2 POGs Save the World Podcast
Two Army veterans—one left, one right—unite for the ultimate mission: tackling real-world problems with common sense, logic, and a healthy dose of military humor. 2 POGs Save the World isn’t your typical political podcast. Hosts Kj Bradley & Lance O'Neil bring unfiltered discussions, sharp debates, and tactical solutions to the chaos of modern society.
From politics and national security to sports and pop culture, no topic is off-limits. With battle-tested insights and zero tolerance for BS, these two POGs (Personnel Other than Grunts) prove that you don’t have to agree on everything to find real solutions.
Join the fight every Sunday at 8:30 PM EST, where the only thing sharper than the takes is the wit. Mission: Common Sense. Execution: Hilarious. Victory: Inevitable
🎙️ Listen. Debate. Disagree. Laugh. Take Notes.
2 POGs Save the World Podcast
Borderlines & Battle Lines: Illegal Crossings, Political Hypocrisy, & Free Speech Fights
Tonight on 2 POGs Save the World, KJ, and Lance dive into one of the most heated debates in America—where does the law truly stand on illegal border crossings, and how do different administrations handle enforcement? Then, we break down the hypocrisy in how Democrats and Republicans respond to outspoken members of Congress—why do some get a free pass while others are vilified? Plus, we tackle the broader fight for free speech in today’s political landscape. Join us for unfiltered takes, common sense discussions, and a few laughs along the way.
What do you want to do tonight? The same thing we do every night, Pinky Try to take over the world. All right, yo, let's get into it. Try to take over the world.
Speaker 2:You're preaching freedom. Try to take over the world.
Speaker 1:And bring Chaplin in the world. Try to take in the world Mr Lance O'Neal, trying to take over the world. What up, what up, what up, what up, what up? World, we are back. It's another Sunday and we are live and in full effect. It's your boy, kj Bradley, and the greatest chaplain in the world. What up, chappie? How you doing, man? Good, how are you? I am in the middle of Quincey era season and it was no Birthdays for classmates every other weekend, so I am exhausted. But I am here and we are live. Let's get it going, man. This is going to be a very, very lightning quick episode, as I stated, because we literally just got in from another birthday party, so we still have to do school preparations and everything over on our end.
Speaker 2:You've got to teach your kids not to like other kids. It makes it easier.
Speaker 1:Yeah, I know man. I have this social butterfly who's just a friend with everybody in the classroom. She gets all the invites. At seven years old it's devastating if she doesn't attend every birthday party.
Speaker 2:Oh yes, they invited me, not realizing that everybody in the class was given an invitation, my wife and I are being run ragged.
Speaker 1:But, I mean it's great. The networking is great, Meeting the other parents we got.
Speaker 2:We were fortunate this year to be in a really great classroom and to meet some really awesome parents so far. So I think I was a bad parent. I couldn't name like three, three parents that I grew up with. Oh, you know, the moving around thing has a big part of that. Yeah, you know that. Once you get settled, yeah, once then that's you know.
Speaker 1:Fortunate for us being here a couple of years now and and growing soft roots has helped out tremendously. All right, man, we are here, we are on the clock, let's go. What do you got? What, as the great Cody Rose likes to say and I hate to steal his line, but I got to. What do you want to talk about? I spent all week at the at the state house this week down in Carolina, so that was an amazing experience.
Speaker 1:So I didn't get a chance to check in locally or at least find out what's going on, news wise with what's going on, but everything.
Speaker 2:I've heard it's been a really, really tumultuous week, as usual, but you know nothing special, but but I I want to read something here, yeah go ahead On OK Quote.
Speaker 2:This is from the New York Times Quote, and I'm going to leave out who they are Chose an unelected technocrat with deep experience in financial markets to replace blank as party leader and the country's leader. Okay, so, an unelected technocrat with deep experience in financial markets. I don't want to hear Canada say another damn word about Trump when you just with your liberal party. Just again, that that's the description for the New York Times is an unelected technocrat with deep experience in financial markets. That might be the funniest thing I've read. Yeah, he's the new prime minister. His name is Mark McCarney. He's 59. He steered the Bank of Canada through the 08 global financial crisis and the Bank of England through Brexit.
Speaker 2:Who has never been elected to office, won a leadership race on Sunday against his friend and former finance minister, christina Freeland. He won a Wow I know I'm just reading. He won a stunning eighty five point nine percent of the votes cast by the Liberal Party members and and more than 150,000 people voted, according to the party leaders. Wow, people, 56%. And then apparently he's expected to call snap elections pretty quickly. He said so. Americans should make no mistake. In trade, as in hockey, canada will win. Taking a shot at the hockey team. Okay, cool, anytime you want to take on any of our baseball teams or football teams or even soccer teams. Well, actually Canada has pretty decent soccer. But no, it's interesting, he doesn't hold a seat in Parliament and he is expected to call federal election soon after being sworn in. In those elections he'll face off with Pierre Oliver, the leader of the Conservative Party. So that'll be interesting to see what happens.
Speaker 2:I do think there's some. I understand their government system in canada and the uk is different. I do like that snap elections can happen, um, and they're in those countries. I, I think they're. I I wish we had a system. I know in certain states, like with governor, like california, you can do a recall election. You can do something, um, because I think in 22, when people started seeing biden uh start to really degrade, uh, I think I think that would have been a good time for a snap election. I think you could see in the next who knows, next year or two. So let's say you know you said trump's chaos is either going to be. Let's say you know you said trump's chaos is either going to be cleansing for america or the fire is coming right. So let's say, a year, 18 months from now, the us might be in a position where they're like, hey, you know what we need to. We need to cut our losses and move on, and we can't because it's a four-year cycle. Uh, so I, I there are parts of me that I think there are benefits from elections. I think canada is going to be really interesting.
Speaker 2:Um, our friend and buddy, greg easterbrook, wrote an article about beware of canada becoming the 51st state and he was going over a lot of the politics in canada that they're fairly left-leaning. I was a bit surprised. I didn't. I didn't think that they're fairly left-leaning. I was a bit surprised. I didn't think that they were as left-leaning as he seemed to say. But I am not a Canada expert by any stretch of the imagination. I've never set foot in the country. So he was talking about how Canada, I believe, would be the if Canada became. Now, remember, canada is not becoming the 51st state, they're just not.
Speaker 1:That would be a huge state.
Speaker 2:Well, it would be the third largest in population, behind California and Texas, I believe, and that's it. But then the House. So California would lose like 10 members of the House, texas would lose four. So it's not like the little ones are going to lose, it's going to be the big ones. So you've got two senators. Let's say that splits one conservative, one Republican. I'm sorry, yeah, because those aren't the same thing actually. Maybe I just had a break.
Speaker 2:One conservative, one Republican, let's say one blue one red, but he seemed to feel that it would go fairly blue for Canada, which was a bit surprising. Yeah, outside of Quebec, because you'd probably vote to say we're out. Outside of Quebec, because you probably vote to say we're out.
Speaker 1:Most of their provinces are fairly liberal-leaning. I don't know the names of all their provinces offhand, but I know, most of them tend to lean. Now, when I say liberal, I mean traditional liberal, not, not, not, you know, not like that, yeah, not not. Extreme lefty, crazy left, crazy leftist liberal. I mean traditional liberal values, you know universal income, health care, yeah basic stuff.
Speaker 2:Basic stuff New Mexico, not Oregon. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, there you go.
Speaker 1:Yeah, that's a perfect way to put it, because you got to be careful with those terms.
Speaker 2:Yeah, and that's you know, and that's the thing. Who knows how it would go? But it's a pipe dream. I saw another one that was really interesting this week. There's a push I don't know where this comes from a push to let puerto rico, uh, independence. Um, I know they've had some votes on it and they have voted to stay with the us multiple times, but the number it said something like the uS would save $640 billion by letting Puerto Rico off the rolls, as it were, leaving the United States and becoming independent. I was surprised by that number. That seemed a bit crazy to me. Now, ultimately, here's the thing I think Puerto Rico is in a situation where, if they want to become an independent, they should become an independent Because, you ask, most Americans and Americans are not always most educated but you see, people go oh, puerto Ricans, they're not even Americans, they're American citizens the minute they're born. Puerto Rico is a, is a protectorate, and so, or a territory, whatever word you want to use. So if you're born in puerto rico, you become a us citizen.
Speaker 2:I'm I'm curious what the current polling would be with trump in office what puerto rico would, how puerto rico would vote at this point well it came.
Speaker 1:It came up through conservative circles. I remember early 2000s, it was um toward the end of the Gingrich years. It was the free Puerto Rico, because they kept voting blue and it pissed a lot of conservatives off. And then it just kind of like you know every, every now and again, you'll hear it flare up, but nothing really serious came out of it. So it wouldn't surprise me that it's flaring up now, with all the rhetoric going on.
Speaker 2:It doesn't really matter, because Puerto Rico literally doesn't have any representation.
Speaker 1:Yeah, it's not really something that Puerto Rico is outright champion themselves. But it's always been one of those things like, hey, where can we save and where can we cut? And they've always been, you know, on the chopping blocks. They've always been been a, I guess, a conservative pipe dream like hey, you know they don't help us, they don't help our cause anyway.
Speaker 1:So we can, you know, cut sling, load and let them be. You know, but I mean a lot of it too is the same way with the DR, right? Like I'm saying, the DR can cut ties as far as the subsidies and whatever we provide for the DR.
Speaker 2:Well, but the Dominican Republic is an independent country.
Speaker 1:Yeah, they're independent in terms of subsidies and providing assistance and stuff like that.
Speaker 2:Well, that's foreign, yeah, but that's straight foreign aid. It's a little bit different when you actually have contractual obligations. Let's put it like that. Yeah, I just it's interesting. I think a lot of this stuff is. It's kind of like when Trump Okay, I'm going to go back to my old old the media.
Speaker 2:You know, okay, I'm gonna go, I'm gonna go back to my old old, which is the media. You know, um, I I read an article on the times that was talking about how rubio was caught off guard by what trump said during his uh, it's not a state of the union, but his speech last week and he said, hey, but if it all goes badly, well, we can all blame Marco Rubio. And it was funny because the media was like oh, did you see that Trump took a shot at Rubio? And I'm like that was Trump joking on his guy. That wasn't anything against Rubio, that was actually just kind of having a little fun, goodness forbid.
Speaker 2:And that's when the Trump derangement syndrome comes into play, where it's like you guys, not everything is. How do you think that's literal when he says I'm going to make Canada the 51st state, like if you're taking any of this here, and honestly I think the whole Canada 51st state. The only reason it got as much play as it did is because Trudeau reacted the way he did. Got as much play as it did is because trudeau reacted the way he did. I think trump kind of did it as a, as a joke, and then you know so immediately trudeau oh, how dare you. And what was the next thing? Trump goes, okay, governor. Yeah, I mean, come on and there it took off from there.
Speaker 2:trump's really good at just kind of poking people and I think I think that's part of his personality. Would it be nice if it was a little more playful manner that he did it? Sure, but I think in general that's what he does.
Speaker 1:I think at this point, yeah, trump is who he is, it's just Sure. You just gotta weather the storm with that guy.
Speaker 2:It's not really Meanwhile. I don't think he was doing that with Zelensky. I think he was genuinely pretty ticked off at Zelensky and I think the more you see what's going on with Zelensky, you start to kind of understand why. Now you can clearly say and I'm sure you do you and our always First Sergeant Jackson both say you know, it didn't matter what was said, you don't act like that in front of the cameras with a world leader got it.
Speaker 2:Um, at the same time I think trump has kind of had it with zielinski going look, you're on again, off again. You wanted to have a deal, you don't want to have a deal, you want to. You're going to sign the mineral rights, you don't. You won't sign the mineral rights. Uh, you know you have this press conference and you get pissed off at us. So you go to England and you say, fine, I'm going to go to my girlfriend over in England and we're going to be best friends. But then England's like yeah, well, you know, you want these shiny diamond ring and I can't afford to give you the presents that you want. I said they come back and say oh, okay, fine, let's get hitched. And he goes oh no, no, I'm not sure I want to do that again. So Zielinski has, I think, been very flaky and at the very least, I think what has happened, zielinski has, I think, been very flaky. And who's that awesome sounding guy?
Speaker 1:No, that was you. I got you in the echo I had to.
Speaker 2:I know, I knew it was me, yeah, but I just think that, zelensky, there's so much going on with the world right now, right, okay. So we could, literally just right now. Let me bring up a fourth one, and we are 15 minutes in. So we've had Canada, we've had Puerto Rico, we've had Ukraine, and we haven't even talked about what's going on in Syria which could qualify. I mean, if you say we are going to kill all Christians in the country, does that not count as a genocide? Because right now, that is what's going on in Syria.
Speaker 2:The US basically backed and said, okay, we're not going to back Assad because he's a bad dude. So we're going to back another group that is moderate, even though they've never claimed to be moderate. They are ISIS-level fundamentalists and we've backed them. And now, when they get in power, they start rounding up Christians and digging mass graves and putting people in. So, yeah, we we have not done well with our who we pick, and certainly we are not backing a moderate in what's going on in Syria, and it's really interesting to see the lack of coverage not backing a moderate in what's going on in Syria, and it's really interesting to see the lack of coverage.
Speaker 2:Again, the New York Times. You're not going to see a whole lot on the New York Times, at least not that I've seen. Right now. The biggest headline for the New York Times on Syria is, and. It says Syria's interim president calls for unity amid fresh fighting. More than 1,000 people have been killed in clashes in the coastal provinces of Syria, according to one monitoring group. And again that's going in. They say clashes, that's people trying not to get killed because of their religion. That's not clashes. That's hey, leave us alone and don't kill us just because we're Christian.
Speaker 1:It's kind of the same thing. Just walk the dog with me. You have your guy in Israel, netanyahu, who essentially says hey, for the protection of Israel, we're going to wipe out everything and everybody Hamas. In order to do that. We're going to wipe out everything and everybody Hamas.
Speaker 2:Right, and in order to do that, we're going to clear out.
Speaker 1:Gaza and we got to clear out all the Muslims. We got to clear everybody out, right? So one man's Christianity is another man's, you know, muslim. So if we're, if we're OK with wiping out Hamas and all the Muslims and clearing out Israel and being okay with backing Netanyahu, we can't then turn around and say, hey, syria, you're wrong for you know, wanting to wipe out all the Christians in your country. Well, at least that's just how I see it.
Speaker 2:Well, and, by the way, the violence and I read the story a little bit more and I read the story a little bit more the violence is actually between those that are backing the new guy, ahmed al-Assad, and those that were actually loyal to Bashar al-Assad. So that's the newest fighting. That's not the Christians, but the Christians are getting killed. I think the difference there, when you, when you say that with Gaza versus Israel, I do think those are apples and oranges, because the Christian minority in Syria are not lobbing bombs at the government offices, they're not going in and killing the. You've had terror attacks going in from Gaza into Israel. So I think there are some very different things. I think now you can argue, you can say what you want, whether it's overkill or whatever.
Speaker 2:I personally I'm a big fan of the of the book Ender's Game and Ender. If you don't know the story, ender, when he's about six years old, he has this monitor taking out where they could see what Ender was seeing and everything right. So as soon as it's out, these three bullies and again this is like first grade, kindergarten, first grade these three bullies go to attack Ender because they're like oh, now you don't have your monitor. Go to attack Ender because they're like oh, now you don't have your monitor, you're not protected anymore. And so Ender basically calls out the leader of the group. He's like hey, oh, you call me a small little third. And here's you with two of your friends. I thought I was just nothing, but you're just going to beat me up, you need your friends to take. So he uses that on him and the bully's like, okay, fine.
Speaker 2:And ender comes in and, full-on, just kicks the kid right between the balls and you pick something up and it hits him on the ground. And then, or no, he, he hits him on the head and knocks him down and the other two back up. And then he steps back and he full-on, kicks him, uh, kicks him in the head or something. And so later on, uh, when they're trying to figure out, do we need this kid? They go to him and the, the adult, says to him Andrew, I need to know, I know about the fight. I need to know. You had him down and he was defenseless. I need to know why you, you kicked him a final time. And here's the six year old kid and he says and here's the six-year-old kid, he says, knocking him down the first time, stopped that fight, hitting him while he was down, stopped all the other fights, because the friends he's like, if you guys ever come after me, I'm going to do this to you too, right? So that was the mentality. The entire book and series is him saying look, do everything you can to avoid a fight, but when you fight, you dominate and you make it so the other guy can't come back. And Israel kind of has that mentality of, look, we can only take so much. And there's a point where you guys have been launching these rockets, you kidnap our guys this and that. And finally, now you know the October, what did Hamas think was going to happen with October 7th attack? Did they think Israel was just going to come in and you know, shoot a couple of bullets and leave and remember they still have hostages. And at this point they're turning over hostages, dead babies in coffins, and parading them down the street. I personally don't have a lot of sympathy for Hamas. I have sympathy for the Gazan and the those that did not want this and don't support Hamas and want to have that peace, because there certainly are Arabs that want that, but as far as the Hamas government, they don't. It's in their charter that part of their goal is to destroy Israel and that Israel doesn't have the right. That's Hamas, israel I'm sorry Hamas, hezbollah, iran.
Speaker 2:You and I talked about this. You said you wouldn't talk with Iran and give them any advantages. We were talking about how Hesketh went in and told cyber to stop doing attacks on cyber offensive on, yeah, stop doing offensive attacks against Russia, right. And you said, well, you know if, if Iran said they were going to leave Israel alone, you still don't do that. And I was like, yeah, we can see that. And I said, yeah, no, you do do that, because the whole point of of Israel, their biggest threat, is Iran itself. And if it means you don't do offensive attacks against Israel, well, or I mean, I'm sorry, against Iran, what offensive attacks do you need against Iran? Well, you're worried about their nuclear, you're worried about their gas production, you're worried about their Raptors that are sneaking in behind them. And I like how he was so sneaky as he went through. That was great.
Speaker 2:But like, if they agree, and they said you know what, ok, we, israel, we're done with Israel, israel can be their own thing. Well, that takes probably 80 percent of our reason to be against Iran away, because Iran is not going to strike the United States in any significant way. They'll, they'll pick, and unless they do something like they did in Beirut and kill 250 Marines or whatever the exact number was, the US is kind of going to go. Cool if we could get North Korea to leave South Korea alone, if we could get Iran to leave Israel alone, and then right now, kind of the front page one is if we could get Russia to leave Ukraine alone. Those are all great, but there's always stuff like that Are you going to get the North Sudanese to leave the South Sudanese alone? Are you going to get the Muslims in Syria to leave the Christians alone? I'll take the win each time that you can get it. And if the only thing the US.
Speaker 2:So ultimately and this is what I said, because we don't know what's going on with Russia and sometimes what Russia wants and what the US wants that they have to line up the US wants to stop giving money to Ukraine, russia wants the US to stop giving money to Ukraine, right, sometimes that lines up and to me I don't know what this is, because we're not being told this, nor should we be, but if part of the deal, if Putin says to Trump if you guys are serious about us having a ceasefire and about us ending this war, you keep attacking us by cyber. We're now, we know it's bullshit, but we're not doing anything to you it's. It's not us, it's our little and we will stop our. We'll try to see what we can do to stop her and I don't know what's changed on their side.
Speaker 2:But if that's the case, maybe that's a piece of the puzzle, Maybe that's part of how we stop what's going on in Ukraine. But you're not going to, even somehow. Even peace in Ukraine isn't making everybody happy. The prime minister of it wasn't Holland, it was next door Belgium. The prime minister of Belgium last week said peace in Ukraine is potentially more dangerous than the war continuing. For who? Not for the soldiers on the ground, not for the people on both sides getting shot. You and I, we can disagree with Russia. We can disagree with Ukraine. We can disagree with the politics. You and I are both soldiers. We don't want fellow soldiers, on whichever side, to be killed if they don't need to be. That is the respect soldiers have for each other. The only time I want a soldier dead is if he's pointing a gun at me and I pull the trigger first. Right.
Speaker 1:Yeah.
Speaker 2:And so there's so much going on. And with Trump, what's tough with Trump and it's not a defense thing, it's his own hubris has gotten in the way, because and again you know we've talked about this a lot campaign trail versus the real governing. When he says I'm going to stop the Ukraine war on day one, why? Why say that Because you're Trump, I get it.
Speaker 2:But if he had just said, said stopping my first day in office the first thing I'm gonna do is I'm gonna, I'm gonna focus on how to stop the ukraine russian war. That is, that is day. That is a day when I have I have these things all laid out. I'm gonna sign executive orders to wipe out the other executive order, blah, blah, blah, whatever they are. But instead of saying I'm gonna stop it on day one, dude, that's like saying I'm gonna put somebody on the moon tomorrow. You can't, you don't have, you don't have literally the power to do that. You could threaten right now. Trump could threaten literally right now. He could call Putin up and say if you don't sign a peace treaty and you don't pull out of Ukraine, the United States will start bombing you tomorrow. That's not going to end the war unless Putin decides. It is Because Putin just as easily can go. You know, mr President, I have this red button here too. I don't have two keys, I've got one button. So do what you must, but I do what I want to do, you know. So, as much as Trump has that blather and that's part of it is why's why people voted for him too. It's also what gets him in trouble with people who are not MAGA and people who say, okay, well you're, I see this a lot. Did you vote for this? Is this what you voted for? And I say yeah. A lot of people say, yeah, this is exactly what I voted for. The problem is, you can say this is what I voted for, but you can't, at the same time, say and I saw one of the press secretaries, I don't remember which Brunette, pretty girl, I don't know. She was talking, a pretty woman and I don't know who she was. She was the spokesman for, but she's either. She's one of them, she's one of the press secretaries. And she said that's one thing that people like about president Trump he does exactly what he says. And it's like yeah, but you can't pick and choose. You can't if he says I'm going to do these and he did. I'm going to do these 50 things and I'm going to do these and he did. I'm going to do these 50 things and I'm going to do them all on day one. And let's say, he did 20 of them. Great, okay, cool, he followed through. He did exactly what he. I'm going to be more transparent. Yep, you have been. You have more press conferences in your first 60 days, or six weeks than Biden had in his full four years. I'm going to cut the prices of this or I'm going to do this Energy, okay, cool.
Speaker 2:But you can't say he does everything that he says he's going to do. When he said 50 things and he's done 20 of them, because 30 of them haven't been done, and you can say, well, that's his, it's out of his power, well then you don't say it, you don't push for things that aren't in your power. Shutting down the border I think he's done a great job. There's lots you know. Again, jackson said you know what has Trump done that you like? And I had a whole list on my Facebook. Shutting the border was one of them. But declaring energy, I think you know. Right now, gas, for me at least, is down probably 40 to 50 cents, but I mean it flexed, it flexed, it goes up and down. The ag crisis, I think, is a bit ridiculous because of the bird flu stuff. But there are things that I really appreciate that he's done. But some of the stuff I don't appreciate is, again, not when you promise things that you don't have the power to do and then you're getting cheers for it.
Speaker 2:Now you cut off President Trump. I give him credit. He said he wanted to stop the money flowing to Ukraine Awesome, I'm with it. He said he wanted to stop the money flowing to Ukraine Awesome, I'm with it. But part of the problem that we see is this thinking of if we don't spend this is me, this is a fiscal conservative, versus, I think, the moderate or even the left. They say, ok, well, if we don't, if we don't send 50 billion dollars to Ukraine this year, then where can we spend it? Where can we put it? Who are we going to spend it? On what special project?
Speaker 2:And, as a fiscal conservative, I say no, not sending 50 billion dollars to Ukraine means not spending 50 billion dollars at all. Don't spend it. We are so far in debt. Unless you are going to, like you and I have talked about, unless you're going to basically rewrite all of your loan agreements with the Fed, you're going to audit the Fed. You might as well just start pencil whipping the debt. You might as well at this point. Unless you're going to get serious about it and take the savings and when, a couple weeks ago, they were talking about all the Doge savings are going to give checks back to the American people no, I understand. You're buying votes at that point, got it, don't, don't. It's no different. Look, it's no different than Biden promising the Cutting the student loans, doing this and this. And I'll be up front, I benefited from that student loan, that's a little different.
Speaker 1:Because the way that differs, just for clarity, the way that differs is the guys that were doing the student loans were charging outrageous interest, so they had paid back the principal. Most of the people who got released had already paid back the principal, but what was what was excused was the enormous amounts of interest that the companies were collecting on that debt.
Speaker 2:So Right, but I mean the big part, though, though. It still was just a matter of hey, we're, we're giving you debt, really, right, so it's fine, yeah yeah, which is, which is I mean but that, but that that part matters, though.
Speaker 1:So, like like, there's a difference between I'm gonna give you fifteen hundred dollars of money that's gonna die, you know yeah that that going to under the premise of we're saving money knowing that it's essentially just a bribe to make you feel good knowing that midterms are coming up, as opposed to somebody saying hey, we're not going to allow these banks to basically railroad you with these enormous interest fees. We're going to forgive these interest fees and get you on a faster track, as long as you pay back the principal.
Speaker 2:So at the same time I mean at the same time if you take out, nobody forced you to take the loans out. So there you know, there's for me. I'll tell you this. For me, the way, the reason I benefited from it was what's supposed to happen is, if you pay for 120 months, which is 10 years, and you're in a government service, if you're military or firefighter, your police officer, whatever if you've made 10 years worth of payments, whatever's left is supposed to be written off. And when I filed for it, they went well no, you had a different type of loan.
Speaker 2:It's like what do you mean? I had a different type of loan. It's a student loan, isn't it? So they were kind of screwing me over with the technicalities of it.
Speaker 2:So I finally, when this came through, I went okay, I'm not getting bought. To me it's like that was the promise you guys made as far as years ago. I think Obama was originally one of the companies that came out with that deal, but ultimately I don't think again. We should be spending money in a lot of ways Now. The other thing is this is another argument that people don't quite understand on the right Foreign aid. People look at foreign aid and they say, oh, it's just a waste. We shouldn't be spending any money to anybody else. Okay, well, one the left will say you know, most of our foreign aid or the largest dollar sign goes to israel. So how come they get it? And to me.
Speaker 1:I say well, because they're the only democracy in the entire middle east and and they're basically.
Speaker 2:You know they're on their own, they're on an island. But whether you believe that or not, I will say as far as foreign aid goes I don't know what the number is anymore, but it used to be we gave Pakistan about $10 billion a year in foreign aid and people got really mad when it turned out Osama bin Laden was hiding in a compound in Pakistan. Gosh, that was over 10 years ago now right, that was like 10, 12 years ago. People started freaking out. They said, well, if Pakistan knew that Osama bin Laden was in our country, why are we sending them $10 billion a year when they didn't tell us? And I'm sitting there going, you guys. The reason we send $10 billion a year when they didn't tell us and I'm sitting there going, you guys.
Speaker 2:The reason we said $10 billion a year to Pakistan is so that they don't launch nuclear weapons against India. That's basically it. You don't blow up India and start World War III. We'll give you some money, just don't do it. And Pakistan goes. Okay, we could use $10 billion a year. That would really help our economy. That'll keep our people relatively happy. That keeps our stuff going and India is going. Yeah, ok, you're going to give them 10 billion dollars to not fire a nuclear weapon on them? Cool, we appreciate that. Don't keep that going, because otherwise you know that's a significant problem, because otherwise you know that's a significant problem. So there are certain things that we essentially, with our foreign aid, we are buying favors with our foreign aid in general, and it's not just we're not getting something for nothing. In most cases there's no, don't get me wrong, there are. There's lots of reasons that foreign aid could be reduced, lots of places it could be reduced.
Speaker 2:You and I have talked about USAID. A lot of actually appreciate, to some degree, trump pulling in the reins and saying, all right, we need to stop taking care of everybody else. I know people look at the America first statement and say, well, that's what Hitler said. He said Germany first. You guys, I would hope that, honestly, every country, especially when it comes to espionage, every country looks at themselves and says we're the most important country in the world. Whatever anybody else does, it's self-defense. I don't care what anybody else says, as long as I'm taken care of. Think China cares about anybody else. No, china wants best for China. North Korea wants best for North Korea. Madagascar wants what's best for Madagascar. You know you could go across the board. You know you can even go in the US. You don't think that Utah wants best, what's best for Utah, and they're like, hey, we don't want. That's one of the big frustrations in Utah. So many people have moved from California, brought far leaning, far left politics, especially into Salt Lake and they're going we don't want this.
Speaker 2:Well, how do you do that when you have population that throughout? Uh, basically take a marker, go from from northern California on the west coast and draw a line straight down and everybody on the east is basically a conservative and everybody on the West Coast and draw a line straight down and everybody on the East is basically a conservative and everybody on the coast is a liberal. And there's so many people in San Francisco, la and San Diego that the people in Fresno don't get a say on anything. That's got to piss you off. But just like I say with anything else, you don't like it, you can move from California. You can move to Texas, you can leave. If you don't like what's going on, go somewhere else.
Speaker 2:You know we like Georgia. We may end up back in Salt Lake. There's a lot of things about Salt Lake right now politically that I'm not a big fan of. But does that? Where does family and job and where does it all balance out? So you know you have opportunities. Like you said, you're in a. You have soft roots right now. When is when is your PCS looking? You know you're in a situation as a spouse where you're like we could get PCS this summer or next winter or the winter after that and we don't have any control over where we go.
Speaker 2:You could end up in Nebraska, in South Dakota, in anywhere. Now you're with Army, right? No, she's Air Force, she's Army. She's Army. Okay, for some reason I was thinking, because you guys are on Air Force, but again you could get stuck somewhere you just don't want to be and the Army says needs the Army? Hold tight, that's where you're going. Yep, so sorry, that was a lot of ramble there. Ultimately, most people have the opportunity to move where they want and all that. But going all the way back, I do think, even what we kind of started with with Syria, I think the Christians in Syria need to be protected a little bit more than they are, a lot more than they are. I think, the Ukrainians the best protection the Ukrainians could have would be to come to the peace table.
Speaker 2:Canada hey look, canada's having elections. It's going to be really interesting to see what happens with Canada in the next couple of months. I don't know. I'm curious because they did not like what Trudeau has been doing, especially, I think, even though it's a war of words with Trump, and I think they, of course, are going to back any Canadian over Trump. It doesn't matter If there's a foreign leader that I think is getting over on Biden. I'm still going to support Biden because I want my country to be the best country. I'm not going to be backing whoever over Biden, especially if I think it's going to hurt the US. Yeah, california, I think it's going to hurt the US. Yeah, california. I think California is really all the way since since Reagan left, it's is when it kind of, but it's had some Republican, it's had some Republicans governor since then. But the state and the legislature have gone pretty far left and I don't think Arnold Schwarzenwarzenegger, although a republican, was anything near a conservative.
Speaker 1:So I think the, the republican I mean the state legislature was mostly republican as well too, so it's kind of back in the day?
Speaker 2:yeah, back in the day.
Speaker 1:It went back and forth, yeah, but now it's kind of like all right, like yeah, it's cliche to blame one another.
Speaker 2:I'm saying it's biblical.
Speaker 1:I'd be curious about the House. I saw a post the other day where Massey I don't know if you've been following Massey. I was a fan of Massey beforehand because he's one of the few true conservatives left in Congress who are just, you know, like he's. He's a Republican, no doubt, but he is a fiscal conservative, like traditional fiscal conservative Right, and during the speech he sent out a sent out a tweet, which was really fun. He said Congress is standing up cheering for Doge cuts that were approved by Congress. And he's like, and it's just, it's just the irony in it all. And you know how I feel.
Speaker 1:You know how I feel about about Congress in general and how it's just a cesspool of just grifters who are just in there to get rich and they can give two shits about legislating anything for the republic, legislating anything for for the republic, um, and it's just, it's. It's a breath of fresh air to see a guy like massey come up and say, hey look, man, we're all for this right, and now you're starting to see more republicans kind of do a soft pushback. I wish the leadership would be more honest, um, about what's going on, um, but I've come to realize that with the blue team in shambles. They don't know which way is up right now. They're just dog and pony show and they're just a big shit show, to be honest with you and the red team is.
Speaker 1:They're so afraid of Elon's money they don't know how to speak on their own that it's just going to be a mess, and the only people that are going to suffer for it is going to be the American populace, and that just really pisses me off even more.
Speaker 2:Well and that's why I go back to the need for a 28th Amendment that Congress will pass no law from which they are exempt. Why is Congress not? Why are they exempt from SEC insider trading?
Speaker 1:They won't. That's that's got. So I figured this out and I've wargamed this you can get the 28th pass without congressional approval, but it's going to take two thirds of the state.
Speaker 2:Yeah, congress, yeah, a constitution. Oh my gosh, what's it called. Oh my gosh, what's it called. Once again, my old brain moment constitutional Congress.
Speaker 1:Yeah, but the problem is well not the problem, I guess, in this revolutionary administration. If you will and you have a republic that is more than two thirds Republican governorship right now, it can easily pass, and I think you'll even have Democratic governors who support the amendment if it were to be presented. However, I don't believe this administration is genuine about making change. I think they're about making change, but they're about changing the way they can fatten their pocket and soften the landing spot for their ventures, which is cool. I mean, every administration tries to take care of their people, but this is going to be more painful.
Speaker 2:One thing I will push back on that. I think people have made this point more eloquently than me. If Trump really was in this just for the money, he didn't need to run again. 45, 47 doesn't make any more money than 45 and 47.
Speaker 1:No 47 ran for president to avoid the 38 felonies he was facing. We can war game it all day long, but had Trump not won the presidency, he'd be in jail. He was facing 38 felonies and then he had more coming from the report.
Speaker 2:I think SCOTUS would have thrown him out. I don't know when you look at what they were, they were basically again paying your lawyer to do his job.
Speaker 1:There's no way, scotus would be able to clear 30 plus felonies without it having damage to the reputation of the Supreme Court.
Speaker 2:The 30 odd felonies? Ok, first of all is a? Was a very purposeful reason done that way to make it 34 felonies, or I think it was Absolutely so. Here's what I mean by that. So 34 felonies, okay. So he basically sent a monthly check to his lawyer to Cohen, I think is who it was sends a check to his lawyer and then I think is who it was sends a check to his lawyer and then he in his ledger, his accounting ledger, says this is what I paid it for. So now, every single month he does that for, let's say, 11 months. Sure, so each felony was. He signed the check, he wrote the ledger amount in his bookkeeping and then he handed the check to his lawyer. So all three of those were separate felonies. 11 months, so 11 times that's 33.
Speaker 2:The New York state legislature had to go back and turn that into a felony. They had to vote to turn that into a felony because the check stuff that he was doing, if it was illegal, first of all was a misdemeanor, and then they had to go back and retroactively make it a felony and retroactively extend the statute of limitations. So this whole idea that he went in to avoid it. Okay, if you say that. Well then, new york went in and they changed the rules on him to begin with.
Speaker 2:Now him paying stormy daniels so even stormy daniels changed her story right. She went from yeah, I was, I was a prost prosecutor, basically all of that.
Speaker 1:All of that sounds great, but you're gonna tell me a guy facing 88 different court cases across the nation and 34 felonies for that one incident, for that one incident, 34 for one incident, 88 overall, and you're telling me all 88 all 88 were were just some mad conspiracy. No, no, no, no, not no no, no no no, no, that's not what I'm saying.
Speaker 2:What I'm saying is in that case because here's the other side of it Did Trump create, did, did? Did Trump create fraud because of Trump University? Was it Trump or was it people underneath him? Right now, trump can how much? How responsible is Trump for and I'm just generalizing because I don't know the details of Trump university, okay, Just to be real, he may have absolutely been in on the whole thing, right? So Trump university, yeah, very different.
Speaker 1:I have to country wanted him to be president, that's that's well, even with what it was that's about.
Speaker 2:But set that aside. Okay, If you remember, there was a lot of pushback a few years ago against for-profit universities. Sure, that were basically giving out degrees. You know, degree mills, Degree mills those got shut down. And what Trump did? Trump?
Speaker 2:my understanding is Trump basically said hey, come to my seminars, trump University, you learn how to sell like a boss, be a salesman like a boss, right? And some people liked it, some people didn't, some people. And so they turned around, they sued him and said, hey, this is bogus, I didn't get what my money's worth. And the court said yep, that was not what was promised. You promised this. And so there was a fine paid and all that stuff. Was it criminal? He wasn't found guilty of criminality. Criminal he was wasn't found guilty of criminality. It was fraud, uh, business fraud, and he had to make restitution that way. So for the 88 charges, I don't know if those were legitimate felonies.
Speaker 2:I don't know if those were legitimate misdemeanors I don't know, because, again, I look at a lot of this and I also see stuff and read stuff that says, like you say, he ran for 47 to avoid being prosecuted for these things. Well, the other argument is he was prosecuted for these things to keep him from running to be 47. Could be. Yeah, I agree, could be. So you've got a chicken and egg situation, right, yep? So, and regardless of all that, trump is the president, he's in there, he's, at the very least, he's stirred the pot and I think the people yeah, you'll agree with that right.
Speaker 1:Yeah, I think that.
Speaker 2:Anyway, yeah, sure. Now I think the average American, if you not average, the average Trump voter, if you said to the up the suit and it's going to really hurt the swamp, the money that's going to be saved for the country is going to be somewhere between 500 billion and a trillion dollars. Oh my god. Well, this is this. That's the argument right that is.
Speaker 1:That is, that is extremely optimistic all right, go ahead.
Speaker 2:I'm just kind of making the argument I got to go ahead, but because and this is why I say 500 to a trillion right, I got, but because of him doing that at the same time he's going to turn around and enrich his own bank account by $10 billion. I think the average MAGA would say, well, he's earned it, would say well, he's earned it If he can save $50 billion but his personal income goes up by $10 billion because of it. Fair trade. Now you, knowing you, and I know you, you'll say I don't give a shit what he saves If he increases by a dollar more than he's entitled to. That's graft, grift, grift, grift, grift, grift. Yes, grift, grift, grift.
Speaker 1:Grift, grift, yes.
Speaker 2:Grift, grift. Yes, he's grafted, he's grafted. Sorry, I messed myself up and I understand that point of it as well. Right, I am very much a look. If there's a law, the law is the law, and if he's doing something now, I'm also lost the law. It's not a coulda shoulda, woulda sure. When the military says stuff like, well, you should have known, is it in the regulations? Well, no, but you should have known, then you're wrong. Put it in the regulations, or I don't give a crap, I can do it right. Um, and I think is a point where, let me rephrase I hope, I hope that what's going on in Doge and in the White House in terms of trying to make the country better through mass chaos I hope their intent truly is. Through mass chaos, let's say, I hope their intent truly is we are going to come out on the other side a better country.
Speaker 2:The analogy I used with you and KJ was that a lot of people look at this country as it used to be the greatest piece of property, with the greatest house on it. And over however many years, the lawn has stopped being taken care of, the fence has been blown down, the weeds have come up, the paint's been peeling, the power line in the back is hanging, there's cockroaches in the house and rats all in the house and it's all but unlivable. And so when you go in and you start cleaning it up, and it sucks that some of the flowers are going to get pulled up with the weeds. And those are the good people that are trying to do the right thing and that's tough. And my cousin actually said, yeah, that's all great, you feel that way, but what if you're one of the flowers? I said, yeah, that sucks. Trust me, I feel for them. But as a whole, you got to start somewhere. And if you're driving by that house, you don't look at that house and go, gosh, look at that horrible house. But boy, there's a couple of pretty flowers down there, right along the edge. You know you say what has got this house? What? Why have they let this house go?
Speaker 2:And Trump at this point and Doge to me, at least they're coming in with the weed whackers and they are. The very first thing is you've got to, you've got to be able to get to the house. You know, you got to be able to get to the house and they're whacking their way through all the weeds and the overgrown grass and the lawn and, starting to, they're trying to fix the fence. That's a great analogy for the border. They've come into the house and thrown the windows open and they've thrown the doors open and the cockroaches and the rats are scattering. They're not gone, they're scattering them. So now the next step will be OK. Now, what can we focus on? Now we focus on the little things You've got. You've got four minutes, so you get the last four minutes.
Speaker 1:That's a great analogy, but let me just leave you with this. If your intent is to go clean the house up, do you go into a stranger's house without their permission and just start cleaning their shit up, or do you follow protocol and get permission from the people who own the house first? Do you?
Speaker 2:follow protocol. He was invited in.
Speaker 1:No, no he was invited in.
Speaker 1:He was invited in, right. But if we were to take that analogy, right, I'm going in, I'm fixing the fence, I'm doing the yard and stuff, right, congress? Right, congress is the financial manager of that house, right? So if Congress says, hey, we have no problem with you doing that. You know the people want you to clean the house, the neighborhood wants you to fix the house. We all agree that the house is in disarray. We champion you fixing the house.
Speaker 1:The only thing we ask is hey, man, if you're going to spend some money here or if you're going to cut money here, just let us know. That should be a reasonable ask if you're going to do that type of remodeling project. And I don't see why there should be pushback for someone asking for accountability. If I am in charge of the checkbook right given, regardless of how it works you may think that I do a horrible job at managing the account, but if it's my money and I've been entrusted to manage the finances of this estate, the least you could do is show me that respect and come in and say hey, man, look, you're spending way too much money here, or I don't think you're spending enough money here. We think we can save you money if you don't spend money here. You know what I'm saying. Why are you paying for a gardener who's not coming to garden the yard? You've been paying for this gardener to come fix your yard. He hasn't shown up in a year and a half. We think you can cut that funding.
Speaker 2:The pushback there is. You guys, Congress, you've been instrumental in letting this house get run down For you to come around and say you don't like how we're doing is.
Speaker 1:You've been part of the problem for the past 20 years, right, and that's where guys like Massey come in. It's not that they're against what they're doing, it's just saying hey, man, listen, we just want to see, we're with you, matter of fact, we're going to support you. Just let us, you know, with you, we, matter of fact, we're going to support you. Just let us, you know, we got you. Hey, we understand that mistakes were made, but show us, you know what I'm saying and I don't think that's unreadable. And before we get up out of here yeah, nobody is against saving money again. Liberty. That is a. That is a media, that is a media blurb that people take and run with because it sounds great. Nobody is against.
Speaker 1:I've seen, I've seen Democratic and Republican, red and blue team come out and say and support and champion Doge. Matter of fact, even when they set up the Doge caucus, they had both members of both gangs in there, both red and blue members. The only pushback they've ever had was the accountability. Hey, we okay. Hey, you're gonna cut 80,000 people from this department. Great, cool. You're telling me the reason you're doing it is because you're saving this much money. Great, show us before you do it. That's all we're asking for and I don't think that is an unreasonable ask for the people or the representatives that we elected, or else what's the point of having them there?
Speaker 2:Liberty. I agree with you, but that is not the major money. Maybe we need to talk about this next week Because we got a hard time for KJ. That is it. The money is not just in government employees, but that is absolutely not.
Speaker 1:That is absolutely not when the money is. Anyway, we have to be out. We have to be out of liberty. This is, this was a quick show. Hope to see you next week. For everybody that tuned in, thanks for coming by. We will see you guys. Same bad time, same bad channel. We are out of here.
Speaker 2:If I can get it to work jeez man, what do you want to do tonight?
Speaker 1:The same thing we do every night. Pinky, Try to take over the world. All right, yo, let's get into it. Try to take over the world.
Speaker 2:You're preaching freedom. Try to take over the world.
Speaker 1:And greatest chaplain in the world, mr Lance O'Neill, take over the world and George Chaplin in the world, mr Lansom Hill, take over the world.
