Radio Show Hour 2 – 07/03/2025

[00:00:13] Broadcasting live from atop the Rocky Mountains, the crossroads of the West. You are listening to the Liberty Roundtable Radio Talk Show. All right. Happy to have you along, my fellow Americans. Sam Bushman live on your radio. Hard-hitting news the networks refuse to use, no doubt, continues now. This is the broadcast for July 3rd in the year of our Lord, 2025. This is Hour 2 of 2, the goal always to protect life, liberty, and property, to promote God, family, and country.

[00:00:43] To do so on your radio and the traditions of our founding fathers. And we reject revolution, unless it's a Jesus revolution. Then we're in because we follow the Prince of Peace. Hope you're all doing absolutely fantastic. Hope you're all gearing up for an incredible weekend. And pray we can reduce expenses. The big, beautiful bill seems to spend us into oblivion. There's a lot of debate about that. Some say the good outweighs the bad, and others are saying no. There's too much bad in it. Time will tell as the Senate passed a different version than the House.

[00:01:09] And now it's going back to the House for, what, arm-twisting? Behind-the-scenes shenanigans? Who knows? I'll tell you that. But it's very, very difficult to kind of think through this thing. Ladies and gentlemen, there's so much going on. It's hard to know where to go with this thing. All right. We've got a great Epoch Times author with us, Andrew Thornbrook, with us. He's been with us before, and welcome back, sir. Oh, thanks so much for having me.

[00:01:38] It's a pleasure to be here. All right. The big, beautiful bill, what do you think is going to happen first? Oh, it's hard to say. It's not really my domain of expertise, but it looks like, well, they say they have the votes, but we'll see. You know, there's always holdouts, and I think a lot of negotiating among the GOP to try to get, you know, just Congress people trying to get the best for their constituents. So we'll see whether or not it happens. I don't know. To me, what we're going to get, like we've always got, is they're going to kick the can down the road.

[00:02:07] We're going to get a bill that no one's going to be happy with, but this is going to be passed, and Donald will get a win, and its benefits will be yet to be seen. Most people can't even read the bill. It's over 900-plus pages long, and every time you turn around, it changes. So I don't even know that we can know what's in it, and I don't know that any congressman or senator who votes against it will have read it, right? Well, it is Congress, so I think you're right. Now, the reason I bring this up to you is because you are an expert in military and war and security and all these kind of things.

[00:02:35] They're increasing $150 billion, the, I don't know what you want to call it, military-industrial complex, the budget for war. It's over a trillion dollars now. We spend more than all other nations combined. Trump made a statement that was interesting several weeks ago. He said, hey, we could decrease that to a half a trillion and do just fine. Do you agree with him? Yeah, you know, we definitely decreased the budget and still do just fine. It would just require a great retooling.

[00:03:02] You know, this is a point that's been made by several former military officials. A few years ago, we had Chris Miller, who was a former acting sec def during the first administration, Trump administration, and he made a very compelling case. You know, if we're not going to be leading these international wars, there's no reason we can't wind down some of our active duty infantry, put that duty back to, you know, our communities, back to the state guard units.

[00:03:28] So these kind of things keep a great, you know, keep that backbone of NCOs and an elite force, you know, using Marines and special forces, and then just train back up our soldiers in the event of wartime. But I think there's all sorts of ways we could cut the military budget. There's so much bloat, and there's so many problems in our acquisition process. We spend so much money on acquisition and development for weapons that we either never get or by the time we get them, they are, you know, out of date, and we don't need them anymore.

[00:03:58] So it's definitely an issue that needs a lot of looking at, and I think we could cut a lot of the budget just by shifting focus and focusing on, you know, the home front. And I'm trying to work more with commercial-first technologies when we use drones and things like that.

[00:04:17] One of the things I note is that we're in over 130 nations, militarily speaking, and some would say, well, we've got to be there because if we can stop problems there, then, hey, it doesn't come to a theater near us or to our backyard. And to some degree, I agree with that, but at the same time, I wonder how many of those nations want us to be there, and I wonder how much we actually aggravate situations or pick sides or involve ourselves and, you know, put our nose in places we don't belong.

[00:04:43] And, you know, the Founding Fathers had a really humble foreign policy for this very reason that oftentimes we back somebody that we think is good, and later they become the very enemy that we tried to prevent in the first place. And it seems like our meddling and our involvement everywhere seems to be, I wouldn't say the problem because there's certainly bad actors out there, but it certainly contributes to part of the problem, doesn't it? Yeah, you know, we're definitely, our global footprint is immense. And like you said, that has bonuses and it has drawbacks.

[00:05:13] So I think the drawback, as we've seen over so many years, is the increased willingness by U.S. leadership to get involved in foreign conflicts. We really shouldn't be involved in it at all. On the other hand, you know, the underlying premise of that global military force is also economic in nature, right? Our military, having it sprawled out throughout the world, provides stability and safety for international trade, which is the entire system that our country has built for the world and ourselves.

[00:05:42] And it relies upon the stability that the United States can provide by maintaining that global military footprint. So it's, you know, again, there's, it's a complicated issue and there's definitely drawbacks and benefits. I, for one, don't really want a huge global international trade. I think America could do very well by looking internal and doing most of our things ourselves and importing on occasion for things we need and not becoming isolationist,

[00:06:11] but trade with the world on a less constant basis than a more as needed basis. And I think we could do very well in doing that. That's what Trump's advocating for. He's advocating for making things in America, for putting tariffs on other countries to try to create a leveling of the trade balances and things. I think a lot of that's wise. The reason I bring all this up is this. Trump bombed some Iran facilities. Many people say it was a surgical takeout of their nuclear capabilities. Capabilities.

[00:06:39] Trump says he set them back decades. Others are contradicting that. Anybody who contradicts that, though, is under Trump's turret. Sad to say. What's the truth on that, Andrew? Well, the truth is we don't know. And we're not going to know for some time. I think Iran doesn't even know. Iran has excavation units right now at the site of Fordow that was bombed by the U.S.

[00:07:05] trying to sort of dig out the tunnels that were collapsed and see what remains underneath. This is a heavily fortified enrichment facility underneath a mountain that was deliberately made to withstand bombing. And the truth is we don't know.

[00:07:21] As recently as yesterday, Sean Parnell, the spokesman for the Department of Defense, said that it looks that Pentagon assessments, all right, our Department of Defense, assess currently that we probably set the Iranian nuclear program back by one to two years. And so that's the military assessment. The International Atomic Energy Agency has less enthusiastic assessment that said some parts of Iran's nuclear program could be back up within months. I'm not sure if I believe that either.

[00:07:52] But it's definitely not been destroyed permanently, right? Iran, if Iran wants to build this program back up, it certainly could unless the United States and Israel want to get involved again. So that's, of course, the risk is will Iran do it again or will Iran try to build it up? How quickly will it try to build it up? And if it does, will the United States then feel compelled to continue getting involved militarily in the region?

[00:08:22] So the Russian leader, I know it's not the current Russian president, but he's a big leader kind of in their military and he used to be the president or whatever. He came back and said, hey, this just ensures that we will develop a nuclear program. It will be for weaponization purposes, not for peaceful nuclear power purposes or whatever. And we couldn't say it before, but now we can blatantly say it. And is there truth to that allegation that, hey, is Russia going to make sure it happens? I think that would be a pretty severe escalation.

[00:08:51] But I, at the same time, would not be surprised if Russia or China was trying to facilitate. I mean, this has been an ongoing dynamic since the 70s. You know, Iran thinks, perhaps rightly, that the only way to keep a superpower like the United States from, you know, regime changing it is to have a nuclear weapon.

[00:09:15] I mean, that's certainly the lesson that North Korea learned is that if we develop a nuclear weapon, it's the only way to keep a great power like the United States from invading us. So, but the caveat there would be whether or not Iran would actually commit to developing a weapon, whether or not it could develop a weapon, and then whether or not it could develop one quickly enough to prevent another military incursion. So, so that's always the caveat.

[00:09:43] You know, we saw with Iraq when there was just the allegation of WMDs that that was enough to get an invasion force. So it's hard to say whether or not Iran would commit to developing a nuclear weapon, but they are certainly incentivized to do so, perhaps more than before. And the sad part is that every time we attack them or every time we surgically remove something that we claim is going to help us at some point, at some point, all we do is create their backbone and their resolve.

[00:10:09] And if we're not careful, we create the resolve of other nations saying, hey, the United States has to be stopped. They can't just bomb everybody into oblivion. And then the idea comes, hey, can we really stop them from getting a nuclear weapon? I think if they were left to their own devices, they couldn't create one. But I think if Russia or China or North Korea or anybody else like that helps them, I think it's inevitable, isn't it? It's possible. And so this actually gets back to the intelligence assessment from Solsi Gabbard and her office,

[00:10:37] Director of National Intelligence, earlier this year when they found that it was most likely that what would happen with intervention is that Iran's leadership would come under pressure from its hawkish elements to develop such a weapon. Hang on. I've got a quick break. Nathan Thornbrook with me. ePotTimes.com, incredible analyst on security. We'll talk more in a second. Do you know what is great about America? Ask an Immigrant. Ask an Immigrant is a new podcast dedicated to helping Americans, especially our youth,

[00:11:06] value, appreciate, and be grateful for the freedoms we have here in America. Join host Lydia Wallace-Nuttle as she interviews immigrants from around the world to discover their inspiring personal stories about why they came to America. To learn more about why America is the most prosperous, greatest country in the world, download the Loving Liberty app or go to lovingliberty.net. In the medical field, IT security is crucial. Our highly skilled consultants are HIPAA certified and have 20 plus years of experience servicing medical clinics,

[00:11:36] billing and supply companies. We offer comprehensive endpoint protection, guarding your computers and servers against all stages of threats. And with our 24-7 monitoring services, you'll never worry about extensive downtime again. Ready to level up your IT support? Call 801-706-6980 today and discover how great IT services can be with managed IT services. As a parent, is receiving a faith-based, character-focused education for your children difficult to find?

[00:12:03] Do you believe that godly principles should be a central component in your child's education? Imagine a school where faith and integrity are at its center, where heritage and responsibility instill character. For over 40 years, American Heritage School has been educating both hearts and minds, bringing out academic excellence. This is the school where character and embracing the providence of a living god are fundamental, where students' national test scores average near the 90th percentile.

[00:12:31] With American Heritage School's Advanced Distance Education Program, distance is no longer an issue. With an accredited LDS-oriented curriculum from kindergarten through 12th grade, your children can attend from anywhere in the world. American Heritage School will prepare your child for more than a job. It will prepare them for life. To learn more, visit American-Heritage.org. That's American-Heritage.org.

[00:13:03] All right, I apologize. I called him Nathan because we've had Nathan Wister on with us from the Epoch Times as well, doing a phenomenal job reporting on great things too. But this is Andrew. And Andrew Thornbrook, ladies and gentlemen, is a security analyst and an expert on China, etc. And before we get to China and their position on this thing, you were mentioning Tulsi Gabbard came out with a report, right, Andrew? Yeah, so we were just talking about the risk that Iran could now be more incentivized to develop a nuclear weapon.

[00:13:31] That's precisely the conclusion that the intelligence community came to with their threat assessment back in March. And that found that at the time, the intelligence community did not believe that there was a dedicated effort within the Iranian government to pursue a nuclear weapon, but that this increasing involvement by Israel and potentially the United States could definitely push the hawkish elements within the Islamist regime in Iran

[00:13:58] to sort of pressure leadership there to develop a nuclear weapon. So there's definitely internal dynamics in Iran that could be more emboldened to pursue a nuclear weapon at this time. So did Donald kind of take the bait and do that and almost ensure that'll happen, do you think? It's hard to say. Right. You know, Donald Trump definitely has a long history with Iran, much of it personal at this point, given assassination attempts last year.

[00:14:28] And, you know, it's hard to say whether or not this is Trump being Trump, if this is taking the bait from Israel to do its dirty work, if it's just giving into the impulses of the more traditional elements of the Republican Party that have a more interventionist bent. It's hard to really say how that's going to play out.

[00:14:53] What's certain is that Iran is feeling the devastation from the attacks from both the United States and Israel, and how it sort of recovers from that and what lessons it decides to take away are going to definitely be defining features of the geopolitical landscape in the Middle East in the years to come. Trump wanted us to believe it was eminent that, hey, within a couple of weeks they were going to have these nukes and we had to do it now or we're going to lose that battle. Do you think that was accurate reporting or accurate reality?

[00:15:21] Or do you think that Trump was wrong? I'm not here to divide you against Trump. I'm just here to kind of understand. Did he have intelligence that Tulsi and the rest of the other reporters, you know, people didn't have? What do you think gives with that difference in reality? Yeah. So, I mean, I'm a journalist. I don't take sides with politics. From my perspective, I mean, I have not seen any evidence to suggest that Iran was going to be able to eminently build a nuclear weapon as recently as March.

[00:15:49] Of course, the Tulsi Gabbard and the director of national intelligence, the intelligence community, published that their belief was that Iran was not pursuing a nuclear weapon. Even if that had changed, I'm not at all convinced that they could have developed a nuclear weapon because even if they enriched enough uranium to 90%, which is what is required for a nuclear weapon, there's no evidence that they have the technology to miniaturize that into a warhead.

[00:16:18] And there's no evidence that they have a missile capable of being mounted with such a warhead. It's possible they could use a modified EMOD missile. But, again, there's no evidence that they have the technology to actually build such a weapon, even if they did enrich the uranium to weapons grade. So that's the key issue here. So I've not seen evidence that they were going to eminently have a nuclear weapon.

[00:16:46] Now, some say if they get a nuclear weapon, it's like, hey, we're all going to die now because those people are, I mean, everybody else that has nuclear weapons, they're responsible. But these people with a nuke, they'd be irresponsible. And we just can't let that happen. Several questions related to that. Number one, I don't know that I believe that's true. I think once a nation does get that capability, I mean, you look at North Korea, China, Russia. I mean, some of these people aren't our friends. And they realize it's a mutual destruction scenario, so they're very careful on that at this point.

[00:17:13] I think the Iranians would be that way, too. It's a pretty sobering reality once you get that kind of a thing, knowing that, yeah, you can fire that against somebody else, but many other countries can fire that same stuff to you, and they've been restrained thus far. I'm just not so sure that they'd be as trigger-happy as we've been told either. What do you say? Yeah, you know, I think Iran understands how much it has to lose. And Iran is certainly an authoritarian nation.

[00:17:40] It's a nation that's committed to great destabilization in the region, particularly against its age-old enemy, Israel. But the idea that it would instantly commit to using a nuclear weapon, I think, is also a premise that should be examined more closely. I don't know. I mean, it's definitely hypothetical, and I don't know that we have good evidence to support it either way.

[00:18:04] We do have evidence, though, that shows once countries do get this capability, they usually mellow out quite a bit. I mean, they usually – the saber rattling and everything else kind of starts to mellow out a little bit, and they're like, hey, we're autonomous in our own right and everything else. The other question, though, is what makes us think we have the right to have nukes? And, hey, Russia and China and North Korea and Israel and everything, they can have them, but this group can't. Where do we seem to get this, quote, world authority that decides who can and can't?

[00:18:34] Yeah, well, you know, I think there's a few things to say there. I think on the mellowing out, it just depends on the nation. So we definitely – in the case of China, it has emboldened China, but China has not at all used that nuclear capability overtly in the negotiations, whereas Russia and North Korea have done quite a bit of nuclear saber rattling, just reminding everyone that they do have the nuclear weapons,

[00:19:01] though North Korea is more guilty of this and has made more explicit threats against South Korea a number of times. But I think the idea that the United States can control, it really dates back to the Cold War, right? This dates back to when the United States and the Soviet Union were the only nuclear powers, and that it was really incumbent on them to manage nuclear competition and prevent proliferation. And preventing proliferation is – I mean, it's a noble goal.

[00:19:27] The more nuclear weapons are out there, the greater likelihood that something wrong is going to happen, be catastrophic. At the same time, how you prevent that – whether or not preventing that is worth it, if preventing it means constantly going to war with nations that could develop such weapons, you then start having to do something – a different kind of math, because I think that's really what's on the table.

[00:19:54] You know, it may be best for everyone if nuclear weapons don't proliferate and that no other nations get nuclear weapons. I think, you know, you'd be hard-pressed to make an argument against that. Whether or not it's worthwhile for the United States to spend blood and treasure constantly trying to prevent proliferation is a different question. I think that's one the American people have kind of grown wary of in the last two decades, right?

[00:20:21] After Iraq and Afghanistan and the global impacts, global war on terror, I think we have a public that is just over its role as the sort of international police force, and that they want someone else to take over and let other nations handle their own business. So I think this is definitely a turning point in terms of U.S. foreign policy. So we'll see where that goes. Well, you've got to ask the question, too.

[00:20:48] I mean, if Iran does obtain nuclear capabilities and they manage to enrich uranium to the point where, hey, it's 90 percent plus and they can miniaturize it and weaponize it to the point we're being told, wouldn't it require, say, a Russia or a China or a North Korea – somebody to help them make that happen? In other words, I don't think they can get it done by themselves. One, get the raw materials. Two, weaponize it. Three, miniaturize it and do – I mean, there's a lot of steps here.

[00:21:14] And so what I'm saying is I don't think it could be done without the backing of some other nation that's already got it done. Is that reality or am I just fooling myself? Yeah, I mean, certainly at this point, especially after so many of the top nuclear scientists have been assassinated in the last month. But this also – this has always historically been an issue as well because most of Iran's missiles, even domestically produced missiles, are based off of older Chinese and Russian designs.

[00:21:41] We see this issue also in North Korea, right, where a lot of these nations that are sort of coming into the orbit of China and Russia, they're still using weapons. If they're not using the older weapons still, which they are, they're also using weapons that are based on those Chinese and Russian designs. So they're not developing and innovating these sort of weapons in the way that a power like Russia or the United States would innovate these brand new designs.

[00:22:06] They're working with older things that have been provided to them and trying to understand it from that angle. So, yeah, I definitely think it would – they would need more outside support. And we haven't seen a huge amount of direct support for its weapons program. We have seen some indirect support. Whether or not that's been state-backed is up for debate.

[00:22:28] So I think two years ago now we had the Justice Department brought a case against a group of – a Chinese network that had been supplying components for WMDs in Iran. But whether or not that was backed by the Chinese Communist Party is – it's impossible to say at this point. We don't have the evidence. But, yeah, I definitely think you're right to think that it would require some further backing from Russia and China that Iran is probably likely to get.

[00:22:57] The reason I bring that up is because, I mean, China is our most favorite nation trading partner right now. And it's interesting to me how Trump has escalated the trade wars with them. But then all of a sudden, you know, Iran is close to a nuclear weapon. And then Russia threatens that they'll make sure that happens. And, you know, it seems to be like we have strange bedfellows. Why fight with Iran?

[00:23:16] Why not really work out an honest, open deal with the Chinese or with the Russians or somebody else to say, hey, we have got to – you know, if we don't want Iran to get a weapon, if we really all don't want that, then it's easy for us to prevent that. Let's not continue to crank up our weapons machines. The problem is China wants to do that no matter what we say or do. I mean, they threatened the nuclear option in the L.A. Times against America. America, they were talking financial at the time.

[00:23:42] But still, we look at that and go, I mean, I don't know that they're going to be dissuaded at any time. And if any time they feel like putting it in the hands of somebody else makes sense, they will. I don't know that Trump or anybody else is going to be able to talk them out of that. We thought we could stop the Russia-Ukraine war first day. It didn't happen. Now we're talking about Israel and Iran and, you know, Hamas and who knows who and the terrorists versus whatever. And we seem to have this boogeyman around the world that we're always on the brink of – I mean, we've been at war my whole lifetime.

[00:24:10] Never at home on our soil, but we've been in wars, endless wars and rumors of wars. And when we get back, we're going to talk a little bit more about that, ladies and gentlemen. This is critical stuff. You're listening to Liberty Roundtable Live. And all I can tell you is this. We better pray for peace because we're on the brink of something. Too many war fronts. Too many claims we're not in a war. We're not fighting this group or that group, but yet we are. Too many claims that we want peace, but we start throwing out bombs.

[00:24:39] Let's talk about it more in seconds on your radio. Pursuing liberty. Using the Constitution as our guide. You're listening to Liberty News Radio. News this hour from townhall.com. I'm Rich Thomason. Launching into a marathon floor speech.

[00:25:08] Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong opposition to Donald Trump's one big, ugly bill. House Democrat Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries obstructing a vote on the President's spending and tax cut bill. President Trump has lobbied Republican holdouts, and so too is House Speaker Mike Johnson. We are working through everybody's issues and making sure that we can secure this vote. I feel very positive about the progress. We've had lots of great conversations.

[00:25:37] I've met with individuals and groups all day long, as has the President, who's fully engaged as well, trying to convince everybody this is the very best product that we can produce. And while there was some dissension within the GOP ranks, Democrats have marched in lockstep opposing the bill that would block a huge tax hike while extending the Trump tax cuts. shooting in Northwest Washington, D.C. has killed a 21-year-old congressional intern

[00:26:05] who was working for Congressman Ron Estes. Eric Tarpini and Joaquin were shot and killed in Northwest D.C. Monday night, Metropolitan Police and the Kansas Republican confirmed. The intern would have been a senior at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst this fall. The 21-year-old was a Grammy, Massachusetts resident, who joined Estes' staff earlier in June. Metropolitan Police said a statement Wednesday that detectives believe he was not the intended target of the shooting. Police responded to the sound of gunshots on the 1200 block of 7th Street Northwest

[00:26:34] just before 10.30 p.m. Monday night. Bernie Bennett, Washington. Four people killed in a mass shooting last night outside a Chicago nightclub. A surprisingly robust employment report. America's employers adding 147,000 jobs in June. On Wall Street, the Dow is up 346 points. NASDAQ ahead 193. More on these stories at townhall.com. Hey, it's Mike Rohn. If I have a choice, I like to do business with companies that actually stand for something.

[00:27:04] That's why I switched from Verizon to Pure Talk. No offense to Verizon. I'm sure they stand for something. I just don't know what it is. Pure Talk, on the other hand, is a veteran-owned company that supports our military in a big way, and I appreciate that. Yeah, I also appreciate unlimited talk and text and plenty of data for half the cost to the big guys, and I do like being on America's most dependable 5G network for just $20 a month. But what I really appreciate is no contract, no cancellation fees,

[00:27:32] and Pure Talk's commitment to handle all their customer service in this country. I saw it for myself. I went to Georgia. I got a tour of their headquarters. I met their CEO, and I talked to the same customer service folks that you'll talk to when you dial pound 250 and say keyword Mike Rowe. Switch today and save 50% off your first month when you dial pound 250 and say keyword Mike Rowe. Pure Talk, a wireless company that actually stands for something. Scott Bradley here.

[00:28:01] Most Americans are painfully aware that the nation is on the wrong track and in dire straits. Unfortunately, most political pundits only nibble around the edges when they claim to address the issues. Even worse, many of the so-called solutions are simply rewarmed servings of what got us into the mess we currently face. And the politicians think we're so gullible and naive that we'll buy their lies that they have reformed and now understand where they led us astray.

[00:28:28] Unfortunately, the truth of the matter is that they simply wish to continue to hold power. The solution to America's challenges is found in returning to the timeless principles found in the United States Constitution. My book and lecture series will reawaken in Americans an understanding and love of the principles which made this nation the freest, most prosperous, happiest, and most respected nation on earth.

[00:28:52] Visit topreservethenation.com and order my book and lectures to begin the restoration of this great nation. Experience the untamed spirit of the American West with Range Magazine. Each issue is a visual journey featuring award-winning photography and compelling stories that capture the heart of ranching and rural life. Stay informed on the challenges and triumphs of those who live and work on the land. Subscribe today and receive quarterly editions delivered to your doorstep

[00:29:21] and join a community that cherishes the enduring legacy of the western frontier. Visit rangemagazine.com to subscribe. Are you ready to stand up for your community and support your local sheriff? Join the Constitutional Sheriff's and Peace Officers Association and become a vital member of the Sheriff's Citizens Posse. At CSPOA.org, we empower citizens like you through weekly webinars, arming you with the knowledge to back your constitutional county sheriff.

[00:29:51] Together, we can uphold our constitution and ensure liberty and justice for all. Your community needs you now more than ever. Casting live from atop the Rocky Mountains, the crossroads of the West,

[00:30:18] you are listening to the Liberty Roundtable Radio Talk Show. Back with you live, ladies and gentlemen, Andrew Thornbrook with me, well-known Epoch Times journalist, specialist on China and more. So I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer, Andrew, but I kind of have this idea, hey, you know, why keep bombing Iran saying, oh, we got to stop and stop and stop and stop and we know that you got to have Russia, China, North Korea,

[00:30:44] somebody with this nuclear capability and somebody with the wherewithal to help them get to the next level. Why don't we spend our time negotiating with China, with Russia, with North Korea, with some of these people to say, look, we need to de-escalate here. We need to reduce the amount of nuclear weapons we have. We need to make sure they don't fall into the wrong hands. And it seems to me that we could be diplomatically working with those who have a lot more control whether it happens or not. Am I crazy here or am I on to something?

[00:31:14] Well, you know, there's certainly room for negotiation, I think, or there was at one point. You know, even up until Israel's strikes, Iran at least intermittently was allowing international inspectors to its facilities. Now it did not conform to its own agreements much of the time. It certainly blew past enrichment thresholds that it agreed to and it did not allow the sort of persistent access that it had once promised to.

[00:31:41] But international inspectors did have a place, right? They did, were able to go into Iran and look at these facilities and measure radiation and look for enrichment. And now Iran's cut that off completely. We had the Iranian government last week saying, you know what, now we're not going to allow the International Atomic Energy Agency back. They're not coming. So whatever they're going to do is going to be shrouded beneath a huge veil of secrecy.

[00:32:08] We've had, I'm not sure if we've had any serious effort to negotiate with China on the issue. The few overtures towards that that we had under the Biden administration were immediately rebuffed by the Chinese Communist Party. We've sort of lost our standing with Russia, right? Since the Ukraine war began, where when the U.S. sort of leaned into that conflict, we had Russia suspend its involvement in its treaties.

[00:32:38] It claims it's still maintaining limits on its warheads and things like that under previous agreements that it was signed to with the United States. But it's suspended its involvement, so it's not allowing the United States to actually inspect those sites or verify its claims. So this is... And as a result, we can't really know, right? Yeah. So the lack of negotiation is definitely... It's led to the United States knowing less than it did before

[00:33:05] about nuclear proliferation in countries where we previously at least had a nominal understanding or agreement to not just proliferate again and again and again. So we're definitely seeing that. And right now, the biggest nuclear threat is honestly going to be China instead of Iran. China has dedicated itself to building out a robust nuclear capability

[00:33:30] and they've refused any hint or any suggestion that they should sign on to a treaty like Russia previously did. And the reason that they've given is that the United States and Russia will not get rid of their nuclear weapons. And so China has actually said that they will put a limit on the number of nuclear weapons they can have when the United States and Russia put the same limit on themselves. So you can see where this is going to go.

[00:33:59] And yeah, I definitely think the United States could do a lot more negotiating, could use a lot more diplomacy on these key issues, especially with powers that are such major powers in the world, given their nuclear arsenals and in case of China, it's economy. So I've always said that I don't want war, but I'm convinced we're headed to war. And I'm afraid that they're going to try to pin the tail on the donkey when it comes to Donald Trump. They're going to try to make him the war president. There are people that want war. They love the military industrial complex. They fund both sides of wars.

[00:34:28] They, you know, criminal bankers have done this for centuries and this is nothing new. And the Bible even talks about more war, not less. And under the name of peace, we promote war and everything else. And so my worries are that we're going to have more war. I wish we could back away from it, but I don't really see a way. Is it Israel and Hamas slash whatever the problem? You know, I mean, it seems like it escalated in October, 2023. It also escalated when Trump just bombed Iran now.

[00:34:55] And it seems like we have less intel, less cooperation, less negotiation. The only outcome of that, if that keeps up, is war, right? Yeah, it's hard to say. You know, we definitely put Iran in context there. You know, I think that that gets to the larger issue here, which is that this wasn't just about nuclear weapons. Right. I think we Israel saw an opportunity that it's been a war, you know, since October 7th, 2023.

[00:35:22] And it has systematically eroded the capability of Hamas and Hezbollah, to some extent the Houthis with U.S. assistance. And it's one opportunity to sort of remake the Middle East in an image that it preferred. And it took it. And the United States got dragged in. So I think that's definitely something that we should be concerned about happening again.

[00:35:49] Whether or not Israel having a strengthened position in the coming years and Iran being at a weakened position is better. You know, I certainly hope it will be. But, again, how Iran chooses to respond in the years to come is going to really determine that. And in terms of war, you know, it could these situations create a lot of instability. And it's the instability that often will lead to war in ways that you don't anticipate.

[00:36:18] So one of the things I think a lot of people like me were looking for in the immediate aftermath of the U.S. bombing in Iran was whether or not there would be a regime change effort. And, you know, we had a lot of very hawkish elements in the United States shouting for regime change in Tehran. But regime change is really the last thing you want in a nation that has highly enriched uranium floating around. Because what happens then is a civil war happens. You have multiple armed groups. And some of those armed groups get their hands on the uranium.

[00:36:48] And they're not a state. And they can use it in ways that the former state would not have, such as creating a dirty bomb or even just selling it to a nearby power, perhaps a bad actor, like Pakistan. And so these kinds of actions create immense instability. And it's that instability that's going to threaten to bring the United States back again and again and again, unless the United States can really make a firm effort to pivot away from this type of force,

[00:37:18] this constant application of force and this constant need to feel like it needs to express its power. Because, you know, I mean, we see from China, we see from Russia, we see from Iran, the more the United States looks like it has to show its power, the more weak a lot of these powers perceive it to be. Right? They're smelling blood in the water. They're smelling that the United States feels on its back foot and that it wants to demonstrate it's still powerful. And that's the problem. Yeah, they can tell that there's desperation, right?

[00:37:48] Yeah, I would definitely agree with that sentiment. So I hope we can work on this diplomatically speaking, but I look at Iran and I say, you know, hey, if we create a regime change, who says that whatever happens will be better than what we've got? Now, I'm not happy with who we have there at all. I think in 79 and some things like that, they really took a turn for the worst. But, you know, I don't know that it's going to be any better if we look for a regime change. We could have anarchy. We could have factions fighting more, creating the instability that you mentioned.

[00:38:18] Or we could even have somebody worse over time, right? Yeah. I mean, historically, the United States has a pretty terrible track record with regime change. And the regimes we generally put in inevitably turn against us or rely on fundamentalist forces that ultimately erode our security and the security of our allies. So that was actually the case with Iran, right?

[00:38:39] So we've seen this show before, and we should watch a different program, in my opinion. Yeah, we should take heed, that's for sure. Without Russia, China, and the United States, look, all three of those nations seem to arm and fund and train everybody that goes to war at some point or another beyond just, you know, knives and sticks and maybe even small weapons. But, you know, some of the weapons, they all come from either us, Russia, China.

[00:39:09] Without us continuing this arms race and then weapons falling into the hands unintentionally or intentionally to other nations, we wouldn't have the problem we have, right? Yeah. I mean, it's the global arms trade is alive and well. Instability certainly ensures that. And, you know, the United States profits. That's just a fact.

[00:39:33] The United States profits immensely from chaos and war throughout the world, including in places like Ukraine. You know, even if you, I know many, if not most people I know think that Ukraine's defense of itself is entirely justified, but also understand the way in which the United States has engaged in at least a form of war profiteering there, right?

[00:39:53] By deliberately dumping its old munitions into Ukraine, the United States has effectively created the incentive for defense contractors at home to earn immense amounts of cash by creating new weapons to replace the ones that they gave away. So, in effect, the United States is very good at turning these international conflicts into jobs programs.

[00:40:16] And that's an incentive that I think is going to increasingly come around to bite us in the years to come. I mean, and this is new, right? This is an issue. Think about Eisenhower talking about the military-industrial complex. This is an age-old tale, and it's something that we're really going to have to try our best to work through in the years to come and to vote. Andrew Thornbrook, we're flat out of time. He's a journalist. He works for the Epoch Times. Check it out if you want truth to power on these issues.

[00:40:47] EpochTimes.com. Andrew Thornbrook. Thank you so much, sir. We'll talk soon. Hang tight, ladies and gentlemen. Thank you so much for having me. We're on the table live final segment in seconds. Why don't we say to the government writ large that they have to spend a little bit less? Anybody ever had less money this year than you had last? Anybody ever having a 1% pay cut? You deal with it. That's what government needs, a 1% pay cut.

[00:41:14] If you take a 1% pay cut across the board, you have more than enough money to actually pay for the disaster relief. But nobody's going to do that because they're fiscally irresponsible. Who are they? Republicans. Who are they? Democrats. Who are they? Virtually the whole body is careless and reckless with your money. So the money will not be offset by cuts anywhere. The money will be added to the debt and there will be a day of reckoning. What's the day of reckoning?

[00:41:42] The day of reckoning may well be the collapse of the stock market. The day of reckoning may be the collapse of the dollar. When it comes, I can't tell you exactly, but I can tell you it has happened repeatedly in history when countries ruin their currency. 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.

[00:42:11] America's news outlets no longer provide the truth. 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. Theepictimes.com Looking for an IT partner that truly understands your needs? Managed IT services is the answer. We meet with you regularly to discuss your goals and form a tailored technology plan. Our customers have called us a trusted advisor who delivers.

[00:42:40] When it comes to IT, we do it all. Firewalls, cloud storage, server migration, and more. Say goodbye to long-term contracts and hello to a team that earns your business month after month. Call 801-706-6980 now and let managed IT services transform your IT experience. All right. Back with you live, ladies and gentlemen.

[00:43:09] So much going on. So little time to discuss it all. Andrew Thornbrook doing a phenomenal job at the Epoch Times. You know, that's the problem here as I see more and more and more do we give weapons and training and funding and everything else to all these nations of the world. And the old weapons, the old munitions or whatever term you want to use for these things, old military hardware, seem to fall in the hands of some of these unstable regions. And it happens over and over, whether we do it, the United States, whether Russia does it, whether China does it.

[00:43:36] You really got to ask yourself how many weapons programs would be happening? How high tech would these people be in terms of war if we or our, quote, partners, Russia, China, whoever, you know, leaders of the world, so to speak, wouldn't do this. And that's really kind of, in my mind, the takeaway. And that's why I say we've really got to work with Russia and China to deescalate this arms war, to deescalate. I mean, we say we're beyond the Cold War days. I don't think so. It's kind of interesting.

[00:44:03] And when you look at this, you find that we're always involved. Every time we're involved in whatever. So you say to me, what are you talking about, Sam? Well, Microsoft just literally sold a bunch of munitions or capabilities.

[00:44:26] Well, it means that we're giving technology to the Israelis. And you say, well, why is that bad, Sam? The Israelis are the good guys. Don't you know they're the biblical Israel? No, wait a minute. I understand it was designed for peaceful purposes.

[00:44:52] But that same AI that's used for hostage location and rescue and everything else can be used for wrong. That AI can be, okay. And what happens when it falls in the hands of the Iranians? Or what happens if we give this technology to Israel so then communist China gives that same technology to Iran or to Hamas or to whoever else we want to talk about, right? I mean, it's insane what's going on. And we continue to seem to fall for this over and over and over. That's what I mean.

[00:45:18] And, well, the Russians and the Chinese and North Koreans say we won't de-escalate our arms because you guys keep cranking up your military arms. And then we say we can't de-escalate our arms procurement, creation, whatever you want to call it, development, because, man, the communist Chinese, they won't stop theirs. And it goes round and round and round. And nobody will stop doing this. Listen, therefore, we got this going on over and over.

[00:45:42] But Microsoft, should they be shipping this technology to Israel? Is Israel really our friend in this thing? See, I don't think so.

[00:46:16] Now, isn't the U.S. and Saudi Arabia aren't? Wow, wow. Is Saudi Arabia the good guys? Well, Ron Paul, back in the early days when he was in Congress, highlighted that, hey, remember the 9-11 attacks? Well, they say that Saudi Arabia was at the heart of all that. Of course, George Bush told you it was somebody else and went after somebody else and created a big old war. Oh, man, we have weapons of mass destruction, weapons that we got in these countries. And it was all a lie, right?

[00:46:46] But we find out later that Ron Paul told the truth. Saudi Arabia was at the heart of a lot of these things. So why are we working on a $142 billion arms deal with Saudi Arabia right now? Why? Answer, because we love to arm and train and fund wars everywhere in the world. We love it. The communist Chinese love it. The Russians love it. The North Koreans love it. Because they all want to be superior. They all want to command.

[00:47:14] And what they're claiming is, well, we just need it because you're threatening us. We just need it because you're doing the same thing. And now we go round and round the barn. Well, we got these weapons and have to create more because those guys are. Then those guys say it's because we are. And then we say it's because they are. And we go round and round and round. And everybody loves the military industrial complex because it makes big, big, big money. And that's the problem that we're facing. So in the first hour, I talked about the big, beautiful bill that's a boondoggle. It's a disaster.

[00:47:43] We're spending a trillion dollars on military. Is that because we're going to de-escalate conflicts? Or what's the reason for that? Oh, it's because the other guys are doing that. And we have to, by golly. Got to protect ourselves, you know. And we're over 130 nations militarily speaking because, by golly, we can't let the... Wow. Just insane, insane, insane. And the answer is for us to peacefully lead with a humble foreign policy and not escalate. Okay?

[00:48:11] I don't trust the communist Chinese. I don't trust the communist North Koreans. I don't trust the communist Russians. I don't trust Israel. I don't trust Hamas. I don't trust Iran. I don't trust any of these people. But I know this. The less I interfere and the more I provide peaceful, stable trade, relationships, diplomatic involvement,

[00:48:40] the greater chance I have to de-escalate these wars. And it seems to me that we're doing just the opposite. Tulsi Gabbard and all those people reported. And Andrew told us, hey, they weren't as close to a nuclear weapon as we think they were. But Trump said that everybody's wrong. He's right. He knows. And then Trump said where he sat there, you know, capabilities back decades. Now others are saying, yeah, it might have been one to two years at best. Who do you believe? Who do you trust? I don't know who to believe or who to trust. But I know this.

[00:49:10] If I go against Donald Trump, he's going to start attacking me, right? So I better go along with the Donald. Do you see how this works? Is that the way we want America to be? What about free speech? What about me and my own opinions? Am I entitled to them? Yeah, at great peril, Sam. You sure are. Where do we go with that? So we go back to the elections discussions internally. Donald Trump says, and he's right, the elections were tampered with in 2020. And now we get the pay dirt. Now we get the truth on this matter.

[00:49:37] Headline, the FBI knew about it. They didn't want to go against.

[00:50:12] All right. So the headline is the FBI now found out. We just got released documentation. Thanks to Cash Patel and others probably. Sorry about the issues. It's a long, complicated traveling story. But anyway, the FBI knew that Chinese government compromised the 2020 elections. But the FBI director testified, Christopher Wray testified that, hey, there's no issue here. And the FBI now has documented that they didn't want to go against their director. So they said nothing.

[00:50:42] But now we find out they knew the communist Chinese interfered with the elections and they didn't speak up about it. So here's my question. Are we going to have the proverbial heads roll on this one? I'm not calling for any heading beheadings or anything. I'm just saying, are we going to have accountability here? You had Christopher Wray literally speak out and lie. And then you had the FBI that didn't want to contradict their director. So they remain silent. And now documents are proving this.

[00:51:13] What do we say to this now? See, so we can't even trust what the United States does around the world. They're not advocating for peace around the world. They're promoting war. And Donald sadly seems to be at the helm of it. We hoped he'd be a peaceful president and back away from a lot of the wars. And that does not seem to be the case. So the big, beautiful bill is going to fund war, trillion dollars plus. And we're going to back war all in the name of so-called peace. We're going to push for regime changes.

[00:51:42] We're going to violate the sovereignty of other nations on the altar of peace. As we continue to promote and proclaim war. It's a sad tale, folks. I'm not here to pick sides. I'm here to follow the prince of peace. I'm here to advocate for the prince of peace. I'm here to say we cannot get peace through war. Let's reduce our military spending. Let's set the standard and reduce, reduce, reduce mutual destruction capabilities.

[00:52:11] Other nations may or may not follow suit. But you know what? If we do this and set the standard, we can trust in our God. That doesn't mean we don't prepare. That doesn't mean we don't protect ourselves. That doesn't mean we don't repel an invasion that may take place. But it does mean we're not going to play the world's cop. It does mean we have a humble foreign policy that we lead by example. We don't just preach one thing and, you know, say one thing and do another kind of thing. But we're congruent in our actions. That we're trustworthy in our word.

[00:52:40] That we do what we say we'll do. That we truly advocate for peace by creating the greatest economic engine the world's ever known. To do that, we need to return to honest money and reject the Federal Reserve. To do that, we need to decrease taxes on the American people like nobody's business. Not temporarily, but permanently. Shut down the IRS. We need to have tariffs at the border, but not manipulated tariffs that are used as a weapon. Tariffs that are stable and consistent and clear and create a level playing field to benefit all people around the world.

[00:53:08] Primarily the American people as we set the standard. Those are the solutions. Those are the answers. And some people would say, Sam, you're way too Pollyanna, buddy. And my response is, you can say that all you want. But what we've been doing for decades certainly isn't working. Because we've had rumors of wars and wars my whole life. I'm almost 58 years old, ladies and gentlemen. And we've had wars, literally, and rumors of wars undeclared, unconstitutionally involved, by the way. But for my whole life.

[00:53:38] When have we not been in a war or a rumor of war? When have we not spent way more money than is even calculable on military, industrial complex type activities? That seems to be our nature. We're a war-like people and it's got to stop somewhere. If we want to get different results, folks, you've got to do something different. I apologize for any audio problems. Sometimes on the road that happens. Thanks for your patience and understanding. But we've got two more hours in the can. I want you to have a happy 4th of July. I'm going to take a break and a long weekend.

[00:54:08] We'll group on Monday. We've got a lot going on, though. I'll tell you that right now. Thanks for being alongside with the ride. I'm Sam Bushman. Thanks to Andrew Thornbrook. Doing a great job for the Epoch Times. A lot of hard-hitting news the networks refuse to use on your radio, right? Tell the tale of truth. If you have problems listening, let us know. We will rectify those things and we'll spread the word far and wide the best we can. This is Sam Bushman with LibertyRoundtable.com. We are nationally syndicated by the Loving Liberty Radio Network.

[00:54:35] Download their iPhone or Android apps or listen online at LovingLiberty.net. Spread the word. Share the love. Have an incredible 4th of July. And God save the Republic of the United States of America.