How Wikipedia Launders Propaganda with Ashley Rindsberg, and Why Doug Collins Urges Congress to Focus on Hitting Singles, Not Home Runs
01:08:36 Share

Hey folks, this is Chuck Warren of Breaking Battlegrounds. Do you want to prepare for a secure retirement? Grab a pen and paper right now and write down 877-80-INVEST. As our loyal listeners know, Breaking Battlegrounds is brought to you by YREFI.

If you are concerned about your financial future and looking for a good return for your retirement, then you need to call YRefi at 877-80-INVEST. There you can earn a strong, fixed rate of return of up to 10.25%, pay no fees, and have no attack on your principal if you ever need your money back.

Just go to investyrefi.com. That's invest, the letter Y, then R-E-F-Y.com or call 877-880-INVEST. I personally invest my own money with Y Refi. I recommend you give it a serious look for your future.

Sam Stone: Welcome to another episode of Breaking Battlegrounds with your host, Chuck Warren. I'm Sam Stone. As always, we are bringing the best interviews of the week.

Welcome to the program.

Thank you, guys. Thank you for having me. So let's start off with the basic question, which our audience will not know. How does Wikipedia work? And then the second question is, who do they decide is a reliable source? Let's start with there, Ashley. Yeah, that's a really good question because, you know, most people and I think until I started doing this digging, this investigation, myself included, I didn't know who they were.

you look at Wikipedia and it kind of looks like this pretty neutral kind of like, you know, it doesn't seem very political or partisan or anything like that. It kind of feels like that's the whole point. That's why we all turn to it for answers to our questions about information and knowledge. But Wikipedia really works in a very structured way, and that's by referencing

mainstream media reporting specifically mainstream media so they've got a list they call it the reliable sources list of sources that people editors on wikipedia can use to make claims or facts or assertions in the articles that they edit and on that list is all the top mainstream media outlets that you could think of that's nbc cbs abc cnn new york times washington post

you name it, it's all colored green for generally reliable. There's also on that list are outlets that are red for unreliable. And almost any right-leaning or conservative news outlet is actually considered red on Wikipedia. And that means generally unreliable. So if conservative media says something is true, Wikipedia is not going to accept that as the basis for a claim in an article. Whereas if

the mainstream media, no matter how left wing, we're talking stuff that's even far left, like Jacobin or The Nation. We're talking like the most left you can go are still considered green. If they say something, then it's considered real. Well, for our audience to understand in your article, you also put Al Jazeera gets a green.

Right. And then the Southern Poverty Law Center gets a green. I mean, so it's clearly biased. I mean, I don't think it's even tilted. It's just like bricks are on one side of it. And how far does it go? Does that like where do they rank the Wall Street Journal?

Wall Street Journal, I believe, is green for the most part. There might be a little asterisk somewhere there, but that's one of the ones that has kind of slipped through. You know, Wall Street Journal, we sort of think about it as conservative, which is true for the most part for its editorial pages.

Yeah, for the opinion. And the reporting tends to be either more center, sometimes even left of center. So kind of like flies under the radar. Right, right. So anyway, you have these left, what people would say left of center publications who get the green light. Anything right of center or even probably center, if there's anything, maybe Reuters is probably maybe a little bit center, get approved. RCP.

on the Simpsons where Homer's driving and his son Bart tells him something's in Wikipedia and Homer goes, we're going to get home and fix it. And he has a screwdriver in his hand. And, you know, and so I think that was always, that was always the assumption for people who follow a little bit that this was a community effort, which is the purpose of it. I don't feel that's that way anymore. Am I wrong on that?

Absolutely not. That's entirely correct. The site really began to shift and to change. I mean, it always had roots in the Bay Area and Bay Area politics obviously run extremely liberal. But I think there was a good faith effort on the site to keep things balanced.

Things really start to shift after Trump's election. That's when we have this rise of this like misinformation, disinformation industry and a lot of panic about that kind of stuff, because according to the people who are promulgating it, that's what got Trump elected. So we have to clamp down. So right around that time, you start having a lot more of these what people call edit wars where people are really disillusioned.

duking it out on the, you know, behind the scenes on Wikipedia. And it turns out that there's a pretty well organized group of people. They tend to be more on the left or on even some, some of them on the far left that just know how to win the arguments. They know how to use the rules on Wikipedia. They know how to use these committees to win arguments and also to get people banned. And my article in pirate wires, uh,

was focused on one editor who was really trying to like kind of provide some counterbalance to that. This editor is the user is called Ask Me, and she was trying to clean up some of the Trump pages where you had a lot of left wing stuff going on. And they banned her. They just banned her from editing any topic on American politics. So they're basically like if you're in politics, someone who knows every iteration of the Robert Rules of Order.

Right. So I know all these rules. And it sounds like from what I read, it sounds like there's one person in particular, Mr. X, which I just love that name, by the way, that he's the one making a lot of the regulations really. So he makes a regulation says, well, based on our regulations, this is what we're doing. Is that correct?

That's right. And Mr. X was the same person who got this editor at me, the one who was trying to bring some more neutrality and balance, got her banned. And he cited one of the rules that he himself had instituted. He just kind of made it up, called gaslighting. He said, you can't do this. And that rule, gaslighting, is actually what he was saying is you can't question reliable sources.

If it's a reliable source on Wikipedia and you question it, you're breaking the rules. He made up that rule. But the other really interesting thing there is that he also made up the reliable sources list. That was him on the site in 2018. He just kind of put it up there for the world to see. It was never accepted by the community. It was just he just did it. Well, you have in the article, I love this line, between 2015 and 2020, Mr. X said,

made nearly 600 edits to Donald Trump article alone, not including edits to Trump-related articles. That's incredible. He was very active. Do you think he was paid? Do you think he was paid by— He has to be paid. Do you think he's paid by NGO or some left progressive PAC or something like Media Matters or something? Is someone like that paid? I mean, I can't see somebody volunteering that much time. So, you know, this is one of the problems with Wikipedia is that—

You don't know who these people are. And you can actually even edit Wikipedia with just an IP address. You don't even need to register an email. So we don't know. I mean, it could be it could be he's just a guy with a lot of time on his hands. And there are very dedicated editors who just really believe in the mission and they do this. It also could be an operative from the DNC or it could be somebody else. I mean, there was early on in Wikipedia, I think around 2006,

Some researcher traced a bunch of IP addresses of editors on the site back to the FBI and the CIA. They were actually editing the site. They haven't made that mistake twice, but it just goes to show that we've got no idea who these people are. So the FBI and the CIA learned how to use a VPN is what we're saying right there. Exactly. Because there's zero doubt. They got clued in.

Took him a little while. Is there a similar example to the right, you know, more conservative or just balanced editor? Is there a left-wing editor whose citations have proven to be wrong over and over that they have banned from this service also? Great question. Not that I came across. Maybe it's out there. I mean, certainly there can be some crazy person, but in terms of someone who's...

It doesn't. I don't. I mean, given given how these pages have these articles about Trump or the racial views of Donald Trump or lab leak or stuff like that, or the Hunter Biden laptop article, given how they are presented, it doesn't seem like it doesn't seem like the people are being banned or from the left. So let me ask you this question. So you had this school shooting, tragic shooting in Georgia and.

J.D. Vance was quoted as saying, well, this is the part of American life, but that's taken totally out of context. His comment was much more, this is a sad reality right now, right? It was not like, well, just this is the way we are, right? The exact quote was, I don't like that this is a part of American life. Right, and they didn't do that. They just said the way of life. How will Wikipedia handle that on the J.D. Vance page?

Well, I haven't looked at that specifically, but I can tell you when there was a lot of the controversy about Trump's remarks about the kind of people that were coming into the country, he called them rapists or whatever. And there was a lot of context around that quote when he actually said it. He actually said, I'm not talking about normal people. I'm talking about the specific groups that are coming in that are being sent in by these governments. And that was something on Wikipedia that I think it was actually Mr. X.

He refused to put the context around the quote. He wanted just that piece of the quote in the article. So that's exactly the kind of thing. And also we had recently, there was a criticism section on Tim Walz's article

article that was removed entirely just about two or three weeks after he was named as Harris's running mate. So like these are the kind of tricks and, you know, they're they're subtle. But when you read the article afterwards, it makes a big impact. So obviously they have a huge bias also between left wing public personalities and politicians versus right wing.

And also things like the lab leak of COVID is a theory. It's not just about people. It's also about things that are like I would say anything that has any kind of political significance. There is that same effect. So I just went to GoDaddy and looked up and we can buy together communitypedia.org.

I mean, does something need to be bought and countered on this where you have a where you have an editorial board that's marked by registration, half Democrat, half Republican to try to get an objective view on this? I mean, how should people counter this type of misinformation? Because everybody we have two minutes left and we can go out, talk about the next statement as well. But everybody I know goes to Wikipedia. It's the first thing they do. Right. It pops up. So how do you how do you counter this this fraud?

Very, very difficult. I think you could get involved in Wikipedia, but that might not be so effective. There are other alternatives like Justopedia. That's a very good alternative. I think there's one from the former co-founder of Wikipedia called Conservapedia, which is specifically conservative.

It's very hard, though, because Google really favors Wikipedia. It's the first result on almost any search you're going to do that's information related. It's going to be the number one search. How do you get that kind of preferential treatment from Google? That's the key to this whole puzzle. Well, and I was just looking. So, for instance, Scriber has an article on for media and in scholars, how to cite a Wikipedia article.

I mean, it's obviously not something that people are just ignoring as, you know, I mean, it's getting into the media, it's getting into academia, it's filtering into every element of society from there, in part because of that position at the top of the Google rankings. And it's where everyone goes. And the starting point for every search. Yes, it is.

Oh, boy. Okay. Well. That's a steep hill to have to climb. We have about 30 seconds left before we go to break here. We're going to be coming back with more in just a moment from Ashley Rinsberg. He is the author of The Gray Lady Winked. You can get that on Amazon or wherever you like to buy your books these days.

And coming up, you're going to want to stay tuned for the second half of our program when we have former Congressman Doug Collins calling in. So great interview there. Stay tuned. More Breaking Battlegrounds in just a moment.

Folks, this is Sam Stone for Breaking Battlegrounds. Discover true freedom today with 4Freedom Mobile. Their SIM automatically switches to the best network, guaranteeing no missed calls. You can enjoy browsing social media and the internet without compromising your privacy. Plus, make secure mobile payments worldwide with no fees or monitoring. Visit 4FreedomMobile.com today for top-notch coverage.

digital security, and total freedom. And if you use the code BATTLEGROUND at checkout, you get your first month of service for just $9 and save $10 a month for every month of service after that. Again, that's code BATTLEGROUND at checkout. Visit 4freedommobile.com to learn more.

At Overstock, we know home is a pretty important place, and that's why we believe everyone deserves a home that makes them happy. Whether you're furnishing a new house or apartment or simply looking to update and refresh a few rooms, Overstock has everyday free shipping and amazing deals on the beautiful, high-quality furniture and decor you need to transform any home into the home of your dreams. Overstock, making dream homes come true.

Welcome back to Breaking Battlegrounds with your host Chuck Moore and I'm Sam Stone. We're going to be continuing on with Ashley Rinsberg. He is the author of The Grey Lady Winked, a best-selling book on how the New York Times misreporting changes history here in just a moment. But first...

Folks, it's been a bad couple of weeks in the stock market. If you've been watching your portfolio, boy, you have taken a beating. If you were invested with YRefi, though, you would have continued earning fantastic returns up to 10.25% fixed rate of return on a secure collateralized portfolio. You wouldn't be panicking over the stock market right now if you had your money with YRefi. So go to invest, the letter Y, then refi.com or give them a call at 888-YRefi24 and tell them Chuck and Sam sent you.

So you wrote an article entitled Kamala Harris could censor Elon Musk X. And you've been seeing on social media this week that...

There is this interview featuring Kamala Harris where she says that Donald Trump had lost his privileges on his Twitter account. She'd be taken down. I think that's how she's using the much as she's trying to flip flop on everything now. She came out yesterday. Plastic straws now. I mean, yesterday she said it needs to be censored. X needs to be censored. So talk about what does she mean if she's president and what does it mean for free speech? What does it mean for censorship? Yeah. Just tell us about what we what you know.

Yeah. So, you know, I think it was in 2019, she did that interview with CNN, Jim Tapper, where she was saying that Trump had essentially lost his privilege to be on social media. And she also sent a letter when she was a senator to the head of Twitter, Jack Dorsey, at the time, saying that the Trump account should be taken down. And it was, as we know, but it didn't take

very long for that to actually happen. So she's obviously very invested in this. She's politically invested in it. She spent a lot of political capital to get this kind of stuff done. She's clearly opposed to what's going on on X. And she's showing that she's not afraid of using government powers to have this stuff actually censored, to have the government intervene, which is exactly what we saw happen last

when Mark Zuckerberg came out a couple of weeks ago saying the White House, the Biden White House did indeed lean on pressure, he said, Facebook to remove COVID related posts that they didn't like.

Are there direct links between Kamala Harris and the Stanford Internet Observatory, Washington – I think it's Washington University, CISA, and some of the others that are actively engaged in this censorship from an academic perspective? Yeah.

I don't know if there's direct links. That's a great question between Harris and those groups. You know, we did see that was during the Biden-Harris administration, they tried to create this sort of disinformation board, as they called it, sort of the censorship czar, Nina Jankovic, which people were just so up in arms that they had to scrap it. But that doesn't mean they're not going to try it again. I mean, we're seeing the rise of the misinformation movement.

disinformation complex or paradigm that is only gaining ground and gathering steam. So I would not be surprised if she goes harder, because I think the Dems understand that it's to their political advantage to control speech on these platforms as much as they can, because they know that they got the mainstream media cover. They're good on that side. Whereas this kind of leaking the leaky valve for them is on social media where they actually can't clamp down.

Well, think about this. And you don't even have to be supportive of this. I mean, you could be for DEI. You could be for all these other type of policies, progressive push the last four years. But without, for example, X.

I really think these would have became the way of life for everybody. But because of X and citizen journalists and people getting clips and posting it, it has really pushed back against them. No one would have any idea what's going on. It would just happen overnight and no one would notice that. Same thing in Gaza. And that's what concerns me whether you're Republican or Democrat. I mean, that's part of our check and balance. And that's frightening for me. So let me ask you this. So we have this situation of the Telegram CEO in France.

Yeah.

You know, that's a tricky case with Pavel in France. I do think that part of what they were trying to do in France, and this is supposition, but I do think they're trying to send a message to say to people like Musk, watch out. Right. You're a CEO, you're a billionaire. Well, you know, you're not going to end up in jail for 20 years. I don't think that's likely.

But we can pretty much disrupt your life whenever we want. We can find a way to get that done. And that's not the kind of message that you want to send. You know, there is a problem on Telegram. We know that there's a problem. There's a problem across social media. These things are real. These threats are real, including child pornography and drug trafficking and terrorism. That does happen. Does that mean we should go around arresting executives? Because I don't see us doing that for other companies.

that where the company has had some kind of violation on its premises or equipment has been used or whatever has been going on, you typically don't see CEOs getting arrested. I do think this was going in the direction of trying to send a message and trying to chill some of these platforms. And it may actually work. That's kind of the scariest part.

Well, what are your thoughts on what's happening in Brazil? You have a Supreme Court justice who apparently made the decision. Alexander de Moraes. Made the decision on his own. Yeah.

There's no legislative input. But now he's been backed by their Supreme Court. But he first came out and did it. He did it on his own. The Supreme Court there just runs unfettered. They're like the supreme law of the land. So tell people why this is a problem, what's going on in Brazil. I think what we're seeing here is a judge can come out and say, you need to comply with this or that. And even if it's...

It actually hasn't worked its way through any kind of judicial or legislative process. It's literally just one person or in a different case, it could be a regulator saying you got to you have to do this. Otherwise, we're just going to ban the app. And that is, you know, the real problem with it is that's exactly the kind of stuff that we see happening in China, in Iran, in Venezuela. And now it's sort of.

creeping into democracies or countries that seem to be almost now teetering on the brink of not being democracies. And this kind of thing can really become a trend where other countries start to see, well, France did it and Brazil did it. This is not really beyond the pale anymore. So like we have a political problem with this platform or that platform or this person. And here, you know, I'm in the UK right now. We're seeing

more and more of this kind of stuff going on where the government is now tracking speech related to COVID, even things that are even claims that are actually just true, but they counter the narrative that the government is trying to put out. This gets flagged and gets reported to various government agencies. Now these people who are some of them are journalists, some of them were even members of parliament, are being reported to various parts of the government that is monitoring their speech.

which is really kind of insane. So I think the biggest issue here is that slope is very, very slippery and we're already on that slope. So final question. We have one minute. What is, how do we push back? I'm giving you an action item. Tell our audience, what is the pushback? What do we do?

I think the pushback is taking enough courage to be vocal and be responsible at the same time. So you don't wanna go out and just start saying crazy stuff, which I'm sure no one in this audience does wanna do. Be responsible, do your research, try to listen to the other side, but do speak out. Do speak out.

You know, if you don't want to use your identity, you can do it anonymously on these platforms. But I think it's about getting yourself educated about what's going on here, really trying to understand the issues in depth. Also kind of trying to understand where the government is coming from, because I think there are legitimate concerns and legitimate threats that they're dealing with. But also then really saying, you know, this is where we have to draw the line. Correct.

Correct. I love that. Thank you so much, Ashley Rinsberg. We really appreciate having you on the program. Look forward to having you back on here in the future. Folks, you can get his book, The Gray Lady Winked, bestseller on The New York Times on the how the New York Times misreporting changes history. And boy, does it. You definitely want to check that out. That's The Gray Lady Winked on Amazon and elsewhere where you buy your books. Breaking Battlegrounds. We'll be back in just a moment.

All right. Welcome back to Breaking Battlegrounds with yours, Chuck Warren and Sam Stone. Our next interview up, Congressman, former Congressman Doug Collins represented Georgia's 9th Congressional District. He fought for law enforcement, religious liberty and constitutional rights in Congress, continues to serve as a U.S. Air Force Reserve chaplain and senior advisor for America First Works. But before we get into that, folks, let's get started.

If you've been watching the news, you understand today how important digital privacy is. We're having the founders of major social media companies threatened with and even arrested. What about you? You think you're less vulnerable than they are? You're crazy. That's why you need to go to 4freedommobile.com. That's the number 4freedommobile.com today for top-notch coverage, digital security, and total freedom. Protect yourself. Protect your information. Use code BATTLEGROUND at checkout to get your first month of service for just $9.00.

and save $10 a month for every month after that. Again, that's code BATTLEGROUND at checkout. Visit 4freedommobile.com today. Congressman Collins, so you're still a chaplain in the U.S. military. Was it the Air Force? Chaplain for the Air Force? Yeah, still in Air Force. So, first, how have your responsibilities changed today versus when you first started? As a chaplain in the Air Force, it's...

One, a lot of it in 23 plus years, I actually served in the Navy for a little time. I think the biggest issue we're dealing with right now in change is not only we're being asked to do more with less, literally, in many ways, and it's the effectiveness on our families. And then just the continuation of what I feel like, and especially under Joe Biden and under President Obama, there were just issues of where the military did not feel like it was

the issues were being heard. And I think when you see that across the world, I mean, it just makes the counseling more difficult. I still love my airmen. I still love being in the Air Force. But the more difficulties are coming on extended stays and wars, and that just drives a real wedge between families and members right now. Do you see—so, you know, there's been lots of articles and studies about the decline of religiosity in America, people going to church. Uh-huh.

Do you see this in the Air Force, or do you see people really sort of knuckling down and trying to find their faith more in the military? It's a little of both. I think what we've got to understand is there's been a denigration in our whole country toward organized, and I'm going to put in blank here. Think about when, I mean, I'm 58 years old. I mean, I can remember when you had Elks Clubs, Moose Clubs, Kiwanis Clubs, Rotary Clubs.

And now most of those, except in certain areas, are not doing as well. People are becoming more and more isolated. I think that's a bigger issue. People on their faith perspective, it's almost also an assumption, too, that we're –

People want to know something, and they're looking for that God, and they're looking for what God has done for them. But it's become very much of a self-seeking existence, which a lot of people do right now through their phones and the Internet and everything else. So I think the want to is there. What we don't have, and I'll go back to my preachy side here, we just don't have enough people willing to work in the field to help us.

Former Representative Collins serves as an Air Force chaplain. I was going to ask in that vein. I don't think people realize the burden that for 25 years basically now since 9-11 has been placed on about one million active duty U.S. military members. I know it's politically fraught for anyone to say this, but since you're not in Congress now,

If you were to go back, would you say, hey, we need a national draft, we need a two-year period of service, we need to find some way to get kids reengaged with serving in the military and serving this country? That is such a great question. And I would have told you probably 15, 20 years ago, no. But now looking back on it and seeing where we're headed,

I'm beginning to think that there probably is going to have to be some more at least discussion about it because simply you look across the line of Army in particular who are down a number, I think, definitely battalions, possibly even division-level strength. I know the Air Force is about the same, Marines. Everyone is having trouble keeping members. And some of the ways that the military is covering up for that is

is they're deactivating units. And so in other words, if we can't get the 40,000 people in, well, as they roll out, we're just taking those units offline. And I think that's become a bigger concern. So the question will be, is where do we get to people? And now the first question you always get is, you know, the drafted troops are not as good. They don't fight.

I wouldn't want to say that to anybody, basically, and volunteerism that goes around when you see what we had in unit cohesiveness in World War I and World War II. And even in the Korean Vietnam, the soldiers who went served well. We had a lot of problems around it. But we've got to figure out a problem, and it's economic, it's cultural. I saw a study just recently that said that well over 50% of those serving in the military are recommended their children do not serve.

And that's a huge, huge shift. We have just about 30 seconds left in this segment. We're going to be coming back with more in the final on-air segment here from former Congressman Doug Collins. He represented Georgia's 9th Congressional District. We want to get to the Gold Star family's response to Kamala Harris, some of the anti-Israel protests that have been taking place on Labor Day, immigration folks.

Some hot topics. I know we got a little off as we tend to do on this show. We tend to be a little bit free form asking questions, but we're going to get to all that stuff coming up. So stay tuned. Breaking Battlegrounds back in just a moment.

Folks, this is Sam Stone for Breaking Battlegrounds. Discover true freedom today with 4Freedom Mobile. Their SIM automatically switches to the best network, guaranteeing no missed calls. You can enjoy browsing social media and the internet without compromising your privacy. Plus, make secure mobile payments worldwide with no fees or monitoring. Visit 4FreedomMobile.com today for top-notch coverage.

digital security, and total freedom. And if you use the code BATTLEGROUND at checkout, you get your first month of service for just $9 and save $10 a month for every month of service after that. Again, that's code BATTLEGROUND at checkout. Visit 4freedommobile.com to learn more.

At Overstock, we know home is a pretty important place, and that's why we believe everyone deserves a home that makes them happy. Whether you're furnishing a new house or apartment or simply looking to update and refresh a few rooms, Overstock has everyday free shipping and amazing deals on the beautiful, high-quality furniture and decor you need to transform any home into the home of your dreams. Overstock, making dream homes come true.

Welcome back to Breaking Battlegrounds with yours, Chuck Warren. I'm Sam Stone. We're going to continue on with our interview with former Representative Doug Collins of Georgia here in just a moment. But before we do, folks, we've got to tell you again to go check out our friends at Invest, the letter Y, and then REFY.com. Go to their site. Learn how you can earn up to 10.25% fixed rate of return on a secure collateralized portfolio. And when you invest with Y Refi, you're doing well for yourself and your family by doing good for others. You're helping students pay off their high interest student debt early.

This is a fantastic opportunity for you. Check it out. Invest the letter Y, then refy.com or give them a call at 888-Y-REFY24. So on Labor Day, Donald Trump went to Arlington Cemetery at the behest of the 13 Gold Star families whose children were needlessly killed through a suicide bomber in Afghanistan through a disastrous withdrawal. I would personally say murdered by incompetence. Through a disastrous withdrawal. Yeah.

What should the public know about this? The press seems to want to focus on Trump having a staff member who did not use proper decorum. I don't disbelieve that story at all. I mean, you know, campaign staffers and improper decorum are high up on Red Bull and everything else. Tell the tell our audience what they should know, what how Biden betrayed these families, him and Kamala Harris and what they've not done for them.

Well, that's the bigger story that the press cannot report about because if it does, then they're undercutting their narrative that led to the coup that got rid of Biden and put Harris in office, to run, not run into office, but into the candidacy for the presidency. And because it's a major collapse of our foreign policy. And she said that she was the last person in the room. Go back and let's remind people that. She tries to pretend she's not vice president, but she is. Right. And here's...

And here's the problem that we have. Number one, they have never, up until just very recently, even mentioned the names of the 13. That is enough gross incompetence right there. And just unfeeling from a president and a vice president to not even mention their names. Because it's almost like if we don't mention it, it'll go away. The other thing to know about this event is that the families actually did reach out to both Biden and Harris and Trump

to come and only Trump took them up. In fact, the others didn't even bother to respond. Here's the problem. There's no, the issues that you want to have people taking pictures and all this, those are side issues. They're like the fever when you have a disease. The disease is this. They got embarrassed.

And Harris and Biden, Biden's laying on the beach, you know, swimming through his phone. Harris is nowhere to be found. And here's Donald Trump laying a wreath in Arlington and going to see these families. And all of a sudden they didn't think it was a big deal until all the media who had nothing else to cover on Labor Day started showing those pictures. Did you notice it was less than 24 hours, over 24 hours later before you started hearing the problems with the event?

And by the way, it was just embarrassed. Well, the NPR wasn't even there. I found that out. We had a reporter on last week. He says NPR did not even attend the ceremony, but they're reporting on it.

Oh, exactly. And I've also heard from one, and I don't have a chance to follow up. I was following one of the family members on an interview. I can't remember which outlet. It was a national outlet. And they gave indication that, look, those were not cell phone video, phone, those pictures. Those were actually from Arlington and from the Trump that actually did it.

They didn't even have the pictures in Trump's campaign. There was at least an implication that there was a concern about where these pictures were leaked from. And so, again, there's a lot of issues that need to be answered. But the bottom line, don't fall for the noise, folks. If you're a conservative, especially in this race, don't fall for the noise. That's what they want you to do. What you need to focus on is the fact that this is the only thing that's problematic about Arlington. Trump went and they didn't.

Yeah. And Trump went at the again. It wasn't him that put this together. Right. It was the Gold Star families that requested him. This wasn't something the Trump campaign sought out. They responded in kindness to families that are hurting. Right. Yep. And Biden and Harris were both invited and they ignored them.

And that's a critical point that obviously isn't getting out there also. But now this whole thing about there's no, you know, no political activity at Arlington. But right. I've already seen a Joe Biden ad and a John McCain ad both shot in Arlington Cemetery. These are actual campaign ads that were shot in the cemetery.

And, by the way, pictures that were released through the Obama White House and campaign for political purposes. Look, nothing they do is not political in purpose. Don't let them also tell you that that's a falsehood as well. So, yeah, this is – look, they got embarrassed. Now they're having to backtrack. And the best thing for us, though, is every time somebody brings this up, all we've got to bring up is why did you give up Bagram? Why did you give up the country? Why did you give up the country?

Why did you make the Taliban stronger today than they were on September 10, 2001? Explain that one to me. That's another critical point because right now there's been a lot of news probably, Chuck, you and I paid a little bit of attention to it, but a lot of folks around the country haven't. The Taliban has been, A, now cooperating once again with al-Qaeda. Well, they're giving a basis.

Yeah. Base is now there again. Yeah. And B, they're now reinstituting the most extreme versions of Sharia law in anywhere in the world. Which, you know, no bases would have been there if we had kept the force of two or three thousand in the Air Force base.

I agree with you. But we had less than two less than three thousand for the last like 18 months of the Trump administration. And there was zero death. And the Taliban wasn't in Afghanistan. And when Joe Biden made the political decision to get out completely and tell everybody we're leaving everything and we're going to be out before the 20th anniversary, that was a pure political decision that cost us equipment and most importantly, cost us lives.

So explain to our audience, Congressman, explain the following to our audience. You keep hearing Biden and Kamala defenders saying, well, Trump is the one that agreed to the withdrawal. OK, they keep saying that we just we just implemented it. Please explain to our audience, because you're in Congress when this happened with the Trump. Why that is really apples and oranges conversation that they're really not. That's not true. Exactly what's going on.

Well, let's describe it this. I'll make it very simple, because at the beginning of the details, you can get lost, and I don't want anybody to get lost. Donald Trump looked at the situation, and it would be as if I was taking my young son and said, okay, I'm going to let you drive the car, but nobody else can be in the car. You only can go to this place, and you can only do what I'm telling you to do, and you come straight home. If anybody else gets in, you can never have the car for another 12 months. Joe Biden, on

on their administration said, Trump started this, but we're going to make a political statement to do it quicker. And they said, basically, here you go, kid. Here's the keys to the car. I don't care when you come or where you go.

That's the big difference here. And look, don't take my word or anybody else's word for it. Take the words of Ratcliffe, who is the director of national intelligence. Take it from Pompeo. Take it from others who all were in the room when the discussions were saying, look, Taliban can't come here. We're not going to give up this base. We're not going to give up this area.

until these certain criteria are met. Biden just simply said, we're going to get out because it'll make our left base happy without any kind of restrictions. And that's why this is apples and oranges discussion as you go forward. But people have to be given the true story. Ed, we have elections coming this year, and we'll have a new Congress sworn in next January.

What do you feel the most important issue is that they need to tackle and resolve? Aside from our state at the border, you know, the things we know, I think they've got to really start coming together to figure out. Conservatives have to get together. And my hope is we take the Senate, which it looks very promising, and if we can keep the House.

Republicans have got to figure out how we get stuff through that actually moves a conservative agenda forward on spending and economic issues that put us back on a path that we had during the first Trump administration. And we win the presidency that can do this. But conservatives have got to quit falling for the trap that if we can't get everything we want, we're not going to try and get anything. And I think that's the part that I see right now. And I've got a lot of dear friends who are still there.

it's much easier to vote for no on something and then go say basically to everybody, well, I didn't get everything I want. And then you let the bill go, the Democrats take anything they can get, and you end up with nothing really conservative of a victory. So I think my hope would be that Congress comes together and our conservatives on our side come together and say, look, we may not all agree here, but we're going to get some conservative stuff here, and we're going to use our leverage to get it, and

And then we'll come back the next time and get some more. My hope is they focus on that economic and energy independence back again. Why don't we, when you were in Congress, and this is always, Sam and I talk about this a lot using a baseball example. Why don't we shoot for more singles? So, for example, let's say the border.

Let's just put a clean bill. We're adding 20,000 border agents to the border or 10,000 or whatever. Why don't we do that? It always seems to be a want a grand slam and then it's a big fight and it doesn't happen. And for someone like you who runs for reelection or higher office, it takes away a talking point, right? So if you go and say, we put forward a bill that passed the House that simply added 10,000 more border agents and

And the Senate didn't vote. That seems like, A, people understand that. They're not going to get lost in the weeds because you just explained like these gold star families and withdraw. We need to be simple for people. They don't have a lot of time to deal with this, but there's a lot you can get done hitting single singles.

Yeah. Well, here's – I'm going to be – some of you are not going to hear what I'm going to say, but I'll be honest. I was able to pass a lot of legislation, stuff that Donald Trump ran on, like criminal justice reform, that actually did do true criminal justice reform, keep our community safe, first step back. That was my bill. We did a lot of other things that were bipartisan that didn't get the headlines because the quote wasn't effective, but it made differences for people. Here's the problem. We don't reward singles. Right. And I think in our political process today, we reward the –

we reward the person telling us we're going to give you everything you want or we're not going to do anything. We,

We reward that, and both sides do this. And so it puts you in a position of saying, okay, we promised you X. Well, I may not have made a promise that I couldn't keep start with, and so now I've got to just dig my heels in, and in the end we may not get anything. I've always made this comment, and it's something I think we all need to look at. Pelosi, her last two years, the first two years of Biden's administration,

She had the same majority as Kevin McCarthy had when he came in last January.

And look what they did in those two years. In the same four-vote majority, they passed the infrastructure, they passed the New Green Deal, they passed some more stuff with four votes. We have not been able to do that. We've gotten rid of a speaker, and we basically just had to go along with a lot of other things because we don't understand the power of those four votes. I love the singles analogy, Chuck, and former congressman.

Because, look, we're baseball fans here, right? Right. If you have to choose between a guy who's hitting 180 with 30 home runs, 200 strikeouts, or a guy who's hitting 320 –

With 10 home runs and a huge on-base percentage, it doesn't strike out. You're taking the ladder. You're taking the ladder every single time. He's a much better player. And yet we lionize on the right these guys who are hitting 180 in Washington. Well, and I think the days of the great Grand Slam because of social media and the various other alternatives to press, that's gone. I mean, because you always find something that's wrong with something, right?

Yeah, and that's your problem, okay? Look, single, single, single hit, you score. Putting somebody on base gives me more options to get them home. I'll continue this analogy. Me simply going up there and telling everybody to swing for the fences, I may get one, but I'm going to have three and out. Or I may get none and get nothing. And the question is, what gives you the most political advantage to, quote, score your run,

And that's by putting wins on the board. The Democrats are playing small ball and putting up crooked numbers on us is what's going on. I would rather win every game and find wins than lose because I couldn't hit a home run.

I'm sorry. I agree. I'm tired of politics on our conservative side where it's either we win everything or we just go home. Bull, Democrats for 60 years have been taking singles and turning them into doubles and turning them into triples and pushing it home, and now my insurance in this country is torn up. My banking from Dodd-Frank is torn up because here's something you may not know. You know how many times the Democrats have had control of the House in the last 32 years? Eight. Eight.

Eight years. That's it. They're stealing a lot of bags after they get on base is what this comes down to. Well, Congressman Collins, we appreciate you coming on our sports podcast today, which we've all made it out to be. We have a minute left. What does the future hold for you? Will we see you in public office again? What's it hold?

It may. First of all, I think this is continuing the sports podcast. Go Dawgs. I mean, my Georgia Bulldogs. And we'll go. But no, look, we're right now focused on getting Donald Trump elected. That's my biggest discussion right now. After that, we'll sit down and take a look at it. Georgia's had a lot of issues going on. But...

But we do need people who are willing to get back, you know, to be a part of it. And we'll have those conversations after November. Fantastic. Thank you so much. Former Representative Doug Collins of Georgia. Really appreciate having you on the program. As always, we look forward to our next conversation. Folks, stay tuned. We have Kylie's Corner. The murder and mayhem is on your way. Some big scandal. I'm going to save all those details for the podcast because it's a Christian station.

We have a sunshine moment. We have good stuff. We have Chuck and I arguing over something, as we always do. Stay tuned for that. Otherwise, we will see you back on the air next week.

If you are concerned about your financial future and looking for a good return for your retirement, then you need to call YRefi at 877-80-INVEST. There you can earn a strong, fixed rate of return of up to 10.25%, pay no fees, and have no attack on your principal if you ever need your money back.

Just go to investyrefi.com. That's invest, the letter Y, then R-E-F-Y.com or call 877-80-INVEST. I personally invest my own money with Y Refi. I recommend you give it a serious look for your future.

The 2022 political field was intense, so don't get left behind in 2024. If you're running for political office, the first thing on your to-do list needs to be securing your name on the web. With a yourname.votewebdomain from godaddy.com. Get yours now.

Welcome to the podcast portion of Breaking Battlegrounds with your host Chuck Warren and Sam Stone. Apparently we have lots of content that we can't possibly put on the air on this Salem network coming up from Kylie. But I do have one point I was just thinking of before we start Kylie's Corner since this is sort of our legal crime section here of the show. As you know, the judge today has delayed sentencing on the hush money trial for Trump after the election. If Kamala Harris is elected, and it's a 50-50 shot right now,

The smartest thing she can do is immediately just pardon Trump if she really wants to start trying to unify the country. She won't do it. Well, she's not interested in unifying the country. But if she wanted to, she would just say, we're just done with this. I'm just done with it.

Well, I will say this, and I think Trump made a tactical and a strategic error when he got into office, when he decided, frankly, not to prosecute Hillary Clinton, who there was lots of evidence. I agree. Would have prosecuted. But he didn't do it. But he didn't do it. But he also did not come out and hold literally a press conference and say, listen, there's actually a lot here we could prosecute. But we don't need it as a nation. We don't need it as a nation. And I'm not going to do it.

I agree. He missed an opportunity there to change the narrative for himself. He didn't do it. But just my side note, if she really wanted to say, look, we have got to turn down the heat, and that would be a good way to start. I tell you, if Trump wins, you know what a good thing for him to do? Is him to say the day after he wins –

My first action, if if President Biden feels uncomfortable doing it, my first action will be to pardon Hunter Biden. Yeah. Somebody's got it. Somebody's got to be an adult and turn it down. And that may not be justice. You know, I love it. It's not fair. It's not just that we've got to turn down the heat. It's horrible right now. It's it is essential right now to change the tenor of politics in this country because we are truly in a cold civil war.

that has every possibility of becoming much, much worse. Well, Kylie has a weird story out of France that her and I came across, and now it's getting more and more attention. And Kylie, why don't you share it with the public here? Yeah, it's actually growing in attention, which I think is good because when I first heard this story, I thought it was something that was an anomaly, didn't happen often. And going into further details,

like looking into it and stuff like that, this actually happens more often than we would think. But a French husband is, um, along with 50 other men are on trial right now in France for the continuous rape of his wife. Um, she's 70 years old. So Dominic Pelicot had been married to his wife for 50 years. They had three children together and seven grandchildren. Um, in 2011, I don't know why this happened. He not sure if he'll testify, but, um,

I don't know why this started, but he would use a date rape drug to drug his wife and then he would invite men over to rape her while she was unconscious. At this point, this guy's like 58, 59 years old? Yes. And he gets – Yes, this woman is 70. And by the way, the 50 people are all they could – he filmed them.

So the 50 people are what they could identify. There's still like 20 some odd other people. Right, Kylie? Yeah. So this happened. They said more than 200 times 50 men are on trial. And the way he got caught was a security guard caught him taking photos of girls skirts at the supermarket. So reported him to the police. So his wife got brought in while the police then started looking into him and found out that he was posting these rapes online.

For other men to watch, to see, to come over and do it also, to join in. What's amazing about that point right there is when I first read this story out of a British newspaper, the point they made, which is like, they were just like, he wasn't even charging money for it. He was doing this for free. And the paper was like totally appalled, like, you're not at least charging money? I mean, it was really weird how they were framing it. That is kind of a European. Yeah, very much like, well, why would you not charge money at least, right? Right.

And she testified this week in court, and she said the way that she found out was police had actually called her in, and she thought it was to discuss the up-the-skirt photo situation. And so they're asking about her husband, their relationship, and he was like, he's a really great guy. I talked to him about this. He said it was a mistake, said it would never happen again.

Blah, blah, blah. And so then how she found out was they showed her photos of the rape. And she said it was she was unrecognizable. She didn't know it was her. So she was like, why are you showing me these photos? Stop until they explain the situation. And she just obviously had a breakdown and had absolutely no idea. Oh, my God. Not even not even an inkling of a clue. So he has two sons and a daughter and he had taken naked photos of the daughter as well as an adult. Correct. Yeah.

This man is just and they have seven grandchildren. So I hope nothing happened with that situation. But why I say it's a good thing that this is getting more media attention is because a lot of times these cases are on complete lockdown because of the victims. They don't want their names out there or whatever. But she wrote a book, wanted her name out there. And the daughter wrote a book. And this is an interesting case.

Given the racial and immigration dynamics in Europe, because under Islam, a wife does not have the right to refuse her husband. Well, I don't think they've gone there yet. No, but that's I mean, so this is an interesting precedent. Well, in that regard that they're also something else about the court. I want to discuss when she was just talking about this. They asked her not to use the word rape. They asked her to use sex scene. Sex what? Sex scene. Sex scene.

Scene? Yeah, sex scene. Instead of calling it a rape. Really? Why? Yeah. Why? No idea. I think because rape was just too graphic for the courtroom. But can I get death penalty for this? Am I okay to ask for this one? So this is what...

I bring back castration. I love a good death penalty. No, Kylie's got this one. No, he's too old. He's too old. I'd like a good, I'd like a death penalty for all of them. Can I get that? But I think, but I, I asked her so little for these guys. Yes. But I think when we're starting young, if you have these guys that are committing this, I think it just takes a few men getting castrated to me. Like, no, I mean the, the justice, the justice has to be severe on this. Well, and here's the interesting thing. Actually, that's a kind of important, broader point.

is that the point of having draconian-type laws for certain crimes is deterrence. It's not the punishment being meted out to that individual criminal. It's to deter the rest of society from having more people doing it. Well, it's like this case in Georgia with the shooting.

Again, it's always the same thing. They were warned. Law enforcement's warned. But obviously there are certain laws that prevent them from going full board. I don't know what it was. We'll find out more about that. But he was on the radar.

Again, you have absent parents that are divorced. I'm not saying all divorced parents are bad, but I'm just saying, again, it's a model, right? And you have a kid that was being bullied at school. I mean, you could fill this checklist out 90% of the time. I mean, that doesn't mean there's not outliers, but 90% of the time you can find those three things in this stuff. I tell you the one other thing that I would like to see come from this case or some other, and it ties to what we've been talking about.

Where law enforcement has been warned, there need to be punishment and consequences for those who did not adequately follow through on those warnings. They need to be suspended. Absolutely. They need to be suspended. And the father deserves a harsh punishment on this. Yes. I mean, they're charging him as they should. So we've got to start taking a stand. But always, and I want to get back to Kylie, the reason I brought that up is that we have to start seeing people who are participating in this, like the father, receive a real punishment. And again...

The shooters, they always seem to have those three criteria, right? Picked on, right? Parents are absent. In the law enforcement, it was on the radar. Has there ever been any shootings where these kids have someone has not called on them or they've posted something?

Not not that I remember. Yeah, I'm sure there is, but it's rare. So anyway, Kyle, they continue as I interrupted you rudely. No, no, no. You're totally fine. We were at the end of that story. The case is still ongoing and this will be going on until December. Why December? Because of all the 50 people? Yeah, because of every single case, because a lot of men are saying that they didn't know she was unknowing. They thought she was participating in the sex game.

So I wonder if they have – I mean he probably went through encrypted messages. I wonder if they even have screenshots saying, hey, she likes this or something, which would be interesting. It's possible. Yeah, I mean the professions on it were teacher. There was a fireman. I mean it's just – Well, first, as this always – A journalist. As this always proves, men are dogs. Yes. I mean more broadly. Yeah.

But then that's actually an important point you brought up. If they if Kylie, if they did or did not know that she was participating willingly, that's a that's a break point. They weren't paying. Right. So they just have another issue of their own kind. Yes. I mean, it doesn't make them you know, we're not letting them off and saying these are good people.

But no, it's just it proves that not one profession, not one type of person is inherently bad. Just there's bad people in the world. Absolutely. Do you have any other sad stories for us today? I don't want to make you guys too sad. So I have something that I came across this morning. OK, and we'll talk about here since we're still in the law and order section. So there have been 243 police officers shot or hurt in the line of duty this year. Mm hmm.

32 officers have been intentionally killed this year. Ambushed. Ambushed. Just intentionally killed 32 of them, okay? And basically hit jobs. Yep. Right? Order hit jobs, right? In 2023, there were 378 shot and 115 were shot in ambushes. Mm-hmm.

Where is Joe Biden and Kamala Harris, the prosecutor I'm hearing so much about, where are they on this attack on law enforcement? And again, we are all pro-law enforcement, but we also are – I think we're also here critical. The people who missed this in Georgia, whoever missed it, should be punished, right? I mean there needs to be accountability. You have a job. Absolutely. But where is Ms. Prosecutor Kamala Harris on this? The base of the Democrat Party does not want to –

does not want to have those people prosecuted as cop killers. That's what it comes down to. And as she proved when she in San Francisco had the opportunity to to charge that young man and put him up for death penalty, she didn't want to do it. No, no. Look, the the the base of the Democrat Party for all the national media hand wringing over the Republican base, the base of the Democrat Party now is made up of people who are have truly horrific beliefs.

Whether it is the anti-cop people, whether it is the anti-Jewish people, whether I mean, they have embraced the worst of humanity in this last couple of election cycles. Yeah. Yeah. Well, OK, that's what we got there. We had the debate coming up Tuesday. Should be. It's really important for Donald Trump.

It's really important because no matter what happens, Kamala Harris is going to have the media chorus behind her that she's had so far. What do you think he has to do to win? First, I think he needs to not come across as mean.

Yeah, I agree. Number one, just come across as a decent guy. He just he he just needs to focus on her flip flop. Stay on message. Go from there. And when she talks, just don't say anything. Right. You need to not have any. She's I mean, she's admitted she's hoping for the you're talking over me moment. Matter of fact, anything she brings up about his felony, she should just ignore.

He should just go back to the issues. So besides your personal attacks on me, Ms. Harris, why did you not call one of the 13 service members' families, Gold Star families? Instead of attacking me, explain to me how you plan to make up the $11,000 more it costs to meet household budgets since I left office. That's what he needs to do. Instead of attacking me personally, why won't you talk about this? I'll tell you what I would do. I would have a set line that I repeated over and over every time they bring up the prosecutions of him.

I would say political – I mean I would lead into my response by saying political prosecutions are third world. This is the first world. Yeah, and then I'd just be done. I wouldn't respond to her comments. Everybody knows this is a sham. Everybody knows this is a sham. Everybody knows this is a setup. Just ignore it. Just say simply I'm more interested besides this political prosecution how you plan to explain to the families that spend $11,000 more a year.

to meet basic household budget items. How do you plan to take care of that? Explain it to me. You throw out $25,000 per household for housing subsidy, but you have no plan to build houses. Yeah. What are you going to do to cut those regulations that the regulators, you want to stay in office? For a woman who opposed the Chevron decision,

Explain how that's going to get done. Right. I mean, all he just needs to do is question her. If he questions her, she's going to lose badly. Oh, yeah. In fact, he probably wins the election. She falls apart. Will he do that? I don't know. My guess is it'll be the normal Trump braggadocio routine, which is not going to win a single voter. I could win this debate handedly. This is easy. I mean, all I'd have to have is just 10 questions on a cue card. So how are you going to do it? Chuck.

You would end Kamala Harris's career in an hour. It's just unbelievable. Well, let's end with some sunshine. Jenna, what do you think about that idea? Sounds great. President Chuck. We have a story that comes from a community church out in East Texas.

It's a really small church, and it kind of fits with what Congressman Doug Collins was talking about, you know, with the decline of religiosity. People are finding community in these churches, and this group, a group of 22 families, was inspired by the bishop and the first lady, Donna Martin, to adopt 77 children from the foster system.

So this – they made a movie about this. It's just – it's a very small church. But they're coming together now and raising money. And the church inspired them to do 70? And the kids are all with them now or over the years? I think it's over a shorter period of time. I actually saw, I think, a news piece on this where the pastor of the church and one of the women who was involved with it basically started this and just –

just started adopting one. And I mean, they realized, I think she was connected to county health services in some way and kind of clued into the problem that they're having. And they just went out and they were like, we got to adopt all these kids in our area that are in foster care. Yeah. And I'm really interested to hear. So they made a movie about it. And I'm really interested to hear kind of what, how he communicated with the congregation to get people together to do this. Because I think they moved a lot forward. Is that the Daily Wire movie? Yeah.

It's by Angel Studios. Angel Studios out of Utah. Yeah, yeah, yeah. So it's called The Sound of Hope, The Story of Possum Trot. And so it tells this true story. It came out in July, and you can find it on the Angel Studios website. So I actually invested in Angel Studios last week. You did stock thing. It was on, yeah. Just 500 bucks. It wasn't whatever. I think they raised their six million bucks. They did.

Yeah, it's incredible. Well, and they're raising money to help different to help people in the foster foster care system now. So you can find it on their website. If you look up, pay it forward with Sound of Hope. You should be able to to find that. But no, it's great that organizations like this are doing this and that like different community churches are able to bring people together in North Carolina this July, July.

There were 1,003 churches who pledged to participate in a service day sometime between August 3rd and August 10th. And this July, July 14th, a different church, a union church, brought together people from multiple different states to help in a lot of different ways. I got to say, Chuck.

I see this as something that, frankly, churches nationwide would be wise to put together an effort and say no more foster care.

We're going to go out there and we're going to try to basically get every kid out of the system. Well, I agree. It's a lift you're not going to achieve. I mean, two points here, folks. Sam Stone is a movie investor. This is what you need to know today before you leave and go home. Two, with the decline of religious attendance, with the decline of people losing faith and doing spirituality...

This is the type of stuff that's not going to happen, and that's really bad for our country because as much as people like to harp on churches pushing their Puritan values, right, this is the type of stuff that has kept America glued. It's like Ashley was talking before—no, no, Congressman Collins—talking about, you know, where do you go for the—

Where do you go for them? I mean, you and I should go join the Moose Lodge just because now I want to join a Moose Lodge. But that community stuff's not happening anymore. And all that stuff was an outgrowth of a church. It all was an outgrowth of a church. I would actually point out as a history nut that most of the what people would call puritanical teachings of churches –

came grounded in real world solutions to problems that the human population was having. So, for instance, and I've talked about this with... I don't know if I've... I don't remember if I've talked about this on air, but for instance, the reason that pork is banned in Islam and Judaism is not because pigs are actually filthy animals. It's because pigs transmit diseases to humans with high frequency. Yes. So...

They didn't understand germ theory, but they understand that people who had pigs got sick and died more often than other people. And they undercooked the pork and blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. And so then the morality stuff, one of the reasons a lot of people died-

In the prehistoric days, it was actually sexually transmitted diseases. And the way to stop a sexually transmitted epidemic of disease is monogamy. Right. No. You're absolutely right. A lot of these rules have very foundational reasons. This is why...

there's this danger besides the fact of lack of faith where people don't have a positive view of the future. You're just going to lose these type of things. Niall Ferguson's book, I can't recommend enough to people. It's been out for 20-some years, The Great Degeneration. He predicted all of this coming with the degeneration of connections between human beings. Order that for me. I will do that for me. It's one of my favorite books. Well –

Jenna, that's amazing. Yeah, it's a great reminder, you know, that we do have the churches that we do have. Maybe we can try to dive more into them or find community. I don't think people realize, besides the number, these are 70 unique individuals. Yes. Right? So these good people are facing some real challenges. You know, I remember there was a friend of mine who was involved in raising money for Ukrainian adoptions to come to Utah.

And a lot of the parents, about half, just had real problems. The kids had all had anger issues. Which is not uncommon. Right. And it's going to happen here. So good wishes and prayers to this family who are taking on this heavy load to help people out. And, you know, again, adult supervision is really important for kids. Yeah. It is. So is structure. Structure, adult supervision. Yeah. I mean, look, study after study shows kids that have regular chores are much more effective adults than those who don't.

Well, folks, on behalf of Jenna, Kylie, Sam, myself, and Jeremy, who does an excellent job as always, we hope you have a good week. Please visit us on BreakingBattlegrounds.vote or wherever you find your podcasts. Share this with your family and friends, and we'll talk to you next week.