Episode 72 Hour of Decision: What About Tariffs? Trump’s Liberation Day

Speaker 0: Look around you. Wrong rules the land while waiting justice sleeps. I saw in the congress and crossing the country, campaigning with Ron Paul. Tyranny rising, unspeakable evil, manifesting, devils lying about our heritage who want to enslave and replace us. But we are Americans with a manifest destiny to bring the destiny to bring the new Jerusalem of endless possibilities. But first, this fight for freedom. Be a part of it. But don't delay because this is the Hour of Decision. Hour of Decision with Lou Moore starts now. My name is Lou Moore. Welcome to the Hour of Decision. This afternoon, we are gonna talk about Trump's Liberation Day. We're gonna talk about tariffs and dispel some nonsense about so called free trade. We're gonna talk about globalism and about the true independence of The United States Of America. The push, the successful push for so called free trade in the twentieth and now the twenty first centuries, was strictly a creature of globalism, and more specifically, the rising influence of Fabian Socialism in our government. Fabian socialists, you might remember, want socialism as dreamed of by Karl Marx, but they use a gradual strategy and a march within the institutions. And folks, that's what we've suffered in The United States, and I've talked about that in innumerable episodes on our decision because it's the big underlining underline the big problem underneath just about everything that we are facing today. They have been working since the Wilson administration for a socialist world government. No borders. No national protection of economies of industries. And important for Americans, most importantly for Americans, the Fabians, including in America, have been working to level America's power and influence, the biggest impediment to the one world Marxist state. In other words, the power of this country and the potential of this country to be totally independent is a big problem, a big roadblock preventing the eventuation, this great reset now that Klaus Schwab calls it, to, initiate the one world Marxist state. A big part of that leveling process has been the hollowing out of America's industrial base. Has it been an accident, folks? That deindustrialization of America that dramatically increased with the NAFTA agreement with Mexico and was soon followed by the creation of the World Trade Organization, the WTO, which came out of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, which, folks, is a creature of the United Nations. And then there was the granting of China permanent normal trade relations or really most favored, trade relations on a permanent basis. And so, that's those three items right there explain a lot of the hollowing out that we've seen now in all of our lifetimes. So I want to explain what tariffs are and what they are not. Then I wanna talk about the history of the use of tariffs by The United States Of America, the very effective use of tariffs by the early Americans. Tariffs, folks, are not taxes. Tariffs are a fee that has to be paid by foreigners seeking to sell their products in our markets. They are not a pass through. In other in other words, if you add $10 well, let me put it this way because I wrote it down. If a foreigner is selling a $100 widget and the tariff levied is $10, the new price for the widget is not automatically $110. The widget has to sell for the market price. In other words, the maximum price that they can get to make the profit that they need to make, the at the price level that, the most sales will occur for this widget. If the sales are going to drop significantly when the new tariff is added and they it made the price a hundred and $10, the producer may have to choose to eat the cost of the tariff in order to maintain sales volume. And, of course, we've had a life example of this, folks, in the first Trump administration with a pretty significant amount of tariff that Trump put on the Chinese, and they ate it. They ate it. They didn't there weren't tremendous price increases under the Trump administration, just the opposite. We had the lowest inflation in years and certainly lower than the inflation we had and we suffered, under under Joe Biden, that we're still suffering under the residual effects of the policies of Joe Biden. So this tariff didn't raise prices at all. It's not an automatic that they won't raise prices, but it certainly is not an automatic that prices will grow go up in any one situation. Tariffs do, in fact, create an upward pressure on prices, on the prices of foreign goods, and, I mean, that's a fact. One purpose for tariffs is to protect domestic producers by making it more difficult for foreign producers to sell in our markets. So, in fact, we are seeking to crowd out foreign actors by what they would have to charge to make enough money to sell in our markets. It's also to force foreign importers to pay something for the market they are entering, particularly this market, the biggest, the richest, the best market in the world to sell products, The United States Of America. And in other words and in this market, domestic producers have to pay taxes. They have all kinds of considerations from the government, to even produce in this market. So it's, at minimum, very fair to have foreigners pay a tariff to equalize that situation. So they have to pay also for the maintenance of this fantastic market, which is The United States. And unlike the income tax, tariffs are wholly constitutional, folks. It's in the constitution the founders were well aware of the need at times to use tariffs, to raise revenue and to protect our industry. And that's another thing. Tariffs raise revenue. If they're gonna go the freight, if the Chinese or whoever are gonna keep trying to sell in our market with these tariffs, then the treasury gets funding. Tariffs go all the way back to the beginning of our country. They go back to the theorizing of our first secretary of the treasury, Alexander Hamilton, who served under George Washington. He was determined to cement our newly won independence by building our own industrial base in this country, so we wouldn't be dependent on the great industrial powers of Europe, particularly, so we would not be dependent on the greatest industrial power at that time, which were the people we just defeated, England. Washington backed him all the way on this, folks. Hamilton's Federalist Party, which became the Whig Party a little bit later, we're now talking political parties, and then which in large part after that became the Republican party, supported high tariffs to protect our industry. That's all the way through the nineteenth century folks and well into the twentieth century. The Republicans, which before that generally were the Whigs, and which before that was the party, that Hamilton started, well, they supported his idea of things, which was to build our industry and have a high tariff wall, as they call it, around this country to allow our domestic industries to, be created and to thrive. This was a defining issue early in the history of The United States, and it wasn't a small part, indeed. It was a big part of the conflict, in the war between the states. The North wanting tariffs because of the industrial base in New England. The South, dependent on trade, primarily with England of agricultural products, want didn't want restrictions on trade. And that's an oversimplification, but that's basically, I mean, that's basically correct. Thomas Jefferson's Democratic Republicans, this is, the this is the party that started in opposition to the party Hamilton started, who were later known as the Democrats. They're the oldest party folks. The Democrats go almost all the way back to Thomas Jefferson, and basically, they do if you count that period of time when they called themselves Democratic Republicans. They were great opponents of tariffs for economic and sectional reasons. I just mentioned the sectional region, reason, which is their base they had in the South. But, Democrats in other parts of the country opposed tariffs as well because of where they sat in the economy, and they weren't industrialists in most cases. That party was based primarily on agriculture, as I said. So the Whigs, who for a long time were the opponents of the Democrats, in the '8 early '18 hundreds, fostered what they called the American plan, Henry Clay. And that was plan was pretty much implemented in the last half of the nineteenth century by Abraham Lincoln and his successors. Remember I've talked about in earlier episodes where the Democrats were weak. And after the Civil War, the Democrats were weak, particularly at the presidential level and only elected one Democrat from the time of the Civil War until Wilson was elected in 1913. That was Grover Cleveland. So it was basically all Republicans, folks. And therefore, all through that time, the high tariff policy, the policy of building up infrastructure and industry, in The United States with a high tariff wall was the policy of The United States. And then at the end of the nineteenth century, William McKinley looking out and seeing how there was more international trade, how, there were, there was a lot of competition and a lot of activity among empires, the British Empire, the French Empire, what Germany was doing, what Russia was doing. He created even a larger tariff, the McKinley tariff, which was over 50% on average. Trump is talking about a 10% baseline, folks. William McKinley enacted, first as a senator and then as a pres as the president of The United States, a tariff that was over 50% on average. This coincided with an explosion in American industrial production, an explosion, folks. That's why this is such a great policy. It turned America into a powerhouse who was dependent on nobody, a truly independent country with people getting jobs and and and as things developed in the labor movement and whatnot, high paying jobs and powerful, powerful military, a powerful industrial sector. And it was the beginning of American dominance on this planet. Just telling you. And this is to the point that by the time we get to World War two, and and and I'm gonna talk in a minute about Wilson, he's no good, and Roosevelt, he's no good, But, nonetheless, they they just had not screwed with things enough by the beginning of World War two, and so America was the so called arsenal of democracy. We were producing thousands of planes, thousands of tanks. I think a 50 aircraft carriers a year. It's unbelievable. The production that was turned on at the beginning of World War two, and we're just talking a two or three year period. I mean, it was unbelievable. Most of the material for the Russians, all the material for the British, all the material for the Chinese, and all the material for our forces fighting on two fronts in World War two. This never could have happened, folks, without the policies that go back to the nineteenth century and back to Hamilton and to Lincoln and to McKinley. Just telling you. We were wholly dominant at that point in time. And that lasted pretty much into the nineteen eighties. It started going down because, I'll explain, the I mean, the, globalist, the powers that be were doing everything they could to level us, from the beginning of the twentieth, twentieth century, but it took a long time for it to take effect, and and negatively, in fact, affect our industry. And so into the nineteen eighties, we were still relatively speaking an industrial powerhouse. But now let me talk about the other side of this. But in 1913, Woodrow Wilson takes office, the first Democrat since Grover Cleveland, and, ostensibly, he was a Democrat. He ran as one. But in fact, he was our first Fabian socialist president. He made the first moves to end the tariff as a revenue source for America and as a means of protection for our industry. And, you know, his goal was to replace it with the thing he came up with, the income tax, a terrible idea, which he enacted in 1913 through a constitutional amendment. He made the first tariff reduction since McKinley. Now the as I said, the tariff was at 50%, so he didn't take it down to zero, not anything close, but he began the process of reducing the tariffs and taking down the tariff wall, as they called it, the wall of protection over our industry. And at this point, you could argue that Wilson was fulfilling the desire of honest Democrats, not plotting, scheming, Marxists, Fabian socialist, just Democrats that thought, you know, like Ron Paul thinks, like Rand Paul thinks, that tariffs should not exist or be very low, a a a matter of principle. You could argue that because Wilson was elected as a Democrat. You might call that the good reason for Wilson to do this, to lower tariffs, but the real reason, as my good friend Kent Snyder used to always say, who I worked with when I worked for doctor Paul, the real reason was, folding all the other elements with the trade issue into the move to one world government. The real reason was to begin the trade process, like they were beginning other processes to fold America into a one world government. The GOP returned to office after Wilson in the nineteen twenties and once again raised tariffs. The GOP at that time was still anti internationalist. They had defeated the League of Nations. We didn't join the League of Nations, which was promoting free trade, so called, from the first hour of its existence. They didn't, the Republicans in the twenties didn't let us, as a country join the League of Nations and enacted the Smoot Hawley tariff to reenact to, again, raise a solid tariff wall around our industries. The Fabian Socialist Scholars that have, unfortunately, poisoned almost all of our higher education and their imitators in the colleges have blamed this Smoot Hawley tariff for the Great Depression that hit in 1930. Rather than looking at the effort of international bankers at that time to seriously inflate the US dollar way out of the bounds where it should have been inflated, in other words, creating more dollars, making each one of them worth less than they were before. And and the reason they did this is at that time, folks, the House of Morgan, the House of Rothschild, and others of these international bankers were trying to prop up the British Empire and Britain. Britain was going down. These free trade policies in Britain slowly but surely were disintegrating, their industrial base and their empire, And, the international bankers tried to prop Britain up by keeping the dollar and the pound on the same basis, but to do that, they had to start literally destroying the dollar by printing too many of them. So you get to 1929 and then the Federal Reserve. We put the Federal Reserve in because they're really smart people that will always know what to do to keep our economy strong, and they take 40% of the money supply out in just like a four month period in 1929. Well, guess what happened? We went into a depression. I mean, 40% of the money disappearing? Unbelievable. The situation was so out of whack that they made this move, which plunged plunged us into depression. This was what was now an established pattern of doing, what international finance wanted. America no longer doing what's the best for America, but our leaders, our finance leaders, our political leaders doing what's the best for the international bankers and for the one world government project, to do what JP Morgan wanted, to do what the Jewish banking houses wanted, the House of Rothschild, Alize Affairs, Jacob Schiff, Coon Loeb and Company, the Warburgs, all of those people. And by protecting faltering England and the city of London to the detriment of the interest of The US, they were pursuing a policy that the bankers wanted. And this is exactly what we did in World War one, folks, for the same reason, to prop Britain up, in this war. That's why we got into World War one, that we had no business to be in that war. There was no reason for America to be in that war. And it would be exactly what we did in World War two, in my humble opinion. But this is starting to be a departure from the main topic, which is Liberation Day and this new terror policy of Donald Trump and some background about it. So I'll get back to it. So world government institutions started on this planet with the League of Nations. And along with the formation of the League of Nations was the proclamation. It's in Wilson's Fourteen Points. You've heard of that before, that there should be free trade free trade throughout the world, and let me define free trade for a moment, folks. It's that ideal state that libertarians love that's only found on blackboards, or smart boards or whiteboards, today, where, in a mythical universe, everybody is able to sell goods anywhere they want on the planet, move their factories and move any part of their factories, anywhere on the planet and sell them to anybody they want. Incomplete individual freedom. Has never happened, not even for a moment, and it ain't gonna start tomorrow. I assure you of that. But that is what free trade, is supposed to be. The desire of our elites to participate in these various free trade, offensives, conferences, plans, initiatives, began, and I'm talking about the elites here in The United States, with the formation of the Council on Foreign Relations. The Council on Foreign Relations, the CFR, was started by Colonel Edward Mandel House because we failed folks. We failed to go into the League of Nations, so they started the CFR to penetrate and the business round tables to penetrate business communities primarily all over America at the national level, but also at the regional level. So the elites, anywhere in the country, were getting the full dose of internationalist propaganda, and it actually worked very, very well. The CFR has been the biggest influence on business in The US to, support this suicidal global trade regime that we have been under. So you get to FDR now, Republicans still supporting the tariff wall, but the re Roosevelt takes over in the depression, and he immediately has a conference over in London. Countries from all over the world pledging to reduce tariffs. He then starts a boondoggle called the Import Export Bank in the early thirties, and he got congress, An earlier version of the trade, adjustment act that John f Kennedy got in the sixties, he got a bill in the thirties to give him sole power to raise or lower tariffs by as much as 50%. You know, another example, I didn't bring it up in my FDR series, but just another example of dictatorial power going to FDR. And, of course, his goal is not to use it to protect our industry or raise tariffs, but to get rid of tariffs. And, he began, entering into what they call called reciprocal trade agreements. You are listening to the hour of decision. My name is Lou Moore, and we're gonna be back to talk more about the history of tariffs and the tariff situation today with Donald Trump right after the news. Against tyranny and corruption for Christ and constitution. The hour of decision with Lou Moore starts now. Welcome back to hour of decision. My name is Lou Moore. We've been talking about tariffs, folks, about tariffs, the mystical, fanciful idea of free trade, about the idea of America being independent, really, not just on paper, but really independent of other forces in the world because we are not dependent on other people to for our way of life, which is the way we have we're headed, and we're most of the way there. But, anyway, we've had an intervention from Donald Trump, so let's talk a little bit more about it. So I've been, recounting the history that led us to the sorry state we're in right now and led us to the necessity of Donald Trump to take the dramatic action that he took on April on Liberation Day. So, Roosevelt, one hundred percent a globalist, one hundred percent a Fabian socialist as I recounted in the last five episodes of this program. And, of course, he was all for free trade, but very carefully moving it, into the, picture there with the American public. But at the end of World War two, between the, effect, of the war and the effects of over 20 of the CFR's, propaganda blitz on not just national business people, folks, but regionally important business people, people in every state around the state capital where they would have these business roundtable meetings and local meetings of the council on foreign relations. They were, penetrating the business leadership of this country and winning them over to their globalist ideas. And at the same time, there was also the weariness around the war and the fanciful idea that was spread by the globalist at the end of World War two that this war was so terrible that we needed a world government. I mean, just flat out, they're getting people to buy this idea. Unbelievable. They really were. A lot of people in the public and, of course, part of the world governance is free trade throughout the world. That's a big part of it. That's why we're dealing with this, folks, because we have the globalist all over us right now on every front, and this is one of the major fronts in that war. So the public was penetrated with some of these ideas. Business leadership was penetrated, with these ideas, and that filtered down into not just more of the Democrats, than than we're already thinking that way, but into the Republicans and the Republican leadership in Congress. And we begin to have this bipartisan consensus on big government, on more and more big government is good on foreign policy, and foreign policy didn't, included free trade. I don't mention that enough when I mentioned this consensus. I mentioned it almost every episode because it is so important to understand why we didn't have any leadership that could achieve the presidency until Trump, both parties co opted by this so called consensus. And that included this consensus around international institutions, international trade agreements that were supposed to give us free trade. And so, after the war, most Republicans were on board when the general agreement on tariffs and trade was signed and passed, which was part, folks, part of the UN. And debt, the general agreement on tariffs and trade, that was the beginning of what they called these trade rounds or these trade conferences they would have every few years, which were building up, leading up to, the World Trade Organization's founding, which occurred in 1995. They these rounds happened. I mean, the this whole regime was conceived of by Roosevelt's people. The, these programs began to be enacted, all of the world government programs, the UN, IMF, all of them under Truman because Roosevelt passed away. Then Eisenhower had a big trade round. Kennedy, big time with Kennedy. See Douglas Dillon of Dillon Reed and Company, a major downtown international banking firm, Wall Street firm. He was Kennedy's secretary of treasury. And even before he joined the Kennedy administration, he was pretty much leading The US, effort to, achieve this World Trade Organization. And so there was a big round just before Kennedy took office then one after. A big round under Ronald Reagan, the Uruguay round, one of the most important ones. And, by '95, the WTO. But there was a there were reasons for this long lag time between, the beginning of the world government institutions in 1946, '40 '7, GATT signed in '47, and the, World Trade Organization's inception not till 1995. And, you know, politics enters into these things, folks. Labor was a big part of the Democrat Coalition. And labor at that time, folks, were mostly trade unions. The, United Auto Workers were a huge union. The Machinist, a huge union. Teamsters, a huge union. And many of these others that were involved with our industrial base, And they didn't want anything to do with this free trade, totally against it, and their leadership was honest that way. But more and more, they got co opted into this internationalist system, co opted, corrupted by the international bankers just as the Republicans did. And, and so, over time, the big sellout happened with labor and with the Democrats, but it took a while. So the Democrats were pushing this because of the Fabian influence, but at the same time, there was resistance in their base to what they were doing. And then on the right, there was a rising number of conservatives aware of the overall danger of the UN and world governance bodies as a threat to our national sovereignty, the Goldwater movement, the John Birch Society, and then just the rise of the conservative movement in general. And in general, these folks were not fond of these international agreements or this whole free trade business. I was told that, Ronald Reagan, in particular, despite mouthing support for free trade, allowing the Uruguay Uruguay round to go forward and even promoting, at one time, I hate to say, Ronald Reagan, a North American Union. Despite those, facts, he didn't want the WTO to be formed on his watch. He knew the dynamite that could be politically, with his own base. But you get to 1995 and slippery Bill Clinton. He was happy to do the deed, and I have to say, unfortunately, the GOP leadership led for most of that time by Newt Gingrich. And in 1995, it was Newt Gingrich, who I've worked for, who I like as a person and who I admire, his leadership skills in many, aspects. Not happy that he was, working with the globalist team on this one. And, you know, and before that, we've talked about the trilateral commission, which was an effort to do regional things because it be had be difficult. It had become difficult to do international things in the trade area and other areas. And, the first spawn well, there's a European Union. I guess the second spawn of the trilateral commission was NAFTA. NAFTA passed in '92, and we got the WTO in '95. Clinton in by that time. Bush was the president when NAFTA was passed. There were some Republican resistance, some Democrat resistance, but plenty of Republicans voted for it and plenty of Democrats voted for it. Then you get WTO. And then after WTO, you let China in the WTO, which was a necessity to allow our government to give China permanent normal trade relations. There were a lot of right wingers, folks. A lot of anti communist did not wanna give China free access to our market with their cheap labor. Duh. People could see that was gonna be a real problem. A lot of people saw it, but the globalist prevailed at PNTR, as it was called, was passed in, I believe, February. One of the biggest battles, that occurred on Capitol Hill on the at the time I was there. And, my my boss was a holdout and in fact voted against it. God bless congressman Jack Metcalfe, one of the greatest Americans who ever lived. And, big battle. We lost that battle. We lost the battle for, the w on the WTO. Ron Paul led that battle on the floor of the house, and a lot of Democrats weaseled out of supporting it with us after they said they would because they were weasels and because they were bought off by the international bankers. But I digress a little bit. So, after we granted these things to China, PNTR access, membership of the WTO, PNTR status as a trade partner with The US. The huge, huge trade deficits with China ensued very quickly and just got bigger and bigger and bigger and more and more and more industry left the shores of America. An absolute tragedy, folks. And as stupid as it could possibly be on the policy level because the Chinese, what did they do with this huge trade deficit? They built their military with it. I went to a business roundtable meeting in in San Francisco, in Seattle. They had lobbyists from Boeing there, from some of these other big corporations. And I asked this woman who had just given a presentation on US China trade as if there was a ton of trade going to China. I said, is it true? I've heard that China's building their military off of this trade, surplus they have with us. She looked at me. She said, absolutely, it's true. These people didn't even care, folks. It was so horrid. Horrid. We have had horrid leadership in this country from our elites, not just at the very top, but all the way down to the congressional level, all the way down to all the different regions, important economic, regions in this country in Seattle and Los Angeles and, New York and through the Rust Belt. Terrible leadership. Sold out leadership. Either wanting to believe the fairy tale or knowing damn well it was a lie and being involved with prosecuting it anyway. And so, China building the military and then having plenty of money to coop elites all over the world, particularly in the third world, big incursion in Panama. I went to Panama in 2,000 folks on a congressional delegation, tour to tour the Panama Canal, and there were already 100,000 Chinese in Panama, a Chinese newspaper, and, of course, Hutchinson Wampoa had, purchased the rights to control both ends of the canal. And, I mean, they're moving so fast. It's unbelievable. They just got this trade relationship with us, and they're moving, moving, moving. Lots of resources And and, of course, these are industries in China. These big outfits in China, they're all connected to the government. When you are you can be a private firm or whatever in China, you have to be an agent of the government, period. That there's no exception to that. They all work as one, and they have been working against us day and night. So that they spent all this money co opting elites, moving the getting these port concessions all over the world. Hutchison, Wampoa, and other companies working under the leadership of the Chinese Communist Party. And then this belt and road initiative all over the world, basically, co opting, bribing leaders in Africa and Asia, and, doing things for them and then putting them at hawk to the Chinese for these infrastructure projects. Terrible. Terrible. All this happening, and we allowed all of it to happen by giving them this trade advantage. Meantime, America's industrial capacity greatly hollowed out. I remember watching the debate on television on CNN between Ross Perot, who everybody made fun of, and Al Gore, the nitwit Al Gore himself, and he's defending the NAFTA agreement. Oh, we're gonna have so many jobs. It's gonna the growth will be tremendous. And folks, this is another p value I have. I have listened to Democrats, but mostly to Republicans in most of my political life saying over and over again every election cycle that some new trade initiative was gonna build all these jobs for America and give us all this growth. A total lie. Do any of them are any of them held accountable? Is Mitch McConnell held accountable for the lies for all of the lies he told us? It's disgraceful beyond belief, folks. Beyond belief. So our capacity was hollowed out. And Ross Perron, this debate, he talked about the great sucking sound of jobs leaving America, and that is exactly what happened. And pretty much what it sounded like just gone all over America. Shameless politicians that we've had to deal with. You know, to the point that that our navy can finish barely one ship a year, while the Chinese are cranking them out by the dozens every year. The rising income inequality that the Marxists are complaining about. You know, folks, and it's not just inequality. I'm old enough to remember my neighborhood in Redondo Beach, California. No woman worked on my block. Not a single woman on my block had to work, and we were all living in new houses. The houses were built in 1960, and I lived there for seven years. Quite a nice house, not fancy. Three bedroom houses. But all these blue mostly blue collar people living, in these houses. Four or five kids each. The wife doesn't have to work. We have been looted, folks. I hope you understand that, you young people, you younger people. The idea of two people having to work in a relationship to have a middle class life was crazy when I was a little kid. But all these trade agreements, one by one, all of the taxes, all of the spending, all of the waste of our resources by the government destroyed to a great degree. The family, the inner cities around this country, you know, the whole Midwest, the so called Rust Belt, tragic folks, inexcusable and tragic. So by the grace of God, we got Donald Trump. And, you know, the Republicans Republicans are still seething under the surface. Most of them in the senate and in the house. They're still getting the money for their campaigns. They're not dependent on the base. They're dependent on the international corporations and other places where they get their funding that all want them to be a little good little internationalist. And there's, you know, they're holding their fire right now because Trump is so popular, particularly with the base, but they're not happy. And the Democrats, total sellouts. Total sellouts. The party of the working people. What a load of crap. What a load of crap. They've totally sold out their base for the Soros money and the great Marxist cause. And then we have the libertarian minded in the GOP like Rand Paul, the deciding vote against Trump's, initiative, his, tariff against Canada. We had the three predictable rhinos voted against Trump, but then JD Vance could have broke the tie, but Rand had to get in there. And, you know, I am sorry. I like Rand. I knew Rand. I, worked with him when I worked for doctor Paul. I love doctor Paul. But they are wrong about these terrorist folks. They're just wrong. So let's look for a moment at the free trade argument versus the protectionist argument. So the free trade argument, enunciated by David Ricardo and other economists, is where you what you do is, you know, it's all on a blackboard, and you go in production, you go to where each element of production is the cheapest all over the world, and labor being the most ex you know, the most expensive one. You go to the place where labor is the cheapest, and you go to the cheapest place to assemble the goods, and then you're free to sell them to anywhere anybody, anywhere in the world. And that they'll benefit from these goods that will be cheap and allowing for more expenditures to further economic growth in other areas of the economy. That's a such a great argument on a blackboard. But trade, folks, is political, and trade is any world full of nations, period, which is why the founders of our country specifically put the right of congress to protect our industries in the constitution with tariffs and to use tariffs as a means to, of income. We still have the best market in the world to sell goods, our own market. Other countries have been mouthing free trade at the insistence of the globalist just to take advantage of getting into our market and then denying us access into their market. So there's no there hasn't been any free trade, folks. I mean, Canada has been screwing us left and right for years with lumber and all a lot of other things. The but the globalist purpose of free for free trade is not this great, paradise that David Ricardo described that libertarians think is gonna happen someday. It's decentralized power and the regulation of everything in a one world government, including trade. And secondly, to level The United States, the one national powerhouse that stands in the way of their ultimate goals of world domination, period. And there are other elements other than just the trading back and forth of goods. There's all these countries that cheat with their currencies, which involves the trade a trade transaction. And then, like China, stealing the technology of their trading partners, which they've done in abundance, costing us a couple or $300,000,000,000 a year, 4 years, ever since the world trade agreement, occurred. So, you know, the you know, people say the other thing is is that they say, well, protectionism thwarts a competition and industries bribed the government to have, to be protected, and then they're inefficient and sloppy. I mean, if we were a little tiny tiny country, that might be true, folks. But we're in a big country in the best market in the world. And if we get rid of a a lot of these regulations, which Trump is doing, and make a situation where people can access the market. If if industries are getting lazy because they have a per a protectionist wall around them, new companies can emerge in our market because we have such a big market. So I don't see that as being a big problem. And then we cannot sacrifice our practical independence. This is the most important thing, folks, on the altar of free trade. We're not making any medications here. We're totally vulnerable right there. Our steel industry, we're vulnerable. We can't we're not produce we can't produce military hardware to any level at all. We're dependent on all these other countries. That means we're not independent, folks. We've gotta restore our practical independence, and that's what Donald Trump is trying to do. And, and he's saying minimally, we need to reciprocate on the terrorists that are being charged against us. That's not even really a protectionist policy. That's that's just trying to level the playing field of trade. Something every politician has talked about half of my life, but none of them have done a damn thing about it until Trump. But, really, we need to protect and foster our own industry and our own independence. And thank God, Trump is calling for a 54% tariff on China, Forty Six Percent on Vietnam. They are also communist. They killed a lot of our people, and a minimum of a 10% tariff across the board. I am all for it. God bless Donald Trump. Folks, if you wanna know more about me, wanna find out about my book, go to lumoore.com. You are listening to the hour of decision on Liberty News Radio, and I promise to get to, the Kennedy papers, and I promised to get to a review of, RFK's book, which is fantastic on Anthony Fauci, and I'm still gonna get there. But today, I felt like I needed to talk about this issue of our sovereignty, our nationalism, and tariffs. My name is Lou Moore. Thank you for joining me today. See you later.