2016: Obama's America

Porter gets in to a heated debate with Dinesh D'Souza - the creator of the second highest grossing political documentary of all time, 2016: Obama's America.

Dinesh D'Souza discusses his breakthrough documentary, 2016: Obama's America and its effects on this year's election. He and Porter get in to a vibrant discussion on the topics in the film.

Announcer: It’s time for another episode of Stansberry Radio. The show that’s too loud for radio. Here are your hosts, Porter Stansberry and Aaron Brabham.

 

Aaron Brabham: Welcome to another episode of Stansberry Radio. I’m Aaron Brabham. Porter Stansberry, my co-host. How are you doing today, buddy?

 

Porter Stansberry: I’m back. Well, apparently I’m not doing that great. Somebody said I looked like Big Bird today.

 

Aaron Brabham: Well, I don’t know who that was but they’re mistaken.

 

Porter Stansberry: Apparently, big guys should not wear bright yellow shirts.

 

Aaron Brabham: And you’re a big guy.

 

Porter Stansberry: I can’t be denied.

 

Aaron Brabham: What’s your size of suit/coat jacket? 54?

 

Porter Stansberry: About 54. Yeah.

 

Aaron Brabham: I think I’m down to a 36.

 

Porter Stansberry: You better be careful.

 

Aaron Brabham: I might be half.

 

Porter Stansberry: You’re going to slip right through the crack.

 

Aaron Brabham: Am I?

 

Porter Stansberry: You’re trying to escape Baltimore –

 

Aaron Brabham: By the way, we can’t talk about anything fun or personal because we’ve had people email saying, I gave it a shot for five minutes and that’s it. I expected better. You know what they get?

 

Porter Stansberry: Yeah. What they paid for.

 

Aaron Brabham: Exactly. Today we do have a great guest on. We have Dinesh D’Souza, who is the creator of the hit documentary “2016: Obama’s America.” We saw this a couple of weeks ago in a movie theater. You laughed inappropriately a lot, which I like.

 

Porter Stansberry: I horse laughed most of the film.

 

Aaron Brabham: But you can’t help it. There’s no way you can quiet that down or hold that back.

 

Porter Stansberry: I think if you go see the film and you are a rational person of average intelligence and you don’t think it is funny, then there’s something wrong with you.

 

Aaron Brabham: Unfortunately, the other people in the audience are probably clueless about what –

 

Porter Stansberry: What I found so humorous?

 

Aaron Brabham: Yeah. Exactly.

 

Porter Stansberry: Well, we’ll get to that when we get to D’Souza. I’ll tell you this in prelude, I can guarantee you D’Souza will not have another interview like ours.

 

Aaron Brabham: And that’s what I’m hoping for. All right. Keep sending us your feedback to feedback@StansberryRadio.com. We’re receiving a ton of it and we love it. Call us on our dedicated hotline, 855-SARADIO. That’s 855-727-2346. Visit us at StansberryRadio.com. All right, Porter, Monday we were having lunch and we’re eating some salads because we’re going healthy. And we were talking about something that I think would be good for our listeners, although they’ll probably ignore it.

 

Porter Stansberry: You know the whole thing about salads being healthy, what do you think cows eat?

 

Aaron Brabham: Actually, salads are awful if you’re getting the ranch and the blue cheese dressing. You might as well eat a burger.

 

Porter Stansberry: I don’t know. I see a lot of fat vegetarians.

 

Aaron Brabham: I do see a lot of fat vegetarians. We were talking about the four reasons why you would short something in hedging your portfolio.

 

Porter Stansberry: This is a good topic. Most people don’t sell stocks short.

 

Aaron Brabham: And the market is going straight up right now. Eventually it’s going to come back. If people put a little hedge in it would be nice but they’re probably not going to.

 

Porter Stansberry: A couple things about this. First of all, most business, as you may not know, don’t make it. Most businesses fail. If you think about it then, does it make sense to specialize in selling stocks or buying them? Well, if most businesses fail, it makes more sense to specialize in selling them. Sooner or later they’re going to fail. I have an example, if you look at the Dow. The only company that’s still in the Dow that started in the original 30 is General Electric. Yes, I know.

 

Don’t call in and tell me they’ve merged. I know all that. But many of them are removed from the index and then fail. I think it makes sense to look for companies that have certain characteristics that make them very likely to fail. And those characteristics, I found in my own experience over 15 years are; number one, they have an obsolete product. Classic case is Kodak Film. I shorted Kodak. Started shorting it in 1998 when it was trading at $85.00 a share.

 

Aaron Brabham: Was that when the digital cameras first started hitting the market?

 

Porter Stansberry: That’s when I bought my first digital camera. And as soon as I used a digital camera I thought to myself, there’s no reason I will ever buy film again. And guess what? There’s no margin in digital cameras. You buy them for a little bit more than what it costs to manufacture them. And you throw it away in three years. There’s no service. There’s no support. There’s no way to make money from digital cameras after you’ve manufactured them. Well, Kodak’s entire business was servicing cameras. Done. Right?

 

Aaron Brabham: Right.

 

Porter Stansberry: Now does it matter what their management does? Not in my mind.

 

Aaron Brabham: Not really. It’s obsolescent.

 

Porter Stansberry: It’s going to zero. And there are, believe it or not, there are some value managers out there who like to buy these kinds of companies because they think they can be managed to produce more cash flow because now you don’t have to reinvest in the business. It never works. Because the legacy obligation of the employees and the pensions and all the losses that come from shutting down factories, they always eat up all the cash flow. Number one, obsolescence. Number two thing I like to short is pretty simple. It’s balance sheet. If you’re General Motors and you owe $490,000,000,000.00, which is more money than every sovereign borrower except for the two or three largest.

 

And no private creditor has ever repaid loans of that size. It becomes very unlikely that your equity holders are going to do very well. Because all of your earning and then some are going to end up going into servicing and repaying those debts. Sooner or later you’re going to go bankrupt. There’s not going to be anything left for the equity holders. And, of course, that’s exactly what we saw at General Motors. Not only did the equity holders get wiped out, the bond holders took 80 percent haircut. The government had to invest another $90,000,000.00. And guess what? Even after $90,000,000.00 of government money, the whole company is still now only worth $30,000,000,000.00. Explain that to me. I know what happened. I know where the money went.

 

Aaron Brabham: It’s a great success according to Obama.

 

Porter Stansberry: I’ve already written all about it. Unions got all the money.

 

Aaron Brabham: Sure.

 

Porter Stansberry: The point is, if you’re shorting, heavily leveraged firms that do not have the ability to repay their debts is a great, great way to do it. Basically, you can’t lose. And the way you figure that out is you see whether or not they can afford the interest payments and a reasonable portion of the principle. And it’s really not hard to find. And then the third and the final thing that I look for when I’m shorting is fraud. Now you don’t find fraud very often. But when you do you’ve got a really good thing. And by the way, fraud, I would define broadly as people that are vastly misrepresenting utility of their products. Now that also incorporates accounting fraud.

 

But what I’m really looking for are people that think they can get rich selling products that hurt their customers or don’t work. And sooner or later it just blows up. And there’s tons and tons and tons of examples of promoters who say that their products are great but at the end of the day they don’t work. And I would put in a category of that, now this is going to be controversial, but I would say the same thing is true about the oil sands companies. I would say that those oil sands companies are really oily mud and that they’re not worth the same thing as other oil reserves. And that the decision by the SEC in 2008 to allow oil sands to be counted as oil reserves was a terrible decisions that doesn’t change the basic economics.

 

And that sooner or later these companies are all going to go out of business because they’re trying to sell what isn’t even actually oil. It’s heavy crude that’s difficult to work with. They’re trying to sell that to investors as oil. And it costs them $60.00 to $70.00 a barrel to produce it. In my mind, fundamentally, it makes no sense. So I think over time you’re going to see that those businesses just get destroyed because they’re not really oil companies. They’re actually oily mud companies. And there’s a big difference.

 

Aaron Brabham: All right. Let’s add one more piece to this. This is a little bit more complicated but I think it’s important as well. And I know we’re not really advocates of buying puts and calls. But buying a put as a hedge. Is that something you might consider at times?

 

Porter Stansberry: Almost never. Almost never. I prefer to short because when you’re borrowing stock to short it, if the company doesn’t pay a dividend then it is very inexpensive for you to short. You typically have to pay your broker a low interest rate, whatever their margin rate is. One and a half percent. Two percent to borrow the shares. It’s very cost effective. And what I like to do is, in general, I like to keep between 10 and 20 percent of my long position short. If I’ve got $100,000.00 long stocks, I want to have $10,000.00 to $20,000.00 short stocks.

 

And I want to do that so that if there is a big market correction, my portfolios average value is going to have less volatility. I’m going to have smaller draw downs. And over time, I’m going to make money on that short book. But I am also prepared in a bull market year, like we’re having right now, I’m also prepared for that to lose me five to ten percent a year. And that’s okay. Losing 5 to 10 percent on 10 to 20 percent of my portfolio, for me, is a small price to pay to know that my portfolio is hedged, at least to some degree. When I feel like risks in the market are escalating, I’ll take the size of that hedge book, my short portfolio, I’ll take it all the way up to 50 percent.

 

The size of the hedging depends upon my view of the macro. And as I said in January, I think this year is going to end up being one of the best years ever for the stock market. I say that and people go crazy. You’re ______ the end of the America. Dah, dah, dah, dah, dah, dah, dah. Yeah. I said we’re going to print money. And that is going to result in the collapse of our currency and the loss of world reserve currency status. And that is going to have terrible ramifications for our country. But it also, when you print a bunch of money, one of the things the inflation drives up is the price of stocks. I figure you better make some money now while you can.

 

Aaron Brabham: And you’ve heard about this with Disney and Comcast and a bunch of other companies that are beneficiaries of this printing money.

 

Porter Stansberry: Right. But I just want to be clear. I do think that our monetary policies will have catastrophic effects for the real economy and for our dollar as a global monetary brand. But it can’t happen until the inflation takes off in the consumer space. You’re going to see food prices go up. You’re going to see oil and precious metals prices go up because of this inflation. And you’re going to see stock and bond prices go up. You’ve already seen bond prices go up. I mean, that’s why the treasury yield on 10 year is still below 2 percent. Because the Fed keeps printing money and buying the damn bonds. Well, look, you’re not going to fight the Fed in that trade. So, you just gotta be patient. You gotta wait.

 

Aaron Brabham: Gotta go with it. All right. On the phone we have Dinesh D’Souza. Dinesh is the creator of the hit documentary, “2016: Obama’s America.” Dinesh is also the president of the Kings College in New York City and was a former policy advisor to President Ronald Regan. Dinesh, welcome to Stansberry Radio. Porter?

 

Porter Stansberry: Hi, Dinesh. Porter Stansberry. Thanks for being with us.

 

Dinesh D’Souza: Good. Glad to be on.

 

Porter Stansberry: Let’s get right into this movie. I saw the movie last week. And the one overwhelming question I had is what’s the real point of it? Why do you care so much about the topics that you made the film on?

 

Dinesh D’Souza: Well, the film happens to be about the President of the United States. I think that the reason for making the movie is that there’s an Obama story. The story of how he became the man he is that really hasn’t been told. And the story is not simply interesting in itself, psychologically, but it relates to what he is doing. It helps us to understand what his inner compass is. It helps us to understand his actions. And it helps us to predict where he would take America in the next four years if he gets re-elected.

 

Porter Stansberry: I guess in line with your book, you’re casting aspersions about the character of the man – maybe you wouldn’t characterize them as spurges. But you’re describing that he has world view that you don’t share.

 

Dinesh D’Souza: That goes without saying. I’m a third-world guy. I was born in India. And I embrace, I would say, the American dream which is to say the idea that we should rise by our merits. That free markets are the best way to create wealth. That America has been a force for liberty and freedom in the world. That was the founders dream and that’s my dream. It’s very different than Barack Obama’s dream. And Obama, himself, tells us that his dream comes from his father. His autobiography is titled “Dreams From My Father.” That’s the first clue and the movie takes off from there. Who was his father? What was his father’s dream? What was his father’s ideology? Now let’s take the father’s ideology and match it up against the actions of the son. And we find that the jigsaw fits.

 

Porter Stansberry: You didn’t build that. I’m sure you’re not responsible for yourself coming from India and building a life here. Someone else did it for you.

 

Dinesh D’Souza: Well, I don’t understand what you mean by that.

 

Porter Stansberry: You missed the whole controversy over the last month –

 

Dinesh D’Souza: No, no, no, no, no, no, no. I got the joke. And in fact, I would extend it by saying that Obama didn’t get himself elected president. After all, he drove on the publicly built roads and so on and so forth. Part of the problem is to understand why an intelligent guy says stuff like that. And the reason he says stuff like this is that is underlying belief is that wealth is not earned. It’s not the result of ingenuity or innovation or entrepreneurship. Rather, he thinks wealth is stolen.

 

Society creates wealth and then greedy, selfish guys swoop in and grab it all. From his point of view, the government has every right to seize it because it’s sort of not your wealth in the first place. It’s a very bizarre ideology. I think even most Democrats if they saw it spelled out would be like – their jaws would drop open. But that’s what Obama believes.

 

Porter Stansberry: Lots of people that don’t understand anything about business or economics believe that. Not just political people. There were a lot of parts in your film, I have to admit, that made me laugh hysterically. And I’m not sure they are the parts that you intended me to laugh at. I agree with all the things you’ve said. But some of the arguments that you make in the film, I just found really like you were grasping at straws. You were trying really way too hard. I wonder –

 

Dinesh D’Souza: What’s an example?

 

Porter Stansberry: For example, the entire thing with the Winston Churchill bust. I mean, I just can’t believe any of the things that you said about that. They were just way too bizarre.

 

Aaron Brabham: And actually, I did see a fact checker that said that that bust was already scheduled to be removed prior to Obama. Is that true?

 

Dinesh D’Souza: No, no. It’s not true. In fact, you always got to fact check the fact checker. AP published this attack on the film. And they had four alleged errors which are themselves all errors. I’ll give you an example. It was reported worldwide in 2009 that Obama removed a Churchill bust from the White House. This is reported all over the British press. It was widely discussed. In fact, we know it’s true because the very bust that was sitting in the White House was taken back by the British ambassador and is now sitting in his house. Now the Obama people let that story go for three years. And now with our film out they came out and said, “Oh, wait a minute. The bust was scheduled to be returned.” Totally false.

 

In fact, if you go back and read the original articles, the bust was on loan but the moment Obama was reelected, the British said we would like you to keep it. We’re offering to extend the loan. And Obama said no. And when Obama said no the British came back and said, listen, we understand that you can redecorate the White House. That’s your prerogative. Why don’t you put the bust somewhere else? Put it in Biden’s office. Put it one of the other federal buildings. But Obama was in a peculiar way weirdly insistent that the bust be returned over the ocean.

 

The truth of it is the White House has now backed down. They’ve apologized. They’ve tried to blow some smoke but it didn’t work. Now more recently, they’ve launched a major attack on the film just a few days ago. This is on BarackObama.com. The White House is trying to blast the film now. But that initial Churchill bust stuff was just an attempt for them to try to divert attention from the real issue but they weren’t able to do it.

 

Porter Stansberry: Aren’t there two busts?

 

Dinesh D’Souza: The White House is claiming there was a second bust but nobody knew about it because it was actually being repaired. And now we’ve found it and now we’re putting it in the residence. I think that they’re scrambling now to cover their butts. That’s not abnormal for someone when they’re caught with their pants down, is to start scrambling later to try to figure out a way to meet a criticism. But all I’m saying is that if all this information was valid why didn’t they release it in 2009 when this whole controversy erupted?

 

Porter Stansberry: I don’t know. One is I got no idea who to believe in this situation. I have no idea. There’s no way I could possibly know. Two, given all the other problems of the day, who _______ cares about a stupid bust? It doesn’t make any sense to me why you would focus on that the way that you did. Hold on. Let me move on because we can just agree to disagree about the bust because it’s irrelevant. I really don’t care one way or the other.

 

Dinesh D’Souza: But the White House cares. They care because they know –

 

Porter Stansberry: I know. But I don’t care about the White House.

 

Dinesh D’Souza: All right. Well, let’s move on.

 

Porter Stansberry: I’m saying when I talk to you about the things that are important to you about Obama, I agree with you. I’m saying your choices as a filmmaker I found curious. Another example of an issue that you picked – and you could have picked any issue you wanted that Obama goes after – is the whole issue at the end of the film about the decline and the nuclear warhead arsenal of the United States. And I wonder why you think it’s important for us to have 5,000 nuclear weapons.

 

Dinesh D’Souza: I don’t think it is. But let me put it this way. You got to realize how this nuclear stuff works. It’s not a simple matter of saying, hey, if we have ten nuclear bombs we can blow up half the world. That’s nonsense. The truth of it is Obama’s taken us down from 5,000 to 1,500. Okay. I get it. Now he wants the Pentagon to study taking us down to 300 nuclear bombs. Now that’s about how many China has. And he’s also talked about us having, and the whole world, having no nuclear weapons. Here’s what you gotta remember. It all sounds wonderful. The world has no nuclear weapons.

 

If the world had no nuclear weapons since the knowledge of how to make nuclear weapons exists, the one country that can secretly build five nuclear bombs becomes a superpower immediately. That’s number one. The second point is that if you have a small number of nuclear bombs, a large number of those can be taken out in the first strike. You’ll have some left but you’ll be deterred from making a retaliation because of the fear of a second strike.

 

Porter Stansberry: Yes. Yes. I think me and our audience is very well understood with the whole mad doctrine. Most of us lived through the Cold War. We’re familiar with why you gotta have nuclear warheads spread all over the place.

 

Dinesh D’Souza: Right. So, why are you acting as if I’m making a preposterous point when I’m making a point that’s been known for 50 years?

 

Porter Stansberry: Because from where I sit, the entire idea that we have 5,000 nuclear weapons is simply preposterous. Do you know how many cities in the world there are with over 1,000,000 people?

 

Dinesh D’Souza: I can roughly estimate but that’s not the point.

 

Porter Stansberry: According to the U.N., there is 450 cities of over 1,000,000 people. Let’s just say, hypothetically, you wanted to make sure you could destroy every single one of those despite the fact that it’s hard to believe that we’d actually want to destroy every city in the world. More likely, we’d want to destroy every city in China or every city in Russia or every city in Iran. But just to make sure we’ve got our bases covered by a factor of five or ten, let’s just go ahead and say we want to wipe everybody out, including our own cities. That’s 450. Why would you ever need more than, say, 1,000 warheads ever? What conceivable possible military scenario gets you to more than 1,000 nuclear warheads?

 

Dinesh D’Souza: Hold on a minute. First of all, that’s spoken like a true ignoramus. Because you’re assuming that we would launch a first strike against all these cities. No American defense planning is based on that. Every American defense plan is based on the following; we initially observe a first strike. Let’s say Russia, which has about 5,000 nuclear warheads, the same as us, launches a first strike against our warheads. How many warheads do we have left? Let’s start discussing things from there. My point is, yeah, if America is down to 300 nuclear warheads and Russia and China come together. And they launch a first strike –

 

Porter Stansberry: Wait, wait, wait. We’re talking about going from 5,000 to 2,000.

 

Dinesh D’Souza: No, no, no. The ______ Treaty takes us down to 1,500. And Obama has asked the Pentagon to study going down to 300.

 

Porter Stansberry: Okay. So we’re down to 1,500. Now we can blow up every city in the world three times.

 

Dinesh D’Souza: That’s right. But we won’t have –

 

Porter Stansberry: By the way –

 

Dinesh D’Souza: We won’t have 1,500 warheads after a first strike. We might have 200.

 

Porter Stansberry: How many of our warheads would you estimate are on things like nuclear submarines and aircraft carriers and guided missile destroyers and B-52’s?

 

Dinesh D’Souza: About a third.

 

Porter Stansberry: There you go. If we’ve got 1,500. We can still blow up every city in the world not matter how many first strikes we suffer.

 

Dinesh D’Souza: That’s right but –

 

Porter Stansberry: We could have Iran gang up with China gang up with Russia and we could still blow up the world. America!

 

Dinesh D’Souza: But blowing up the world is not the point.

 

Porter Stansberry: Ignoramuses are us.

 

Dinesh D’Souza: No, no, no. First of all –

 

Porter Stansberry: It makes no sense.

 

Dinesh D’Souza: First of all, Obama is not –

 

Porter Stansberry: What you’re saying makes no sense.

 

Dinesh D’Souza: That we freeze at 1,500. He wants to go down further.

 

Porter Stansberry: Let’s go to the last thing that made me horse laugh in your film. How about the fact that if we stop supporting Israel that we’re going to suffer the United States of Islam.

 

Dinesh D’Souza: First of all, I don’t say that.

 

Porter Stansberry: How could you even say that with a straight face?

 

Dinesh D’Souza: That’s a non-sequitur. That’s a non-sequitur. Let’s explain what’s going on in the Middle East.

 

Porter Stansberry: No, you said in your film that we’re at risk of developing a new national superpower enemy called the United States of Islam. I’d like for you to explain how that would happen.

 

Dinesh D’Souza: Let’s look at the middle – you should read the news today. But the truth of it is in the Middle East there are three important countries. Three central countries. They are Iran, Egypt and Saudi Arabia. Iran has been in the hands of the radical Muslims since 1979. Now with Obama’s help, Egypt is transitioning, falling into the clutches of the Muslim Brotherhood, which is the largest organization of radical Islam in the world. The Obama administration – there’s a power struggle going on in Egypt between the military and the Muslim Brotherhood.

 

The Obama administration is intervening on the side of the Brotherhood. They have warned the Egyptian military, you better turn over power to those guys or we’re going to cut off U.S. aid. This is Obama, our president. Now if Egypt falls then the second most important country is now also in the hands of radical Islam. And all that’s left is Saudi Arabia. Now is it so hard to believe that Obama in a second term would go to the Saudis and say, hey guys, we’ve got this great democracy movement in the Middle East. Why don’t you put yourselves on the ballot against the Muslim Brotherhood?

 

Porter Stansberry: Yes. That’s very hard to believe.

 

Dinesh D’Souza: It’s very hard to believe for you.

 

Porter Stansberry: It’s hard to believe if you know anything about the history of the Middle East. None of these people that you’re alleging would collude with one another can stand each other.

 

Dinesh D’Souza: Don’t be ridiculous. Who can’t stand each other and will not collude. Egypt and Saudi Arabia?

 

Porter Stansberry: No, Saudi Arabia and Iran.

 

Dinesh D’Souza: Why would they not collude with each other?

 

Porter Stansberry: They can’t stand each other.

 

Dinesh D’Souza: First of all, they’ve got a Shia Sunni difference, I realize. And Iran, for that reason, has had difficulty affording its revolution.

 

Porter Stansberry: That difference is only about 2,000 years old.

 

Dinesh D’Souza: Pardon me?

 

Porter Stansberry: They’ve only been fighting one another for 1,500 years.

 

Dinesh D’Souza: Nonsense.

 

Porter Stansberry: We can sell arms to both sides.

 

Dinesh D’Souza: Let me ask you this. Since you’re so knowledgeable, name one war that the fought.

 

Porter Stansberry: Name one war that was fought between Saudi Arabia and Iran?

 

Dinesh D’Souza: Yeah. Go ahead.

 

Porter Stansberry: Well, you can’t because Iran’s only been –

 

Dinesh D’Souza: Exactly. You can’t. So what I’m saying is you rely on laughter and ______ but you don’t know anything yourself. I’m just saying they haven’t fought a single war. You say they’ve been fighting for 1,500 years and yet you can’t name a single conflict.

 

Porter Stansberry: I’m saying that between Iran and Saudi Arabia, those nation states have not yet fought a war because Iran has only been a nation state since 1959. If you want to –

 

Dinesh D’Souza: I didn’t say. You said that those people have been fighting for 1,500 years. And I said when.

 

Porter Stansberry: Those people being Muslims and the Middle East. Those people have been fighting one another for eons. Everyone knows this.

 

Dinesh D’Souza: Everyone knows this. You can’t name a single war and you’re claiming that they’ve been fighting each other for 1,500 years.

 

Porter Stansberry: They have been fighting each other for, according to the history books I have read, since the beginning of the Muslim times which is AD 600.

 

Dinesh D’Souza: All right. Since the seventh century. That’s true. But what I’m trying to say is there has been a Shia Sunni difference in Islam. There has been Islamic empires that go back hundreds of years. And they have had conflicts of power and territory, which is very normal. Similar to conflicts within Europe. But just as Europe has come together in a European Union, just as America got over its differences in the Civil War, it’s simply naive to think that people who have differences can’t unify in the name of restoring Islam as a global power. I’m not saying that you can’t disagree with me. But what I’m saying is I don’t like is the fact that you’re acting as though your position is obvious and mine is foolish. And I’m simply saying I know a lot more of that history than you do.

 

Porter Stansberry: What’s more naïve? To believe that in the next four years that the world of Islam will unite against us, forgetting all other differences, or to believe that the relationship between the United States and Saudi Arabia, which has been the backbone of our energy and defense policy for 60 years, is suddenly going to change.

 

Dinesh D’Souza: I would agree. 10 years ago if we said that that would seem very naïve. But look at the radical tectonic shifts that are occurring in the Middle East before our eyes. Look at the way that American allies in places like Mubarak and Egypt, in Tunisia, even Libya. Gaddafi was at least doing business with us. He wasn’t burning our embassy. He paid reparations for the Lockerbie bomber. He was outing terrorists. What do we use? We use massive military force and kill him. The point I’m trying to get at is one by one the people who are working with us are being toppled. And one by one the radical Muslims are consolidating power. Don’t you see that happening before your eyes?

 

Porter Stansberry: When I watched your film what I thought that you were doing is that you were picking the topics that were most sensitive to the upcoming election. You were picking topics that would scare older voters, like the risk of our military establishment being weakened. And then you were picking apart the president’s Israeli policy because the Jewish vote is a swing vote for the Democrats. And I thought to make those claims the way you were making it, you really had to stretch.

 

And given all the other much more important, in my mind, and much more – I mean, it’s easier to attack the president on things that are, in my mind, much more important and are real threats to our country. But it’s not easier to do that if you’re trying to influence the election. The question I have for you is why do you want the Republicans to win? What do you see the benefit of electing Mitt Romney versus Obama as being?

 

Dinesh D’Souza: I’m not making any ______ for Romney. I’m a college president. I’m studying Obama. I have disagreements with Obama but they’re not because of Romney. They’re because I have a dream, so to speak, and it’s different than Obama’s dream. I have a right to make a film –

 

Porter Stansberry: I’m not denying that.

 

Dinesh D’Souza: I think your audience should go see it.

 

Porter Stansberry: I agree. The audience should go see it. I think that the points you make in the film are a little silly. You think that they’re very serious and people should make up their own minds. That’s fine with me.

 

Dinesh D’Souza: And the film contrasts two different ways of looking at the world. One says that the free market system is the way for countries to come up in the world. Then there’s Obama’s approach, which is the statist way, the redistributionist way. And then if you look at foreign policy, there is one way that says America is and has been a force for freedom in the world. You seem to think Obama shares that view. I don’t. And I look at Obama’s behavior and I say look at his little tete-a-tete with Medvedev.

 

I mean, it was weirdly intimate. Obama leans over and pats him on the thigh. He says, listen, Medvedev. I want to give up some stuff on missile defense but I can’t do it now. Let’s wait until after the election. He’s basically saying, listen, he’s conspiring with a foreign leader, an adversary, against the American people. When you’re watching the film you’re like, wow, why would a president do that?

 

Porter Stansberry: Of course. But every president in history does this kind of stuff to the American people. Like I said, I think you’re making a big to do over these little tiny things that are not even serious issues. And I just wish – because I think that if Obama is re-elected, and maybe much more importantly if there was some way that the Democrats could gain control again of the House, we’d have a real problem. I see our country’s biggest threat is our fiscal cliff. If I were making a movie about the risks going forward to our country, I would have focused on the things that are really under our government’s control, unlike the future, perhaps, United States of Islam.

 

Dinesh D’Souza: Any president has two portfolios. There’s domestic policy and there’s foreign policy. And in a film, I didn’t want to make a film that was a bunch of policy wonks talking. Rather, I wanted to make a film that was an Obama story –

 

Porter Stansberry: By the way, I thought your interview with Obama’s brother was absolutely spellbinding. That was incredible.

 

Dinesh D’Souza: Thank you. Thank you. All I’m saying, Obama deals with domestic policy and he deals with foreign policies. In domestic policy, we pick the issue of debt. In foreign policy, we pick the issue of the Middle East. Partly because we had to pick something and we had to focus in. I said, these are two very important examples of how Obama acts on the domestic front and he acts on the foreign policy front. It seems like you have some disagreements with me on the foreign front. Okay. You agree that the domestic issue is important. I think so, also. But I think that the two are _____ a ______. There’s a global ideology here. And for Obama, domestic and foreign policy are two sides of the same coin, if you will.

 

Porter Stansberry: I got one more question for you, Dinesh. You’ve been a good sport and we’ll let you get out of here. One question for you is do you know how many nuclear warheads the United States military has lost.

 

Dinesh D’Souza: That I don’t know. I’m listening with dread to your answer to that question.

 

Porter Stansberry: I have to say that I don’t believe the sources. Like you said, you have to check the fact checkers. The stuff I’ve read on it claims that there’s between 10 and 12 nuclear warheads missing. And they’re missing because we lost submarines and we lost airplanes and we lost ships. And it’s hard to recover the nuclear warheads from deep in the ocean and things like this. I’m not suggesting that our nuclear warheads have been misplaced. I thought Bobby had it last night, Tim. I don’t know where it is.

 

I’m not suggesting that. I’m just suggesting that there are risks to maintaining a large nuclear arsenal because unfortunate accidents become more likely the more weapons that you have. And that’s something that when I hear people who are advocating huge nuclear arsenal or dramatic expansion of military power, I think you have to also recall the flip side of these things, which is a giant standing army might make us safer but it also increase a lot of the other risks that we face.

 

Dinesh D’Souza: Look. From what you just said, I have no disagreement whatever. Remember, I worked in the Reagan administration and Reagan talked about a world without nuclear weapons. And Reagan recognized that there was something untenable about two nuclear armed cowboys facing each other with a full holster of nuclear weapons. I’m not saying that there isn’t a reasonable debate to be had about what to do about these weapons. I’m simply saying I think Obama is taking us a little bit too close for comfort to the cliff.

 

Porter Stansberry: You think having 100 nuclear warheads orbiting the earth, ready to fire isn’t enough?

 

Dinesh D’Souza: No. What I would do is what Reagan proposed, which is I would put some missile defenses up there so that small numbers of nuclear bombs, even if fired at the United States, could be intercepted and shot down.

 

Porter Stansberry: It’s certainly hard to argue about that. I just wonder about the practicality of it. I wonder if we wouldn’t spend another trillion dollars and end up with something that doesn’t quite really work. Kind of like at home, I have all this technology that’s supposed to turn on my television and stuff like that. Right? And I spent a fortune for it. And on paper it looks great but it never really seems to work. Dinesh, again, it was a pleasure to have you. Thanks for being a spirited and good natured debater. And I think it’s incredible the financial success your film has had. And I think it’s good. Because I think it shows that people in America are passionate about these political ideas. And I think it’s good for our country. Thanks for coming on.

 

Dinesh D’Souza: My pleasure. Hey, good to talk to you.

 

Porter Stansberry: Very good. Bye-bye.

 

Dinesh D’Souza: Bye.

 

Aaron Brabham: Boy, you’re good at building massive amounts of tension to almost hanging up and then throwing him a little bone.

 

Porter Stansberry: He’s easy to play with.

 

Aaron Brabham: He’s a good dude.

 

Porter Stansberry: I love that I got him to call me a name.

 

Aaron Brabham: I do, too. Ignoramus.

 

Porter Stansberry: You always know when you’re winning an argument when the other side, when they’re left with calling you names.

 

Aaron Brabham: You had him at the peak. And he called you out for the – the laugh was really good in him. He was not a big fan of that. That’s the first guest that has called out the laugh.

 

Porter Stansberry: The horse laugh.

 

Aaron Brabham: The horse laugh.

 

Porter Stansberry: I didn’t know I was laughing at him. Was I?

 

Aaron Brabham: Of course. Come one, dude. It’s like an involuntary thing for you. It just comes out.

 

Porter Stansberry: I didn’t know I was doing it.

 

Aaron Brabham: All right. Porter. One of our favorite topics. Actually, not yours anymore and you hate it. But that’s okay. I’m going to fill out my 64 brackets, no matter what, for the scumbag registry. A lot of people write in. They’re like no more scumbag registry. I know all politicians are scumbags.

 

Porter Stansberry: When are we going to have the contest? The online voting and everything?

 

Aaron Brabham: It’s going to be at the end of the year.

 

Porter Stansberry: But I mean – all right.

 

Aaron Brabham: I’m putting it together. We’re getting all the blog and everything rolled out. It takes a little development on the tech side.

 

Porter Stansberry: I’m with you. I just don’t think it’s going to be very interesting to see how 24 Arbitron listeners vote on scumbags. Because you’re only going to get 10 percent of them to vote. It’s going to be two and a half people deciding the brackets.

 

Aaron Brabham: We’re sending an award to the scumbag no matter what. I’m seeing it through. I’m a man that will see things through.

 

Porter Stansberry: What is the trophy going to look like?

 

Aaron Brabham: We don’t know. But it’s going to be from Stansberry Radio. And it’s going to be outrageous.

 

Porter Stansberry: Do I get to write the letter?

 

Aaron Brabham: Absolutely.

 

Porter Stansberry: Okay. Very good.

 

Aaron Brabham: Most certainly. Now he’s back in.

 

Porter Stansberry: Now I’m on board. And can we have the listeners suggest what the object on the trophy ought to be?

 

Aaron Brabham: Absolutely.

 

Porter Stansberry: Could it be the rear end of a horse?

 

Aaron Brabham: I like that. I like that. It’s got to be something really obnoxious. We’ll spend a little money on it. We’ll make it quality so that way they’re excited to open it.

 

Porter Stansberry: What about a bobble head that has a giant phallus instead of a face?

 

Aaron Brabham: I’m open to it. A little weird but all right.

 

Porter Stansberry: Listen. We need your ideas.

 

Aaron Brabham: We need your ideas. You can send it to us at feedback at StansberryRadio.com or call our toll-free hotline, 855-727-2346. So, you probably saw this on Drudge. Today we’re nominating Trenton New Jersey mayor, Tony Mack, a.k.a. Napoleon, a.k.a. the Little Guy, a.k.a. Honey Fitz. By the way, when you have a bunch of –

 

Porter Stansberry: What?

 

Aaron Brabham: – nicknames like this, you’re mafia than you are a politician.

 

Porter Stansberry: What was the last one?

 

Aaron Brabham: Honey Fitz.

 

Porter Stansberry: What’s the difference? Honey Fitz?

 

Aaron Brabham: The difference is one of them is stealing money from us. The other one is they’re just stealing money for each other. I’m okay with the mob stealing money for each other.

 

Porter Stansberry: I don’t know.

 

Aaron Brabham: Honey Fitz.

 

Porter Stansberry: You know what? Everybody wishes they had a friend in the mob. I can tell you that.

 

Aaron Brabham: That’s for sure. You got a problem with someone and make a phone call.

 

Porter Stansberry: Hey, Bobby.

 

Aaron Brabham: Yeah.

 

Porter Stansberry: Joey.

 

Aaron Brabham: I don’t know to know the details. Just this guy is bothering me. Let’s go take care of him.

 

Porter Stansberry: I do like the way the mob solves problems. They’re much more reasonable than the government. I understand you’ve been inconvenienced. I’m going to give you $10,000.00. Keep your mouth shut. Oh, you don’t like it? I’m going to whack you, your wife and your kids. At least there’s give and take. With the federal government, it’s just like you don’t like it we’re going to come to your house in the middle of the night and we’re going to kick in your door. We’re going to stick guns, automatic weapons in the face of you and your children. And we’re going to haul you off to jail.

 

Aaron Brabham: It’s all take.

 

Porter Stansberry: There’s no give.

 

Aaron Brabham: There’s no give there, man. None at all. This guy, Tony Mack, was arrested and charged with corruption following a two-year probe into kickbacks allegedly taken by city officials in connection with a development project. Shocking. Somebody wants to build something and they need a little money to grease their palms.

 

Porter Stansberry: I am so shocked that a governor or a mayor in the northeast of the United States was involved in a scheme to pay for play with kickbacks.

 

Aaron Brabham: There ended up being 44 people arrested. Apparently, one of the FBI guys went undercover. And there was a parking garage being built. And they’re like $119,000.00 parking garage. The contract is yours. I like the FBI actually doing a little bit of work on the politicians for once.

 

Porter Stansberry: It’s kind of surprising that it wasn’t a round number. I mean, who comes up with $119,000.00? Can you imagine that negotiation? Hey, Bobby, what do we want for the garage, huh? I don’t know.

 

Aaron Brabham: I’m thinking $120,000.00.

 

Porter Stansberry: I think $120,000.00. Let’s cut him a break. Make it $119,000.00.

 

Aaron Brabham: Let’s do $119,000.00.

 

Porter Stansberry: That doesn’t make sense.

 

Aaron Brabham: You’ll like this. The housing director Mack chose quit after it was discovered he had been convicted of theft in the past and his chief of staff was arrested in connection with an alleged attempt to buy heroine. This is prior to this event.

 

Porter Stansberry: Oh, boy.

 

Aaron Brabham: Politicians. Keep making those choices, people. All right. Porter, you just can’t make this stuff up. Massachusetts has been ordered to pay for transgender prisoner’s sex change.

 

Porter Stansberry: Yeah. I saw that.

 

Aaron Brabham: Would this fall under Obamacare? Because if it’s Massachusetts, it’s that pretty much the same thing?

 

Porter Stansberry: Listen. On the face this thing makes no sense. Why is the state responsible for changing someone’s sex when they’re in prison? Great. Yeah. We see how foolish this is. This obviously isn’t medically necessary. Blah, blah, blah. Besides the guy’s in jail. It’s not like we should be doing him any favors. But why it’s happening and the way that it is happening, to me, is more interesting. Because it’s happening because of some federal judge or something who ruled in this case.

 

Aaron Brabham: Yeah. It says the judge in this case made this ruling on the recommendations of doctors who prescribed sex reassignment surgery as the “only form of medical care” for the prisoner. They’re setting a precedence now.

 

Porter Stansberry: Don’t you see the collusion between the doctors and the state? And isn’t this a sign of what’s happened in our society. Right? Where the state is now forcing companies to pay for the medical care of other people. The state is forcing it. It’s a mandate. And also forcing individuals, if they don’t work for corporations, to pay doctors. Somehow the doctors have co-opted the power of the state, the ability to kick in your door in the middle of the night and put a gun in your face. Doctors, the AMA, have co-opted the entire resources of the government to enforce their pricing regime on us.

 

Aaron Brabham: I don’t like that at all.

 

Porter Stansberry: I think that’s pretty amazing. No individual doctors are out there saying, it wasn’t us. We didn’t do it. We don’t want this stuff. I get that. But your union did it. It’s very interesting to me. And, of course, I know it’s going to come back to bite everybody in the ass, including the doctors because it’s going to turn the people against the medical establishment big time. Nobody likes to be forced to do business with you. And by the way, why is it that there isn’t a list of prices at the hospital?

 

Aaron Brabham: Because every one of them is different. Because they make it up on the spot.

 

Porter Stansberry: I mean, I can call around and find out what a six-pack of beer costs at different stores around town.

 

Aaron Brabham: Come on, Porter. That’s different. It’s your health we’re talking about. We should be able to label it what we want.

 

Porter Stansberry: Why can’t I call 12 hospitals and find out how much a double bypass costs?

 

Aaron Brabham: Not only can you not do that but you don’t even know until the bill comes back to you as to what the contracted price was.

 

Porter Stansberry: Not only do they not list prices but they include all kinds of services that are completely extraneous to run up your bill. And they actually have several sets of prices depending upon your insurance provider or the fact that you don’t have any insurance.

 

Aaron Brabham: Cash payer.

 

Porter Stansberry: Right. If you’re a cash payer, you got to pay through the nose. What I’m saying is that in any other industry, all these things would be the target of anti-trust action. All of these things would lead to law suits. But someone the medical establishment gets a pass. I understand it. I know why. But it’s such a sign of the collusion between the doctors, the AMA and the government. I just wish people would stand up and say enough. I know it will never happen.

 

Aaron Brabham: All right. Porter, we’re very honored to have our first advertiser for Stansberry Radio. He totally forgave the fact that we only have 24 Arbitron listeners.

 

Porter Stansberry: Just think about what he’s paying per listener.

 

Aaron Brabham: It’s a stinger, man. We really need some more listeners.

 

Porter Stansberry: I know why the guy – we’re talking about Joel Nagel. He’s a long, long old friend of mine. In fact, long before my newsletter business was worth anything, Joel was a huge supporter of me personally. He’s followed my career. He’s supported anything I’ve ever done. And it’s really an honor that he is our first advertiser. We greatly appreciate the support even though we’re thinking he’s a little crazy for doing it.

 

Aaron Brabham: A little crazy but his loyalty is great. And you love loyalty as well as I.

 

Porter Stansberry: No, of course I don’t actually think Joel’s crazy. It’s just very, very kind and humbling that he supports my work the way he does. I’m going to ask all my listeners, if you like the work I’ve done in the radio or in the newsletters and you have any of the needs that Joel could help you with, please go to him. Because he supports me. And if you want to support me or thank me in return, this is a simple way for you to do it.

 

Aaron Brabham: And just for our listeners out there, because we are introducing the advertising model, we’re very limited in the number of advertisers we’ll take. And it’s people that we’ve worked with that we trust, that have worked with your subscribers.

 

Porter Stansberry: We don’t let people come to us. We have to go tap them and say, would you like to be an advertiser on our radio show. We’re only going to people that we know very well. Joel has been a long, good friend of mine. I’m very grateful for his support and I urge you, if you have any kind of asset protection, legal needs. Particularly, if you want to move a portion of your assets overseas or you’re starting a business overseas. Joel is the guy to go to. He’s got 30 years of experience. I know many of his clients that have been very happy with his work.

 

Announcer: Are you looking to invest, live or retire overseas? Before you pack your bags you need to log onto NegalLaw.com. It’s the only stop you need to make for global business, asset protection, estate planning, overseas residency and citizenship needs. Our experts have experience working in 41 countries around the world. Starting a business abroad can be overwhelming without expert help. We assist clients with foreign trusts, foundations, corporations, LLCs, IBCs and property acquisition.

 

Need help with IRA assets abroad, capital formation, foreign securities issues, banking, brokering or finance needs? NegalLaw.com. We ensure compliance with U.S. tax and regulatory laws. We engineer global structures to help our clients achieve their personal business objectives. Get started today. To find out about our introductory, personal asset protection plan, visit us online. NagelLaw.com. We represent capital overseas.

 

Aaron Brabham: Thank you, Joel. Stupid business models. It’s our favorite whipping boy. GM. Reuters last week released a report that basically said they’re still losing as much as $49,000.00 on each volt it builds, according to estimates. Cheap leases, which we talk about a lot on here –

 

Porter Stansberry: This is the big problem. When they say losing $49,000.00 per volt, what they mean is if the guy at retail is the asking price the loss is $49,000.00. If the guy at retail pays the asking price. But he doesn’t. The current promotion has you leasing a volt for $199,000.00 a month. I can’t do all the math in my head.

 

Aaron Brabham: Two years is $5,050.00. A two-year lease.

 

Porter Stansberry: A two-year lease. But the thing that they’re not telling you is after two years the car isn’t worth anything because the estimated battery life on this thing is only three or four years. You drive it around the batteries for two years, the thing is half cooked. No one is going to buy it from you used. You’re going to return the car to GM. GM will have gotten $5,000.00.

 

Aaron Brabham: An $89,000.00 car.

 

Porter Stansberry: And they’ll be very, very lucky if they can sell it used for another $5,000.00.

 

Aaron Brabham: Lucky.

 

Porter Stansberry: Lucky. The loss won’t end up being $49,000.00 per unit. It’ll end up being close to $100,000.00 per unit.

 

Aaron Brabham: GM believes if they keep producing these, they will eventually become profitable.

 

Porter Stansberry: They’ve already invested a billion dollars into this car that no one will buy. This has got to be one of the best examples that we could ever come up with, which is why you don’t want the government directing corporate product development.

 

Aaron Brabham: This almost falls under the government built that.

 

Porter Stansberry: That’s right. This is one of those things that Obama built.

 

Aaron Brabham: Don’t worry about – I know you didn’t build your business but Obama definitely built this one.

 

Porter Stansberry: That’s Obama’s. Oh my God.

 

Aaron Brabham: All right, Porter. We got a couple of voicemails. Tim, fire them up.

 

Male: I just want to respond to something that Porter had said regarding gene medications on a board certified surgeon. Ibuprofen is actually a superior pain medication. Ibuprofen actually provides, not only few side effects but it also provides superior pain control. Just like your podcast, is _____ individualized advice regarding you medical care. I find it interesting. These depths and breaths of the guests and the topics that come up. It’s not just, hey, here’s a hot stock to pick _____ you.

 

Porter Stansberry: These guys crack me up. Apparently, he’s never tried a really good pain pill.

 

Aaron Brabham: I was going to say. Ibuprofen is great for blocking but it doesn’t give you a buzz. You know what I mean? I mean, that’s fine. But where’s my buzz?

 

Porter Stansberry: I do not regularly use pain pills.

 

Aaron Brabham: No. Not at all.

 

Porter Stansberry: But when my feet were covered in blisters and I couldn’t walk, I needed something that was a little stronger than ibuprofen.

 

Aaron Brabham: I forgot what it was. The last time I was in the hospital they had this drug that was like a super ibuprofen Advil type of thing. And it blocked all the pain receptors. But it gave you not buzz. I was a little disappointed to find out that’s what I was prescribed. But hey, that’s fine. I was clear minded. Next.

 

Joe: Good afternoon, guys. My name is Joe. I’m calling from Melbourne, Australia. I’ve been listening to ______ _____. I now just started to listen to Porter Stansberry. You guys are doing an excellent job. I’ve got a question. I’m having a look Wikipedia. And I just found quite a ______ of ______ ______. And I’m just wondering if you might be able to explain some of the data behind that. You guys are doing an excellent job but I’m just curious to know what happened. Thanks, guys. Keep up the good work. I’m loving everything that you’re coming up with. Terrific stuff.

 

Porter Stansberry: If we had three more hours I could explain it in excruciating detail. The better thing to do is just to tell you that the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times both wrote editorials on my behalf. And the whole story of what happened and why the Federal Government sued me is all outlined on a website that we have published called StansberrySECfraud.com. My last name, StansberrySECfraud.com. At the end of the day, I got sued by the SEC for writing a report about a company called USEC. By the time we came to trial the stock I recommended has almost tripled.

 

Aaron Brabham: That’s not good enough.

 

Porter Stansberry: Why I was sued, I believe, was because the company was heavily regulated. It was formally part of the Department of Energy. I was alleging that there was a bunch of insider trading and collusion going on between government officials and the company. The government sued me because they said I lied about the whole thing, that none of it was true. You can read the facts and make up your own mind about who was telling the truth. The simple point that I would make is I sent a copy of my entire report to my source at the company.

 

He never asked me to change a single word of it. That’s not a matter of dispute. That’s a part of the trial record. It doesn’t make any sense if I was actually lying. If I was lying, none of these other things could have taken place. The company wouldn’t have gotten this positive deal that they got. The stock wouldn’t have tripled. And the guy would have put out a press release that said he didn’t say the things he said to me during this interview. It’s a gigantic ball of mess over whether or not a guy at a company told me to watch the stock on May 22nd.

 

That’s the only issue at stake in the case. Did he say watch the stock on May 22nd? And it became a federal case. It makes no sense unless you understand that what I was really alleging was collusion between government officials and the company. I’d urge anyone who has an interest understanding how corrupt America has become to go to the website. Read the facts for yourself. Make up your own mind. All right. One more voicemail.

 

Ron: My first name is Ron. And I want to thank you for all you do. I’m an MP who just retired. Why put everybody on the payroll, on the government, at least on the welfare system, on the food system, on the healthcare system they’re putting in place. Who’s behind this? What’s their plan and what to do? Why do we have a developing system of drug shortages in 99 plus percent of hospitals? Why couldn’t the government do something about that? Why was there no incentive to solve that problem? And many other problems in health and wellness. This so-called healthcare business is not about care. It’s about business.

 

Porter Stansberry: That was a very interesting call.

 

Aaron Brabham: I feel like I was somehow teleported to the Alex Jones show and we took a call.

 

Porter Stansberry: Yeah, I wasn’t quite sure where he was going.

 

Aaron Brabham: Not sure. A lot of hypothetical questions.

 

Porter Stansberry: For me, it seems pretty clear the government want to control food and medicine and everything else so that they have more power.

 

Aaron Brabham: Getting a lot of leverage with those.

 

Porter Stansberry: Right. So they can get re-elected. And so that they can grab more tax revenues. All those things. That’s how government bureaucracies work. They always are angling for more power.

 

Aaron Brabham: All right, Porter. We’ve got some emails, some feedback that people have written into us. Terry said, I’ve been reading the Creature from Jekyll Island. This is the G. Edward Griffin. And along with your insight and the book, I now have a better idea as to why the world makes these stupid decisions. Can you consider having a one world order update or try to incorporate their logic into world events. I’m not a proponent of OWO but I will try to gear my future investments on their actions.

 

Porter Stansberry: OWO.

 

Aaron Brabham: One world order.

 

Porter Stansberry: What?

 

Aaron Brabham: I don’t even know what one world order is. I like the video, blah, blah, blah.

 

Porter Stansberry: I think it’s crazy, the idea that people who are in the Middle East would ever organize. This whole one world stuff, frankly, it just makes no sense to me. I just don’t get it. It’s not that I don’t believe in it. It’s just that it makes no sense. It just doesn’t make any sense. In fact, if you look at the trajectory of political order around the world, it’s becoming more fragmented not less fragmented. And it’s becoming more fragmented because of the development of technologies that allow small groups of people to actively resist larger groups.

 

When you got the stinger missile, you can shoot down a $40,000,000.00 helicopter with a $5,000.00 missile. The power tilts back to the masses. That’s one of the reasons why these people who are talking about the FEMA camps and all this stuff. For me, it’s just fantasy. Do you know how many legally owned arms there are in the United States? 270,000,000 legally registered firearms. The idea that the government is going to round us up and put us into camps.

 

Aaron Brabham: It’s not going to happen.

 

Porter Stansberry: It’s not going to happen.

 

Aaron Brabham: By the way, there’s 318,000,000 people. That includes every age, babies, dying peoples.

 

Porter Stansberry: America is the best armed population in the world. We’re not going to be conquered by a foreign government. We’re not going to be conquered by our own government. That’s why this whole nonsense about having this huge military expenditure makes – you can’t in good conscience make these arguments. You have to be making them for another reason. Probably because you are being financially supported by the military contracting companies. Believe me, they want to keep making nuclear weapons.

 

They want to keep making tanks and bombs and planes. And they want a million-man army. They want a 600 ship Navy. It’s incredibly expensive. But it doesn’t make us any safer. For some reason, it seems like particularly older Americans just get radically paranoid. They’ll believe anything you tell them about the United States of Islam. It’s just nonsense. Just stop. Stop.

 

Aaron Brabham: I’m glad you said that. Because we had a female write into us, Lauren. She said as a 21-year-old freelancing graphic designer learning how to protect myself financially and being able to maintain the not-so-steady career path is very important to me. I really truly enjoy the podcast. It’s a healthy balance of current events and legitimate learning. Truthfully, I feel like I’ve learned more about what’s going on my listening to this station than I did in college. You guys bring on great guests. And Porter, it makes me laugh so much when you get into your stop it, just stop it rants. Which you just happened to do.

 

Porter Stansberry: Lauren, I was taken aback that someone your age would be interested in our show. I’m very flattered. We’re going to send you a hat and a t-shirt and stuff when we get them in. Any idea when –

 

Aaron Brabham: We should get them in in a couple of weeks.

 

Porter Stansberry: Okay. Be patient. We’re going to send you a hat and a t-shirt. I think, Aaron, what we should do with the swag giveaway, we need to aim for folks like Lauren who are going to skew to younger and perhaps more attractive. I feel like if we sent all of our listeners a shirt we would end up with a bunch of 89 year olds in the retirement home wearing our hats and t-shirts.

 

Aaron Brabham: I feel like that’s a demographic that won’t last very long.

 

Porter Stansberry: We’re not going to attract a big following.

 

Aaron Brabham: We’re going to go Ron Paul style. We’re going to get the youth.

 

Porter Stansberry: Yeah.

 

Aaron Brabham: I like the youth movement.

 

Porter Stansberry: Speaking of Ron Paul, we need to have him on the show.

 

Aaron Brabham: I’d love to, man. I know it’s something that he was very hard to track down, obviously, during –

 

Porter Stansberry: Presidential –

 

Aaron Brabham: – the presidential election.

 

Porter Stansberry: He doesn’t really need to take the time out to talk to 24 listeners.

 

Aaron Brabham: And one thing that we will do is we’ll let him have his own speech unlike the RNC who wanted to script him.

 

Porter Stansberry: You know what? I’m going to go after him.

 

Aaron Brabham: Of course.

 

Porter Stansberry: I’m going to give him some hard questions. I love the guy’s ideas. I love his platform. But I’ll find something.

 

Aaron Brabham: We had one iTunes feedback. Porter and Aaron lay it out raw. Porter’s comments on the road to riches were both illuminating and depressing. Porter got his newsletter company to where it is today by sacrificing all else. To paraphrase him, “Success in business came from all else. Family, friends, health and leisure. It was all consuming. And I get it why many people choose to have some resemblance of a life, instead.” If you want to hear two liberty loving investors, this is the place.

 

Porter Stansberry: Very good.

 

Aaron Brabham: Good synopsis. That’s our show for today. Next week’s guest, we will have Lauren Lister. Lauren is the host of Capital Count on Russia Today Television. We appreciate you listening to Stansberry Radio. A special thanks to Dinesh D’Souza for joining us on the show. We do encourage all of our listeners to go watch his “2016” documentary. Visit us online at StansberryRadio.com. Follow us on Twitter at StansberryRadio. Find us on Facebook/StansberryRadio. And, of course, if you have a cocktail or two, too many and you’re listening to the show, call us on our hotline, 855-SARADIO. Who knows, we might send you some swag out. We’ll see you next week.

 

Announcer: Stansberry Radio is a purely public broadcast and is not intended to be personalized financial advice for any individual’s specific situation. Each individual’s financial situation is unique. StansberryRadio should not be relied upon and/or considered as personalized advice.

 

[End of Audio]