Loading summary
Transcript90 lines
- [00:00]
A
I started Ornod in 2013 and we make bike apparel. The best part of Shopify for me is our ability to run the business as essentially non technical people. We're able to admin everything on the back end, front end, and sell things online easily. If Shopify were a bike accessory, I think it would actually be the bicycle.
- [00:22]
B
It's the thing that you do the thing on.
- [00:25]
A
We run the business on Shopify. So start your free trial on shopify.com. Hello, everyone, I'm Amy McGrath and this week we're talking the on again, off again, on again war to win back access to the Strait of Hormuz. Then why should we care if this war is depleting our oil reserves? Trump's Qatar Force One upgrades are now so super secret that reporters are getting subpoenaed for talking about them. Plus, ICE is out of control yet again. Who in the world is Fat Leonard? And Lindsey Graham passes away. Today we have with us an expert in all things national security, retired U.S. navy commander, surface Warfare Officer Bobby Jones, president of Veterans for Responsible Leadership, someone who's operated in the Middle east for many, many years. Welcome back to Truth in the Barrel Unfiltered.
- [01:19]
B
Thank you. Thank you as always for having me. I appreciate it. Appreciate you asking me back on. Yeah.
- [01:25]
A
And Bobby, you're the president of Veterans for Responsible Leadership. You're on Midas. You're all over the place, right?
- [01:31]
B
It seems that way lately. So, yes, I'm gainfully employed running around, just talking.
- [01:38]
A
Well, there's a lot going on and people want. We want to hear your expertise. We're going to start out today with this on again, off again, on again war in Iran. And we have a bit of catching up to do because, you know, it seems like something bad is happening every single week. Of course, Trump started this war. We then had a ceasefire. We had these on again, off again negotiations. I don't know how many times Trump and Hegseth have declared victory in this thing, but then we had this disastrous MOU where Trump gave Iran everything it wanted and we got nothing in return. David Sanger from the New York Times recently put out in his the Daily. In the New York Times Daily that that many did not expect the ceasefire, the MOU to fall apart as quickly as it did. And I laugh at that because, you know, we've been talking about this for months.
- [02:35]
B
Yes.
- [02:36]
A
Thought it was going to fall apart immediately. I'm surprised it lasted even a couple of weeks.
- [02:41]
B
I laugh at that because it's almost like mainstream media is trying to cover their own prognostications. The reality of it is those of us who, you know, done this whole military thing at some point, or you're in the diplomatic circles, Department of State, etc. The MoU was the equivalent of drawing together an agreement on the back of a napkin at a bar. It was a lot of hope and a lot of talk. And just like at a bar, when people drop something, there may be this inebriated mindset as to what could possibly happen. But again, when you don't have professional diplomats in the room, for the United States in particular, and yet Iran sends their most polished people, this is what you get. You get a one sided deal. And what they are attributing the latest rounds of military escalation to is this misunderstanding of the MoU. No, Iran understood it quite well based on what we signed off. They wrote it exactly word for word, bar for bar, as the kids would say, and slid it to the United States. And Trump looking for immediate exit ramp was like, yeah, that's fine, whatever, go with that. Until you realize that you cannot just change things. After the agreement was made, the main contention right now, it seems as though, is the United States started telling merchant vessels to go towards the Omani part of the straight to transit when Iran went out of their way. And this is why some of us are like, wow, I can't believe we agreed to this. They went out of their way to say, no, the entire straight of our moves is under our jurisdiction, you know, and they have an argument from international law and how, you know, coastal waters, etc. They were adamant on this because they realized that this is now their nuclear deterrent. They may not have nukes, but they have something that will make the world pause and they are not giving it up, especially when they were getting bombed every day. So for the United States to sit there and claim ignorance on this is ridiculous. What they were hoping, what the United States, I think was hoping was, okay, we've calmed them down, we've eased some sanctions, we've given them some money, tell the ships to flow as they were and hope that, hey, Iran was going to be cool with them going on that lower half of the transit. And they were not. They were not. And that's where we are.
- [05:08]
A
When the MoU came out, I was like, oh, Iran is just toying with us. It's just a matter of time. These guys are so naive. But, you know, now we're back to strikes. Yes, we're now back to renewed fighting. Of course, the Strait of Hormuz in which 20% of the world's oil flows is shut down yet again. Now also, Trump, of course got upset that this was happening and I guess in order to prove somehow that the Strait of Hormuz is still open, because he wanted to say, well, it's still open. He earlier this week said the United States would protect the vessels going through the strait. Yes, but that we would charge Those commercial vessels 20% of their cargo value for our protection to get through the strait. I mean, this is crazy. And then 24 hours later, the ideas walk back because, you know, of course, of course it's stupid. And the United States says that we're going to start a blockade again, not to mention more bombing Iran. Trump has said we've now started the 60 day clock on, on the war powers again. This is crazy.
- [06:22]
B
I, I can, I can tell you my initial thought. When I heard about this transiting 20 thing, I was like, is this a grade B mafia movie? So now you want to pay protection money on something that you yourself are adamant about. When it came to freedom of navigation, as a matter of fact, when Oman said we'll charge a service fee to ensure a clean transit due to straight and was working with the Ron to do it, you were the one that told them on to sit down and shut up. So now you take their idea and you offer to do something that you offered way back at the beginning of this to escort ships through, you know, Operation Freedom. People may have forgotten that. Petrick Farm remembers that he said that. And the, the thing that's interesting about it is it's hard to do escort duty as someone who's done it. It's very difficult and you better believe it's damn hard in such a constrained waterway. So of course it didn't make sense. But Trump does not have any subject matter experts around him in his inner circle to say, sir, that's not going to work. So he had to walk it back. So yet again, another international embarrassment. While you're bombing Iran, no ships are going through. As a matter of fact, I want to say in the last 24 to 36 hours, we've had less than 12. And at the height of the Strait of Hormuz transit, you're looking at approximately 135 to 140 vessels going through there every day, day. So the effects are real. And we'll talk a little bit later about how that affects all of us here in the United States.
- [07:49]
A
Yeah, but Bobby, your background as a surface warfare officer in the United States Navy, sometimes I hear People still say to me, I don't understand, we have the Navy there. Why can't we escort these merchant ships through this strait? And this is not what the United States Navy, a blue water Navy, what we used to call, is designed for. Can you, can you talk about that? I mean, this is like littoral combat.
- [08:18]
B
There it is. And so when people think about the Navy, they think of the classic blue water, cold war, even open water warfare, right? Where you know, some people even think back to World War II with the 18 inch, 16 inch guns and a boom, boom, boom. That's nice, but that's not the reality of modern naval warfare. When you're talking about the maritime domain, you're talking about sensors, radars, and most importantly, surface to surface and air to surface missiles that fly faster than the speed of sound. So if you're talking about a transit area that's basically eight miles at the widest, well, actually I think six miles at the widest, at the most narrow point. And you're talking about a missile that can be fired from shore fast as the speed of sound, which is like basically you blink, it's over. Your defense systems having to be able to knock that down. Not to say it's impossible, but man, the percentage goes down. It's hard. Just imagine a weapon having to turn, move track, and then release faster than the sound of that snap, right? That's hard. And so you're fighting a gun battle in a, in a telephone booth and you have very nice knives. It's the best way I can describe it. And so as we, as we look at this, the geography of Iran is the number one deterrent for, from invasion, from trying to keep the strait open. It's the geography everybody talks about what will take cargo. Have you seen Carg Island? Google Earth, Car. And take a look at those mountains. Take a look at those cliffs, right when the Marines put the, the flag on Mount Suribachi and Iwo Jima, those mountains on that little island are tiny compared to what Car island is. And so people need to understand everything sounds nice and it looks cool in movies, but there's a reality here that not only the American people need to understand. Most importantly, Donald John Trump and Peter Hegseth need to understand. And I think they know it, but they're afraid to admit it 100%.
- [10:18]
A
And you know, you, you hear this phrase a lot. Oh, they don't have the cards. They, they have always had this one big, big card. And it is geography. They are there. They, they know the area. The other piece of this that we are not maybe as capable as, you know, as you could argue, maybe not as capable as we should be. Although there are trade offs in defense posture that we all have to make is counter mine warfare. You know, we don't have as much minesweeping capabilities as maybe we need. Right now there's 80 mines that Iran has put in the Strait of Hormuz. Getting those out requires knowing where they are. It requires a lot of time. And that area has to be safe in order because you're very vulnerable in getting rid of those. That's just one aspect of this. Even our US Warships are at risk right now.
- [11:18]
B
Yes, very much.
- [11:21]
A
You have to be damn near perfect all the time with protecting vessels going through that area for it to actually work, because all it takes is one Iranian artillery shell or drone or missile to hit a tanker and boom, all the other tankers in the commercial world are not going to want to transit there anymore because of the risk. So, I mean, that's where we're at.
- [11:51]
B
You're 100% right, Amy. And I'll take it a step further. The United States made the strategic decision a couple of years ago to have their minesweepers retired and removed from the Fifth Fleet area of responsibility. And those, those minesweepers were removed in the first year of the Trump administration. So the, the platforms that we had dedicated to doing exactly what you said, clearing minds, the United States no longer has. Okay, this is one of the reasons why President Trump was upset with NATO, because you have other forces like the French and stuff, who have minesweepers who refuse to let the United States use them. This is a problem because of maneuverability. This is a problem because of, of our own warships not being able to transit. But there's not an insurance company in the world that's going to ensure a tanker to go through an area where, you know you have mines. And so this is why we can say whatever we want. You already nailed it. We know their minds there. We know the United States does not have the inherent capability to remove them, especially in a timely fashion. And the merchant ships are at the mercy of what's called clearance routes that the Iranians provide for them. And mind you, even if they get them, those mines could move because of atmospherics. The currents may shift them over 2, 3ft to the left or to the right, and then you can get hit anyway. So it's hard. It's very hard.
- [13:21]
A
Meanwhile, in all of this, Trump's sons are making billions by investing in defense companies, getting billions of Dollars of contracts because of this war. But I often get asked, you know, from neighbors or just folks that, that I talk to here in Kentucky, why should we even really care? I mean, it's really far away. It doesn't seem. Other than gas prices, you know, and there are real national security consequences of this. You know, one is the Strategic Petroleum that we're going to talk about. But, but it's, it's even more than that. And I don't want to forget about this other piece, and I'll just mention it really quickly. There's a new, new numbers out on this war's impact, humanitarian impact. And what these reports say is that 45 million additional people will now face food insecurity because directly because of this war. And this is because of disruptions to the humanitarian supply chains, energy flows, which we all are always concerned about, the United States, but the energy flows really disrupt other countries even 10 times worse than our country. Fertilizer disruption. There are certain countries that are now at risk of famine because of this. We still have more than, I think, 10,000 or 11,000 seafarers, sailors who are stranded in the Persian Gulf. So this is something that never needed to happen.
- [14:53]
B
I agree. The ripple effect from a humanitarian standpoint is clearly catastrophic. And it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure this out. The domino effect of a singular decision that came from Mar Lago is having humanitarian effects with the breadbaskets of the world. What do I mean by that? Breadbasket meaning fertilizer that goes all over the world to help grow food. Not just for native population, but it's shipped all over the world. When you add that to Ukraine's war, which was basically the breadbasket of a certain section of all of Europe and beyond, you're dealing with food constraints on two different ends. No one's putting that together except for, like, NGOs who are tracking this. The other piece is when you are talking about energy, right? The domino effect. The energy that comes out of the Strait of Hormuz has a domino effect going into Europe and to Asia. Asia primarily. Right. And when you're dealing with a war that could go into their winter months, then you will really feel it. But you're feeling it now with energy consumption from air conditioning to keeping food and stuff palatable. It's all connected. And no one's talking about it in the United States because we believe we're supposedly energy independent of that. But as we'll talk about with the svr, that is not true either. And so these decisions were made In a vacuum of, you can be the first president to make Iran healed. That's basically what Netanyahu said to Trump. And Hegseth was like his Flavor Flav, like, yeah, boy, let's go do it. And here we are. Here we are in a situation that is perpetually cycling. There's no end in sight. Because that would take real diplomacy. And since we have no real diplomats at the negotiating table, all we're going to continue to do is deplete our ammunition stores and hope that, I guess, Iran wakes up one day and says, okay, we've had enough.
- [16:54]
A
I think this is going to go on for the entire Trump presidency. I mean, I'll just say it right here. I just don't think that they're competent enough to come to a conclusion. But, you know, Bobby, even if you open up the straight of Hormuz completely tomorrow, there's still a huge shock that's going on that's happening right now and in the future with oil and LNG markets. What's happening is unprecedented. We've never seen this kind of shock before. So we don't really know exactly what the impacts are going to be long term. But one of the reasons why gas prices haven't totally skyrocketed here in the United States is because of this thing called the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. And so this is America's stockpile of crude oil. We started this idea back in the 1970s, during the 1970s energy crisis, where we. We have this stockpile of oil. It's down on the gulf coast. It's 60 different salt caverns that, that store this stuff. And we're now, because we've been tapping into it at the lowest levels with these things since 1983. And we got to consider this.
- [18:08]
B
You know, no, not only do we have to consider it, the SPR was created trying to have a nest egg for real crises. I mean, I want to say the four times that it's been used before. You had Desert Storm 91, when the whole oil system was at risk. You had Katrina, when the entire oil refinery capacity of the United States was shut down because it's located in the Gulf of Mexico region. And then you had, I want to say, Covid, when everything got shut down. And now with Trump and the Ukraine war.
- [18:49]
A
And to be fair, the Trump administration and the Biden administration did order. Have been ordering the release of some of these strategic reserves. The Ukraine war was a big part of that. The largest. And actually that was the largest. But regardless of who's in office, this is A national security concern because we have been depleting this and not, you know, putting more into it.
- [19:13]
B
It's very difficult. Right. Not refilling. And, and that's the, that's the piece that, that should scare people. You're talking about over 700 million barrels that was supposed to be in there. And we're down to the, the threes. That's over half. And how long it takes to refill is the issue. So even if we're pumping at full capacity, we're talking about months to get back up to speed, and it's even longer when you deal with the residual effect of the straight being. For a oil tanker to leave the Persian Gulf and get to the United States is about six weeks, depending on where they moor up and then, you know, plug it into a refinery and then storing it. So you're talking about a process of months, just if you have a steady flow. Now, mind you, all the oil that comes out of the Persian Gulf area is not coming to the United States is going everywhere else. And we're kind of last. However, we're in hurricane season, okay? And the SPR is located in a hurricane attracted region. So God forbid, if a hurricane rolls through right now with our SPR levels at this level, God only knows what the residual effect is. It's supposed to be safe for emergencies and a rainy day. And we could get both in a hurricane. And we're at less than half of capacity. This is a strategic problem. It's a national security issue. And I've not heard not one member of the United Congress really pound the floor on this because they have not presented a fix. They want to keep prices low because it's bad politically, but they're not thinking about the strategic objective of having such a reserve. And what happens if something goes sideways.
- [20:59]
A
Yeah, this is such an example of the conflict between easy political win versus long term strategic needs and the reason why politicians don't do what probably the country really needs. If you look at what is the purpose of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, the easy political thing is to keep this reserve and we can draw upon it when prices are high and refill it when prices are low and try to keep everybody happy. But that's not the purpose of this because what happens if, you know, prices are high, we draw on it, it gets low and then we actually need it for something like a true emergency. The purpose of it was to have it there for, save it for a true emergency, for a war, for a very large natural disaster, as you said. And it's not easy. We have a lot of problems with this. It's not an easy problem to fix. You talked about the fact that it takes a long time to fill it up well, or at least longer than it does to release it. But the equipment, because this was built in the 70s, a lot of the equipment, the storage equipment and everything is old. There's, there's leaks, there's problems with. It wasn't designed, Bobby, for, you know, let's tap it, let's tap it this month and maybe next month, you know.
- [22:23]
B
Right.
- [22:23]
A
It was designed for full draw. It was designed for like war or a major disaster. So we're going to draw it down completely, not for frequent releases. And that is causing all kinds of problems to the infrastructure there. And I think the good news out of all this is maybe this war in Iran will highlight this a little bit more to lawmakers and say, hey, we need to invest in fixing the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. Fixing the infrastructure?
- [22:55]
B
No, I hope so. But it also big, big strategic picture. China right now has crossed this threshold where most of their energy now is slated to come from renewable energy. Right. And not the fossil fuel basis. And that is significant. And Europe is trying to trend in the same direction because we are so hooked on fossil fuels. This past week, President Trump signed, basically took away the executive order, more national forest land that's now going to be drilled in Utah stuff to go find more oil. And this is where I'm just like, is anybody paying attention? Our near peer competitors are pivoting. We are still talking about drill baby drill. Like this is Dallas and the Ewing family in the 80s. This is unbelievable to see. And it's causing, if you really think about it, a strategic strain. Everything that's going on in Iran, everything that we're going to be dealing with, with China, all connect to this dependency. Jimmy Carter warned us about this in the late 70s. Gerald Ford came up with the SPR. They all had these lessons learned and we've chose to ignore them. And the sad part about it is, until there's new leadership, I don't think a dang thing is going to change.
- [24:18]
A
I don't either. It's not terribly expensive to fix this stuff. And, you know, with, with this $1.5 trillion defense budget that these guys want now, you know, I think we can probably take some of that and fix this infrastructure instead of maybe building Trump's golden battleship or something like that. I mean, you know, it's crazy. Well, Bobby, another story that's raised a lot of eyebrows this week involves The Justice Department subpoenaing. I'm terrible with that word. The Justice Department subpoenaing several New York Times reporters over the reporting of the security concerns on the new Air Force One. Right. So Trump flew the new Air Force One, I call it the Qatar Force One, flew this new jet to Turkey last week. Then the New York Times does the story about the Air Force, the new Air Force One, and the fact that it lacks some of the advanced security features that the older aircraft, the original Air Force One, has like anti missile capabilities and that sort of thing. And then Trump leaves Turkey on the old one after the story comes out. For those of us, my husband and I reading this with a military background, we're sitting at the dinner table and we're like, well, no shit, we knew this was going to happen. We knew that they weren't going to retrofit the Qatar jet quickly with all the things that's required, the comm suite, the anti missile capability. And the administration is now saying that it's going after the New York Times because supposedly this is super secret. Well, you can, you can see pictures
- [26:14]
B
there it is. I was going to say it's, it's not secret. And, and, and they're going after the reporters and now they're trying to clean up saying, well, we want to go after the leakers. So that's why we have to go after the reporters. No, no, what you should be going after is why the hell are you flying a plane does not meet standards, basic standards that we've had really for 50 years, when depending on the version of Air Force One you're talking about, the reality of it is he wanted to show off. And then he saw those protests in Iran when they were burying the previous ayatollah and he's like, my God, these people are serious. And you're right next door to Turkey, in Turkey. And now you're sitting there saying, I want to go back on the old plane because I want to make sure I make it back. And there are various rumors and reports and people leaking, saying that President Trump is truly concerned about his own demise being handed to them by the Iranians. And he's left orders, well, if that happens to me, to blob them in the oblivion, blah, blah. This is ridiculous. He, he wanted to be all sizzle, but he needed steak. And he realized, I need to get back on this old plane that has all of the capabilities. And what really pissed me off is how he said, yeah, we wanted to show off the new Qari Force One to Service members overseas. That's why we brought it. It's like stop using us as a bailout. You know, if you love your plan,
- [27:42]
A
there's very few people in the military that really want to look at a jet, a former jet from Qatar and say, oh, I really care about that.
- [27:50]
B
Exactly, exactly. He's terrible. When it comes to lies.
- [27:54]
A
I'm not sure if the President, I'm speculating here, I'm not sure the President really cares about his own protection. But if you think about everyone else on the plane, they never should have taken the new jet overseas to begin with. They never should have done that.
- [28:11]
B
Right.
- [28:11]
A
And you know, and, and then going after the New York Times, I mean, I feel like there, there does need to be a balance and I want to get your take on this. There, there is a balance between protecting like real classified information.
- [28:27]
B
Right.
- [28:28]
A
That we need for national security. Yes, but this, to me, this is just intimidation of journalists.
- [28:34]
B
This isn't, I mean, yes, I don't, it's amazing. In one lifetime we've gone from the press being embedded in World War II and having enough wherewithal to censor what needed to be censored for national security, but yet still being able to report real straight facts. You know, the Ed Murrows, the Walter Cronkites, those individuals who could do that. And then in one lifetime, literally just one lifetime, we are now at the point where we know the information being put out by the White House to the press corps are 90% lies. And they are more upset that the lies are not being pushed and instead they're being checked. So now let's go after the journalists and intimidate them. That symbiotic relationship protected by the United States Constitution, mind you, has fallen completely apart in two administrations with the Trump administration. And that should, I mean, the Pentagon press corps being booted from the Pentagon. I mean, what are we doing?
- [29:33]
A
It's crazy. And it's not just US press. I mean, I remember being in, living in a tent in Al Jaber in Kuwait in 2003 for the run up to the Iraq War. We did, I forget what the operation was called prior to the war. We did that operation and then the war kicked off, I think in March or April that year of 2003. And in my tent, along with female Marines corpsman, the other, other female officers that did various things. It was a tenant, it was like a 12 man tent, no air conditioning by the way. The Air Force had that we didn't have. That was a British journalist. They housed the Female British journalists with us. You know, they were embedded with us. And I'd go, you know, she there on the mission planning? But she was there when I came back from a mission. You know, back, back in, in the tent. Hey, how was the mission? You know, I mean, it's just we, we have gone from, from, from that to kicking out the press from the Pentagon. I mean, it's crazy, right?
- [30:45]
B
It's, it's, it's borderline insane. And, and more importantly, here's the thing that you need to understand. Our strategic communications coming from the military are trash. And this is part of it. This whole Iran debacle, the way it's being shaped, the communications. If you ask anybody around the world who's winning that battle, they're going to say Iran. And part of that is because of the distrust that this administration, in particular Pete Hexa, formerly of Fox News B team, has of the actual press. And instead of using them effectively to convey whatever messages you want. And part of that's because you have no idea what the heck your, your goals are in the first place. Instead, you find them as adversaries and you try to go after them at every point to bring the FBI in to subpoena people and try to intimidate them. Do you really think that's going to work with today's journalists? Matter of fact, it may have the opposite effect. It really may. And as this thing continues to crumble apart, it'll have more leaks than the Titanic did on April 12th. I'm just telling you now it's going to be bad because you have no established precedent.
- [31:59]
A
That's right. And, and we know that the perception of the military, both here at home and abroad, is diminishing. A lot of what. Because of what Pete Hagseth has done here. I mean, this is, this is what we're seeing. So. So now it's time in the show for we call them quick takes. But yeah, the first one, or one of them at least, is what I'm calling the dirty swill. This is the part when you drink bourbon, when you distill bourbon, there's sort of an excess part that nobody wants that smells bad and you get rid of it. And we call that the dirty swill. And we talk about corruption because there's so much of it at least once a week here. So for our weekly look at corruption and grift and abuse of power, this week's nominee is Fat Leonardo. Now, I know you know Bobby, who Fat Leonard is.
- [32:57]
B
Oh, very much.
- [32:58]
A
I actually thought he passed Away. I read the book about him, learned, learned all about what happened in the Navy here. But I was surprised to hear that he is in prison in the United States and that he has asked President Trump for a pardon. So Bobby, for people who may not know who exactly is flat Leonard so, and why does he care about the. Why does he care about a pardon?
- [33:26]
B
So I was stationed in Japan while all this was happening. I was in Yokosuka that my department head tours were there. I, I saw this man. Luckily I was such of a low rank that he would look right through me and whatever, but so Fat Leonard Francis, he was basically a defense contractor. He was the, the, the guy that when you would pull into a port anywhere basically in the Asia aor, he would set up the, the things for your ships to pull in the brow, the, the connectivity to, to electricity, cht, all that. So he was basically your, your, your port.
- [34:05]
A
He's like your gas station, your, your 711 guy when you're a battleship, when you're a destroyer and you go into what, Singapore, in some of these ports in Asia.
- [34:15]
B
And so because like someone's got to take out the trash for the ship and all that other kind of stuff, bring fresh water connections. He was that port guy, the port authority guy when you would pull in. Now here's the thing, those are expensive
- [34:31]
A
services and he had a monopoly. Didn't he have a monopoly on some of these?
- [34:35]
B
And over the years he developed the monopoly and once the monopoly had been established, he would pay scheduling officers fully uniformed in the United States Navy, part of 7th Fleet officers to direct ships for port visits to his ports. And then he would overcharge the United States Navy absorbently. And to keep this going, he'd give kickbacks to the officers all the way up into the admiral ranks. Hey, here's tickets to a Broadway show. Here are prostitutes in Singapore. Here's this, that other. And I'm telling you, the web that he created over the, the decades there snagged all sorts of officers from senior four star, three stars down to, to commanders who had just had command of their ships and now on staff. I mean, and the evidence was damning. We're talking emails, we're talking text messages. It's the biggest scandal the Navy has dealt with in its modern history. And again, I was stationed there. As a matter of fact. His offices were right outside the front gate of Fleet Activities Yokosuka, where Most of the 7th Fleet is stationed. So he would see people, he'd wink at them, he'd give them all sorts of Stuff. This is the, this is fraud in his most dangerous situations because he could also tip off any enemy of the United States when and where ships were going based on the contacts he had established. So it was also a national and international security issue as well. So this dude did this for years
- [36:10]
A
and was found out and, and it took, what, a decade or more.
- [36:14]
B
Yes.
- [36:14]
A
For, for him to be, for the feds to, to get all the evidence to, to nab him and. Yes, try to. And now he's, he's in jail. And of course, you know, anybody that's in jail for fraud at a high level is, is looking to the biggest fraudster in the White House to say, hey, can you. What are the chances he gets pardoned?
- [36:37]
B
You know what I'm going to say? Low, unless Trump feels good. Because here's the problem. He was supposed to pay back $35 million in restitution to the United States government, United States Navy, and he says he can't afford to do it. He can't repay. I guess he's got $30 million left that he has to pay back. He can't pay it. And if you notice anything about these pardons, when it comes to Trump, these people have cut checks to get them. They have donated money and turned it into an ethically banked rub system where, hey, donate money to me or my family, and then I will give you a pardon, period. So I don't think he has the cash to do it. And if he doesn't have the cash, he won't be able to play. And I think that's why I don't think he'll get it, but I think they will consider it.
- [37:26]
A
That's a really good point about the cash there. I don't know. I kind of give him 50, 50 chances at this point. I sometimes I think the guy in the White House just, oh, look at that fraudster. He's like, he's a lot like me. I'm gonna, I don't like him.
- [37:39]
B
That may be true, too. I never thought of it from that perspective, because when I saw the story, I was like, he don't have the money. That's the damn shame. I think pardon, and I think someone doesn't have the money to get the pardon when that's not supposed to work. But you're right, he does identify with people who he believes were unjustly persecuted by the American judicial system. So we'll have to see.
- [37:59]
A
Yeah, we'll have to see. All right. Bobby, do you know about the Freedom Fuel Network? This is These gas stations in Pennsylvania and New Jersey that are selling gas at prices well below the market prices, and these are like mega gas stations. And they're like, hey, we're patriotic. The President asked us to lower our prices and we're going to do this. The White House promoted it. Don Trump promoted this, but he says he doesn't have anything to do with it. I don't know. What do you think?
- [38:35]
B
So there's been some digging into that. And, and, and this is why I find it fascinating because I'm here in Georgia. The company that they've tried to nail this down to, the llc, actually had offices here in Georgia, even though it was incorporated in Delaware. So basically, they're moving money around. So you can't figure out what, which mega donor, because that's what this is, is funding, obviously, gas stations that are losing money. And what is interesting to me is the White House is trying to pass it off as something that they, as the federal government, they're doing, which is not the case. This is a, basically, from what we see is a private citizen or a private donor arm, maybe even a super pac, whatever, funding this. That's why they can't tell you how long it's going to last. They can't tell you who's responsible. It's dark money. But if you notice Pennsylvania, New Jersey, areas that obviously someone targeted for midterms, trying to hold on to power, because when you have, especially Pennsylvania, with Fetterman as their senator, right now, there is a war of conscience going on in that state. And so I saw the actual commercials and I just started laughing because it was so hokey and over the top, that there's no way anybody who's rational can believe this is just out of the goodness of someone's heart.
- [39:58]
A
I mean, it's, it is interesting. I mean, they put out a statement. This, this group, this, these gas stations, just like the President, we remain committed to putting America first. God bless the usa. And you're like, okay, great. I mean, how long can you do that? Who knows?
- [40:19]
B
I do think it recognizes the problem. It shows the White House recognizes the affordability issue. They keep acting like it doesn't exist, but this, these commercials came from the official White House social media, meaning they recognize that Americans are pissed off about these gas prices and affordability in general. So.
- [40:39]
A
Yeah, Well, I also think it's a drop in the bucket. I mean, it's one area great for the people in New Jersey and guess eastern Pennsylvania, but, you know, for the rest of the country, who knows? All Right. So the other piece of unfortunate information on this quick take today is ICE is back at it again. You know, we've said for many months earlier this year that the ICE operations were out of control. I think they are. Again, we've had two different ICE operations this week that resulted in deaths of people who were not target, not intended target of their operations. So this gentleman who lived in the United States for more than 35 years, was killed in Houston during a, an enforcement operation. He was not the target. There was another man who was killed recently in Maine. He was 26 years old, father of a, of a three year old. He had a work, a valid work authorization. The ICE agents, the ICE took it. First of all, it took them 12 hours to put out a statement about this shooting. When they did, they said they shot this man out of quote, public safety.
- [42:01]
B
Right.
- [42:01]
A
So the man apparently didn't have a weapon. He was driving slowly. It was 7am he had a 3 year old in the car. This is just there. There's apparently no witnesses or no, no camera. No body cameras, no witness cameras. There were witnesses, but no cameras. I mean, after what ICE did back in January, what they've been doing, is anybody gonna believe. I don't.
- [42:30]
B
No, no, no one's believing the statement. And what's interesting, the amount of funding that they have, which by the way is more than your beloved Marine Corps this fiscal year. They all are supposed to have body cameras. All of them?
- [42:43]
A
Yeah.
- [42:44]
B
Even Republican lawmakers, like, where are the body cameras? That's what they pass the legislation for, for these situations. The other thing that jumps to my mind very quickly, both cases, mistaken identity. You know, that's why these, these, these statements are taking so long for them to craft because they're like, oh my God, we messed up. How do we sell this? Right? There are a couple of things that jump out because of that. You know, the stereotype, they all look alike. And all this other stuff is jumping in my mind because again, I've heard that my life, all my life. But I guess the thing that I'm really just floored about is what do you expect when you introduce a foreign police force into an environment where they don't know anybody, they don't know anything, they don't even know the lay of the land. And you're telling them to. After these people, this is what happens as when I was a peacekeeper in Liberia for the United nations after, after the civil war there. One of the things they hammered in us, These people don't know you. You have to take the time to get to know them, their lifestyles and where they live, because it will make a difference in whether or not you find the right person that's committing a violent crime or this, that and the other. These guys come in like locust, destroy, and then move on someplace else. And you're going to continue to hear these things because they don't know, nor do they care about the communities that they're infiltrating to do this. This is why Haldeman had to come out and say, we're going to take a step back from stopping vehicles. Right. Because you have no idea who the hell you're dealing with. You, the local police do not want to deal with you across the board. I wonder why. And. And you have people who do not trust your presence when you show up. That's not how you do any type of law enforcement, let alone what you're saying you're doing and making America safe.
- [44:40]
A
Yeah. It's a massive lack of training, poor leadership, and, you know, look, when you're killing people who are not even the target of your operation.
- [44:51]
B
Exactly, exactly.
- [44:53]
A
You got to stop. I mean, you got to take it. Take a step back. This is crazy.
- [44:57]
B
There seems to be. Real quick, I just want to say, there seems to be like this, This. I keep saying this, this 1980s action movie mentality that reaches all corners of this administration, whether we're talking about the Department of Defense, whether we're talking about ICE and cbp, whether we're talking about how they look at the economy. It's like this Rambo mentality. It's like, yeah, we're tough and this is going to be it. And it's not working. It's not working because true strength is having strength and knowing when not to use it.
- [45:27]
A
I also think there's an attitude of, well, these things are going to happen. And because, you know, we got to get rid of the illegal and, you know, folks who are not here, and if. If some people die in the process. You know, that's just. I mean, I feel like there's that attitude. Yeah. I just never thought I would see that in the United States. Well, you know, we had a really important, very powerful senator pass away this week, Lindsey Graham. His death has sparked sort of a broader conversation about the age of elected leaders. I know in his case, he had apparently a heart condition. He was 71. Tragic that he had this condition and has died. But every time something like this happens, I think about term limits. I think about the fact that, you know, I really feel like some of these senators, you know, we get to the point where they're, they're, they're pretty old. And should our democracy be sort of held hostage when, you know, we don't know what they're, you know, think about Senator McConnell in the hospital, you know, we, what right does the American people know, have to know about their health?
- [46:58]
B
I'm dying to get your take on McConnell, but before we get there, though, the average age of, of Congress is, you know, we're talking about damn near 60 years old, okay? And we've had, I want to say, like six members of Congress pass away here in the last three years. You know, that's ridiculous. I mean, the district right next to me in Georgia, David Scott, he, he died this year and everybody down here knew he was sick. Everybody. And I'm like, And yet you see Reelect David Scott signs all over the place. I'm like, are you kidding me? Are you kidding me? And I will say this, this is on both sides of the aisle, by the way, Democrats and Republicans holding on to power too damn long. You know, the same people that were running Congress in the 90s when I was in high school are the same people running Congress right here, right now. And I've retired after a 26 year Navy career. You gotta be kidding me. You know, and between them, and to be honest, the Supreme Court, they don't have term limits, but they made a point to put them on the presidency because of them not wanting to have a king. And I get that. But institutionally speaking, you cannot tell me that Mitch McConnell is not an institution in the Senate. You cannot tell me that, you know, Senator Byrd from West Virginia, all these people that were there for 40 and 50 years were not institutions. And to be completely honest, I think that is the biggest problem facing our country right now. The fact that the United States Congress has such entrenched leadership. How are you going to pass legislation on AI and you're 91 years old, or 94, whatever. Chuck Grass, you're still using a flip phone, right? You think a rotary phone is modern technology and you're telling me you want to try to stop ChatGPT and Claude? I don't understand how that's supposed to work. I just don't.
- [49:00]
A
I think a lot of folks get into power and they, they have surrounded that. You know, when you're a senator, you have a staff of 60 to 80 people and they get used to being in power and you know, they say to that person, oh well, we'll take care of everything. You know, they sort of push them to get in. You know, people. People get into positions of power and they want to keep it. And that's why you need a structural way that, you know, people can retire and move on.
- [49:32]
B
Yeah.
- [49:33]
A
And. And I, you know, I feel like with. With the death of, Of Lindsey Graham, you know, it kind of highlights that he had been in office for a very long time. I was never a fan of him politically. I think he changed a lot and really lost his principles when McCain passed away. But, you know, I, I don't wish anyone, you know, death or, Or. Or that passing away is not a laughing matter. But I, I feel like we need to have a conversation in this country about how long you should be in these positions.
- [50:13]
B
So I'll put it to you like this state of South Carolina, that one Senate seat has had two senators, two since 1946. Strom Thurman. Lindsey Ground. That's.
- [50:29]
A
Did he take. He took Strom Thurman's seat.
- [50:33]
B
Yes.
- [50:34]
A
Oh, my gosh. Wow.
- [50:36]
B
Just think about that continuity line. That's.
- [50:39]
A
Yeah. Well, I was never a fan of him politically, but there's this really great. There's this really great quote that I came across recently, you know, after his passing, when people, People are talking about it that he said that I thought was 100 true. And I'm going to read it to you in its entirety because I just think it's from Lindsey Graham, who I never thought I'd be quoting. Okay. He said, quote, when I was first elected to the House, I looked for the they. They who run things, they who know how things really work, they who know what they are doing. But I couldn't find the they. I went to the Senate, but there were still no they. And then I started to get invited to the White House and to close door briefings and to meetings with top officials. No they. What I finally realized is that there is no they. There is only we. And we usually don't know what the we're doing. I thought that was like. I read that and I was like, okay, I don't agree with that.
- [51:44]
B
But he got it. Wow. That may be the most accurate depiction of modern politics I think I've ever heard. That is unbelievable. Wow. Geez. I need to write that one down, too.
- [51:58]
A
Well, sad that he has passed on. Before you go, Bobby, I want to always end with a shout out. Okay. And this week, I thought I read this thing in the Economist where they ranked the world's most livable city cities. And I always think these things are really interesting. And so I want to ask you if you had any guesses as to what, where, who the, where the most livable cities in the world are and did any American city even make it in the top 10?
- [52:32]
B
I, I would tell you that, you know, you know, when you retire from the military, they'll move you anywhere in the world and tell you, yeah, you got that last move. I moved right back home to Atlanta. I would put, put Atlanta on the list because it's the greatest place on earth to me as far as American cities. Oh, I, I hate to say, I hate to say this city. I would probably throw Charlotte there. Places that are not too big, but big enough to feel like they're metropolitan and have a relatively good cost of living worldwide. Geez, I don't know. I woof. I, I love Tokyo. When we lived over in Yoko. So, okay, those would be the three off top of my head, but maybe, okay, maybe, maybe Sydney, Australia. That place was pretty awesome too.
- [53:17]
A
Okay, well, those are pretty good guesses. So before we get into the answers here, just, you know, when they do these surveys, I always look at, well, how did you do the survey? What are you looking for? What's livable, Right? And so I looked up, you know, what their requirements were. And they look at things like stability, right? Are you getting attacked by Iran? You know, in your city, for example. Okay, but they look at things like crime rates, how, like, can you walk down the street and not be mugged? They look at things like public health care, corruption, environment, education, infrastructure. So how clogged are the roads? Do you have affordable housing? How clean is the water? Do we get cell phone coverage? All of these things. And they put all of this together, right? And what they came up with was the top 10 most livable cities in the world. There was not a single city from the United States in the top 10. The highest city that made the rankings was Honolulu. They ranked, they were ranked 25th. Atlanta was the next highest from the United States, then Pittsburgh, then Seattle and Washington D.C. but none of them are in the top 10. Most of the cities that are ranked most livable in the world are in Europe, Europe and Australia. Copenhagen was number one. Vienna, Melbourne, Sydney, Zurich, Geneva. Tokyo was number 10. There was a city, Vancouver is ranked number nine. So there's one in North America. But it's really interesting list and you know, just, I gotta look at a little bit to go here in the United States.
- [55:04]
B
Well, I can tell you my, my daughter, she was traveling over in, in London and, and she, she got sick, had to go to the doctor. She's like, do. Who do I go to? I'm like, just, just walk in. She's like, well, how much is that going to cost? We like just walk in and walked in, gave her her medicine. She was good to go. And she was just blown away by this. This is a new college graduate. She's like, oh, my goodness. I'm like, that's quality of life. Those are the type of things we, we talk about. And I, I'm not surprised that a lot of those European countries or cities are on there because of stuff like that.
- [55:36]
A
Yeah. Yeah. And, and in contrast, though, we're, we're nowhere near the least livable, which of course are places like Tripoli and Damascus and Tehran who we're bombing, you know, so it's all relative.
- [55:52]
B
Yeah.
- [55:53]
A
Well, awesome show, Bobby. Great to have you back on. I hope you come back again soon because there's no shortage of stories and things to talk about. Love having you on Truth in the Barrel.
- [56:05]
B
Ah, thank you. Thank you for having me. And thanks everyone for watching and listening.
- [56:14]
A
Hi, Ryan Reynolds here for Mint Mobile. Are you looking for a beach read this summer? May I suggest your big wireless bill? It's got suspense, mystery, a slightly flat emotional arc, and a shocking twist where you realize you've been overpaying the entire time. Fortunately, though, Mint Story is better. Every plan, $15 a month, even unlimited. That's it. Happy ending, zero tears. Give it a try@mintmobile.com Upfront payment of $45 for three months, $90 for six months or $180 for 12 month plan required. $15 per month equivalent taxes and fees. Extra initial plan term only greater than 50 gigabytes. May slow when network is busy.
- [56:44]
B
See terms.