← Truth in the Barrel
Truth in the Barrel
Devil's Cut | Donald Trump's Golden Dome
00:36:04
On January 27th 2025 President Trump signed an executive order to begin production on a missile defense system based on the design of Israel’s famous “Iron Dome.” Would the potential cost be worth it? Could something like that even work for a...
Loading summary
Transcript64 lines
- [00:00]
Chumba Casino
Ready to level up. Shumba Casino is your playbook to fun. It's free to play with no purchase necessary.
- [00:06]
Line 2
Enjoy hundreds of casino style games like.
- [00:08]
Chumba Casino
Bingo, slots and solitaire anytime anywhere with fresh releases every week. Whether you're at home or on the go. Let Chumba Casino bring the excitement to you. Plus get free daily login bonuses and a free welcome bonus. Join now for your chance to redeem some serious prizes. Play Chumba Casino today. No purchase necessary. VGW Group void where prohibited by law 18 DC Supply want to keep your personal number private but still stay connected? With line two, you can get a second phone line right on your device with a super simple app and no need for another phone. Whether it's for online shopping, dating or shielding your main number from spam, Line two is an easy way to manage it all. Ready for peace of mind without breaking the bank call, text block and more for only $9.99. Get started with line2.com audio or download line2 in any app store today. Line 2, your second line simplified.
- [01:10]
Amy McGrath
Hi everyone, I'm Amy McGrath and I'm here with Denver Rigamund. And this is Truth in the Barrel, the Devil's Cut.
- [01:19]
Denver Rigamund
Love this, love this. And you know, today, before we get into the incredible story of Golden Dome, which, you know, it sounds sort of like one of the kids books, like everybody poos, you know, it's just sort of weird, you know.
- [01:33]
Amy McGrath
Yeah, we're talking today about Trump's new shiny idea of a Golden Dome missile defense system, which he has decided we need based on Israel's Iron Dome system. And so this is really important because it's massive, massive amount of money and we need to talk about the potential for this system, why we might need it and how kind of crazy it is. But first I'm going to hand it back over to you, Denver, because this is truth in the barrel. And we got to talk whiskey.
- [02:11]
Denver Rigamund
We got to talk whiskey because it is a Devil's Cut episode. And pretty special by the way, if everybody out there you need to know, you can always join in. The fun, the education, the incredible insight into what's happening every day by making sure that you download us on your favorite pod and you subscribe to our YouTube channel and you can actually see us on all the socials, Amy. I mean we're pretty brave. We've been on True Social on X. We're on Blue sky, just everywhere that you can find truth in a barrel. Look us up. And then you get to hear things like Golden Dome and also whiskey tastings. And today, amy, I have E.H. taylor small batch bottled in bond, which is very interesting. Now people are like what is bottled in Bond? And so EH Taylor, I don't know if people know this, why this is so cool. H. Taylor was one of the first people to lobby for Bottled and Bond to ensure that distillers had tax breaks.
- [03:08]
Amy McGrath
So what does that mean? Bottled and Bond? What does that mean?
- [03:11]
Denver Rigamund
Yeah, Bottled and Bond is a four year whiskey that's you're already paying the taxes on it. But it has to be at 100, it has to be bottled at 100 proof. So when you have a Bottled and Bond you have a straight whiskey over 4 years old that's bottled at 100 proof that's already been taxed, it's been bottled in bond or in a bonded warehouse. So pretty cool, right?
- [03:32]
Amy McGrath
Yeah.
- [03:32]
Denver Rigamund
So and each tailor, this is a bottled and bond. This is very, very traditional. And if people know the history, they're going to love it. Each tailor started multiple distilleries around the, around the country. Well in Kentucky but, but his stuff is everywhere. And by the way, this used to be a, like a Jim Beam product. You know who bought this? Buffalo Trace. This is now distilled at Buffalo Trace's distillery, which I know Amy, you're a Buffalo Trace fan. So we're looking at a Bottled and Bond EH Taylor. If people go look up EH Taylor, incredible. The distilleries he started. The distillery that he started today is actually Castle and Key. I don't know if you know that.
- [04:08]
Amy McGrath
Oh yeah, been there.
- [04:09]
Denver Rigamund
Castle and Key, right. So Castle and Key rebuilt the original distillery by the way. And gosh, I'm trying to remember the distilleries. Name two distilleries that E.H. taylor started are now the baseline for Buffalo Trace distilleries. So incredible history. Each Taylor is just an amazing person.
- [04:26]
Amy McGrath
And how does it taste?
- [04:27]
Denver Rigamund
Well, we're going to do it now. I'm going to.
- [04:29]
Amy McGrath
Let's do it.
- [04:29]
Denver Rigamund
Pop the cork. I don't know if you could hear that, but I'm going to do a little. Oh a nice little pour. So here we go. So let's see. You know, let me get the nose real quick. But. Okay. I have a Glen Karen class today for the nose. I haven't had my small batch in a while. This is special for you Amy, as always. Oh, you know what the nose is. You know I have an awful palette. Like my wife's like I like it or don't. Right. But you know, my wife could tell you. But it's almost like a little cherry.
- [05:00]
Amy McGrath
Okay.
- [05:01]
Denver Rigamund
Like with mint, cherry sweetness, but you have this little sweetness underneath. It's almost, to me, it's almost more peanut buttery than butterscotch. So anyhow, that's what I love, anything at bottle and bond. So cheers. Here's to you, Amy McGrath.
- [05:19]
Amy McGrath
All right.
- [05:19]
Denver Rigamund
Oh, my God. That's, it's, it's easier than a Monday morning. Man. This is nice. This is really nice, good stuff.
- [05:26]
Amy McGrath
And we need it because today we're talking about Trump's January 27th executive order in which he ordered the Pentagon to deliver a plan for a golden dome system to protect America. So let's just start. Denver. What, what is a missile defense system at all? Like, what is it?
- [05:51]
Denver Rigamund
Well, if you're, if you're looking at missile defense systems, there's pretty cool stuff, Right. And you know, my training and Amy know me, and you've talked about this, you know, based on your background being in the jet, My background mission planning for the jet. So when you're looking at a missile defense system, you're looking at something that's almost an integrated air defense system that goes all the way from early warning to executing against a target. So that means seeing something coming as soon as it's actually launched to shooting it down with a variety of methodologies or a variety of warheads or weaponry. Even when you're talking missile defense, you have different types of missile defense, which is interesting because we've talked nuclear in one of our shows and we talked about ICBMs. But missile defense could be anything from ICBMs to rockets fired from Lebanon into Israel. Right. Or even different kinds of specific types of surface to air missile systems. Even man pads, man portables. Right. That can shoot from your, from your little shoulder here all the way to very advanced mobile SAM systems like the Russian SA15s. Right. Or even up to very advanced systems like strategic surface air missile systems like the S400. Right. That can actually reach out and touch aircraft from a long way away, which you can put our intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance assets in harm's way.
- [07:08]
Amy McGrath
Yeah. Basically, you're trying to, you're trying to shoot down something that is coming at you in the sky. So if a drone is coming at you, a missile's coming at you, a cruise missile or something, a nuclear tip missile. The idea behind missile defense in, in all of its broad categories is we're going to shoot that thing down so it doesn't go boom. Okay? That's what this is. Now, Donald Trump has, has decided that he loves Israel's Iron Dome system. The Iron Dome system is a system that, that Israel has developed. It's worked very well against rockets coming from Hamas. It's worked very well against regional missiles coming from Iran. And Donald Trump has basically said, I want that for America. I acknowledge the idea. We, we all want to be safe from incoming, potentially incoming missiles. But there's some real issues with this, starting with the size of Israel is about the size of New Jersey. And so protecting the entire United States pro makes, makes it more difficult scientifically, right? I mean, the Iron Dome, as you know, Denver, it's protects against regional missiles, lower flying missiles. It's a tactical system. So, folks, unless Canada is going to launch a missile at, I don't know, Cleveland, Ohio, this is not a system that we necessarily want to buy. But Donald Trump has bigger ideas, right? He wants to create one that would protect us against all missiles coming from all around the world, right?
- [08:56]
Denver Rigamund
That's exactly right. And I think when you look at Iron Dome as a tactical system, I think people need to know, first of all, I've got to feel and touch it in Israel. Right? And, you know, the fact that, you know, I was trained, you know, you think about intelligence training and then go into mission planning, right? Like, for instance, if you were going into harm's way, Amy, what would I need to tell you? Right? You're looking at your initial points when you're looking at your altitudes. What's your threats? Right? Yeah.
- [09:20]
Amy McGrath
What are the threats?
- [09:22]
Denver Rigamund
What are the threats?
- [09:22]
Amy McGrath
Because you want to shoot me down. That's all I care about.
- [09:25]
Denver Rigamund
You're like, dan, I don't know if I want to go in at 8000 AGL. If there's an SA8 on the ground right over, right?
- [09:31]
Amy McGrath
You know, you're like 8,000ft up.
- [09:33]
Denver Rigamund
Oh, sorry. Yeah. Yes. So. So, right, you'd be like, dan, I don't know, do I want to go right over that, Sam, what other assets do I have? CJ's there with me? Do I have, you know, do I got prowies or prowlers or terpies pods? What do I got looking at? Are we going to target that before I actually fly over it? Don't send me over, you know, an actual envelope where I'm going to get shot down, right? Amy, you'd be like, I hate you as an intelligence officer if I do that. That's stupid, Right? When you look at an Iron Dome as a tactical system, it can fire between, I don't know, 60 or 80 missiles per battery. So Right. So say, you know, say you got 10 batteries that are active at a time. That's 800 missiles, right. That are shooting down the lobbying that's coming from either Gaza or Lebanon. I'm talking Israel specifically. That's, that's really different. Really different from protecting United States. And you made me laugh. I don't think Canada or Mexico are going to be shooting tactical rockets.
- [10:28]
Amy McGrath
I mean, give us some time with Donald Trump.
- [10:30]
Denver Rigamund
That's right. That's right. That's right. You know, it's like John Candy and Canadian bacon. You know, we're actually gonna go to war with Canada. But Golden Dome, when they put it out there, was almost this, well, we're gonna shoot down every threat from everywhere. Almost in an ICBM scenario. Right. Or missiles that are coming into America. Iron Dome is not the exact corollary. Corollary. Maybe that's why they use golden. But it's really not it. Right. We're actually sort of expanding or improving. If I had to build the requirements, we're expanding or approving our strategic missile defense, which is very different from tactical and operational.
- [11:11]
Amy McGrath
And we've been here before, right. I mean, Ronald Reagan started what was called, some people called it Star wars, some people called it the, the SDI or Strategic Defense Initiative. And the, the idea behind that was we'd have space lase out there to be able to shoot down nuclear ballistic missiles coming at us. And here's the bottom line about what happened in that case. It was a super costly program. It cost us over $400 billion in the 1980s. 80s 80s. It proved way too technologically difficult to do. And we abandoned it. We abandoned the program because it was not working. And when you think about today and think about all this happening in government with, you know, this, hey, we're going to tackle fraud, waste and abuse the dodge people going up there and trying to do that. Think about spending trillions because that's what this iron, or, sorry, this Golden Dome would cost $5 trillion to build this thing. And it's, you can say, well, Amy, aren't we more technologically savvy than we were in the 1980s? Shouldn't we be able to do this now? Well, it's still really hard. Scientists liken this to trying to shoot a bullet out of the sky with another bullet. It's tough.
- [12:42]
Denver Rigamund
It's really tough. And you know, of course, spaceborne lasers, obviously there's a, there's sort of an umbrella of defense. Right. We do have a system that, you know, has a certain number of Missiles in the dozens to shoot down ICBMs. I can't go into it much. You know, Amy, mean, you've talked about this, right? I've always been absolutely impressed by what you've done. My background's been very diverse and even space based weapon systems, you know, I've worked the nsa, nro, combined the joint angle for specific programs in this area. You know, I've been to Cheyenne Mountain, I've been to Peterson. I've worked in Cheyenne Mountain, I mean, and in Peterson Air Force Base, you know, Fort Belvoir, been all around there, but really worked a lot of Buckley adf. Right. Aerospace Defense Facility, which is now, I think they changed its National Guard base. But it's still, it's an nro, NSA joint area that I can't talk too much about, but that's where I cut my teeth. And I think when we're talking about this Golden Dome thing, and it's interesting, I think they might have named the Golden Dome because they had a trademark issue with Iron Dome in Israel. I think what you're, what you're looking.
- [13:56]
Amy McGrath
At is because Trump loves gold, right?
- [13:58]
Denver Rigamund
Well, not only that, but it's weird. I think based on the rumors of him and golden things happening in Russia, like, you know, golden showers and stuff. Maybe Golden Dome isn't the appropriate name for this. But you talked about how big this would have to be trillions. Right. Do you know that they're already running lines for funding through the appropriations process for Golden Dome now think about that. Without really a defined way of going about it, what's the first requirement? And it was like Denver, it's a boondoggle. And Amy, why don't you define boondoggle for people? I think this is, I loved it when you said it. Yeah.
- [14:36]
Amy McGrath
Would you define, I guess that's not a term that people normally use, but we use it in the military. It's, it's basically means where it's a complete waste of money that there is no feasible way to get to the mission to, you know, to, to actually succeed. And people are just having a lot of fun with the money. I mean, it's a boondoggle, right? I mean, it's, it's, it means we're all having a lot of fun with the money that been thrown at us. When people say to me, why is this a problem? Shouldn't we be thinking big? Shouldn't we be tackling these technological challenges to protect our country? I break it down and try to remind people there's three different phases for when a ballistic missile is shot and launched at us. Okay, the boost phase, the mid course phase and the terminal phase. The most vulnerable is the boost phase. So ideally we would want to shoot down that missile that is launched at us in the boost phase. That's in, as you know, the first three or four minutes of when it's launched up into the atmosphere, you know. And the idea behind this golden dome is that we would try to do that. Now you can do that by having ground based interceptors, but those ground based interceptors would have to be very, very close, geographically close to the missile that is being launched at us. And if it's being launched in North Korea, we would have to be very close around North Korea with thousands of ground based interceptor missiles. And the problem with that is China ain't going to want that. They're not going to want that. It's. It's hard. And then you could place them and people say, well, let's place them in space. That sounds good. Let's place these interceptor missiles in space so that when you know that the nuclear launched missile goes up into, into outer space or, or even ideally before it gets into outer space, we've launched our interceptor missiles from space. The problem with that is you got to put thousands of these interceptors in orbit around where we think, where we think the North Koreans in this case are launching from. So the scientists have looked at this, have said we need 1,000 interceptor missiles orbiting in space to counter just one North Korean nuclear ballistic missile. How feasible is this?
- [17:22]
Denver Rigamund
I don't know. It's a weird thing because I don't know if that's exactly correct. Right. I, depending on what we can do left to boom, that might change everything. Right.
- [17:32]
Amy McGrath
So what's left of boom?
- [17:34]
Denver Rigamund
So left of boom is all the mission plane that goes in before the actual missile is launched, which is called, you have intelligence preparation of the battlefield or intelligence preparation of the battle space. Right. You're looking at the order of battle of the specific threat country and the type of missile systems that they have from tactical to strategic. Right. Through all those multiple machinations. Right. As you're talking, Amy, it's a much different missile trying to shoot you down than an icbm. Completely different. Right. It's a, it's even a different TTP tactics, techniques and procedures. A different. Right. It's, it's different in how they actually engage the target. I think the plausible portion of this is indications and warning Inwood and that with the advent of the able, the ability to process multiple types of Data that might not be in the same formats, right? And I'm not going to go into all the weird technical terms for AI or graph neural networks because that's what my company does. Now when you're looking at that, I think the one plausible thing is tracking where or how those missiles will be released, right? Based on an INW AI or advanced technology. Look at how these countries are actually deploying, for example. I don't know how far I can go in. Okay, there's different things that happen before there's a missile launch, right? We talk about people are moving things into place to launch something, right? If it's, it's, if it's a mobile missile, it's going to be moving, we, we can track those movements, right? And we have different systems to do that. But if our AI says that this movement happened or we're looking at historical precedent because past performance is based on future performance. And there's, there's Russian ways of doing business. We look at tactics, you know, Russian tactics, weekly, Chinese tactics, which are some that the different, the same. We can tell by past tactics what they're getting ready to do. What if we could do an automatic I and W without having thousands of analysts. We can take analysts out as simple.
- [19:31]
Amy McGrath
What is inw?
- [19:32]
Denver Rigamund
So indications and warning so that you're looking way left of boom, right? You're saying oh my gosh, they just did it. And you know what, when they did that announcement 10 years ago that they, they launched something that's interesting. You know, they might be launching something.
- [19:45]
Amy McGrath
But I'm going to push back on that a bit because like so we get an indication that they're launching. So what you're not, I mean you, you still have to, to knock the thing out after it launches. It's not like you can, oh, we're gonna, we're gonna bring our, our space based satellites closer now because we think they're gonna launch. It doesn't, it doesn't work like that.
- [20:12]
Denver Rigamund
Well, retasking can so when you can pre position assets. So you know, for me, right, if, if, if you're going into harm's way, right, And I already saw and, and so say I'm doing, you know, a mission plan, right, and we have tactical operational strategic assets. So I got a, I got national data coming from nsa, I have data coming in from our combatant command, right that's looking at past historic data for order of battle. And I'm getting tactical inputs from aircraft or other pre positioned ISR assets. Say I'm getting all that data, right? And I have three things up, right? This is, this is before, you know, I, this is what I did. So I got three things up and all of a sudden I see a very specific system pop, right? And that specific, specific system based on microns or infrared might tell me that it's the, it's the Bob's your uncle system that we didn't know was there beforehand. We can pre position assets quickly to mitigate the threat. So if we have indications and warning that say that Djibouti is already moving TELs Transport erector launchers and I'm making this up, right, because I can't talk about the other stuff. They're moving TELs into position and we know that Djibouti is getting ready to launch and we know that those specific systems are only meant for the US and we're getting sigint eland or comment and then we predirect or we direct our resources and realign our resources into a collection right posture that goes directly for the threat. Based on the left of boom inw line, we're getting on past performance or past tactics, we might be able to hit them right in the womb, right? Okay, Boom. So it's those kind of things.
- [22:05]
Amy McGrath
I can, I, I can, I can see your logic there. However we're talking, you know, we, we rearrange our assets to look at one particular system somewhere. China has over 300 ICBMs. You're not going to target all 300 and shoot all 300 down. Russia has thousands, okay. North Korea, dozens. It's gonna be, you know, and, and we're talking just in the boost phase. If you look at, oh well, let's shoot them down in the mid course. You know, it's very EAS systems to have chaff, which is like a decoys that they, they put out. We know that we already have missile defense Systems. We have 44 interceptors that are based in California and Alaska, at least in open source. And those are limited, meaning they, they are not perfect. And if we are overwhelmed with multiple missiles coming at us or multiple warheads, those missile defenses can be easily overwhelmed. So I mean there's, there's just a, a lot of limitations to this. And I worry that this is a giant, as I said before, boondoggle where we are going to sink a ton of money into this for not much to show for it. Now we could also work on terminal phase destroying something in the terminal phase, which we have some systems that can do that, but again, they are limited around small areas we don't have anything that could cover the entire United States of America. And to create something like that would be just really technologically difficult. And also, and I'm interested in your opinion on this. Number one, who profits from this? Because if lots of satellites have to be launched, who's the one that's going to profit from that? Well, Elon Musk. And then two, what does it do to the balance of our deterrence and world deterrence in terms of nuclear powers?
- [24:29]
Denver Rigamund
Right. So. Well, man, that's a lot to unpack. So first part, bring it first part. So when you're looking at missile defense systems being shot down in a strategic way, I'm going to humbly submit this. Amy, you know who's worse at ICBM missile defense? China and Russia. So if we invest in INW indications and warning or left a boom on Golden Dome and not specifically the weapon systems themselves, what we can do is actually affect an offensive posture before they're really ready for it. Because the advantage that we have is superior naval and air technologies. And we also. So it's great, right, when you look at even, you know, combined spending. But what we have now, we're still absolutely dominant when it comes to our ISR assets and our ability to pre position assets based on how they're working. So I would say as far as building an architecture or infrastructure to shoot down every icbm, it seems almost impossible at this point in current technology. But what doesn't seem impossible is use of advanced technology to go offensive before they have a chance to actually react. Because if we know in advance, it allows us to either back channel or pre position assets. But we're now like, okay, mfers, you guys want to start testing, you want to start looking North Korea at doing long range tests and you think you have a missile that flies, you know, 9, 500, you know, nautical miles or so. If you're going to do that, we can see it.
- [26:05]
Amy McGrath
Well, we can see it. But what do you mean by going offensive?
- [26:07]
Denver Rigamund
What does preposition assets say? If you guys are going to do this, we're going to go ahead and we're going to go ahead and make sure that our weaponized assets are a little bit closer to you. And we're going to mobilize ourselves and they're like, well, how do they even know? And that's the thing, that's the scary part about the United States. The more we know in advance on intel, specifically if they're doing any type of increased production. And by the way, we have a lot of A lot of ints out there, a lot of intelligence disciplines that the Chinese and the Russians aren't very good at. And I'm not trying to make people feel better just by blowing smoke, but I can tell you and Amy mean, I've done some war games or some tabletops and some exercises and you know, me and you've been to Red Flag and Ellis and all that where us going offensive earlier or seeing them in specific modes scares the out of them. Like, holy, if they can see this, what else can they do? So it's sort of a, like what other technologies do they have in their back pocket? So it's a little bit of a perception game based on how I would.
- [27:06]
Amy McGrath
Actually not use the term going offensive. Because we're not. You're not, you're not saying strike them. You're just saying move assets to be in a more defensive position. Okay.
- [27:17]
Denver Rigamund
To be able to.
- [27:19]
Amy McGrath
Okay. I mean, I, I hear you. I just think that it's, it's harder than, it's, it's harder than we make it out to be. And, and, and here's the other thing I hear from about people that are, are kind of pushing this, this, hey, we need to buy this Golden Dome. We need to invest in this thing. This is Trump's big thing. And he's a, he, you know, you know, Denver, he's a master negotiator and, and this all in his master plan. This Golden Dome is, is like, you know, Reagan started Star wars and that's when the Soviet Union collapsed. Right. Because they couldn't compete with Star Wars. And, and so, you know, now this is Trump's idea of bringing China and Russia to the table to talk nuclear non proliferation or arms control, shall we say. Because he's going to start this talk of starting this Iron Dome system. I don't know, I don't know what you think about that, but I don't think Trump even understands any of this stuff and so doesn't know.
- [28:22]
Denver Rigamund
I, I think if Golden Dome was relegated to indications of warning left a boom for ICBMs, for any other type of possible prioritized targeting and terminal phase and you can build the requirements for that. I think that's worthwhile. I don't think it's worthwhile to go right into building a constellation. Because your other question about the boondoggle is that there's two people that are really, really going to benefit from this. Because I think we've lost all competitive nature and contracts and I think that's musk and bezos so and I also think, you know, the big boys, you know, you have the other competitors with the Northrop Grumman, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, sort of all the JVs, the joint ventures that are out there, also building missile equipment and rocket equipment and satellite equipment for, you know, NASA and for NSA and for NRO and for our deity services and all the other things we could go into in another. If we want to talk about satellite constellations, I forgot more about that. I think I don't even want to remember everything that I was taught in special access programs. So the, the thing that scares me here, looking at what the rational portion of this would be, which is a requirements based appropriations process for looking at strategic threats in the nuclear space and strategic space. Wow, that's a good way to put it. Right. And we had a requirements driven approach process based on the hask, the hipc, the Senate Armed Services Committee and the, and the Senate Subcommittee on Intelligence. If all of them actually had a requirements based way of doing this with real individuals and professionals coming in and shaping this, Amy, I'd have some confidence. But we have incompetence and ridiculousness with people like Hegseth and Waltz and all these people who are sort of just firing from the hip. So it's interesting that we have that going on. So, and my mind is blown because the people that are really lobbying for this are going to be the must, the Bezos, the Teals, everybody who has direct access with direct contract lines to take away any competition from anybody else based on the fact of where they're at in the hierarchy as Trump's boys. We have a really bad situation here.
- [30:30]
Amy McGrath
Big picture. Look, we start to develop something like this, China and Russia are going to counter, they're going to build more nukes, they're going to start building more countermeasures that, you know, we do not do things in a vacuum. Okay, so that's number one, we can think about, oh, this is a great system, we should, we should develop it. Guess what? Our enemies are going. And I know you said they're, they're behind, I get that. But they're going to look and they're going to see this as a, as a threat to them and they are going to try to counter. So that's number one. Number two, the domestic political pushback to this will be real, not only in terms of money, because as we've talked about, our budget is it's limited. I know Pete Hagseth wants a trillion dollar defense budget. The reality is there's a lot of other competing priorities in our national defense. Shipbuilding has been something that Donald Trump has, has now cares about. That's going to cost money. Nuclear modernization itself is going to cost money.
- [31:38]
Denver Rigamund
Cheers.
- [31:39]
Amy McGrath
So, you know, this, this price tag of, of trillions for something like this is just, it's probably not feasible. And the second piece of this is the domestic politics behind it. Look, what I've often thought, what's in a name? He named this thing Golden Dome. Well, what does that do, Dan, that makes all Democrats look at this project as this is Donald Trump's pet project and we're not going to be for that. What if you were serious about a weapon system that we really needed for our national security, why on earth, why on earth would you name it after yourself? If you're Donald Trump, if you really gave a shit, you would name it something that, you know, Democrats could get behind because that's what it's going to take in our country to do a long term national security major project. If it's just Republicans and Donald Trump behind this thing, it ain't going anywhere.
- [32:35]
Denver Rigamund
Well, I mean, for me, I had to name a lot of stuff when I was in the military and when I was a program manager in the Pentagon and United Air Force, United States Air Force special projects. Like for one, one of the major programs I named Daisy Digital Attack Surface Execution Environment. Right. The other one was the network modeling and exploitation system Nemesis. Right. Golden Dome is such an awful name. See, if it was me in a naming convention, it would be something like the icbm. Let's see, the ICBM Constellation Execution Space System, isis. Right. Or something like that where you have a acronym to go with the name that's not specifically linked to the word gold. Because Donald Trump loves a gold toilet seat. Right. And things like that. Or you know, he likes the gilded stuff all around his freaking house. Right. It's just ludicrous. So I think you, you, your naming conventions matter and the seriousness of it matters. And I think, Amy, your point is so well taken. Are we going to bankrupt our nation for something called Golden Dome? And what is that going to do to our deficit and debt? What's that going to do to our appropriations process? You know, it's so amazing, Amy, me and you have already gone all over this in our prior shows and people need to watch it. And that's the thing that you're saying, I think, Amy, that I agree with wholeheartedly, there's an unserious to this that could actually destroy the real foundations of what we call the United States of America. And here's my hope. Talked about Russia and China responding. They could see this as a boondoggle. I wonder if they're like, let's spend them, let them spin into oblivion. You know, we'll just improve our icbms, right.
- [34:26]
Amy McGrath
We'll just make more of them.
- [34:28]
Denver Rigamund
We'll expand our blue water navies. Right. We're going to make them even better. We're going to make sure our subs are better. Yeah. We're gonna make sure our triad capabilities are on par. Holy. Now, we, it's, it's. But on the other hand, we have to continue to increase our capability too. And I think that's the thing I always go back to is what is the prioritization of our military capabilities when it comes to seeing the threat systems that are coming at us. So I always get caught up, Amy, based on my background, your background, and what I've done, I have really seen the benefit of advanced technology development over the 25 years I've done it and having my own companies and even having an AI company today and what it can do, but it's a very limited target based on very defined requirements. If we're just blowing money to make sure that people get money and become richer and stronger while the rest of America suffers, I think that's the worst thing we can do. So I think why I love doing this show with you is what we're telling people right now said you have to have serious people in charge to have serious things happen. We don't have that right now. And if I had to make a huge overarching summary for me, Denver, personally, my opinion, there's certain sections of indications and warning and looking at how they're going to come at us helps with our technology development. But the entirety of Golden Dome and building a thousand to two thousand systems that are spaceborne with a terrestrial, you know, compatibility, I don't know if that's actually anything that could work in the New York boondoggle.
- [36:01]
Amy McGrath
That's what it is. If it was so good, he would have tried it in this first term. He didn't because he was surrounded by people who told him, this is dumb, don't do this, it's going to be too expensive and not work. And now he's not, he's not surrounded by anybody that'll tell him that. So here we are. It's like tariffs.
- [36:18]
Denver Rigamund
Here we are, Amy. Truth in the barrel, right? All right. Truth in the barrel. This is awesome. And listen, another great show, Amy. I love having these discussions with you. I hope people are learning some things. I hope they go and look some of this up. I hate that word. Do your own research. Do not do that. Do sourced, specific research based on validated sources and validated individuals and real documentation. Not memes from 4chan or from Truth Social. And again, if you want to hear Truth in the Barrel, make sure you go to our socials. Make sure you look at everywhere we're at, make sure you subscribe to our YouTube and download your favorite podcast because we want to see you every week. And so I appreciate all y'all cheers. Cheers and thanks for another Truth in a Barrel, ma'am.
- [37:03]
Amy McGrath
All right.
- [37:07]
Line 2
Hey friend, I know how this feels Waking up exhausted after multiple trips to the bathroom and feeling embarrassed by sudden leaks. I used to be constantly on edge searching for a restroom whenever I was out. Then I discovered Better Woman. I was skeptical at first, but two months in, everything changed. I experienced improved bladder control, no more heart stopping moments when I laugh or sneeze, less urge to go deeper and more restful sleep. I finally felt like myself again, confident and in control. Better Woman is natural, effective, clinically tested and trusted by Women for over 25 years. Ready to take back your control? Head over to be betternow.com to order your supply today. That's be betternow.com these statements have not been evaluated by the FDA. This product is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease. Use as directed. Individual results may vary.
- [38:07]
Chumba Casino
If you're running a retail business, don't let disorganized order fulfillment cause chaos. Use Shipstation instead. From running a business out of your garage to multiple warehouses, shipstation is ideal for every phase of your growth. Save time with onelogin for all your stores and by automating tasks. Plus, you'll get the best shipping rates from global carriers. Calm the chaos with the shipping software that delivers. Start a free trial@shipstation.com audio that's shipstation.com audio.