Venezuela and he's saber rattling Colombia.

A (39:55)

Putin is.

B (39:56)

Yeah. And he's talking about how great Putin is. He's talking about Greenland. Greenland's right there. It's not crazy to kind of think to, for them to look at this and be like, the Americans have totally lost their minds. Like, like he is a threat.

C (40:09)

And, and, and this, this goes to like, we are not trying to be the world's policeman here. We are not trying to dominate the world. We are trying to. We're like a regional bully now.

A (40:19)

Yes.

C (40:19)

Like, like, it is such a downgrading.

A (40:22)

Exactly correct.

C (40:22)

We, we are the.

B (40:24)

You miss being the world's policeman. You miss it.

C (40:26)

I miss being. I miss.

B (40:28)

Put on your lesbian police cap.

A (40:30)

I am same.

C (40:31)

I'm. I miss being enough of a moral authority that the United States has enough of a moral authority. There's enough goodwill at its back. It has done enough good things that people trust it to be the leading light of the world order. And we. You can't. I don't, I don't agree with JVL that we are no different from Russia. I. I agree, though, that Trump is squandering that quickly and that his aspirations are to be a regional bully from Russia.

A (41:01)

Donald Trump himself.

C (41:02)

Well, he said. He said, like, we are so innocent, right?

A (41:04)

Like, oh, like we're so innocent, you know? Hey, before we move on, though, Tim.

B (41:12)

Yes. We have an ad for our new sponsor, and I want to read you what our producer wrote for me at the top of this ad here. They write for me to say in my voice. Lately, everyone's trying to clean up their habits, myself included. And honestly, having one less drink has never felt easier. Whoever wrote this was not hanging out with me over the holidays. I'll let you know that.

A (41:36)

Did you have one less drink over the last?

B (41:39)

No, I did not. And nor was I cleaning up my habits in any way. A lot of my old college friends were in town in New Orleans, went to the Sugar bowl, and my habits were accelerated. That said, we're now for other people, not me, into what they're calling dry January.

C (41:59)

I'm doing dry January.

B (42:00)

Oh, you are? Me too.

A (42:01)

Yeah, me too.

B (42:03)

Congrats, guys.

C (42:05)

JBL does dry life.

B (42:06)

I'm doing torrential downpour January. But for the rest of y', all, instead of pouring a cocktail, take a look at Sol's out of Office drinks. Same relaxing vibe. Zero alcohol, zero hangover, and you still wake up feeling like a functioning adult. I love the out of Office Drinks.

C (42:23)

Me too.

B (42:24)

They make feeling good simple. It's delicious hemp drive, CBD and THC products with precise dosing, clean ingredients and formulations designed for predictable feel good effects. Sol is the alcohol alternative that puts you in control of your mood. Their best selling gummies will have our customizable calm and buzz. From the 1.5 microdose for gentle lift to the 15mg Sarah Longwell dose. The easiest way to unwind. Stop yourself without the grogginess or next day regret of alcohol. Give yourself the gift to a healthier unwind. Right now, Sol is offering our audience 30% off your entire order. Go to getsoul.com and use the code thenextlevel getsol.com promo code thenextlevell for 30% off. Put those little out of office drinks in your fridge. Have them have one around. You never know when you might need one.

C (43:08)

I'm a. I'm a three milligram person for you.

A (43:11)

For the new year, we'll be rolling out a new Bulwark plus subscription tier, the Champagne room tier, where you will get, once a month, a live stream with Me where I'll do 15 milligrams and just see what happens.

C (43:25)

You cannot start with 15 milligrams, JBL. You're too skinny now.

B (43:28)

It will ruin the your next day.

C (43:30)

50 milligrams is a lot. Here's the thing. I do think that we should do a show with politicians called when the Gummy Hits where we talk to them like they take a gummy at the start. You talk to them like while they're lucid and then, you know, you switch to softer topics. When the Gummy Hits.

B (43:46)

I don't think I want to be with Adam Schiff when the gummy hits though.

C (43:51)

I don't think so.

B (43:52)

No.

C (43:52)

Just no pitch a good idea.

B (43:54)

We can bet we can knock it around in the development meeting.

C (43:58)

All right, well, 45 minutes on Venezuela for something we thought we were going to do.

A (44:02)

50 years happening. Dan Bongino has left government service. It was the honor of his, his young life, his sweet, sweet life. And he's bringing back his podcast that's happening. Mike Johnson is trying to take down the plaque about the January 6th Capitol Police officers.

C (44:23)

They don't know.

A (44:23)

I wonder what the Capitol Police who protect him every day think about like, do you think they look at the Republican congressman coming in and just think, you guys, it's very interesting to me. We have, we had an unfortunate death. Republican member was called home to the Lord. Which brings their majority down to 2. Is that right?

C (44:43)

Yeah, they have a 2. 2. Well, their majority is up, but it's a, it's a two person vote majority. So like they, they can only afford to lose two votes which, which is already tough because Thomas Massie basically is staging his like one person fight against the leadership. And so he's voting with Republicans not that often these days. So they really only have one vote to spare.

B (45:04)

They only have 218 actual members right now with Margie to Green gone and the Malfug gone. And the margins could get even closer if Johnson would see there's a special election in Texas in January. Sylvester Turner died, that's going to be replaced and there's another one I think in April because, you know, if it's 218 to, you know, there are four vacancies right now, so. And it could get down to even closer than it is right now.

C (45:35)

Well, yeah, and there's an 80 year Indiana Republican, Jim Baird who's in the hospital after a car crash.

B (45:41)

Right. So if they don't show up to the vote.

C (45:43)

Yeah. So like they have an attendance problem now. Where like, anybody who's gone for any reason isn't there for a vote.

A (45:51)

Give me the odds that he's still speaker on election day.

B (45:55)

MIKEY J. Yeah, I think really high because, like, you can't play some replace somebody with nobody. And they. We've been through this process now so many times, but it's just like, what, who, who would do better? It's not his fault. I mean, he's not really knocking it out of the park, but. But it's.

A (46:12)

Oh, it's not that. It's just. Is there enough spite, no spiteful hatred of him within the caucus to just want to ruin his life?

C (46:20)

So this is against my prediction, not of this year, but of the previous year when I thought we'd go through. Like, there's no way Mike Johnson holds on. Part of the reason he's been able to is because there aren't that many votes happening. Right. Like, the rub happens when people are leaving. They're mad because of votes taking place that they don't like. And the only vote that is coming up is like, they've got another spending vote to get through at the end of the month. But because of the narrow majority, Democrats have way more leverage. And so right now it's looking like the Democrats and the Republicans are basically on the same page. Like they're going to pass a bill that is much more favorable to the Democrats where they have vetoed a bunch of the stuff that they don't like. And everybody's. Nobody's got the stomach for another shutdown politically. And so I think he, I think he survives.

B (47:07)

Yeah, I mean, we could play fantasy politics. I love jvl loves to bring this up. And so I'm going to do it for you. Is that like, given the current state, you know, if there were any House Republicans who felt like they were opposed to Donald Trump, supporting illegal wars in the Caribbean and in Venezuela without Congress, Congressional oversight, or that they, you know, want us to do more to support our friends in Ukraine or they don't. They want more the Epstein files to be released faster because that, that process is moving notably slow, I would say, or any other issue. It's like the same set thing we've been saying for all, all. And I don't know, Lisa Murkowski could go to the Democrats and say, make me a majority leader. I. They're really. That's how small the margins are now. And Gavin Newsom is, I think, gonna play, continue to play hardball, shout out to Gav on that. At least this, you know, that's going to be forever until this special election comes up for the seat. And so it's possible. They, yeah, you know, that's, that's so it's not possible.

A (48:12)

It's not possible. But the reason it's not possible is because the last people to leave the bus will be the responsible people like the, the normie. Republicans are just pot committed to this and they don't believe any of this shit anyway. So they're not going to leave Trump until it's already over.

B (48:31)

Brian Fitzpatrick doesn't want to be speaker of the House. They can make Brian Fitzpatrick speaker of the House, I think Tom Matthew, they're.

C (48:38)

Just going to take out his seat. I mean, in 26, you have a.

A (48:41)

Better chance of getting busy.

B (48:42)

Well, yeah, you'd only be speaker of the House for like three months. You'd still get the bust. What did Kamala say on the tour? And they asked her if she felt like she was like my vice President. Bust will always be there.

C (48:51)

That's true.

B (48:52)

Speaker of the House bus would always be there by Fitzpatrick or Thomas Massie. I don't know. I don't actually think that's going to happen. I just wanted to see if I could titillate JVL and he wouldn't go with go for it.

C (49:01)

But, but, but I will. Just as we're talking about this, it's worth noting that if you're a Democrat who is worried about the Republican agenda under the Trump trifecta, like you've actually come out pretty good. Like the only piece of legislation that they passed is the big beautiful bill. That's it from Congressional. Everything else has been done unilaterally by Trump, which actually is a huge problem for our democracy.

B (49:26)

It's not great. You know, they haven't done anything. Is the Senate even in session right now? Like, who would know? Are they back?

A (49:34)

Like, it's an excellent question.

C (49:36)

The only reason I know anything about the Senate is because I'm watching how Cassidy handles all of the vaccines being rescheduled.

B (49:44)

Lindsey Graham's in D.C. nobody's happier than that guy. That guy is like that little elf's like, who are we taking out next? Who we going for next?

A (49:54)

Do we, do we have anything to say about Dan Bongino?

B (49:56)

He sort of, I'm just enjoying it. I mean, have you read what. And he is out, dude. I, I, I just, I have no love for Dan Bongino, but as a poster, I do appreciate that he had to, he had to suffer 11 months where he really couldn't post and he wasn't meant to be dep. Yeah, well, he wasn't meant to be deputy director of the faa. It did stop him because he wasn't tweeting shit like this. He said this to Matt Gaetz. This is a couple hours ago. You've always been a dick, by the way. Grifting off your daddy like a suckling little doggy. When I first met you in the panhandle, I knew you were a piece of shit. It's written all over that phony face of yours. He goes back again. Yeah, that's right, doggy. Backpedal away. Good move. Now go playing blame the Jews for your dumbass tweet.

C (50:47)

Wait, who is that to?

B (50:48)

Dan Bongino. To Matt Gaetz.

C (50:50)

Oh, to Matt Gates.

A (50:52)

Yeah, I think I'm on Gates. I think I'm on the Gates.

B (50:55)

You don't have to pick a side.

C (50:56)

Yeah, this is not one where you have to pick a side. Why do you always do this? Just neither.

A (51:00)

Because I grew up in a world where you always pick sides.

B (51:02)

You don't have to pick a side. Okay, backpedal away, doggy. I mean, I just. It's. It's. It's concerning that this man was the deputy director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Right.

A (51:13)

It seems like his temperament and judgment are fantastic. I can't imagine that his actions would endanger any criminal prosecutions.

C (51:20)

Part of what's funny about the Bongino thing is that you can tell not just that he was desperate to post, but that being in a government and being in a position where when asked, you couldn't lie all the time because you could get subpoenaed, that. That was very hard for him. Those constraints, those terms were unacceptable for him. And for him to be able to get out now and just bloviate, I think probably suits him. I do wonder, now that he's back in the podcasting chair, everybody's going to ask him about the Epstein files. They are going to want to know. And I do wonder how he's going to handle that. I might tune in for the first time.

A (51:58)

What? Why is he coming back and setting his sights on the Indra Maga debate instead of going after the libtards? Is that just where all the juices right now in podcast world? And where is he on Candace?

B (52:13)

I mean, I think based on the tweet where he said, now go blame the Jews for your dumb ass tweet, that seems like Dan's going to be anti Candace. Yeah, diving in on the Ben Shapiro side seems like to Me.

A (52:27)

Well, good for him. I guess.

B (52:28)

My guess is that he's also mad. I mean, we really should have Will summer on for this. So we'll do. We'll just. I'll offer you my guess and we'll do a longer lead thing with Will here in a couple days. But I, My guess is that he's mad at the maga people because they're coming for him. You know, so you could see why he might aside and share his chart. I don't know. You can pull the chart back up. You might put Bongino more on the maga establishment side because he's like, all those other guys are throwing spitballs, you know, why is Cash so incompetent? Why haven't you arrested any of the people that stole the election? Why haven't you revealed all the Jews behind the Epstein, you know, saga, right? Like, and so I bet he's mad that like, they weren't supportive enough of him. That would be my. That'd be my guess.

C (53:10)

I think that's fair because I do think the podcasters who've lived in the toxic Maga soup for so long expected their fans, the fandom, to convey to their real big boy jobs. And when it didn't, they were sad about it. And he wants to get back in that, you know, where the, where the fans just talk to him really hard.

A (53:32)

Going through life without mouth breathers asking for your autograph. Our show is brought to you by Green Chef. Are you annoyed with misleading healthy meals? Healthy. Tired of locking in for another new year's trend? Green Chef cuts through the noise as the trusted authority in clean eating, delivering only real farm sourced ingredients. Trust every bite. With over 40 clean, customizable weekly recipes designed to give you peace of mind. I am so looking forward to trying their chicken with lemon crema. It is hard to get everyone in my house to eat the same thing. I think most of us will be on board, which is about the best you can ask for. If you can get five out of six on board with the same dinner. Winner, winner, chicken dinner. Every Green Chef box delivers certified organic produce and responsibly sourced proteins and seafood. That means avoiding ultra processed fillers. You can reach your wellness goals with options like Mediterranean, high protein, high fiber, plant based and more. All clinically proven to support healthier habits and you can take control of your health without the stress they do the research, meal planning and grocery shopping. You get to enjoy low prep, low mess meals for every lifestyle. The Green Chef meals I make at my home make my night Every time. And you can't find a better win win than that, you get to treat yourself and do something healthy for yourself. Right now. Go to greenchef.com Nextlevel Graza and use code Next LevelGraza to get started with 50% off Green Chef plus free Graza olive oil set in your second and third boxes. This 50% off offer is only available for a limited time, so don't wait. That's code Next LevelGraza@GreenChef.com Next LevelGraza so, Graza, what do you guys think about that?

B (55:31)

I just want to throw away just one more on the Candace thing. Sure. No, no.

A (55:38)

I want to hear it.

B (55:39)

Well, Candace thinks the FBI lied about Charlie Kirk's assassination. It's just I felt remiss by not mentioning that about another reason why Dan would be on the, on the opposite side of Candace.

C (55:51)

What is Cash Patel going to do now that he doesn't have Dan Bongino as his sidekick to help him with all the. The work? How will the FBI go on?

A (56:02)

Who will get his raid jacket for him?

C (56:05)

Yeah, the kid. The kid size.

B (56:07)

And the FBI is only doing the perimeter around immigration raids and also looking into real estate fraud among Democrats. So I think, I don't know.

A (56:15)

Didn't FBI agents execute the arrest warrant on Nicholas Maduro?

B (56:20)

No, I don't believe so.

C (56:22)

Mouth.

A (56:22)

Yeah, I, I believed that. That they were doing the arresting. Maybe not.

C (56:28)

All right, are we going to talk about Jack Smith or are we going to talk about vaccines? Is there an end? Neither. Okay.

A (56:35)

Neither.

B (56:36)

Both.

A (56:37)

Why did Jack Smith take vaccines? How deep does this thing go?

B (56:41)

He looks great. Jack looks great. That testimony. Did you have something to say about Jack Smith?

C (56:45)

I only want to say this, that it's. I, I want to talk about it just briefly because to complain that basically it, it happened, you know, over the break when no one was paying attention and he was like, yeah, he definitely did it. Like, he was definitely. And he was. And about both about the, the documents at Mar A Lago and like his investigation was going to show Donald Trump was absolutely responsible for it. Like, that is what his testimony is. And they, they did, I think, successfully. News cycle bury it. He says Smith claimed they found proof beyond a reasonable doubt that President Donald Trump engaged in a criminal scheme to overturn the results of the 2020 election. So, you know, I mean, I guess no one cares because he's president again.

A (57:34)

They didn't care when he wasn't president.

B (57:38)

Yeah. I got to tell you, people don't care, including me. I Hear you. I know it's upsetting, but I was on when I went to New York, I was like, if I'm going to be. I might as well just pop over to Ms. And this is a couple of. And it was the day there's Nobody else was doing it. It's like, it's a solid. So it was like whatever, one of the holiday days and it was the day after that came out, you know, and like the segment intro comes in and God love the segment producer who did it. And it's like the Jacks. Jack Smith has Trump's number and you know, he testified clearly that Donald Trump was guilty on that day. And here it is in the music and the clips and the images from January 6th and got to me and I think they wanted. Right. Like hell, yeah. You know what? Like waving of the bloody shirt. And I was like, this just makes me mad at Merrick Garland. Yeah. I sat here for six minutes and it's like we. I know he's guilty. I guess so. I. Great. I think it's nice Jack Smith's out there. I'd like for him to do more. It doesn't hurt, I guess, but it didn't. It didn't take a grand jury to know he was guilty. It just took like living on this day five years ago, you know, so that's just. Sorry to be a WW.

C (58:51)

That's true. And after the January 6th committee, I guess it's like we've had multiple iterations of proof that he is guilty on these fronts and we didn't. The Justice Department under Biden didn't do anything about it and the voters didn't.

A (59:08)

Do anything about it and the voters didn't do anything.

C (59:11)

That's true.

A (59:11)

Although the voters increased his vote share. Yeah, well, that's what they did.

C (59:15)

I know.

A (59:16)

Yay, America. So get out of here.

B (59:19)

That's great.

A (59:19)

Sarah wanted to defend the Iraq war so that all of the people in the comments don't do it. Especially don't you say that can be super duper happy with her.

C (59:30)

Go, guys. Read JBL's Triad today where he defends neoconservatism and all I was saying, as I outlined before, that I sort of. I think I broadly agree with some of JVL's take on this, but why don't you say your take and Tim can say his take because he disagrees with you and I will be Tim in the conflict and split the difference. Go jbl.

A (59:55)

I mean, look, I'm just saying that I, I was a Skeptic on neoconservatism in my youth and in a very JVL way now that absolutely nobody in America is willing to defend neoconservatism as a foreign policy, I've come around and thought, yeah, actually in the long sweep of things net net, a lot more good than bad.

B (60:19)

Here's what you wrote.

A (60:20)

Too bad.

B (60:21)

Actually, JVL writes this. He doesn't know why the commenters are mad at him. He writes this. The public consensus is that the Iraq event, adventure, like Afghanistan was a failure. I disagree. Paquiz, who is leader of Iraq today? You probably don't know. That's a good thing. It's Mohammed Shia Al Sudani. Point taken. I did not know who the leader was of Iraq was today. That is a good thing. It's better than Saddam Hussein. I will say, in spite of that, the fact that the leader of Iraq is now better than Saddam Hussein, I would have to side pretty staunchly with the public consensus over you on Iraq being a failure. And I don't know, I like the idea of neoconservatism. I think that there's a softer version of it that probably might work. I think that it's called neoliberalism.

A (61:10)

Yeah, the same thing again. It's the office thing. Neoconservatism, neoliberalism, they're the same.

B (61:14)

They aren't though. It's important difference. Like, encouraging democratic formation abroad is good. Encouraging freedom and democracy is good. Using the US as soft power to try to nudge that along is good. I still feel that way. I'm not like an isolationist now, but like, objectively speaking, the effort to use the military to try to turn autocracies into democracies, like, was a failure across several different. And across, you know, on. On in multiple different countries. And like, if you have grown up in the last 40 years and just watched failure after failure, I don't think that, like, you're going to be assuaged by the idea that Mohammed Shia Al Sudani is the leader of Iraq right now. And like, a lot of people died and Donald Trump's probably president because of Iraq, I would say. And, you know, having a slightly better leader in Iraq now versus then I don't think justifies all the deaths. So that's where I'm at. Sorry. Thank you. Shower me with praise now. Commenters. JBL is like, do you want to talk about, do you want to argue about Iraq? And I was like, no. And then I was like, wait a minute. Yes, I do, actually. I'm happy I want to take the popular position today.

A (62:28)

You're welcome to have it. The good news is neoconservatism is gone and it ain't never coming back because nobody would ever trust us. We're never going to get any international support anymore. Like, as far as you can see to the horizon, that world is gone. And, yeah, I mean, you look at the way that Trump has treated Machado in Venezuela, just sort of shunting her to the side, right? This is so. You can't even.

B (62:57)

She was on Hannity last night begging to share the Nobel Prize with him, right?

A (63:01)

And she's like, I haven't even taken it yet.

B (63:05)

So you get it January to June. I'll take it July to December.

A (63:10)

Anybody who is a democratic republic resistance leader somewhere is paying attention to this and seeing that the United States doesn't want to help democracies. And at best, you can try to play Trump and pretend that you'll be his vassal state. But even that, right, is that we're an unreliable partner. It's great.

C (63:32)

Yeah. But the. The loss. I do think we should mourn the loss of an essential thing, which is that we believed that democracy, because we were good at it and we were modeling it, like, could bring prosperity and freedom to other people. And, like, we want that for humans. Right? Like, that's an okay instinct to not want people to live under repressive regimes. The problem with the moment right now is that we're not getting to be a beacon of democracy. We have to fix our own democracy. We're in no position to tell other people how to do their democracies. Right now.

A (64:07)

We.

C (64:07)

Because the guy who's in charge tried to overturn an election and for all we know, tried to get rid of the Venezuelan dictator, not because he cared about democracy or the people living in Venezuela, but because he wants the Venezuelans who are here, who have been, you know, pushed out under their regime, he wants them to go back and get out of here, and he wants to take their oil like every other petty dictator thug around the world to just raid other places to. For their. Their natural resources. That is not. That is not what a democracy does. That's. That is not how a great democracy behaves.

A (64:46)

Iraq has a longer streak of peaceful transitions of power than America does. You sit at that.

B (64:55)

Congratulation, Paul Bremmer. Heck of a job. And it's true, though. So, Sarah, who won, me or jvl? You're in the middle. Oh, you're.

C (65:08)

Yeah, I mean, I guess I. I think that jv JBL makes a point that I think is underappreciated, which is that there are. I think everybody thinks everything about what we were doing was a failure. I think Tim is right though that ultimately if you weigh the cost benefit analysis and you had to say, did America in the post World War II order do a lot of good in a variety of ways. Right. And I think the answer to that is yes.

B (65:35)

Yes, I think yes on that.

C (65:37)

Okay.

A (65:38)

And all the Cold Warrior stuff, right. All the, the supporting the solidarinos movement in Poland and I mean I. Undermining the commies.

B (65:47)

Cold War stuff in our hemisphere was mostly a catastrophe and Vietnam was a catastrophe. And so, you know, hit or miss. Eastern Europe was pretty good in the Cold War. Our Cold War stuff. Eastern Europe was good. But you know, I don't. Again, this is just like, it's like the real. I just, I said this, I'm sorry to reuse this. I said that. Jonathan Blitzer on the pod today. It's like there's like the real communism has never been tried element of this. Like objectively do I think that the United States should be doing what it can to use its soft power and maybe some weapons from time to time to like support the more freedom and democracy loving person that is in Peru or Venezuela or El Salvador? Like, yeah, like on paper, academically, in a room, I think so. But we have like 50 years full of like what, two being two for 37 on that front. Outside. Outside of Eastern Europe.

A (66:44)

Yeah.

B (66:44)

And it's like, I don't think it's. That's a bad record. And it's like maybe it doesn't work in practice as well as we think.

A (66:49)

I, I think you can't just say, well, outside of Eastern Europe, Eastern Europe was the most important of all the battlefields. And as I say in the piece, like it's messy and there were lots of mistakes and times when there was tons of internal contradictions and it was at war with itself. But net net the world is better off for it. Things worked out pretty well for us.

C (67:13)

The holidays are expensive. You're paying for gifts, travel, decorations, food, and before you know it, you've blown way past what you were planning to spend. Don't start the new year off with bad money vibes. Download rocket money to stay on top of your finances. The app pulls your income, expenses and upcoming charges into one place so you can get the clearest picture of your money. It shows how much to set aside for bills and how much is safe to spend for the month so you can spend with confidence, no guesswork needed. Get alerts before bills hit. Track budgets and see every subscription you're paying for. Rocket Money also finds extra ways to save you money by canceling subscriptions you're not using and negotiating lower bills for you. On average, Rocket Money users can save up to $740 a year when using all the app's premium features. Start the year off right by taking control of your finances. Go to rocketmoney.com cancel to get started. That's rocketmoney.com cancel rocketmoney.com cancel the free trade part.

B (68:13)

I will defend. I'll be the dead ender on the free trade side of it if you want me too. Which is the weapons part a little less.

C (68:20)

But part of the neoconservative argument is about increasing freedom and democracy and other capitalist stable countries with whom we can trade to the benefit of all involved.

A (68:34)

And, and if I could just say, mostly to the benefit of America. Yeah, that's the other thing that's lost in this. Like all these American firsters are like, oh, what do we get? What you got is a global financial system arranged specifically to America's desires. Do you people have any idea how much that's worth? Like, oh, but we're going to get a couple of tankers of oil.

B (68:55)

The Stephen Miller thing in a different part of that Jake Tapperview, he's like the post World War II order where we decided to apologize for ourselves and just give everything away and be generous to other people and we, we. While we got raped. Pillage. No, that shit drives me crazy. Like, no, economically, like, you just look at the math. Like, I mean like throughout, like the, the growth like throughout the world of people's economic prospects like after World War II to, you know, through now is just objectively good. And like the American firsters are morons for like arguing the other side of it. And it's like, I'm just talking about the meddling and the politics of the other countries is what I'm talking about.

A (69:31)

Well, it's all of a piece. And the point is we didn't do the neoconservatism stuff was not done with no self interest. It's all based on self interest. The idea was that stability and liberalism ultimately reinforces our lead position. And the, the extent to which the magas and America Firsters see the period of America's largest domination ever as somehow being the period where America was giving everything away. I don't understand, I legitimately, I don't understand it. I don't understand how Steven Miller can say that. Right. This was. He looks back at the part where America became the hyperpower, the most powerful civilization, you know, since probably the time of Rome or. Nah, not since like, the. The late British Empire. Yeah, yeah, the late British Empire. And it's like, yeah, look at how terrible things were. Like, dude, what planet are you on? Yeah, there we go. That's a show. That's a show.

B (70:31)

You. Stephen Miller consensus.

C (70:34)

Yeah. And another thing, it's the same thing with immigration. Like, the red. The. The bigness of us and the fact that, like, people wanted to come here, especially the world's smartest, most ambitious people from all over. Like, they came here and they made us richer and smarter and able to invent more things. Like, we are giving up our superpowerness right now as we speak. We are walking away from all of it.

B (71:02)

And yeah, it's gone, actually.

A (71:05)

It's gone. It's already done. It's already done. I was listening to Shield of Republic. I promise. Last thing. And Eric Edelman had a guy on from. I'm sorry, I'm forgetting his name from Think Tank, but he's a veteran of the Obama administration and talking about the importance of securing our supply. Supply chains and positioned, you know, because of our. Our close competitive relationship with. With China and how, you know, they're rivals. And I just thought to myself, maybe he's right. Right. I mean, just objectively, like, all these things sound exactly. Yes, they're the responsible things to do, but also that thing is done like it's cooked. You know, like, you're talking about bringing horses back into the barn when they've been, you know, out for days. And I just don't see how any of that's possible. Happy 2026, everybody. Good show.

C (72:03)

Disagree with that overly weak assessment.

A (72:06)

Well, you can talk about it in the next hour. Good show. Long show, guys. We'll be back next week. Sarah and I will be here on Friday. Good luck, America.