[00:00:04] Broadcasting live from atop the Rocky Mountains, the crossroads of the West, you are listening to the Liberty Roundtable Radio Talk Show. The economy is in the tank. War seems to be everywhere. What about the Abraham Accords? We're hoping for peace, right? Happy to have you along, my fellow Americans. I'm Sam Bushman. Of course, it's a freedom-loving, faith-filled, fantastic.
[00:00:32] We're taking America back one heart, one mind, one issue at a time Friday, and that means the good doctors in the house. Dr. Scott Bradley, freedomsrisingsun.com, just came off his last night's webinar, and boy, do we have a bunch of topics to discuss. Welcome, sir. Well, thank you very much, Sam. Hope all is well with you and yours. You know, it is a holiday. It's Founders Day here in Utah, so everybody else is probably working hard, but not you, right?
[00:01:02] I never work hard. I just sit around and have a good time, but you know, today's a day to celebrate, in my opinion, the founding of the great state of Utah. Really, it was called Deseret, and you know, you almost kind of wonder if it should have stayed that, doctor. It was a pretty big state. I mean, it was probably almost as big as Australia. Not really, but it had a big blob on the western third of the whole United States.
[00:01:25] I guess, I don't know. It's something that got worked out a long time before my time. I'm not going to fret too much about it. Anyway, all I can tell you is it's a good day to be alive. It's a good day to celebrate, you know, liberty. They left for religious freedom, the United States back in the day, and we celebrate that. And then they joined the United States believing that, hey, a united country would be better than going it alone until the Savior returned, right?
[00:01:56] Well, you know, I mean, the people that founded this particular state have some scriptural endorsement, if you will, of the United States Constitution. In fact, according to the scriptures, whatsoever is more or less than the Constitution cometh of evil.
[00:02:16] So I think any variance should be recognized by those that believe in that record, that we shouldn't be doing that because it's going to be a big problem for us. And boy, howdy, as you often say, we sure do vary from that dramatically nowadays. Roger that. And that's kind of the problem. I want to talk a little bit about the Abraham Accords. You know, a lot of people love these things.
[00:02:41] President Trump trying to push them is the greatest, one of the greatest legacies he created in his first term. And, you know, there's a big debate about the Abraham Accords. Guys like me would call them unconstitutional. Others would say, no, Sam, they're fine. The courts have kind of said they're fine. The president has tremendous foreign authority. And therefore, you know, they're fine.
[00:03:07] But my my problem with them are is the sovereignty of nations. And, you know, these agreements basically circumvent a lot of sovereignty in nations, including the United States. Congress did not pass a law related to these documents. The Supreme Law of the land remains supreme. Any law that conflicts with that Supreme Law was a law that never was unless it's, you know, we vote to change the Constitution, which means massive super majorities, et cetera, et cetera. So I've got a problem with promoting these Abraham Accords. Do you, doctor?
[00:03:38] Yeah, it probably bears more discussion than we usually have time for. But I hearken back to something that's been an international protocol. If you want to think about it as international law, it's been the basis of nations being founded. In fact, it's the basis of our foundation in our nation. And it's the 1648 Westphalian Treaty. And without going into a long and drawn out discussion about that, basically, it recognizes the sovereignty of all nations.
[00:04:08] All nations are sovereign within their own nation. And no supranational, meaning like the United Nations or NATO or CETO or CETO or CETO or so on. Or the Abraham Accords. Or Abraham Accords can take precedence over the sovereignty of that nation to handle things within its own nation.
[00:04:27] And what these supranational agreements do is they subvert that by giving credence to the fact that some international body or maybe a group of nations can interfere with the internal affairs of another nation. And that's what we do every time we do anything anymore. I mean, we have so far strayed. The United States would never have become a country had that been a common thing. In fact, it was pretty tough anyway.
[00:04:56] England was pretty big for their britches. And they thought, well, yeah, you know, this Westphalian Treaty, we still get to board all ships that we decide to board. We get to decide where they go and what ports. And we're going to run our way of things. And, you know, and that's why we had the War of 1812 to say, no, we really are independent. This was our second war of independence, if you will, because the Brits had been trying to interfere with the sovereignty of the United States.
[00:05:26] But we overcame that and we became a sovereign nation. We kind of stood up, dusted ourselves off and went forward. But the fact is that really since at least the beginning of the 20th century and the League of Nations and then the United Nations and, of course, all of the entangling alliances that are associated as regional arrangements with the United Nations nowadays are interfering with that.
[00:05:52] That is the basis that we keep saying to people, the United States, Trump, you and I don't, but keep saying to England and everybody that's in NATO, hey, guys, jump in this war with us. Article 5 says you guys got to be part of this fight. And if you go look at the NATO agreement, it was signed in 1949, it says if one gets in a scrape, everybody's in the scrape. That's not what is meant to be. And basically that...
[00:06:19] Well, the Abraham Accords is kind of a subcontract, in my mind. They claim it's kind of a banner for peace. But the reason they use the term accords is because then they can play games with the Constitution because they say, well, it's not a treaty. It's not a this. It's not a that. We don't need Congress. President has authority. But what it lets the president do is meddle in other nations. It breaches sovereignty of all nations.
[00:06:43] Now, constitutionalists like myself say, hey, it's unconstitutional because it breaches American and other countries' sovereignty. But what they say is, Sam, that's a constitutional argument, not an established legal. Then they say conclusion. Well, conclusion means opinion. So it's very interesting how they want you to believe somehow we have to let the nine justices decide, where you can't know what law is. What I know is this. It conflicts with the supreme law, so I don't need a lawyer. I don't need a court decision.
[00:07:11] I can just tell you that it conflicts with the supreme law. Therefore, it's a law that never was. It's bogus. And Trump's hanging his hat on it right now for his second term. And I think it's disaster because it creates foreign entanglements like no other. But they really are dangerous. And I've said often, I'll say it again, one of the biggest, biggest, biggest issues that comes up in president's terms, if you will,
[00:07:37] in their second term is that they get, I'm going to go look internationally. It's hard to govern in the United States under the limits and bounds of the Constitution. You know, you can't solve Birmingham, Alabama's problems or LA's problems. I'm going to go over in Kuwait. I'm going to see what I can do over there. Presidents constantly fall into that trap to get involved in internationalism, particularly in the 20th and 21st century.
[00:08:04] And Donald Trump is doing this on steroids right now. So it's interesting to me, though, that we're going to battle about this, but no one's really going to take it on. And what even scholar attorneys would say now is, Sam, we're so far from that. You can talk about the ideal the way it should be. And we agree with you. But look, it's been so different for so long that it's fine. And there's nothing you can really do about that, Sam.
[00:08:31] And my response to that would be, if we're going to befriend the supreme law of the land, then we need to make the real turn into the ideal the best we can on our watch. That's my take. And I'm standing by it. I'm claiming the Abraham Accords unconstitutional. And they use the word accord on purpose because it lets them legally dodge a lot of obligations and responsibilities to broaden the discussion to Congress and to the American courts and anything else. The courts won't rule on it. Congress didn't touch it.
[00:08:59] Donald or any president just continues with it as if it's magic, giving him authority and power. But it's an international lie skirting the United States supreme law, pretending that it doesn't conflict when we all know if we study it, if we pay attention, that it really does, ladies and gentlemen. Moving right along. I don't know. Just before we leave that, let me just say what Washington said about that lie that the scholars, quote unquote, are promoting now. Yeah.
[00:09:26] Washington said that the Constitution is sacredly obligatory upon all until changed by an authentic act of the whole people. Which would mean all the two-thirds and all the three-quarters of the states, all the different processes that it requires to change the Constitution is the point, right? It's sacredly obligatory upon all until changed by that authentic act as mentioned in the Article 5 constitutional process.
[00:09:56] So the lies, lies and more darn lies, if you want to put it in that terminology, that we are told does not change the facts. What changes the facts is the American people do not know any of these things. And they believe that because someone in a quote-unquote leadership position said something, they cow down and they bow and they scrape and then they go forward and do it.
[00:10:26] And by those steps, we are absolutely egregiously removing the entire Constitution. And sadly, it's true. And I'm one to call it out and stand tall for the sacred cause of liberty. I want to make the real the ideal. I want to have a great constitutional Republican tell our Savior Jesus Christ returns. That's who I am. That's what I do. What do they call this? 1.15 trillion dollars in another disaster.
[00:10:55] It's domestic and international. This one, we'll talk about it. The Foundation for Moral Law is a non-profit legal foundation committed to protecting our unalienable right to publicly acknowledge God. The Foundation for Moral Law exists to restore the knowledge of God in law and government and to acknowledge and defend the truth that man is endowed with rights not by our fellow man, but by God.
[00:11:45] The Foundation for Moral Law is a non-profit tax-exempt 501-7. This is a battle. A battle between truth and deceit. A battle between forces that would enslave this country in darkness and between a media that wants to present you with the truth. We are being censored. America's news outlets no longer provide the truth.
[00:12:14] 90% of news outlets in the United States are controlled by six corporations. The mission of the Epoch Times is to chase the truth. To ground all statements and facts. theepochtimes.com Okay, so Sam mentions a $1.5 trillion deal that's been cut. The National Defense Authorization Act has passed the House. The National Defense Authorization of the House.
[00:12:43] And it's, you know, they say, oh, we don't just support the troops. We've got to have, it's a constitutional issue. And yes, Congress has that responsibility and blah, blah, blah. Well, $1.5 trillion is actually a war-making act because it includes a whole bunch of stuff that allows us to take violence to the world.
[00:13:05] Not in defense of America, but we have institutions and installations and ships at sea that are there threatening everywhere in the world. And you have to make a footprint to make an impression or we're losing that footprint. But the thing that concerns me is that Section 219 is still in that National Defense Authorization Act,
[00:13:29] which basically integrates the United States and Israeli military. Israeli military will have input, at least, and certainly a lot more than that. They'll be doing development, they'll be doing deployment of the American weapons systems.
[00:13:52] So this is basically a Trojan horse, if you will, putting the Israeli military in the middle of our defense budget. And you talk about a Trojan horse. I mean, we're letting an organization, let's just say, okay, we're going to let, okay, China has a lot of steel production. They do great with steel production. They took all of our steel production over and we could talk about that at great length.
[00:14:15] But because they have great steel production, we're going to put them in the procurement, development, and delivery process for our 70-ton battle tanks. Because they have a lot of steel and you need a lot of steel in a tank. How asinine is that? How absurd to let another foreign power. Those that think that Israel is always going to be intertwined and loved by all, which their status is diminishing right now in the United States by large demographics.
[00:14:44] But we think about the Jonathan Pollard 1980s espionage stuff that he did against the United States on behalf of Israel. Probably it was the single most egregious destruction of military security secrets in all of the history of the United States, all the other attempts combined. And an Israeli agent did that to us in the 1980s. And we could talk about that at length too.
[00:15:12] The fact of the matter is, Section 219 is in there. This bill has passed. It's gone on to the Senate. Here's my recommendation. J.D. Vance is not a senator, but he's the president of the Senate. He gets to vote only when there's a tie vote. But he has a collegiality with the senators. He was there. He knows them. Some of them are his good buddies.
[00:15:37] He could use his influence to get the Senate, before they vote on this thing, to pull Section 219 out. So I can almost assure you, if the House and the Senate pass the National Defense Authorization Act, Trump is going to sign it. So he can maybe get the senators to pull it out, or if the senators make modifications to anything on the bill, it has to go to reconciliation. And I appreciate pulling some sections out. It might make it better.
[00:16:07] But you know what? The fact is, the whole thing's rotten, Doctor. Well, there's so much pork in there and everything else like that. But 219 is what the discussion has been about, because it's integrating a foreign nation into our military defense system. Which, by that door, makes us part of the Abraham Accords, just so you know, right? Yeah, I think there's an argument that could be made for that fact. But I think Vance could exercise.
[00:16:34] And that's why I start with that and tie this to that, because they directly relate whether people realize it or not. But I think that Vance could help get it pulled out while it's in the Senate. And then if the Senate, and they likely will make changes, a bill has to be... But Vance won't do that. He loves this. Well, Vance has had some... He's been a little bit more of a... He's had a little bit of blustering at the mouth, but he hasn't had any stand-up boldness. Not at all. No, but I'll tell you one thing.
[00:17:03] I think the bigger the splash gets in regards to this unconstitutional war of our choice by a president that followed another foreign power, the one that's dragging us into this Trojan horse thing with Section 219, I think the bigger the splash gets on this. It is becoming a no-off-ramp war. But I think Vance and Rubio are damaging their opportunities or options or their gravitas,
[00:17:32] I don't know what you want to call it, that might allow them to become the Republican presidential nominee, because this thing is damaging. Yeah, but they probably know that. The Republicans are in intentional self-destruction mode. They're planning to let the Democrats take control. They have no plan. They have no mind of the economy, really. I mean, I don't understand what they're even accomplishing or doing. Well, and then the Democrats, if the Republicans don't have a plan... They don't need a plan. The Democrats just say we're taking over. Yeah.
[00:18:00] The Democrats actually are out wandering in Never Never Land, you know, some kind of... Yeah, but they don't care. As long as they hand it to them, they'll be in good shape. That is a very real possibility. I think Trump's quote-unquote legacy, that he could have really kind of burnished and polished up a little bit until this stupid, idiotic, unconstitutional war of our choice blew up. And it's kind of like, well, there's so many things that could be said about this.
[00:18:28] He kicks over the hornet's nest at the behest of Netanyahu. And then if the hornets sting anybody, then he expands the war further. And it's like, you can't tell the hornets. All they can do is buzz around and throw frantic, you know, little movements. Well, and Israel continues to do what they do on the side, expanding the war too in a separate but yet equal action. And then Iran retaliates and expands the war.
[00:18:55] There's no talks on the table anymore from what I understand, right? The House decided they want to try to rein in. Trump voted yes to do so. Primarily the Democrats backing that. Now the Senate just shut that down as well. So no reigning in of President Trump either. Well, duh. I mean, come on. This is an imperial presidency. And the Republicans are bowing and scraping, sycophants to the president.
[00:19:21] And there was only four Republicans that joined that House effort. It was a concurrent resolution anyway. It didn't have any teeth. But it would have been a movement to say, hey, guys, we're unhappy and our constituency's unhappy with this war. It's time to call it good. We need that off ramp. Let's find one instead of expanding it constantly. It really is on a tragic slope right now. And people think that it's going to be over, you know,
[00:19:51] the first week in August or something like that. We're just starting to see the oil prices bump up again. It's been over $100. Brent crude's been over $100 a barrel this week. I think it's just under right now. But it's hovering around $100 right now. And what was it, $70 before the war started? And we still are keeping, you know, billions of gallons of oil out of the world's economy.
[00:20:19] And we've been supplementing that with our strategic petroleum reserve. We're nearing the bottom of that barrel, if you will. So we've got to keep some reserve. But China's been doing the same. At some point, people are going to say, oh, there ain't no more out there. So now we're going to shut down airlines in Europe. I mean, you know, who knows? It'll be some silly thing.
[00:20:41] But the fact of the matter is, this does not have a happy ending at the rate we're going right now. And there doesn't seem to be an off-ramp coming up in the next mile or two for the president to say, okay, fine. We've made our point. Do they want an off-ramp? Because what do we get when we get an off-ramp at this point now? Well, here's the deal, Sam. I would like an off-ramp. Don't misunderstand me.
[00:21:07] But I'm saying from the warmonger perspective, what good does an off-ramp do, doctor? Well, that's the problem. There is nothing. They don't want an off-ramp. Therefore, there's not one. There's only one if we decide to be honorable and, as Ron Paul says, just get up and walk out. We should have never been there in the first place. We just walked in. We just walk out, right? Everything's in a worse position than it was February 27th. Everything. Everything.
[00:21:33] And there, I mean, we have expended weaponry that will be years being recovered. We have weakened the United States. You know, Trump talks about weakening, how Biden weakened the military. I built it back up. It's great. No, he's expended huge arsenals of weapons. Billions and billions and billions of dollars. Not only that, most likely we're going to do some nation-building or cleanup after the fact as well. Not that we should, but we always do, right?
[00:22:02] It seems like that's our habit. So we haven't even talked about half the money spent. Our ammunitions are now depleted or our capabilities are depleted. We've shown our hand and what we're capable of to the other side, and they're starting to gain knowledge based on the things that we've done, too. So for them, it's been an incredible, I don't know what you want to call it, release of military capability on our side to them. I mean, we've stepped back so far, it's not even funny.
[00:22:29] And we've done a huge drawdown of our military. We've got over 50,000 American military personnel in that region right now. And then if you and I bring this up, then we're the haters. We're the bad guys. No one can associate with us because we don't support the president, right? Real patriots are odious, according to Washington's farewell address, because of these entangling alliances. And this is exactly... You've got to stay tall for what's right.
[00:22:54] You do, but that's exactly what caused this whole debacle is our entangling alliances that the founders warned us so explicitly and passionately about. So I'm saying we've got to get out of the war. We could just walk out if we just walked in. I'm saying we've got to get out of the Abraham Accords and jettison that whole fiasco. And I'm saying to you, the $1.15 trillion disaster called NDAA has got to go.
[00:23:18] We should have jettisoned the whole thing, but most likely it'll be passed and most likely we'll embed Israeli military in our armed forces in some strange sovereignty-violating way. And then we'll talk about Americans being killed in the Iran war, doctor. Well, it's interesting. We had four more. They brought their bodies home. I don't know if you watched the retrieval of those bodies and everybody standing there at attention, mourning, and everything like that. So we went from 14 to 18.
[00:23:48] And then this morning, I just saw a report that says we're back to 14 again. Why is that? And I think it's because they died after Trump declared in April that was a ceasefire, and so they're not counting them. What a pack of lies. Well, I think they're fudging the numbers everywhere, and they've been doing so for decades on end, Dr. Bradley. I think they're flat out fudging the numbers, and we never—war to us in America has been sanitized to the degree.
[00:24:19] All right, ladies and gentlemen, thanks so much for being alongside for the ride. Check out Dr. Bradley's incredible work at freedomsrisingsun.com. I'm Sam Bushman. God save our constitutional republic.