I think that there has to be a demonstrated set of actions that the president and probably
only the president can do.
And some of those are things like saying, and I'll just use it, I'll use it as an example.
I don't know what direction he's going to take yet when it comes to this.
Let's just talk about the FBI as an example.
A demonstrated action is to put chains on the doors on Friday afternoon of the inauguration
and park security, even if you had to bring military, national guard, but martial service,
park them around the building, all of the entrances, and nobody, and the president stands
there, and the president of the United States, Trump, instead of going to his office in
the White House, stops at the, because he's the president now.
He stops at the Hoover building as they're coming down, you know, Pennsylvania Avenue,
and he stands there and he holds a quick press conference and says, you see this building
behind me?
It's never going to ruin your life again.
They're done.
It's being closed as of now.
I'm locking the doors.
I mean, there's got to be a demonstrated action.
We have a very special guest, General Michael Flynn.
We were just talking before this started about this period of time we're in, and it's historical
context.
And, Mike, you brought up that this is, you brought up a couple of eras in history.
It was about Alexander the Great, and in the legend of Alexander the Great and the
Gordian Knot, it was this impossible knot that, you know, no one could untie, but
the person who would would rule all of Asia, I think was the idea.
And it seems to me that the administrative state in the U.S. today is the modern equivalent
of the Gordian Knot.
You can't get at it in any conventional way.
So I wonder, the way Alexander got through it, obviously people probably know the stories,
but it took bold and very unconventional action.
I just wonder what is the bold and unconventional action to break through the administrative
state Gordian Knot?
Yeah.
So, and first of all, thank you guys for having me on your show.
And I know we talked about doing a longer show at some point in time, so I hope we're
able to pull that off for both you guys as well as your audience, because I do, I do
have immense, you know, confidence in your audience that, you know, because of the
types of things that you guys cover.
So, and I think that their, you know, their expectation is always, you know, more
and more if, especially if they think it's an interesting subject.
And this particular subject, I think, is fascinating because, you know, if you think
about the great captains of history, you know, the great leaders of history that were, that
we still talk about.
I mean, you just mentioned, you know, Peter and you mentioned, and there's others throughout
history that are memorable because they took extraordinary risk during extraordinary
times.
And some of those times they created, they created some of those conditions.
And that's, that's a, that's a part of human history.
I think where we are right now, where this administration is right now, and I'm talking
about the, you know, I love, I think it was a Doug that said, you know, Bidenistas.
I love that word, Bidenistas.
I'm going to use that from now on.
So, so this administration is being led by an individual who was declared to be
generally incompetent by a special counsel by the name of her.
Okay.
So people can go back and look at that H you are.
So, you know, his memory wasn't that great, right?
Talking about the president of the United States of America.
So we're, we're in a place right now where this, this will not be a peaceful
transfer of power.
This is not going to be a peaceful transfer of power, even though Biden said it,
even though Obama said it to, to Trump back in 2016 and Biden just said it to
Trump last Wednesday.
Do not count for one second that this is going to be a peaceful transfer of
power in the last 24 hours.
There are reports of at least six of these high, very offensive capabilities.
These ATACMS missiles that were fired from Ukraine soil into Russian soil.
These are offensive weapons.
And the only way that these weapons can be used is by applying a satellite
capability for the targeting, the precision targeting that is necessary.
That satellite capability comes from either NATO or directly from the United
States.
The only way to actually fire these weapons is by having people who are
not, who are the likelihood of them being Ukrainian are very, is very low.
So that's a, that's a tactical example of something that could immediately
take us into World War three.
Putin has already come out with a statement yesterday.
He came out with a statement prior to this firing where essentially Putin is
talking about the conditions will change if in fact these weapons systems
are used, meaning that the strategic conditions will change overnight if
these weapons are used.
So they've been used.
Now we have to wait and see what's going to happen in terms of a, of
the give and take of warfare, physical warfare between Russia and the West.
And I'll just say, you know, the West principally being the United States of
America.
So we have a, a president of the United States that probably should receive
what we call here in the United States, the 25th Amendment.
And Harris should automatically, she should immediately take that action.
And I, I, and I'm not saying this, you know, just to say it, I'm
saying it very precisely.
And then, then it's up to, it's up to her to show whether or not she actually is
competent enough to be able to handle this, you know, dramatic situation for
a short period of time, the people inside of the Trump orbit.
So what they need to start doing, and Trump can actually do this.
And I, I mentioned this to you guys on the prior to coming on, you
know, during the 26th period of time, there was a whole range of circumstances.
And one of the things that I got caught up in, you know, and I, I was
absolutely in my right to do it.
I, I, I spoke with the Russian ambassador at the time because there
was very high tension being created by the outgoing administration.
In this case, Obama, you know, when he, you know, after he said, we're
going to have the smooth transition of power, we did not.
And I was able to deescalate a very dramatic situation because of my
relationship with the Russian ambassador.
And then, of course, him relaying it back to Putin and the response
back was, was, okay, we're going to wait until Trump gets into office to
be able to have a more, you know, a more reasonable conversation.
Well, I think that President Trump, President-elect Trump, he may have
to take things into his own hands because the American people just gave
him a mandate for peace.
One of the things that Trump said during the campaign was he wanted
to end the killing in Ukraine.
So, so Trump actually has a responsibility not to act as the
president, but to act as a person who is going to be coming into
office very soon and make that phone call to say, hey, look, you
know, and that's not just to Putin, who he has a relationship with,
but that's the G who he has a relationship with and other world
leaders, Orban and others, even, even people in, in, in South
America, you know, Millay, he got the, the, the president of
Paraguay.
I mean, you have other international leaders.
And I think that we, that we still have the conference going
on down in South America right now.
So, so there's got to be sort of cool heads prevail time
because what we're seeing is we're seeing decision making by
the bureaucratic deep state in the, in Washington, DC, not, not
the White House, Biden is incapable.
It is undeniable he's incapable of making these types of decisions
that we just, that we just heard, you know, we just saw occur
in the last, frankly, from Sunday until the overnight
firing of these eight Tacoms.
So you have a bureaucratic deep state inside that are
making decisions.
And frankly, it's probably emanating from places like
the CIA.
So, and I, and I've said very publicly, guys, that, that I
think that John Brennan is sort of the tactical pointy end of the
spear here for this bureaucratic deep state.
And he's not even in the government right now.
So, so all that said, Matt Gaetz, Matt Gaetz is the
designated incoming Attorney General for the United States
of America for the Trump administration.
Matt Gaetz will likely become the Attorney General and Trump
has every authority, every constitutional privilege and
up and right to be able to appoint Matt Gaetz in one of
these, what they call recess type appointments.
He can clearly do that.
And Matt can actually sit in that position for close to, I
mean, damn near, you know, 400, I think it's 420 days or
something like that.
There's a 215 day rule.
And then there's an extension that he can stay there
if the, if they, if the dummies in the Senate don't
confirm him.
So Matt Gaetz ought to put the word out to those in the
Department of Justice to hold on all communications that had
anything to do with this very provocative offensive event that
the, that was promulgated by the West, whether it's NATO or
whether it's the United States, but hold on all those
communications.
We want all communications with anybody in the United
States government between, you know, this, you know,
between point A and point B that have to do with this issue.
And we want all the communications that go over to
Ukraine, hold on to all of it, because if you don't, we're
going to come after you.
There has to be a consequence for people that are making
these decisions that are not in the authority to do these
things.
The third thing, the third thing is Congress, Speaker,
Speaker Johnson should immediately move to impeach Biden
because, you know, the impeachment clause basically
talks about high crimes and misdemeanors, right?
These are, I mean, Trump was impeached because he said the
2020 election was stolen.
Trump was impeached because he had a perfectly good
phone call to Ukraine.
Twice they tried to impeach him.
So this is a case of, and again, it's undeniable,
provocative, offensive action, and then the Speaker
Johnson has a responsibility to sit there with his
leadership and say, you know, what do we do here?
You know, and they should move to impeach immediately if the
if the 25th Amendment isn't invoked by by Vice President
Harris.
And and that that move to impeach, you know, is a very
real, you know, he is he is basically taking the
nation to war.
So when you think about what's the high crime, what's
the misdemeanor, Biden is taking the nation potentially
to World War Three without a declaration of war by the
United States Congress.
Now, people can go, well, we've been doing this for a
long time, we've been we've been going overseas for a
long time without a declaration of war.
That doesn't mean that it's that it shouldn't happen.
That that's that's in our that that is in our system
that we're supposed to do that.
So so the nation then, you know, takes responsibility
for this and not just the president, right?
So those are just a couple of things that I believe
have to happen in this here and now going forward,
going forward, President Trump is going to have his
hands full because, you know, despite what what Elon
and Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy, who are
responsible for this, they call it the Doge, right?
The Department of Government Efficiency, I guess.
Number one, there will be, you know, there
should be no new departments created.
What they really have is they have a they have
a directive by President Elect Trump to find
places in our government that we like Millet did.
Millet, I love his up, where up, where up, right?
I mean, that was great.
I mean, it was he did it kind of in a comedic way,
but he did it in a very purposeful, precise way.
You know, as the as the incoming leader, and he
to me, as I've watched Argentina, you know,
I've watched Argentina actually begin to show
some some blossoming, right?
Like like a dead plant, which was dead from
communism for a hundred years.
I've seen some blossoming in places like Argentina,
like a new flower coming to come into life because,
you know, he is he is, you know, taking
capitalism to another level that can actually
help a country economically, you know,
and frankly, to a degree, morally ascend.
And in this case, Trump is going to have
his hands full to fill the coffers
of the of the parts of the administration
that do survive because there has to be
a reckoning with parts of of our government,
of our US government that must be eliminated.
And I've been a very big proponent for years
of getting rid of like the Department of Education.
It's a wasteland, you know, that I'm sure
that there's good, you know, the secretarial staff.
And I'm sure that they're competent people.
But when you get up into the into the the higher echelons
of that organization, they've been ruining our education
system in this country for, you know, basically
going back to the late 70s, late 1970s,
when Jimmy Carter stood it up.
So so there's a lot that that is an example
of the kinds of things that that an Elon
and a Vivec are going to have to look at.
Never mind, you know, those are whole cloth
institutional structures that must be removed
and taken down.
But there's also going to have to be a some decisions
about people and about budgets, right?
And how how can you shift budgets
from one budget line to another?
And where do budgets exist?
I mean, most people, Bobby Kennedy is learning
and he knows Bobby Kennedy is learning that
the the the health and human services
actually has a budget almost twice the size
of the Department of Defense, folks.
OK, for your audience, I mean, that blows people away, right?
I mean, you're talking in the trillions of dollars, a budget.
So Bobby Kennedy is going to have to look at at some
of these things, as well as like a Pete Hage set
going into the Department of Defense, which has never
passed an audit.
I think what they just said, you know, a week ago,
nine years or whatever, I know, I know inside
of the Department of Defense and these are the again,
these are things that the that the incoming
administration is going to have to deal with because
you either decide to keep to keep these things running
or you stop them and you shut them down.
You shut them down whole cloth.
But inside the Department of Defense, there's
sixteen different agencies and activities.
I ran one of them, the Defense Intelligence Agency,
a large one of the largest intel agencies in the world.
But that was just one agency inside of a Department
of Defense that has about sixteen of those.
Now, some of those are smaller like our like our
commissary agency that, you know, where people go
and buy on military bases where they buy food, right?
Or you have a logistics agency, which is actually
a pretty, pretty large body of people.
And no, and then you have all of the services.
So this is just inside the Department of Defense.
So there's going to have to be a reckoning
because everybody goes, oh, we can't touch our military.
We got to we got to give our military more money
and we got to make them stronger.
If you give the military one more dollar,
it's not going to make them any stronger.
If you give them another trillion dollars,
it's not going to make them stronger.
One of the most important things for Trump to do.
And I know I'm going along in your question,
but I, you know, I'm on a roll
and I want to get these points across
because your real question is, does Trump have the guts
to do the things that need to be done,
as Peter the Great did, or Alexander the Great,
or any of these great captains in time, you know,
does he have the guts to make the calls
to be able to achieve the things he needs to achieve?
Right. I believe that he does.
I believe from what I have seen him say
since the election that he is really looking
hard at taking the actions that are necessary.
And one of the things that has to change
from the top down and certainly in all these different
organizations is the culture.
When you take and I've taken over a lot of organizations,
I've led organizations from 30 to almost 30,000.
So when you take over an organization,
one of the things that you examine
is the culture of the organization.
Is it a discipline culture?
Is it a war fighting culture?
You know, is it a lazy culture?
Are they do they not understand what the standards are?
I mean, so the culture of the organization
has everything to do with the attitude
and the way that an organization functions and operates.
Right. And so all of our all of our
all of our institutions right now inside of the government
have this woke mentality, this woke culture.
And it has it was it was basically, you know,
intubated inside of the government by Obama.
Trump had did, you know, was really not able to change it
as much as I think he would have liked to have changed it.
And it and it resulted in him, you know, not getting elected in 2020.
And we can argue that.
And then for four years being persecuted by the court systems,
but coming back like a, you know, like a I mean, like like a like a Napoleon
or like a Caesar, right?
He came back and he's going to stand the test of time
and talk about a historic figure.
But does he have the the necessary courage to be able to stand there
and say, OK, I understand forgiveness.
But I also understand accountability and I believe now I'm speaking for Mike Flynn.
I believe that accountability must occur because without accountability,
four years from now or 10 years from now,
people will attempt the same things over and over and over.
And they'll continue to get away with it as long as they see
that no one is held accountable.
And I'm not talking about some little minion, you know, low level,
you know, government bureaucrat.
I'm talking about people at the highest levels of our, you know,
that have that have been in charge of very, very high levels of our government.
And that also includes up and up to and including
the executive office of the president of the United States of America.
So accountability has to happen as reform is occurring.
And that's where I want to see Trump's inner strength
come out of him because the people around him,
they're going to make decisions about, you know,
which direction to move a new, you know, whatever organization
they're responsible for, a Hague Seth or a Tulsi Gabbard or a or a Matt Gates.
They got to move these organizations forward.
But they're, you know, do they have the authority?
I don't want them to look behind, to look over their shoulders
and wonder if Trump is, you know, is, you know, waiting to see what they do.
I want Trump to say, here's what I want you to do.
Here's what I expect you to achieve.
If you need my help, you come back and you let me know.
But I expect you to do the following things and, man,
you know, you give me that kind of guidance and, you know, Katie bar the door
and you'll have a very effective organization in a relatively short period of time.
So I'll pause there because that was a long answer.
You know, speaking of that, I really loved your comment on X
a while ago where there was a very smarmy and slick
female DOD executive who was being interviewed by John Stewart.
And it was amazing how she dodged and slithered around the question that he asked.
And I think this is typical of the bureaucracies that we have in the government.
But do you think that it could possibly be changed?
Because let's take Johnson, who impresses me, frankly, is something of a nothing nobody.
Wouldn't you say having run one of these 17 praetorian agencies in the government
that they have or could have so much dirt on him that he wouldn't dare do anything
to change things or they would unleash the hounds of hell on him?
Now, isn't that the way it's going to work?
Yeah, and it does work like that in Washington, D.C.
And it works like that when it comes to anybody
that's going to that's been hanging around Washington and floating back and forth
in between administrations, whether they stay there and, you know,
in some K Street lobby group or law firm, and then they go back into the Democrat
regime or the Republican regime, definitely throughout the legislative branches,
all members of Congress, you know, the House and the Senate
and then all judges fall into fall into this into this trap.
So the person that you mentioned that I that I highlighted the other day
was the deputy secretary of defense, the number two persons.
She she was the number two.
She is the number two person in the Department of Defense, you know,
of a trillion dollar organization that has not been able to pass audits for years.
And she she basically her response showed the American people
that she was so out of touch with with what the American people expect.
For example, I have been audited twice in my in my life by the IRS
while I was serving in the military, actually.
And then I've gone through other audits in my in my civilian capacity
now running different organizations because because I'm a conservative.
So when I go through an audit, if I don't pass the audit,
the IRS comes in and charges me some additional monies
or maybe they come maybe they'll come after me for other reasons.
But yet the Department of Defense has not been able to pass an audit.
And I think it's like nine years or something like that.
It's an incredible amount of time.
Well, we all remember.
We all remember when Rumsfeld said his two point three billion, right?
No, trillion dollars that we can't track.
And that was a long time ago. I'm sure it's I'm sure it's the same thing.
It's he said that on the 10th of September of 2001,
the day before the Twin Towers were hit, by the way.
So, you know, timing is everything.
So I but her attitude is is the attitude
that we are dealing with when I talk about culture
and culture in these organizations in Washington, D.C.
That that culture, that attitude has to be like like like a metastasized
answer of the throat.
It's got to be excised out and then a purification, you know, has
in these, you know, the deep state people in the media, the big media,
they got they're going to go crazy.
They hear me say to use the word purification.
Now, the purification, the cleansing of what we must do
to get rid of this attitude.
We have to get rid of this attitude.
And I can tell you from the uniform military side of things,
that's actually not that difficult to do.
It's going to take some time, but it's not that difficult to do
on the civilian side of those that are appointed officials inside
of the executive branch of the government, whether it's Department
of Defense or Department of Commerce or Department of Agriculture.
This attitude of wokeness, this attitude of mediocrity has got to be eliminated.
And we don't need that many people in the government.
The federal government doesn't I am so looking forward to how
President Trump deals with taxes, right, federal taxes, because he's
talked about different ideas about eliminating federal taxes.
That and then, you know, going with a sort of a tariff based payment system,
right, we'll see we'll see what he's able to achieve.
And I know he's he's looking at some really smart people to bring in
to help him, you know, work through that, you know, particularly a treasury.
And I think commerce is another big one that does require somebody
that that has that kind of a mind when you say that commerce is another
agency that should be abolished, frankly, just education, which everybody's
talking about, but the Department of Agriculture, which employs 100,000
people to make farmers lives miserable.
But the point I'd make, and I don't know if you agree with this or not,
it's that replacing the terrible people that are there now, these
Jacobins, actually the control Washington and everything in the beltway
and replacing them with good people.
I think that's actually kind of counterproductive and firing people.
Why? It's like trimming a noxious plant.
When you trim it, it just grows back stronger.
You've got to pull it up by the roots and so Agent Orange where grew.
And I don't know if they're going to be able to do that.
Do you think we'll be able to do that?
Yeah, I mean, that's the that's the big $64,000 question.
And I think that I think that there has to be a demonstrated
set of actions that the president and probably only the president can do.
And some of those are things like saying, and I'll just use it.
I'll use it as an example.
I don't know what direction he's going to take yet when it comes to this.
Let's just talk about the FBI as an example.
I mean, we've mentioned the Department of Education and Trump has already
talked about that, but a demonstration of action to remove something.
I mean, literally to pull it right out of the ground by the roots, right?
Not like you say, getting in there and trim the dead branches off of it.
And in all, you know, in four years from now or 10 years from now,
it comes back and it's and it's worse, right?
To go there, a demonstrated action is to put to put chains on the doors,
you know, on Friday afternoon of the of the inauguration and and park security,
even if you had to bring military, National Guard, but but Marshall service,
park them around the building, all of the entrances and nobody
and the president stands there.
So in the president of the United States, Trump, instead of going to his
office in the White House, stops at the because he's the president.
Now he stops at the Hoover building as they're coming down, you know,
Pennsylvania Avenue and he stands there and he holds a quick press conference
and says, you see this building behind me, it's never going to ruin your life again.
They're done. It's being closed as of now.
I'm locking the doors, you know, whatever, right?
I mean, there's got to be a a demonstrated action.
And like I said, back to I think it was Matt's question earlier about,
you know, are we willing to take these steps, right?
I mean, you had great time.
You had these these momentous times in history and then these great
captains rose to those momentous times and they change the world.
They actually change the direction of the world.
If Trump doesn't take these types of actions, I'm not sure if we're going
to change the direction, you know, and course correct us back to a time
that I talk about going backwards in time.
I'm talking about to a place where we can live on a planet
where the United States of America continues to thrive and be a humble
nation, but be a nation of innovators, of wealth producers, of idea makers and creators.
I mean, that's what the United States is very capable of still doing
with the right leadership and the right culture, the right attitude.
And if Trump doesn't take these kinds of extraordinary actions,
I'm afraid that what will happen is the bureaucracy like they typically do.
And I know because they did this.
They tried to do this with me and in some cases they succeeded.
You would tell somebody you'd go, OK, I want your your part of the agency.
I want it eliminated.
Right. And I wanted it eliminated by Monday.
And so what they would do is they would come back to you on Monday
with a white paper like this.
They come back to the white paper and all the reasons why they can't do it.
And you're like, well, that's not what I asked you.
But I don't want the white paper. I want it. I want the door shut.
So now I got to go do it myself.
And I would sit there and I did this a couple to a couple of of elements
within the Defense Intelligence Agency to this day.
And I'll, you know, a point of pride for me.
And I don't normally talk like this.
But I reformed that agency into centers, what's called centers
to be more downward looking to support war fighting
commands out in the battlefield.
Right. And that was at a time when we were still was 2012.
We were still at war.
And those though that center concept has stayed in place
till this day because it is a it is a downward focused link linkage
to the people that that we were supposed to support
instead of this upward looking organization that I got
that was kissing the rear end of the CIA and the White House and the DNI.
Right. I didn't care about that.
What I cared about was we had elements in our military
and in our country that were at war.
We had great capabilities and I wanted to focus down and in.
And until this day, those that structure still exists.
The attitude is not quite there, but the structure exists
because how you when you when you recreate a government structure,
you have to do it two ways.
It's not just, you know, a good idea that you just, you know,
you move some desks around a couple of line and block.
You've got to change the human resources system, which I did.
And I made it more more of an upward mobility type thing
instead of a lot of people at the top and very few at the bottom.
And then you also got to look at the the budgetary processes
to move monies from one line over to another and then make it permanent.
And those are two ways to do that.
And and frankly, I would have shut down half of DIA if I could.
But, you know, you're at the time, I'm not I'm not in a position where,
you know, you got the secretary of defense, Panetta and the director
of national intelligence, Clapper, you know, and they were like,
no, we can't do that. We're not going to do that.
But you do what you think you need to do.
And they allowed me to do it.
They gave me great flexibility to do the things I needed to do.
But now we're talking about, you know, the entire governmental level
as well as some institutions that do tie into the government,
meaning like the banking institution, educational institutions,
right, the, you know, colleges and universities that get I can imagine.
I can imagine how hard it would be, because you remember that ex-football
player, Jack Kemp, who was appointed head of HUD during the Reagan years.
And his mandate was to.
Cut it back.
Actually eliminated, which had been done.
But to show how competent he was and how strong and he actually
doubled the size of the damned agency right in front of everybody's eyes.
So this is a real danger.
I mean, the DIA, which you used to run, used to run,
it's one of 17 intelligence agencies.
Do we need 17 intelligence agencies?
Because you're an intelligence guy.
And no, and no, so let me jump because I'm going to run out of time here
and I appreciate it. And like we talked about earlier, you know,
maybe we maybe we figure out a way to get me down there for a longer form format.
So in the one, just one of the issues with 17 agencies is every
single one of them has their own communications system.
And every single one of those communication systems are multi
billion dollar systems.
I mean, you're talking about everything, the box, you know,
the box itself, the wiring, the naming conventions,
how they function, what they're tied into.
It is utter insanity.
And I can tell you that some of those agencies have multiple communications inside.
So that's so, so, yeah, so do you need 17?
No, you do not need 17.
Do you need 17 or or at least 20, maybe 25 different communication systems
that are that are probably on average.
Every single one of them is probably around somewhere between one
to four billion dollars at cost, OK, average per.
So, I mean, the insanity of what we allowed from from 9 11,
the Patriot Act, the growth of the intelligence community.
And yet and yet we the the the the enemies around the world
were actually diminishing.
They were they were really diminishing at the time.
And what we have done is we we've grown and become
we've essentially grown into a very incompetent
intelligence community, extremely incompetent intelligence community.
We have gotten almost nothing right at the strategic level.
Nothing. Nothing. You're right. Absolutely nothing.
Yeah. I mean, there's tactical successes here and there.
But at the strategic level, we've gotten nothing right.
And so, yeah, so that there has to be extraordinary reform.
And this is something that I know Tulsi Gabbard,
you know, it's and it's going to be it's going to be difficult.
She's going to have to to really consider how, you know,
because you can't just go in the in the in the high offices
of the of the Director of National Intelligence,
which I spent a year there as an assistant director.
And you can't just go up there and have a nice office
and look out your window and, you know, and feel good about yourself.
No, this is this is really hard work and the hard work I know has already begun.
But but there is going to have to be reform.
And like I said about President Trump, you know,
to for him to close the FBI down, the American people would be cheering.
They'll you'll hear the cheers from the American people if he closes the FBI down.
And there's a lot of second order effects.
I mean, I think it was G.K.
Chastritson said, you know, be careful when you take offense down
because it was put up, you know, it was the reason why it was put up in the first place.
So you just got to understand the consequences when you do something.
And then you have to accept those consequences back to back to the earlier question about,
you know, does, you know, does Trump does he does?
He got the courage, he have the courage to do the things that are necessary.
Sitting here today, I believe he does, I believe he does.
But there is going to be so much inertia directed against him
to keep him from doing what is necessary.
Everybody around even a lot of a lot of the Republicans,
a lot of the establishment are going to tell him, oh, you can't do this.
You can't do that.
And frankly, it's the first person that comes to you that says you can't do something.
They're they're on the other side.
You know, I I I hesitate to say they're your enemy,
but damn, they're close to being your enemy.
So understand that if somebody comes to you and says,
you Mr. President, you really can't do this and they don't have a damn good reason why,
you know, we need them.
OK, now you go back and you follow the money trail.
You go back and you follow the money trail.
And that's those are the people to me.
And that's why, you know, I like I like Matt Gates's attitude.
You know, I mean, there there's going to have to be lawfully done
investigations, but they have to be done quickly.
And I will tell you, I will tell you, you know, because I I've been,
you know, accused of knowing where the bodies are buried.
Right. So one of part of that accusation of knowing where the bodies are buried
is knowing which place to look for the the the communications
that I know were had between people.
And some of those have to do with budgeting authorities
that, yes, they come from Congress, but there's probably
less than this many people, less than a handful
that really know anything about those budgets.
And I'm talking about budgets that are that are that are in the in the
hundreds of billions of dollars level that nobody pays any attention to.
OK, so that I know that I know for a fact.
And those are the things that it's obvious.
And the way you're talking, Mike, it's music to our ears.
It seems to me the US government at this point is like a hundred story
building about to collapse and you can either let it collapse randomly
and unpredictably or you can have a controlled demolition of it.
And it's going to be one or the other.
I'm for the controlled demolition.
Now, is there any chance that you'll be able
to join this party with the new Trump administration?
Yeah, there's a chance.
But it's not necessarily, you know, I think we're on
that right now with everybody is in a good place.
And I definitely will help.
I I I understand the direction and the strategy that Trump is taking.
And I agree with it, you know, not not necessarily every single piece of it.
But but the the more important thing right now is the is to kind of what I call
in it's a military term, you organize for combat, right?
You and actually the more specific phrase is you task organize for combat.
And when you task organize for combat, that means that you go and look at
the people that you're going to need on your team.
And then you look at the resources that you're going to have to use
immediately, because once you make contact with the enemy
and believe me, they are already engaged.
But once you make even greater contact with the enemy, once you're in
you once you're at the line of departure, which is really the day
he takes the oath of office, if it's a smooth transition of power,
then war will have to be waged.
And and I say that metaphorically for the crazy mainstream media
that will take it and say, Flynn wants to go to war.
No, the metaphor for saying there is going to be great difficulties
once the line of departure is crossed by the by this new Trump administration.
Because right now, trying to get anything out of your counterparts
in the various agencies, activities, departments and commissions is near is damn
near impossible. And and Biden just sat with Trump last Wednesday
and told him smooth transition of power.
And we're firing offensive provocative weapons into Russia today.
So those two don't connect.
That is undeniable that these things have occurred.
So these are not made up things.
So it's it's kind of like, OK, so where are we at?
I mean, I would if I were, you know, and I said this last night to some, you know,
to some folks, Trump ought to be calling up Joe Biden going, hey, Joe,
are you all there? Because, you know, if you're not and you need to,
you know, we need to do something else here, something is not going.
You know, Putin has got to.
He has got to take some responsibility.
You know, for his own sovereignty, his own protection.
I mean, you know, it's not it's not the Kremlin that provoked this.
It's the White House. You're quite correct.
And nobody nobody says that these days. You're absolutely right.
But if if Biden stepped down or was impeached,
he'd be replaced by Kamala.
And yeah, she's even more dangerous. OK, that's OK.
That's OK for a period of time.
So let's let's let's give her that and see what she's willing to do.
See what she's capable of.
But she's she's demonstrably
unintelligent and unknowledgeable and philosophically
a communist, quite frankly. Right.
So I'm afraid we'd be stepping from the frying pan into the fire.
This is the next two months is going to be dangerous.
Don't you think? Well, and that's why I said that, you know,
that Congress needs to impeach as well.
I mean, you can't have.
So number one, this is why the 25th Amendment is so important right now.
And I understand that you're right about Kamala Harris.
But but we haven't we have an incompetent person
with his with his responsibility on the on the nuclear football.
Right. I mean, this is crazy.
So we can't have that.
I'm not going to say that Kamala is much, you know, much better.
But she's she is at least at a level of competency that
that, you know, she's she would be and she's elected,
I guess, is the other part of this.
It's I mean, I'm having a real difficult time saying that Kamala would be better.
She wouldn't be better.
But but we cannot have an incompetent person in the White House right now.
But this is why my second thing was was we got to we have to impeach immediately.
I mean, these people this is this is such a dangerous
moment in history and and and I want people direct to remember, OK,
because history in the last hundred years, so this is twenty twenty four,
you know, the Bolshevik Revolution from from 1924, essentially,
that early 1920s, a hundred year period of time,
you look at all of the wars that we were involved in,
all of the people that were killed unnecessarily in many, many cases.
Right. I mean, most cases, in fact, damn, they're all cases.
I always tell people I'm not I'm not anti war.
I'm anti stupid war.
And most of them, 99 percent of them have been stupid.
And but that's only in the last hundred years.
That's not that long of a period of time.
So what is that what is happening now could take us into another evolution
of warfare that is much different.
And we're already in it.
You know, I say that we're in this we're in this fifth generation warfare
that is that has components of irregularness and and and conventional
and information and, you know, and physical.
I mean, these these different dimensions that we are currently involved in.
But what if it grows, if it grows larger, which it could very quickly,
folks, we could be in big trouble.
And that's what I personally, again, speaking from Mike Flint,
I would love to be able to avoid that, you know,
and help those people that are trying to make those decisions to avoid that.
But there has to be decisions made.
We can't just sit here and keep talking to each other like this
or posting things on X or some other social media outlet
and think that that's going to solve the world's problems.
It is not.
Wouldn't you say that we're already actually at the cusp
of what might be something resembling an actual civil war
in this country, because the red people and the blue people
actually can't talk to each other.
They're different tribes.
This is very, very dangerous.
Yeah, I think I don't think it's as bad as as has been described by the media,
the mainstream corporate woke media.
I do think it from the mandate, one of the things that the mandate showed
for Trump's victory was a larger component of America actually believes
in the kinds of things that he has spoken about, that Trump has spoken about.
So so I think it's not it's not like a 50 50 thing.
I think actually we've got a much smaller group of very vocal,
very active leftists, communists, primarily.
And we have a majority of Americans that that want to have
what frankly what I'm talking about.
We want to have peace.
We want to have the ability to be able to thrive as an economy.
We want to be able to thrive as a country, but we want change.
And we want, you know, I'll use Barack Obama's word fundamental,
but we want fundamental change, you know, taking us to a place
that is that is based on our constitution and not based on some
communist edict that Barack Obama wanted because that's the direction
that we were heading.
Well, of course, we're absolutely right.
But, you know, we did a we did a show that analyzed the 20 points
that, you know, that big fat guy.
What's his what's his name more?
Yeah, Michael Moore. OK, so he came up with 20 things.
And we checked that he was right about these things.
And it turns out that on each of these 20 things,
the average American is looking for more government and more benefits
and so forth, so that it may be that the US has been very
corrupted for generations by Marxist professors in college
and now in high school and now in grade school.
It's going to be hard to turn around there.
They're in they're in law schools, they're in medical schools.
I mean, they're in public schools.
So anyway, yeah, I mean, I'm I know, listen, I'm going to have to
I'm going to have to jump because of my time.
And I want to also respect your your guys time, too.
And I I would I love this kind of a conversation.
And I hope that it was OK for your audience, too.
It was great. I want to thank you.
You gave us double the time you said you would.
I really appreciate it.
It's very generous of you.
And hopefully we can have that longer conversation at some point.
So thank you. Yeah, think about it.
And you know, you guys know how to get a hold of me.
And God bless you guys and your audience and and say some prayers out there.
If you've got to if you have an audience that prays, pray a lot
because I tell people it's the most powerful weapon system known to man.
All right. Thank you very much.
Thanks. God bless you.