Speaker 1: A late stage republic. We talk about that a lot
Speaker 1: as far as what we are as a nation, And
Speaker 1: let me explain a couple of things about being a
Speaker 1: late stage republic. As we talk about America like it's
Speaker 1: gonna be a great special, we're gonna talk about us
Speaker 1: crumbling a bit, We're gonna talk about the other nations
Speaker 1: who might take over for us at some point in time.
Speaker 1: But before we get into any of that, allow me
Speaker 1: to just do this. Maybe as an American, maybe you
Speaker 1: like me, and I admit I'm one of these people.
Speaker 1: Maybe you look at what's happening in your country as
Speaker 1: we begin to falter and fall, and you say to yourself,
Speaker 1: I'm really bummed. I hate this. I don't want this.
Speaker 1: That's fine that you feel that way. I'm glad you
Speaker 1: feel that way. I feel that way. But you should
Speaker 1: also understand this. It's the year twenty twenty three. Okay,
Speaker 1: what does that mean? When the country start seventeen seventy six,
Speaker 1: Where does that put us almost two hundred and fifty years?
Speaker 1: Right about that two hundred and fifty year more, you
Speaker 1: know how long Historically most significant empires last two to
Speaker 1: three hundred years. That's about what you've got. Now, maybe
Speaker 1: that doesn't make you feel better at all, but you
Speaker 1: should know this is how it goes. What I'm about
Speaker 1: to describe for you, this is how it always go.
Speaker 1: You start out and things are good, and you have
Speaker 1: good patriots and great people running the country, and the
Speaker 1: country has a new idea, like we did, the idea
Speaker 1: of freedom, and everyone loves it and they embrace it,
Speaker 1: and we go all in. And then the country grows
Speaker 1: and it's ambitious and things are going really well, and
Speaker 1: things get going so well that you just get so
Speaker 1: rich and so far removed from your founding that you
Speaker 1: lose your way. And the people who want to pick
Speaker 1: at the bones and tear your country down, they don't
Speaker 1: like to your number one people inside your borders and
Speaker 1: outside of your borders, which we'll talk about a bit tonight,
Speaker 1: they see an opportunity. They see a population that's fat, complacent, lazy,
Speaker 1: board and just doesn't want to protect the thing they have,
Speaker 1: and things just start rotting. Slowly, but surely they start rotting.
Speaker 1: That's all you're seeing here. And now now we're probably
Speaker 1: at the stage where things will pick up in pace
Speaker 1: a little bit. No, America is not going to fall tomorrow.
Speaker 1: I'm not doing any of that doomsday stuff. But we're
Speaker 1: at a place now where we have failed multiple times,
Speaker 1: and we've failed on the world stage, and that in
Speaker 1: and of itself, that is the problem. I've been doing
Speaker 1: a lot of reading lately, is we We'll get to
Speaker 1: America in a second. But I've been doing a lot
Speaker 1: of reading lately on Napoleon and his various conquests and whatnot.
Speaker 1: And he's one of these historical characters that have a
Speaker 1: real love hate relationship with He's so fascinating and talented
Speaker 1: at the same time just horrible about something. But one
Speaker 1: of the things I always find sad about the Napoleon
Speaker 1: story every time I read it is there's this great
Speaker 1: general and he's conquered so much and all these lands,
Speaker 1: and everyone's scared the death of him. But then towards
Speaker 1: the end, towards the end, when he loses a battle
Speaker 1: here there, they all just start coming for him. The
Speaker 1: second they see the king bleed a little bit, they
Speaker 1: start coming for him, and from there it was already over.
Speaker 1: That's what we are right now. Do you remember you
Speaker 1: remember Afghanistan? Now, this building up to this moment took
Speaker 1: a long time. I don't want to act like it
Speaker 1: was just one singular moment that really that really brought
Speaker 1: all this about. That would be a huge oversimplification. But
Speaker 1: this was the moment the world found out, Oh man,
Speaker 1: we got a late stage republic over here. You see.
Speaker 1: It's one thing to fail. It's one thing to embarrass yourself.
Speaker 1: It's another thing to do it publicly. If I go
Speaker 1: home tonight when I'm done doing the show for you,
Speaker 1: and I walk in and I'm eating dinner, and I'm
Speaker 1: walking around the house and I absently stubbed my toad,
Speaker 1: and I stub it so bad I trip and fall
Speaker 1: and bang my knee on the ground. Well that sucks, right,
Speaker 1: that's not fun. That hurts a little bit of humiliating,
Speaker 1: but not that big of a deal. It's just me
Speaker 1: at the house, maybe the wife and kids. If I, however,
Speaker 1: have to go give a speech somewhere in front of
Speaker 1: ten thousand people, and I do that when I'm walking
Speaker 1: down on the stage, that's a whole different problem entirely.
Speaker 1: It's one thing to have some embarrassing things happening within
Speaker 1: the borders of your nation. It's another thing to have
Speaker 1: each and every country on the planet look at their
Speaker 1: tell vision screen and watch you stub your toe and
Speaker 1: bang your knee and fall flat on your face and
Speaker 1: embarrass yourself. Afghanistan, the disasters some draw that was America
Speaker 1: sending the bat signal to the world that we ain't
Speaker 1: what we used to be. I told you this back
Speaker 1: in twenty twenty one. You should feel embarrassed on behalf
Speaker 1: of your nation because we look terrible to the rest
Speaker 1: of the world right now. There's not a way to
Speaker 1: put it. This is in international international embarrassment. America has
Speaker 1: been the global superpower for your entire lifetime, it has.
Speaker 1: We took over that rule right about the end of
Speaker 1: World War One. That's when we really became top dog,
Speaker 1: and we've been top dog ever since. That's about one
Speaker 1: hundred years. The world is looking right now and they're
Speaker 1: asking are they still top dog? I mean, this is
Speaker 1: not what the top dog does. This is what some
Speaker 1: fading power does. And what happened after that was done.
Speaker 1: What happened Russia goes marching into Ukraine about fifteen minutes
Speaker 1: after that happened. Now we're mired in a crappy war there,
Speaker 1: and look, other nations know it. And again back to
Speaker 1: the Napoleon thing. This is one of the things I
Speaker 1: notice every time I read about it, how they just
Speaker 1: start they're trying to feel him out the other nations,
Speaker 1: and they're trying to figure out is this the same
Speaker 1: guy who never loses a battle? Am I about to
Speaker 1: lose here? And so what they really try to do
Speaker 1: is they start just poking them in the ribs a
Speaker 1: little bit, just kind of just kind of like you'd
Speaker 1: be with like a rabid dog you're trying to get
Speaker 1: away from. Just kind of poke them with a stick
Speaker 1: and back away. Is it gonna get me? Well, that's
Speaker 1: what they're doing with us right now, just trying to
Speaker 1: feel us out, see what we're made of. Remember when
Speaker 1: the Chinese sat down just doctor Joe Biden got elected,
Speaker 1: sat down in front of the Secretary of State and
Speaker 1: essentially told him, you ain't running things around here anymore.
Speaker 1: So let me say here that in front of the
Speaker 1: Chinese side, States does not have the qualification to say
Speaker 1: that it wants to speak to China from a position
Speaker 1: of strength. How you don't get to talk to us
Speaker 1: from a position of strength. And maybe when you watch
Speaker 1: that clip initially, maybe you were filled with this wait
Speaker 1: a minute, Yes we do. I know. I was, hey,
Speaker 1: who do you think you are China? Maybe we were wrong.
Speaker 1: Maybe we were wrong. After all, not only did they
Speaker 1: just fly a spy balloon from coast to coast, from
Speaker 1: the Pacific to Atlantic. Here in the United States of America. Embarrassingly,
Speaker 1: the President of the United States met with the press
Speaker 1: and said he wanted it shot down, but they told
Speaker 1: me no. Brief found the balloon. I order the Pentagon
Speaker 1: to shoot it down on Wednesday as soon as possible.
Speaker 1: They decided, without doing damage to anyone on the ground,
Speaker 1: They decided that the best time you do that was
Speaker 1: got over water. I told them to shoot it down Wednesday.
Speaker 1: I wanted the recommendation. They said to me. Let's wait
Speaker 1: till the safest place to do it. They said to me,
Speaker 1: so someone's ordering around the commander in chief. That's where
Speaker 1: we're at now. This guy, Mark Milly, the guy who
Speaker 1: promised China, he'd warned them if we were going to attack.
Speaker 1: As part of that conversation, I said, generally, there's not
Speaker 1: going to be a ward. There's not going to be
Speaker 1: attacked between great powers, and if there was, the tensions
Speaker 1: would build up. They'd be calls going back and forth
Speaker 1: from all kinds of senior officials. I said, hell, generally,
Speaker 1: I'll probably give a call, but we're not going to
Speaker 1: attack you. Trust me, We're not going to attack you
Speaker 1: a late stage republic. And you know there are a
Speaker 1: million examples. I used Napoleon off the bat. Maybe Rome
Speaker 1: is a really good one too. Just you have this
Speaker 1: gigantic juggernaut superpower who forever would dictate terms to whatever
Speaker 1: country they felt like dictating terms too. If Rome said jump,
Speaker 1: you said how I. And then internally they were rotting
Speaker 1: and rotting and rotting. And this took place over a
Speaker 1: long period of time. And then eventually these various tribes,
Speaker 1: from the Huns, the Vandals to all, they start picking
Speaker 1: at the bones and picking at the bones and poking
Speaker 1: at the ribs and poking at the ribs. And soon
Speaker 1: what's happened is you've let the world know that the unstoppable,
Speaker 1: the Great Juggernaut isn't really a great Juggernaut anymore. The
Speaker 1: Great Juggernaut eventually becomes painted rust. And once the world
Speaker 1: finds out that the Great Juggernaut is painted rust, you're
Speaker 1: in a lot of trouble because they remember all those
Speaker 1: years they weren't number one, and they want to come
Speaker 1: make sure you remember how you treated them. All that
Speaker 1: may have made you uncomfortable, but I am right. This
Speaker 1: is all while we have a military that is rotting
Speaker 1: out from underneath us, as always happens with these late
Speaker 1: stage republics. We're going to talk to green Beret Joe
Speaker 1: Ken about that next. We don't need a military that's
Speaker 1: women friendly. We don't need a military that's gay friendly,
Speaker 1: with all due respect to the Air Force. We need
Speaker 1: a military that's flat out hostile. We need a military
Speaker 1: full of type A men who want to sit on
Speaker 1: a throne of Chinese skulls. But we don't. We don't
Speaker 1: have that now. We can't even get women off of
Speaker 1: naval vessels. That should be step one, but most of
Speaker 1: them are already pregnant. Anyway, I forgot how mad the
Speaker 1: Chinese got mad at me about that. They're furious joining
Speaker 1: me now one of those men. By the grace of God,
Speaker 1: they still exist. Joe Kent, green beret combat veteran, former
Speaker 1: congressional candidate, and hopefully I believe running again. Joe, You're
Speaker 1: running again in Washington, right, I am, Jesse. We're back
Speaker 1: in the fight. Yes, my man, Joe Kent is running
Speaker 1: for Congress again, one of the few people one percent
Speaker 1: support in this country. All right, Joe, let's set aside
Speaker 1: some stupid take I did on Tucker Carlson. We're missing,
Speaker 1: we're shooting down a lot of things. Apparently we're missing
Speaker 1: some of these things as well. We actually dropped the
Speaker 1: four hundred thousand dollars sidewinders somewhere, and no one seems
Speaker 1: to know where it is. Joe, what am I missing?
Speaker 1: You know? Look, I mean the Biden administration just doesn't
Speaker 1: take our security seriously. We knew that before they opened
Speaker 1: up the border for an invasion, and then this nonsense
Speaker 1: with Chinese spy balloons, Chinese spy craft. They won't give
Speaker 1: us any straight answers. And look, I think initially they
Speaker 1: were caught off guard. They hadn't seen these things before.
Speaker 1: They had left that entire northern frontier wide open. And
Speaker 1: they're back pedaling right now. And really they know that
Speaker 1: the mainstream media is just going to help them cover
Speaker 1: up their incompetence and really just their negligence. Joe, it
Speaker 1: seems like we're watching everything uble around us. It goes
Speaker 1: way beyond you know, military stuff, and let's focus on
Speaker 1: that there. It doesn't feel like we have the same
Speaker 1: proficiency we have known that we've always known as Americans.
Speaker 1: It's been that way my whole life. Always the biggest,
Speaker 1: always the best, always on point. It feels a little
Speaker 1: rotting now, But you're you're the one with the experience.
Speaker 1: Is it most certainly is? I mean, look what Joe
Speaker 1: Biden has done to our military, Joe Biden, Lloyd Austin,
Speaker 1: but they've done to our military in a short period
Speaker 1: of time is nothing short of absolutely catastrophic. They they
Speaker 1: received one of the most battle hardened forces, the force
Speaker 1: that fought the global War on Terror for twenty years.
Speaker 1: They received them, and they put the vaccine mandate on them.
Speaker 1: They put the extremist stand down on them, or they
Speaker 1: automatically said, hey, we think any of you who are
Speaker 1: on the opposite side of the aisle as the ruling power,
Speaker 1: we think that you are domestic terrorists. And then, like
Speaker 1: I said, the vaccine mandate, we've just eroded and eroded,
Speaker 1: and we put all these different woke talking points as
Speaker 1: our priority as opposed to just war fighting. And look,
Speaker 1: at the end of the day, our enemies see there's
Speaker 1: no way in heck that China would have taken these
Speaker 1: drastic and very dangerous and very provocative measures against the
Speaker 1: United States if President Trump or really any previous president
Speaker 1: was in the Oval office because they didn't think they
Speaker 1: could get away of it. And now under Biden, they
Speaker 1: are completely and totally emboldened. So there's a direct result
Speaker 1: at what our ruling class, what our political leaders, Joe
Speaker 1: Biden and Lloyd Austin, what they do to our military
Speaker 1: and our national security. Joe, what do we talk about
Speaker 1: when it comes to these high altitude balloons, satellites, various
Speaker 1: ways that people spy today, the Nation States spy on others. Look,
Speaker 1: I'm just an idiot. What information can they gather? Can
Speaker 1: they gather valuable information? Sixty thousand feets so that's pretty high.
Speaker 1: What are they getting it is? Look, I mean there's
Speaker 1: a lot of technical collection that they could get from
Speaker 1: these balloons or these other types of crafts. However, look
Speaker 1: at the end of the day, you know, I served
Speaker 1: in the military and special forces. I was also an
Speaker 1: intelligence officer in the CIA. Every time you go to
Speaker 1: do an operation like this, you do risk versus gained.
Speaker 1: And the Chinese had to assess that Hey, look, we're
Speaker 1: not really risking much. Under any other administration, the risk
Speaker 1: would have been really high. Hey boss, I want to
Speaker 1: float a balloon over an American nuclear installation. I think
Speaker 1: most of the time that the answer back would have been,
Speaker 1: are you crazy, You're going to start a nuclear war?
Speaker 1: But with Biden in the White House, they were like, Yeah,
Speaker 1: what the heck, let's let's give it a whirl. I
Speaker 1: personally think that the Chinese could have collected sense of
Speaker 1: information from their satellites or from all of the different
Speaker 1: operatives they have deployed on the ground here in the
Speaker 1: United States buying up farmland by these nuclear installations. I
Speaker 1: think that this was meant to send a message that
Speaker 1: they control the time in place in which they can
Speaker 1: attack us, and that also, look, at the end of
Speaker 1: the day, they have our ruling class, especially the Biden
Speaker 1: crime family. They have them at their behest. Joe, is
Speaker 1: this as simple as well? Here's a little video clip
Speaker 1: of Joe Biden not remembering Austin's name. I want to
Speaker 1: thank all of our distinguished guests that are here today,
Speaker 1: the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, the Secretary of the
Speaker 1: of the Secretary, Austin the Secretary of State and the
Speaker 1: Secretary of the military of the behind me, Joe. It's
Speaker 1: this as simple as a commander in chief problem. We
Speaker 1: have a dementia riddled old man who can't speak, can't
Speaker 1: remember anybody's name. And that's the reason this is rotten.
Speaker 1: Or is the rot deeper? The rot's much deeper. It's
Speaker 1: it's way too easy to give Biden to pass and
Speaker 1: just say like, oh, he's he's an old man of dementia,
Speaker 1: he doesn't know what he's doing, he's sleepy. Joke, yeah,
Speaker 1: I mean that factor is when you're talking about a
Speaker 1: press conference. However, at the end of the day, Joe
Speaker 1: Biden is a career politician, fifty years in government. He
Speaker 1: has been in the back pocket of the Chinese Communist
Speaker 1: Party now for decades, going back to when he was
Speaker 1: on the Foreign Relations Committee in the Senate. The Hunter
Speaker 1: Biden laptop is very real. It speaks for itself. It
Speaker 1: shows the level of compromise that the Chinese Communist Party
Speaker 1: has on Biden not to mention oligarchs in Ukraine. So
Speaker 1: this is a deeply corrupt person who, at the end
Speaker 1: of the day him in the vast majority of people
Speaker 1: on his national security team. They don't believe there's anything
Speaker 1: exceptional about America. I don't think there's any kind of
Speaker 1: secret cabal of globalist plotting against us. What's even more
Speaker 1: dangerous is this mentality that, Hey, this expert class of
Speaker 1: corporatists should be in charge of everything, and we'd be
Speaker 1: much better off having closer relations with people in Brussels
Speaker 1: than we would be having relations with people in East Palestine. Ohio, Joe,
Speaker 1: what are you hearing from the hardcore types who are
Speaker 1: still in? Because there are many, many great men and
Speaker 1: women still in the United States military. They want the
Speaker 1: right things, they're there for the right reasons. But if
Speaker 1: your emails look at anything like my emails, they're not
Speaker 1: going to be in very much longer. Jesse. I'm getting out, Jesse.
Speaker 1: I'm getting out, Jesse. I'm getting out now. My son's
Speaker 1: not joining Jesse. I'm hearing a lot of this. Are
Speaker 1: you hearing this? I'm hearing the exact same thing. N
Speaker 1: It's very dangerous because, like I said, I mean, these guys,
Speaker 1: they're the ones who really bore the burden of twenty
Speaker 1: years of constant combat, and we need these guys to
Speaker 1: stay in and bring up the next generation of soldiers,
Speaker 1: and the vast majority of them, if they haven't already
Speaker 1: gotten out, they're going to do the bare minimum until
Speaker 1: they can get their retirement, and then they're going to
Speaker 1: get the heck out of the military, which is dangerous
Speaker 1: if you look at how the recruitings are going, because
Speaker 1: we're not being we're not able to put folks into
Speaker 1: the military to fill those gaps. So I think it's
Speaker 1: in there's especially with Joe Biden taking us, you know,
Speaker 1: ever so close a kinetic war with Russia and Ukraine.
Speaker 1: Joe fix it for me. Joe Kent is a dictator
Speaker 1: for a year. How do we fix America's military? We
Speaker 1: love our military, We're proud of it. We're used to
Speaker 1: be in number one. We don't want to watch this
Speaker 1: rot happen. What fixes this? Yeah, I mean, first and
Speaker 1: foremost the vaccine mandate. It's good that we got rid
Speaker 1: of it, but we need to bring back everybody who
Speaker 1: has kicked out and make them whole again and give
Speaker 1: them back their rank, give them back pay. That's number one,
Speaker 1: and then get rid of all this woke nonsense. And
Speaker 1: that's going to That's easier said than done because it's
Speaker 1: so deeply ingrained. I think we need to remake our
Speaker 1: officer corps. We need to start bringing in a lot
Speaker 1: more guys from the enlisted ranks to become officers, so
Speaker 1: we can cut the university and doctrination system of how
Speaker 1: groom our military leaders. And there we need a foreign
Speaker 1: policy that is America first. We don't need to have
Speaker 1: a combat division plus sitting over in Poland, sending the
Speaker 1: vast majority of our military resources into Ukraine for a
Speaker 1: conflict that we don't need, that we don't benefit from,
Speaker 1: that we'll only lose in. We need to get very
Speaker 1: serious about restoring economic dominance and really getting back to
Speaker 1: being an energy dominant once again, energy independent, energy dominant. Really,
Speaker 1: at the end of the day, it's like you said
Speaker 1: in that opening clip with Tucker, our military has one purpose,
Speaker 1: and that is to kill people and to break things.
Speaker 1: The second they start trying to do anything else, they
Speaker 1: are veering into a very dangerous area that makes our
Speaker 1: country less safe. We have to get back to Joe
Speaker 1: war fighting as far as our military goes Man, Joe Kent,
Speaker 1: I appreciate your brother, Thanks very much. Thanks for having
Speaker 1: me all right, Jacket, soback is going to join us?
Speaker 1: What is the capability of China? What can they do?
Speaker 1: Hang on? Have relations now between the US and China
Speaker 1: taking a big hit? No, how do you know? I
Speaker 1: know I talked to him. You've talked to Shock a
Speaker 1: j Pain before. I and our team talks to our
Speaker 1: people during this. Yeah, after, I haven't talked to him
Speaker 1: to during this. What joining me now? Jack Posilviic, host
Speaker 1: of the Great Human Events Daily podcast, also a Navy veteran.
Speaker 1: I don't like that, but it is what it is,
Speaker 1: all right, Jack? What is what is our relationship with China?
Speaker 1: I know we're enemies, we're friends, We're enemies who need
Speaker 1: each other. What is it? Well, so, I mean, there's
Speaker 1: a lot of ways you can answer that question. But
Speaker 1: the reality is this is that China has always, for
Speaker 1: the last thirty years or so, been the partner in
Speaker 1: crime of the elites in this country. When all of
Speaker 1: our jobs were shipped overseas. The deal was manufacturing will
Speaker 1: go to Asia's. We're going to remove manufacturing from the
Speaker 1: steel belt will become the rust belt. We're going to
Speaker 1: remove it from the Midwest, We're going to remove it
Speaker 1: from the South. It's going to go to East Asia
Speaker 1: as particularly China, so that they can pay slave wages
Speaker 1: to Western capital and the intellectual property will be our
Speaker 1: angle of it. So the people who were shipping all
Speaker 1: the jobs over there got filthy rich, while all the wealth,
Speaker 1: the jobs, the employment, the growth that all went to China.
Speaker 1: The backstop of the included in all of this was
Speaker 1: that the imat from the World Bank would be going
Speaker 1: and funding all their rides with loans. So you know,
Speaker 1: there's a reason that Chicago and Detroit look the way
Speaker 1: they do, and Shenjen and Shanghai and Beijing look the
Speaker 1: way that they do, because we paid for that. Our
Speaker 1: wealth was transferred to China. However, on the military side,
Speaker 1: we also sort of you have the military industrial complex
Speaker 1: which always must put China out as a rival, as
Speaker 1: a major threat, so they seek to portray China as
Speaker 1: this and it's it's kind of this interesting track where
Speaker 1: China as a military threat and by the way, they
Speaker 1: are by the way, an actual threat to the United
Speaker 1: States at least in terms of Taiwan, in terms of
Speaker 1: our partners in East Asia, Korea, Japan, etc. But when
Speaker 1: it comes to it, we have this sort of dual
Speaker 1: relationship which I think you were kind of getting at
Speaker 1: there that we are deeply in bed with them economically,
Speaker 1: and yet we look at them also as military rivals.
Speaker 1: What you're actually seeing is a fight at the highest
Speaker 1: levels of globalism. Right. So that system that I just outline,
Speaker 1: that's that's globalism, That's what that is. We outsource also
Speaker 1: our energy policy to the Middle East, so manufacturing in
Speaker 1: East Asia Middle East gets gets our energy policy. But
Speaker 1: underpinning all of that is that the United States the
Speaker 1: West is supposed to be the senior partner. Well, now
Speaker 1: all of a sudden, here comes Chijan Bing and here
Speaker 1: comes the resurgence CCP. They want to be senior partner.
Speaker 1: Now we saw this all throughout COVID. We saw this
Speaker 1: through just last week when they decided to send a
Speaker 1: spy platform, this dirigible over our nuclear silos, basically telling us, Oh,
Speaker 1: you think you're in charge. It's like that scene in Batman.
Speaker 1: You know you think this gives you power over us. No,
Speaker 1: we have power because we have all the wealth, we
Speaker 1: have all the manufacturing, and you handed it to us.
Speaker 1: Here's your cheap you know, big screen TVs and you
Speaker 1: can sit and swipe on your Netflix while we'll be
Speaker 1: building a real army and real military and you guys
Speaker 1: can go have you know pronoun Thursday Jack can I
Speaker 1: have a bunch of want to nail down on. But
Speaker 1: let's nail down on the military part of this. What
Speaker 1: can they do beyond Taiwan and making life visible for
Speaker 1: the Koreans and things like that, What can they do
Speaker 1: to us here on the mainland As an American citizen,
Speaker 1: I live in the I live in rural Texas. What
Speaker 1: can they do to me, to my friends, to my neighbors, anything, nothing, everything. Well,
Speaker 1: there's the thing I mean, particularly when it comes to China,
Speaker 1: I would not They're military is geared towards regional threats.
Speaker 1: They're military geared towards attacks within Asia, within what they
Speaker 1: call the island chains for second third island chains all
Speaker 1: the way up to du Guam. Maybe maybe hit Hawaii
Speaker 1: if there was an actual World War rececenario that kicks off, which,
Speaker 1: by the way, if you look at the way things
Speaker 1: are going with the United States right now, we're escalating
Speaker 1: into a hot kinnetic war in Ukraine while we're also
Speaker 1: escalating in the South China see in the Taiwan Strait.
Speaker 1: So maybe, but more directly I think what you'd be
Speaker 1: looking at is number one, they're going to be spying
Speaker 1: on you. We saw that, of course with last week,
Speaker 1: where and I took a lot of incoming for saying
Speaker 1: this that I think that balloon was clearly looking at
Speaker 1: cell phone signals as well as all sorts of personal signals.
Speaker 1: We now the State Department later came out and confirmed that.
Speaker 1: But you're also looking at cyber attack, Jesse. You understand
Speaker 1: that their cyber capabilities are such they understand they're not
Speaker 1: going to defeat the United States and open wars, so
Speaker 1: they don't want to fight it that way. What if
Speaker 1: all of a sudden you can't because all of our
Speaker 1: lives are so connected to any type of cyber system.
Speaker 1: You're banking, your car, your GPS. Imagine all of that
Speaker 1: goes down for every American at the same time. And
Speaker 1: I'm just talking about Twitter goes down. I'm talking about
Speaker 1: all of the ways that we run our lives. You
Speaker 1: can't even make it to the next town. You can't
Speaker 1: even you know, trucks don't know how to go where
Speaker 1: they're going. Everything breaks down overnight, Banking completely breaks down.
Speaker 1: That is exactly the threat that I would see from
Speaker 1: the Chinese Communist Party when it comes to this, as
Speaker 1: far as a direct threat, the long term threats of course,
Speaker 1: the transfer of wealth, and if you know, one another
Speaker 1: one of their bio experiments decides to escape from a lab,
Speaker 1: we might have to deal with that again, Jack, Why
Speaker 1: would they be collecting cell phone signals? Whose cell phone signals?
Speaker 1: What does look? I'm stupid, I understand, So you need
Speaker 1: to explain this to me. What is China gain by
Speaker 1: collecting my cell phone signal? I'm on the phone with
Speaker 1: my father. What do they gain by that? I know
Speaker 1: it's something, but what well, what I mean for you
Speaker 1: maybe not so much anything, but of course, you know,
Speaker 1: maybe they are looking at you in terms of they're
Speaker 1: looking at patterns of behavior within American society. So if
Speaker 1: they say, hey, here's a guy, you know, he hosts
Speaker 1: a show, he's talking to government leaders, he's talking to
Speaker 1: influential people inside the United States, they're mapping out power networks,
Speaker 1: They're mapping out influenced networks. When it comes to bases,
Speaker 1: they're going to say who runs the base, who runs
Speaker 1: who are the guards, where are the guards working with,
Speaker 1: who's the one who what are these trucks that go
Speaker 1: in and out. Oh, that's the food delivery. What company
Speaker 1: does the food delivery? Who works for them? What are
Speaker 1: the logistics, what are the supply runs that go back
Speaker 1: and forth? What's the frequency? How do you get in
Speaker 1: and out? What are the codes that we use for
Speaker 1: all of these things that we put on our basic
Speaker 1: And we saw this in the navy, by the way,
Speaker 1: how you know they could look at our fire control
Speaker 1: they could look at our ages, our early warning radars,
Speaker 1: But what about signals that we send to power the lights,
Speaker 1: to run the engine, to just have basic electricity throughout
Speaker 1: the ship? Are those systems as safe as the ones
Speaker 1: that we use to run our weapons systems? Not exactly,
Speaker 1: But guess what if we don't have the secures on
Speaker 1: security controls on them, then what happens to your ship
Speaker 1: if all of a sudden you can't drive it across
Speaker 1: the ocean. What if you get stuck somewhere? What if
Speaker 1: you can't turn your engine on? You've just neutralized that
Speaker 1: as well. So they've really been investing heavily in these
Speaker 1: cyber programs, and it doesn't surprise me at all that
Speaker 1: their surveillance would have kicked up to another notch where
Speaker 1: they're sucking up these types of signals. Jack, why'd we
Speaker 1: let the balloon get clear across that? Now I have
Speaker 1: my own theories, but I'm positive you have won. It
Speaker 1: doesn't make sense. Republican democratic doesn't make sense. Why would
Speaker 1: any president, any administration allow the thing to go from
Speaker 1: the Pacific to the freaking Atlantic before they shot it down? Why?
Speaker 1: I mean, Jesse, Look, I said this the night that
Speaker 1: it happened live. This is what it feels like to
Speaker 1: be in a vassal state. This is what it feels
Speaker 1: like to be completely owned, to have an administration and
Speaker 1: a government, and you see this on both sides of that.
Speaker 1: That is so we talked earlier about the dual relationship
Speaker 1: that the United States has the China, where they present
Speaker 1: a military threat to us, but financially our leaders are
Speaker 1: deeply in bed with them. This is exactly exemplifies what
Speaker 1: I just said there. Because they're more interested in their
Speaker 1: dollars and sense, their yuan and ren mimbi that they
Speaker 1: can get in terms of these deals rather than any
Speaker 1: of these millet They're willing to overlook the milletary airy
Speaker 1: threats because of the massive amount of billions and trillions
Speaker 1: of dollars in generational wealth. It's going to come through
Speaker 1: that relationship. So if a spy plane goes across, they're
Speaker 1: going to allow it to happen, and then they're going
Speaker 1: to blow it up after where it leaves us territory
Speaker 1: where you know, they're not even really using it anymore
Speaker 1: at that point, and they're going to beat their chest
Speaker 1: and make it out like they you know, like they're
Speaker 1: taking some big care of it. But at the end
Speaker 1: of the day, I think that was a message. I
Speaker 1: think that was a message to the American people, and
Speaker 1: I think we all saw it that we are owned
Speaker 1: and our our new management is not in Washington, DC,
Speaker 1: it is in Beijing. Dang all right, Jack, Finally, what's
Speaker 1: their weakness? Make me feel better? So I feel like, crap, now,
Speaker 1: what what we'd like to imagine this big red dragon.
Speaker 1: You know, there's this all powerful red dragon. They see everything,
Speaker 1: they know everything there, but they've got weaknesses. Everyone does.
Speaker 1: What are they well? So one of the biggest weaknesses
Speaker 1: in China is that once you get past the coastal
Speaker 1: sections of China, you're still dealing with a massive I
Speaker 1: mean numbers that we can't even imagine, can't even fathom
Speaker 1: in the United States, a seven hundred, eight hundred million
Speaker 1: people still living in poverty in that country, people who
Speaker 1: if they realize that they are the ones being kept
Speaker 1: in those conditions by their elites that are really only
Speaker 1: operating in order to enrich themselves rather than do anything
Speaker 1: for the country, then if those people were somehow able
Speaker 1: to be turned on the regime itself. Just like any
Speaker 1: other dynasty in China, they believe in this thing called
Speaker 1: the theory of dynastic cycles, where each dynasty in throughout
Speaker 1: Chinese history has had this sort of cycle of growth, superiority, decline, decay,
Speaker 1: and then a new revolution puts a new dynasty in place.
Speaker 1: So if you look at the Communist Party is just
Speaker 1: another one of the dynasties of China going back for
Speaker 1: five thousand years, it certainly fits into that. So you
Speaker 1: get a lot of those regional issues, you get a
Speaker 1: lot of situations where like this. But it's also why
Speaker 1: the Chinese Communist Party uses the United States as a scapegoat,
Speaker 1: uses the Taiwan s suation is the scapegoat because they're
Speaker 1: fanning the flames of really ultra nationalism, hypernationalism that only
Speaker 1: the Chinese Communist Party can protect you from the outside.
Speaker 1: Only the Chinese Communist Party can return Taiwan can return
Speaker 1: Hong Kong from the Western imperialist only the Chinese Commist
Speaker 1: part And so this is the way that they keep
Speaker 1: their hold on people to be able to say that
Speaker 1: we are the ones that must fight back. So, yes,
Speaker 1: do they have weaknesses, do they have issues, absolutely, But
Speaker 1: the same issue is guess what we got them too? Jack,
Speaker 1: appreciate your brother, Thanks so much, Jessie. All right, what
Speaker 1: about Russia? Though? Boris Rivkin, his name is Boris? Who
Speaker 1: think he knows what he's talking about? He's going to
Speaker 1: join us next. The idea we're gonna send in offensive
Speaker 1: equipment and have planes and tanks and trains going in
Speaker 1: with American pilots and American crews. Just understand, and don't
Speaker 1: kid yourself, no matter what you all say. That's called
Speaker 1: World War three. Okay, let's get it straight here, guys.
Speaker 1: Today I'm announcing that the United States will be sending
Speaker 1: thirty one Abram tanks to Ukraine. Okay, so are we
Speaker 1: in World War three? It is this the early stage
Speaker 1: of It's one of the smartest human beings I know,
Speaker 1: especially when it comes to that region, is my friend
Speaker 1: Boris Rifkin of Modifly Holdings and they get deals done.
Speaker 1: Newsletter Boris. Okay, we said it was going to be
Speaker 1: World War three we sent them. It doesn't feel like
Speaker 1: world War three. But maybe we're in some kind of
Speaker 1: soft cyber version of world. Where are we when it
Speaker 1: comes to US Russia relations right now? Obviously they're not good. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I mean, I think that the world War three card
Speaker 1: has been overplayed to some degree in terms of on
Speaker 1: the Russian side. In other words, it's in their interest
Speaker 1: to continue to increase the rhetoric, to sharpen it, to
Speaker 1: offset the problems that they have at the front and
Speaker 1: their lack of their diminished capabilities. Essentially, so it's rhetoric
Speaker 1: as a potempcan village almost strategy to conceal their own
Speaker 1: problems in the worsening situation in Ukraine for them right
Speaker 1: now practically so in reality, that's why Poutin, for example,
Speaker 1: keeps defaulting to the nuclear card. You notice that it's
Speaker 1: sort of a diminishing return on using it because he
Speaker 1: threatened to use it if we send any heavy weapons
Speaker 1: to Ukraine at all. He's threatened to you know, that
Speaker 1: there would be consequences if we sent the high Mars,
Speaker 1: we sent the anti ship missiles that were used to
Speaker 1: sink their battle cruiser Muscovy in the black seat, he
Speaker 1: threatened consequences if we increase the range of the howitzers
Speaker 1: and the long range of artillery that we would be
Speaker 1: sending to them, sending me the more of those, and
Speaker 1: he said the same thing that there would be consequence
Speaker 1: is in his former president of Russia, who's now really
Speaker 1: kind of a pathetic sap mouthpiece to metrimidved if threatened
Speaker 1: all sorts of consequences that the world would end if
Speaker 1: the tanks were sent, if the Germans signed off on
Speaker 1: sending the Leopard tanks the Ukrainians wanted. So the more
Speaker 1: that we have pushed the envelope, the response has been
Speaker 1: largely rhetorical, So nothing has fundamentally changed from the Russian side. Militarily.
Speaker 1: They have it up the ante because I think they can't,
Speaker 1: and to a large extent that has nothing really to
Speaker 1: do with Biden and what we're doing. It has to
Speaker 1: do with Russia's own internal problems and what Putin realistically
Speaker 1: can and can't do. So what Putin is essentially doing
Speaker 1: right now is he's telling his generals to accomplish political
Speaker 1: objectives for him. So by the one year anniversary coming
Speaker 1: up at the end of the month, he told his generals,
Speaker 1: I want a couple of politically important positions in Ukraine
Speaker 1: and the don't boss region like bach Mood where there's
Speaker 1: a huge amount of fighting going on right now. I
Speaker 1: want those positions taken. I want something that I could
Speaker 1: spin on. The one year anniversary is a big political
Speaker 1: victory for me in light of the reality that the
Speaker 1: Russians have now lost north of two hundred thousand probably
Speaker 1: approaching two hundred and fifty thousand dead, wounded and captured
Speaker 1: in Ukraine in one year. So in context, what does
Speaker 1: that mean for the Russians. So, the Soviet Union lost
Speaker 1: about ten thousand killed in nine years fighting in Afghanistan
Speaker 1: during the Soviet Afghan War. So it's that's about three
Speaker 1: or four times what they lost in the two Czechen
Speaker 1: Wars put together at this point, the first one under
Speaker 1: yelston In the second one under Putin, So you basically
Speaker 1: just put that in contact. That was the Soviet Union
Speaker 1: in Afghanistan. Here you have Russia, which has the Soviet
Speaker 1: Union had about three hundred million people. Russia now today
Speaker 1: has one hundred and forty million, and you know, they
Speaker 1: lost ten thousand killed. The number killed in Ukraine is
Speaker 1: about sixty to seventy thousand, So it's a disaster and
Speaker 1: they don't have anything else mill I mean as far
Speaker 1: as equipment to technologically to offset that in any way.
Speaker 1: But Putin is setting these political objectives and his generals
Speaker 1: are in panic. But they are terrified. They are doing
Speaker 1: what they can because there's a lot of you know,
Speaker 1: to appease the Czar, if you will, to appease Putin.
Speaker 1: There are a lot of these factional battles that are
Speaker 1: happening inside the Kremlin, each each trying to kind of
Speaker 1: undermine his political rival. Be it this guy who's the
Speaker 1: head of the Wagner Group, which is this mercenary private army,
Speaker 1: the chairman of the their equivalent of the Chairman of
Speaker 1: the Joint chiefs Kasimov chief of the General Staff. Then
Speaker 1: you have the hapless Defense Minister Shoigu, who's never served
Speaker 1: a day in his life in the army. You think
Speaker 1: it's kind of like some of the people we have
Speaker 1: in our military, But this guy never served a day
Speaker 1: in the army, and of course because he was a
Speaker 1: Putin crony, he became defense minister, so his main job
Speaker 1: was robbing the defense budget. And now we're seeing what's
Speaker 1: going on there. So you have to separate the political
Speaker 1: the political rhetoric of Putin himself from what's actually happening
Speaker 1: on the ground and what they can do. And the
Speaker 1: final point on that in terms of what more could
Speaker 1: happen here, like how close are we to the bring
Speaker 1: because we're hearing this and when I said, it's not
Speaker 1: as much to do with us, China is a huge
Speaker 1: restraining force on Putin, so aside from Putin's own internal
Speaker 1: limitations and what's happening within the Russian Army and its
Speaker 1: inability to achieve anything that he really wants it to achieve. Strategically,
Speaker 1: the Chinese are a huge restraining force on Putin. So
Speaker 1: she basically told Putin do not use nukes. You know
Speaker 1: that There's been a lot of behind the scenes pressure.
Speaker 1: So the Chinese are helping Russia in some areas, but
Speaker 1: they're a huge restraining force on them in other areas.
Speaker 1: So they the Chinese want a Russia that sort of
Speaker 1: weakened and prodding that would be a Russia that where
Speaker 1: they kind of have them where they want them. That
Speaker 1: would actually be useful to the Chinese. But if this
Speaker 1: escalates into them using even tactical nuclear weapons in Ukraine
Speaker 1: at all, that would be really really problematic for the
Speaker 1: Chinese across the board. So they've been trying to get
Speaker 1: putin to not go that far. So and another interesting
Speaker 1: point kind of to close that off in terms of
Speaker 1: their capabilities, there was I think it was about five
Speaker 1: or six years ago, maybe longer, the former deputy prime
Speaker 1: minister who was later the head of the Soviets the
Speaker 1: Russian equivalent of NASA, RUSS COSMAS, their their space agency,
Speaker 1: and he was the deputy prime Minister in charge of
Speaker 1: defense issues, and he gave a speech to their equivalent
Speaker 1: of the Pentagon and said that and this was supposed
Speaker 1: to be off the record, but it was somebody filmed
Speaker 1: it and it was disseminated that in his estimation, the
Speaker 1: US could within a matter of hours knock out eighty
Speaker 1: to ninety percent of Russia's nuclear capacity with conventional weapons,
Speaker 1: so with targeted long range conventional messile weapons, with targeted
Speaker 1: missile strikes, without US even having to contemplate any kind
Speaker 1: of nuclear retaliation, second strike or anything before they do anything.
Speaker 1: So before a single Russian nuclear device even gets off
Speaker 1: the ground, we have the conventional capability of destroying eighty
Speaker 1: to nine of that capacity without any further problems. And
Speaker 1: he admitted this to their equivalent to the Pentagon, So
Speaker 1: they're fully aware of the disconnect between what they're saying
Speaker 1: as far as the nuclear threats and the Gulf incapabilities
Speaker 1: between us and them. So you kind of have to
Speaker 1: keep all of those things in mind when you hear
Speaker 1: a lot of these scare stories. I think about World
Speaker 1: War three being imminent. Boris. Finally, politically, you mentioned Putin's
Speaker 1: vulnerable politically, and I continue to hear this, He's vulnerable,
Speaker 1: He's vulnerable. We Americans we like to imagine this all
Speaker 1: powerful autocrat who has total control of everything. Why is
Speaker 1: a guy like that in trouble politically? Well? I don't
Speaker 1: know if to be honest, I think that that kind
Speaker 1: of devetails too these rumors as Putin ill, does he
Speaker 1: a cancer? Like, what's his staying power? What's going on?
Speaker 1: I wouldn't put too much greevance into that. I think
Speaker 1: that it's too early to think about who might succeed Putin.
Speaker 1: What I can say is or what's his real standing
Speaker 1: in the Kremlin. I think that for now there's no
Speaker 1: one really who could challenge him directly. There are a
Speaker 1: couple of people who might together, but Putin has been
Speaker 1: able to set up a very specialized scheme. Obviously, he
Speaker 1: was a former KGB colonel. He understands what happened to
Speaker 1: borbatchoff when they attempted to overthrow him in nineteen ninety one.
Speaker 1: Putin is very careful to keep close tabs on everyone
Speaker 1: around him. He hates them, he doesn't trust them. This is,
Speaker 1: you know, a late stage. He's been there for over
Speaker 1: twenty years. He suspects plots and attempted pus at every turn,
Speaker 1: behind every rock, and so he's very careful not to
Speaker 1: allow any potential rivals to gang up on it. So
Speaker 1: I would really put too much weight into that, and
Speaker 1: more importantly, the aspiration of Putin's successor being some kind
Speaker 1: of enlightened pro Western democrat. I think we shouldn't put
Speaker 1: up keep our hopes up on that either. I think
Speaker 1: really what I can say is that, I mean he
Speaker 1: does use body doubles that we know he does keep
Speaker 1: his senior advisors, you know, across these mile long tables,
Speaker 1: because he's literally has all these phobias. He's just terrified
Speaker 1: of them being around him. So he has a special train,
Speaker 1: armor train that's prepared to him, like Kim Jong n
Speaker 1: you know that. He so that's to not have too
Speaker 1: many people close to so I wouldn't. So he's taking
Speaker 1: every precaution he possibly can. I don't give too much
Speaker 1: weight to any of these rumors, but what I would
Speaker 1: probably say is that the war in Ukraine currently, whether
Speaker 1: it expands or doesn't, or there's some kind of strategic
Speaker 1: operational change in the battlefield, if you will, the war
Speaker 1: in Ukraine will continue politically so long as Putin is
Speaker 1: in the Kremlin. So for Putin, he's ideologically possessed with
Speaker 1: this Ukraine issue and has been for far along than
Speaker 1: a lot of our commentators and officials I think have
Speaker 1: given him credit for it. And when somebody is ideologically
Speaker 1: possessed with something, rational thinking goes out the window, which
Speaker 1: is why he's continuing to insist on all these really unachievable,
Speaker 1: deranged political objectives which have no military aren't militarily realizable.
Speaker 1: He doesn't care so he wants to keep going, and
Speaker 1: so we have to decide that could sort of debtail
Speaker 1: to what we need to do at this point. How
Speaker 1: will this end? How long is this going to go on?
Speaker 1: I mean, we have to decide what our tolerance is meaning.
Speaker 1: Are we prepared for a multi year potentially, which I
Speaker 1: think could very well be the case of a sort
Speaker 1: of lower grade protracted war another Afghanistan another Vietnam type
Speaker 1: of experience, in more of a proxy setting where we
Speaker 1: would be providing some kind of open ended support for
Speaker 1: Ukraine as the front begins to sort of ossify and
Speaker 1: solidify and we get into this war of attrition stalemate situation.
Speaker 1: Or are we prepared for a new definition of what
Speaker 1: we would be fined with as far as he's concerned
Speaker 1: over there, because we have other priorities like China and
Speaker 1: things that we have to be focused on. So that's
Speaker 1: a political decision for us. But on Putin's end, I
Speaker 1: don't believe he's going to be stopping so long as
Speaker 1: he has the ability to keep going. Boris Rifkin, thank you,
Speaker 1: my brother, Thanks Jesse, we have final thoughts. Thanks. All right,
Speaker 1: that's a lot right you're thinking about foreign powers How
Speaker 1: are they? How are we trying to assess World War three?
Speaker 1: Which is ugly anyway, but let's stay on top of
Speaker 1: it around here. Obviously, world War three doesn't matter until
Speaker 1: it matters a lot. We'll let you know. We'll do
Speaker 1: it again.