Elon Musk Gutting CIA & USAID | EYES ON PODCAST

today we talk about USAID, the CIA and other agencies that may be on the chopping block, as well as President Trumps statement about the U. S. talking over Gaza and redeveloping it. New merch, patches, and stickers! ⬇️ https://theteamhouse-shop.fourthwall.com Support the show on Patreon:⬇️ https://www.patreon.com/TheTeamHouse Find Andy Milburn here: ⬇️ https://twitter.com/i/flow/login?redirect_after_login=%2Fandymilburn8 https://www.linkedin.com/in/andrewmilburn2023 https://amilburn.substack.com/ https://www.amazon.com/When-Tempest-Gathers-Mogadishu-Operations https://bsky.app/profile/andy-milburn.bsky.social https://open.substack.com/pub/amilburn/p/journal-of-a-plague-year?utm_source=app-post-stats-page&r=emo6q&utm_medium=ios Find Mick Mulroy here: ⬇️ https://fogbow.com/ https://www.loboinstitute.org/ https://x.com/MickMulroy?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor https://www.linkedin.com/in/michael-patrick-mulroy-31198b52/ https://bsky.app/profile/mickmulroy.bsky.social Find Jason Lyons here: ⬇️ https://www.linkedin.com/in/jason-lyons-666873316?utm_source=share&utm_campaign=share_via&utm_content=profile&utm_medium=ios_app https://bsky.app/profile/bgsilverback73.bsky.soci Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-team-house--5960890/support https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-team-house--5960890/support?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=rss.

• 0:00Speaker 00

  Cash flow crunch on deck small business line of credit gives your business immediate access to funds up to $200,000 right when you need it covers seasonal dips manage payroll restock inventory or tackle unexpected expenses without missing a beat with flexible draws transparent pricing and control over repayment get funded quickly and confidently apply today at on deck.com funds could be available as soon as tomorrow depending on certain loan attributes your business loan may be issued by on deck or Celtic bank on deck does not lend in North Dakota all loans and amounts subject to lender approval.

• 0:31Speaker 01

  Hey guys, there's a new team house merch store. You can come and check it out. The link is in the description. You can get team house stickers, team house patches, which are really cool and really well done, American made, team house t-shirts, hoodies, mugs, shout out to that one person that bought the eyes on mug, love you mouse pads, camelback tote bag. I don't know why we have the tote bag. I'm not a big tote bag guy. If you are, you know, all the more power to you. But yeah, we got a ton of cool stuff stickers, American made patches, American made t-shirts also American made, but I don't fulfill them. I'm actually going to be the one shipping you the patches and the stickers. They're very

• 1:11Speaker 01

  cool. Check it out. The team house dash shop dot fourth wall.com. That's a crazy URL will change that, but don't worry. The link is in the description. Take a look and in the show notes. If you're listening to us on audio, we really appreciate it. Thanks for the continued support.

• 1:39Speaker 01

  Everybody, welcome to another episode of eyes on. We got the full crew here. Jason Lyons, Andy Milburn, Mick Mulroy, myself. Pretty busy week. A lot of things going on. And, you know, not many things blowing up, I guess, that we could talk about, which I guess is a better decent thing. I mean, there are still things blowing up, but the big news this week was probably the USA ID and that that agency getting essentially gutted or trying to be gutted like, I think it speaks to, we were talking about in our group message, like US soft power and stuff like that where, you know, someone's going to fill that gap.

• 2:20Speaker 01

  And, uh, yeah, all right, let's kick it off. You guys, you guys fight over who wants to go first about this.

• 2:28Speaker 02

  Why you want me to start?

• 2:29Speaker 01

  Go for it, Mick, yeah.

• 2:31Speaker 02

  Sure, so just not to give too much of a history lesson, but it's a bit relevant. It was created as a creature of the Cold War, 1961, by the Federal Assistance Act, which created the need for an entity like this. And then President Kennedy created USAID from an executive order. I'm only bringing that up because there's a lot of questions about can you get rid of it by executive order? I don't know the answer, but that's from my understanding, doing the research on the topic to be ready this week, that's how it was structured. So the importance of it is substantial, and I'll be the first, I'll lead with that. It is to enhance US foreign policy.

• 3:16Speaker 02

  That's a question that we should come back to, whether it has strayed from that. That's one of the reasons why many people wanted it to fall directly under the State Department and not be its own independent agency, the first part, which is enhancing US policy objectives. The second part is the humanitarian work that it does overseas. Well, disclosure, obviously, and my team is fully involved in that, so we see it in action. About 60% of their budget goes to critical food aid, to people who are in need, and a substantial part goes to medical assistance, to include trying to seriously reduce transmittable

• 4:01Speaker 02

  diseases, which of course can affect everybody. And I think as Americans, we should all be proud of the work that they have done in that regard. We're about 40% of the foreign aid US taxpayers around the world. We could have another discussion on the need for other countries to step up in that regard, but we should be proud of that. And then the other part is the developmental part, and I think we can get into some of the issues there, some of the things they fund, to be frank. To me, we should never be funding. But some of it on the developmental side is very important because countries that once received developmental aid are now key trading partners with the United States.

• 4:44Speaker 02

  So there is, it isn't just, you know, all give, no benefit. It's, it is to US beneficial. But I think some of the issues that have, have really harmed the reputation of USAID in seeing what's happening right now are that they haven't always been consistent with US foreign policy and some of the things they fund seem to be not beneficial to the United States. And I think we could solve those issues by addressing that rather than dismantling the organization, which is very important. Foreign aid, only 1% of the budget, 1%. And that includes all of the State Department and USAID.

• 5:28Speaker 02

  And then lastly, before I stop my die drive here, the people of USAID. As I'm sure you guys, Jay, Andy, have seen them all over the world, conflict zones, risking their lives, out on patrol, they, they don't get near the recognition that, you know, say us vets do for doing what they do. And they hanging out there and they risk it all. And this is no way to treat those folks. There's a lot of real issues that need to be addressed and I think it's good that they are being addressed. But remember, these folks are Americans working for the government, doing great work around the world for America.

• 6:11Speaker 02

  So I would just hope that we don't turn criticism of what the leadership has decided to do in some circumstances into turning them into something they're not, which is this, this, you know, idea that they're completely off the reservation. They're doing great work and they're risking their lives every day. So I would hope that we keep that in mind in any of the debates going forward on this agency.

• 6:37Speaker 03

  USAID is a tremendous enabler for the military, especially in the south side, but the military in general. You know, going all the way back to Vietnam. I mean, the agency, right, to some extent, certainly the Marine Corps, Civil Action Program, both involved tying in closely with USAID officials. Guys in the field who stayed there longer than the US military did. You know, they'd be out there for two to three years, but went Vietnamese. And then, you know, in our own experience, remember the, remember, some that long ago, the provincial reconstruction teams in Afghanistan, you know, which were heavily supported by USAID.

• 7:22Speaker 03

  And, you know, and even if you don't care about things like the tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands, actually, of lives that they've saved, most of them children, from epidemics like malaria in Africa or indeed HIV.

• 7:41Speaker 03

  You know, I agree, if you make a good 75% of what the organization does is solid work in line with US foreign policy. And if it has strayed in the area of development, well, fire the

• 7:58Speaker 04

  Sponsored by GSK, the makers of Extenture, Depomocamab ULAA. If your asthma keeps interrupting, it may be time to try something else. Extenture is an ultra-long-acting prescription maintenance treatment for severe asthma, eosinophilic type, ages 12 and older. It isn't for sudden breathing problems. Extenture is the first and only add-on treatment that can help deliver protection from asthma attacks with two doses a year. Just one dose every six months. That's a lot of time for everything in between. Serious allergic reactions can occur. Get help right away for swelling of face, mouth, tongue, or trouble breathing. Don't change or stop medicines, including steroids, unless told by your doctor. Report if you have a parasitic infection.

• 8:41Speaker 04

  Common cold, sinus infection, inflammation in the nose, flu or fluke-like symptoms, joint pain. Or sore throat may occur. Carry on with fewer attacks and ask your doctor about Extensure. Learn more at Extensure.com or call 1-833-393-3678.

• 8:58Speaker 00

  Cash flow crunch? OnDeck's small business line of credit gives your business immediate access to funds up to $200,000 right when you need it. Cover seasonal dips, manage payroll, restock inventory, or tackle unexpected expenses without missing a beat. With flexible draws, transparent pricing, and control over repayment, get funded quickly and confidently. Apply today at OnDeck.com. Funds could be available as soon as tomorrow. Depending on certain loan attributes, your business loan may be issued by OnDeck or Celtic Bank. OnDeck does not lend in North Dakota. All loans and amounts subject to lender approval.

• 9:28Speaker 03

  High in charge, you know? I mean, that's how you deal with a unit. I mean, if Seventh Marines is doing bad things, you don't dismantle the whole regiment and send the Marines elsewhere, although many of them would love to be out of 29 palms. You know, you've the boss. I mean, it all comes from, it all stems from leadership. I mean, that's such a basic tenet. But I think, you know, I mean, this is, it's politics. It's about, it's about sending a very loud message by the media. And I've watched Fox News go over and over these stories about development projects gone awry.

• 10:10Speaker 03

  But none of this other background or context, not a single story about it.

• 10:17Speaker 05

  Yeah, I agree with everything that both of you just said. And I, for me personally, it's the human element of it. Both those lives saved and the fact that like Mick touched on, these people have families, you know? Even if they're overseas, they have families back home. And to say that you're okay with just gutting, you know, these people's jobs and saying, oh, well, you know, go find something else, especially for me, and this is kind of a rant for me, people who have never worked in the government at all, or even with the government, you know? Whatever it is they do, God bless you, your job, whatever that is, but. Not that you shouldn't have an opinion on it, but that's an opinion. I I don't care what, you know, unless you're gonna show me numbers and you're gonna say, well, when I worked at USAID.

• 11:03Speaker 05

  You know, I saw this and I do agree that there's probably bloat that needs to be cut and there are probably programs that need to be. Refined and again, like Andy said, you know. Get rid of the people who are in charge of those things if they're wrong, you know, but leave the the little folks alone and for anyone who's okay. With um decimating these people's lives, well, I question your patriotism. You know, if we're gonna get a prickly about it, sorry.

• 11:27Speaker 01

  Yeah, and if we're like, you know, if we're going by the premise that there's bloat, um, there's bloat and waste and like probably every agency. That the US government or any government runs, right? Like um.

• 11:41Speaker 01

  It's it's just, it's hard to like not delve into domestic politics with this. Cause I mean, Congress control controls the budget, right? So if there is an issue, they wanna cut certain things. Negotiate it in Congress, do it the right, the lawful way, how it's always been done. And, you know. That's that, like going in and just with a chop saw. And sending out two million emails, this is a broader conversation to like all federal employees. I think it's cra- I think it's insane. I think it makes no sense. Uh. It's leaving us in exposed, there's someone's gonna fill that vacuum, right? And it's gonna be China.

• 12:24Speaker 01

  So if we have a real, if we're really thick, seeing China as an actual threat in the next.

• 12:31Speaker 01

  Next century. How how is one percent, cutting out completely one percent of the budget that helps. Strengthen our soft power and put us where we need to be around the world. How is that beneficial? Like, I mean, I I'm looking for somebody to explain it to me. I get it. Maybe there's ways for sure. Chop that stuff. I get it like, but. It just really feels like a ready fire aim kind of thing. Rather than like actual thoughtfulness, logic going into making decisions that would benefit. U S taxpayers and people around the world. I don't know, call me nuts.

• 13:06Speaker 02

  We, I think you hit on a really important point that we hadn't touched on yet is just how our adversaries are gonna react to this, right? So, I mean, the reason why China has its built in road initiative isn't because it's giant benevolent country that's just looking to do good in the world, right? They try to embed themselves in these developing countries and then take all our resources. That's my commentary on it. And they're looking at this idea that we would just dismantle um the U S uh entity that does this. Again, very small part of the budget. Uh, and they're just gonna fill the gap. So, and that's why um secretary, then secretary Rubio was so um pro USAID for his whole career.

• 13:47Speaker 02

  Cause he looks at it as soft power, yes, but certainly a way to compete um outside of the sphere of conflict um with our adversaries. So they're, yeah, they're absolutely gonna take advantage of the fact that uh we're not where we used to be and they're, they are, and they're just gonna be there. We're, we're the only ones left on the uh on the field, so to speak. So, yeah, that is, that is a big factor in this that I think a lot in, a lot of senators understand uh both sides of the aisle and they'll be asking all those questions here next week.

• 14:18Speaker 01

  Do you remember when we spoke about a few weeks back about like a little bit of a rift inside the administration? With uh the China Hawks being Rubio and others against like the business folks, Elon Musk and those guys. It seems to me that the business folks won. Or at least have a little bit more sway in, in the administration. I feel like Rubio is kind of a.

• 14:43Speaker 01

  Kind of the odd man out a little bit. At least it's what it seems like. For my.

• 14:48Speaker 02

  So I, I think, I think you could include Mike Walz and the, into the traditional national security perspective of the Republican Party, along with Rubio. So there's others there. There's certainly others in the Pentagon. I don't, I don't even know what Secretary Hegseth knew of that is, but certainly under him.

• 15:12Speaker 02

  Colby, for example, was one of the biggest China Hawks in DC. And now he's the undersecretary of Defense for Policy. He was set the policy of the Defense Department. He was a very fervent anti-China hawk. And I assume he still is, you know, he don't just change. So there's, I think you're right. There's going to be attention inside the party. Particularly with Elon, which I don't know, I don't know how long you're allowed to be a special government employee, or I don't know what the situation is with that.

• 15:42Speaker 01

  Are your CEO of five other like massive companies? Like, yeah.

• 15:46Speaker 02

  Yeah, that all do business with the US government, which is not our issue. But I think there is Hawks, the traditional Hawks inside of the Trump administration.

• 15:57Speaker 03

  Yeah, that's, I mean, that's, that's a good point. I, I think, you know, hopefully, hopefully cooler heads get.

• 16:07Speaker 03

  You know, it holds sway here. And that's a great point about, you know, National Security Advisor Mike Walz. I mean, he,

• 16:17Speaker 03

  he has, you know, everything I've seen from him. I mean, he's, he's got a balanced and very realistic view when it comes to foreign policy and particularly towards China. And we'll recognize the fact that undermining our own soft power is shooting ourselves in the, in the head. However, however well it seems to play in the short term to domestic politics. And it's probably wise for any politician to understand that public discourse in this country is largely fueled by ignorance. Just lack of education, general education, lack of interest and collective ADHD. So. But you know, and, and wise politicians and statesmen understand that and.

• 16:59Speaker 03

  I mean, going all the way back, I mean, you know, who who knew who knew that we would now be looking back at someone like, say, Nixon. Okay, but Nixon and Kissinger.

• 17:14Speaker 03

  Who had been vilified and rightly in cases, you know, for the conduct of Vietnam War, blah, blah, blah, delaying. But remember, you know, they they also had some inspired moves when it came to foreign policy. My point is that reaching out to China at the time when they reached out to China would not have sold well to the American public. Right. But they recognized that it was something that was probably in the long term interest of the United States. And it was, you know, for the next two decades.

• 17:46Speaker 03

  It was the right thing to do regardless of how it played to domestic politics.

• 17:51Speaker 02

  True. The try to get the Sino Soviet split, right? I mean, that was the that was.

• 17:56Speaker 03

  Yeah, exactly.

• 17:57Speaker 02

  Yeah.

• 18:00Speaker 03

  Yeah, it wasn't about befriending the Chinese or thinking that they were benevolent, but yeah. And ultimately, ultimately, arguably, that led, you know, twenty twenty something year, twenty seven years later to denigrate the Soviet Union or contributed to it.

• 18:19Speaker 02

  Yeah, it did contribute, I think. I think that's a fair statement.

• 18:23Speaker 01

  Uh. Any final thoughts about USAID?

• 18:29Speaker 01

  I can't really see it being held up in courts, I'm gonna be honest. I mean, I hope not anyway, because like that would mean

• 18:39Speaker 01

  separation of powers are out the window. Right?

• 18:42Speaker 03

  Yeah, but the problem, the problem with that, though, Dee, is, and yeah, I'm a great believer in separation of powers, but in order for them to work, they have to act with alacrity and courts are not positioned to act quickly necessarily. So normally, in the in the in the near term, you're looking at at Congress.

• 19:05Speaker 03

  But yeah, I mean, I I I agree. Ultimately, that is that is the sanction. We'll see.

• 19:13Speaker 02

  Well, I hope cooler heads prevail that the, you know, a lot of the, not that Democrats shouldn't also do it, but certainly the Republicans on the Senate Foreign Relations Committees in House, go talk about why this is important and how they can address the issues that they have issues with, without dismantling the very entity that we're just going to recreate, right? To do that. And yes, I think, and I've heard, I've been on many country teams, which are the inter-agency teams at embassies, where the State Department were one of the most adamant about USAID falling understate. Maybe it was a parochial belief,

• 19:54Speaker 02

  but I think it also makes more sense that the leader of the US foreign policy and diplomatic should actually include direct tasking of USAID. So, yes, I think most would agree with that, including on both sides of the aisle, or many. And then the question is, if we don't want to fund that, that doesn't mean we stop doing all of that, right? Like, so, helping the world not be so unstable, you know? Because it's, yes, it's, we should, we're a moral country, and I think we should be proud of that. We are primarily the ones that are going around the world helping people in dire need.

• 20:33Speaker 02

  But that's important for itself, but it's also important because if the people that live there can't stay there, they leave, and it destabilizes other countries. So it's in benefit of everybody to do that. That's 60% of their budget. So the other 40% is really coming down to these developmental issues. And a lot of them are really important, too. But just focus on the ones you don't like, don't, you know, destroy the US reputation. And potentially, and I'm not one to be hyperbolic, but a lot of people are going to die if we don't keep supporting this. I mean, there's people on the verge of starvation now, for example, in Sudan, which doesn't get enough attention, in my opinion. If we just cut off our efforts, it's not just the aid itself.

• 21:16Speaker 02

  And by the way, $2 billion a year goes into...

• 21:22Speaker 02

  The farming states to buy food to send to places like Sudan. It also it benefits the American people. So they're gonna have to hear from their from their Iowa can see here really quick because they're gonna lose a lot of money because of this. Right? So that that part I don't think is controversial. It benefits the United States and it saves lives around the world, which I think, you know, we should all support.

• 21:47Speaker 01

  Yeah, you think? Yeah, that's like an easy like, oh, it saves lives like, oh, yeah, I'm for that, right? You would assume that that's the the snap reaction by most people. Can you let me know some of the development programs that are like on the fence in terms of like, maybe they don't make sense. Maybe they're boondoggles or whatever, you know?

• 22:06Speaker 02

  So there's a list. I don't want to repeat them because I can't tell now which ones are true or not.

• 22:12Speaker 01

  All the condoms in Gaza thing?

• 22:14Speaker 05

  Oh, Jesus.

• 22:15Speaker 02

  Yeah, there's a lot. And I've seen congresspersons read them in Congress, so I assume they're reading.

• 22:24Speaker 02

  And some of them, I think everybody on this is like, what? Why are we funding that?

• 22:27Speaker 01

  Sure.

• 22:28Speaker 02

  So I'm not I'm not saying that there isn't in you guys have already said it, you particularly, there's there's there's stuff that is funded by a lot of different agencies around the government that I love that are head scratchers.

• 22:39Speaker 01

  Right.

• 22:39Speaker 02

  So I'm all about going through that and cutting them because we could take that money and spend it on something more worthwhile to the American people. So I'm not defending all of it. And I don't think anybody is, to be honest. But I'm just defending the part of it that's at the core, the whole reason why it was created. Uh, uh, back in in the early 60s. It's still relevant today. It's as relevant as it was back then. And I think we just need to make it more effective in more line with with uh, what the American people expect.

• 23:10Speaker 01

  Yeah, I think that's a totally logical and reasonable way of that that everyone, you know, anyone who's has the purse string should be doing that, like living by that standard. Like, I don't think I can't see this be why this is such a why this has to be such a wedge issue and a political issue. It's I mean, it's because Elon Musk. Let's not get it twisted here. Okay, like, I'm gonna say it. You know what I mean? Like, I have, I don't care at all. So.

• 23:40Speaker 01

  And what's going on with him is I'd be worried if I work in any federal uh federal agency or department, right? Like you got, you just got like basically walking papers, the similar ones that they got at Twitter. Two years ago, meanwhile, Twitter's not even profitable yet. Like, so let's not act like he's doing stuff that makes sense. It doesn't.

• 24:03Speaker 01

  And you know, they did it with the CIA. They sent us, you know, what if the CIA, what if half the CIA? It was like, you know what? I'll take my walking papers, go to the private sector, make three times as much money as I make in the CIA. And the CIA's got it. When sixty percent, uh, forty percent or is it sixty or forty percent of the CIA's budget goes towards intel on China, right? Our next greatest peer, uh, near peer threat. So I don't know, it's too much to me and I'm just a dummy. It's too much like ready, fire, aim, like not even giving a shit about the lives it affects, the national security it affects. They shot over a list of the email, uh, names of the CIA folks that had signed up over the last two years over unsecured

• 24:47Speaker 01

  uh, emails. Like, what are we doing here? Like, this isn't like just a startup. Like, yeah, they sent over a list of the names of the CIA folks who had just been hired over the last two years. Because they're more likely to get fired, I guess, or easier to get rid of over unsecured emails. Yeah.

• 25:06Speaker 02

  Yeah, so they're in a probation period, so it is easier to terminate them. Um, the issue, of course, I don't, we'll start with the email and go to the broader issue. I mean, there's, I don't know why you wouldn't do that on a security mail.

• 25:19Speaker 01

  Right.

• 25:21Speaker 02

  They tried to obscure it by not including the last name, but some people have very distinguishable first names. Let's face it, we're not all John Smith. Right? So, um, that's a problem, big problem. It's going to be a big, big problem for them to deploy, especially if they do have these certain first names that are very easily, um, identifiable, so unique. The bigger issue, and I'm biased, and you know, me and Jason were both in the agency. So I'll start with that. First of all, the agency is very small. The exact number is classified, so I don't even really know it, but I will guess. But I can say, because we used to say this to a lot of congressional delegations is,

• 26:02Speaker 02

  at one time, there was a base in Afghanistan that had more military members than CIA had people.

• 26:10Speaker 01

  Oh, wow.

• 26:10Speaker 02

  All of it. Okay, so, you know, if there's some kind of cost savings, then you've definitely gone to the wrong place when it comes to personnel. In addition to that, especially on the clandestine side,

• 26:26Speaker 02

  it costs an extraordinary amount to train a person. I mean, they told us it's more than a fighter pilot. The training, you know, for, you know, just PMO, for example, could take over two years. And then you're going to get language before you actually, so we're getting rid, and PMOs were very small. But the clandestine side, which is much broader than my little tribe, it costs a lot of money just to get them before they walk out the door to do their first job, right? It's a lot of training. It's repetitive. Then there's language. There's all sorts of things that they have to go through before they're actually hitting the streets, doing the clandestine job, which is, is, is dangerous, very important.

• 27:10Speaker 02

  And there's no decent country in the world that ever didn't have an intelligence, right? I don't care, it's like you could go back to, we had raiding parties as primitive men. And the, you know, probably the second thing they thought of is let's, let's go collect information on the other group, right? So, I mean, this is a core function of any society. We do it better than anybody in the world with a budget that's actually pretty reasonable. So I would hope that they, and I, I know that a lot of the, the career national security folks in the administration are going to stand up about this. We don't want them to take that. We'll have to replace them. It'll cost more and it will take years to get to the point if we get a lot of takeouts in this buyout. So I hope that they don't.

• 27:53Speaker 02

  And it's in the interest back far of the US people that they don't.

• 27:57Speaker 04

  Sponsored by GSK, the makers of Extenture, Depamocumab ULAA. If your asthma keeps interrupting, it may be time to try something else. Extenture is an ultra-long-acting prescription-maintenance treatment for severe asthma, eosinophilic type, ages 12 and older. It isn't for sudden breathing problems. Extenture is the first and only add-on treatment that can help deliver protection from asthma attacks with two doses a year. Just one dose every six months. That's a lot of time for everything in between. Serious allergic reactions can occur. Get help right away for swelling of face, mouth, tongue, or trouble breathing. Don't change or stop medicines, including steroids, unless told by your doctor. Report if you have a parasitic infection, common cold, sinus infection,

• 28:42Speaker 04

  inflammation in the nose, flu or flu-like symptoms, joint pain or sore throat may occur. Carry on with fewer attacks and ask your doctor about Extenture. Learn more at extenture.com or call 1-833-393-3678.

• 28:58Speaker 06

  OnDeck is built to back small businesses like yours. Whether you're buying equipment, expanding your team, or bridging cash flow gaps, OnDeck's loans up to $400,000 help make it happen fast. Rated A+ by the Better Business Bureau and earning thousands of 5-star TrustPilot reviews, OnDeck delivers funding you can count on. Apply in minutes at ondeck.com. Depending on certain loan attributes, your business loan may be issued by OnDeck or Celtic Bank. OnDeck does not lend in North Dakota. All loans and amounts subject to lender approval.

• 29:31Speaker 01

  Yeah, sorry to the Elon Musk fans out there, but I'm gonna call it like, the guy's a joke. Like, he shouldn't be anywhere near the administration at all. Forget the fact that he's a CEO of like four or five companies that gets government contracts. And it's just insane conflict of interest. That's for sure.

• 29:55Speaker 01

  And I don't want to get anybody worked up because it's right or left thing. Uh, but it's wild and anybody who's like sort of logical and reasonable sees that and understands that. Cause there's things you can cut. Yeah, there's a four trillion dollar budget, right? Or whatever the trillions of dollar our budgets like we could cut stuff hundred percent. When the next budget comes up, go in there and figure it out. Like do your job as a Congress. Um, and negotiate it, debate it, do whatever you need to do, what you get paid for. And, uh, take care of business. I mean, the Defense Department can't pass an audit. The Marines can, but the entire Defense Department can't.

• 30:36Speaker 01

  Right? That's an issue. I'm not saying cut the Defense Department by half. I would never say that because we have real threats out there, but. You could find stuff to cut. You could, you don't, maybe you don't need seventeen different like submarine, uh, development programs, right? Maybe chop that down to four. Like there's probably ways you could, you could line item it and find things to cut. So I don't know. Sorry if I'm a pinko con.

• 31:03Speaker 05

  Well, and, and sorry to add to that, along with what you're saying, um, you know, making these cuts. Don't just send people to the chopping block, fold them into other areas. They have skills that can be used. Don't just, hey, you have a week to decide the rest of your life, you know, your fate. Um, fold them into other areas. That's, you know, this, you know, willy nilly thing that we're doing here is just, it's dangerous in my opinion.

• 31:32Speaker 01

  I think it makes sense as a strategy if you're. A startup or a business owner that just like you're, um. Whatever Bain Capital is, like a type of like a private equity company that goes and chops up a company and makes money off that. I don't practically agree with that too, but it makes more sense to do that in the private sector than it would. Governmental stuff. And I don't know what I'm talking about, but I'm just looking at like set, like some logic, just one plus one equals two, which doesn't make sense.

• 32:01Speaker 05

  Or even if you're going to do it in the federal government, do it stretched out over strategically over time period, not just. You have a week, you know, or, or we're just going to gut this thing, whether you like it or not. That just doesn't make any sense.

• 32:17Speaker 01

  And it's unconstitutional.

• 32:19Speaker 02

  Yeah, and it might sound to be disappointing if I didn't bring up the the whole issue of massive national debt. He tracks it a lot. We do. What's thirty four trillion? You know, I think it's right now. And I I saw a stat the other day that by twenty fifty that fifty percent of our budget will go to paying interest. So it's a real issue. I mean, I'm not an economist, but you don't have to be an economist to see that. So but there has to be, like you guys just said, there has to be a comprehensive plan. Right? Because even the cuts are talking about now aren't going to do much to it. So like, how are we going to actually increase revenues, cut spending? I mean, how are we going to do that? It most politicians don't care much beyond their term either side.

• 33:01Speaker 02

  So if there isn't some like coming together of the folks that are making these decisions, coming up with a plan that will suck for some people. Um, whether you're paying higher taxes or tariffs or like whatever it is that we have to, we have to come up with a plan because it just seems like where we're headed is just like we've ignored, we just ignored it. Like, we're just not even talking about it and then hoping that it won't come to fruition, but it seems like it will. I'll tell one short anecdote. When I was at the Pentagon, the Secretary Mattis had us go to an offsite with all those folks. We had one, and I'll leave the person out, but it was a significant political figure that was there.

• 33:44Speaker 02

  Answer all sorts of questions, and most of them are obviously very helpful. But he got one question on the deficit or the debt, rather. And his answer was Camp Pendleton. And we're like, what? And he like, what about Camp Pendleton? He goes, we're going to sell Camp Pendleton.

• 34:03Speaker 01

  To who?

• 34:05Speaker 02

  People like like Camp Pendleton, I mean.

• 34:07Speaker 01

  The developers.

• 34:08Speaker 02

  Developers, right? And so and then, of course, the second question after he said that is First Marine Division, right? So I mean, it's and then it I mean, a lot of us left out of that going, well, I was concerned about the debt. Now I'm super concerned about it. Like it's that's the plan. Like, literally, this person was substantial. And I don't know if he was being tongue in cheek, but it was like.

• 34:30Speaker 01

  Is the plan to deal with the debt to sell off federal lands? I don't know. I don't know. But I've never heard that articulated by anybody else. But I would, you know, I know this isn't what this show is about, but we're gonna have to deal with it because it is a security issue too, a national security issue to have this this incredible debt hanging over all of us.

• 34:51Speaker 03

  If you wanna really go after it. And as far as the DOD budget, you you go after the acquisition programs. I mean, not, you don't, you don't tinker around the margins with manpower. You know, trying to persuade a handful of people to retire early. You go after the big acquisition programs because if you want to talk about wastage and pork and that is where it occurs, right? And everyone knows it. But no one wants to go after them because there are too many people with vested interests. I mean, it is, you know, the I know it's a cliche, but the military industrial complex, that is the heart of the military industrial complex. And I haven't heard any talk from this administration about really going after that.

• 35:35Speaker 03

  I haven't seen any action either. And that, you know, I I would welcome that. I mean, the whole, our whole acquisition program needs to be retooled. It is hopelessly slow, inefficient. By the time we field pieces of gear, everything from, you know, the seven eighty-two gear to aircraft carriers, they're largely obsolete. And by the way, aircraft carriers are obsolete. And if you want to save ten billion bucks a pop, then you and you do away with, you know, the modernization programs and the and the and the building programs, but I won't get into get into that. But you know, my point is all of this is for show, well, the same for show.

• 36:17Speaker 03

  If you want to really go, it's cut down on the budget, DOD. That's what you do.

• 36:23Speaker 01

  Well, I remember the F thirty-five program, which obviously it brought out like a really good plane and they're out there and they're they're we given them, sold them to our allies and stuff like that.

• 36:35Speaker 01

  But parts for that plane were built or manufactured in like forty-five states because they wanted it to be a job program. And I get that. I love jobs for a lot of states, but. There's definitely more efficient ways of doing things, right? And yeah, I mean, unlimited money into Congress is not the way to keep things efficient, right? Like, that's always gonna

• 37:00Speaker 03

  It's poor barrel politics, right? It ties and the same and the other vested interests, of course, are the, you know, the giant defense companies. And there's only half a dozen of them. And and they are, they get contracts again and again and again to reduce hardware. Um, which, as I've said, is is largely obsolete. Uh, I'm not, I'm not talking about the F thirty five, you know, I mean, that's an extraordinary aircraft. But you can look at, you can, anyone, anyone familiar with acquisition and more familiar than I am. Uh, can trot out a long list of failed projects that have cost the government billions of dollars, and that's no exaggeration in in aggregate.

• 37:41Speaker 01

  Yeah. And like, yeah, like you said,

• 37:44Speaker 03

  But it, but it's, but no one goes after it because, as you pointed out, uh, this is tremendous, tremendous congressional buy in to, uh, you know, you regardless, regardless of which side of the aisle you fall, you're gonna have, if you have constituents who are making money out of one of these acquisition programs, constituent companies, then you're gonna, you're gonna fight tooth and nail to prevent that program from being scrapped.

• 38:13Speaker 01

  Right, or you're gonna get primaried, right? Like, he'll get booted.

• 38:18Speaker 01

  Yeah, so we we should just fix the entire government, us four right here. I'm ready when you guys are to get going on this.

• 38:27Speaker 01

  Yeah, I, I don't know. I don't know what the hell is gonna happen.

• 38:31Speaker 03

  I mean, that's certainly, you know, that's certainly fat. I mean, we've talked about that. And and and I've got to say, I mean, there's there's part of me that just looks at the Pentagon, you know, twenty eight thousand people. We should be, we should be solving everything in the world, you know, and but it, I mean, it's a, it's a major city. I mean, yes, we we definitely have, we definitely have a tremendous layer of fat when it comes even to D O D in in manpower is is my guess. But that's all it is on my part. It's kind of my guess. Uh, because I don't, you know, I've never done the analytics. But even then, you're not gonna save, that's not what, as I said, where you're gonna save most money.

• 39:13Speaker 03

  And the other area where the O D spends most of its money is on

• 39:22Speaker 03

  benefits, right? I mean, I hate to say this, but retirement, a huge amount because as people get older, you've got and then remember we had military retire a lot of people during Vietnam, during Afghanistan and Iraq, disability payments, all of that takes up an enormous amount of the the tense budget. Are you going to go after that? No, I would hope not.

• 39:50Speaker 01

  Yeah.

• 39:51Speaker 02

  Exactly.

• 39:53Speaker 01

  It's interesting because it like Mick had alluded to it too. It's like all kind of interlocked, right? Like even if we got rid of USAID, which helps domestic farmers, right? Bring food to different countries that need it. Like you said, like if we fix the healthcare system, it'd probably be a lot cheaper for folks in America, whether they're military or not, to like, it would ease the burden on like certain agencies and be able to trim fat if healthcare was like more streamlined, like every other, you know, developed country in the world.

• 40:28Speaker 02

  Yeah, I mean, Secretary Mattis said, I think when he was general, but that if you're going to cut USAID, you're going to have to give him some money to buy more bullets, right? So this is also, a lot of these places. And I saw one example that I think at first, most people would say, ah, it seems like we shouldn't be spending it. But we were spending money on, I guess, a version, if not Sesame Street, teaching kids in Iraq and Syria. You know, at first you're like, wow, should we be paying it? And then when they say, well, do you want Big Bird teaching these kids? Or do you want ISIS?

• 41:03Speaker 03

  I mean, madrassas, yeah.

• 41:05Speaker 02

  Yeah, right? It doesn't cost that much. And obviously, we want kids to be educated and we sure the hell don't want them indoctrinated into the theology or the depravity of ISIS, right? So when you step back and actually look at it, it's, again, it's pennies.

• 41:22Speaker 02

  On the budget and it does so that's those one of those things that they they should be a full review, not just a, you know, a snippet on, you know, uh, social media where people just go, I don't know why we spend that it it needs to actually be thought out and explained. Uh, and if they can't explain it, then it needs to be cut, right? So

• 41:40Speaker 01

  Sure.

• 41:40Speaker 02

  It's a, it's a two way street, but it's not as easy as it might appear, uh, from a social media post.

• 41:48Speaker 01

  Yeah, and not two hundred eighty characters, right? Yeah, I budget, you know.

• 41:54Speaker 01

  All right. I don't feel good about this conversation, but, uh, um, so are we gonna buy a eyes on time sharing Gaza soon? What are we doing? Cause the next bit of news was, uh, President Trump came out the other day in a joint press conference with, uh, Bibi Netanyahu. Talking about relocating, uh, Gazans, Palestinians from Gaza to the surrounding areas, Egypt, Jordan. And the US taking over Gaza and redeveloping it, which is like a new wrinkle in this entire and this roller coaster.

• 42:30Speaker 02

  Sure. Yeah, so I'll, I'll start with where it started, then where it went and, you know, potentially try to put, you know, both sides, if there is both sides.

• 42:44Speaker 02

  One, I think it surprised even the White House. So, and I think it's enough reporting that we can, we know that's true. Um, and this certainly Defense Department and who would not want to sign up for another war in the Middle East. Um, and, uh, State Department. So the issues with it, you laid it out, I think, um, one, it's completely impractical, right? There's too many people that aren't going to be for just leave their home homeland. So it would be an extraordinarily difficult military problem. Well armed, uh, well entrenched, uh, it probably would require the US military and that's completely against

• 43:22Speaker 02

  the stated policy, uh, trying to pull herself out of conflicts, not going into conflicts that aren't even our conflict. Uh, so that's one. Uh, two, it's likely, and I'm not an international legal scholar, uh, but unlawful. Uh, you can't forcibly displace people from their homeland, period. It's not a thing. Just because you want to then occupy and potentially benefit from their terrain, uh, territory. So that's another downside. Uh, the third downside is everybody that would be required to do this is against it. Right? So the two countries where these people, people could potentially be forcibly relocated

• 44:06Speaker 02

  are Egypt and Jordan, and they're a hundred percent opposed. They would think completely destabilize their country and they don't have the infrastructure for it. Uh, and then the countries that we really need to come in and help reconstruct Gaza, the Gulf countries, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Qatar, uh, are also completely opposed to it. So it seems like a nonstarter from the get-go. And that's why even the White House rolled back, you know, he didn't mean permanent, he meant temporary, even though we said permanent, like the word, uh, permanent. It, it, it's been walked back substantially. I think we're kind of where we were before the press conference. I'm sure that there's certain elements of that Yahoo's coalition that'll just continuously go back to the press conference because they want this to

• 44:47Speaker 02

  happen. But I don't think we're there. Uh, if there is, you know, an upside to be as fair as I can, um, it, you know, some people are saying it's a negotiation tactic, just throw, just on the wall, just kind of a very out there idea. And then when everybody's opposed to it, like they are, turn to them and say, what's your idea? So I do hope that, you know, some of these countries that are very, uh, comfortable sitting on the sidelines and critiquing our ideas, some of them have been good for the last forty years, do start coming more involved. And well, what's the solution? So that might be very, um, uh, rosy way of looking at it, but that's certainly what some of them are saying. And if it does

• 45:29Speaker 02

  get more countries to the table to actually present ideas and ways to implement those ideas, I hope that does happen. But this, I think, is a nonstarter.

• 45:38Speaker 03

  I think, um, you know, to Mick's point about Egypt and Jordan, again, second and, second and third stage effects, and Jordan is, Jordan.

• 45:51Speaker 03

  Just over half the population is Palestinian. And during this whole, since Gaza kicked off back in October of last year, the Jordanian government has been hanging on by its fingernails. And the Muslim Brotherhood gained traction, significant traction for the first time in the Jordanian parliament in last elections. So, you know, mass displacement of Gazans into Jordan would undoubtedly have a catastrophic effect on, you know, one of the most benevolent democracies in the Middle East and a staunch ally of the United States.

• 46:32Speaker 03

  And now Egypt, Egypt has its own concerns with Muslim Brotherhood, as well know. And Egypt said that, hey, the peace treaty with Israel is off if this happens. And so you can see, you know, Israel may scoff at that right now, but that's going to have significant ramifications for Israeli security too. Even if you don't care about anything else, Israel says all bets are off and lets that border be porous, especially, you know, with all the trouble that's been bubbling away in the Sinai, that's endless trouble for Israel. And unlike Gaza, where Israel could contain all this problem, all these problems.

• 47:16Speaker 03

  Now you've got two massive borders and countries are just not enough border guards to be able to stop the, you know, Palestinian militants from going back and forth and then attacking Israel. So, you know, Netanyahu chortling away about this again just shows that, that, yeah, he's a, he's a political operative and he sees again another lifeline, but this isn't good for his country either. It's disastrous, disastrous for the Middle East. And by the way, Russia and China are gonna, are also laughing because, I mean...

• 47:58Speaker 03

  Let's be honest.

• 47:59Speaker 04

  Sponsored by GSK, the makers of Extenture, Depamocumab ULAA. If your asthma keeps interrupting, it may be time to try something else. Extenture is an ultra-long-acting prescription-maintenance treatment for severe asthma, eosinophilic type, ages 12 and older. It isn't for sudden breathing problems. Extenture is the first and only add-on treatment that can help deliver protection from asthma attacks with two doses a year. Just one dose every six months. That's a lot of time for everything in between. Serious allergic reactions can occur. Get help right away for swelling of face, mouth, tongue, or trouble breathing. Don't change or stop medicines, including steroids, unless told by your doctor. Report if you have a parasitic infection, common cold, sinus infection,

• 48:44Speaker 04

  inflammation in the nose, flu or flulike symptoms, joint pain or sore throat may occur. Carry on with fewer attacks and ask your doctor about Extenture. Learn more at extenture.com or call 1-833-393-3678.

• 48:59Speaker 06

  Cash flow crunch? OnDeck's small-business line of credit gives your business immediate access to funds up to $200,000 right when you need it. Cover seasonal dips, manage payroll, restock inventory, or tackle unexpected expenses without missing a beat. With flexible draws, transparent pricing, and control over repayment, get funded quickly and confidently. Apply today at ondeck.com. Funds could be available as soon as tomorrow. Depending on certain loan attributes, your business loan may be issued by OnDeck or Celtic Bank. OnDeck does not lend in North Dakota. All loans and amounts subject to lender approval.

• 49:30Speaker 03

  The United States is looking not very smart right now. And then they're poisoning the wings, ready to take advantage of that yet again. It's just bad. You know, it's just bad news across the board.

• 49:45Speaker 01

  Yeah. And I mean, it looked like Netanyahu was pretty surprised by it as well, right? Because if you, I'm sure if you ask his, like, his right of his coalition, you know, they want to come back into Gaza and resettle it, right? Like, that's, they probably don't make it a secret. That's what they want.

• 50:02Speaker 03

  Well, yeah, Netanyahu's, yeah, the right, the right wing in Israel has for a long time. Said that Jordan should, you know, that the Palestinians have a home in Jordan. But there's all, you know, kinds of things wrong with that. I mean, even if you don't care about the ethical part of this of simply transplanting people from that from one place to another, you know, which may seem like a great idea

• 50:30Speaker 03

  to, to, again, many Americans until, for instance, you talk about taking Brooklyn and now that's a bad example because I think most people there would just love to move anywhere in the United

• 50:42Speaker 03

  I mean, any other like normal part of the United States.

• 50:47Speaker 01

  It's probably fair.

• 50:50Speaker 03

  Yeah, I mean, it's.

• 50:53Speaker 03

  But.

• 50:57Speaker 03

  You know, the, the point with the, the right wing in Israel is that they really can't see.

• 51:05Speaker 03

  To say they, they lack.

• 51:08Speaker 03

  They lack vision is an understatement. I mean, all they're thinking about is return to Judea and Samaria and this, this is our homeland, blah, blah, blah. But they, they're told on that homeland, it's going to grow increasingly fragile if they perceive these policies. You can't appeal to their ethics because they don't have them, you know, they, they really do feel as though the Palestinians are untamished, they're not, you know, that they're, they're people who not, not worthy of of consideration. So you have to appeal to the fact that they're going to undermine their own security.

• 51:48Speaker 03

  I mean, it's, you remember when we, we, we had an episode here with an Israeli, former Israeli politician and that, that appeal just kept falling flat, you know, it's like, look, we know you don't care about the ethical part of this argument, but do you understand that by simply plowing on as though these are not human beings and they don't deserve anything or that, that in the end, you, you know, you can't ever attain what you want to attain for your people.

• 52:19Speaker 01

  That's a good point.

• 52:20Speaker 03

  Yeah. Which is a secure homeland.

• 52:25Speaker 01

  Yeah, very well said. Um.

• 52:29Speaker 01

  I mean, that's it. Have we solved it? Have we figured everything out? I feel like we haven't.

• 52:34Speaker 03

  Right? Yeah. Abolish the Pentagon.

• 52:38Speaker 01

  Well, we know, we see now what Andy's really, he's anti aircraft.

• 52:41Speaker 02

  Yeah, he's been from the beginning.

• 52:46Speaker 03

  Anyone with a brain is, yeah, against these.

• 52:50Speaker 02

  They're definitely rethinking the aircraft carrier.

• 52:53Speaker 01

  I mean, they're not cheap. They're 13 billion a pop.

• 52:56Speaker 02

  And how, how much is a missile that can take it out, right?

• 52:58Speaker 01

  Yeah.

• 53:02Speaker 03

  I mean, I was in a, you know, I'm digressing a little bit here and, and I, you know, when we divested the tanks in the rank hall, it was a hugely emotional issue. And actually I didn't, I, I didn't hundred percent agree with it. I think if you need, you know, you need certain weapon systems, but the problem is I think we need to re, and you certainly need a rolling gun platform. Uh, you know, wherever you're going to use infantry and, um, and then to scrap them, um, I thought was premature because until you can figure out, until we can have unmanned tanks. You know, that is the solution.

• 53:41Speaker 03

  Yeah. Or unmanned aircraft carriers that fly drones, you know, and multiple ones. Massively reduced cost. But once you start having to pay for the care and feeding and protection of human beings in any platform, uh, then the price starts shooting up.

• 54:02Speaker 02

  Exactly. But tanks are a good example of that, right?

• 54:05Speaker 03

  Yeah, yeah, absolutely. If you could, you can make multiple little M1A1 models. Um, you know, with similar, similar capability gun platform, right?

• 54:18Speaker 02

  Yep.

• 54:19Speaker 03

  But unmanned.

• 54:21Speaker 02

  Much lighter, much cheaper.

• 54:23Speaker 03

  Yeah.

• 54:24Speaker 02

  Absolutely.

• 54:27Speaker 01

  And I mean, going back to the guy that came back, I was trying to think what I was gonna say. Um, like Saudi Arabia put out a statement at like 5:00 AM their time after that. So they were like, yeah, we do not, we're not down with this. We want Palestine to have their own state.

• 54:45Speaker 01

  You know, dropping a statement like that at 5:00 AM local time is, you know, means like, yeah, this is serious for us. We're not waiting till we wake up and have our, you know, our tea.

• 54:54Speaker 03

  Yeah, that's another aspect of the day is they've been absolutely consistent with that throughout.

• 55:00Speaker 02

  And one of the big initiatives for this administration when it comes to Middle East is this grand bargain, right? Expanding the Abraham Accords, which is Saudi Arabia, Israel coming into some kind of agreement. And this, this took us well down the path of the other direction. So that's another reason why they, they walked it back, I think substantially.

• 55:20Speaker 01

  Yeah.

• 55:22Speaker 01

  Anything else, boys? This was great. Sorry if anyone's upset.

• 55:29Speaker 05

  I'm not.

• 55:30Speaker 01

  Talked a little smack about Elon Musk, sorry.

• 55:35Speaker 02

  I'm totally into space exploration, so I, I.

• 55:38Speaker 01

  So am I.

• 55:39Speaker 02

  People saw that.

• 55:40Speaker 01

  Listen, I think Tasso's done some great stuff in terms of like.

• 55:44Speaker 03

  They sex has done great things.

• 55:46Speaker 01

  Yeah, I, I'm, I think he's done some great things for sure, but he's gone off the deep end.

• 55:51Speaker 05

  Yeah, I think he stuck his, his toe into the wrong pool of water here.

• 55:56Speaker 01

  He's just been too long at the party, man. You can't be the richest guy alive and like have, be a normal person your whole life. Something's gonna give. It's like, look at Gaddafi, look at like these people who are in power for 30 years. They're just too long at the party and they gotta go home.

• 56:12Speaker 01

  Guys, do me a favor, check everybody's links out in the description, McMorroy, Lobo, Fogbo, doing great stuff, humanitarian stuff. Uh, it.

• 56:25Speaker 03

  Dee, you just muted yourself, man.

• 56:29Speaker 03

  Oh.

• 56:32Speaker 05

  Cool.

• 56:33Speaker 02

  Oh, that's what happens when we talk about Elon.

• 56:35Speaker 05

  Exactly, yeah.

• 56:43Speaker 02

  He's still gone.

• 56:44Speaker 05

  Sign it.

• 56:45Speaker 03

  Okay, well, we are signing off here. About Longbow Futter, please check out my book. I get at least a dime every time one is bought anywhere in the world. And we will see you next week and hopefully we'll have Dee back at that time. I think he's still running the show, so only he can end, right?

• 57:06Speaker 05

  Oh, sorry.

• 57:09Speaker 03

  Say bye, Dee.

• 57:10Speaker 02

  Bye, guys.

• 57:19Speaker 04

  Sponsored by GSK, the makers of Extenture. Depamocumab, ULAA. If your asthma keeps interrupting, it may be time to try something else. Extenture is an ultra-long-acting prescription maintenance treatment for severe asthma, eosinophilic type, ages 12 and older. It isn't for sudden breathing problems. Extenture is the first and only add-on treatment that can help deliver protection from asthma attacks with two doses a year. Just one dose every six months. That's a lot of time for everything in between. Serious allergic reactions can occur. Get help right away for swelling of face, mouth, tongue, or trouble breathing. Don't change or stop medicines, including steroids, unless told by your doctor. Report if you have a parasitic infection,

• 58:02Speaker 04

  common cold, sinus infection, inflammation in the nose, flu or flulike symptoms, joint pain or sore throat may occur. Carry on with fewer attacks and ask your doctor about Extenture. Learn more at extenture.com or call 1-833-393-3678.

• 58:19Speaker 06

  Cash flow crunch? OnDeck's small business line of credit gives your business immediate access to funds, up to $200,000, right when you need it. Cover seasonal dips, manage payroll, restock inventory, or tackle unexpected expenses without missing a beat. With flexible draws, transparent pricing, and control over repayment, get funded quickly and confidently. Apply today at ondeck.com. Funds could be available as soon as tomorrow. Depending on certain loan attributes, your business loan may be issued by OnDeck or Celtic Bank. OnDeck does not lend in North Dakota. All loans and amounts subject to lender approval.

• 58:56Speaker 04

  Sponsored by GSK, the makers of Extenture, Depamocumab ULAA. If your asthma keeps interrupting, it may be time to try something else. Extenture is an ultra-long-acting prescription maintenance treatment for severe asthma, eosinophilic type, ages 12 and older. It isn't for sudden breathing problems. Extenture is the first and only add-on treatment that can help deliver protection from asthma attacks with two doses a year. Just one dose every six months. That's a lot of time for everything in between. Serious allergic reactions can occur. Get help right away for swelling of face, mouth, tongue, or trouble breathing. Don't change or stop medicines, including steroids, unless told by your doctor. Report if you have a parasitic infection, common cold, sinus infection,

• 59:41Speaker 04

  inflammation in the nose, flu or fluke-like symptoms, joint pain or sore throat may occur. Carry on with fewer attacks and ask your doctor about Extenture. Learn more at Extenture.com or call 1-833-393-3678.

• 59:56Speaker 00

  OnDeck is built to back small businesses like yours. Whether you're buying equipment, expanding your team, or bridging cash flow gaps, OnDeck's loans up to $400,000 make it happen fast. Rated A+ by the Better Business Bureau and earning thousands of 5-star TrustPilot reviews, OnDeck delivers funding you can count on. Apply in minutes at OnDeck.com. Depending on certain loan attributes, your business loan may be issued by OnDeck or Celtic Bank. OnDeck does not lend in North Dakota. All loans and amounts subject to lender approval.

• 1:00:32Speaker 04

  Sponsored by GSK, the makers of Extenture, Depamocumab ULAA. If your asthma keeps interrupting, it may be time to try something else. Extenture is an ultra-long-acting prescription maintenance treatment for severe asthma, eosinophilic type, ages 12 and older. It isn't for sudden breathing problems. Extenture is the first and only add-on treatment that can help deliver protection from asthma attacks with two doses a year. Just one dose every six months. That's a lot of time for everything in between. Serious allergic reactions can occur. can occur. Get help right away for swelling of face, mouth, tongue, or trouble breathing. Don't change or stop medicines, including steroids, unless told by your doctor. Report if you have a parasitic infection.

• 1:01:15Speaker 04

  Common cold, sinus infection, inflammation in the nose, flu or fluke-like symptoms, joint pain or sore throat may occur. Carry on with fewer attacks and ask your doctor about Extenture. Learn more at Extenture.com or call 1-833-393-3678.

• 1:01:32Speaker 00

  OnDeck is built to back small businesses like yours. Whether you're buying equipment, expanding your team, or bridging cash flow gaps, OnDeck's loans up to $400,000 make it happen fast. Rated A+ by the Better Business Bureau and earning thousands of five-star TrustPilot reviews, OnDeck delivers funding you can count on. Apply in minutes at OnDeck.com. Depending on certain loan attributes, your business loan may be issued by OnDeck or Celtic Bank. OnDeck does not lend in North Dakota. All loans and amounts subject to lender approval.

• 1:02:00Speaker 04

  Sponsored by GSK, the makers of Extenture. Depamocumab ULAA. If your asthma keeps interrupting, it may be time to try something else. Extenture is an ultra-long-acting prescription maintenance treatment for severe asthma, eosinophilic type, ages 12 and older. It isn't for sudden breathing problems. Extenture is the first and only add-on treatment that can help deliver protection from asthma attacks with two doses a year. Just one dose every six months. That's a lot of time for everything in between. Serious allergic reactions can occur. Get help right away for swelling of face, mouth, tongue, or trouble breathing. Don't change or stop medicines, including steroids, unless told by your doctor. Report if you have a parasitic infection.

• 1:02:43Speaker 04

  Common cold, sinus infection, inflammation in the nose, flu or fluke-like symptoms, joint pain or sore throat may occur. Carry on with fewer attacks and ask your doctor about Extenture. Learn more at Extenture.com or call 1-833-393-3678.

• 1:03:00Speaker 06

  Games on a break? Don't doom scroll. Try rips on Underdog. Buy a digital pack, rip it open, and reveal a real, physical card. Football, basketball, even Pokémon. Packs start at just $5. Ship it straight to your door or sell it back instantly at full market value. Max value up to $125,000. Download Underdog and get in on the chase. Deposit $5, get five free packs. Real rips, real cards, real cash. Only on Underdog. Unleash your dog. 18 plus, terms apply. Top Grails are extremely rare. OnDeck is built to back small businesses like yours. Whether you're buying equipment, expanding your team, or bridging cash flow gaps, OnDeck's loans up to $400,000 help make it happen fast. Rated A+ by the Better Business Bureau

• 1:03:44Speaker 06

  and earning thousands of five-star TrustPilot reviews, OnDeck delivers funding you can count on. Apply in minutes at ondeck.com. Depending on certain loan attributes, your business loan may be issued by OnDeck or Celtic Bank. OnDeck does not lend in North Dakota. All loans and amounts subject to lender approval.