Radio Show Hour 1 – 01/23/2025

[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 that I wish refused to use no doubt starts now. This is the broadcast for January the 23rd in the year of our Lord, 2025. This is Hour 1 of 2. The goal always is to protect life, liberty, and property, to promote God, family, and country,

[00:00:42] the news on your radio and the traditions of our founding fathers. 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. I've got Pete Sepp with me. He's president of the National Taxpayers Union. NTU is the voice of the American taxpayer, ladies and gentlemen, mobilizing elected officials and citizens to work together for tax relief and reform. NTU.org.

[00:01:11] National Taxpayers Union. Pete, welcome, sir. Always great to be here. All right. A few controversial issues, but I hope to not be controversial about them. First off, they say this, the plows can't be everywhere at once. Warmer temperatures will bring some relief to Americans from Texas to Florida following the deadly ice storms. They got ice and snow storms. They can't even get the plows out there. Hopefully warmer weather will help.

[00:01:41] Is this global warming, Pete? I mean, I don't even really get this. Well, the climate changes all the time. I think we can acknowledge that fact. Sure. When we use the term climate change, it means it's variable. Storms happen a lot. Are they increasing in frequency and intensity? According to some climatologists, yes.

[00:02:05] One thing is for sure, from a taxpayer perspective, the damage that these storms cause is getting more expensive. And there are policy choices we've made that make them more expensive and needlessly time consuming and harmful to people. When you think of the fires out in California, I know that President Trump and Governor Newsom are in a running insult battle over who's at fault.

[00:02:33] But there are fundamental questions to ask of, well, did we have the right resources in place at the state level to respond? Were the water supplies adequate? So on and so forth. To your point about controversy, Sam, it should never be controversial to ask those questions on behalf of taxpayers. Maybe tone down the rhetoric and the insults.

[00:02:57] But at the core, we need to ask these questions so that people and tax dollars are not put in harm's way the next time. And that's the same with the winter storms occurring across the South and the Southwest. Is that going to be a thing that governments are going to have to deal with more frequently over the next 20 or 30 years? Probably. Probably. And so that means making contingency plans.

[00:03:25] So the next time around, we have something better to respond with. I believe in a principle, Pete, called a no blame autopsy. And I don't know if you've read there's business books that highlight this principle. But what we do is we say we're going to come to the table. We're going to dig into what went wrong. Factually, we're not going to point at people. We're going to point at what went wrong. And then we're going to put a plan together to make sure that it doesn't happen again. I mean, isn't that what we ought to do? Yes. That's how businesses work.

[00:03:53] Many businesses, not all. But that's always how governments should work. Otherwise, we keep repeating the same mistakes over and over again. And guess who's at the end of the line of all of those mistakes? Taxpayers. The amount of money the federal government spends year after year on disaster responses runs in the tens of billions of dollars. And it's getting worse.

[00:04:19] You know, some of the things we need to examine going forward are building regulations. Are we going to have more resilient structures to withstand storms? Are we going to subsidize building in hazardous areas? Governments do that at the local level. And they just keep cleaning up the mess every time destruction happens. Stop doing that. Yeah, maybe move to higher ground.

[00:04:48] One of the things I like about a no-blame autopsy, too, is this idea where, you know what, people will take responsibility oftentimes if they don't have their, you know, if you're not pointing the finger at them. If they don't feel under the gun, they'll be like, yeah, you know what, I really blew it on this one. And people can admit that if we're not attacking them. And so what we need to do is say, hey, let's share responsibility. Let's be transparent. Let's make sure we don't repeat it. Let's make sure that we, you know, find a way forward that's productive, that solves problems.

[00:05:17] Another controversial topic, and there's so many of them, but I want to take the controversy out of them because I think the solution is when there's not controversy. Okay? Here's the second one of interest, Pete. New York Times complains that labeling Mexican drug cartels, terrorist organizations will hurt the U.S. economy. The Gateway pundit with this piece, what do you think? Is it going to hurt the U.S. economy to say, hey, these guys are bad guys?

[00:05:45] It seems awfully strange. And I imagine if you went through a pretty tortuous line of reasoning, you could say, well, the sanctions might touch organizations or individuals who really aren't involved with the cartels. Well, that's an argument to take a look at the laws themselves.

[00:06:05] And as you said earlier, Sam, in a blame-free environment, saying, okay, we need to fine-tune these things so that innocent people aren't hurt by them. But to come out with a controversial statement like that and have very little backup for it seems very strange right now, almost like, well, if Trump's doing it, it must be wrong. Now, it seems to me that we just need to say this.

[00:06:35] Hey, we don't want criminals, drugs, rapists, murders. We don't want that on our streets. I don't care who we are. Now, let's find the best ways to make sure that we have a safe society for we the people. How can that be controversial? Yeah, it shouldn't. Public safety is one of the things that taxpayers expect to be a core function of government. You know, there's plenty of room to disagree or agree on the appropriate level of funding, the powers that you give law enforcement.

[00:07:05] Fine. But it is considered to be a basic constitutional function of the federal government. And most state foundational documents, their constitutions, have something in there about the duty for public safety. That is. I mean, after all, if you don't protect my life, liberty and property and yours and everybody else's, regardless of our opinions, our thoughts, our beliefs are. Okay. Then what on earth is the value of government if we don't do that, Pete? That's right.

[00:07:34] And, you know, it also makes many, many other depredations on our Constitution and taxpayers possible. If we don't focus on those core questions.

[00:07:46] It allows governments to exceed their authority into many other functions because they take their eye off the ball on things like public safety, on patents, on all of the enumerated powers in the Constitution that our government used to be limited to performing. Now it's taken kind of as a license to say, well, we'll go from there and see what other things we can do. No.

[00:08:16] Constitutions exist generally to limit what governments can do and guarantee the freedoms of people everywhere to do everything else. And they're replete with checks and balances, ladies and gentlemen, for that very purpose. That's why that's one of the greatest peaceful solutions we still have at our fingertips. This check and balance idea. It's critical. We need to be involved at every step of the way.

[00:08:42] NTU.org is your partner, National Taxpayers Union, all the way from the general government all the way down to your local dog catcher. You know what? They can help you understand how to bring tax relief, how to have tax accountability. We all support the proper role of taxes. Let's just make sure they're not out of control. And right now they are absolutely out of control. I think basically stopping the drug cartels will actually improve the economy.

[00:09:06] That's my humble opinion to which I'm entitled because, hey, the more safe, stable, environmental reality you have for business, the better things are, Pete. Yeah, that's right. Businesses tend to thrive when they're not worried about being shaken down or having their property damaged.

[00:09:25] I mean, those are important considerations, as are taxes and the ability of government regulations to be restrained and practical and understandable by the folks that these regulations intend to reach. All right.

[00:09:42] The next controversial topic is this headline says the Senate plans to work overtime to approve Donald Trump's cabinet, including nights, weekends, skipping recesses. That's according to the Senate Majority Leader, John Thune. I think the guy I don't mean to be offensive here, but come on, that's clown talk, folks. Listen to me. They say it takes only a majority vote to approve nominees.

[00:10:10] And so Republicans control the chamber, 53 to 47. And so then they say, hey, they can only afford to lose three Republicans and still get something passed. That's not true. That's not true at all because Democrats can join, too. And so you can't just look at it like that. You've got to look at it and say, how do we take the controversy out? How do we stand for what's good for America and articulate it in a way that's non-controversial, nonpartisan, non-divisionary?

[00:10:37] OK, and then this only one person has been confirmed since they say Trump took office on Monday. So it's been three days and they've only got one person done. But if you really go back, the Senate started on the fourth. OK, these people have known the people Trump's been putting up. They could have been vetting them and talking about them and they could basically have passed a bunch of them if they had tried. Right. They've literally wasted from the sixth or the fourth, I guess they started to the 23rd. So literally like 20 days.

[00:11:07] They could have confirmed these people and got it done. Now, I don't even know the value of bringing them to a committee. And then after they get released from committee, they go to the whole Senate. Hey, let's just have straight up and down votes right now on these people. Line them up and vote them up or down. You could say, well, Sam, we got to debate them for fine. You know what? Have a half hour debate for each one. If you got an eight hour day, half hour debate and a vote, 45 minutes apiece. When you can get like what, eight of them done by the end of the day? I mean, come on now. Am I crazy, Pete? Well, not crazy.

[00:11:36] I think the process by which nominations occur. Yeah. OK. You need to allow for the deliberation, maybe even more than the hour per person you suggest, Sam. But here's the other thing. As you said, the nominees for many of these positions were known barely a week after the election.

[00:11:56] And so the committees in charge of these nominations had several weeks of research time available to them with their full investigative powers to start checking out these nominees. They certainly started that early with the defense secretary nominee. But others like Commerce and Treasury and the rest. I don't know what happened. Here's the other thing, Sam.

[00:12:22] Sean Duffy, for example, the transportation secretary nominee. He was approved in a House committee vote unanimously. Unanimously. So, OK, he would take, assuming every Democrat and every Republican on that committee agreed that his nomination should go through. Well, you could have a voice vote in both chambers in less than 10 minutes and clear that nomination. And that's my point.

[00:12:51] I agree that some research needs to be done. But, see, that research needs to be done. OK, when I talk about 20 days since the Senate took office, I'm not talking about, you know, you could say, well, Sam, we've had five days to research these one guy, you know, these three or four or five or six people. You know, we've had time to debate these people in the next five days. And now we've got five people approved. OK, I'll go there. I'm not trying to be just crazy. But one person in 20 days? Yeah. How many people do we need to approve, Pete?

[00:13:22] Oh, well, in addition to cabinet level appointees where you've got roughly a dozen, you have subcabinet appointees, some of which need approval. For example, IRS commissioner. Yeah. So how many total? Just a general number. I mean, I don't need exact. I'm just kind of saying. Oh, I would say somewhere between 60 and 100. All right. So let's say you have 100. And let's say that you get 20 done a day. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. You get one done in 20 days. Yeah.

[00:13:52] We're going to be at this until the next, you know, House of Representatives election happens and stuff. Yeah. It's not even close to realistic. Brian Rust, rustcoinandgift.com is what it used to be called. Ladies and gentlemen, now, though, it's called freewatercoinco.com. Check out freewatercoinco.com. You've got a friend in the honest money business. Hi, Brian. We're talking about this issue, by the way. I'm just saying they wasted 20 days. And they've got one person approved in the Senate. Yeah.

[00:14:21] I mean, this is clown show stuff. It is. It's ridiculous. And I just think it's a clutter mess that they try to – they just try to twist things up and take longer and so on just to cause havoc or whatever to a new president and his cabinet. Now, Pete Sapp, I get that you could say some of them are controversial and they're going to take longer, Sam. Okay.

[00:14:44] But out of those 100 people, how many of them really don't take too much controversy, too much debate, too much – we've done the research ahead of time. I mean, every one of these people, every one of these people, every one of these 100 senators have like probably 10, 20, 30, whatever people on their staffs to do all this to. It's not like while they're on the floor they can't be getting the research done and get a summary and get details and, okay, can't you pick the easiest among these people and slam through 25 of them and say those are off the table now? We've got a great start. I mean, I just don't understand it.

[00:15:14] Yeah. You could do that. And, in fact, you could bundle a lot of the nominees. I wasn't even including all of the ambassadorial posts that might get named. And, of course, that would be an easy thing for Congress. Why don't they make me the ambassador to Congress to tell them to get a clue? Can't I just be the ambassador to Congress, man? That would pursue it. That wouldn't be a bad idea. Sam Bushman, Donald's ambassador to Congress. Listen to me. You clowns need to get this done. You can't wait.

[00:15:43] You can't not take 100, 200, whatever number of people and drag this out to where it's like we got one done in 20 days. Yeah. And now it's the weekend, so we're taking a recess and going home again tomorrow or whatever we're doing. It's crazy. Well, and then you think about the other thing. There are much bigger, more ambitious goals like getting done what's called reconciliation to set spending and tax levels by the end of February. The end of February.

[00:16:11] That's about five weeks away now. And we're spending time on these nominations. I mean, trillions of dollars of decision-making processes are ahead of us that they want to get done in five weeks. And we're still dealing with this issue. But don't we have a headache? Don't we have a headache from bumping our head against debt ceiling right now too? Yeah, we do.

[00:16:37] I mean, look, like you said, if there are legitimate concerns about the character or the ability of a given nominee, they need to take the time to discuss that.

[00:16:49] But if I were an opponent of Trump's agenda, I would want to get anybody else, anybody else nominated as quickly as possible and have them fall on their face and be able to go on TV and radio and complain about what a bad job they're doing. I mean, think of it in the negative sense. Even Democrats who oppose the administration's agenda have an interest in moving past this.

[00:17:19] Anyway, I'm just shocked at how they act like they're going to take their weekends and their nights and their vacations and they're going to just quadruple down for you, ladies. And these clowns start at like noon every day? Come on now. Get up at 6 a.m. Let's do it. Okay, anyway, I go off on this, but I just get I get so sick of it because I believe that there's a way to not make it political and to not make it Republican versus Democrat to say, hey, what's good for the American people?

[00:17:48] That's what's good for us because you know what? We work for them. We got to think about that. All right. Trump outlines his plan for TikTok. Wants Elon Musk or Larry Ellison to purchase it. He wants a government joint venture, writes Ben Q about this. I'm going to play this soundbite that Trump was asked by the news. Then I want to get your take on it, gentlemen. We'll play the soundbite and come straight back. Here it is. Are you open to Elon on TikTok?

[00:18:18] I would be if you wanted to buy it. Have you discussed it with Larry Ellison? I'd like Larry to buy it, too. I have the right to make a deal. So the deal I'm thinking about, Larry, let's negotiate in front of the media. The deal, I think, is this. And I've met with owners of TikTok, the big owners. It's worthless if it doesn't get a permit. It's not like, oh, you can take the U.S. The whole thing is worthless. With a permit, it's worth like a trillion dollars.

[00:18:48] So what I'm thinking about saying to somebody is buy it and give half to the United States of America, half, and we'll give you the permit. And they'll have a great partner in the United States. And they'll have something that's actually more valuable because they have the ultimate partner. And the United States will make it very worthwhile for them in terms of the permits and everything else. So think of it. You have an asset that has no value or has a trillion dollar value.

[00:19:15] It all depends on whether or not the United States gives the permit. So what I'm saying is let the United States give the permit and the United States should get half. Sounds reasonable. What do you think? It does not sound reasonable to me, Pete Sepp. This idea that the government gets half as a windfall or the government determines if something's worth zero or a trillion dollars in the private sector. I've got a problem with this whole fascist agenda going on.

[00:19:42] Well, if the president is indeed proposing government ownership by half of TikTok, I would refer him. You heard him just say give half to the government. I would refer him back to previous ventures. The federal government has taken an ownership share in Amtrak for one. The federal government took over the nation's passenger railroads and they now run it.

[00:20:08] Contrast that with the freight railroads that are all privately owned and are efficient and effective. Amtrak has never been that. We've subsidized upwards of 50 billion dollars from taxpayers to Amtrak since it was created. Still can't run a profit. Still can't serve passengers effectively.

[00:20:27] I can name a dozen other examples where the federal government gets into business as a true private sector owner or partner and it ends in disaster. We should run away from that notion and leave the other questions of TikTok to policy. Fine. You're going to regulate it. You're going to allow it to operate. Have that debate. But the government owning part of it, big mistake.

[00:20:59] Big mistake indeed. What do you say to that, Brian? I agree with Pete. I think he's right on. I think we don't need to get involved in that or take that. I think I'll just give TikTok to Sam Bushman, don't you think? Yeah. Don't you think, Pete? It should just be given to Sam Bushman. If you've got that kind of money, I'm going to ask you for a donation. No, no, I don't need money if they just give it to me, Pete. They're just going to give it to me.

[00:21:26] Now, do you understand I'm demonstrating the absurd by being absurd intentionally making this point? It's insane, people. Yes. They shouldn't give it to Sam Bushman, not even maybe. It was just a joke to kind of illustrate the point. It's like, are you kidding me? All right, Trump wants to rename the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America. It sounds cool, but is it smart? It's already starting to appear in government documents, Pete. Is it a wise economic idea for taxpayers?

[00:21:54] Well, I suppose taxpayers will have to shell out something for all the renaming exercises. They certainly do that whenever Congress renames a post office in honor of somebody. What that's going to do for our foreign policy, I don't know. Don't you think it ought to be the Gulf of Pete Sepp? There you go. I'm just saying he's the master taxpayer savings guy. You would think of it as the Gulf of Pete Sepp.

[00:22:23] If we're going to name the Trump Arena or the Gulf of Pete Sepp, man, the National Taxpayers Union guy. We're going to benefit all taxpayers this way. It's just like, what is happening? I understand it, but I don't really get it, right? It's a little bit crazy. All right, now the next question is, could this administration kill the penny? Doge, the Department of Government Efficiency, is saying, hey, it costs more than three cents to make each penny. Are they going to get rid of the penny, Pete?

[00:22:54] You know, this has been a longstanding issue. There have been calls to get rid of the penny because of the cost-benefit analysis problem, I would say, for at least 20 or 30 years. Same reason for minting dollar coins instead of paper bills because they last longer. I think with the cause of the penny, I mean, it's becoming less and less valuable in the economy.

[00:23:20] So you might be able to make the case going forward. Well, why don't we just round up everything? And, you know, if you pay in cash, you just have to use the next nickel, either up or down, to make a payment. That's an idea worth exploring. I'm not sure the savings will be gigantic. But, hey, a little bit at a time.

[00:23:46] We have to regain our muscle memory toward cutting federal spending rather than increasing it. Little things like this can help. Amen. Can you stay with me a little longer, Pete? I've got a hard break. I can't stop. Can you stay a little longer? For a few more minutes, sure. All right. We'll have you right back. What I want to finalize the discussion with you about is this. Coalition urges Congress to keep corporate tax rates stable. NTU.org.

[00:24:15] This is critical as we go through this transition. We'll get Pete's take on that, then we'll let him fly. We'll do it in seconds and be back with Brian Rust and Pete Sepp on Liberty. Roundtable Live.

[00:24:25] You're listening to Liberty News Radio.

[00:25:00] News this hour from townhall.com. I'm Rich Thomason. President Trump is wasting no time, sparing no resources, and reasserting federal control over the southern border. Now some 1,500 troops are being sent south. The Pentagon's military deployment to the southern border puts in motion President Trump's executive orders cracking down on immigration. The acting defense secretary said the troops will fly helicopters to assist border patrol agents and help in the construction of barriers.

[00:25:29] The Pentagon also will provide military aircraft for deportation flights for more than 5,000 detained migrants. Greg Clugston, Washington. Thousands of homes are under threat, and there are evacuations in northern Los Angeles County as a new wildfire, the Hughes Fire, continues to burn. The weather is what's predominantly driving this fire, and it's spread right now.

[00:25:52] The National Weather Service has extended the red flag warning through 10 a.m. on Friday for most of Los Angeles and Ventura counties. L.A. County Fire Chief Anthony Maroney. Some 50,000 homeowners are under evacuation warnings or orders.

[00:26:11] President Trump is questioning the wisdom of providing millions in federal disaster aid for wildfire ravage Los Angeles if California's leaders don't change the state's approach to water management and wildfire deterrence practices. The House has given final approval, congressional approval, to the Lake and Riley Act. The bill requires a detention of illegal aliens accused of theft and violent crimes.

[00:26:35] The bill, named for the 22-year-old Georgia nursing student, was brutally murdered by an illegal immigrant from Venezuela. The bill now heads to President Trump's desk for his signature. On Wall Street this morning, stocks so far have been mixed. The Dow is trading about 97 points higher, while the Nasdaq is down 89 points. More on these stories at townhall.com.

[00:27:00] If you own a timeshare, don't miss this public service announcement from Chuck McDowell, founder of Wesley Financial Group. If you receive an unsolicited phone call or mail piece to discuss selling, renting, or especially canceling your timeshare, don't fall for it. If you really want out of your timeshare, hang the phone up immediately or throw that mail piece in the trash and contact your timeshare resort or Wesley Financial Group for assistance with your timeshare.

[00:27:27] As the only Inc. 500 timeshare cancellation company, our knowledge, experience, and results has made Wesley a trusted resource for over 40,000 families we've helped get out of their timeshare. Give us a call, and I'll send you our timeshare exit information kit free with the straight facts about your timeshare and all of your options for cancellation. Call for your free info kit. 800-885-3333. That's 800-885-3333.

[00:27:56] 800-885-3333. 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. 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.

[00:28:21] Call 801-706-6980 now and let managed IT services transform your IT experience. Have you ever had great honey? No, I mean really good all-natural raw honey? Well, now you can thanks to localhoneyman.com. We can ship out our locally made honey all across the U.S. So don't worry, you won't miss out.

[00:28:44] Plus, localhoneyman has so many different flavors like Utah Wildflower, High Desert Delight, Happy Valley, and Blackberry, just to name a few. So purchase your delicious raw honey today at localhoneyman.com. In the spirit of 1776, here's your chance to own a piece of history and show your commitment to liberty and justice. Introducing the beautiful, high-quality leather wallet, crafted with precision and pride,

[00:29:13] featuring the official Constitutional Sheriff's and Peace Officers Association bronze badge on the inside. This isn't just a wallet. It's a bold statement of your values. Made with premium leather, it's built to last, just like the principles of our founding fathers. Don't wait. This is a limited edition. Once they're gone, they're gone. For $760, you can carry the spirit of 1776 with you wherever you go. Visit CSPOA.org to secure yours today. True patriots, don't wait.

[00:29:42] Get your CSPOA leather wallet now and join the movement to honor our Constitution and protect our freedoms. The badge and wallet for the CSPOA is a symbol of membership and should be used to indicate that affiliation, rather than for any official or professional purposes.

[00:29:56] Casting live from atop the Rocky Mountains, the crossroads of the West, you are listening to the Liberty Roundtable Radio Talk Show. All right, back with you live, ladies and gentlemen.

[00:30:26] Brian Rush with me, FreeWaterCoinCo.com. Pete Sepp with me, president of the National Taxpayers Union with me as well. And the reason I wanted to take on so many of those controversial topics, because I want to really demonstrate to the American people that, look, we're Americans. And we are taxpayers. And instead of looking at everything from a point-to-finger-at-the-other-guy point of view or this or that or whatever, I want people to really think of it from, you know what, we're a group. We're the union. The Founding Fathers even called it a more perfect union.

[00:30:56] And as taxpayers of a more perfect union, we should be a light on a hill to other countries. We should set the example of appropriate taxation, but accountable transparent taxation as well. And so with Pete Sepp, I wanted to really highlight those topics to say we can think about it from a let's work together point of view. Thus, there's a coalition built now, urges Congress to keep corporate tax rate stable. NTU.org.

[00:31:23] This one is critical because as we go through all these changes and everybody's scared about the economy and inflation and da-da-da-da-da-da, one of the best ways to stabilize an economy and make it run efficiently and appropriately is to stabilize things to where it's like, hey, I know what I'm getting with the environment. There's a level playing field here. I can deal with this in a very productive way. My business can count on things, Pete. This cannot be understated, sir. That's right.

[00:31:50] And the 21% corporate tax rate was instituted in 2017 under the so-called Trump tax cuts. Before then, it was 35% terrible, punitive rate. Now, what that did was bring our rate back to a competitive level with most of our trading partners in the so-called OECD.

[00:32:14] Well, in the seven years since that happened, the OECD countries have actually lowered their rates further. So we're slightly above average right now. Yet there are members of Congress who want to say, well, maybe we need to raise the rate again to bring more revenues into the federal government. That would be a serious mistake because that reasonable rate has helped to drive economic growth, sustain it.

[00:32:44] And if we affirm it, we have the prospect of better economic growth down the line. There was a study recently that said the U.S. capital stock will grow by more than 3.5% over the long run if we keep those rates low. That 3.5% is a vital margin. If we tinker with the rates and raise them, we're actually going to be far worse off than our trading partners. We're going to be uncompetitive around the world.

[00:33:14] That is not going to serve President Trump's agenda or Republicans in Congress. They need to either leave it alone or even consider reducing it further, not raising it. But isn't it evidential through all kinds of study after study after study? Hey, you know what? You raise taxes. There's a smaller pie. There's less pie for all of us. You lower taxes. That's right. The fact is there's more pie for all of us. Isn't that reality? Yes.

[00:33:42] And study after study from the Congressional Budget Office to private organizations, they have all acknowledged that workers bear a huge portion of the burden of corporate taxes because, after all, that's an expense businesses have. That's money they could be putting into higher wages or better benefits for workers, but they don't when it goes up.

[00:34:07] In fact, one study said almost 50 cents of each dollar increase in corporate taxes is shouldered by workers, not the businesses, owners, or the shareholders. That's really important to bear in mind. We all have a stake in this issue. If we're going to provide the leadership role, which we need to do in the world, we need to lower taxes. We also need to repatriate a lot of the dollars that are stuck overseas.

[00:34:35] Is that something that's on the table for serious consideration in 25? Yeah, absolutely it is. And there are several provisions of the 2017 law that helped that along. I think we can strengthen them. Again, there are opponents of the law who say we have to get rid of it all and start all over again. No, no, we need to learn from the mistakes as well as the successes and say, what are we going to do going forward?

[00:35:03] And whatever we do, we're going to do it carefully informed by evidence. That comes back to the very first topic we were discussing today. No blame. Just look at what happened and how we can improve going forward. Any final comments? We know you've got to fly, sir.

[00:35:21] Well, this coalition of nearly three dozen organizations is an example of what happens when you reach out and you say, first and foremost, what do we have in common? When you do that, you build alliances not only with people who think like you, but those who don't. And that's how policy advances in America that benefits everybody.

[00:35:48] Pete Sepp, president of National Taxpayers Union, NTU.org. Get a hold of them. They can help you at every level work on transparent, accountable, proper taxation. They can benefit every one of us and we can work together. Partisan politics is out the window. Standing together, shoulder to shoulder for solutions is on the table. Thanks, Pete. My pleasure. Take care. Talk to you soon. There he goes, ladies and gentlemen. What do you think of that, Brian? We need leadership like that, sir. Yeah, let's put Pete in there.

[00:36:17] Get him in some form or capacity in the White House. You and Pete. I don't know about me. I'll tell you that. It's crazy. I'd like you to kind of head up, you know, when these people ask questions, you know, in these press conferences. I'd love to have you up there and answer some of those questions. I think you could tear them apart a little bit. I'd let her rip. That's for sure. So I got an idea.

[00:36:48] The question is, could this administration kill the penny? Doge, the Department of Government Efficiency, says it costs more than three cents to make each penny. So I got an idea, Brian. What would it take to have a penny made out of silver? Oh, there you go. Well, we got a steel cent that looks like silver. But yeah.

[00:37:12] Well, you know, just on this topic, I mean, we look at Canada who did dissolve their penny and they no longer use that penny. And so I think, you know, we've talked about it here in this country. I don't know. Yeah, it wouldn't be hard. I think they could do that. I mean, get rid of the penny. What it would do is would allow people that that had copper pennies.

[00:37:35] So if you go back from 01, 2001 and earlier, those people at that point could melt the penny down and would influx copper into the economy. So, well, what if you did this? What if you got rid of the penny and then you made a silver nickel and all you'd have to do to make it worth the five cents that it was? You could get rid of the nickel and turn it into silver. Start at the bottom. Get rid of the penny entirely. Have a silver nickel.

[00:38:01] Now, it wouldn't be the same as the old silver nickel because they're worth like $1.60 or so right now. But you can create a real silver nickel that would have hardly any silver in it. You'd have to take an ounce of silver at 30 bucks and figure out what percent would be a nickel's worth. But you'd have a little dot of silver in there. What do you say? Yeah. Yeah. Let's get back to that and kind of start moving forward on that. Silver. Don't they talk about grains of silver? Isn't that how it is? Yeah. Grams. Yeah. Grains. Both. Yeah. Okay.

[00:38:28] So my question becomes, well, I don't know what you'd need in a five cent piece, but you'd get rid of the penny and you'd have your nickel start out as silver. And now you're starting competing currency and you're bringing us back to a backed system a little bit at a time. It seems like a brilliant opportunity to me. Right. I like it. I think it'd be good. All right. I just thought I'd see what you kind of had to say about that because it's weird. What do you think about this? New York Times is labeling.

[00:38:58] They say labeling Mexican drug cartels as terrorist organizations will destroy the economy, says the New York Times. What do you say to that, Brian? Well, I say wrong is wrong. And so if I think that the impact of these cartels in our country, I think we need to. Yeah, they ought to be labeled and we should, you know, maybe halt some of this stuff that's happening. I mean, help protect our country.

[00:39:23] Isn't it war against our country when when all this these cartels are influxing all this, you know, medical or these pills and drugs and all this stuff that's coming in? I mean, isn't that war against us anyway? Hey, man, I don't understand how they get there. And I don't understand the controversy they put behind it. It's like who in their right mind wants to keep drug cartels around? It's just like, yeah. Yeah.

[00:39:52] Are they even talking about, you know, maybe we ought to just create a corridor where they could all just flow right into New York City there where the New York Times is and see how they like it. And then we can talk about it a little later. I'm just saying. All right. What's gold sitting at, sir? Gold sitting at $2,743.40. All right. So that's $2,743.40, right? Yep. Yep. Silver? $30.20.

[00:40:23] All right. Do you think things are going to change much with Trump in the hot seat? Well, I just think that, you know, right now I think our dollar is toast. And that's the issue right there is if the dollar is toast. We're back to 90 to 1 ratio. And so these factors. Go ahead and skip the break. Brian's just got too much good information, people. That's all there is to it. Silver is extremely underpriced when you look at this 90 to 1.

[00:40:52] And so that makes, in other words, it's a good price to be buying. You know, it's underpriced. When we look at 80 to 1, when in 08, it was 80 to 1. And in, you know, when Colbert, it was 60 to 1. So we've got these various, you know. But right now it's running amok. And back in the day, it was 15, 20 to 1, right? Yeah. That's exactly right. So we go back to that scenario. So right now, silver is obviously extremely underpriced and a good value.

[00:41:21] Plus, you look at the mine output has been declining for the last few decades. Or for a decade, I should say. And the demand is continuing. You know, three straight years of demand outstripped by supply. So, I mean, you just, they don't have enough demand. So that in itself would also push the, say, silver's price. All right, Brian, have you ever seen these reality shows? One of them is like called Gold Rush and stuff. Are you familiar with these at all?

[00:41:51] Yeah, I knew a young man from Alaska that was involved in one of those shows. Anyway, the reason that I'm bringing it up is because when you watch, they just move so much dirt and have such a massive plant. And it's so difficult to get silver and gold and everything else with modern technology. They're using, you know, big dozers. And they're using all this equipment. And they're using these modern-day wash plants that, you know, do all these things. And they just run so much dirt through these things.

[00:42:21] And I just kind of think about that. And I go, I mean, I get it. But, man, their return isn't that great when you really think about it. But how did they get so much gold and silver in the olden days and stuff? It seems like gold and silver is almost more scarce now than in the olden days. And we have all the technology to get at it when we didn't before. And I don't really even understand it. Well, I think a lot of the dredging and stuff or panning back then was, you know, kind of, I guess, as we go olden days.

[00:42:50] But then they, you know, dredges. You get some of these dredges when these miners came up in Alaska. I saw a number of machines when we floated rivers. There'd be some of these dredges out there off to the side. And they would suck some of that stuff out and be gathering a bunch. But, yeah, big dozers. I mean, you look at Kennecott. Kennecott, we talked about the copper mine. But also minerals that they're pulling is gold and silver and other minerals from there as a result of their copper. Yeah, they get everything they can as they go, right? Yeah.

[00:43:17] So that's, I think, big, big, these big mines are doing some of that. They're getting some of the other. No, but I look at that, though, and how does that compete to, like, in the olden days? I mean, they didn't have anything like this. And, you know, you're reading history. There was gold and silver all over the place. Yeah. Yeah, good point. But big business is getting it, you know, extracting it. They're able to get a lot more out of the dirt and so on. They've got to process it.

[00:43:44] But these big mines, they do okay, I think. Or obviously they wouldn't be in business if they weren't making money, I would think. Yeah, for sure. And if I was doing it, I know some of the people in the oceans, up in the freezing waters of the oceans, that's where they're pulling a lot more gold than they are, you know, in the land anyway. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, I don't know what the cost is to go underwater and go deep. And I guess they're making lots of money. I'll tell you that right now.

[00:44:13] But, hey, there could be a problem if they endanger one of those fish, you know, they suck it up in a tube. And they're going to have to shut that plant down because, you know, you can't endanger another fish. I don't know. Maybe. That's right. Those sucker fishes are sucking up all the gold. All right. This is an interesting twist. Jamie Dimon, the big banking guy, JPMorgan Chase Bank. Jamie Dimon is the CEO, just so everybody kind of understands.

[00:44:40] He's been whispering in Trump's ear, but he spoke publicly at the World Economic Forum in Davos or in Switzerland or whatever. Speaking from the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, Jamie Dimon is blunt on Trump's tariffs. Here's what he said. Get over it. They're good for national security, Brian. What do you say? Well, there you go.

[00:45:09] It's easy for him to say. I don't think he worries about his next meal there, Brian. Well, he doesn't. And you look at all the – I mean, his corporation basically gets fined every year for illegal trading, but they don't care because they make – you know, what? If they're making $5 billion and they're only paying $500 million on the fund. That's a pretty good deal, you know. Yeah. He's got a good racket going. You know, most people are going to jail that are doing that kind of thing, but he's not. Now, don't get me wrong.

[00:45:37] I'm fine with tariffs too, but I just find it interesting where he just kind of dismisses the whole discussion. And I think tariffs are great, ladies and gentlemen. I think they're indirect taxes, which the founding fathers applauded. And I think they're, you know, a way to make sure that we create a level playing field so that our workers don't get harmed. There's a lot to tariffs that people don't really understand. However, even though Trump's forum – I don't believe in using them extreme. Hey, we're going to put a gazillion percent tariff on you and this and that. I don't believe in bluffing with them.

[00:46:07] I believe you use them very sparingly, very carefully, very appropriately to make sure there's a level playing field, to make sure we cover the proper role of limited government in an indirect tax way. But it's most important to understand that we've got to reduce taxes internally when we put tariffs there. Otherwise, it's just a double jeopardy burden on the people, Brian. Yeah, you're right, Sam.

[00:46:33] And I think, you know, Trump and his tariffs in past that seemed to have a pretty good impact on what we were trying to accomplish and putting this in a good position. And I think other leaders of other countries saw their – you know, that they had to work with us and figure out what – you know, we were tired of some of the crap that was going on. But as soon as Biden got in, he kind of wiped away all the tariffs and gave about everything away that we had in place.

[00:46:58] So, yeah, I think it's a good thing that we use some of that, but we have to be wise in what we're trying to accomplish as well. Anyway, I find that interesting because I hear Donald Trump wanting to put a – he calls it the e-revenue service or ERS. And I get that. I support that. Let's do that. But, man, we've got to decrease the IRS then. And we cannot add – and this is what people need to clearly understand – you cannot add tariffs to the burden that the American taxpayers are already shouldering.

[00:47:28] You just cannot. We're already brought to the brink from so many ways from Sunday. I mean, Pete Sepp talked about the corporate tax is higher than almost every other country. And so we've got to reduce regulation. We've got to reduce equivalent if we're going to get it foreign instead of domestic. In other words, tariffs. That's great. I support it 100%, but we've got to decrease as we increase proportionally. And if we don't, I don't know that the American people can withstand that kind of an increase in costs.

[00:47:56] If you toss 25% on tariffs relating to Canada and Mexico on February the 1st, that's what he's talking about kind of stuff, and it'll instantly destroy like a third of the economy that Americans relate to, Brian. It's that big of a deal. And I don't know that we can withstand it unless you're going to get rid of expenses other places. Well, that's it. You need to look at this a little bit and just make sure we're not hitting the people again.

[00:48:25] I mean, we're already getting little for the cost we're spending, you know, as far as inflation increases and so on. And people are already to a higher limit than they want to be. You know, it's hitting the bottom line. And so I think if you start to do, you know, jump into this and not thinking about it, it could be a disaster. You're right. All right. There's two other stories I wanted to kind of pick your brain on before the end of the hour here.

[00:48:52] They're kind of strange stories in a lot of ways, too, but they're interesting. First one says this. New report, Secretary of State Marco Rubio headed to the Panama Canal, writes Mike Lachance. You thought Donald was joking about the Panama Canal? Rubio's headed down right now, Brian. Well, that's a good – that canal is very heavily used by the U.S.

[00:49:23] Which it is, and we pay more than anybody else to get our ships through it, which I find to be the problem. No, that's exactly right. I think that's where Trump is looking at it and saying, you know what, why are we paying more? You know, it seems like we – well, we had the Panama Canal, and we gifted that over to Panama to run that and so on, and then they gifted it to China. And now it seems like that's not a win-win, and so it's becoming a – I think it's like a toll road. We've already paid for that sucker. Our payments are done.

[00:49:53] Why don't they let us use it for free, and everybody else can go ahead and kind of ante up and kind of cover their costs and equal that playing field appropriately. We've already, you know, done our due diligence on it, Brian. I agree. I think that, yeah. Well, that's the problem. You know, I mean the abuse that has come back to hit us as a result of some of these things that we've done. And, you know, and so, yeah, I think we're going to be a little more strong-handed and say, yeah, we're not going to play this way anymore. It's not going to work.

[00:50:22] Either we're going to take it back or you're going to flat out let us pass our ships through for free because how much did we put into it? We built it. We lost lives over building it, believe it or not. Cost us a ton of money. We gave it to you. We've got to have something to make this fair for the American people. I'm going to be the people's advocate and get it. Anyway, I pray for Marco Rubio to get that done in a meaningful way. Are you into rap, Brian? You're like a rapper. Not really. Not really. No. Oh, Brian. Come on, man. Listen, buddy. Snoop Dogg.

[00:50:51] You know Snoop Dogg, right? Oh, yeah. Snoop Dogg. All right. Snoop Dogg, man. He jumped aboard the MAGA train, buddy. And now people are saying, should we welcome him? Well, is it going to welcome Snoop Dogg to MAGA, Brian? Moneymaker there. He can double debt. What does he say? Double dog. Are you or something? Snoop Dogg? Yeah. Anyway.

[00:51:15] I just, I look at this and I go, Snoop Dogg and Mark Zuckerberg become MAGA. It's like, what is going on? I mean, it's just crazy how these people want to jump in front of the train and just take advantage of it, whatever they can. I don't even, I don't think these people are even genuine. I mean, they literally trashed Trump, called him Hitler, funded opposition to him. Now they're like, hey, man, we're MAGA. Yeah. It's like. Yeah.

[00:51:41] Well, they're tossed to and fro and whatever's good for them, they're changing their way. That's the key. They don't, you know, when they're friends, you know, when they all speak out against him and so on because they didn't like what he was doing or so on, but boy, now he's back in because they didn't think he'd be back in. Now they got to change. They got to, you know, they got to change their way so that they can get on board. See, that affects their bottom line, I think.

[00:52:07] Well, so I think instead of Snoop Dogg, if we're going to rename the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of Brian Rust, I mean, America, constitutional currency. Hey, man, make it, rename the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of FreeWaterCoinCo.com is what we ought to do. But anyway, I digress. I'm just saying Snoop Dogg, we ought to just call him M-Dog for MAGA-Dog. It's like M-Dog.

[00:52:33] And, you know, I just find it just so fascinating how all these people are like all aboard and stuff. Yeah, that's exactly right. Seems like a lot of these movie stars, you know, they're kind of, they were saying a lot of stuff and now they're changing face. So if M-Dog or Snoop Dogg comes to you and wants to buy some constitutional currency, will you sell it to him, Brian? Yeah, I'll say, hey, you need more of this constitutional. Let's quit thrashing the things that are good.

[00:53:01] Things that mean, you know, let's apologize for the, you step out. If you're going to be in the limelight, apologize for the words you shared and make amends. And then let's get some currency and then, you know, maybe they can trumple, I don't know. But it's about apologetic. They don't seem to be, you know, do they come out and say, you know, we made some mistakes. We probably shouldn't have done this, that, and the other. You know, let's, how about the view, the view?

[00:53:27] Yeah, then the news would say M-Dog buys gold bars from FreeWaterCoinCo.com and it'd be brilliant. It'd just be like, wow, the dog's getting, anyway. So we want to sell constitutional currency, make sure people understand. We're no respecter of Persians, are we, Brian? We're not. No, we'll sell something that's good for you. Help you understand, get you on stable footing, stabilize your finances. I'd even like to stabilize Hillary Clinton's finances, you know?

[00:53:55] Let her get some constitutional currency. Yeah. Well, get that appointment. By the way, if we did return to constitutional currency, ladies and gentlemen, it would instantly create a debt ceiling and we wouldn't have to worry about that, by the way. Brian Rust, ladies and gentlemen, he's with FreeWaterCoinCo.com. He's got constitutional currency and you've got a friend in the honest money business. Brian, I know it was a little bit of a crazy show today. Thanks for your patience and indulgence. We appreciate all you do, sir. Hey, it was great. I like Pete. He's a good guy. Amen.

[00:54:25] Thank you, sir. You bet, Sam. Good job. There we have Brian Rust, FreeWaterCoinCo.com. I'm Pete Sepp, president of National Taxpayers Union, NTU.org. Between the two of them, man, honest money and proper guidance on tax reform. Man, we're getting it done on the roundtable, aren't we? Thanks for being alongside for the ride. Hour one of the can. Hour two coming up. God save the republic.