Learning The Constitution | Lesson 20 – Article II The Executive Branch Continued

➡ Ron Partain and Douglas V. Gibbs, also known as Mr. Constitution, discuss various topics on the Untold Issue Channel. They talk about the USAID, its original purpose, and how it’s being used now. They also discuss the inefficiency of government spending and how problems are often not solved but used as political leverage. Lastly, they touch on the constitutional powers of the president in terms of budget allocation and spending.
➡ The text discusses the power dynamics between the President and Congress, focusing on the control of funds. It mentions how the President can decide when to use the money allocated by Congress, and any attempts to control this could violate the separation of powers. The text also discusses alleged issues within the Treasury, including a lack of audits and potential misuse of funds. Lastly, it touches on the role of unofficial departments and the potential for their misuse, using the example of the Department of Homeland Security.
➡ The text discusses the controversial actions of a political figure, comparing them to negotiation tactics used in business. It suggests that the figure’s actions, while alarming to some, are part of a strategic approach to achieve desired outcomes. The text also touches on the idea of regions seceding from their current political entities, and the implications of such actions.
➡ The text discusses the possibility of a state or county seceding from the United States, suggesting that while it’s a complex process, it’s not impossible. It also touches on the issue of corruption in local governments, particularly in relation to cartels. The text ends with a discussion about the importance of understanding the Constitution and how it applies to current events.
➡ The text discusses the historical context of the Mexican American War and its parallels with current U.S.-Mexico relations, particularly in relation to the cartels. It also delves into the Yucatan Peninsula’s attempt to become a U.S. state and the reasons it was denied. The text further explores the economic dynamics between the U.S., Mexico, and Canada, emphasizing the U.S.’s stronger position. Lastly, it mentions how some Canadian companies are moving their production facilities to the U.S. to avoid tariffs.
➡ The text discusses the loss of production jobs in the United States and how they’ve been outsourced to other countries. It also touches on the history of the Republic of Yucatan’s request for statehood in 1847. The conversation then shifts to the eligibility requirements for the U.S. presidency, emphasizing the need for maturity and experience. Lastly, it mentions the 25th amendment and how it expanded on the original, vague constitutional provision for presidential succession.
➡ The text discusses the 25th Amendment, which replaced an older clause about presidential disability and succession. It explains that the amendment clarifies that if a president can’t perform their duties, the vice president takes over. The text also mentions that the president’s salary can’t be changed during their term to prevent manipulation. Lastly, it talks about the president’s oath and how some traditions, like placing a hand on the Bible, were added later.
➡ The speaker reminisces about his active youth, his transition into a sedentary lifestyle, and his interest in historical events like the construction of the Twin Towers and the Confederacy. He also discusses his current life, living near the beach and enjoying the weather. He ends by mentioning an upcoming discussion about Harry Truman.

Live. Welcome to the Untold Issue Channel. My name is Ron Partain and it is Tuesday, meaning it is time to learn the Constitution with Mr. Douglas V. Gibbs, Mr. Constitution himself. His green screen isn’t working very well and I can see Virginia, Virginia in the background. So she’s very, very slightly, not, not very well, but watching you make your sandwich or whatever. But it’s, it, it’s, it’s like you can see, you can see it kind of, kind of, sort of. Yeah. Well, I have a virtual screen, green screen right now because I don’t really don’t have an office going.

I don’t have any place for the green screen. So I’m doing the virtual and it looks like crap. But, but as I’ve been told a number of times, we really don’t care what it looks like. What we care about is what’s coming out of your mouth. Indeed that’s true. Indeed that is true. Well, there’s no shortage of, of, you know, of constitutional things. According to Ilhan Omar, we have a constitutional crisis with the USAID thing going on. So I don’t think that’s really much of a constitutional crisis. In fact, didn’t U.S. aid. Wasn’t USAID initially USAID? Yeah, yeah, it was.

It was started by executive fiat under jfk, if I’m not mistaken. No, and it’s supposed to be tasked with handling international deals like the embassies and stuff like that. But really. And Trump actually said the intent of what it was about makes sense. But that’s not what it’s being used for. No, it’s actually being used to overthrow governments for one, and, and color revolutions. That’s kind of what. But Ron, we have to spread democracy. Yeah, exactly. Yeah, we, we spread democracy multiple ways. We spread it with bombs and we spread it with subversion activities, you know, via the CIA and State Department, which for all intents and purposes are one in the same, so.

Well, when they start talking about it, that, talking about spreading democracy that way, to me it sounds like they’re trying to spread syphilis, but hey, amen to that. Well said. Very well said. Well, I have been jazzed watching what’s going on and almost everything is constant. A couple things where I’m like, but for the most part he’s actually operating constitutional. A couple things they shot down was unconstitutional, like for example, the federal funding freeze while they, for whatever, I think it was like 90 days and, and that way they could review how the money is being spent and they got shut down by a federal court and president has the authority to do that while he is given the, uh, he is given the task of executing the laws of the United States and there is money appropriated for that.

He’s in the real world situation where he knows how that money should or should not be spent, when it should be spent and all that. And they’re basically, no, you gotta spend it all, you gotta spend it now, you know, kind of attitude that’s like. That’s like giving your kid 10 bucks to go buy eggs. He comes back, says, hey, I got a deal for 6.99. No, I give you 10 bucks, take those eggs back, go find someone will sell them to you for 10 bucks. I mean, that’s basically what Congress is doing. Well, okay, so the way the budget works for a lot of people who, if they don’t understand.

And I knew this because my dad was, you know, my dad did. He was on the school board here in town for like 12 years. And he said that the way the budgeting system works is that if you are allotted. Let’s, let’s just. I’m going to throw out a theoretical number. Let’s say, let’s say you’re allotted $50,000 annually for your budget by the federal government to, to spend. Well, you think, if you think, you know, you, you spend only 35,000 thinking that you’re being frugal. Well, what happens is, if you only spend $35,000, the next year, your allotment goes to 35,000, not 50,000.

Yeah, in order. But there’s automatic raises if you spend it. All right? And so what they do when they get down the end is they start spending all kinds of stupid stuff. But that’s not my point. My point is that they are so drunk on bureaucracy. They are so, they so believe that nothing happens unless the federal government’s hand is in it. Unless there is a. I mean, and this is what I was telling my wife, they are, they have been governmentally institutionalized. And, and so, oh, my gosh, he’s gonna make it more efficient. That’s less money.

And we think that. And when I say we, I mean them. We think that the way to fix problems is to throw money at it. And he’s taking away money. Oh, my gosh, we’re gonna have problems. And he’s like, no business efficiency. You know, I remember. They can’t understand it. You know, I’m, I’m, I, I recall the, the story that you once told about a friend of yours who was running for office as a Democrat here in Southern California. And, you know, there was a, he, he, he had achieved a certain level to where he was invited in to this, to, to a meeting.

And as a result of that, they, they, he, they were talking about a problem, and he raised his hand, he said, well, well, what are we going to do to fix it? And everybody kind of looked around and looked at him like, who is this? Yeah, I’m trying to remember his name off top of my head. He basically was for office in LA County. It was an LA County Democratic Party. And yeah, he had risen to the point where he was working for the guy who was running for, I want to say, for a state Senate seat or something like that.

But anyway, he basically got a chance to see behind the curtain, right? And, and this friend of mine would be considered a moderate Democrat. And he believed in fixing problems. And so, yeah, he says, hey, you know, we’ve been doing this, doing this, doing this. It hasn’t done a thing. You know, why don’t we try to really resolve this issue by doing this, this and this? Or, you know, and the room went silent, says, well, if we fix the problem, what would we run on? Right. And so he learned, and really, both parties are guilty of this to a different.

Correct. Absolutely. Different degree, absolutely. But, but the Democrats, more so. But basically, they’re in business to keep the problem in place perpetually. Yes. Because that is, as long as there’s a problem, then they can run on trying to solve the problem. And it’s never, they never. Hegelian dialectic. Yes. They’re never going to solve the problem. In fact, you know, you know, look at what’s going on in Los Angeles right now. Oh, look who decided to join us today. Hey, what’s up? You got, you’re really quick, Ron. I. Wait, I had to wait in that room for 10 seconds or two seconds.

Yeah, I didn’t, I didn’t, I didn’t even see you there, so. No, I popped in and you got me right away. Yeah, well, me pretty quick, too. I, I saw, I saw you pop in, so, but hey, all good. I’m glad you’re here. We’re, we’re, I don’t know how much you heard of what we’re talking about, but we were talking about how government runs on solving problems that never get solved. And now, and now we have a question in the chat room that kind of ties in what we’re talking about. Sophia, I, I love what Doge is doing.

My question is, is it actually constitutional? Generally, yes. I, I, you know, we can get into each one individually. But generally yes, because this goes back to what I was saying earlier. It is while the executive branch, the president who’s head of the executive branch, his task is to execute the laws of the United States. He has given money to do that and then it is his discretion on how to do that, when to pay, spend that money, and so on and so forth. And if he believes that he can take money appropriated for something and spend less on that thing though, then he could do that.

Then what happens is that those monies saved would go back to the Treasury. This is the way the founders looked at it. Now it would just probably go into, you know, some other money laundering scheme, but that’s beside the point. And so, and so what he’s doing essentially is, is right and it ties into something that Warhamster and I, matter of fact, we’re talking about this in the last video he and I did. The power of a presidential power of impoundment. And that goes back to us saying earlier, it’s like the kid being given, you know, 10 bucks to go buy some eggs from, you know, by mom, finds them on sale for 6.99.

Hey, I didn’t spend the whole 10 bucks. She’s not gonna yell at him, tell them no, you gotta go back and spend the whole 10 bucks. Or he may say, oh hey dad picked up eggs. I don’t have to, here’s the money back for the treasury. Or hey, there’s going to be a sale in two weeks. I’m not going to spend the money now. I will in two weeks and the presidents will do that. For example, the Congress might give a president money to build new naval vessels, but if he starts building them now, that there may be a situation when it comes to the steel availability or whatever, or maybe there’s some ships that could be decommissioned in two years and he wants to coincide it, whatever.

And that’s up to the President. It’s not for Congress to dictate the president how and when to spell it to spend it. And so what they’re do. So their attacks, they’re actually trying to violate the idea of a separation of powers. I, I played this little, I played this short little clip. It’s like a minute and 20 seconds. I’m gonna play it real quick because it, it was very telling. It kind of has something to do with what we’re doing, but not totally, but, but listen to this. Here’s the interesting one. So apparently the highest ranking person in the Treasury, David Lebrick, he resigned Rather than comply with Doge for access to audit, where they spent trillions of dollars a year, trillions of dollars go through the system.

And as soon as Doge said, can we see what’s in there, see where the money went, the person in charge quit. Now, I don’t know how that could be more damning. The only thing that would be more damning is if they’ve already left the country to a country with no extradition. But let me tell you a universal truth. One of the things we learned in this story, allegedly, is that there was never any audit to money requests that went through the Treasury. They simply said yes to everything. Now, I hope that’s not literally true, but it’s being reported that they didn’t even have the function to check.

There was nobody whose job it was to even check. They just said yes. And some of that would include maybe some requests that you wouldn’t want them to pay. Interesting. Interesting. And like I said earlier, you know, money going back to treasury, or is it going into another money laundering scheme? I just said that that’s exactly what it is. And, you know, what do you do when you, how do you react when you don’t want anybody looking under the skirt and suddenly someone who has authority to can and will you run? This goes to Doug’s. Doug’s analogy with a dozen eggs.

It’s one thing if you’ve got a legitimate purpose of going out to get a dozen eggs, and we’re trying to make you fiscally responsible in terms of your egg purchases. What they’re uncovering with DOGE is a lot of money is being funneled and use the word laundered if you want to all kinds of DEI and other stuff that this administration ran against and is going to end. That’s not going on getting a dozen eggs. These are programs that. Absolutely. Let’s be honest with you, it was politicized. You actually really want to follow the money trail. You got to go through these donations to these NGOs and find out how much of it ended up with Act Blue back to Democratic politicians.

Oh, you want to talk about Act Blue? Guess. Guess where. So Gavin Newsom out here in California is like, hey, go and donate to all these. Go and donate to all. For all the fire victims. And where was all that money going to Act Blue? Yeah, absolutely. Well, here’s. Here’s a development from today, and I think we need to keep an eye on it. I was hoping that doge’s next target after usaid, and don’t call it usaid. It’s usaid because. Right. The Democrats are trying to say, oh, US Aid is good. It helps people. No, it’s not aid.

It’s aid. It’s a industrial development. I wanted the next target to be the State Department because that’s where they, We’ve been funneling money for regime change. NGOs internationally for decades, which we talk about all the time. Well, well, the entire government. Every, every department’s going to get reviewed. You, you missed what I said. I, I actually had a conversation with a friend of mine earlier this morning, and, you know, she actually worked in the government or she worked as a government contractor and was instrumental in the changeover when they, when they reorganized government to include the Department of Homeland Security.

And she said, she said defunding USAID is essentially the first step in getting rid of the CIA because that’s a lot of the money that they’re using to do regime changes. And the, that’s, that’s the, the, the, the, the. I guess it’s the political method of spreading democracy around the world as a. And remember, a lot of people believe, now we’re finding out Johnson had a lot to do with it, but a lot of people believe that’s a part of the reason why Kennedy got a bullet to the head was exactly that kind of thinking. So this goes back to the church Committee in 1970, early 1970s, when Congress actually started to call the CIA to the carpet for all of their international covert operations.

And their solution to the CIA was, okay, we’re not going to do these covert operations per se. We need to have some cutouts. So we got the creation of the ned, the National Endowment for Democracy. There’s a Democrat side and there’s a Republican side ran by John McCain called the IRI, and that’s how they both sides get the same amount of money. It’s a bipartisan grift, but that’s exactly what you’re talking about there. My concern is that the State Department is every bit as dirty as usaid. In fact, probably dirtier, I would say. Dirtier. Yeah. And who’s leading the State Department? Mr.

99 to nothing. Confirmation vote Marco Rubio, who I will remind you, sat on the ssci, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, when they issued the bogus report on Russia collusion in 2018. And if he doesn’t come clean on that, you know, a snake can shed his skin, but he’s still a snake. I agree. Well, you know, and, and I’ll tell you, just, I know this is a Little off topic, but my thought on what Marco, you know, getting Marco Rubio into, into Secretary of State was a, was a mechanism that Trump could use to get him out of the Senate into a position of authority.

And, and yet he could be fired at a moment’s notice. And now that there, now he’s gone completely. Yeah, that’s a fair speculation. I’ve said something similar. So, yeah, that’s, that’s worth, that’s definitely worth consideration if we both came up with that. And to tie into this, another question from Sapphira. So the actual office of Doge is also constitutional, the appointment of it. All right, so Doge is not an official department yet, hasn’t gone through Congress and been created and all that jazz. And the people that are in it have not gone through the confirmation process.

So people say, well, then it’s not constitutional. Well, here’s the thing. The Democrats are the ones who created the precedent for unofficial departments, right. With czars and things like that. So what Trump is doing, whether or not it’s constitutional and, and technically, I don’t think it is, but nonetheless, he’s, he’s using their game against them 100%. Wait a second, you guys have had czars. What’s the difference? He can do anything with, you know, it’s like you run a company and you want to bring in an outside contractor to invest outside auditor, and that’s really what they’re doing.

It’s all about what Doge is. Yeah, but, but I think, I think eventually he may want to try to make an official department. I don’t know. Well, we, you know, this is kind of the, one of the things that, that I wanted to talk about is either last week or the week before when I mentioned that, you know, at some point in the past, Trump had talked about how the executive branch had more power now than at any time in the history of the country and because of precedent created by the Democrats. And it’s exactly. Well, it’s been actually not by Democrats but by globalists in both parties that have ceded control to the office of the Executive.

And in my humble opinion, with the idea that they were going to have, you know, guys like Obama or people like Obama and Hillary to come in and basically become dictators. And so, so now what they’ve got is they’ve got a, they kind of have a dictator on their hands with the, with the mat. With the machinery that they’ve created. But now that guy is using that machinery to take their power away and ultimately take apart the machinery. Right. He’s about. Jack is Jacksonian as anybody since Andrew Jackson in many ways. But it’s a totally different scenario because Jackson was fighting to create a government.

It wasn’t a total totalitarian government, but he was trying to get it to give power, give it more power. And Trump’s actually doing the opposite. He’s fighting against. Well, Jackson was using presidential power to create more presidential power and he, and to try to turn the country into a greater democracy, but he did it in such a slam dunk kind of way. Kind of like Trump. Is that very similar that the Whigs actually formed as in, as opponents to it and called them King Andrew. So in the sense Trump is using presidential powers that are unconstitutional.

Too much. Whatever. And, and, but, but only a little bit of, A lot of what he’s doing is actually constitutional. He’s just doing it in a way that’s freaking them out because, and here’s the thing. Let me back up a little bit. Here’s the thing. And it cracks me up because nobody thinks about it this way. When you sell a car, do you ask for what you expect to get? No, you ask for a lot more because you know everybody else is going to come in lower and then you’ll work it. It’s negotiations. That’s what he’s doing.

He’s playing that same type of game. It is the art of the, you know, he wrote a book about it. Right, the, the art of the deal. You know, you, you come in strong. No, he doesn’t expect to make, you know, kind of the 51st state, but you come in like that and they’re freaking out. So they come, they come in low and then you’ll work your way. It’s okay. This is where we’re gonna agree. That’s how you negotiate. And also, you gotta use your strengths. If you have a, something that’s strong, you’ve got to use it.

That’s what he’s doing. Same thing with the tariffs. He’s using them as a negotiation tool. Hey, I’m gonna hit you with 25. Oh my goodness, that’s horrible. Okay. We give in. Right? Right. We do this in our own lives, but what we freak out of is used politically because the machine, the bureaucratic machine says no, we have to be appeasers and give in because, you know, we might make them mad. And well, it’s, it was hilarious to see how both the, the, the, the, you know, the governments of Canada and Mexico were. And Colombia. And Colombia and all.

And Panama, how they’re all like, oh, well, yeah, no, we’re gonna fight back and we’re gonna do all this stuff. And then they all of a sudden now they’re like, wait a second. Well, you know what happened is then that those resistors, the bean counter came into their office, said, well, let me show you this real quick. Oh, oh, crap. That’s the nature of Trump. He’s totally transactional. Hey, Ron, can I read it? Can I address a comment in chat before it gets too far? Sure. Is that the one that I posted? No, I don’t know which one you post.

I don’t know where I’m looking. I posted this one right here. OIG and OMB were supposed to provide some of that oversight, but were never set up to be totally independent auditors or authorities to do what they were set up to perform. Yeah, that’s actually a great comment. And also that ties into the firing of all the inspectors general, which was supposed to have a lot of power to keep government. The problem is the OIGs became political appointments and they didn’t actually go after the corruption. We saw that through many departments. God. I can get, we can get into that, but I want to address a bit different.

Just a fun little side Note. Tackleberry says AOC is up in arms about Musk and Doge hiring 19 to 20 year olds. Raise your hand if you think AOC got into politics when she auditioned for. Because it’s not true. She was actually in college working with a program sponsored by USAID and had her first job in Africa working for USAID in Niger, I believe. I think it was Niger while there was a revolution going on. Really? Oh, yeah. This is absolutely fact. I did not know that she started as a USAID employee out of college. Wow.

Yeah, that’s why I wanted to address that. I thought you enjoyed it. To recruit the commies. Well, I, I, I see that there’s pictures of, of Karen Bass, you know, older pictures of her working in Cuba. So, but you know, I thought a thought came to me last night after we, it was, it was after we had done our show and you know, talking about the, all these countries that are rebelling. And somebody had mentioned to me in a previous show about how California was trying to secede. They were talking about the, you know, the new California thing with Preston and, and I just said, well, that’s, you know, that could never work because the California legislature would have to approve them to, to leave.

But I keep hearing rumors of California trying to organize a secession movement. And my thought is maybe we could get into a, a situation where it’s almost like West Virginia. Exactly where. All right, we’ll let you secede and then we’ll let the rest of California come back in Cal, come back into the union and then LA and, and San Francisco can you all can go and, and be your own little, you know, in institutions or whatever or, you know, entities. But I, I don’t know, I just, it was just something that, that kind of I thought about and I thought, you know what, I want to bounce that off of you guys.

Well, and that, that’s, that’s a very big possibility and it wouldn’t surprise me, but I don’t see him seceding because of all the federal money comes in. Of course, federal money is driving, drying up and Trump’s taking the reigns here. You know, we’ll see what happens. But here’s the thing. Understand every time you see something politically, especially when it comes to Trump, what they’re screaming on the surface is not what it is. Every time, every time they lie and, and, and they’re trying, they’re, you know, it’s funny because what it remind, what all of this reminds me of is a kid who got caught doing something and they’re trying to come up with every excuse that it wasn’t them.

Even the stupidest stuff. They are panicking. They got caught with their hand in the cookie jar and Trump is getting ready to snap pics of it and they’re freaking out that the, all the public will know too. Well, you wanted to say something, Brady? Yeah, I got a question for Doug because you talked about, you know, Red, you know, California secession. This is a fun topic. Okay. We’ve been talking about this for years. I don’t think I’m asking. And I’ve met Preston. I’ve actually used to talk to him every once in a while. Great group. That’s good group.

Good guy. Listen, I used to it, I, I used to hand out there, I used to hand out the new California literature at the gun shows for him. Yeah. And I’ve, all of us have made the point for years that secession is legal. It always has been. It was always believed to be until Lincoln decided it wasn’t. And he doesn’t get. He didn’t have that authority. That being said, if California were to secede, and for those who don’t know, I spend most of my adult life and adult air quotes in San Diego. And so there was conversation we had in San Diego, well, gee, we don’t want to go with California.

We’d rather stay with the union. And obviously the rest of the United States would love to keep access to the Pacific Ocean. So why doesn’t California was in San Diego County, Orange County, Riverside county and Imperial county join with Arizona Jones. San Bernardino County. Yeah, I guess San Bernardino could be looping. So. So the, the five most conservative counties in the country are. Was it Tarrant county in Texas? There was a county in Alabama and, and two of them are, are San Diego or excuse me, two of them are Riverside and, and San Bernardino counties, which.

Well, you wouldn’t know that by some of the voting patterns. Well, San Bernardino county, not San Bernardino City. Right. So here’s the question. If it’s legal for a state to secede, have we talked about how a county can secede from a state? And this gets into that, the Greater Idaho Project, everything like that. Do you want to delve into that? Because I think if you’re going to stand on the moral high ground and say that, you know, California can secede from the union and I agree they can, but cannot accounting secede. Do they have that option? They should.

They should. I mean, because the county, the counties are to the states what the states are to the union. Well, almost the. Because the counties are incorporated under a state charter and the states are not incorporated under a federal government charter. That’s the difference. So I want Doug, I’m going to zip it now and hear Doug’s gonna, Doug’s thought about this before. I know he’s gonna have something awesome to say about it. You know, it’s funny because it kind of reminds me of the idea in California difference between a general law city and a charter city.

A general law city is a city who’s. Who must function as the state dictates. A charter city has their own city, basically constitution, and they can operate independently. And so I would say absolutely, a state could act independently and can secede. But, and, and that, but that poses a. A good question because it’s. I have thought about it, but I haven’t taken those thoughts beyond where I’d like to. Would there need to be congressional involvement? Would there need to be other involvement? Approval or. No, we’re out of here. I mean, that’s a good question and I’m not sure I know the full answer.

That said, that’s, that’s a 10. Wait, wait. That said, if a state can have its own charter, why can’t it secede? Yeah, a state can secede. I mean, I think that’s established. I mean, so a county and a city I’m getting back to city. A city can have its own charter. Why can’t a county, why can’t a county establish its own charter and say we’re gone? Well, we know a state does not need congressional approval to. Let’s do, let’s start at the beginning. You need a congressional approval to add a state, but to remove one, you do not.

Well, this, and we, we knew in Texas v. White that they can, the union can kick a state out. Now if the counties were to secede and then request to come in back in as its own state, then they would need congressional approval. They would no longer need California’s approval because they seceded. It’s messy, but I mean, I think a lot of the country would be really happy to get rid of most of California and to keep the good parts. Well, you know what I’ve been saying for years though, you know, this big new California thing, it’s all about LA and basically the coastal cities between LA and San Francisco.

And I’ve told everybody new California is coming. It’s called the big one. When that sucker hits, they’re dropping in the ocean. We’ll have a new California. So. Well, you know, one of the things that I, I think is very interesting in terms of, you know, this thing with the cartels is, you know, there, I, I’m sure you guys know that a lot of the government, a lot of the local governments here in California and in, in Arizona and you know, along the border, really almost all over the place, a lot of these guys are on the take from the cartels.

And if they are on the take from the cartels, if these, if these members of government are on the take from the cartels and that it’s discovered that they are on the take, they’re going to be removed from office for, you know, potential treasonous activities. And then you’re going to have to have, you’re going to have to. And get a whole new government. And if that, if that’s the case by that, at that point you’re going to have a lot of other people, you’re going, gonna have a lot of new people that are going to come into government that are going to be paying attention to stuff and not be bought off.

Well, we have to. And, and the structure that has been creating the, the corruption and the collusion and all that has to be dismantled. And that’s what Trump’s working on. Jabber Jaw actually put something in the chat room I thought was very apropos. If you become your own country, don’t be upset when we show up with democracy and usaid. Yep. Gentlemen, gentlemen, on that note, I’ve got to jump off the show. Thanks for having me on. It was fun. 30 minutes and wish I could do more often, but I’ve got the. I got some family obligations.

Oh, no worries. Well, I’m glad. I’m. I’m glad you were able to get in, I guess. And we’re. We’ll see you tomorrow. Yes. We are not doing that tomorrow. I’m not at the point of the book. I do. I think I can guarantee you we start it next week. Copy that. And, Doug, we will do that one last thing on the executive orders tomorrow if that’s good. All right, Ron, I know you’re looking forward to this, and I am, too, but I. Like I said, I told you on the phone the other day, I need to be ready and I’ve been busy.

Oh, yeah, no, you’re good. It’s okay. I’m. Whether it’s tomorrow or next week, it’s okay. I’ve been. I’ve been. Been studying. Doug tells me you’re like a little kid at Christmas waiting for this, so. Oh, well, you know, I’m. Well, I mean. And, you know, I’m actually very, very fond of. Of the reads, so. All right. Cheers, gentlemen. Thank you. All right. Later. Alrighty. Yeah. Well, that was. Well, I’m glad. I’m glad he jumped in, you know, just for. For temporarily. That was. That was. That was nice. So, you know, that was fun. He’s very. He’s very bright and very intuitive about a lot of things.

So that’s. And that’s one of the reasons why I really take it as a compliment when he introduces me as his mentor. He does that whenever we do the videos on his channel. And. And it’s. It’s a compliment because I’m like, I’m your mentor. I’m learning from you, too, man. Yeah, exactly. Absolutely. So. Well, anyway, you want to. You want to finish article, Article two? Well, our article two, Section one. I think we can finish section one in. In the next half hour. And that’s what really people are here for, is the class. But I think most of our audience also appreciates when we deviate because we keep it constitutional.

And. And it’s. And it’s important. And we’re talking to. Typically, our audience are people who are well informed. And, you know, it’s funny because I’ve had people tune into my radio program, say, you know, Doug, it was just. It was above me. My. My audience, the people that, that really listen to me, it isn’t above them. They’re so well informed. And I think this crowd appreciates sometimes when we do that. Well, actually, actually, I think it’s, I think, you know, the feedback that we get or that I get when we actually talk about how, you know, it’s one thing to teach the Constitution, but it’s another thing to talk about how far off the rails it is in present day.

And I think that people appreciate, you know, how we examine things, of events of the day and how, you know, from, from a constitutional standpoint, I think that that brings a lot of benefit to them. There is a question in the chat room I want to address, though, and it ties into something that you actually wanted us to talk about, kind of. And, and this person isn’t expecting the answer that we’re going to give, but we’re going to give it. Mexico Warrior. Hi, Douglas. Why is it that I see the cartels as General Santa Ana and Mexico government as the politicians that had no control over his rule during those times? You know, here’s what’s interesting about that.

You’re right that the cartels are acting in a manner that’s kind of out of control and they can’t seem to reel it in. And Trump is doing exactly what the United States did. This. A lot of people don’t realize when it came to the Mexican American War, what we’re taught in our classrooms is that it was a war of expansion. United States decided they’re going to steal the Southwest, you know, corner of the what North America section. They wanted for Manifest Destiny. You know, what was going on is Santa Ana, like the cartels, was out of control.

He even had control of the, of the government, the Mexican government. He was president a bunch of times, all sort of stuff. And the people really couldn’t control him. And he, and, and it gets deeper than that. So in 1824, Mexico had actually passed, approved, ratified a constitution for Mexico that was based on ours. They wanted what we had. Mexico was looking at the United States saying, we like that system. We want that. Santa Ana came along, tore up the Constitution, he started killing anybody who supported it, and also religious leaders and everybody else. But, and so now we’ve got this dictator.

This kind of reminds you the cartels slaughtering people. And on top of that, he’s also going after Americans too, because Mexico had invited Americans to, to, to settle the properties of Texas and, and New Mexico and Arizona, what, what those states are now, Colorado. Because most of the Mexican people Didn’t like that property. Remember Spain, Southern part of, of. Of Europe, Mexico and Central America is more that type of climate. Yeah. Your Mexican people didn’t really like the antlance north of that. It was too rocky. It was harder to, you know, do certain things with. It was colder.

So they began to invite Americans to settle it. And the only requirement was you learn Spanish, you become a Mexican citizen. And so, Santana, I know, it’s funny, it’s hilarious. So, ah, ah, the irony. The irony, exactly. But anyway, so Santa Anna comes along and he doesn’t like, you know, this Constitution. And so Americans who have settled Mexican lands, they’re like, well, wait a second. We like that 1824 constitution. And a lot of Mexican citizens. Wait a second, we like that 1824 constitution. If you look at some of the old paintings from the Mexican American War, you’ll see a flag with the three Mexico colors on it.

But 1824 in place of the eagle in the middle. That’s what it represents, that Constitution. It was a big deal watching this and says, you know what, we’ve got to get involved because partly because Texas is really ours and there was dispute over it, but also because we’re watching this and we’re like, we came in as liberators. The Mexican American War was a war of liberation. So Trump is doing what America did, the Mexican American War. He’s saying, whoa, wait a second, you guys are off kilter. It’s causing problems on our side of the border, it’s causing problems with our people, and it’s not good for your people.

We’re going to take action here. Going to knock out instead of, instead of Santa Ana’s knuckleheads, the cartels, and for those of you in Mexico, government or whatever, who wants to work with us, work with us now. And the best way to argue, by the way, real, real side note on Mexican American war, do you know how we know it wasn’t a war of expansion? Because we got, we got all the way down to Mexico City. If it was a war of expansionism, we would have kept. We would have kept the United States. Yeah, we would have kept.

We would have kept it. Yeah. The. When, when, when, when did Yucatan apply for statehood? Yeah, I’m trying to remember the year. I have to think about that for a second. The, the story is, what he’s asking about is during that time period, uh, Yucatan, the peninsula was five states, uh, that, that, that, that, uh, applied for, uh, state statehood and United States statehood right now. Now, here’s the thing. Originally they had seceded and, and I think it was 1846 that the Yucatan had seceded and, and they originally were being attacked by Santa Ana’s men. But Santana was so spread so thin, what he had done is he had the Mayan Indians attacking in the Yucatan Peninsula.

So originally Yucatan sent a delegation to Washington D.C. this was 1840s, I want to say 1846. That’s what’s on my mind. But anyway, and so they said it was before the Mexican American War, but, but, but not that time period. But yeah, but it was just before, if I recall. So, so anyway, so they sent a delegation to Washington D.C. not to apply originally for, for statehood, but to say, hey, we’re, we’re under attack here. And, and we’re an independent. We, we declared our independence and, and we’re being attacked and you know, we would really like American military help.

And, and uh, the Congress is like, well, strategically and with our interests and it’s, it’s not within our interest. I mean, you know, we, unless you were a state, you’re not gonna get that type of support. 1824. Oh, 1824. Okay, so I’m off by about 20 years. 1846 is the second time they declared independence. But anyway, but anyway, so, so. And Juan Sierra O’Brien I think was his name. I think off top my head. Juan Sierra O’Brien. I know, O’Brien kind of funny. But anyway, so they’re like, okay, fine, we want to be a state. Let, because you know what’s going on in Mexico, we want no part of.

Yeah, well, and, but they, they, I think didn’t they say no because they needed more. They needed. Well, well, so, well, I’ll get there, I’ll get there. So, so they, so they put in an application to apply for statehood and, and Congress disapproved it for two reasons. One, because they, they didn’t want to make a bigger mess with Mexico. And two, because they were still operating under the idea that, that they had to keep the, the northern states and the southern states, the pro slavery, anti slavery states even. And so everything south to the south was supposed to come in as a slave state.

And the idea is if, if a state comes in as a slave state, then there has to be a free state in the north. Missouri compromised as a part of that. 18 Matter of fact, it was about the same time 1823 I think was the Missouri Compromise. And so, and so the southern states like no, because Yucatan said no, we don’t want to be a safe state. We want to Be a state. But we don’t want to be slave. You and Southern states. Like, no, we’re not going to vote for it. We’re not going to allow this state in, in the south.

That’s not a slave state. The agreement is we’re going to keep it even. To the south is slave states. To the north are the free states. We’re going to keep the number even, you know, for the House Representatives. Right. So there you go. Yeah. And, and it’s a funny story because I. Wouldn’t it have been awesome if you could go to Cancun and it’s a part of the United States? Yeah, that would make. I, I know somebody that, that would not make very happy. But anyway. Oh, this is O’Brien. Right. Just like the current Mexican president’s name.

Shine Bomb. Sounds very Mexican. Yeah, actually it sounds very Jewish. It sounds very converso to me. But hey, hey, you know what? My wife has German. All right, so just saying, you know, you know, everybody know people may or may not know that it was Germany. The, the, the, the rumor is is that Germany tried to get Mexico to come in on their side during World War I, you know, to have conflict with the United States to keep them away from. Oh, and the Nazis were working with Mexico. The best of the same deal. Well, Virginia’s like great grandpa or great, great grandpa.

Was it great on your mom’s side, Your grandpa. So her grandpa. On her, on, on her mom’s side, German. Was it World War I or World War II? World War I, you think? Okay. But anyway, yeah, German soldier, officer, whatever. And so she has Germans. That explains why our son has green eyes. Yes, she’s Mexican. Brown eyes. You know, we’re like, hey, where’d this green eyed kid come from? I mean, but, you know, but, but anyway, so, so that’s that story. But, and you’re welcome answering the question, or at least I hope I answer it the best I could.

Mexico warrior. But yeah, I think I, I agree. This kind of reminds me of that cartel versus Mexican government and America back then. Now with Trump saying, okay, instead of Santana, we’re dealing with the cartels, but the same crap. Well, you did see, you did see that the Air Force was flying a, a one of those. It was a plane they were flying down in the Gulf of Mexico, or not in the Gulf of Mexico. The, the, the Baja California. What is it? The Sea of Cortez? They were flying it down. They were flying this, A signal intelligence aircraft down there to intercept all of the radio communications.

This was this, this happened just like within the last day. So the Trump, Trump demanded, like, access to Mexican airspace and he was flying a reconnaissance aircraft, an Air Force reconnaissance aircraft down there. So it’s funny because Trump is shutting up the other. Well, he can’t shut them up because they make their noise, but it’s hilarious. They’re like, oh, my gosh, you know, your tariffs are going to cause this. So this got, they, they are so static in their thinking. He, it’s being used as a tool. They backed down. You know why? Because we didn’t appease them.

We got in their face, said, no, we have an economy. You depend on. You, you, you, you play the game the way we want you to play it, or we’ll hit you because it’s not going to hurt us. We’ll figure out a way around the increase of cost of your goods and you’ll probably lose, lose a trading partner in the long run if that, if that stays in place because Mercury not going to want you buy your products. We’re the stronger economy. We are in the driver’s seat. We’re not going to appease you. You’re going to play our game.

You’re going to do it the way we want. Or the tariffs. Well, I, I saw that the, you know that both Mexico and Canada like their exports. The United States is their biggest customers. Like, 80, like 70 to 80% of their exports come into the United States and like only 20% of our exports go to them. So them applying tariffs does not do anything against, it really doesn’t harm the United States. It only harms, it only harms their businesses. And in fact, I saw that, that there are multiple Canadian companies that are moving their production facilities down into the United States, you know, into like the Rust Belt, Wisconsin, Michigan, Indiana, places like that, to where they, they, they, they will be producing the things that they’re going to produce and, and produce them in the United States.

So, and I think that’s, I think that’s what, I think that’s what Trump’s ultimate objective is, is to get those people down here so that we can get the jobs back, you know, the production jobs, because all of our production jobs, I mean, United States has, has, you know, ever since the Marshall Plan, where we’ve been exporting all of our jobs, all, you know, all to all points abroad outside the United States. Do you remember the movie, what was it? Back to the Future, when he goes back to like the 1955 or whatever, and he says, well, where did you get that? He’s it’s like this radio.

It’s from, like, Japan. He’s like, japan? What are you talking about? He’s like, oh, all the electronics are made in Japan. And he’s like. And he. He couldn’t. The guy from the. The dock from the 1950s couldn’t believe that the United States would have exported all of their, you know, the radios and stuff to Japan. That just wouldn’t make any sense. So. But now. Now. Now, update. So earlier I said that I believe it was 1846 when the delegation got sent to Yucatan. You said it was an 18 what? 23. I pulled out my notes. The delegation from the Republic of Yucatan traveled to Washington, 1847, November 1847, to present the request for statehood.

So. So, yeah, because I was thinking they. They declared independence again in 1846. So I thought it was that time that they did it. So my. My memory was better than I thought. When you say 1820s, I’m like, wow, am I getting that bad? I could have sworn. So SD Garter says, I stand corrected. Yeah. Yeah, that’s okay. Yeah. You know, it’s funny, dude, because I got so many filing cabinets in my brain, sometimes I don’t get the. The years exactly right. Sometimes I do, but, man, I didn’t think I was two decades off. But anyway, all right.

And thank goodness I’m using the same computers. I just, you know, found my notes. Anyway. All right. Yeah. Twice they became independent. Right. 1820s, 1846, 1847, November is when they sent their delegation. It was Juan Sierra O’Brien, and the rest is history that nobody knows. Right. You want to. You. Do you want to read the. The last part of that, of Article 2, Section 1? Yeah. Well, where we left off is, uh, the eligibility of the president. We. We were talking about natural born citizen. Then there are other eligibilities after that. It says that you have to.

That the president has to. Person running for president has to attain the age of 35. And that that’s a big deal because how do you need to be to be elected to Senate? 30. What is it for the House of Representatives? 25. Right. More. More time under your belt. More wisdom, more experience. They didn’t want somebody coming in that’s in their 20s and goofy and haven’t figured things out. Even back then, they knew that you had to have some time under your belt. And then been 14 years a resident within the United States. Now someone asked me, well, what about diplomacy? Well, they’re still a resident of the United States.

They’re out of country, not to live, not to be a resident elsewhere, but for diplomacy. So that doesn’t count. So that’s why Thomas Jefferson was still able to become president United States because, you know, he was out of the country quite a bit, you know, during the constitute writing the Constitution. I mean, he was in France on diplomacy for diplomacy reasons. So, so when it says and 14 years a resident within the United States, in other words, you’re a resident within the United States. That’s where you live, that’s where your home is. The fact that you have to go out of country for business such as diplomacy doesn’t count.

Well, let me highlight this real quick. This is, this is, this is the one that I wanted. Like a 25 year old today is like a 12 year old back then. And that is absolutely true. If you look at the, at the, at the framers. I mean, when, when they formed the, the, the first and second Continental Congresses, I mean, shoot, they were in their mid to late 20s. A lot of them were. Yeah, yeah. And, and that was actually considered. And, and not, not necessarily an old man, but I mean, shoot, what was the life expect? Well, life expectancy was kind of what it is today.

The reason why everybody says it was shorter. Oh, people are dying in their 30s and 40s. The reason why the life expectancy is set at that number is not because people are dying at that age, but because of the high mortality rate of, of infants. And so, so in reality, the average age of someone who made it out of their childhood, because that’s, you either died in your childhood or you could spend some time on the planet, you know, was usually the 60s, 70s, 80s. So similar jabberjaw says you don’t really, you don’t really realize what’s going on until you’re 35 to 40.

And I, I agree with that. In 2025, but in 1775, 76. No, that’s not the, that’s not right. Now here’s something that’s interesting though. Now think about it. You’re basically a man Somewhere between 12 and 14 back then, right? You, you’re working. I mean, you know, John, John Quincy Adams was the secretary for the ambassador to Russia when he was 10. All right, so, so you were considered a man. You, they did in Hebrew. There is no word for adolescents because when it comes to God’s way of looking at things and the founders back then and the old age, we want to, when I say age, I mean eras of long ago.

You were, you’re a child and then you’re an adult. Right. There is no in between. And then, and what made you, what made you an adult was, you know, the transition, you know, when you went from, I guess, puberty. Puberty. Yeah. So now that said. And I mean, the average age of entrance into Harvard and Yale back then was 13. Give you another little tidbit there. Yet, even though young men were considered men, they were in caught. They were getting their college degrees while they were still teenagers, yet they still set the voting age at 21.

Think about that. As, as mature as American young men were, you still didn’t have enough sense to vote. Right. Until you’re 21, at least. Well, and, and I, and, and, and you know what? Maybe that, that kind of comports with what Jabberjaw says here, you know, when he. You don’t really realize what’s going on until you’re 35 to 40. Well, and that depends on the person. I know people that are 40 are still idiots best. Besides. That’s true. But, but, but my point, My point is, is that if, if you’re, if you’re going to college at, you know, at 13 or 14 years old, by the time you get out of.

Then you get out into the real world and you start to realize what’s going on in your early to mid-20s, that that kind of is. It’s, it’s, it, it’s, it’s a parallel. There’s a parallel there. He. Because, because he’s not. Jabber does not wrong about, you know, you don’t really realize what’s going on until you’re 35 to 40, because that’s the life that we live today. But back then, things were. Think things happened a whole lot faster and a whole lot earlier. Also. You got to realize that a part of life, a large part of life was working in the field.

You know, the tough part of life. The stuff that we don’t even understand today. I mean, back then, the men were not just, you know, ones with brains, but they were men. I mean, George Washington was a manly man. Now, you know, and not them gonna take it out on folks that are not manly men. Big. Because it seems like almost every young guy nowadays are little girly men. That’s right. I said it. I said it early men. But yeah, girly men didn’t survive back then. Let’s just say that. Yeah, that was not fashionable. All right, so maybe in France.

Watch the John Adams miniseries, man. They nail France. So. Well, absolutely. But anyway. Yeah. And, and when I say France, I mean certain parts of the democratic Party too, today, that would get along very well. Same same. Absolutely. So. So once again, S.D. gardner, they say the average lifespan during the 1700s was 36. In 1800, 40 to 50. They’re calculating into that the high mortality rate of infants. So in other words, you’re count. You. You’re averaging into it the age of 1 and 2 and 3. You take out the infant mortality and the average age was much older.

I’m not saying that they lived as long as we did, but it wasn’t as drastically shorter as people believe. So. All right, now, the part that you highlighted, this became the 25th amendment. They only had one paragraph for what we now have an entire amendment that’s a lot longer for. Because it was so vague that it could be taken advantage of in case of the remove. And so you don’t have brackets there. My pocket Constitution has brackets around that paragraph, meaning it’s. It’s obsolete. Because the 25th Amendment, matter of fact, when you put your mouse over it, little box pops up saying 25th amendment supersedes this.

So put, put your mouse over. Over it again. Okay, See that box? So right there. Leave the box there. Put your mouse over it again right there. Stop. The 25th Amendment superseded this clause regarding presidential disability, vacancy of office and methods of succession. So it does have it. It just didn’t put it in brackets. All right, so here’s what it says. When we get 25th amendment, we will elucidate this much better because the 25th amendment takes this and, and very well. Actually, it’s a very well written amendment. Clarifies it much better, let’s put it that way.

In case of the removal of the president from office or of his death, resignation, or inability to discharge the powers and duties of the said office, the same shall devolve on the vice president. Now, here’s the thing. It says the duties devolve on the vice president, but doesn’t say that the vice president becomes president. That didn’t happen until, like I want to say, the, the 20th Amendment or something like that. Then it says, and the Congress may by law provide for the case of removal, death, resignation or inability, both of the president and vice president declaring what officer shall then act as president, and such officers shall act accordingly until the disability be removed or a president shall be elected.

Now, I’m gonna get back to that vice president thing. So then how is it the vice presidents were becoming presidents if it wasn’t in the constitution until the 20th century, that. Well, there’s this guy called, named John Tyler And I, I think he might be my favorite president of all time. Amen to that. More especially the more I study him. So when, when Harrison died, short time in office. And John Tyler, if you read about him, he was, he was a strong minded individual. I think him and Trump would get along really well. I, I really see John Tyler and Trump as very simple, cut from a similar cloth.

And John Tyler says no, because it never, it never happened before. No one had died in office before. He says, no, I’m not just going to take on the duties. I’m president. And he was so forceful about it that it happened and he set the precedent. So after that, whenever a president died, the vice president became president because of John Tyler. Real men are an endangered species. Suzanne? Yeah, yeah, I, I agree. So, you know, it’s funny because I worked for a credit union for about four years, some people and, and there were 43 employees, 40 women and two men.

And then someone says, wait a second, Doug, you said 43. Well, yeah. Then there was a guy who had male genitalia, but we’re not sure what he was. So he, he, he was so lightness loafers. He floated down the hallway. But anyway, I don’t, that’s the funny, that’s funny. But, but anyway, yeah. And then the other, the other, then myself and then the assistant manager were the other males. And there was a, so I, so I’ve worked with all women. And then I was in Construction for 20 years. I’ve worked with all men are bigger gossipers.

They talk more crap than anybody. But anyway, all right, getting back to the point here. So the president, this section that he has highlighted here, that became the 25th Amendment. When we get to the 25th Amendment, we’ll elucidate it a little bit better. But because they did change a lot of this, Congress had a lot more control over what to do here. And when we get 25th amendment, we’ll see that that changed a little bit. And then, then it says, the president shall stated times receive four services of compensation which shall neither be increased nor diminished during the period for which he shall have been elected.

Why did they do that? Could you imagine Congress playing games with a president who needs the money? Because back then the wealthy guys weren’t becoming presidents. And, and the founding fathers were not wealthy. People say, well, they’re just a bunch of rich white guys. No, they were land wealthy. They were not cash wealthy. And could you imagine Congress playing games with the President? No, no, no, no. You’re going to sign that bill or we’re going to cut your pay, and we got enough votes to override your veto. Could you imagine that? That’s the reason why they put that in there.

Okay, so. And then he says he shall not receive within that period any other emolument from the United States or any of them. That’s the emolument clause that they tried to hit Trump with during his first presidency. So you can’t, you, you can’t receive emoluments from other place, from other states. And then later on in our two. It also talks about from other countries, from princes and all that. And he’s like, this was his own businesses. He’s. He’s not receiving emoluments for being a government guy. It’s for business that he held that. That doesn’t count. And then finally, before he entered the execution of his office, he shall take the following oath or affirmation.

Oath is to God. Affirmation is not. There were some, like Quakers, who believe that swearing to God was a sin. So they. That’s what we kind of talked about when Trump didn’t put his hand on the Bible. Well, John. John Quincy Adams didn’t put his hand on a Bible. He put it on a law book. That was his thing. But he turned out to be one of our better presidents. But anyway, so here’s the, here’s the oath. I do solemnly swear or affirm that I will faithfully. Boy, that’s a, That’s a word with a lot of religious connotation, huh? I will faithfully.

In other words, do it to the, do it from his soul and with the favor of God. All right. I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States and, and will, to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. That’s. That’s it. That, that’s that oath or affirmation, it doesn’t say, so help me God, Doug. I thought it would. That got added by Washington. He said that, and it became tradition. The placement of the hand on the Bible also was created by Washington. It was tradition. It was not.

It’s not required nor be present. Put your hand on the Bible. Here’s, here’s the part that I think I said this last week or the week before. That makes some people’s head spin. But I just. And I, I just think it’s hilarious. So when George Washington said, I think I need to put my hand on a Bible for this, we need a Bible. Where’s the Bible? Somebody go get a Bible. You know where they got it from? The Masonic Temple up the street. Just saying, so many heads spin and explode when they find that out. And I’m not gonna get my opinions there.

I actually wrote a whole section in my history book about Freemasonry. Buy the book, read the section. But anyway, and, and one things you’ll learn about me is, is I’m. I’m typically extreme free. In other words, when someone says it’s this and somebody else says, no, it’s that, I usually land somewhere in between. And so that’ll give you a clue on probably what I wrote when it came to Freemasonry. And because I go to the sources, man, I gotta. I gotta have some detailed data here, man. I don’t just jump, you know, I’ve got to know all the little details.

So I spend a lot of time figuring stuff out before I even have an opinion. Sometimes, sometimes people say, well, what do you think about. I don’t know enough about it, man. I’m not gonna. I’m not saying jack until I know enough. So anyway, I. Hey, man, it took me. It took me a good 20 years before I had an opinion about 9, 11, and. And once again, I’m somewhere in between. But anyway. Oh, stop. I see that weird grin of yours. You’re about right. We went through that in, in Corona multiple times. Yeah, and I remember.

I remember. What was her name? Was it. Was it. Was it Karen? Yeah. Oh, man, she went off on you. She did not like. Yeah, she did not like me because her. Her husband was a firefighter and he knew, you know, because of what he said, it was gospel truth and. Okay, so. And what you said was gospel truth and. Yeah, well, and I mean, I always had. I always had Skip on my side. Now, see, Gus says something in the chat room and he’s. And I think it’s said before, and I’m gonna jump on this.

If John Goodman ever needs a bottle body double, you got the job. See, it used to be Russell Crowe and. And what? And now it’s become John Goodman. I must be deteriorating, man. I went from Russell Crowe to John Goodman. My wife’s over there. That’s bad. Who’s the other guy? Gerard. Gerard Butler. Gerard Butler. I’ve been face wise compared to him when I was younger. Oh, wow. I was gonna say, well, sure. Not sure. Not ab. Wise. Well, hey, when I was in my 30s, absolutely, I was fit. Virginia, did I have a six pack? Yes, I did, but I turned it in for a kick.

Yeah. But anyway. Yeah, I know I was an athlete, man. I used to, I was a long distance runner and play baseball. And then, and I got in construction. I was healthy, man. I was, I actually danced too. I was a dancer too. And then I got to construction. I worked my way up. And then when I got to the point where I was a supervisor and I was sitting on a machine all day, didn’t change my eating habits as I got older. Sitting on the machine all day and suddenly one day I looked down, my feet were gone.

I couldn’t see him. So. And I haven’t seen him since about my mid-40s. But anyway, yeah, I used to, I used to, I used to play so much basketball too. For the fun of it. I would, I would show up at the park just with a basketball on my arm. Just play pickup games like all day, stuff like that. I was, yeah, definitely. Anyway, my dad, my dad was there when the towers were built. He’s 92, says no way two planes took them down. He was a foreman on that job. All right, that leans more in your direction.

I’m not saying we’re already past the hour. I’ve got noodles to finish eating. I will, I will tell you this. Shungite lives in New Jersey and can see, can see the skyline of Manhattan. And yeah, so well, and, and I did a lot of research. I’ll say this real quick. And one of my, one person that I use that I spent a lot of time with regarding that research is as a former Navy SEAL and former CIA. And so I got some inside and also baseball on a lot of it. So anyway, Douglas, you, you look great.

Hell, we all get old. I, I, I, I’m not old. I’m older. Not old. I’m older. That’s my story and I’m sticking to it. That’s true. All right there, Mr. Gibbs. Well, I, I, I, I thought I was going to be seeing you tomorrow, but I guess that’s not going to happen. Yeah. What he’s talking about, for those of you who are wondering, is there’s a Confederate Confederate States of America constitution that run. And I and Warhamster are talking about doing a show on and so, and that’ll be fun. I’d like to see that. I’m, I’m looking forward to it as well.

We’ve got, and I’ve, I’ve been doing a little bit of, I’ve been listening to the guys from Abbeville Institute and uh, Brian Mcclanahan and then another guy that, that actually wrote a book on the Confederate Constitution. He Actually came in and did. And I’ve been listening to some. So I’ve been, I’ve been doing some, some, just some listening but I also have a, a book on it. I just, I just don’t read as well as I used to with, with, with my eyes. So. But, but yeah, I’m, I’m. That, that, that is a, that’s a topic that is very near and dear to my heart.

I’m, I’m a. You know, people who don’t know me, you know, I’m, I’m actually, I have a very soft spot in my heart for the Confederacy. I think the, I think the Confederacy was actually was much more aligned with true American values than the North. And if you, if you look aside from that slavery thing. Well, actually, actually the, the, the south, the, it was the north that prolonged. Absolutely profited from slavery much more than the south did. Missouri Compromise helped elongate it also. Yeah. And, and, and the south was, the south was migrating away from slavery because they realized that it was a lot, it was a lot more fiscally advantageous for them to let, to just to pay them a wage and let them find their own food and board or housing.

And slavery was on its way out for that. And that was one of the primary reasons. And if you read the book South Was Right by the Kennedy brothers, there’s a discussion between Jefferson Davis and Robert E. Lee where they’re saying, hey, we know slavery’s on its way out. And really the war wasn’t about slavery. It was about the fact that they were being dictated to on what to do during this process by the north and tariffs and all kinds of other stuff. And it was like, you know what? We’re tired of being dictated to by the ones that don’t even produce raw materials.

Right. Well, they’re making all of their money off of us. And, and you have to understand in the 1860s, cotton was essentially the oil of the 1970s. That was the, cotton was the primary, you know, that, that was the, that was the big thing because you didn’t need oil because you had horse drawn carriages and whatnot. So it wasn’t, you know, oil wasn’t necessary, was it? Nearly the, the commodity that was, that was used as a lubricant and stuff at that point. And Amboyer says North was always more fascist. Well, so Brian McClanahan has a video about the Puritan Yankees.

Yes, absolutely. Absolutely. That is, that is an, that is a fantastic video. So, but, but, but, and you know, and, and you know, people don’t want to believe that the, you know, that there were a ton of free blacks in the south and the, a lot of the Southern units, the Confederate units, uh, were integrated. They, they, they had integrated, uh, black and white troops. So, you know, less, less than 5% of free white people own slaves. About a quarter of the free black population own slaves in the South. Yeah. And if you really, if you really want to look at who was responsible for bringing the, the slaves and the slave trade, whether it be, whether it be the, the, the, the trafficking them from, from Africa to the, you know, to the west, whether it be North, South, north, south or Central America or the Caribbean and the people who were profiting from it, from, from their sale, you know, at the slave trading areas.

It, this, it’s basically the Ashkenazi. So, you know, I’ll, I’ll be nice and say it that way. All right, well, I’ve got noodles to eat and a wife to spend time with and. Oh, real quick, Oregon coast. I am four miles from the ocean, but I’m 500ft up in elevation in my place. And yesterday it snowed almost all day. The snow’s still there. It hasn’t melted away. And they’re talking about a mixture of rain and snow during the week in my location. Man, I love it here because I get the best of both worlds. I’m in the country in the trees, but I’m four miles from the beach.

I get snow, but I don’t have to dig out of it. It’s like the best of both worlds, man. So anyway, I said I sent you a couple pictures. Yes, you did. I saw them this morning. They were. And I, I intended on, on, on responding to you, but I got, I got derailed with phone calls. I bet I was on the phone all morning. So anyway, well, this was a lot of fun today. This. Oh, it was a lot of fun and hopefully the audience enjoyed it too. Yeah. So. Alrighty, Mr. Gibbs. Well, we will see you next week.

Hopefully not snowed in three inches of snow. I’m not worried. All right, man, you have a great. Thanks for spending the time with us. DouglasV. Gibbs.com talk to you later. Well, so I’ll see you here in about, in about 15 minutes with Mike. So I’ll be back with Tuesdays with Mike. We’re gonna be talking about Harry Truman tonight, so that’s gonna. Oh, that sounds fun. I might want to tune into that one. Yeah, that’s gonna be quite a bit of fun. Mike does his research, man. I tell you, he digs up some interesting stuff, so. But anyway, well, see you here in about 15 minutes, guys.

And thanks, Mr. Gibbs. We’ll see you next week. See you then.
[tr:tra].