0:00

Hey, guys, ready or not, twenty twenty

0:02

four is here, and we here at

0:04

breaking points, are already thinking of ways we can

0:07

up our game for this critical election.

0:08

We rely on our premium subs to expand coverage,

0:11

upgrade the studio ad staff give you,

0:13

guys the best independent.

0:15

Coverage that is possible.

0:16

If you like what we're all about, it just means

0:18

the absolute world to have your support. But enough

0:20

with that, let's get to the show. Joining

0:23

us now is presidential candidate former Congressman Will

0:25

Hurt. It's great to see you, sir, Thanks for joining us.

0:26

I appreciate you having me on so.

0:28

Absolutely from my own home state of

0:30

Texas, so it's always fun to see you. I actually

0:32

kind of forgot that you guys were Oh yeah,

0:35

right, we

0:40

have a big Aggie audience.

0:41

I'm really happy about that.

0:43

We always ask the same question to everybody who joins us here in studio,

0:45

why are you running for presidents?

0:47

I think America needs a better choice

0:49

than a rematch from hell between Joe Biden

0:52

and Donald Trump. I think we're faced with

0:54

a number of generational defining

0:56

challenges. The Chinese government trying

0:59

to surpass US as a global superpower,

1:01

the fact that every industry

1:04

is going to get impacted by advanced technologies

1:06

like artificial intelligence. We continue

1:09

to have a growing humanitarian

1:11

crisis on the border, and our kids

1:13

and grandkids are scoring the lowest

1:15

on maths, science, and reading in this century.

1:18

These are the issues that we should be addressing.

1:21

And these are the reasons I'm in

1:23

the race because we need someone that has a mix

1:25

of foreign policy experience, domestic

1:27

policy experience, technology experience

1:29

in order to address this. And one of the things

1:31

I've learned from my time when I was in Congress,

1:34

way more unites us than divides us. Most

1:36

people wouldn't think that's the case if you only

1:39

look at social media and watch

1:41

cable news. But I think we're better together.

1:44

And the only way we're going to continue to make sure

1:46

this experiment called America exists for

1:48

another two hundred and forty seven years is if we

1:50

solve these problems together.

1:52

You can read a poll as well as easily as I can,

1:54

and it's certainly former President Trump still has

1:56

a very dominant position within the Republican primary.

1:59

What is yours sort of theory of

2:01

what led him to find such appeal

2:03

within the Republican base and leads them

2:05

to still really, you know,

2:08

support him so strongly in spite

2:10

of everything that we saw happen under his presidency,

2:12

and know a lot of broken promises to taxcuts for the rich,

2:14

in spite of him positioning himself as populous,

2:17

to say nothing of January sixth, stop the

2:19

steal in the what is it ninety one criminal

2:21

charges that he's facing.

2:22

And didn't build a wall and made

2:24

it harder for agriculture in many parts of the states.

2:27

You know, the list goes on of his

2:29

deficiencies. Look, he is

2:32

someone you know when he ran he had one hundred percent name

2:34

I d He is someone that has

2:37

has I think tapped

2:39

into an anger and fear

2:41

of the future, and he's soaking those flames.

2:44

And there's no question that he's the front

2:47

runner in this GOP race. There's no question

2:49

that I'm a dark horse canon in this race.

2:51

I understand that and appreciate that. But

2:54

when you really start thinking and look

2:56

at state by state, his

3:00

front runner status is

3:02

not as dramatic as it is in

3:04

some of the national polling. And so

3:06

there is a way we don't not have to

3:08

accept Donald Trump as the

3:10

nominee. It's not a fad a complete

3:13

that Donald Trump is going to be the Republican nominee,

3:15

and it's a matter of galvanizing

3:18

all those other folks who want

3:20

positive actions. But

3:22

we asked if we have to win, right, like, that's the reality

3:25

if we elect Donald Trump. And I've made it very

3:27

clear, I think Donald Trump is running for president

3:30

to stay out of prison. He is not running

3:32

to make America great again. And if we

3:34

put Donald Trump up as a nominee, we are giving

3:36

four more years to a Democrat. And

3:39

that the opportunity for Republicans is

3:42

to appeal to those independents and Democrats

3:44

who are sick and tired of the direction the Democratic

3:46

Party is go is going. And

3:48

that's that's the upside, that's the

3:50

opportunity. And we need more

3:52

people voting in primaries. Only twenty three percent

3:54

of the country votes in primaries, and that's part of the PROBMB

3:56

too.

3:57

It's true, it's an important point you're considering

3:59

your dark horse status. Didn't get on the debate stage

4:01

last time. A lot of critics I think of

4:04

people who are running against Trump, at least for

4:06

the big race, is that you're splitting the ticket just

4:08

like you did in twenty sixteen. So if you can't

4:10

even get on the debate stage, and you said you'd reconsider

4:13

it by the fall, why not support somebody

4:15

like Ron DeSantis, Nikki Haley or anybody

4:17

who you may agree with more who may

4:19

actually have a chance of rolling up the anti Trump

4:22

Volde.

4:22

Well, I've made it very clear that by by

4:24

late fall early winter, you know, it needs

4:26

to be some consolidation. So so

4:29

I think that's the right strategy. I think Governor's

4:31

knew New from New Hampshire had articulated

4:33

that a while ago, and I subscribed

4:35

to that. And so we're still I've

4:38

been in this for ninety days. I believe one

4:40

quarter we've we

4:43

have the lower we had started with, the lowest name id

4:45

and the least amount of money. And

4:47

this was never about peaking today or tomorrow.

4:49

I got peaking in late fall.

4:51

And so we're going to continue to push this. And

4:54

and if and if your viewers watch, your subscribers

4:56

want to help, go to herd from America dot com

4:58

and a right

5:00

and help it brother out. Because because if

5:02

you want to see something, if you want to see something,

5:04

something different, right, And so so I said,

5:07

I'm a reasonable guy, all right, So you.

5:08

Were saying that you see Trump as coming

5:11

to power as part of an expression of this

5:13

rage that not just I think the Republican

5:15

Party. I mean, I think you can see a similar angst and anger

5:18

that led to the rise of Bernie Sanders and very different

5:20

people with very different solutions, but I think that was

5:22

a commonality. Where do you think

5:24

that comes from? And do you think

5:26

that the you know, version of the Republican

5:29

Party that you know you've queue very closely

5:31

too, do you think that was part of creating

5:34

that rage through failures around

5:36

you know, do you regulating Wall Street? Through failures

5:39

around the Iraq War, et cetera.

5:41

So this rage begins with a

5:43

lack of trust in our institutions. And we've

5:46

seen that lack of trust and this is

5:48

not just a recent phenomenon. It's been

5:50

going on for decades. And that that

5:52

that mistrust, specifically within the federal

5:54

government, comes from when people run for office,

5:57

they say one thing, and when they get in office,

5:59

they do something else. And so that exacerbates

6:02

this lack of trust. While people are

6:04

like, you're upset repeal and replace Obamacare.

6:06

Everybody talked about it, but when Donald

6:09

Trump came into office, they weren't able to do it, and

6:11

so that's part of the problem. And so

6:13

for me, the way I've always

6:16

been successful is talk about the things you

6:18

can solve, right, And that's

6:20

how I continue to get elected in a

6:23

district that nobody thought a black Republican

6:25

could win, the twenty third district that I represented

6:27

for six years with seventy two percent Latino,

6:30

And when I first ran, nobody thought I had

6:32

a chance. And the way I want

6:34

one was because I talked about things people cared

6:36

about. I solved problems that were impacting

6:39

the community, and then I went around

6:41

and said, hey, this are the things that I did, and so that's

6:43

how we build trust back in this And so yes,

6:45

I believe that these opinions

6:48

and things that I articulate are

6:50

reflective of probably a majority of

6:52

the country, and the majority of the country

6:55

wants someone who's actually going to

6:57

solve problems and not just you know,

6:59

have some fancy slogan on TV.

7:01

Well, what do you think about abortion? Do you think abortion is hurting

7:03

the Republican Party today?

7:05

Yes, I think it is. I'm

7:07

of the opinion I've been pro life my entire

7:10

career. If the Senate put a fifteen

7:12

week abortion ban on my desk,

7:15

I would sign it. But the other thing, now

7:17

that it's back in the state's hands, the states

7:19

that are restricting this need to

7:22

be the greatest places

7:24

on the planet for healthcare

7:26

from others, for neo natal health care.

7:28

The fact that in some community, especially black

7:30

women, black women having kids

7:32

in the United States are more likely

7:34

to die during childbirth than in many

7:36

parts of the developing world, to me, that's

7:39

outrageous, and that's an issue

7:41

that, Look, we can champion that,

7:43

and our governors need to be pushing that. Our

7:45

elected officials need to be pushing that. And

7:47

so I think that's one of those issues

7:50

that you know, look, I don't think you're going to change people's

7:52

opinion on this brought a topic, but

7:54

you can be talking about things that we can all agree

7:56

on.

7:57

So, speaking of issues, people are very interested

7:59

in big auto worker strike against

8:01

the Big Three going on right now. You

8:04

have somewhere around seventy five percent of the American

8:06

public on side of the workers. Are you on the side

8:08

of the workers?

8:08

Well, I'm on the side of one. I'm

8:10

not a big government Republican, So the federal

8:13

government doesn't have a role in this two

8:15

having led organizations. You know, when

8:18

the organization benefits, the people

8:20

involved in the organization should benefit, right,

8:23

And so I don't know the details of the case,

8:25

but yeah, if you're having a company

8:27

that's making a lot of money, then you should

8:29

make sure your workers are benefit.

8:32

It's the workers right now, you know. So

8:34

my issue with unions, you know, look, if

8:36

you want to join a union, join a union, that's fine. Just

8:39

don't force people to join a union,

8:41

right, is my position on

8:44

this.

8:44

So look, I think that I mean, you're

8:46

in favor of right to work, Like, would you work for

8:48

a federal right to work passage?

8:51

I would not do that. On the

8:53

on the federal government side, I think there's difference when it

8:55

comes to the federal unions. Now again I've

8:57

worked with a lot of the existing federal unions,

8:59

whether it's a border patrol union,

9:02

even SEIU, you know,

9:04

when I was in Congress. We work closely with them.

9:07

But again, if people want to be able

9:09

to join a union, they should.

9:13

I want to ask you about Ukraine as well. This

9:15

isn't interesting. So we have some polling up. We can

9:17

go ahead and put this up there on the screen. We've

9:19

got a majority of Republicans who are opposing

9:22

Ukraine funding right now, considering

9:25

your stance on this, and if the majority

9:27

of the party doesn't support it, why do you

9:29

fall on the other side.

9:31

Because it's the right thing to do. And here's why, And I'll

9:33

explain why as a less be here in Washington today is

9:36

specifically a pertinent question for sure. Yeah, So

9:41

the issue is nobody wants

9:43

to see a forever war in

9:45

Ukraine. Nobody wants

9:47

to see a lack of accountability

9:50

of the resources or the material

9:53

that we send to that right, Like, these are things

9:55

that we can all agree on. One of my long

9:57

term problems I have with the

9:59

federal government, like our ability to account

10:02

for dollar spend is crazy. If you want to know

10:04

how many how much money DoD you spent

10:06

on office supplies last month, it would take

10:08

you a year to figure that problem out. So those

10:11

two are problems. However, the United

10:13

States of America built an international order

10:15

that benefits us, and when we don't

10:17

defend that international order, that hurts

10:19

us. And the reality

10:22

is if Ukraine doesn't win, And

10:25

the way I define winning, right, the way

10:27

I define winning is pushing the Russians

10:29

out of all of Ukraine that includes Crimeria and Donbos

10:32

and I'm probably more aggressive than

10:35

most on that position. And

10:37

so so if we don't do that

10:40

and the Russians, let's say we go, the Russians

10:43

go back to February twenty twenty two, that's

10:46

a win in a victory for Russia. Eastern

10:48

Europe is not going to care about what

10:50

Western Europe or the United States of America thinks.

10:52

Western Europe is not going to care what America

10:55

thinks. The fact that macront

10:57

the French president this summer, I want say

11:00

it was June was in China talking

11:03

to an American newspaper saying

11:05

that, hey, America, don't make us choose, don't make franch

11:07

choose between the US and China. Ukraine

11:09

losing is going to exacerbate that problem,

11:12

right, And I think the biggest

11:14

issue that the United States of America is facing is

11:17

this new Cold War between US and the Chinese government.

11:19

So these things are connected. And I also,

11:21

and again I'm sorry for my long winded

11:23

answer, I

11:25

think we would not be fighting

11:27

a war the way we're trying to make the Ukrainians

11:30

write this war. So you

11:32

know, the issue is not the percentage

11:34

of how much money we're spending. It's about five percent

11:36

of the entire DoD budget that

11:38

is going to dismantling the Russian

11:41

military. The fact that Russia has to go to

11:43

North Korea to get weapons is a signed

11:45

things aren't going that well, right, And

11:47

so I think the speed

11:49

at which just equipment and support goes is

11:52

part of is part of the problem.

11:53

So you would actually ramp things up, then

11:56

spend more. Provide would

11:58

you provide the long range missiles they're asking for?

12:00

We're healthy, Yes, I would provide like so

12:03

so troops on the ground, right, Ukrainians

12:07

on the ground, I would not have I

12:10

appreciate it.

12:11

If Ukrainians, if the Ukrainian military

12:13

uses a long range missile to a crime

12:16

in Rostov well established?

12:18

Okay?

12:19

Yes, so that with US provided

12:21

weapons, with US.

12:22

Provided weapons and and the counterdar

12:24

that is going to be is that escalation? Yeah? Right?

12:27

And and so so I think that

12:29

the concept of escalation has has

12:31

gotten out of control. When the when the Iranians

12:34

provided ua vs to this conflict,

12:37

did we escalate against Iranians?

12:38

Know?

12:39

When the Chinese provided additional support

12:41

to the Russians, did we escalate against

12:44

them? Right? And so so will the

12:47

Russians use an attached a nuclear weapon?

12:49

Right? Putin's

12:52

rule and we've found out what is Vladimir

12:54

Putin going to do when he's pushed? We

12:57

saw Progosion decide that and

12:59

instead of escalating, what did he did? He capitulated?

13:02

Right now? He ended up killing them killing

13:04

it. Now. Guess what if I was prodotionan, I

13:06

probably wouldn't be flying around in Russian military

13:09

equipment.

13:10

In Russia, no question, you know.

13:11

So so so again, if

13:14

we want at the moment, is

13:17

is Ukraine winning? Well?

13:19

The answer to that is no, yeah, sure, but

13:21

is Russian winning well?

13:23

It depends on what you look at.

13:24

Right, have an industrial base, They've ramped

13:27

up their defense, spending their artillery

13:29

production. All that outpaces the sanctions

13:31

actually haven't worked. I mean, I want to flip things around.

13:33

So I believe that you served in the CIA at the time.

13:35

That we were at the war in Iraq.

13:36

That's correct, right?

13:37

Okay, So the Iranians were providing e

13:39

fps, these very deadly IEDs

13:42

that killed upwards of hundreds

13:44

of American soldiers. Don't you think that

13:46

that was an attack and an escalation on

13:49

our behalf.

13:50

Or against us?

13:51

So if the Iranians are providing she and militia's

13:54

IEDs that are killing Americans. A lot

13:56

of people in this country at that time understood that

13:59

as an attack or indirect attack against

14:01

us. How is it not vice versa when we're

14:03

doing that to Russia? And then what would

14:05

stop them from doing things similar

14:07

to us?

14:08

So so, in my opinion,

14:11

the error, and that was we

14:13

should have attacked the Iranian locations

14:16

interact, not the wrong. We

14:18

we knew where, we knew where the Kods force was.

14:20

Right, Let's let's go back to Costom Sulimani.

14:22

Right.

14:23

I think the attack on Costom Sulimani was absolutely

14:25

correct and and and did

14:28

what was a response by the Iranians in that

14:30

moment They telegraphed

14:33

launching missiles at a US location

14:36

that that that injured nobody

14:38

and then then then it was squashed. So in

14:40

that case we knew. So that is the

14:42

example of how the Iranians were going to escalate.

14:45

And we have an example already of how vitamin

14:47

putin is going to escalate and and so will

14:50

that force the the the the

14:52

the Russian to do something? So do you think

14:55

that Russia would be able to find if they attack

14:57

something in Poland or if they hit

14:59

somebody in the US, and you get the

15:01

you get NATO forces in the right

15:05

for for Vladimir

15:08

Putin, well for US too. So but

15:10

but again it's it's you

15:12

know, what is what is the what have we

15:14

seen the Russians do? And if the goal

15:17

is you.

15:17

May be correct, You might be correct,

15:20

just like you know, the bet was right in terms

15:22

of Iran's response to the assassination

15:24

of a costum stool of mine.

15:26

But if there is.

15:28

Even a small percentage

15:30

chance that we could end up in a

15:33

world destroying nuclear conflict, isn't

15:35

that something that we have to take seriously?

15:37

Of course we take it seriously. But you make

15:39

a calculation on whether does that prevent you

15:41

to stop from doing something? Well, so let

15:44

let's play that out. If so

15:47

we go to let's say Zelensky

15:49

for some reason system with Latimir Putin and

15:52

decides to have say, hey, we're

15:54

to go back to February twenty twenty two, how

15:56

how does the world change from

15:59

that? Okay, so we prevented a

16:01

nuclear war, but then does

16:03

that exacerbate America's role in the world.

16:05

And here's why I'm concerned about this issue.

16:08

Because of this order that we built,

16:10

we become the greatest economy on the planet.

16:13

And if the Chinese government

16:15

surpasses us in their percentage

16:17

of global GDP, in their ability

16:19

to work and increase their access to

16:21

allies, that means the dollar is

16:24

not going to go as far as it has

16:26

as we've gotten used to. It are four to one caves,

16:28

and retirement accounts are not going to go as far

16:30

as we expected it. Our kids are not going

16:32

to have access to the best paying jobs.

16:34

These are the consequences because

16:37

no one's going to care about us because there's no such

16:40

things the security guarantees anymore. There's

16:42

no such things as improving

16:44

a cooperation between our economy.

16:46

We have no security guarantee with Ukraine. Let's

16:48

be clear. I mean we do with NATO. But essentially

16:50

you said at the start, you said I don't want to sign U up endless

16:53

war. You effectively we're talking here about

16:55

twenty four billion. The intelligence community brief senators

16:57

yesterday. They said this is just the first of

17:00

as we've already provided one hundred billion, the

17:02

same amount we provide the Afghan national security

17:04

forces over twenty years of war.

17:06

If this is what they need on a quarterly basis. Aren't

17:08

you signing us up for an endless war?

17:10

I mean that's one hundred billion a year expenditure

17:12

for what you're talking about. Ukraine is our sixty

17:15

seventh largest trading partner. Russia is

17:17

like number twenty five. Fifty percent of world

17:19

GDP is China and the rest of Asia. They

17:21

don't care about Ukraine. I was just in India. They could

17:23

care less about what's going on in there. You

17:25

shouldn't you be managing this relationship that's

17:27

happening here as supposed to risking a nuclear

17:30

conflict over security non security guaranteed

17:32

country and talking again about something irrelevant

17:34

to the global economy.

17:36

Well, there was a security guarantee between

17:38

US, the Russians, the United States,

17:41

the Budapests memorandum when the Ukrainians

17:44

willingly gave up to the weapons. Right, So it's

17:48

not NATO, but there is there

17:50

is an agreement in

17:52

place. So how

17:56

is the money being used? What are the objectives?

17:58

Right? Like, these are valuable questions.

18:01

We should be suspicious of the amount

18:03

of money that is being spent. And I'm

18:05

not saying, you know, blank shack or

18:07

anything, but but these are some of the conversations

18:09

that need to be had. I wasn't. I wasn't

18:12

in the the intel briefing and stuff like

18:14

that. But when I'm president, we're going to be having these issues

18:16

because guess what, what was

18:18

the failure in Iraq? Right? The invasion

18:20

Iraq was a failure? Right, it was in failure because

18:23

it was based on flawed intelligence and

18:25

you ignored information on the

18:27

ground. The consequences of that

18:30

was long term you know, the number of deaths,

18:33

destabilization in the region, right,

18:35

and then a long term impact on the

18:37

socio political fabric of Iraq. Right

18:40

in in Soul Syria, in Syria. But there

18:42

was zero plan post

18:45

invasion, right, there were there, There

18:48

was of course no

18:51

no, no, But I agree, I

18:53

agree, I agree with that. Right, But if

18:55

you're going to go, you need to

18:57

have you need.

18:58

To have a part in your ideal world.

19:00

Because this is one of the things that I just struggle to understand.

19:02

What does the endgame in Ukraine look like?

19:04

Because what we were but we were sold

19:07

I mean, that's a nice thing to say, but

19:09

it's not anywhere close to reality. And

19:11

we were sold the idea that Okay, we've

19:13

got this counter offensive coming, let's

19:16

do what we can. We're gonna ship more aid, We're

19:18

gonna, you know, really fund this thing to the hilt. They're

19:20

going to have a chance to break through and at least

19:22

disrupt this land bridge that the Russians have to cry

19:24

it didn't happen. So what

19:26

is the strategy now? What does

19:29

it look like to bring what has been a brutal

19:31

and horrific conflict that has devastated

19:33

so many people's lives.

19:34

And the Ukrainians are doing all of this. The

19:36

Ukrainians are doing all this. We were out

19:39

but without air superiority,

19:42

right, we would never be fighting that war

19:44

that way, and so so theer.

19:48

But we're also we're also restricting how

19:50

they can use the equipment.

19:51

So what so lay that out

19:53

for me? So what are you advocating for specifically

19:55

here?

19:56

Continue to let Poland and again now we have palms

19:58

with Poland today, right Because again, if

20:00

I was advising today Zelenski

20:03

or yesterday, I guess, okay,

20:05

yeah, yeah, yeah, the Ukraine deal.

20:08

If I was, if I was advising Zelenski,

20:11

I wouldn't be saying, hey, be critical

20:13

of your partners that are helping you, right,

20:16

And I think that was a mistake with Poland.

20:18

But give them F sixteen's

20:21

right, let them use the equipment the

20:23

bomb rush. And again,

20:26

so this notion that so

20:29

y'all think that if if Zelensky

20:31

attacks sites, that he's already attacked.

20:33

With drums, with his drunes, with his eniings.

20:35

Okay, so Vladimir Putin's going

20:37

to launch your nuclear weapon into San Francisco.

20:40

Maybe bomb's leviv or maybe that

20:42

accidentally goes across the border into Poland.

20:44

And Article five gets uh, yeah, and now

20:46

we're in a full blink. Sure, And even if the nukes

20:49

don't go, half a million people lost

20:51

limbs already in Ukraine, outpacing some

20:53

of the out of some of those prosthetic

20:55

statistics that came out of the.

20:57

First World War. I've been to the grades in France.

21:00

We don't need any of that over.

21:01

Here, especially over I agree with that. I agree

21:03

with that.

21:04

Okay, we're obviously there's a lot that we could

21:06

get.

21:06

Of course, I do actually want to go These.

21:10

Are the kind of debates that I wish we had

21:12

more often, right about, Yeah, that's

21:15

why we had that's the premise. Yes,

21:17

we don't have a time later, which is kind Yeah, absolutely.

21:19

I did want to ask, so you worked in the CIA. Yeah,

21:21

we've always been curious ask somebody who wasn't there. Do

21:24

you think the CIA had anything to do with the assassination

21:26

of John F.

21:27

Kennedy. Oh,

21:29

I'm not equipped to answer that,

21:31

like like c I A like official,

21:34

I don't like

21:37

you got So here's

21:40

here's what I always say about There's two

21:42

things about movies about the CIA

21:45

that kind of like, you know, rubbed

21:47

me the wrong way. It always

21:49

shows that like when you're handling an asset, like

21:52

their lives is like throwaway, like my

21:54

most my one job. These

21:56

are people that are giving us information to keep

21:58

our country safe. My number one job

22:01

was to keep them safe. Right. I would never do

22:03

something with an asset that would that would ultimately

22:05

hurt Okay, and then like like that, like

22:07

the CIA is going to violate laws in the United States?

22:10

Right now, what's happened? So

22:13

no, No, it

22:15

was a different you know, I started in October two thousand,

22:18

right, and so THEA was very

22:20

different from the time when we were doing things

22:22

in Central America and even in

22:24

in in Vietnam. And you know,

22:26

my job was to stop terrorists from blowing up

22:28

our homeland, right to prevent Russian

22:31

spies and chinesevies from stelling our secrets

22:33

and to put you know, nuclear weapons flippers

22:35

out of business. And I always tell

22:38

people, if they knew how many threats to the country they are, valid,

22:41

valid threats they were, most people wouldn't come

22:43

out of their homes, right. But it was a

22:46

job that I loved and enjoyed and

22:48

got to do it in exotic places.

22:50

Okay, Well, I always wanted to ask, so we got

22:52

a non committal answer.

22:53

There you go.

22:54

We appreciate you joining you, sir, and what

22:56

you can shout out your website.

22:58

Yeah, sure, heard for america dot

23:00

com.

23:00

All right, thank you sir, Thank you.

23:15

M