"You’re a CUCK!" Trump Global Chaos Debate | With Dave Smith & Michael Knowles

Michael Knowles argues that Donald Trump's foreign policy, which includes interventions and threats in various countries, is not a contradiction to 'America First' but rather a form of 'conservative imperialism.' He posits that the US has been a global empire since the Louisiana Purchase and a 'muscular global empire' since WWII, making it natural to manage the Western Hemisphere (Monroe Doctrine) and pursue national interests through limited, targeted interventions, rejecting both conservative isolationism and liberal internationalism.

Michael Knowles states, 'America is a global empire. We just are... we've been an empire since the Louisiana Purchase... President Trump's vision... rejects a conservative isolationism and it rejects a liberal internationalism. And it posits a conservative imperialism.' He cites Trump's campaign on destroying ISIS and military operations in Iran, Syria, Afghanistan, and Venezuela as examples. (06:41, 07:09)

Dave Smith and Kyle Kolinsky strongly condemn Trump's foreign policy as reckless, unconstitutional, and a betrayal of the 'America First' promise. They argue that pursuing regime change and massive defense budgets while the US is trillions in debt is irresponsible. Kolinsky labels it 'naked rank disgusting imperialism' driven by corporate interests, not genuine national security, and questions the US's moral authority.

Dave Smith states, 'The idea that we would go flirting with multiple wars of choice at this point is it's not leftwing or right-wing. It's just reckless.' (05:00) Kyle Kolinsky adds, 'Now it's naked rank disgusting imperialism where they say, 'We're going to take the oil.'... We're doing this for our corporations. We're doing it for the Epstein class, the billionaires.' (10:21, 10:31)

Coleman Hughes offers a more nuanced perspective, emphasizing that the success or failure of interventions depends on specific ground situations. He differentiates between deeply sectarian countries (like the Middle East) where interventions often lead to civil war, and more coherent nations (like Venezuela) where regime change, if done correctly, could be beneficial. He also highlights the 'risk to inaction' when dealing with rogue regimes.

Coleman Hughes notes, 'If we were to actually affect regime change in Venezuela, that would almost certainly be a good thing for the people of Venezuela and for American interests.' (16:30) He contrasts this with the Middle East, 'You're talking about deeply sectarian countries... Venezuela is not a country like that.' (25:10) He also states, 'The idea that inaction has no risks is one thing I want to flag as a false argument.' (24:30)

The panel debates the fatal shooting of Renee Good by ICE officer Jonathan Ross. Coleman Hughes and Dave Smith suggest it was a tragic outcome of a dangerous situation where Good attempted to drive away, and the officer, possibly influenced by a prior incident, feared for his safety. Kyle Kolinsky and Michael Knowles offer starkly opposing views, with Kolinsky labeling the officer a 'thug' and 'murderer,' while Knowles argues Good was 'indoctrinated' and deserved to be shot for driving at a police officer, sending a message to 'leftists.'

Coleman Hughes states, 'Officers are trained not to be in front of a car to begin with... However, a lot of prominent Democrats are saying that this is murder.' (47:28) Dave Smith adds, 'I don't think she was trying to run over the officer. It seemed to me that she was trying to peel out of there and he got spooked and he shot her.' (53:16) Michael Knowles asserts, 'She accelerated... while the tires are aimed at the cop... This is an important message to all the leftists out there... You cannot drive your SUV into a police officer. If you do that, you will be shot in the face and deserved and it will be very, very sad.' (51:53)