0
SPEAKER_00
The following is a conversation with Tulsi Gabbard, who was a longtime Democrat, including being the vice chair of the Democratic National Committee.
0
SPEAKER_00
She endorsed Bernie in 2016 and Biden in 2020.
0
SPEAKER_00
She has been both loved and heavily criticized for her independent thinking and bold political stances, especially on topics of war and the military-industrial complex.
0
SPEAKER_00
She served in the U.S.
0
SPEAKER_00
military for many years, achieving the rank of lieutenant colonel.
0
SPEAKER_00
And now, she s the author of a new book called For Love of Country.
0
SPEAKER_00
And now, a quick few second mention of each sponsor.
0
SPEAKER_00
Check them out in the description.
0
SPEAKER_00
It s the best way to support this podcast.
0
SPEAKER_00
We got Riverside for recording a remote podcast, ExpressVPN for security and privacy on the interwebs, NetSuite for business management software, and Notion for note-taking and team collaboration.
0
SPEAKER_00
Choose wisely, my friends.
0
SPEAKER_00
Also,
0
SPEAKER_00
If you want to work with our amazing team or just get in touch with me, go to lexfriedman.com contact.
0
SPEAKER_00
And now onto the full ad reads.
0
SPEAKER_00
As always, no ads in the middle.
0
SPEAKER_00
I try to make these interesting, but if you skip them, please still check out the sponsors.
0
SPEAKER_00
I enjoy their stuff.
0
SPEAKER_00
Maybe you will too.
0
SPEAKER_00
This episode is brought to you by an oldie, but a goodie Riverside.
0
SPEAKER_00
Riverside FM, the platform that makes it easy for podcasts and media companies to record remotely in studio quality.
0
SPEAKER_00
I use them to record remote podcasts.
0
SPEAKER_00
I usually don t record remote podcasts, but I have done a few, and the experience there is just effortless, flawless, super high quality in terms of audio, in terms of video, super easy on the guest side.
0
SPEAKER_00
Everything is just wonderful.
0
SPEAKER_00
Aside from sort of the basic thing that this is a great way to record remote podcasts, they have so many features.
0
SPEAKER_00
They got AI transcription, they got text-based editor, they got multi-track sync to make sure everything is aligned and synced.
0
SPEAKER_00
Man, that s a hellhole that you want technology to help you avoid.
0
SPEAKER_00
And they do wonderfully, the syncing of everything together.
0
SPEAKER_00
It kind of makes me want to do more remote podcasts because for certain kinds of guests, being there in person is not as essential as for certain others.
0
SPEAKER_00
Whenever there s chemistry and the dynamic kind of wit and banter and back and forth,
0
SPEAKER_00
sort of the dance, the music of conversation and so on, that being in person is really nice.
0
SPEAKER_00
But when it s really intense and heated, not necessarily in the argument there in the room, but on the weight and the heaviness of the topic, then sometimes being in the room is nice.
0
SPEAKER_00
Plus there s something that s difficult to describe that s not present with certain guests when it s remote.
0
SPEAKER_00
But I think with others,
0
SPEAKER_00
You can have a hell of a good conversation, especially when you re doing like a debate or multiple people, just getting them in the room together as I had to do for the Israel-Palestine debate is really tough.
0
SPEAKER_00
So I should probably do more remote conversations.
0
SPEAKER_00
And I record my remote interviews with Riverside.
0
SPEAKER_00
Give it a try at riverside.fm and use code Lex for 30% off.
0
SPEAKER_00
That s riverside.fm and use code Lex.
0
SPEAKER_00
This episode is also brought to you by ExpressVPN.
0
SPEAKER_00
I ve used them for many, many, many, many years to protect my privacy and the internet.
0
SPEAKER_00
I think everybody should be using a VPN for many reasons.
0
SPEAKER_00
One, it can allow you to geographically transport yourself, but the main reason is it just adds this extra layer of security and privacy.
0
SPEAKER_00
When you use incognito mode on Chrome and go to all the shady websites that you go to, yeah, I m talking to you,
0
SPEAKER_00
I know what you do.
0
SPEAKER_00
And so does the NSA.
0
SPEAKER_00
So does everybody.
0
SPEAKER_00
Anyway, you wanna protect yourself as much as possible.
0
SPEAKER_00
The low-hanging fruit of protection is the VPN, and use a great VPN.
0
SPEAKER_00
The one I ve always used, the one I highly recommend is ExpressVPN.
0
SPEAKER_00
They re like the big one.
0
SPEAKER_00
Works everywhere, any operating system, including Linux, it s super fast, super easy to use.
0
SPEAKER_00
What else do you want?
0
SPEAKER_00
Go to expressvpn.com slash LexPod for an extra three months free.
0
SPEAKER_00
This episode is also brought to you by NetSuite, an all-in-one cloud business management system, aka ERP system, Enterprise Resource Planning.
0
SPEAKER_00
It s the machine inside the machine.
0
SPEAKER_00
No, it s the universal language that connects the different modules within the machine of a company.
0
SPEAKER_00
For some reason, I really enjoy talking about a company as a machine.
0
SPEAKER_00
Maybe that s the engineering perspective.
0
SPEAKER_00
But there s also a camaraderie in it.
0
SPEAKER_00
Thinking about all of human civilization as a kind of machine where we play our roles, there s a communal aspect to it.
0
SPEAKER_00
You know, there s like a negative sense that gears in the machine are somehow used by a bigger thing, but really, gears are working together.
0
SPEAKER_00
It s a camaraderie, there s collaboration as you all are doing a difficult thing.
0
SPEAKER_00
So anyway, NetSuite makes it easy for people to work together by managing all the messy stuff, the financials, the human resources, inventory supply, e-commerce, and all that kind of stuff.
0
SPEAKER_00
37,000 companies have upgraded to NetSuite by Oracle.
0
SPEAKER_00
Download NetSuite s popular KPI checklist for free at netsuite.com slash Lex.
0
SPEAKER_00
That s netsuite.com slash Lex for your own KPI checklist.
0
SPEAKER_00
This episode is also brought to you by Notion, a note-taking and team collaboration tool.
0
SPEAKER_00
It combines note-taking, wikis, project management.
0
SPEAKER_00
So the individual note-taking is incredible.
0
SPEAKER_00
Their integration of AI into that process is really, really well done.
0
SPEAKER_00
The AI assistant does summarization, it generates first draft, it helps you in all kinds of ways it can, like rewrite to make things simpler or more sophisticated.
0
SPEAKER_00
It s a great assistant in terms of the individual writer, but they also do a great job of having the AI assistant integrate all the different parts of a project.
0
SPEAKER_00
So looking across docs and wikis and projects where you can ask questions of the assistant and they will answer based on all of those files.
0
SPEAKER_00
And that means all the different people that are part of that project that are collaborating on it, that s part of the information that the assistant is using.
0
SPEAKER_00
So it s just a really, really great collaboration tool that I highly recommend if you re on a team.
0
SPEAKER_00
Try Notion AI for free when you go to notion.com slash lex, that s all lowercase, notion.com slash lex, to try the power of Notion AI today.
0
SPEAKER_00
This is the Lex Friedman Podcast.
0
SPEAKER_00
To support it, please check out our sponsors in the description.
0
SPEAKER_00
And now, dear friends, here s Tulsi Gabbard.
0
SPEAKER_00
You ve served in the U.S.
0
SPEAKER_00
military for many years, achieving rank of lieutenant colonel.
0
SPEAKER_00
You were deployed in Iraq in 2004 and 5, Kuwait in 2008 and 9.
0
SPEAKER_00
What lessons about life and about country have you learned from that experience of war?
0
SPEAKER_01
So many.
0
SPEAKER_01
Central to those lessons learned was having my eyes open to the very real cost of war.
0
SPEAKER_01
You know, of course, I served in a medical unit during that first deployment to Iraq.
0
SPEAKER_01
It was 2005 during the height of that war.
0
SPEAKER_01
And unfortunately, we took a lot of casualties.
0
SPEAKER_01
We, across the entire U.S.
0
SPEAKER_01
military.
0
SPEAKER_01
My brigade that I deployed with was from the Hawaii National Guard.
0
SPEAKER_01
We had approximately 3,000 soldiers who were operating in four different areas of Iraq.
0
SPEAKER_01
And my first task every day was to go through a list of every combat-related injury that had occurred the day before in the country.
0
SPEAKER_01
And I went through that list name by name, looking to see if any one of our
0
SPEAKER_01
nearly 3,000 soldiers from Hawaii had been hurt in the line of duty.
0
SPEAKER_01
And then if seeing them on the list, tracking them down, where were they?
0
SPEAKER_01
Were they getting the care they needed?
0
SPEAKER_01
Would they be able to get sufficient care to stay in country and return to duty?
0
SPEAKER_01
Did I need to get them evacuated?
0
SPEAKER_01
Usually it would be to
0
SPEAKER_01
military hospitals that at that time were in Landstuhl and Ramstein in Germany, and then from there getting them to either Brooke Army Medical Center, which is here in Texas that specialized in burn-related injuries, or to Walter Reed, and tracking them and their care until they were finally home with their families.
0
SPEAKER_01
And it never became a routine task.
0
SPEAKER_01
It never became like, okay, cool, check the list, you know, kind of dot the I s, cross the T s.
0
SPEAKER_01
It was that daily confrontation with the reality of the cost of war.
0
SPEAKER_01
Friends of mine were killed in combat.
0
SPEAKER_01
experiencing firsthand that high human cost of war caused me, you know, 20-something year old from Hawaii, I had left my seat in the state legislature to volunteer to deploy with my brothers and sisters in my unit to Iraq.
0
SPEAKER_01
And so recognize the cost of war, I think, in two fundamental ways.
0
SPEAKER_01
Number one is the high human cost of war on our troops and on the people in the country where this war was being waged.
0
SPEAKER_01
and also the cost on American taxpayers.
0
SPEAKER_01
Seeing then back in 2005 and recognizing KBR Halliburton, one of the biggest defense contracting companies then, and I know that they are still very much in that business now.
0
SPEAKER_01
Dick Cheney being connected with that company at one point or another.
0
SPEAKER_01
But in our camp specifically, which was one of the larger ones in Iraq at that time,
0
SPEAKER_01
There wasn t anything that happened in our camp that didn t have the KBR Halliburton logo imprinted on it.
0
SPEAKER_01
We had a big shack-looking place where we ate our meals.
0
SPEAKER_01
They call it a dining facility, a DFAC in the military.
0
SPEAKER_01
They served four meals a day.
0
SPEAKER_01
They brought in and they being KBR Halliburton, they imported workers in from places like Nepal and Sri Lanka and the Philippines to come in and cook food and work at this dining facility.
0
SPEAKER_01
I got curious about how much it cost us as taxpayers.
0
SPEAKER_01
So I started asking around some of the people and I think at that time it was like, well, every time a soldier or a service member walks through the door,
0
SPEAKER_01
If I were to go in for breakfast and grab a banana and walk out, that s an automatic $35.
0
SPEAKER_01
per head, per meal, four times a day, thousands and thousands of people.
0
SPEAKER_01
And then we made friends.
0
SPEAKER_01
There s a pretty large Filipino community in Hawaii, a lot of Filipino soldiers from Hawaii.
0
SPEAKER_01
We made friends with the Filipino workers who were there.
0
SPEAKER_01
They would often go in the back of the tents and set up their own rice cookers and cook their own meals, which is where the real good food was.
0
SPEAKER_01
But just started talking to them and getting to know them and ask, like, hey, how much do you get paid?
0
SPEAKER_01
And on average, it was like, oh, I get paid like 500 bucks a month.
0
SPEAKER_01
500 bucks a month.
0
SPEAKER_01
to go and do this work of either cleaning out porta-potties, picking up trash, the dining facility, doing laundry, all of these different tasks because the military wanted soldiers to be out doing things that only soldiers could do.
0
SPEAKER_01
Understandable.
0
SPEAKER_01
But when I started putting two and two together and knowing that this company, one company alone, was making trillions of dollars, trillions of dollars, and yet this,
0
SPEAKER_01
Filipino mom is making 500 bucks a month, maybe getting one day off a week, maybe working 12 hours a day otherwise.
0
SPEAKER_01
How often are you able to go home to your family?
0
SPEAKER_01
Well, they ll let us go home a couple of weeks every other year.
0
SPEAKER_01
It was an eye-opening experience that growing up in Hawaii, I frankly hadn t given much thought to before.
0
SPEAKER_01
But it s what led me ultimately coming back from that first deployment.
0
SPEAKER_01
There was no way that I could go back to the life that I had left behind.
0
SPEAKER_01
and I knew somehow, someway, I needed to find a way to use those experiences to try to make a positive impact, to try to influence those, I mean, frankly, the politicians who are making decisions to go and launch these regime change wars and send our men and women in uniform into war, and to what end, ultimately?
0
SPEAKER_00
if we can just go back to that list.
0
SPEAKER_00
So the list is just name and injury, name and injury.
0
SPEAKER_01
Name, unit, potentially location, if someone had documented that, and their injury.
0
SPEAKER_00
And it s just pages and pages of that.
0
SPEAKER_01
Yeah, and I knew, I didn t get to call home every day,
0
SPEAKER_01
When I called home and talked to my parents, I felt the tension in their voice.
0
SPEAKER_01
And they didn t want me to worry about anything at home.
0
SPEAKER_01
And so they were always like, hey, how are you?
0
SPEAKER_01
What can we send you?
0
SPEAKER_01
And this and that.
0
SPEAKER_01
But it wasn t like I was calling them from down the street and saying, hey, how s it going?
0
SPEAKER_01
Let s go have lunch or whatever.
0
SPEAKER_01
And so I knew that the reason for that tension was they were terrified of getting a phone call delivering the worst possible news.
0
SPEAKER_01
And that was what I thought of as I went through that list of how, you know, it is the reality of war.
0
SPEAKER_01
Behind every one of those names on that list was, you know, a husband or a wife, parents, you know, sons and daughters, family members.
0
SPEAKER_01
who had no idea what we were dealing with, really.
0
SPEAKER_01
All they knew was what they saw on the news.
0
SPEAKER_01
And what my dad told me later when I got home after that deployment was that every time they saw the news and they saw a helicopter shot down or crashed or some IED, they held their breath until they saw or heard the news of who it was or what it was.
0
SPEAKER_00
What can you say about
0
SPEAKER_00
what the soldiers had to go through physically and psychologically when they get injured?
0
SPEAKER_01
The physical, you know, I mean, some injuries appeared to be minor up front.
0
SPEAKER_01
At that time, traumatic brain injury was not something that was talked about much, if at all.
0
SPEAKER_01
And so, you know, many had visible wounds, others are now what we know were
0
SPEAKER_01
appeared like, all right, cool, you checked out, but had invisible wounds.
0
SPEAKER_01
Those who were injured in a way that did not allow them to get back to work found it emotionally very difficult to be put on a plane and evacuated out of there, feeling guilty that they were leaving their friends behind.
0
SPEAKER_01
not thinking about themselves, or not feeling bad for themselves, but instead feeling bad for being forced to be in a position to leave.
0
SPEAKER_01
You know, for soldiers, it s not
0
SPEAKER_01
Of course, we all have our own political opinions on things, but when it comes right down to it, in a war zone, it s about your friends.
0
SPEAKER_01
It s about your brothers and sisters that you re serving alongside.
0
SPEAKER_01
It s not about the politicians or whatever insanity is going on in Washington.
0
SPEAKER_01
It s about
0
SPEAKER_01
getting up and going out, getting the job done, and coming back home together.
0
SPEAKER_01
I mean, I had friends of mine who were from Hawaii, who were from American Samoa, very culturally tight-knit community, who confided in me throughout that year that we were there.
0
SPEAKER_01
Some of the infantry soldiers who were going out on security patrols and doing raids every day.
0
SPEAKER_01
just some of the very traumatic experiences that they went through.
0
SPEAKER_01
No physical injury, but creating a kind of emotional stress and trauma that as human beings they were struggling in dealing with.
0
SPEAKER_01
On a positive note, you know, the Polynesian culture especially, but also Asian culture and other cultures around the world,
1
SPEAKER_00
Our guys found that shortly after we got there, the unit that we were replacing, we re taking the guys out on patrol and saying, hey, here s this village, here s where we found friendlies, or here s where we know that there are insurgents operating and they ve got allies and lookouts, and showing them the lay of the land, basically.
1
SPEAKER_00
And what our guys found was that as they were doing these ride-alongs, they call it a left seat, right seat, when you re coming in and taking over, that there was a bit of a tense, even adversarial type of relationship where on the military side, there was an assumption of suspicion or lack of trust, just with the local Iraqi people who lived around the base that we were at.
1
SPEAKER_00
And without anybody telling them to, culturally, our guys began trying to build relationships.
1
SPEAKER_00
And for Hawaii and Samoa, and we had soldiers from Guam and Saipan,
1
SPEAKER_00
Little things like you re riding down in a Humvee, you ve got a gunner in the turret with a .50 cal or a machine gun of some sort.
1
SPEAKER_00
Little things like pointing the muzzle to the sky as you re riding through a town rather than pointing it directly at where people are walking down the street was a huge gesture of an assumption of,
1
SPEAKER_00
let s actually talk and become friends.
1
SPEAKER_00
We had our guys riding down the street and throwing shakas out to the local people there, breaking bread, sharing tea and building those relationships.
1
SPEAKER_00
And again, I served in a medical unit and what we saw was a downward shift in casualties from the unit that had been there before us simply because of that,
1
SPEAKER_00
that basic human connection that our guys sought to make, and then gradually finding like, hey, local, you know, people who lived in the town right next to us are saying, hey, you guys should really, somebody was digging a big hole down this, a mile down the road.
1
SPEAKER_00
You might want to bypass that or check that out and finding weapons caches and IEDs, improvised explosive devices and other things that helped save people s lives.
1
SPEAKER_01
On the cost side of things, how is it possible for a company like Halliburton or others to get away with $40 bananas or however much it was?
1
SPEAKER_01
So the overhead costs.
1
SPEAKER_00
Look, what they will claim is that it s expensive to move logistics through a country at war.
1
SPEAKER_00
But they get away with it, ultimately, this insane war profiteering.
1
SPEAKER_00
And they re not alone, obviously.
1
SPEAKER_00
There are other companies that this is their business model.
1
SPEAKER_00
They get away with it because of their political connections and the lobbyists that they have, the relationships they have with politicians.
1
SPEAKER_00
and ultimately what President Eisenhower warned against with regard to that cozy relationship between Congress and even what he called then the military-industrial complex.
1
SPEAKER_00
It s been alive and well.
1
SPEAKER_00
He warned us against it, and I would say it s thriving more now than ever before.
1
SPEAKER_01
How powerful is the military industrial complex as a thing?
1
SPEAKER_01
Is it a machine that can be slowed down, can be stopped, can be reversed?
1
SPEAKER_00
It can be.
1
SPEAKER_00
It s powerful.
1
SPEAKER_00
I don t think you can overstate the powerful nature of it because it extends so deeply within our government.
1
SPEAKER_00
It s not just those in these specific big defense contracting companies that benefit from it.
1
SPEAKER_00
You look at the revolving door within the Pentagon, for example, where you have both high-ranking people who wear military uniforms, as well as those who serve as high-ranking Department of Defense civilians who are literally working their way into a big payout when they leave that job.
1
SPEAKER_00
We see it with our own Secretary of Defense now.
1
SPEAKER_00
He retired as a general officer, went and served on one of the boards for one of the big defense contractors, and then now back as the Secretary of Defense.
1
SPEAKER_00
We see the same thing in Congress with members of Congress and senior professional staffers in Congress.
1
SPEAKER_00
Same exact revolving door.
1
SPEAKER_00
where you have people, whether they re writing contracts for the Department of Defense for the company that then wins the bid for that contract and then going and working for that company, or those in Congress who are writing policies and doing exactly the same thing.
1
SPEAKER_01
You have been both a war hawk and a war dove at times.
1
SPEAKER_01
So what is your philosophy on when war is justified and when it is not?
1
SPEAKER_00
War is justified when it is in the best interest of our national security, and when it is the last resort, when all diplomatic efforts have been completed and exhausted, and war is the last possible route that must be taken to ensure the safety, security, and freedom of the American people.
1
SPEAKER_01
So that s a high level, beautiful ideal, but there s messy details.
1
SPEAKER_01
So terrorism, for example.
1
SPEAKER_01
Yes.
1
SPEAKER_01
The United States involvement in the war in Iraq and Afghanistan was in part the big umbrella of the war on terrorism.
1
SPEAKER_01
So, you know, when you decide whether something is justified or not, and whether something can be defeated or not, how hard is it?
1
SPEAKER_01
Is it even possible?
1
SPEAKER_01
To what degree is it possible to defeat terrorism?
1
SPEAKER_00
Well, first of all, part of the problem of our foreign policy has been how many conflicts, wars, military actions have been waged in the name of this quote-unquote war on terrorism, in the name of national security, legislation like the Patriot Act that violates civil liberties, our civil liberties and freedoms, in the name of the war on terrorism and national security, when it s not justified.
1
SPEAKER_00
And so I ll use Afghanistan as an example.
1
SPEAKER_00
I support the initial mission that lifted off shortly after the attack on 9-11, the Islamist terrorist attack on 9-11.
1
SPEAKER_00
It was a relatively small group of U.S.
1
SPEAKER_00
military launched to go after those al-Qaeda cells and Osama bin Laden in the wake of that attack.
1
SPEAKER_00
that is the mission that should have been supported and focused on in its execution.
1
SPEAKER_00
Instead, as you know, attention was diverted very quickly to the regime change war in Iraq that was waged on false pretenses, and the resources and focus was taken away from that initial mission that went
1
SPEAKER_00
to Afghanistan.
1
SPEAKER_00
And the war in Afghanistan blew up into something that became about regime change and governance and the Taliban and less focus on al-Qaeda and Osama bin Laden.
1
SPEAKER_00
And it became this thing that even general officers had a hard time
1
SPEAKER_00
articulating what is the objective here?
1
SPEAKER_00
What are we trying to accomplish?
1
SPEAKER_00
What does winning look like?
1
SPEAKER_00
At what point do we know it s time to exit and get out?
1
SPEAKER_00
And as you look at things like the Afghanistan files and others, the answers to these simple and essential questions shifted and changed over time, over a very long time.
1
SPEAKER_00
Similarly in Iraq.
1
SPEAKER_00
I bought into a lot of what was being sold by the administration and by Democrats and Republicans and Congress at the time, and very quickly, even as I was on the ground there, started to have my eyes opened up into how we had been lied to tremendously, and how that protracted war went on for a very, very long time with decisions being made that ultimately served to strengthen
1
SPEAKER_00
terrorist groups like Al-Qaeda, the creation of ISIS, and others, really undermining our national security interests in the meantime.
1
SPEAKER_00
Understanding the enemy that you are trying to defeat is essential to being able to build a strategy.
1
SPEAKER_00
The declaration of President Biden, for example, saying, well, the war on terror is over.
1
SPEAKER_00
The war on terror is over.
1
SPEAKER_00
What does that mean?
1
SPEAKER_00
Or the forever wars are over.
1
SPEAKER_00
What does that actually mean?
1
SPEAKER_00
I served on my last most recent deployment in 2021 to East Africa and Somalia.
1
SPEAKER_00
where al-Shabaab is one of those Islamist terrorist groups that follows the same ideology as al-Qaeda, ISIS, Hamas, and others.
1
SPEAKER_00
This group has been allowed to grow and be strengthened, even though they are one of the main groups that provides funding to al-Qaeda in that entire region.
1
SPEAKER_00
So any president or politician can declare a war to be over.
1
SPEAKER_00
But when you have an enemy like these Islamist terrorist groups, who are still intent on their goal and their objective, which is to ultimately establish their Islamic caliphate and, you know, destroy Israel and exterminate the Jewish people and basically destroy, kill or convert anyone who doesn t adhere to their ideology.
1
SPEAKER_00
That continues on, and they will only become stronger the longer our leaders put their heads in the sand and pretend like, oh no, this doesn t exist.
1
SPEAKER_00
This kind of war, this war specifically, is one that has to be waged militarily and ideologically.
1
SPEAKER_00
And the ideological component to this, which is defeating their ideology with a superior one, is one that I pointed out in Congress during the Obama administration.
1
SPEAKER_00
we, the collective, we were failing at, the Obama administration was failing at because they were so afraid of being labeled Islamophobes that they refused to accurately identify the ideology driving these terrorist groups and instead said, oh, we are countering violent extremism, was the term that the Obama administration started to use.
1
SPEAKER_00
and was coined and kind of mandated across the U.S.
1
SPEAKER_00
government.
1
SPEAKER_00
Well, you have to know, again, you have to know the enemy that threatens you and why they re doing what they re doing if you have any hope of actually preventing their attack, both militarily and as we re seeing now with Hamas s actions, not only directly in the assault on Israel,
1
SPEAKER_00
but how they, Hamas, achieved their objectives in spreading their ideology around the world.
1
SPEAKER_01
If you look at the lessons learned from the U.S.
1
SPEAKER_01
involvement in Afghanistan and Iraq, how do you fight terrorism?
1
SPEAKER_00
Clearly understanding who they are and where they are and why they re doing what they re doing is essential, first of all.
1
SPEAKER_00
And obviously there are different groups, different names they have morphed and changed based on their locale and how they operate.
1
SPEAKER_00
building relationships with people in other countries, both state leaders as well as religious leaders and others who share that same objective of defeating these Islamist terrorists on both fronts.
1
SPEAKER_00
and acting as a united front in taking that action.
1
SPEAKER_00
What exactly that action looks like, details on the ground dictate that, details about these different groups will dictate that.
1
SPEAKER_00
But we ve seen examples of this before, and I saw this in Somalia, we saw it in some cases in Iraq,
1
SPEAKER_00
where, for example, you have imams who recognize the threat that these terrorist groups pose to their own people and their own communities, and exerting their influence in defeating the terrorist Islamist ideology with their own teachings of Islam and preaching peace amongst their people.
1
SPEAKER_00
War is ugly and it is messy.
1
SPEAKER_00
It is also an unfortunate reality of the world we live in.
1
SPEAKER_00
So while I
1
SPEAKER_00
firmly believe that we must always pursue peace, I m not a pacifist, I m a realist, and recognize that where there are these threats, we must do what we can to work towards that safety, that security, that freedom and peace that we all want.
1
SPEAKER_01
If we look at the perspective of Israel in the Israel-Gaza war going on now,
1
SPEAKER_01
What do you do with the fact that the death of a civilian serves as a catalyst, gives birth to hate, potentially generational hate?
1
SPEAKER_01
So in Israel s stated goal of destroying Hamas, they are creating immeasurable hate.
1
SPEAKER_01
What do you do with that?
1
SPEAKER_01
From a perspective of Israel, what is the correct action to take in response to October 7th?
1
SPEAKER_00
It s a complex question with a complex answer.
1
SPEAKER_00
I think Israel s approach has to be in recognizing that delineation as far as possible.
1
SPEAKER_00
And I know it s tough when you have a terrorist group like Hamas that is so interwoven within the community of people in Gaza.
1
SPEAKER_00
but to recognize that there should be and there is a shared purpose there for the Palestinian people to be able to live free and in peace and not under the oppression of this terrorist group, just as the people of Israel would like to live in peace and free from the threat of attack from a terrorist group that wants to exterminate them.
1
SPEAKER_00
The complexities of what s going on in Israeli politics is, I think, a different conversation, but also one that is directly intertwined with the answer to this question.
1
SPEAKER_00
When you have some people in the Israeli government who don t want the Palestinian people in Gaza at all and want them to go and repatriate in other countries, I think that s a big problem.
1
SPEAKER_00
And that further exacerbates this hatred and resentment that continues to grow there.
1
SPEAKER_00
This is a generations-long challenge, unfortunately, of the resentment and tension that exists between many Israelis and many Palestinians that can only be resolved when there s strong leadership representing both peoples.
1
SPEAKER_00
who are able and willing to come together and recognize that the only way forward is to let the past be in the past and find a way towards peace in the future.
1
SPEAKER_01
How do you think, how do you hope the war in Ukraine will end?
1
SPEAKER_00
The only way that this war ends is to do exactly what we re talking about.
1
SPEAKER_00
There has to be a brokered dialogue.
1
SPEAKER_00
and conversation about peace that has to occur with representatives from Russia and Ukraine.
1
SPEAKER_00
It is really, truly heartbreaking to see both how efforts that began just weeks after Russia invaded Ukraine to do exactly this were thwarted by the Biden-Harris administration and other Western powers has cost
1
SPEAKER_00
so many innocent people s lives.
1
SPEAKER_00
I have friends in Ukraine.
1
SPEAKER_00
I ve been there more than a few times.
1
SPEAKER_00
I ve enjoyed and appreciated the time that I ve spent there.
1
SPEAKER_00
When I hear from my friends about
1
SPEAKER_00
how afraid they are of their husbands being conscripted and, you know, feeling like they have to hide for fear of being yanked off the streets, their friends and family members who ve been killed in this war.
1
SPEAKER_00
The only way this ends is when both sides come to the table
2
SPEAKER_00
and find an agreement that neither side is going to be completely happy with, both sides being forced to make some concessions, but one where they will both walk away and this war can end.
2
SPEAKER_01
What s the role of the U.S.
2
SPEAKER_01
President, perhaps, to bring everybody to the table?
2
SPEAKER_01
Do you think that the U.S.
2
SPEAKER_01
President should sit down with Zelensky and Putin together?
2
SPEAKER_00
Yes, yes, in an ideal world, yes, this should have happened long ago.
2
SPEAKER_00
The question of whether or not President Biden is the right person to do that at this time, when all of the statements and comments that they have made, the Biden-Harris administration has made from the beginning of this war, essentially point to their objective being to basically destroy Russia.
2
SPEAKER_00
And that s one of the reasons why they have supported both the continuation of this war for as long as it s lasted, as well as why they have thwarted efforts towards peace.
2
SPEAKER_00
whoever that most effective neutral broker is, that s the best person to do this.
2
SPEAKER_00
The Biden-Harris administration, I think the role that they have to take is actually encouraging Zelensky to sit down and begin this process.
2
SPEAKER_00
Those kinds of engagements are the most, to me, the most powerful exercises of diplomacy that can t be matched, especially when our president s foremost role and responsibility is to serve as commander-in-chief.
2
SPEAKER_00
and I wish that we had leaders who were more willing to engage because I think we d make a lot more progress more quickly and to find areas both of mutual interest as well as to help de-conflict and de-escalate areas where there is tension or disagreement or adversarial interests.
2
SPEAKER_01
Some of it is basic human camaraderie.
2
SPEAKER_01
People call me naive for this, but sometimes just knowing that there s a human on the other side, even like when it s in private, if you look at Zelensky and Putin, for example, just humor.
2
SPEAKER_01
Both are very intelligent, witty, at times even funny people.
2
SPEAKER_01
Yes, this is wartime.
2
SPEAKER_01
Yes, a lot of civilians and soldiers are dying.
2
SPEAKER_01
There s hate.
2
SPEAKER_01
But if you can look above it all and think about the future of the countries, the flourishing of a people, and the stopping of the death of civilians and soldiers, then in that place, you can have that basic human connection.
2
SPEAKER_00
I agree.
2
SPEAKER_00
I don t think that s naive at all.
2
SPEAKER_00
And I think there are so many examples through history that point to the power of that, the real power in that.
2
SPEAKER_00
In, you know, the Cuban Missile Crisis, how JFK had to literally find a secret way to communicate with Khrushchev to try to
2
SPEAKER_00
go around the backs of the military commanders who were urging him to take military action and instead find, hey, we both ultimately want the same thing.
2
SPEAKER_00
Neither of us wants to launch a catastrophic nuclear war, so let s figure this out.
2
SPEAKER_01
Of course, there s examples throughout history.
2
SPEAKER_01
You know, leaders are complicated people.
2
SPEAKER_01
They re manipulative people.
2
SPEAKER_01
So you have like Hitler and Chamberlain meeting and Chamberlain kind of getting hoodwinked by Hitler s charisma and being convinced that Hitler doesn t have any interest in invading and destroying the rest of the world.
2
SPEAKER_01
So, you know, you have to- Be smart.
2
SPEAKER_01
Don t be hoodwinked.
2
SPEAKER_01
You ve met,
2
SPEAKER_01
You ve been criticized for this.
2
SPEAKER_01
You ve met with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, and as part of the campaign, when you were running for president, got criticized for not calling him a war criminal.
2
SPEAKER_01
What s the right way to meet and communicate with these kinds of leaders?
2
SPEAKER_00
We, as I just stated, we need leaders who have the courage to meet not just with allies but with adversaries in the pursuit of peace, in the pursuit of increased understanding.
2
SPEAKER_00
If policies are being made through the lenses and the barriers of bureaucrats and the media and others who have or may have their own interests,
2
SPEAKER_00
Our president, a leader, can t make, even members of Congress, can t make decisions with the kind of clarity that we, the American people, need them to make.
2
SPEAKER_00
I think that these kinds of engagements are weaponized and politicized as they were against me.
2
SPEAKER_00
by those who have their own interests, whether it be the military industrial complex or in Washington.
2
SPEAKER_00
If you re not part of the official narrative of the US government, which was intent on a regime change war in Syria, then you re an outcast.
2
SPEAKER_00
And it was unfortunate because
2
SPEAKER_00
You know, people levied all kinds of accusations and smears against me for going and having the audacity to go and learn more, try to seek the truth in the hopes of preventing more needless war and in the hopes of preventing yet another quagmire and disastrous war.
2
SPEAKER_00
in the Middle East, and simply for going and, yes, meeting with Assad, also meeting with religious leaders in Syria, also meeting and talking with people on the streets of Damascus, talking with college students, talking with people from the opposition party who would like to see Assad replaced.
2
SPEAKER_00
you know, talking with local, just a whole host of people over the course of a few days.
2
SPEAKER_00
You know, the accusation was of it like, oh, she loves dictators.
2
SPEAKER_00
It s a sad state of affairs when some of the most influential voices in our country
2
SPEAKER_00
will label someone a lover or supporter of dictators simply because you re saying, hey, we shouldn t be going to war.
2
SPEAKER_00
There is another way.
2
SPEAKER_00
And I m not alone in this, you know, people who were against the war in Iraq,
2
SPEAKER_00
we re given similar labels until it became popular in our politics to have been against the Iraq War.
2
SPEAKER_00
We see the same thing now with people like Tucker, myself, and others who are saying we should not be waging this proxy war against Russia via Ukraine and using the Ukrainian people s lives in this war.
2
SPEAKER_00
Well, now all of a sudden you re a Putin lover, a Putin puppet, or whatever, you know, the traitor, treason, all of these accusations that are used ultimately by people who are not interested in having a substantive conversation about the truth, about looking at these wars and conflicts, you know, with a comprehensive view
2
SPEAKER_00
on exactly all the dynamics that are at play.
2
SPEAKER_00
And that s what I found when I came back.
2
SPEAKER_00
I went to Syria looking forward to coming back and shedding light on different perspectives, experiences, and stories that I found that would give people a more broad understanding of what was happening in that country.
2
SPEAKER_00
And what I found was there was zero interest in the mainstream media or in Congress in hearing any other perspective other than their own, which was we need to launch this regime change war through the use of arming and equipping known terrorists within Syria to overthrow the regime.
2
SPEAKER_00
without any idea, without them stating any realistic idea of who would take control once Assad was overthrown.
2
SPEAKER_00
But the reality actually being that no matter which opposition group they might try to prop up, they would not have the power to withstand the terrorist groups whose stated goal it was to go and take over power from Assad.
2
SPEAKER_00
they had no interest in trying to gain true understanding.
2
SPEAKER_00
And it was very disheartening.
2
SPEAKER_00
It was very disheartening, and a big lesson learned about where their interests really were focused.
2
SPEAKER_01
Yeah, it s a simplistic narrative template that s fit into every single situation.
2
SPEAKER_01
A lot of stuff is not talked about in the Russia-Ukraine war.
2
SPEAKER_01
One of the things that s not talked about is, okay, so Putin is overthrown, then who do you think will come into power?
2
SPEAKER_01
One of the things I talk about with Aristotle is that Putin
2
SPEAKER_01
and he gets criticized for this, that Putin, out of all the people that might take power, is the most liberal, is the most dovish.
2
SPEAKER_01
In fact, every indication shows that he really hates this war.
2
SPEAKER_01
And so everybody that will step in if he steps down or if he is overthrown is just going to accelerate this war and the expansionism and the thirst for empire and all that kind of stuff that
2
SPEAKER_01
the US military industrial complex will feed into.
2
SPEAKER_01
So you have to think about what the future holds and what the different power players are and what the level of corruption there is and sort of the realistic view of the situation versus the idealistic view of the situation.
2
SPEAKER_00
Just on that note real quick, I think that was exposed in broad daylight when it appeared that the former head of the Wagner Group was about to try to launch a coup and how that was so celebrated even on MSNBC and Rachel Maddow and others touting that this was somehow going to be a great thing.
2
SPEAKER_00
without looking at, you know, who is this guy really?
2
SPEAKER_00
What has he been doing in different countries around the world?
2
SPEAKER_00
And what would be his kind of ruling philosophy and how that would differ or benefit American interests or the interest of security and peace?
2
SPEAKER_01
But also the interest of Ukraine or Russia, humanity overall, just the flourishing of nations, which is
2
SPEAKER_01
Great for everybody in collaborations with nations.
2
SPEAKER_01
Friendly competition.
2
SPEAKER_01
One of the things I love about the 20th century is the friendly, sometimes not so friendly competition between the Soviet Union and the United States in space, in the space race.
2
SPEAKER_01
It s created some incredible engineering and scientific breakthroughs and all of this, and also made people dream about reaching out to the stars.
2
SPEAKER_01
War destroys all of that.
2
SPEAKER_01
or damages it, hopefully just damages it.
2
SPEAKER_01
Hopefully the phoenix will rise again.
2
SPEAKER_01
Well, let me ask you about the criticism you ve mentioned.
2
SPEAKER_01
It s probably the most common criticism of you, that you love Putin.
2
SPEAKER_01
So just to linger on it, what do you think is the foundation of this criticism?
2
SPEAKER_00
Well, I ll tell you when it began.
2
SPEAKER_00
My first day in Congress was January 3rd, 2013.
2
SPEAKER_00
I believe it was the 3rd, 4th, 5th, somewhere around there.
2
SPEAKER_00
And my last day was January 3rd, 2021.
2
SPEAKER_00
I had been given my experience of serving as a soldier in the Middle East and
2
SPEAKER_00
the motivation that really drove me to run for Congress in the first place.
2
SPEAKER_00
I served on the Foreign Affairs Committee and the Armed Services Committee for almost eight years, the eight years that I was there, with my drive and motivation to actually be in a position to challenge the influence of the military-industrial complex, to try to prevent us from needlessly going to war.
2
SPEAKER_00
And so, you know, the likes of Hillary Clinton and the cabal of warmongers in Washington, they weren t fans of mine, to say the least.
2
SPEAKER_00
I can t say it was a total surprise, but it was disheartening nonetheless that the very day that I announced my candidacy, that I was running for president, which was in February 2019,
2
SPEAKER_00
As the hour that I walked up onto that stage to announce my candidacy, I was in Hawaii and I gave my announcement speech, NBC News published a hit piece that planted the seeds of suspicion in voters  minds that somehow I was a darling of Putin and Russia and whatever.
2
SPEAKER_00
It was baseless, all of it baseless.
2
SPEAKER_00
And that continued like a steady drumbeat throughout my candidacy, but that really was escalated when in a podcast with David Axelrod, Hillary Clinton said, oh, well, the Russians are grooming her.
2
SPEAKER_00
And this is not, I mean, this came from a very influential person.
2
SPEAKER_00
She was the former Secretary of State, former US Senator, former First Lady, someone who
2
SPEAKER_00
wielded and continues to wield a lot of power in the Democratic Party and amongst voters.
2
SPEAKER_00
And that took it to a whole new level.
2
SPEAKER_00
What is the basis for this?
2
SPEAKER_00
Nothing.
2
SPEAKER_00
It is a tired yet dependable playbook that is used not only by people like Hillary Clinton, but also people like Mitt Romney and others.
2
SPEAKER_00
to try to smear, discredit, and destroy the reputations of people who have the audacity to question their objectives as they call for one war or another, or have the audacity to say that this is not in the best interest of peace or in our country and our national security.
2
SPEAKER_00
They keep going back to this playbook, as they do today, because, again, they re not willing to debate the substance of one position versus another, which is what we should have.
2
SPEAKER_00
If people feel so strongly that we should be going and waging this war or that war, okay, great.
2
SPEAKER_00
Go make your case to the American people.
2
SPEAKER_00
Go stand on the floor of the United States House and actually have this debate.
2
SPEAKER_00
allow those who are saying, no, this is not a good idea to also stand freely and make that argument.
2
SPEAKER_00
Instead, they resort to the kind of name calling that tells voters, hey, you can t trust this person or anything that they say.
2
SPEAKER_00
We, myself and some of my other colleagues, got the same treatment when we tried to pass legislation in Congress that would have taken out provisions from the Patriot Act that are most egregiously violating our Fourth Amendment rights and civil liberties, authorities that have allowed our government to illegally surveil Americans without a warrant.
2
SPEAKER_00
And as we did so, we re called traitors, we were called, we had other members of Congress on the House floor saying that if you pass this legislation, you will be responsible for another 9-11 style attack on our soil.
2
SPEAKER_00
These are all distraction tactics to try to divert our attention away from what s actually happening.
2
SPEAKER_00
and instead just tell voters, hey, you can t trust these people.
2
SPEAKER_00
Obviously, this has happened to Trump.
2
SPEAKER_00
It s happened to Bobby Kennedy.
2
SPEAKER_00
It s happened to people like Rand Paul and others.
2
SPEAKER_00
There s a small group, but a growing number, at least among the Republican side at this point, people who are actually willing to stand up and challenge the military industrial complex, challenge the warmongers in both parties.
2
SPEAKER_01
Well, people on the left have challenged the warmongers as well throughout the last few decades.
2
SPEAKER_00
less so recently.
2
SPEAKER_00
I agree with you, but less so recently.
2
SPEAKER_00
And this is one of the reasons why I left the Democratic Party, one of the foremost reasons.
2
SPEAKER_00
I devote an entire chapter to this issue in my book, For Love of Country, Leave the Democrat Party Behind, going into the detail of some of the things we ve talked about, about my own experiences, about what I have learned along the way, but also how
3
SPEAKER_01
even in the last year, two years, certainly under this administration, people who I worked with in Congress who were Democrats, dependable voices for civil liberties, dependable voices speaking out against the insanity of people who wanted to wage war for the sake of war.
3
SPEAKER_01
they re largely silent now.
3
SPEAKER_01
And unfortunately, within the Democratic Party in Washington, there is no room for debate.
3
SPEAKER_01
That if you challenge the Biden administration s position on foreign policy, you re going to get, you re going to hear about it.
3
SPEAKER_01
And what we have seen is that that s exactly what s happened.
3
SPEAKER_01
And people have
3
SPEAKER_01
retracted statements or just fallen silent or whatever the case may be.
3
SPEAKER_01
This debate that should be existent within both parties on the Democrat side, unfortunately, it just doesn t exist anymore.
3
SPEAKER_00
There seems to be some kind of mass hysteria over the war in Ukraine.
3
SPEAKER_00
It was strange to watch that the nuance aspect of the discussion
3
SPEAKER_00
was lost very quickly.
3
SPEAKER_00
It was Putin bad.
3
SPEAKER_00
It was a war between good and evil.
3
SPEAKER_00
And in that, if you bring up any kind of nuanced discussion of like how do we actually achieve peace in this situation, you re immediately put on the side of evil.
3
SPEAKER_01
Yeah, which is pretty sick when you think about it.
3
SPEAKER_00
I mean it s, you know, the cynical view is of course it s the,
3
SPEAKER_00
the military industrial complex machine, the war profiteers is driving this kind of conversation.
3
SPEAKER_00
You know, I hope that s not, I hope they don t have that much power.
3
SPEAKER_00
I hope they just have incentives and they push people and they kind of use people s natural desire to divide the world into good and evil and fight for the side of good.
3
SPEAKER_00
You know, people just have a natural proclivity for that.
3
SPEAKER_00
And that s a good thing that we want to fight for the side of good, but then that gets captured
3
SPEAKER_01
And manipulated.
3
SPEAKER_01
Yeah.
3
SPEAKER_01
Yes.
3
SPEAKER_01
I admire your hopefulness.
3
SPEAKER_01
I am hopeful also because of the goodness in people and the naturally compassionate nature of people.
3
SPEAKER_01
However, I will tell you from firsthand experience that what we talk about is the national security state and the military industrial complex.
3
SPEAKER_01
this cabal of warmongers that extends not only within government but outside of government, extends to many powerful media outlets.
3
SPEAKER_01
They are incredibly powerful and don t have any qualms at destroying those who try to get in the way of their power.
3
SPEAKER_01
And they ve got a lot of tools.
3
SPEAKER_01
They ve got a lot of tools to do that, which I think is why President Eisenhower chose to include this in his farewell address as a warning, because the only recourse, the only real power that has the ability to destroy them and stand up against them is a free people living in a free society, exercising the rights that we have enshrined in the Constitution and Bill of Rights.
3
SPEAKER_00
I just talked to Annie Jacobs and she wrote a book on nuclear war, a scenario of how a nuclear war will happen second by second, minute by minute.
3
SPEAKER_00
I apologize.
3
SPEAKER_00
If it happens, how it would happen is terrifying.
3
SPEAKER_00
It s terrifying how easy it is to start, that one person can start it, first of all, and then there s no way to stop it.
3
SPEAKER_00
Even potentially with tactical nuclear weapons.
3
SPEAKER_00
that it s just the machinery of it, how clueless everybody is, combined with the machinery of it, it s just impossible to stop.
3
SPEAKER_00
And it s just between rushing the United States especially, and then all of a sudden you have nuclear winter and five billion people are dead.
3
SPEAKER_00
And they die through just essentially torture, slowly.
3
SPEAKER_00
How do we avoid that?
3
SPEAKER_00
How do we avoid a nuclear war?
3
SPEAKER_00
That s something that you talk about and think about.
3
SPEAKER_00
How do we avoid this kind of escalation of a hot war?
3
SPEAKER_01
I think the most essential thing, first of all, is understanding exactly what you have just detailed.
3
SPEAKER_01
we are in this very strange and absurd time where we have talking heads and so-called pundits on TV, we have politicians, we have people who are talking about a nuclear war as though it is a war that can be won, period, and a war that can be waged
3
SPEAKER_01
somehow without that risk of escalation to the point of destruction of human civilization.
3
SPEAKER_01
And so they talk about this as though it s just another war, and especially as they talk about the use of tactical nuclear weapons.
3
SPEAKER_01
Oh, well, this is just, this is small, and we think it ll send a message without actually escalating to the point where
3
SPEAKER_01
we re dealing with the kind of destruction that we witnessed in World War II.
3
SPEAKER_01
That s a dangerous thing when it becomes normalized as, well, we ve got this new missile that ll go, and it s targeted, and it s strategic, and it ll only harm this quote-unquote military target.
3
SPEAKER_01
Ronald Reagan was 100% correct when he said, you know, a nuclear war cannot be won and should never be waged.
3
SPEAKER_01
It was true then and it s true now, no matter how much these guys who are producing these weapons or those who are benefiting from that industry try to tell us, oh no, it ll never happen.
3
SPEAKER_01
So to me, that s an important first step, to continue to inform and educate and sound the alarms to people, don t buy this crap because it s not true.
3
SPEAKER_01
And I look forward to listening to your podcast, but the PSA that was put out by New York City s Emergency Management Office about what to do in the event of a nuclear attack,
3
SPEAKER_01
you would find it funny if it wasn t so deeply disturbing.
3
SPEAKER_01
How they created this public service announcement, they distributed it everywhere across the city, on the internet, I think it was on the radio, where you had a woman who appeared to be an actor coming in and saying, hey, in the event of when the big one hits,
3
SPEAKER_01
Here s what you should do.
3
SPEAKER_01
Focus on doing these three things.
3
SPEAKER_01
And I m paraphrasing, but I encourage you to watch it.
3
SPEAKER_01
I m paraphrasing, but she said, get inside, stay inside, and stay tuned.
3
SPEAKER_01
That was it.
3
SPEAKER_01
And you know, get inside, go away from the windows.
3
SPEAKER_01
Stay inside, don t go outside until you get the all clear.
3
SPEAKER_01
And stay tuned, follow our account on Instagram and Twitter.
3
SPEAKER_01
And at the very end of this short PSA, she said, her closing words were, we ve got this.
3
SPEAKER_01
And it was so disturbing in that it was so completely out of touch with reality.
3
SPEAKER_01
It creates this kind of false sense of security that, okay, well, it s kind of like, here s what you do when a tornado hits or when a big storm hits, and categorizing the big one, a nuclear attack, within that same kind of preparedness that you would want people to have in the event of a natural disaster of some sort.
3
SPEAKER_01
And it is reflective of the carelessness with which people in our government, that careless attitude that people in our government have towards nuclear war and a nuclear attack
3
SPEAKER_01
even as they set us up for failure in pushing us closer and closer to the brink of a nuclear war occurring, whether it be an intentional attack or, as we saw during the last Cold War, one that
3
SPEAKER_01
could be launched unintentionally.
3
SPEAKER_01
How many near-misses were there during the last Cold War?
3
SPEAKER_01
I saw this documentary called The Man Who Saved the World, and it was some mid-level
3
SPEAKER_01
officer who happened to be on duty and who didn t do what he was told in launching the nuclear missiles because of what they thought was an incoming attack.
3
SPEAKER_01
And it turned out to be a complete mistake or misread on the radar, but that s what we re facing.
3
SPEAKER_00
But by the way, there s so many things to say there, but one of the things that Annie Jacobson details is just how organized the machinery of all of this is, where the humans involved don t have to think.
3
SPEAKER_00
They just follow orders.
3
SPEAKER_00
There s a very clear set of steps you take, and there s very few places where you can inject your humanity and be like, wait a minute, what s the big picture of this?
3
SPEAKER_00
The only person
3
SPEAKER_00
that can think is the President of the United States.
3
SPEAKER_00
The President of the United States gets six minutes after the warning.
3
SPEAKER_00
The early warning system says, whether it s false or not, says that we believe that there s been a nuclear weapon launched.
3
SPEAKER_00
You have six minutes before you can make the decision of launch back, initiate.
3
SPEAKER_00
And to me, that s what I m voting based on in the current situation.
3
SPEAKER_00
You really have to see that as one of the most important aspects of the United States president, is who do you trust in those six minutes to sit there?
3
SPEAKER_00
And I m not really sure, looking at Biden and Trump, boy,
3
SPEAKER_00
I don t know, but I do know that I would like somebody who is thinking independently and not part of the machinery of warmongers.
3
SPEAKER_00
That s really, I mean, I don t wanna make it sound cynical or dramatic, but sometimes in such scary situations and such dramatic situations, you kind of follow the momentum.
3
SPEAKER_00
When the right thing to do, the right thing for a leader to do is to,
3
SPEAKER_00
step back and look of all of human history and ignore all the people in the room that are like,
3
SPEAKER_00
saying stuff, because most likely what they re going to be saying is warmongery type of things.
3
SPEAKER_00
That s one of the things why I also get criticized for.
3
SPEAKER_00
I still think Zelensky s a hero for staying in Kiev.
3
SPEAKER_00
Everybody was telling him to flee.
3
SPEAKER_00
It was all the information was telling, basically saying the world s second biggest military is like,
3
SPEAKER_00
coming at Kiev, it s just dumb on all fronts to stay in Kiev.
3
SPEAKER_00
But that s what a great leader does, is ignores everybody and stays.
3
SPEAKER_01
Yeah.
3
SPEAKER_00
Screw it.
3
SPEAKER_00
I m gonna die for my country, I m gonna die as a leader.
3
SPEAKER_00
And that s the right thing for a leader to do.
3
SPEAKER_01
It s sad that, I mean, to me, that s what we should expect of our leaders, is exactly that.
3
SPEAKER_01
And it s sad that
3
SPEAKER_01
having a leader in that position fulfill their responsibility and the oath that they take is seen as a heroic act, when we should, like, that s your job.
3
SPEAKER_01
That s what we elect our leaders to do.
3
SPEAKER_01
And yet so many, so many have failed.
3
SPEAKER_01
But to your point,
3
SPEAKER_01
It s not cynical at all to know that in those rooms, especially in these moments of crisis, unfortunately there are the predominant prevailing opinion
3
SPEAKER_01
of this warmongering establishment that s not specific to one party is the knee-jerk reaction, which is to go to war or to execute an act of war.
3
SPEAKER_01
And this is
3
SPEAKER_01
you know, one of the biggest costs of this establishment destroying the reputations of and smearing and trying to cancel and censor those who are voices of peace or just those who take a contrarian position and say, well, hey,
3
SPEAKER_01
Why don t we just pause for a moment and actually think this through?
3
SPEAKER_01
Why don t we talk through what happens if we take this course of action?
3
SPEAKER_01
What happens if we go down a different path?
3
SPEAKER_01
Let s actually be thoughtful about what our options are for A, B, and C, and then make the decision in a thoughtful manner based on that.
3
SPEAKER_01
Even advocating for that is seen as a kind of heresy in the warmongering establishment in Washington.
3
SPEAKER_01
And the cost of this, the cost of their retaliation against those who are reasonable voices, who look at the world as it is, not some fantasy that they wish existed, is in those rooms, during those critical moments,
3
SPEAKER_01
people will, even if they know in their heart or their mind that this could end really badly, their instinct is to self-censor and not speak up because they don t want to experience the wrath and ire, whether it be coming from four-star generals or the secretaries of state or defense or these high-ranking people in positions of power and influence.
3
SPEAKER_01
They don t want to be the one guy in the room who s just like, hey guys, let s just take a breath and actually think this through.
3
SPEAKER_01
What will happen, not just in the immediate response of this action that you re advocating for, but what are all of the other people, other actors, stakeholders in the world, how will they respond?
3
SPEAKER_01
And then how will we respond to them?
3
SPEAKER_01
How will they respond to us?
3
SPEAKER_01
Actually go through this exercise of, in the military, this is commonly referred to as, what are the second, third, fourth order of effects that will occur as a result of pursuing a specific course of action?
3
SPEAKER_00
It s weird how difficult it is to be that person in the room.
3
SPEAKER_01
It requires courage, which is sad, but it requires courage.
3
SPEAKER_00
But why does it require, like even just to ask, okay, we ve been in Afghanistan and Iraq for this number of years, what s the exit plan?
3
SPEAKER_01
Right.
3
SPEAKER_00
Just bring that up every day at a meeting.
3
SPEAKER_00
What s the exit plan?
3
SPEAKER_00
It s strange that that gets criticized, the war in Iraq and so on.
3
SPEAKER_00
But I just remember there was this pressure you can t quite criticize or ask dumb questions about, wait, why are we going into Iraq again?
3
SPEAKER_00
But they re not dumb questions.
3
SPEAKER_00
In retrospect, you re like, oh, they re not dumb questions at all.
3
SPEAKER_00
But it actually required a lot of courage to ask them, whilst still working within the institution.
3
SPEAKER_00
It s easier if you re like an activist from the outside saying, no war, this kind of stuff.
3
SPEAKER_00
But within the institution, in the position of power, to ask the questions like, maybe let s not.
3
SPEAKER_00
It seems really difficult.
3
SPEAKER_00
The same kind of thing in the war in Ukraine and just any kind of military involvement.
3
SPEAKER_00
Again, I guess the cynical interpretation is that it s the military-industrial complex that permeates the halls of power.
3
SPEAKER_01
It does.
3
SPEAKER_01
And what is behind the military-industrial complex?
3
SPEAKER_01
And there are different examples of this.
3
SPEAKER_01
You can look at the pharmaceutical industry as well.
3
SPEAKER_01
There s a huge amount of money and a huge amount of power that wields tremendous influence over members of Congress.
3
SPEAKER_01
There are different examples of this across different sectors of our society, but I think the military-industrial complex over time has proven itself to be the most powerful and influential, and that s what is behind it.
4
SPEAKER_00
is this is why they try to destroy anyone who dares to ask the most obvious questions, is because it is about power and wielding power.
4
SPEAKER_01
Well, the cool thing about United States presidents, they have the power to say a few to everybody in the room, I think.
4
SPEAKER_00
They do.
4
SPEAKER_01
It just seems like they don t quite take that power.
4
SPEAKER_01
People say like, yeah, the US president doesn t have that much power.
4
SPEAKER_01
I don t know about that.
4
SPEAKER_01
Just like if you look at the law, especially in military, when you re talking about war and the military, they have a lot of power.
4
SPEAKER_01
So they can fire everybody.
4
SPEAKER_01
They have a lot of power.
4
SPEAKER_01
They can stop wars, they can start wars.
4
SPEAKER_01
They have a lot of power.
4
SPEAKER_00
The position of the presidency certainly does, unfortunately,
4
SPEAKER_00
we have people too often who assume the presidency from a position of weakness because they re afraid of losing power.
4
SPEAKER_00
And so they make those calculated decisions not based on what is right or for the right reasons, but instead driven by fear of loss of power and loss of influence.
4
SPEAKER_00
And that s where
4
SPEAKER_00
especially given all that we are facing, we need leaders in the presidency and in Congress who have courage to be that voice in the room, to ask about, to remain mindful of and rooted in the Constitution, to, even as we are seeing this legislation being billed as the anti-TikTok bill,
4
SPEAKER_00
that s really not about TikTok.
4
SPEAKER_00
It s about freedom of speech.
4
SPEAKER_01
Can you actually explain that, Bill?
4
SPEAKER_00
Yes.
4
SPEAKER_00
This is another, I guess the bottom line up front is this is another piece of legislation being expedited through Congress with strong bipartisan support in the name of national security interests
4
SPEAKER_00
that is essentially a power grab and an assault on freedom and liberty.
4
SPEAKER_00
And I ll just say this in, I think, probably like the top three things that they re not actually telling us that s in the bill.
4
SPEAKER_00
Freedom of speech.
4
SPEAKER_00
It s our ability to be able to express ourselves, whether it be in person, on a podcast, on a social media platform, in a newspaper, whatever the platform may be.
4
SPEAKER_00
This legislation gives the executive the power to decide which platforms are acceptable for us to be able to use.
4
SPEAKER_00
TikTok itself, the words TikTok is not actually in the bill, but it gives the power to the president to decide
4
SPEAKER_00
who is a foreign adversary, single-handedly, no consultation with or agreement from members of Congress or anyone else.
4
SPEAKER_00
It actually gives the power to a cabinet secretary to designate who is a foreign adversary.
4
SPEAKER_00
And if a social media platform has at least 20% ownership in a social media platform, that platform may be banned.
4
SPEAKER_00
from doing business in America, essentially.
4
SPEAKER_00
But it s not just a foreign state actor that could be named as a foreign adversary.
4
SPEAKER_00
It also includes a line in the legislation that if
4
SPEAKER_00
Let s say a person has at least 25% financial interest or ownership in a social media platform.
4
SPEAKER_00
They re an American citizen who may be working or living in some other country.
4
SPEAKER_00
or working or living here, but doing business with other countries.
4
SPEAKER_00
If the executive branch of our government decides that this individual is under the influence of or controlled by
4
SPEAKER_00
someone that they deem a foreign adversary, then that platform must not do business in America.
4
SPEAKER_00
And that person, obviously, even an American citizen, is banned from
4
SPEAKER_00
conducting that business.
4
SPEAKER_00
They must divest, essentially.
4
SPEAKER_00
So when you look at, and this is where there s been a lot of chat around this, when you look at Elon Musk, for example, well, you already have people in the Biden administration, even President Biden himself, implying that Elon Musk s activities need to be investigated.
4
SPEAKER_00
Well, he is someone with Tesla who does business in a lot of countries, including China, and therefore he must be investigated.
4
SPEAKER_00
It is not at all a stretch of imagination to say that X could be the next platform, that the executive branch decides, nope, we ve designated this person to be a foreign adversary, and therefore his business interest cannot be allowed for this social media platform, cannot be allowed.
4
SPEAKER_00
to exist.
4
SPEAKER_00
We ve seen this already with people accusing him and X of interfering in our elections.
4
SPEAKER_00
Again, it s ironic that it s coming from the Democratic Party that they are claiming that
4
SPEAKER_00
a guy who has said himself he s committed to free speech and is allowing free speech on his platform and is not allowing the federal government to manipulate his platform by deeming which accounts are okay to, you know,
4
SPEAKER_00
posts their content and which accounts are not because of disinformation or whatever they claim it to be.
4
SPEAKER_00
It s not an accident that the social media platforms that have been proven to take action at the behest of the federal government and the White House to censor certain voices
4
SPEAKER_00
they are not included with or being targeted at all in this legislation or outside of it.
4
SPEAKER_00
Yet other platforms that are not cooperating or collaborating somehow are.
4
SPEAKER_00
So the underlying issue here, this is being sold as TikTok and national security, but ultimately, even as Ron Paul said, this is legislation that s the greatest assault on liberty
4
SPEAKER_00
since the Patriot Act was passed.
4
SPEAKER_01
Yeah, it s quite dark.
4
SPEAKER_01
It s just a graph of power.
4
SPEAKER_01
It is.
4
SPEAKER_01
I mean, this doesn t, it s not just with Elon, it s probably with Zuck, with Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp.
4
SPEAKER_01
It puts pressure.
4
SPEAKER_01
It s not just about banning, but it puts pressure for them to kind of moderate behavior.
4
SPEAKER_00
Yes.
4
SPEAKER_01
Which is a slippery slope.
4
SPEAKER_01
Of course, it s a beautiful dance of power because you don t want tech companies to have too much power either, or individuals at the top of those tech companies have too much power.
4
SPEAKER_01
But then do you want that power in the hands of government?
4
SPEAKER_01
The history of this nation is a fascinatingly effective
4
SPEAKER_01
a journey towards the balance of power.
4
SPEAKER_01
And it does seem like this sneaky little thing, as much as I hate TikTok on all fronts, my brain rots every time I use TikTok.
4
SPEAKER_01
I know it is also like the national security dangers of China and so on, but it s just like TikTok, man.
4
SPEAKER_01
Just, I just, I don t know, it s so addicting.
4
SPEAKER_01
It s so addicting, so.
4
SPEAKER_01
When I first saw this TikTok bill, I was like, yes, no, but then they got me.
4
SPEAKER_01
The Trojan horse got me.
4
SPEAKER_00
No, I mean, they all, you know, and this is like the social dilemma documentary, I think exposed a lot that this, there is so much.
4
SPEAKER_00
There s so much that these algorithms do in these various social media platforms that s problematic, to say the least.
4
SPEAKER_00
Data security and privacy is a serious issue.
4
SPEAKER_00
These are serious things.
4
SPEAKER_00
And so let s have a conversation about these serious things and cease
4
SPEAKER_00
these attempts to try to have our government try to tell us what we are and aren t allowed to see, you know, where we are and aren t allowed to say what we want to say.
4
SPEAKER_00
That s really what it comes down to.
4
SPEAKER_01
Yeah, more and more trust people to, whenever social media companies do bullshitty things, for the people to make documentaries about it, to discover it, for great journalists to do great journalism, and find the flaws and the hypocrisy and the call for transparency, all those kinds of things, I don t trust.
4
SPEAKER_01
in most cases, government regulation of technology companies because they seem to be really out of touch.
4
SPEAKER_01
One, they want power.
4
SPEAKER_01
They re really intimidated by the power that the tech companies have.
4
SPEAKER_01
And two, they don t seem to get it, the technology at all.
4
SPEAKER_01
So they re like hindering innovation and they re just greedy for power.
4
SPEAKER_01
And those are not- It s a bad combination.
4
SPEAKER_01
It s a bad combination.
4
SPEAKER_00
The thing here, too, though, is this extends far beyond social media companies.
4
SPEAKER_00
This is a very specific example, but it s one example of many how those who are greedy for power are continuing to try to find ways to tell us how to live our lives.
4
SPEAKER_00
They are increasingly trying to tell us, again, what we re allowed to see and hear, whether it be social media companies or what shows up in a Google search engine, for example, and if they re not finding a willing and compliant
4
SPEAKER_00
social media company or big tech company, then they re looking for ways to reach their hand into those tech companies and force compliance.
4
SPEAKER_00
But in the age of disinformation, misinformation, hate speech, all of the excuses that are given for government, either directly or indirectly through big tech, to try to censor certain voices,
4
SPEAKER_00
it really undermines the truth, which is the way to defeat bad speech is with better speech and more speech.
4
SPEAKER_00
Whether it s hate speech or things that you might be offended by or things that you might disagree with, the answer is not
4
SPEAKER_00
to have some entity with the power of censorship and being the quote-unquote authority to decide what is good speech and acceptable and what is bad speech and unacceptable, it s what you said.
4
SPEAKER_00
Let s encourage this debate and encourage people who are inspired by like, no, man,
4
SPEAKER_00
I saw this thing or this thing is happening and it s pissing me off.
4
SPEAKER_00
So I m gonna bring a superior argument.
4
SPEAKER_00
I m gonna show what the right way is.
4
SPEAKER_00
And gosh, this is what our founders envisioned for us as a society in this country.
4
SPEAKER_00
And we would be so much stronger with a more engaged people and a more informed people if we had this and had it supported.
4
SPEAKER_01
Do you think, what are the chances that the TikTok ban bill passes?
4
SPEAKER_00
The way that it passed through the House of Representatives with such an overwhelming bipartisan support and so quickly, and President Biden saying that if it comes across his desk, he ll sign it, I thought it would pass through very quickly.
4
SPEAKER_00
I m only slightly encouraged by the fact that the Senate at least appears to be saying, hey, there are serious free speech concerns around this bill, serious civil liberties concerns around this bill.
4
SPEAKER_00
We need to do our due diligence.
4
SPEAKER_00
I won t say I m cautiously optimistic because I understand how that place works, but their pause at least gives people the opportunity to continue to kind of sound the alarm and for people to call their senators and express their concerns with this, that are very real, valid concerns.
4
SPEAKER_01
Yeah, this is really messed up.
4
SPEAKER_01
Just in case we didn t make it clear, I think this is a really, really big danger if this thing passes.
4
SPEAKER_01
Even if you hate Elon Musk or your whatever, this is really, really, really dangerous.
4
SPEAKER_01
If the government gets say over the platforms on which we communicate with each other, it s a huge problem.
4
SPEAKER_00
And there s a section in there as well, just kind of the last piece on this, is if you use a VPN and you try to use a VPN to access this, you could have problems with the law.
4
SPEAKER_00
And you take that a step further and say, well, how would they know?
4
SPEAKER_00
There s a surveillance aspect to that.
4
SPEAKER_00
So once you start peeling back the layers of this really toxic onion, it really leads seriously to a pretty dark and dangerous and oppressive place.
4
SPEAKER_01
You were a longtime Democrat.
4
SPEAKER_01
You were the vice chair of the Democratic National Committee until you resigned in 2016 to endorse Bernie.
4
SPEAKER_01
I should say I love Bernie.
4
SPEAKER_01
I loved him before he was cool, all right?
4
SPEAKER_01
Anyway, can you go through what happened in that situation?
4
SPEAKER_01
And with the Democratic National Committee and with Bernie and why you resigned?
4
SPEAKER_00
As a vice chair of the Democratic National Committee, one of the things that the rules of the DNC required was that officers of the DNC, of which we were, as I think there were five or six of us who were vice chairs at the time, you have to remain neutral in a Democratic primary.
4
SPEAKER_00
So you re not, as a party, supposed to be tipping the scales in any direction for any candidate during a primary election.
4
SPEAKER_00
And so I had no plans to get involved for any candidate or against any candidate during that primary in just the hopes of like, all right, we got to make sure that this is a fair and balanced primary so that voters have the best opportunity to vote for the candidate of their choosing.
4
SPEAKER_00
I saw a couple of things pretty quickly.
4
SPEAKER_00
Number one is that the chair of the DNC at the time was a woman named Debbie Wasserman Schultz, a congresswoman out of Florida, and she made very serious decisions unilaterally that many times we found out about via tweet or press release that
4
SPEAKER_00
that showed she was tilting the scales in the favor of Hillary Clinton in that 2016 primary.
4
SPEAKER_00
The other thing that I saw was how
4
SPEAKER_00
The mainstream media and those who are supposed to be in a position to be neutral arbiters to facilitate debates and forums and conversations so that voters can be best informed in who they want to vote for.
4
SPEAKER_00
We re calling Hillary Clinton the most qualified person ever to run for president in the history of our country.
4
SPEAKER_00
because of the positions that she had held as Secretary of State, as a U.S.
4
SPEAKER_00
Senator, as First Lady, and yet they glossed over those titles without ever holding her, asking questions even, or holding her to account for her record, especially in the area of foreign policy.
4
SPEAKER_00
The job she was running for was to be Commander-in-Chief, to be the President of the United States.
4
SPEAKER_00
That responsibility to serve as commander-in-chief is the foremost responsibility a president has.
4
SPEAKER_00
It s essentially the one area where the president can unilaterally make decisions without
4
SPEAKER_00
Without education, healthcare, immigration, Congress has to actually pass legislation.
4
SPEAKER_00
The president can come through and say, hey, here s the policies that I want, here s legislation that I ll propose, but those changes can t be made without Congress working with Congress to pass them.
4
SPEAKER_00
So she was essentially being let off the hook for her record.
4
SPEAKER_00
as an American, as a soldier, as a veteran.
4
SPEAKER_00
That was a big problem for me.
4
SPEAKER_00
And so I made the decision to resign as vice chair of the DNC so that I could endorse Bernie Sanders, who largely at heart, I believe, is a non-interventionist.
4
SPEAKER_00
He hasn t focused a lot on foreign policy.
4
SPEAKER_00
It s not at the
5
SPEAKER_01
the heart of what his focus has been for decades, but he was certainly far more of a non-interventionist than Hillary Clinton, who has shown through her record to be the queen of warmongers in Washington.
5
SPEAKER_01
I wanted to be in a position where I would have a platform to inform voters about her record so that they could make that decision for themselves, so that they could see, hey, in this area, on this issue, which is
5
SPEAKER_01
incredibly important, there is a clear contrast between these two candidates running in the Democratic primary.
5
SPEAKER_01
And that s what drove my decision to resign and to endorse Bernie Sanders.
5
SPEAKER_01
And that s what I went on to do throughout the rest of that primary election.
5
SPEAKER_00
What do you like most about Bernie, the positive?
5
SPEAKER_01
You know, what I like most about him is he is who he is, unapologetically so, both in personality, but also in what he advocates for and what he s advocated for for a long time.
5
SPEAKER_01
So you can agree or disagree with his positions, but he is who he is.
5
SPEAKER_00
Like I said, you were a long time Democrat.
5
SPEAKER_00
You ran for president in 2020 as a Democrat.
5
SPEAKER_00
Now you re an independent and you re an excellent book describing your journey ideologically, philosophically through that.
5
SPEAKER_00
Why did you choose to leave the Democratic Party?
5
SPEAKER_01
In the book, I go into a number of the central reasons why I made that choice, but fundamental to them is that the Democratic Party has become a party that is opposed to freedom, that is opposed to the central and foundational principles that exist within our founding documents.
5
SPEAKER_01
and that serve as the identity of who we are as Americans and what this country is supposed to be about.
5
SPEAKER_01
It has become a party that is controlled by this elitist cabal of warmongers who are driven, who are driving forward this quote-unquote woke agenda.
5
SPEAKER_01
and we see it through their racializing of everything.
5
SPEAKER_01
We see this through their defund the police mission.
5
SPEAKER_01
We see this through their open border policies.
5
SPEAKER_01
We see this through how in their education policy they are failing our kids and how they are pushing this narrative
5
SPEAKER_01
that ultimately is a rejection of objective truth.
5
SPEAKER_01
The fact that it s a question up for debate about whether or not, well actually it s not a question up for debate for them, they are actively pushing for
5
SPEAKER_01
you know, boys who identify as girls to compete against girls in sports, changing our language so that the word woman, the identity of being a woman, is essentially being erased from our society.
5
SPEAKER_01
It is the height of hypocrisy and frankly an act of hatred towards women that they are so intent on doing this.
5
SPEAKER_01
And ironic that it s coming from the party that for so long proclaimed themselves to be the greatest feminists and the most pro-woman party in the country.
5
SPEAKER_01
I go into detail around each of these issues and more in the book, but you will see as we go through each of these issues, fundamental and foundational to every one of them is that sadly the Democratic Party has become a party
5
SPEAKER_01
that is so consumed by their desire for power, this insatiable hunger for power, that they are willing to destroy our republic, our democracy, our freedom, just so that they can try to hold on to power and gain more power.
5
SPEAKER_00
So these are just different mechanisms for power.
5
SPEAKER_00
The identity of politics and the warmongering are related to each other in that they re mechanisms to attain more power.
5
SPEAKER_00
You re making it sound like only the Democratic Party are full of power-hungry people.
5
SPEAKER_00
So to you,
5
SPEAKER_00
You know, the Republican Party, I don t know if you ve met those folks, but some of them.
5
SPEAKER_00
A couple of them.
5
SPEAKER_00
Are also in love with power.
5
SPEAKER_00
Yes.
5
SPEAKER_00
And are, you know, at times to some degree, politicians in general are corrupt.
5
SPEAKER_00
Sometimes within the legal bonds, sometimes slightly outside of the legal bonds.
5
SPEAKER_00
And so to you, to what degree is sort of the Democratic Party is worse than the Republican Party?
5
SPEAKER_00
So I don t want to paint a picture of like this kind of beautiful vision of the Republican Party that there s somehow not power hungry.
5
SPEAKER_01
Yeah, I m glad you brought this up.
5
SPEAKER_01
You know, the book details why after 20 or so years, as a member of the Democratic Party, I decided to leave.
5
SPEAKER_01
But also, and it goes through my experiences and things that I have seen and learned along the way, but I also point out exactly that fact in the book.
5
SPEAKER_01
But from the very beginning with the prologue is we should not be naive to think that this only exists within the Democratic Party.
5
SPEAKER_01
There are very serious problems within both of our political parties, specifically coming from politicians who are driven by this
5
SPEAKER_01
desire for power and who are so afraid of losing that power that they re willing to do whatever they feel they need to do, which centers around taking away our freedom.
5
SPEAKER_01
Because the more free we are to make our own decisions, even if they may end up being the wrong decisions, but to learn from those things and
5
SPEAKER_01
know that we ve got to live with the consequences, the beauty and messiness of what a free society looks like.
5
SPEAKER_01
They re so afraid of us because they see us as the people and our freedom as the central threat to their ability to remain in power.
5
SPEAKER_01
I think the difference that we re seeing today
5
SPEAKER_01
is that unfortunately, we talked about this a little bit, how the Democratic Party has become a party where you must walk in lockstep with the leadership of that party or risk being faced with
5
SPEAKER_01
you know, your reputation being destroyed and smeared and all of these different attacks.
5
SPEAKER_01
And the reason why they do that is to to put people like me and Bobby Kennedy and others up as an example of saying, hey, if you step out of line, if you challenge us, this is what we re going to do to you.
5
SPEAKER_01
The Republican Party has also done that, and they also have
5
SPEAKER_01
politicians and leaders who are more interested in feeding the thriving system in the Washington establishment.
5
SPEAKER_01
But we re also seeing that the Republican Party also has some voices, and I would say increasing voices of people, and I would put Donald Trump in this category, who are challenging
5
SPEAKER_01
the quote-unquote norms of the Republican Party that are represented by people like Nikki Haley or Mike Pence, for example.
5
SPEAKER_01
The Republican Party is not a monolithic entity, and it means different things to different people, and that s where I think the real challenge in this next election is less
5
SPEAKER_01
It s really less about one political party over another, and it s more about our opportunity as voters to select leaders, first of all, to fire those who are against freedom and who are
5
SPEAKER_01
warmongers who, by their essence, are willing to take away our freedom in the name of national security and vote for people.
5
SPEAKER_01
Nobody s perfect.
5
SPEAKER_01
We shouldn t hold anybody up on a pedestal, but vote for those who are committed to the Constitution and who hold those values that represent the interests of the people.
5
SPEAKER_00
I m not a fan of this choice, but here we are, Biden versus Trump.
5
SPEAKER_00
So let me ask you sort of a challenging question of pros and cons.
5
SPEAKER_00
Can you give me pros and cons of each?
5
SPEAKER_00
What s the biggest strength and biggest limitation of, let s say, Biden?
5
SPEAKER_01
This is a tough question.
5
SPEAKER_01
I ve known President Biden for a lot of years.
5
SPEAKER_01
I knew his son, Beau, who served in the National Guard the same time that I did.
5
SPEAKER_01
I consider Joe Biden a friend.
5
SPEAKER_01
He is someone over the years that I have talked to and shared laughs with and spent time with in different situations.
5
SPEAKER_01
The positive characteristics that drew me to Joe Biden of the past, they are not represented in how he has led as president.
5
SPEAKER_01
And I ll let the pundits theorize as to how that is or why that is, but the truth that I know exists, which points to his weakness, is that instead of
5
SPEAKER_01
listening to his better angels, he has instead at every turn, if you go back and you, you know, I look back to his inauguration speech where he promised to be a president for all Americans and, you know, during his campaign promised to be the uniter in chief to bring a country together that was deeply divided.
5
SPEAKER_01
That s the Joe Biden that I ve known
5
SPEAKER_01
for many years, a guy who has, you know, worked with different people with different backgrounds and different political views, but tried to find at different points in time a way to work together.
5
SPEAKER_01
At every turn, he has done the exact opposite of what he spoke about during his inauguration speech, and has left us, as the American people today, more divided, less secure, both from an economic standpoint, as well as a national security, or a safety and security standpoint, and less free as a society and as a people.
5
SPEAKER_00
So the biggest criticism would be he divided us or continued the division that s been there.
5
SPEAKER_00
Who do you be the greatest uniter?
5
SPEAKER_00
Like to me, over the past few decades, to me, Obama.
5
SPEAKER_00
You ve been very critical of Obama on the foreign policy side on many fronts.
5
SPEAKER_00
But to me, that guy did really good.
5
SPEAKER_00
Maybe some people say just rhetoric, but I think rhetoric matters when you re president.
5
SPEAKER_00
I think he was, out of all the presidents we had, as probably the most effective uniter of the people.
5
SPEAKER_00
Would that be fair to say?
5
SPEAKER_01
During his 2008 campaign, yes, I think that his message resonated with so many people across generations and across, you know, different views, different backgrounds to where, you know, people cried on the night that he was elected because they felt so hopeful.
5
SPEAKER_01
I talk to people and I know people who set aside their entire lives to work on his campaign, to be a part of this hope and change mission that he laid out that would bring us together.
5
SPEAKER_01
Some of the people that I know personally, they gave up their lives during the campaign and after he won, they went to Washington, D.C.
5
SPEAKER_01
because they wanted to be able to do the work that he had laid out and continue to be a part of this mission that they expected would extend beyond the campaign.
5
SPEAKER_01
And they ve expressed to me personally how heartbroken they were, because so quickly after he was elected, instead of bringing in a new generation of fresh leadership,
5
SPEAKER_01
that was not a part of the Washington establishment, he instead immediately chose to surround himself with people who were more of the same old same old, who were essentially part of part of the problem.
5
SPEAKER_01
And many of his actions after that,
5
SPEAKER_01
proved that fear and that broken heart, that brokenheartedness that they felt to be true.
5
SPEAKER_01
And I ll mention one example related to civil liberties that we talked about.
5
SPEAKER_01
He was someone as a US Senator who gave some pretty powerful speeches on the Senate floor about his concerns with the Patriot Act, his concerns with surveillance from the NSA, his concerns with a violation of our Fourth Amendment rights and civil liberties.
5
SPEAKER_01
But when, as president, he was confronted with leaked information about this surveillance occurring under those authorities, in his presidency, he took the side of the national security state and did not take action.
5
SPEAKER_01
to right the wrongs that he correctly pointed out as senator and during his campaign for the presidency, which is unfortunate because he really did build this unifying momentum throughout his campaign.
5
SPEAKER_00
What do you think that is?
5
SPEAKER_00
Why is it so hard as a president?
5
SPEAKER_00
to kind of act on the promises of the campaign, but also just, I mean, his speech, his basically anti-war speech, that really resonated to me, the fact that he was against the war in Iraq, I believe, early on.
5
SPEAKER_01
And that was a huge point of distinction between him and Hillary Clinton, probably one of the biggest.
5
SPEAKER_00
Well, why is it so hard when you step into the office of president to sort of act on your ideals?
5
SPEAKER_01
I think it goes back to what we talked about a little bit, which is, you know, what are you driven by?
5
SPEAKER_01
And what are you afraid of?
5
SPEAKER_01
And if you are concerned for whether or not you can get reelected, who s going to fund that reelection effort?
5
SPEAKER_01
Who s going to fund the presidential library and your legacy that will follow?
5
SPEAKER_01
There have been some documented examples around how he promised to crack down on Big Pharma, but when push came to shove, his Department of Justice campaign funding was threatened, and they chose not to take action, even when they had a very, very strong case to make.
5
SPEAKER_01
This was with regard to the opioid crisis in the country.
5
SPEAKER_01
And this just goes back to the heart of why it s so essential that we have leaders who have courage and who are focused on doing what we elect them to do.
5
SPEAKER_00
And who are resistant to the love of money and power.
5
SPEAKER_00
Yes.
5
SPEAKER_00
It s hard.
5
SPEAKER_01
And we are human, we are fallible, we are flawed by nature.
5
SPEAKER_01
And I ll go into kind of the next one you asked about Trump, the weakness side.
5
SPEAKER_01
And the lessons that I hope have been learned from 2016 for him and his team is you have to be in a position where you are surrounding yourselves
5
SPEAKER_01
with other people of courage who aren t just thinking about their next political job or their next job getting a cable news contract or looking for fame themselves or looking
6
SPEAKER_00
at how they can monetize their position for whatever their next financial interest might be, but people of courage who know what they re up against to really seriously clean house across the federal government and the corruption and rot that is so deeply entrenched.
6
SPEAKER_00
in order to truly be effective.
6
SPEAKER_00
And if he is reelected, that is my hope, that he sees, that he s learned from what went wrong in 2016, that he went in with a largely non-interventionist, more focused on peace agenda, and yet he surrounded himself with people who are at the heart of
6
SPEAKER_00
the warmongers in Washington and who directly went against the policies that he advocated for.
6
SPEAKER_00
On the strength side, I think it s easy to point out because it s also what has caused him to be so attacked in ways that we haven t seen before, certainly not in my lifetime.
6
SPEAKER_00
by the Democrats, by the Biden administration, not only in now, but you know, something that started back in 2016 when he was a candidate.
6
SPEAKER_00
He s a guy who, you know, by all measures has been successful in his own life.
6
SPEAKER_00
And because of that, he s not coming in with this desire to please Washington that many other politicians have.
6
SPEAKER_00
And because he is so willing to challenge the quote-unquote norms, and these are not norms that serve the interests of the American people, these are norms that serve the interests of the most powerful, he is a direct threat.
6
SPEAKER_00
And so that attitude and that mindset of not coming in with the kind of caution that too many politicians come in with of
6
SPEAKER_00
wanting to be the popular one at the parties or whatever it is that they want, that is the strength that he brings.
6
SPEAKER_01
Yeah, I just had a conversation with Dana White and he s good friends with Trump and he talks to the fact that he seems to be resistant to the attacks.
6
SPEAKER_01
And some aspect of that is it s just the psychology of being able to withstand the attacks that are there in the political game.
6
SPEAKER_01
And that can break people.
6
SPEAKER_01
Like you just don t want the headaches.
6
SPEAKER_01
So to withstand the attacks is tough.
6
SPEAKER_01
And something about his psychology allows
6
SPEAKER_01
for that.
6
SPEAKER_01
I mean, I guess a question for you also in your own psychology, you ve been attacked quite a bit.
6
SPEAKER_01
We ve mentioned some of that sort of misrepresentations and how do you deal with that by yourself?
6
SPEAKER_01
Like how do you not become cynical or overcompensate the other direction, that kind of stuff?
6
SPEAKER_00
It really stems from having a clear sense of purpose.
6
SPEAKER_00
I never saw, you know, I ve served in state government.
6
SPEAKER_00
I ve served on our city council in Honolulu and served in Congress.
6
SPEAKER_00
But at no time have I have I seen this as a quote unquote political career.
6
SPEAKER_00
I don t have that ladder climbing ambition that a lot of politicians have.
6
SPEAKER_00
My sense of purpose is deeply rooted in my
6
SPEAKER_00
my dedication and my desire in my life to be pleasing to God and to live a life of service?
6
SPEAKER_00
And what better way to be pleasing to God than to try to do my best to work for the well-being of God s children?
6
SPEAKER_00
being rooted in that has made it so that as the attacks are coming from different directions, even as people who I was friends with, former colleagues of mine, others, even family members,
6
SPEAKER_00
even as they have turned away or become attackers against me themselves because of different reasons related to politics.
6
SPEAKER_00
Of course, it s a sad thing, especially when it s someone that you know personally and have had a personal friendship or relationship with.
6
SPEAKER_00
But I don t live my life trying to please politicians or please the people who show up on TV or anyone else.
6
SPEAKER_00
As long as I am doing my best to be pleasing to God, that is where I draw my happiness from and my fulfillment and contentment and strength.
6
SPEAKER_01
So you spoken about the value of religious faith in your life, of your Hindu faith, and seeing the Bhagavad Gita as a spiritual guide.
6
SPEAKER_01
So what role does faith in God play in your life?
6
SPEAKER_00
It s everything.
6
SPEAKER_00
It is central to who I am, what inspires me, what motivates me, where I find strength, where I find peace, where I find
6
SPEAKER_00
shelter and where I find happiness.
6
SPEAKER_00
And this has been a constant throughout, you know, times of challenge, times of darkness, times of heartbreak, times of happiness in
6
SPEAKER_00
always feeling very secure in knowing that God s unconditional love is ever-present, and no matter what else is happening in my life, that God is my best friend, and remaining centered and grounded
6
SPEAKER_00
in always remembering that and meditating upon that truth is, it s everything to me.
6
SPEAKER_01
The interesting thing about the Hindu God is how welcoming the religion is of other religions.
6
SPEAKER_01
It s true.
6
SPEAKER_01
How accepting it is.
6
SPEAKER_01
In that way, in many ways, it s one of the most beautiful religions on earth.
6
SPEAKER_01
So who do you think God is to you?
6
SPEAKER_01
In specifically the texts, but also you personally.
6
SPEAKER_01
what does he represent?
6
SPEAKER_01
So for Hinduism it s also, God can be many, there s also like a aspect where there s a, it s like a part of all of us.
6
SPEAKER_01
There s like a uniting thing, not a singular figure outside of us.
6
SPEAKER_00
I think one of the things that s most commonly misunderstood about Hinduism that people don t know is that Hinduism is truly a monotheistic religion.
6
SPEAKER_00
That there is one God and he goes by many names that describe his different qualities and characteristics.
6
SPEAKER_00
And as you pointed out, Hinduism is uniquely of a non-sectarian spiritual practice, essentially.
6
SPEAKER_00
It s not a quote-unquote religion that you convert into or you leave behind or whatever the case may be.
6
SPEAKER_00
Bhagavad Gita, a central scripture and text that comes from India, literally means Song of God.
6
SPEAKER_00
And the principles that are conveyed throughout the Bhagavad Gita are applicable to all of us.
6
SPEAKER_00
They are timeless truths that, whether you consider yourself Christian or Catholic or, you know, Muslim or Jewish or Hindu,
6
SPEAKER_00
These truths are eternal and relevant through all time.
6
SPEAKER_00
So for us as kids growing up, we learned from and had bedtime stories that came from both the Bhagavad Gita and the New Testament.
6
SPEAKER_00
My dad was raised Catholic, my mom was raised Episcopalian, and both of them were attracted to the Bhagavad Gita as they were in their own lives searching for a more personal relationship with God than they had been able to find elsewhere in their own spiritual journeys.
6
SPEAKER_00
And that s where
6
SPEAKER_00
the application of, you know, there are teachings in the Bhagavad Gita, for example, that talk about bhakti yoga.
6
SPEAKER_00
Bhakti yoga essentially translates into dedicating your life, striving to develop a loving relationship with God.
6
SPEAKER_00
There s a chapter in the Bhagavad Gita that speaks about karma yoga.
6
SPEAKER_00
Karma is a word that has become a part of the, you know, both karma and yoga have become very common terms, but what it really means is
6
SPEAKER_00
trying to dedicate your actions in life in a way that have a positive impact on others, being of service to others.
6
SPEAKER_00
And so for me growing up, I never really understood as a kid the idea of sectarianism, of one religion battling against another, because I knew and understood and experienced that the real meaning of religion was love for God.
6
SPEAKER_00
no matter what name you worship him by or how you worship, that is the real meaning of religion.
6
SPEAKER_00
And the application of that in your life is
6
SPEAKER_00
You ask, how do I see God in a personal way?
6
SPEAKER_00
I know that God is my best friend.
6
SPEAKER_00
God is my confidant.
6
SPEAKER_00
When I am struggling with a problem in my life or during those quiet moments by myself where I am anxious or I m sad,
6
SPEAKER_00
I turn to God for that solace, for that clarity, for that strength to both know what the right thing to do is and the strength to act accordingly and to constantly strive to further develop that very personal, loving relationship with God.
6
SPEAKER_01
Tulsi, this is an honor to finally meet you, to talk to you.
6
SPEAKER_01
This was amazing, thank you.
6
SPEAKER_00
Thank you, Lex.
6
SPEAKER_00
It s so wonderful to be here.
6
SPEAKER_00
Thank you for the opportunity.
6
SPEAKER_01
Thanks for listening to this conversation with Tulsi Gabbard.
6
SPEAKER_01
To support this podcast, please check out our sponsors in the description.
6
SPEAKER_01
And now, let me leave you with some words from Dwight D. Eisenhower in his 1961 farewell address.
6
SPEAKER_01
A vital element in keeping the peace is our military establishment.
6
SPEAKER_01
Our arms must be mighty, ready for instant action, so that no potential aggressor may be tempted to risk his own destruction.
6
SPEAKER_01
American makers of plowshares could, with time and as required, make swords as well.
6
SPEAKER_01
But now we can no longer risk emergency improvisation of national defense.
6
SPEAKER_01
we have been compelled to create a permanent ornaments industry of vast proportions.
6
SPEAKER_01
This conjunction of immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience, yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications.
6
SPEAKER_01
In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex.
6
SPEAKER_01
The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.
6
SPEAKER_01
Thank you for listening and hope to see you next time.