Hey guys, I'm giving a speech to the Libertarian Party in Rhode Island on October the 27th and then November the 3rd with Ron Paul and Lou Rockwell and a bunch of others down there in Lake Jackson.
Jeff Deist and all them, Mises Institute, are having me out to give a talk about media stuff.
And that's November the 3rd down there in Lake Jackson.
If you like Ron Paul events and you're nearby, I'll see you there.
Sorry I'm late!
I had to stop by the Whites Museum again and give the finger to FDR!
We know Al-Qaeda, Zawahiri, is supporting the opposition in Syria.
Are we supporting Al-Qaeda in Syria?
It's a proud day for America, and by God we've kicked Vietnam Syndrome once and for all.
Thank you very, very much.
I say it, I say it again, you've been had!
You've been took!
You've been hoodwinked!
These witnesses are trying to simply deny things that just about everybody else accepts as fact.
He came, he saw us, he died.
We ain't killing they army, but we killing them.
We be on CNN like Say Our Name been saying, say it three times.
The meeting of the largest armies in the history of the world.
Then there's going to be an invasion.
All right you guys, introducing Ben Freeman, he is the director of the Foreign Influence Transparency Initiative, I like the sound of that, at the Center for International Policy.
And here he is writing for TomDispatch.com and therefore Antiwar.com as well.
The Saudi lobby juggernaut.
Welcome to the show, how are you doing?
I'm good, thanks for having me.
Really appreciate it.
And so what a great piece that you have here.
And first of all, can I just ask you, were you the one who came up with that name for that project at that think tank?
And what's the deal with that?
Must be all about obviously Saudi and Israel, right?
Yeah.
Well, I was the one to come up with the name actually, and we batted around a few ideas.
But I'll tell you the backstory on that is maybe less glamorous than it might seem.
I'm a big CrossFit guy, and so the acronym of FIT, FIT I, was actually the secret justification for settling on that one.
Very good.
Yeah, but you know why I like it?
Because it says right what it is.
It's a little hidden acronym.
That's an inside joke for you and the buds.
But for an influence, basically, you're kind of arguing past the sale and winning the argument that this is a thing that needs transparency in the first place, which of course it is.
But you're kind of bringing it to attention and calling for accountability all at the same time, in a sense there.
And I like that.
Yeah.
Yeah, that's exactly right.
And I think this is really one of the areas in DC, you hear a lot about lobbyists and the influence game in DC, but you really don't hear a lot about what foreign governments are up to and how they're trying to shift U.S. foreign policy.
And so what we're trying to do here is, you know, shed a kind of a brighter light on that shady business.
Well there's a lot of power to abuse.
You got to figure they're going to do everything they can, Israel, Saudi, or anybody else, to influence America, to take their interests into account, or maybe even put them first when it comes to a lot of American Middle East policies.
We see a lot of that with Saudi and Israel, especially.
But so, well, I don't know, you tell a story about this one particular lobbyist in order to shed light on the process itself here, Mark Lamkin.
Tell us about him.
Yeah.
Mark Lamkin is a longtime Republican operative, for lack of a better word.
He's held some pretty important positions within government and within the Republican Party.
But he currently works for a law firm, which is really a lobbying outfit, political consultants, to use the politically correct term, Brownstein Hyatt and Farber Schreck.
And he does a lot of their work in their so-called government relations division.
One of his big contracts is with Saudi Arabia.
And amongst other things, as a lobbyist, he reaches out to members of Congress on behalf of the Saudis, has meetings, phone calls, emails, all this sort of stuff to get the Saudis' message out there.
But another thing he does, too, also very extensively, he makes a lot of campaign contributions.
And so what we did, and some of my colleagues here, were quite pesky when it comes to this stuff.
And we wanted to see if there was any overlap between these two things to see if some of those contributions that folks like Mark make are going to some of those same members they're contacting on behalf of the Saudis.
What we found out was, yes, in fact, they certainly are.
And sometimes they're doing it on the exact same day that they meet with members on behalf of their Saudi clients.
This is exactly what we found with Mark Lampkin.
The same day, he had a meeting with Bob Corker's office.
He made a campaign contribution, and if memory serves me, it was for $2,700 to the Corker campaign.
And so that's it, huh?
That's the cutout?
That's the big loophole?
Is the foreign government hires a lobbying firm, and then just the employees of that lobbying firm make the donations themselves, and then that's it?
Yeah.
I mean, it's the most simple workaround of a lot that you might find.
The Federal Election Commission has a provision that bars any foreign national from making campaign contributions in a U.S. election, and so it's illegal then for the king of Saudi Arabia or the crown prince of Saudi Arabia or even their ambassador to make a campaign contribution to a U.S. election.
However, it's perfectly legal for them to hire these lobbying and public relations firms that are filled with U.S. citizens who then are allowed, perfectly allowed, to make campaign contributions to whomever they want to within those campaign finance limits.
And there's absolutely no provision that prevents them from making those campaign contributions to members of Congress on the exact same day they meet with them.
So if you're a Saudi king or a Saudi prince and you're hoping to line the pockets of some members of Congress, this presents a pretty easy workaround for you to get that done.
You know, it's always amazing to me, I'm just astounded constantly by the low, low prices at which one can buy, especially if you're a foreign power, you can buy a congressman.
I mean, I guess there's 535 of them, House and Senate, and so they're a dime a dozen for $2,000?
I can buy a genocide?
I mean, this is insane.
Yeah, you can buy a genocide.
In most of these cases, you can just buy the silence of a member.
And I think that's what we saw for the first week or so, really, in this post-Jamal Khashoggi era, where you have a lot of folks speaking out now.
But in that first week after it happened, even in D.C., you know, it was really crickets.
There wasn't, you know, people weren't really speaking out on this heavily.
You didn't have, you had the Washington Post, you know, of course, was very up in arms about it, but you didn't have really anybody in Congress speaking out on it for almost a week after his disappearance.
And I think that was a testament to how powerful this lobby is, that they can, even in something as horrific as this, they can buy almost a week's worth of silence.
Yeah.
Well, you know, I'm sure you probably saw this thing by Greenwald at the Intercept, where he's talking about the Washington Post has been running outright Saudi lobbyists for years, and including up to and on the very day, the same day that Fred Hyatt wrote this thing, where all of a sudden now the Washington Post has, you know, just because the Saudis killed one of their guys, now all of a sudden they're a problem.
And then so Hyatt's now in high moral dungeon against anyone else in the, you know, corridors of power anywhere between, you know, New York and D.C. and vice versa and what have you, who have any taint of cooperation with this horrid Saudi regime.
And that day he's publishing their lobbyist, pushing their policies on the pages of the Washington Post.
And they actually responded to Greenwald that, oh, yeah, no, but we just got around to dropping them yesterday.
So, yeah.
Oh, man.
No, I hadn't seen that piece.
I'll have to read that.
Yeah.
No, it's great fun.
And so, I mean, that's the whole thing of it, right, is there's been a lot of pretending going on.
And all that Saudi money, all that PR money has bought not just congressmen, but it's bought a lot of media people.
And it's bought a narrative, right, that like, hey, check out our hip new young Lamborghini driving crown prince who, you know, I mean, he lets women go to the movies.
Right.
Right.
It's so true.
And that was really what we found in our research.
We looked at every single thing that the Saudi lobby did in 2017 in a huge chunk of what they did.
It was over twenty five hundred different activities that we tracked that they did in over five hundred of those were stuff they were doing with the media, you know, reaching out to folks like The Washington Post, The New York Times, The Intercept, too, actually, in a lot of it.
There's really not a media outlet.
Wait, did they get a story published in The Intercept?
Oh, I don't know.
I don't know about that.
Oh, OK.
I'm sorry.
You're saying but they were they were going for it, though.
Yeah.
Yeah.
Yeah.
They're there.
There's really no media outlet that the Saudi lobby didn't go after.
I mean, we even found six different occasions where they reached out to folks at ESPN.
What the heck they're doing, reaching out to ESPN.
I don't know.
Maybe there's a bad soccer story about Saudi Arabia.
Well, you know what?
Actually, our news director at Antiwar dot com, Jason Ditch, Jesus, I can't talk today.
Forgive me, Ben.
Our news director at Antiwar dot com, Jason Ditch, is a huge wrestling fan.
And he says, you know, there's been this huge Saudi influence.
They just had one of their big slamma jammas, whatever you call it, in Riyadh.
And they were supposed to have another one.
And now all that is kind of endowed.
This is a huge part of their lobbying is to get, you know, the patriotic Trumpian wrestling fan right on their side and in their narratives where the Saudis are the good guys, you know.
Right.
Right.
Right.
Exactly.
Yeah.
Yeah.
I mean, that's probably spending their money pretty wisely, honestly.
You know what I mean?
That's pretty smart to do.
Yeah.
And the thing about him is there there's really it's almost like this bottomless pit of money that they have.
You know, we we documented that last year they spent around twenty seven million dollars and that's just on the firms they have registered.
You know, that doesn't count all the think tank money that they're pumping into D.C.
You know, it doesn't count all the money they're dealing around the nation to universities all over the U.S.
It's really the piece that we capture here is just it's just the tip of the iceberg of Saudi influence.
Right.
Well, so there's two really important ones you want to talk about those a little bit.
I know that's not as you're saying, that's not exactly what you're covering.
But, you know, I'd like to get a little bit of a picture.
I know the Middle East Institute and Brookings both said that they were going to no longer accept Saudi money, not that they're going to return any.
Yeah.
And there were a couple of others that so far were refusing.
But there's some pretty big think tanks that, you know, I think the average farmer's wife might not expect that the Brookings Institution is bankrolled by Saudis and and or Israelis mostly rather than by Americans that these think tanks almost outright represent the interests of these foreign states.
Yeah, this is a big problem that that I have with a lot of think tanks who don't disclose their funders is that, you know, your average consumer of their information out there, you know, whether it's somebody out in Texas or here in D.C. or wherever, they don't really know where that money is coming from.
And they might think, well, you know, these are just all academics.
You know, they've got you know, these are respected, objective researchers.
But then at the end of the day, they're taking in some cases, they're taking millions and millions of dollars from foreign governments or not just foreign governments.
A lot of D.C. firms here, they take money from defense contractors, too.
And then they put out pieces about those same defense contractors or about their weapon systems, which not surprisingly, are very favorable to those weapons systems.
And so it becomes part of this circuitous, you know, cycle where, you know, as long as you say the right things about the right contractors, weapon systems, then they're going to keep those those contributions coming to your think tank.
Yeah.
All right.
And then so tell me more about the the universities, too, because those are almost separate worlds from the rest of us a lot of times.
But my imagination runs wild when you talk that way.
Who knows what chairs for what professors are endowed by these guys where they get to set major agendas, maybe yet, you know, if they're at the right universities at Georgetown or University of Chicago or Harvard, Yale and these kinds of things.
Right.
Right, right.
I mean, it's really, really pervasive across universities in America.
And, you know, we hear a lot of the examples of, you know, Georgetown and George Washington here in D.C. being funded by some of these foreign governments.
But it's really it's certainly not isolated to D.C.
I remember when I was at I was at Texas A&M getting a Ph.
D.there.
Several of the rooms I remember seeing there, you know, were funded by by Saudis or Qataris or Emiratis.
So it's certainly not isolated to D.C.
But what the Saudis have done a particularly good job of is, in fact, getting some of these folks directly on their payroll.
There was recently a report came out about a Syracuse professor who was both doubling as a national security professor and as a registered foreign agent for the Saudis.
And so some of this influence, you know, it's very it at least potentially can be very misleading.
You might be sitting there as an undergraduate student taking a national security class and learning about Saudi Arabia.
But little did you know that you're actually learning about it from Saudi Arabia, Saudi Arabia's very own lobbyists.
All right.
So here's who all sponsors this show.
First of all, Mike Swanson and his great book, The War State, about the rise of the military industrial complex after World War Two.
An excellent history there.
And get all of his investment advice at WallStreetWindow.com.
Then there's Roberts and Roberts Brokerage, Inc., where you buy your precious metals.
And that's at rrbi.co, rrbi.co for all your gold, silver, platinum, palladium, etc.
No dev, no ops, no I.T.
A great book about how to run your technology business like a libertarian.
No dev, no ops, no I.T.
By Hussein Badakchani.
It's really great.
I mean, I'm no businessman and I really enjoyed reading it.
So I think you should check that out.
And also Kesslin Runs, the great new novel by our friend Charles Featherstone.
It's in the very near future and only slightly dystopian.
No, maybe worse.
Kesslin Runs.
And also check out Horizon.
Global.
That's Zen Cash.
They're changing.
They're not just a digital currency.
They really are working hard on becoming a new platform for all different sorts of blockchain type secure applications.
And so for all you techies who really understand, check out all you need to know at Horizon.
Global.
LibertyStickers.com for your anti-government propaganda.
Tom Woods Liberty Classroom to fill your brain with good stuff.
Follow the link from my site so I get the kick back there.
ScottHorton.org.
And check this out at ExpandDesigns.com.
You can get a brand new 2018, hey, a 2019 model website there and get a $500 discount if you use ExpandDesigns.com slash Scott.
So how much trouble do you think they're in over the apparent, I guess, murder of this guy Khashoggi, the Washington Post writer?
I actually think the reaction to this, frankly, has been surprising to me because we've seen the Saudis do so many despicable things now for so long and really not get punished for it.
If you look back over just the last couple of years, you know, the crown prince right now, Mohammed bin Salman, he to get that crown, he kidnaps his cousin and he basically imprisons him until he renounces his throne.
And then a few months later, a lot of people in the royal family weren't very happy about it.
So he rounds them up, puts them in the Ritz-Carlton, imprisons them there and tortures some of them.
Oh, and he steals billions of dollars from them, too.
Earlier this year, the Saudis and the Canadians get into this spat about human rights issues.
The Canadians basically told the emperor he has no clothes and that the human rights issues in Saudi Arabia are terrible.
And instead of jumping to the side of our ally, Canada, the U.S. didn't work.
We basically left Canada on the sidelines and didn't do a gosh darn thing about it.
And this isn't even mentioning the terrible Saudi disaster in the war in Yemen, which the U.S. has more than stayed silent on.
We've actively helped them in their war in Yemen, which has killed at least 10,000 civilians there.
Throughout all this, we, the U.S., either said nothing or the Trump administration very actively cheered them on for what they were doing.
And so what we're seeing right now with this response to Jamal Khashoggi from a lot of Republicans is actually encouraging.
The fact that you have folks like Lindsey Graham and Bob Corker and Marco Rubio being the most fiery about punishing Saudi Arabia on this, I think that's very encouraging.
And really right now, Trump is kind of the lone man out.
Republicans and Democrats in Congress are united.
So I actually think we might see Saudi Arabia actually get punished for this.
Yeah, well, now and so it brings up, though, their alliance with the Israel lobby, which I don't know, I guess the first question would be, how would you compare the influence of the Saudi lobby?
I mean, they're not necessarily separate and distinct.
They work together on a lot of things and are clearly allies and boost each other.
But how powerful is the Saudi lobby compared to the Israel lobby in D.C., do you think?
I'd say there, I think nobody would argue against you if you said that they're two of the most influential, if not the two most influential.
But in terms of how they operate, I think they operate very differently.
With the Saudis, there's not a really large Saudi American community, unlike in the Israeli American community.
It's quite expansive.
And so what the Saudis have to do, they have to sort of from afar, they have to hire a lot of lobbying and public relations firms to do their work for them.
They can't rely on a groundswell of support anywhere in the U.S. unlike the Israeli lobby, which can rely on that more and more.
Right.
One interesting thing I'd like to note on that is that you mentioned how closely connected they are.
And I think a sign that the Saudis think that they're really in trouble on this is that some reports were coming out that amongst their many other excuses for what happened, they were saying that the Israelis framed them.
And it was actually Israel who had killed Jamal Khashoggi and was trying to frame them and make the Saudis look bad amongst the many ridiculous excuses they've offered up.
Right.
Well, of course, they gave a wink and a nudge to Netanyahu that, you know, we don't mean it, man.
But we got to say something.
Yeah.
Clearly, their interests are aligning quite closely these days, the Israelis and certainly Mohammed bin Salman.
I don't know about the entire rest of the Saudi court there.
But yeah, I mean, it's tough to see where it's all going to all going to come out.
And, you know, we've also heard him blaming Iran, too, that Iran was trying to frame him.
I mean, if we believe everything they'd say, it sounds like the plot to the next Jason Bourne movie.
Yeah.
Well, you know, as long as we're on that, I have no specific reason to disbelieve the Turkish story or whatever.
But really, all we have, right, are claims of the Turks or I guess the Americans are saying they've seen the evidence themselves now, but we haven't seen the evidence.
Right.
For what happened here?
Right.
Right.
Yeah.
Nothing to my knowledge, at least, has been publicly released in terms of the intelligence that we have.
I do know that I've seen reports, at least, that members of Congress have been briefed on on what our U.S. intelligence community knows.
And every indication from them is that it points directly to Saudi Arabia on this.
So any credible evidence that that that I've seen or heard of points to the Saudis and not to any of these other conspiracy theories about Iran or Israel about or Jason Bourne, for that matter.
Yeah, yeah.
Well, yeah.
I mean, again, I don't have any specific reason to disbelieve this or and I certainly I guess I could say I don't have any reason to believe any other explanation either.
But CIA told Congress ain't good enough for me, you know, I don't know, on any question, whether it's this, that or the other thing.
And of course, the Turks have their own interest in pushing the story however they want.
Again, that's no reason to doubt this specific tale necessarily.
But sure, it's interesting the way that like, hey, well, the Turks say and now everybody knows.
And I guess, you know, I don't know.
Right.
If if indeed it is very true, then you could see why there wasn't much doubt.
So obviously that's the simplest explanation.
I don't want to sound like Cook here.
I just I just don't like faith when it comes to these kinds of questions.
That's all right.
Right.
I think on a very basic level to what we do know and what we've heard repeatedly, Jamal Khashoggi's fiancee was waiting outside of that consulate for him.
She watched him walk in and she never watched him walk back and she never saw him again after that.
You know, that right there tells me either the Saudis did it or they sure as heck know who did.
Yeah.
Well, you know, I read one thing this morning in Middle East Eye where a source claimed to describe what all was going on and even some of the conversation as they killed him.
And it took seven minutes and all these things.
I don't know.
Very well.
Yeah.
Anyway, that's terrible.
Yeah.
Yeah.
And so but it is interesting to the reaction to this.
And it is because, boy, of all the guys to kill, they kill the guy for The Washington Post who, you know, and I thought it was interesting, too.
There were some reports that the CIA had warning that this was going to happen and didn't warn the guy.
So here the Washington Post is nothing but carry water for CIA all day, every day, month in, month out, year in, year out.
One of their reporters is about to get murdered and CIA doesn't tip them off.
Some loyalty to their friends, you know, up there.
I'm so glad I don't live in D.C.
In addition, we have construction and traffic everywhere.
So maybe you're in the right.
Crazy, man.
But yeah, yeah.
But so, yeah, they really picked a fight with the wrong guys because The Washington Post.
Why?
That's the major newspaper in Washington, D.C., by, you know, ten to one over The Washington Times or something.
Right.
This is a junior partner, just barely, but almost equal partner with The New York Times as the official written history of America forever here.
You can't kill their writer.
No, no.
Yeah, that's exactly right.
They picked the wrong person.
And I think what shocks me about this is that it's it's so tragic that it had to be, you know, we had to have the disappearance and probably the death of Jamal Khashoggi for people to actually wake up to what Saudi Arabia was doing.
You know, I wish on any of these other instances, you know, where this guy, you know, he he launches this palace coup or any of the multiple bombs that have been dropped in Yemen, U.S. bombs that have killed civilians there.
You know, I wish we would have had enough roar back then.
But, you know, that's the one silver lining.
I hope after this that people people have to wake up and realize what's really going on with Saudi Arabia.
You know, there's this thing in the Jerusalem Post where they talk about how, well, you know what, if Saudi Arabia does get in trouble, we'll just have to do all their lobbying for them.
And then, of course, that'll just bring us, the Israelis, closer to the Saudis.
And so there we go.
They're already thinking ahead there.
It's certainly not in our interest to see the status of the Saudi government diminished in Washington, say Israeli hawks in the Jerusalem Post.
Yeah, that I mean, that's surprising.
I mean, it's crazy right now, you know, politics in the Middle East, because, you know, with everybody sort of ganging up on Iran and then there's the Qatar situation, too, where, you know, the the Saudis lead this blockade of of another Middle East country, you know, presumably out of nowhere.
And oh, yeah, by the way, Qatar is home to the largest U.S. military base in the Middle East.
And so it doesn't really it doesn't make sense for the U.S. to to, you know, make an enemy of Qatar either.
We're certainly not going to, but the Saudis seem more than willing to.
So, I mean, all the way across the board, I think the Saudis have really put us in a very, very uncomfortable relationship and a dangerous posture for U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East.
Well, there's been some analysts saying they think that MBS is not going to last, that this guy is just way too much of a little kid, the way he tries to handle things and that somebody is going to kill him and push him out here.
Yeah, I wouldn't be surprised if that happened, honestly, and man, if you if you didn't get a chance to see Lindsey Graham's tirade on TV the other day, I would I'd give it a look because he is basically screaming for the Saudis to get rid of Mohammed bin Salman.
Well, and that's something.
Meanwhile, the bombing continues in Yemen as we speak.
But yeah.
Yeah, yeah.
I mean, you know what?
I mean, maybe that would end if he was gone.
Maybe that would be the same thing as calling a halt to the war.
You know, she would be nice.
He was certainly the one who launched it.
That goes kind of unsaid in all this.
But it seems like we're absolutely.
Yeah, yeah.
I mean, he was he's the architect of the Saudi led war in Yemen.
And, you know, he at the end of the day, he's the he's the one who was ultimately accountable for a lot of these airstrikes that killed civilians.
So if you get him out of there, maybe that does change the equation there.
But even independent of that, Congress has a lot of opportunities right now.
There's a congressional resolution 138 right now, which would end U.S. support for this unauthorized war in Yemen.
You know, Congress has the power to declare war.
We've never declared war in Yemen, yet we continue to provide the Saudis with bombs and we refuel some of their airplanes that are conducting these strikes and we provide support to them for a lot of what they're doing.
And I think, you know, after this incident, there's plenty of reasons why we should stop that.
Yeah.
Well, you know, you mentioned Lockheed earlier and their interest in these sales.
And Trump brought that up.
All we have is one hundred and ten billion dollar sale, which from the first time when he went there to visit and announced that it was debunked by almost certain William Hartung and others, that there never was one hundred and ten billion dollar had nothing to do with anything.
And now, you know what?
One hundred and ten billion dollars is nothing compared to what I don't know in these inflationary days, exactly.
They measure GDP as what's, you know, twenty trillion dollars or something.
Twenty trillion.
Yeah.
So, I mean, the supposed benefit there and just blatantly invoking that when you're talking about priceless human lives being destroyed for a little bit of money in that just blatantly transactional way.
I mean, you've got to give Trump credit in a sense for taking the veil off of the way things work around here, to put it that way.
But I mean, that kind of thing impresses him.
But that really should not impress Americans at all.
When you think about how those same people putting those, you know, building the bombs and shipping them out could be doing other productive things, more profitable things than selling weapons to genocidal princelings.
Right, right.
I mean, from a basic point of view, when you think about, like, the economic effect of a bomb, the economic, you know, multiplier or, you know, how good it can help the economy long term of a bomb.
It ends when that bomb blows up.
You know, you can't do anything else with it after.
It's not like a tractor where, you know, I can I can build a tractor and then I can use that dang tractor for 30, 40, 50 years.
And even when you use it, there's no multiply there.
It's just a divisor because you're destroying wealth and life and property.
Right.
Right.
I mean, the basic economic argument doesn't hold up.
The moral argument doesn't hold up.
I mean, even the math on this doesn't hold up.
I mean, Bill Hartung, he's a colleague with me here at the Center for International Policy and a friend and a co-author, and he's laid out the math on this now for over two years.
This, what Trump is talking about, these are arms agreements that were made actually under the Obama administration.
And they're nothing more than these aren't deals.
These aren't contracts.
They're not anything like that.
This is just in principle, we could sell this amount of money to the Saudis.
Realistically, last year, I was just looking at the figures.
We didn't even sell $10 billion in military equipment to the Saudis.
So the idea that, you know, overnight we're going to sell, you know, that plus another hundred billion, it's just ridiculous.
The math is just not there.
And to use his term, this is fake news.
Yeah, absolutely.
All right.
Well, listen, thanks very much for coming on the show, Ben.
I really appreciate it.
It's a pleasure, Scott.
You take care.
All right.
That is Ben Freeman.
And check him out at the Foreign Influence Transparency Initiative.
That's CIP online or CIP online or slash, yeah, whatever, you'll find it at the Center for International Policy and find them at TomDispatch.com and Antiwar.com.
This one is the Saudi lobby juggernaut.
All right, y'all, thanks.
Find me at LibertarianInstitute.org, at ScottHorton.org, Antiwar.com and Reddit.com slash Scott Horton Show.
Oh, yeah.
And read my book, Fool's Errand, Timed and the War in Afghanistan at FoolsErrand.us.
