uch support is that you put 2,000 people in jail for political reasons. You're trying to jail the president for political reasons and Peter Navarro is still in jail. So revenge is going to be at the top of the menu. Revenge is at the top of the menu and it belongs there because that's what justice looks like. Justice looks like honest revenge.

Who else needs to talk about let's not have revenge? Did anybody else have to talk about that? Do you remember Jimmy Carter saying oh don't do revenge on me? Do you know why we didn't have to do revenge on Jimmy Carter? Because there was no reason. Do you know why we didn't need revenge on Bill Clinton? There was no reason. There was no reason. Do you know why nobody's ever talked about revenge before ever? There was no reason. If he's talking about don't do revenge it's because he created the whole situation. Nobody's going to be talking about revenge unless something really really big and terrible happened and something big and terrible is happening right now. Peter Navarro is still in prison. No you let Peter Navarro out of prison and the other 2,000 people. You drop this stupid lawfare charges and we'll stop talking about revenge. But right now I want to see hundreds of Democrats in jail. I want to see hundreds of Democrats in jail minimum and we do have the goods. I mean completely within the legal system. I recommend no actions outside the legal system. Yeah no no vigilante anything. Don't do that. But yes the justice system has plenty of evidence of crimes at the highest level. So yes revenge revenge revenge revenge. And every time you say don't do it you remind us why we need to because nobody else needs to even talk that way. If you're talking somebody out of getting revenge, revenge is called for because it isn't even in the conversation. It's just not part of the conversation until you fuck up really badly and you have Peter Navarro is still in prison. Peter Navarro is still in prison.

Remember the Elmo and yes you can build a future on revenge. It's called the justice system.

Speaking of justice, apparently the amuse account on X tells us that there's something called the 65 Project and it's apparently mostly to cancel anybody who was a lawyer who's trying to help Trump and it's run by David Brock and it's funded by George Soros and it's as Amuse says an all-out war on the Sixth Amendment to the Constitution. Revenge revenge.

All right. America First Legal that's the Republican-oriented group that's trying to create a counterbalance in the legal system and is trying to use legal means to get justice in a variety of ways that Democrats have tried to take it away from you. But there's this new story that frankly I do not understand. There's something about a new document that's been uncovered, some Obama order from his days that's been kind of secret that says that there should be something about keeping copies of all the classified stuff on a server. And the argument doesn't make sense to me but maybe it does to you. So I've asked for a clarification but here's what it sounds like. It sounds like America First Legal is saying that Trump's legal problems with the Mar-a-Lago documents are not a problem because there are also copies of them that the government never lost. They've always had the copies.

Now I don't understand that. Do you? Why would that make any difference if they have copies? I assume they had copies. Didn't you always assume they had copies? Would the government in 2024 not have a digital copy of everything important that came across the government's desks? I mean I just assume so. So I don't understand the importance of this but America First Legal is playing it as very important. So I've asked them to explain it. Give me the dummy's version of it. I don't get it. Like why is this important? How's it have anything to do with anything? So if they come up with that I'll talk about it again but at the moment all I can say is that people who know more than I do about the law think there's an important thing that happened and I have no idea what it is.

Block the FBI from arresting dangerous Iranians. Yeah that's a boring story but I see what you're saying. So there's some story about John Kerry blocking the arrest of some known Iranian bad guys because he was trying to get a deal done with Iran. Is that the biggest crime in the world? Here's the thing that might be just realpolitik meaning that if you're this close to getting a deal that's a really big deal maybe you don't arrest those people on Tuesday. You maybe get the deal, arrest him a few weeks later. So I don't know how real that story is. It's not that far from something I would think is normal business but I guess I'd wait for Dan Bongino to set me straight on that. So I guess I don't have enough of a hook into that story to care about it.

There's a report that the US and the European Union are moving toward an agreement for a massive loan for Ukraine but their clever technique is they're going to use Russian assets frozen in the West as collateral. Here's the thing I've been saying that our form of government is not a democracy. Of course it was designed to be a republic you know federal republic with democratic principles but it's really not that either. It probably hasn't been since the 50s. We are essentially a criminal organization and colonizers. We're basically the board trying to take everybody's assets and apparently we've always been that way. That's what America is now.

If that sounds like a criticism here's the twist. I don't think there's a better form of government because if you don't coordinate your government with your big capitalist entities somebody else will and they'll be your daddy. So unfortunately if you're not the baddest criminal in the criminal world you're going to get dead. So being the baddest of the criminals might be the best form of government maybe because you know I think democracy has its issues too if you let dumb people make big decisions. So I don't know. But when I see a story like this it just reminds you that we're a criminal organization trying to steal Putin's stuff.

You know the Mike Benz take is that Ukraine is really just an energy play and that Hunter Biden is part of that with Burisma. That's why Hunter was part of Burisma. All part of the big energy play to steal the energy from Russia. And since we couldn't get all of their energy we're going to settle for keeping their assets that we could freeze. I mean I get that there's a war going on but we're prosecuting the war like we're just criminals. We're just looking to steal it. It's hard to not see it as just a criminal act against another criminal. And again if it sounds like a criticism believe it or not it's not. We seem to be a very effective criminal organization because we've overthrown lots of governments. We've got access to lots of resources in other places and maybe it's not working out so well in Ukraine but you know it seems to be proving the point.

But to me, so Putin has said that he's willing to negotiate a ceasefire along current lines of who owns what now. I say there's no chance of negotiating until Trump gets there because the Biden play it was never about stopping a war. They're not really concerned with ending war. They're only concerned in stealing Russia's energy game and if they haven't done that and they think they still have a chance they're not going to negotiate. So this basically they're going to save the negotiations for Trump who as far as I know does not have a massive interest in a big energy deal or stealing things in Ukraine. So he could just say yeah let's just end this.

When Trump says he could end it in a day I would bet against it but I wouldn't bet against ending it in a month because I think he can get it done in a month. And that ladies and gentlemen brings us to the conclusion of my prepared remarks.

It all comes down to race and religion somebody says. Does it? Trump didn't let Zelensky rip up the Minsk peace accords. Biden did and that was the start of the war. You think that's what you think?

So all right I had another topic but I think too controversial. I think we overestimated Russia's willingness to negotiate. Creating a, well here's what I think we should do. I would love to see Trump do a grand deal where we just work out our differences with the three superpowers and just agree to rule the world in peace and they can have their part we'll have our part. You know I realize that Taiwan's a problem but at this point we are moving our chip facilities out of there and I think Taiwan knows that in the long run there's really no way that they could become, they can't be independent in the long run. It's too dangerous. Could you imagine China having a major ally in Cuba and being right at our doorstep? And I don't know it just seems to me that we're fighting history if we're trying to keep Taiwan out of Chinese control.

Here's what I think we should do instead. They had a good plan. I think what we should do instead is create a hundred-year plan. Do the Hong Kong plan. Say you know what why fight history? In a hundred years sometime within that hundred years Taiwan will be China but if you wait a hundred years you don't have to worry about microchips because something will be very different by then and it won't be depending on Taiwan. So I think if we said how about we just agree now that there's a hundred-year plan and in the hundred years Taiwan will figure out what its role will be. So there'll be future negotiations of does it operate a little bit independently compared to the mainland? Nobody knows what the mainland would even look like in a hundred years. You could have a democracy in China in a hundred years. Anything could happen.

So I think you do a hundred-year plan and just take the violence off the table because if you're President Xi and you know you got it back you just won't be alive when it happens. That's a big win. And if we can take that off the table then we can deal with China at a much much better level.

Hong Kong Island was ceded to the UK in perpetuity. I don't believe that. I thought it was a 99-year lease. Hong Kong had a 50-year plan that the CCP removed. Yeah well it's a risk but here's the thing. Hong Kong didn't really have a chance of staying independent forever. Taiwan doesn't have a chance of staying independent forever. If it were our hemisphere we would insist that we had that much control and I don't know I just wouldn't fight history.

Many think it was a deal. So I'm seeing people say that the narrative of Hong Kong is all fake and that they did not have a deal to give it back. I'm doubting your framing of that. I think it was a 99-year lease and when it ended the UK gave it back. So but I will note that there are people who are saying that's not true.

Yeah a managed democracy with an authoritarian streak. The one thing I don't see is China looking like they want to control other countries except economically of course but Taiwan's special. So I think something will happen there one sooner or later it's going to happen. So I think it's a deal that Trump could make. I think he could say look how about Russia you making your money China you making your money we'll make our money and let's play. I think you could pull that off.

I suspect that the biggest reason we can't get along with Russia and China is that we can't stop doing covert things to each other continuously because we're sure that the other is doing it too. So I know I'll tell you that the theory that China is doing everything it can to stop reproduction in America is looking better and better. I don't think that they're that clever but maybe.

All right that's all I got for you. And on YouTube and Rumble and X I'm going to take a few minutes with just the subscribers on Locals and I'll see the rest of you tomorrow. Locals stay with me. The rest of you bye for now. Thanks for joining.