344: We Need to Talk About the Hysteria from the Left -with Brad Polumbo

Brian  
Who doesn't like going out and having a glass of wine and celebrating Liberty? Well, if you're in Alameda County, don't worry. I have an amazing event for you coming up on Sunday October 3 at 1pm, the 15th annual wine and liberty celebration at Westover vineyards winery sponsored by the Libertarian Party of Alameda County questions email Elizabeth stump elpac vice chair at Vice chair@lpac.us we can become great at doing the the things that we do well the things that we focus on like I'm I think our audience is great at selling Liberty I think we have been amazing at doing that. Welcome to The Brian Nichols Show Your source for common sense politics on the we are libertarians network as a sales and marketing executive in the greater telecommunications cybersecurity industry, Brian works with C level executives to help them future proof their company's infrastructure for an uncertain future. And in each episode, Brian takes that experience and applies it to the Liberty movement, you start to ask questions that pique his interest and get him to feel like okay, this guy's actually got something that maybe you can help me out. And then you're asking him questions and trying to uncover the real problems build that natural trust. I know it wasn't a monologue there, man. Instead of focusing on simply winning arguments or being right, we're teaching the basic fundamentals of sales and their application in the world of politics, showing you how to ask better questions, tell better stories, and ultimately change people's minds. And now, your host, Brian Nichols. Well, Happy Friday there, folks, Brian Nichols here on The Brian Nichols Show. And thank you for joining us on another fun filled episode. Did you get the chance by the way to check out yesterday's solo short? Yeah, it was a you and me. Yeah, we had a one on one where we talked about why it's important to treat your prospects like normal people, by the way. underlying theme, yeah, just treat people the way you want to be treated. Isn't that the golden rule? I think so. And it definitely pertains when you're going through the sales cycle. But today, you're not here to talk about sales. I know surprising, because that has been a very big focus in the program. But we're going back to a little bit of the meat and potatoes of what's happening in the world today. And that is having a conversation with our good friend. And as Brad points out, the most frequent guests outside of Jeremy and Chris, here on the program, Brad Palumbo from Fie. And the Washington Examiner joins the program once more, to dig into number one. Remember, we are going to have a whole tsunami of evictions with the CDCs eviction moratorium being lifted by the Supreme Court back in the summer out that didn't happen. And then Joe Biden says that if you don't go ahead and support his $4.5 trillion spending proposals that you are just going to be compliant and the downfall of America. Yeah, we see this overarching theme of mass hysteria, really pushing the political discourse and ultimately the policy. And then we wrap up the conversation digging into four areas that Brad can help Nancy Pelosi go ahead and cut from the $3.5 trillion spending bill. So with that being said, out of the show, Brad Palumbo here on The Brian Nichols Show.

Brad Polumbo  
Hey, thanks for having me back. Am I up there with your like most repeated guests?

Brian  
Absolutely are my friend I think your number is a 677? I

Unknown Speaker  
don't know a lot. Yeah, I

Brian  
think actually you beyond Chris and Jeremy, who they cycle back and forth for the the sales and marketing shows. I think you are easily foreign above the most repeat guests. And it's because Brian, you always bring so much value to the audience. I not even trying to you know, kiss your butt here. This is this. Like, I get people who reach out to me and they say, Brian, like that episode you had with the economist. I think he's an economist. I'm like, Brett, I mean, he's from feed. But yeah, Brad. He's awesome. Like, yeah, he was great. I learned so much. And I'm like, Yeah, there you go. That's that's the conversations we're trying to have. So that's why you keep coming back in the show, my friend.

Unknown Speaker  
Well, that's awesome. I appreciate it.

Brian  
Well, I appreciate the work you're doing. And that's why we weren't having the show. Again, obviously, you've been so busy, not only at Fie, as I mentioned, but also the Washington Examiner. But first we're going to start off you wrote an article over at Fie. And it made me laugh because we you hear all the doom and gloom that we hear in the world, especially from our friends in the left. And this is what you do all day long as you you address a lot of the doom and gloom with reality. And one of the articles you wrote over a fee was the progressive politicians predicting these massive tsunamis of evictions after the Supreme Court decided not to go ahead or rather, they went ahead and ended the CDC eviction moratorium. So Brad, let's start off dig into what isn't just a matter of the hysteria seems to be the overarching driving force here from the left is just to get people terrified that something terrible is going to happen to them. Is that is that seemingly The language of the left it nowadays.

Unknown Speaker  
Yeah, well, I don't know about you, Brian. But I consider myself a survivor of the great net neutrality repeal of 2018, I was reliably informed that we were all going to die, the Inner Wealth net would never be the same as we know it. You're 99 for Facebook brand, like this for the rest of your life, all this stuff that they said about this, I remember, during President Trump's tax cut, push, and I agreed with most of the tax cut bill, but not all of it, and there were valid criticisms you could make of it. But instead, they decided to say that tax cuts kill people. Yes, Nancy Pelosi literally said that cutting taxes. In this case, removing the Obamacare mandate would kill people. So the hysteria from people and there's hysteria on both sides. But in particular, when it comes to rolling back government interventions into the economy, it is progressives and the left who are constantly hysterical. And so one of the things that I think is unfortunate is that in our current media ecosystem, they get all these coverage when they issue these warnings, or these dire predictions or condemnations, what's going to happen, but very rarely does anybody follow up and see how those have aged? Now what I decided to do in this case was simply just go back. So for folks for a little bit of background in late August, the Supreme Court struck down the CDCs eviction moratorium, what that was, was an order by the federal agency that's you know, ostensibly focused on like public health and pandemics, basically saying that in the rental market nationwide, landlords could not evict non paying tenants in many circumstances. It created tons of problems that we can get into potentially. But it was a really drastic intervention. And the Supreme Court struck it down, said that it was unlawful because they really stretched their authority. And they said that you would have needed an act of Congress to do something like this, not just some unelected bureaucrats issuing a mandate. And when the Supreme Court made this decision, there was a meltdown like you've never seen AOC predicted that there was going to be a secondary pandemic of evictions across the country, Ayana Presley who's a member of the squad and a Congresswoman from Massachusetts. Well, she said that there was going to be a tsunami of evictions in the national Tent City, across the country of people living in tents after they've been thrown out onto the streets. Ed Markey said something like we're going to see a harmful wave of millions of people thrown out of their homes. He's a senator as well. So what we saw is all these bolts come claims, but about a month later, we look back, and there's there's not been any change in the eviction rate. Literally, The Washington Post reported this not some right wing source, but in most major metropolitan areas in the country, the rate of evictions, the number of evictions has not noticeably increased since the moratorium expired. The only difference is now people actually have to pay their bills.

Brian  
Well, we see this reoccurring theme, and it seems that hysteria sells. And we saw this throughout the entirety of the pandemic. I mean, you mentioned a OC saying, a second pandemic, the pandemic of the the evictions, and that never came to be and we saw this, you know, this throughout the entire pandemic, every single action that was taken, was taken in fear of preventing the absolute worst case scenarios. Those worst case, worst case scenarios don't really seem to ever really come Brad. And I think we're seeing right now, a lot of people starting to wake up to the fact that a lot of these dire predictions that the quote unquote experts have been making or that these political betters have been making haven't really panned out, nothing's really coming to fruition. And now they're starting to even question these authorities and these these really the infrastructure that we built across the United States, and they're questioning it, and I can you blame them? I think, honestly, we're getting to the point where your average person is like, like, let's go Brandon, like, yep, that's what they're saying in the crowd. Let's go Brandon. And you can hear just how forced it is like for the media to try to just present it in such a different way than what's actually just right there. And that permeates across so many different areas in life, Brad and I mean, you see this hysteria it plays into the the article you wrote was fantastic over the Washington Examiner, with Biden insulting anyone who disagrees with his $4.5 trillion spending binge. There was one line in particular, where he said they're they're being Democrats or Republicans rather are about opportunity versus decay. They're about leading the world versus lead. As passed by, which is literally happening, to support these investments as to create a rising America to oppose these investments is to be complicit in America's decline. And that right there, it's it's that language of this is going to be the worst case scenario, America's decline if you don't do exactly what we say you're supposed to do, Brad thoughts?

Unknown Speaker  
Yeah, I do find the apocalyptic and alarmist tone, just exhausting, because I've been a huge opponent of this massive spending push that they're pursuing of these multi-trillion tax hikes. But I will sit here and tell you that if all of it passed, the US would not fall apart, our economy would suffer, but it would not collapse. And it wouldn't be disaster. It democrats in particular, for some reason, seem incapable of talking about policy disagreements, or people that disagree with them without just painting these worst case scenarios. So Joe Biden, who we were told was going to be president unity, and norms and civility. First, he's just been gaslighting us. He's been looking the American people in the eye and lying to them and saying that we're going to spend trillions of dollars, but it costs $0. It's like 1984, like war is peace. Slavery is freedom. And 3.5 trillion is 0 trillion. I mean, it's

Brian  
scary in the beginning of whose lines in any way was one of the points made up and that the rules are made up, the points don't matter. That's right. The points are like, and then you give it as little spiel, because that's literally what it is Brad.

Unknown Speaker  
Yeah. But then he went on and said this quote that you just mentioned, the whole thing about being complicit. And he's saying that if you oppose this 4.5 trillion agenda, you are complicit in America's decline. I just think that's a very drastic and unfortunate way to talk about good faith policy disagreements. But if anything, right Biden's infrastructure plan, the 1.2 trillion transportation infrastructure bill and analysis from Ivy League researchers at the Wharton School of Business, downloader would actually not lead to more jobs, not lead to higher wages, and not lead to economic growth. So he wants to spend trillions for basically zero return on investment. And in doing so he wants to raise our corporate tax rate so that we would have the third highest corporate tax rate of any developed country in the world, putting us at an enormous economic disadvantage is that bad businesses will go to other places. And yet he says that we're the ones complicit in America's decline. I don't want to talk like that. But if we're going to Joe, it's not us who should be worried about that label.

Brian  
I mean, Brad, come on, we can just go ahead and print, print mint, a $1 trillion, platinum coin, and then poof, all the problems are solved. Duh.

Unknown Speaker  
It's all. So I, we Yeah, we should go into this topic. But

Brian  
my, my skin crawl is just like, because that's, that's actually a solution that's being presented. And like, you say it like that. I'm sorry, like, you say it like that. And it sounds so stupid. I said to my wife, I said this out loud. I said, they're gonna print the coin. She laughed. And then I showed her the article, she goes, Oh, my God, you're being serious. I was like, Yes. She's like that. How does this work? I'm like, exactly it. No, it doesn't. Yeah, dig into the policy. What is their proposal? Well,

Unknown Speaker  
the funny thing is, Brian, it's this crazy idea. But it's not impossible. It's not implausible that they could actually do it. Yeah, basically, the idea is that they they're running up against a debt limit right now. So the US unless Congress, Republicans and Democrats can agree to raise the debt limit, in theory, this is never gonna happen. They're going to strike a deal. But in theory, the US could default on its debt, which would be really catastrophic for our economy. Nobody wants that to happen, trust me. But one work around that they're trying to that some people are pushing, including members of Congress. Like, I think it was Rashida to leave, but some of the squad members support hashtag mint the coin. It's an online movement, and they're calling on basically the federal government to mint a coin, assign it a value of $1 trillion deposited in the Federal Reserve's accounts, and then use that to fund the government in lieu of additional debt. But then have the Fed offset it? Basically, it's a very bizarre theoretical way you could get around the debt limit and still fund the government without having to default.

Brian  
It is basically an IOU I mean, is that fair to say they're basically turning this coin into a proverbial future IOU that they will kind of pay back once that value can be acquired, no. So what they'll do is they would create this one. That's why that's why you're on the show, by the way, Brad, because I was wrong, just so well,

Unknown Speaker  
it's just, it's sort of actually indistinguishable from taking out a trillion dollars more in debt in the end, because what they would do is take out the 1 trillion coin, mint it, put it in their accounts, and therefore draw from it and spend on it. But then the Fed would sell treasuries to take an exact equivalent amount out of the private economy. So what they would do is like some people are like worried understandably, that printing a 1 trillion coin would cause inflation, but it actually would not because of the way that they're talking about this proposal is that they're going to print a trillion dollar coin, use it to fund the government, but then take a trillion dollars out through the federal reserve of the private economy. So if they do that, then there's no inflation shock. But then it's literally the same as if you just spent a trillion dollars anyway. So it's just a technical work around from the debt limit. That's probably illegal, according to some monetary experts. But they do disagree about this. And also, the other big thing is that then the spending power starts to lie with the Fed and the Treasury, unelected bureaucrats rather than our elected officials. And that's a real perversion of our constitutional order, because we can hold our members of Congress accountable, at least in theory, but we can't hold the Fed people are the people that the Treasury Department accountable for how many trillion dollar coins they meant. I mean, it's just a pretty alarming vision of government to have it go down that route.

Brian  
Fun, fun stuff. And then Janet Yellen wants to go ahead and keep an eye on your bank account. $600 plus all these great things coming from the Biden administration. Thank you. Thank you. No mean tweets. I'm so goodness, yes, super moderate. Really, really super duper moderate. Bernie Sanders is singing his praises super duper moderate. God, this is just this is like a nightmare. No, I'm teasing. Because, I mean, it is insanity to hear this proposal laid out because it is it's it's Charlie from always sunny with the big board behind them. They were all the lines drawn together, because that's how you have to make this accounting work. But it literally is just exactly to your point. It's just it's, it's just doing the trillion dollars.

Unknown Speaker  
But Brian way, it's probably not going to happen. I will say that. Okay, good. It's a lot of talk in progressive, like wanke circles. It's a huge online movement. But from what I've heard, I think Jen Misaki, the White House press secretary has been asked about it and shot the idea down. I know Janet Yellen, the treasury secretary and former Fed chair, she's in the Biden administration, she was asked about it, she shot the idea down. So while it's disturbing that the progressive movement is pushing an idea like this, we can rest assured that at least in the very short term, it's not going to happen. I don't think I would say, it's pretty unlikely.

Brian  
Let's hope uh, how about this, let's go for the last 10 minutes or so I want to make sure we focus on this insanity. That is the $3.5 trillion spending bill. Um, and I'm just I kind of think we're numb at this point to the idea of how much money $3.5 trillion is, um, it just seems like fun money. It doesn't seem real, because it kind of isn't. But Brad, you wrote an article, because right now, obviously, Nancy Pelosi and the democrats are fighting back. They're saying we can't cut anything from this bill, because it's super important. Everything is super, duper important. And you say I disagree. And you wrote an article overhead fee, which actually it goes ahead and lists off four specific areas that Nancy Pelosi could start, Brad, what's number one area that Nancy Pelosi can cut from this $3.5 trillion spending monstrosity?

Unknown Speaker  
Well, I'm glad you mentioned about the real cost because that doesn't get talked about enough for context. Like if I just say 3.5 trillion, what does that mean to most people that's beyond our comprehension. What that means, though, to put it in context is $24,400 per federal taxpayer in expenditure, a lot of money. The other thing that you can think of is you can compare it and 3.5 trillion is significantly more than the inflation adjusted costs of FDR his new deal. So we are talking about an insane sum. That's mostly going to what I would honestly call green new deal like climate change schemes and expansions of the welfare state. So there's so many things in here I rolled my eyes so hard that comment that Nancy Pelosi made about, what could we possibly cut? I'm like, well, Nancy, here are a few things. And this is just scratching the surface. But for example, they have Obamacare subsidies in there, that would go to very affluent Americans, you would get 10s of 1000s of dollars in health care subsidies, because this would extend the subsidies and also eliminate the income caps. Even if your family's earning up to $400,000, you're still gonna get 1000s of dollars in taxpayer subsidies. Why don't we start by cutting billions out with that, Nancy?

Brian  
I mean, that makes sense. But then, I mean, that would require Nancy Pelosi to go ahead and actually lead. Number two, Brad, you went ahead, we talked about this back, whoo, what a year ago, maybe when we're talking about canceling student debt. And that's, of course, tossed in here in a roundabout way. And that's giving people free community college $300 billion of taxpayer money bread.

Unknown Speaker  
Yeah, I'm pretty against this one as well. Because one thing that people don't seem to understand, I'm actually very pro community college, I encourage people to go to community college for two years, you'll you won't have to take any debt, because that's the thing. It's very inexpensive. It costs about a few $1,000 in tuition per semester, in most places, before any scholarships or existing aid. So you can pay your way through community college, working a minimum wage job, and then maybe go to a state university to finish your bachelor's and avoid a lot of the debt that people are drowning in, and they want big daddy government to come take away from them. But in this case, they just want to make Community College free for all. And there's no such thing as free. So it would cost taxpayers at least 100 billion, which is a huge sum of money. And I say we get rid of that, because like I said, it's already affordable, it's plenty affordable. And two, the biggest problem facing community colleges right now is low graduation rates and low academic outcomes. And there's been a lot of research into this. But when you have students that don't have skin in the game, they financially write their own loans, their own money, their own involvement. If they're just on their their parents money, or they're just on the government's money, they don't do as well in school, they're not as dedicated. So that's another reason I feel like that would really exacerbate existing problems in our community college system. It was just free, you'd have way more people probably signing up. But even fewer graduating and actually finishing through and getting good grades and going on to do something with it. So I think it's a terrible investment of taxpayer resources, and a very easy area to just scrap some room out of this massive budget bill. He called

Brian  
this big guy here, the green New Deal light, which I thought was was very clever, because that's exactly what I was thinking to. And I was reading his one provision about the massive subsidies here for electric vehicles, and quote unquote, green energy companies, which you so perfectly pointed out, Brad, that this is nothing more than just an overwhelming support of your already rich Americans who have investments in these quote unquote, green alternative forms of energy companies.

Unknown Speaker  
Yeah, let me just ask you a question. Brian. Have you ever seen a poor person driving a Tesla?

Brian  
Like, what, six a day negative?

Unknown Speaker  
Right? I mean, think about for a moment who drives electric cars, and what kind of companies create electric cars? The answer is very wealthy people and very liberal groups of people. These are the dead, the Democrats, true constituencies. They are corporatist crony capitalists, they want to funnel huge amounts of taxpayer money to these corporations through these subsidies and to these favored groups of high income earning people because that's their agenda. And they can say it's about climate change. Listen, I believe in climate change, I believe it's a real problem, I do think we should look for ways to reduce our carbon emissions. In particular, nucular energy is extremely promising and needs to be deregulated. But this would make no difference. I mean, the Cato Institute has done a lot of research on this, but the US in terms of global carbon emissions, US passenger vehicles account for about 2%. So if you stopped every car on the road, we never drove anything. Again, you would barely make a single dent in the trajectory of global warming as it's anticipated in the coming decades and century. So it wouldn't make a difference. And now just imagine a small tech or a hugely expensive tax credit scheme that would have maybe a small impact on our carbon emissions, but like not even come close to completely eliminating that 2% and the 2% is already a tiny amount of the global problem. So it's like it's not gonna make any noticeable difference, but it will cost half a trillion dollars or something like that in taxpayer money that's going to these companies for subsidies and it is a really good example of how the democrats talk a big talk about being progressive and standing for the working class, but they so often use power when they get it to funnel money to well off and well educated and richer constituencies and voters and then politically favored companies.

Brian  
Well, we see how great the government is managing everything we've talked about today. So let's go ahead and talk about number four, where they're trying to go ahead and manage some more and that's in our healthcare, of course, and Brad, you go ahead and you outline they're trying to just blow up Medicare, right now it's set to hit insolvency in five years or so. But they say, Hey, we're just gonna go ahead and I guess, you know, pump it full of dollars, and that's gonna save it,

Unknown Speaker  
right? Yeah, I just can't even imagine this logic, like, I feel like a toddler with a piggy bank understands this better. with Medicare, the government health care program for elderly people, it is already going to hit insolvency in just a few years. They're like, you know what, let's slap a bunch more expansions into that bad boy, what could go wrong. So they want to push millions more people off of private insurance and onto government insurance by lowering the age of eligibility for Medicare by expanding it to provide dental and vision and hearing coverage. And all these other ways of expanding this program, though, cause billions of dollars and a lot of these people. So I guess I'm agenzia I have my share of disagreements and resentments for baby boomers, and maybe this will come through a little bit here. But these elderly people are much wealthier than young people in middle age, people on average, much wealthier, yet now we're going to be taxed more and have more of our future borrowed away to pay for their like glasses and their supplemental health care. I mean, even if the budget already wasn't bursting at the seams, this still wouldn't make sense as a matter of redistribution or policy.

Brian  
Brad, we could go on and on man, but unfortunately, we're already at time. But I think the the way we could put the bow on this episode is that it requires us to have this conversation because your average person, we've said this once will say it again. They're just they're not plugged in like this. They're not reading the articles like we I mean, I say articles, your average person doesn't have time to devote to looking at the news and trying to get like the actual news versus the sensationalism. factor that into actually reading these these Gosh, darn bills, and you take the time to do this. And then we have you on the show, we try to break it down. So your average person now I can try to understand it, but then can better communicate to people that they see in their their circle. So that's why we do what we do. And I got to thank you, man, because this is really where we're gonna win is just showing how insane the hysteria has become. And when you're able to raise up the outcomes, that didn't happen, right, because of the cries that Oh, my gosh, net neutrality, you know, Elizabeth Warren, we're all gonna die. You want people to die. That was the argument we heard at the beginning of COVID. This is why we have to make sure that we're not only being consistent in making sure that we're answering the questions that people are asking. But we're being consistent and making sure that we're staying true to what we actually believe. Because this is what people call out on the BS. They see through the hypocritical, you know, contradictions, they see it and it's, it's time for us to stop playing defense. Did you get the chance, by the way really quick to watch the ben shapiro on Experian debate. Yeah, I did. I really enjoyed it. I did too. And she she shared something at the end of the debate on Twitter, and it came down to the left having to stand up and be more confident in their ideas and that she believes that they can win more people over by speaking to more people. And I just like I threw my hands in the air and I'm like, that is what we have been trying to do here for the Liberty movement because that is what works. Just sitting in your little group think bubbles, and hive mind talking about how great you are and how right you are doesn't actually accomplish anything, if anything. It isolates us from the rest of the real world. So having stories like this that take these sometimes very confusing, very hard to explain and sometimes very complex issues, breaking it down and making it so your average person can take away not only the the meat of the information they need to understand but also how to convey it. Brad, thank you my friend, folks, please do me a favor, go ahead and support our good friend Brad Palumbo. He has an amazing podcast breaking boundaries a proud sponsor here on The Brian Nichols Show. Also he does a lot of amazing work over at fi and at Washington Examiner Brad what is on the agenda for Brad Palumbo going forward?

Unknown Speaker  
Make sure you're also following my YouTube channel. I'm uploading a lot of videos there. All the podcasts are there in the video version. You can go find Brian's ugly mug if you scroll back far enough in that Brad Come on. Yeah, they don't want they probably don't want to do that. But just search Brad Palumbo p o LUMBO. To check out my YouTube channel where I do break down videos, reaction videos, long form podcasts with people like Rand Paul. So definitely check that out.

Brian  
Brad Palumbo as always you're busy my friend. And you're doing great work I know you were over on the young turks yourself more recently the young turks right you did a debate debate or not really debate just more of a friendly? Did bait discussion

Unknown Speaker  
debate? Yeah, they had a debate.

Brian  
Yeah, it was those were good. outtakes there. So yeah, folks, make sure you go ahead and follow Brad over on YouTube. But with that being said, Brad Palumbo As always, thanks for joining The Brian Nichols Show. Thanks, man. Trust the experts. We're all in this together. If it saves one life, raise your hand if you've heard any of those tiresome phrases over the past year and a half. I know my hand is firmly raised millions of people across dozens of industries are labeled on essential and forced the lockdown with livelihoods and futures crushed in an instant and as government has continued to expand its power and leverage fear to turn neighbor against neighbor a group of filmmakers have taken a stand and are determined to help set the record straight on the importance of following the actual science of the pandemic follow the science on lockdowns in Liberty from the sound mind creative group is a brand new docu series highlighting the stories of those negatively impacted over the past year and a half by ineffective government policies enacted in the name of following the science with noted experts like Nick Hudson from panda the pandemic data analytics organization healthcare policy advisors like Scott Atlas and telling stories of business owners families and just your average everyday person harmed by these government mandates follow the science on lock downs and liberty is giving us a chance to make sure the true stories of the pandemic are told so please help us at The Brian Nichols Show in supporting the sound mind creative group with noted figures in the Liberty movement like Dr. Tom Woods donating 1000s of their own dollars to this project. You know just how important this project is. So head The Brian Nichols show.com forward slash follow the science to donate and catch their brand new trailer to the docu series one more time. That's Brian Nichols. show.com for slash follow the science. Alrighty folks, that's gonna wrap up our conversation with Brad Palumbo. Thank you, Brad, as always, for joining the program and bringing your insight here to our amazing community at The Brian Nichols Show. Folks, if you enjoy the episode or you got some value from the show, please do me a solid and go ahead and share today's episode. And of course when you do make sure you go ahead and give Brad a tag and also give yours truly tag as well at B. Nichols Liberty coming up tomorrow, Saturday, we have our solo shorts with one of our returning guests. And it's going to be a conversation with a one on one you and Eric brachii from young Americans for liberty and Eric has a bone to pick with people picking on millennials. So if you have not had the chance to hit that subscribe button so you're not missing. Yes. All seven of our episodes here of The Brian Nichols Show Sunday through Saturday. So with that being said, folks, it's Brian Nichols signing off. You're on to The Brian Nichols Show for brand Palumbo. We'll see you tomorrow. Thanks for listening to The Brian Nichols Show. Find more episodes at The Brian Nichols show.com if you enjoyed today's episode, don't forget to subscribe. Want to help us reach more people? Give the show a five star review and tell your friends to subscribe to find us at Brian Nichols show.com and download the show on Apple podcast, Spotify or wherever you listen to podcasts. Follow me on social media at V. Nichols liberty and consider donating to the show at The Brian Nichols show.com forward slash support. The Brian Nichols Show is supported by viewers like you. Thank you to our patrons Darryl Smith, Maura Stanley, Mike olema, Michel Mankiewicz, Cody John's friend Acosta and the we're libertarians network. audio production for The Brian Nichols Show is brought to you by DB podcast audio Learn more by emailing inquiries to Wm at dB pod audio.com

Transcribed by https://otter.ai