The Admiral

When I was a young man living in the Soviet Union, I considered myself a Reagan Communist. After all, all Soviet citizens were supposed to be de facto Communists, but I much preferred the free thinking and the free markets of the West. And I got in trouble with the Soviet authorities for saying so, not just for saying it, but what I said it in a long interview with Playboy magazine. Another example of how poorly I fit in with the Soviet power structure was when the American Embassy in Moscow held a reception for all Reagan in 1988. I arrived and was told by the smirking Soviet official that I was not included on the list of Soviet guests. I told him he was looking at the wrong list. I've been invited by the Americans. So I have long had a strong belief that America was the good guy, which is why it's troubling when a man with the experience of today's guest Admiral William McRaven openly wonders whether America still wants to be the good guy. From the Atlantic, this is Otokrasyn America. I'm Gary Kasparov. Bill McRaven is perhaps best known as the military commander who oversaw the siltium-six rate that killed Osama bin Laden in 2011. And in recent years, he has been outspoken about the erosion of military's historic apolitical role in American democracy. The military is one of the very few trusted institutions remaining in the American society. So when we spoke this summer, I wanted to know what role should the military play in safeguarding democratic ideals? Bill, thank you for joining the show. Of course, Gary. Great to be with you. I saw you most recently in April. When the organization I chair the Renew Democracy Initiative, named you a hero of democracy. And I mention it here because the speech you gave, it has stuck with me. I think it could be something of a sermon. A morning sermon for all Americans with a simple title. We are the good guys. I won't ask you to deliver the speech here, of course. But I want to give all listeners a flavor of it. What makes us the good guys? So yes, in my speech at the Renew Democracy Initiative, I talked about the fact that I think that's quite important to recognize that the world has historically seen us as the good guys. And now, we have had our problems in the past, but in general, when you look at the good things, the United States of America has done, I think at far exceeds the problems that we've created. And so when you think about being the good guys, you think about how we lifted Europe up after World War II, and we rebuilt Europe, we had the Marshall Plan every time that there is a natural disaster, the first people on the scene are invariably the Americans. And so my counsel to the audience that night is we always have to be seen as the good guys. And if we stop being seen as the good guys, then I think the world will lose a little faith in us. And I talk about the quote that was from Alexia the Toadville, when he went around the country trying to decide what democracy really looked like. He said something to the effect that America is great because it is good, but if America ever stops being good, it will stop being great. And while the veracity of the quote may be in question, I can tell you, for my travels around the world, this idea that America needs to be good is very important. And we need to continue to do good in the world. As a former chess player, I like this dichotomy, you know, white and black, you know, good guys and bad guys. Sure. But the question I have to ask is, are you sure that America is still viewed by the world as good guys? Well, I think it depends on where you go in the world, Gary. I mean, the fact of matter is there are always people who viewed us as the bad guys. I mean, you always had whether it was the Soviet Union or now whether it is parts of China, the authoritarian governments historically viewed us as the bad guys because it was this to your point, this dichotomy between a democracy or a republic or representative government and an authoritarian government. So today, you know, I still think that most of the world views us as the good guys. And this is what we have to be cautious about. Clearly, some of the policies that have, I think, come out of this administration, but frankly, a lot of administrations. You can't blame it all on this administration. We've stumbled, I think, in the last several decades. And as a result, people begin to question whether or not America are the good guys that they remember. Having said that, you still see that most people around the world want to come to America because they believe in the American dream. And we need to keep that dream alive. Oh, absolutely. Many of my compatriots saw America, you know, just stands in a very different light. So for us, America was and still is for hundreds of millions of, not billions of people around the world is a beacon of hope and a garden of democracy. But my question was about people who always viewed America as good guys. Europeans, I mean, people living democracies and somebody who travels across the ocean very often. It's not as criticism is astonishment in the Baltic nations, in other European countries. And of course, you know, from Ukraine, that America is not what it used to be. And it's, as I said, it's not just Trump administration. There are several administrations that push America in this direction. But again, it's the, do you think that America can recover its unique geopolitical image that was kind of a North Star for people coveting freedom and liberation from tyranny? Well, I'm always optimistic here. I mean, I believe we can recover from just about anything because, you know, the American people are what make America unique. It is this amalgamation, this e-pluribus unum, this, you know, people coming from all over the world that make up the American culture. And I travel around the country a lot. And there is still remains a lot of optimism. But I have growing concerns, of course. And as I think I mentioned at the Gale event that you put on, I was at the Munich Security Conference. And the word that I heard most often was America has become transactional. And this idea that now America would only do things if it were in America's best interest. And of course, every leader of every country wants to do things that are in their nation's best interest. Nothing wrong with that. But sometimes your best interest can also be about bringing your allies and your friends along with you. And by the way, your best interest, a lot of times rely on your allies and friends. So, you know, as we look at Ukraine, you know, I'm a strong believer and supporter of Ukraine. And I got it. It's not a perfect democracy. And there's a lot of problems in Ukraine. But the fact of the matter is most Ukrainians believe in the values that we as Americans espouse. They believe in this idea of democracy. They believe in the rule of law. They believe in their constitution and representative government. So these are important values that I think are worth us standing up for. So our support of Ukraine cannot just be about whether or not we're going to get rare earth metals out of the Ukrainian ground. It's got to be about an alignment of our values. But it seems to me that the current administration doesn't share your idealism about America's role and is not considering values that you have been describing vividly as a cornerstone for any geopolitical decisions. I was also at the Munich Security Conference and we both heard Vice President J.D. and the events addressing European leaders and basically telling them that they are punchable losers that are just irrelevant in this global picture. And America has different agenda. And that's the alliances that were very much ineligible just the foundation of American foreign policy for decades are no longer relevant. So do you think that Trump administration is aberration or it's somehow the logical continuation of America inconsistent foreign policy after the end of the Cold War? Yeah, I think the latter because I do believe that the foreign policy has been a little inconsistent and sign way if you will. But the fact of the matter is our alliances matter Gary. You know that clearly. And I tell people the old quote from Churchill was the only thing worse than fighting with allies is fighting without them. So I think we have to be very careful as we deal with our allies in Europe and Asia and around the world. We have to recognize that these alliances are incredibly valuable. You want to make sure that publicly the alliances, the relationships you have with heads of state are openly strong. And if you have some differences and close the doors have an opportunity to have a candid discussion with them without the press, without the public so that you can begin to move things in the right direction. If you lambast any particular ally in public it makes it very difficult to kind of move the needle in the right direction. I want us to go back to domestic issues because I think the Trump administration while you know he's ruining America's global influence but it also aiming at certain foundation elements of this great republic. And you have been outspoken about the urgent need to safeguard our democracy against the threat coming from many actions, recent actions of Trump's administration. And I wanted to first say thank you for not shying away from that. We need more individuals with a military background taking this kind of stand. But it is fraught. And I want to talk about that with you. And what is the role of the military, the democratic society, of course wars or wars? But you know how the men and women who are in military relate to politics? Well, the answer is that they shouldn't relate to politics. I mean at the end of the day as a member of the military you have an obligation. You took a note to the constitution of the United States. And that constitution, the rules and the rules of that constitution elected the president of the United States and the president of the United States is the commander in chief. So as long as the president in his role or her role as the commander in chief gives a lawful order, you are obligated by your oath, by the law to follow that order. And I have told folks, look, do I have disagreements with President Trump? Of course I do. But at the end of the day, he is the duly elected president of the United States. And as long as his orders are lawful, you have an obligation to follow those orders. Or you can resign. Okay, he can help but asking what are the lawful orders? Well, I mean lawful orders are ones that just assess, I mean it sounds totalological, but they're ones that follow the law. So an illegal order would be, for example, killing civilians in a, even in a conflict zone. You know, you're the law of armed conflict does not allow you to kill innocent civilians at the direction of anybody in a conflict zone. That's an unlawful order. Now again, do civilians die in a conflict, of course they do, because it is the nature and the complexities of war. But what you can't do is you can't target civilians in a conflict as part of your war aims. That is, at least in today's environment, that is an illegal order. And so, you know, if the Secretary of Defense told me I want you to go into this village and kill civilians that had no value to the enemy's war effort, that would be an illegal order and you don't want to follow that. And you're not allowed to follow that. I don't understand from your explanations that the line is blurry. So the rules of engagement, they are not up black and white. So again, this is the place in the middle, kind of a grey zone. And what happens if standing up for democracy is seen as a political act? Yes, we understand the military must stay away from supporting one party or another. But if you clearly see this gap between the orders received from the political office, from party that is in power now, and your understanding of your constitution duties to protect the Republic. Well, I'll tell you one thing. In my 37 years in the military, and this may surprise some people, I never once heard somebody talk about politics. I never heard senior officers or junior officers are enlisted talk about politics. You know, we were in the military. We were going to do what we were asked to do on behalf of the nation. As you get more senior, and of course, I was fortunate enough and honored enough to be promoted to four stars. So now, even though I was in the Oval Office a lot, and I spent a lot of time talking with President Obama, it was never about politics. Now, there were some decisions that President Obama, in this case, was prepared to make that I didn't agree with. And the great thing about the American military, certainly in the Obama administration, was I was free to express my concerns and my doubts, and I did that on several occasions with the President, and he always took that in the vein and how it was meant and how it was expressed. So the concern that, of course, you're always going to have is, if somehow there is a belief that as an officer or senior enlisted or junior enlisted, that you can't speak up, because what you say may be construed as political or counter to your bosses, well, then that's not a good military. And I will also offer that I was never in my career given that I remember a specific order. You are ordered to do this. People don't look you in the eye and say, I'm ordering you to do this. The orders in a broad context come down in terms of a mission order, that sort of thing. But nobody looks you in the eye and says, MacRaven, I'm ordering you to do this. But having said that, the fact of the matter is, you want a military that will push back on orders and on positions. If you create an environment, a culture of fear that speaking up, whether it is against a particular mission or a particular policy, is going to get you fired, then you're going to find yourself as a military in a very difficult position. So to your question, yes, if we ever get to the point where all we do is follow orders, well, then you know where that leads Gary. That's exactly my concern, because I'm afraid we are just moving down this path. But again, I share your optimism about the nature of good nature of American people, and I can help thinking that it's the very perilous moment historically, and we probably have to reach the bottom before we start climbing out of this hole. Well, you might be right there. I'll add one other comment here, though, is, you know, for folks like you and me who spend all day watching the news and seeing how things are evolving, it can look very perilous. My expectation or my guess is that 99% of the people in America are more worried about you know, daycare and getting their kids to school, and whether or not they're going to be able to pay their bills, they're not really paying attention to whether or not we're in a constitutional crisis. They're not paying attention to whether or not we are or not supporting our allies. Because these are not things that affect most Americans at their household, their family level. But this is something that I think just requires kind of constant engagement with the American people, so they have a better appreciation for, you know, where we stand as a country right now. We'll do right back. Attention. Attention, rail travelers, platform paces, window gators and our rest negotiators. Have you heard the big rail fair for ease is here. Rail fairs have been frozen across England until March 2027 on standard class tickets, including off-peak, anytime and season tickets. For more information, visit nationalrail.co.uk slash fairs for ease. Season season excursions apply. Okay, my colleagues at Atlantic David Froome has written about how the military could be used to subvert elections. So he imagined three steps. Step one, use federal powers to provoke some kind of maid for TV disturbance. Okay, whether it's it's those provocation, but we saw it's enough in all the violence of American streets, you know, back in 2020, even before and of course now. So it's there. Step two, use the disturbance as a pretext to declare a state of emergency and deploy federal troops. We already saw it in California. So step three, cease control of local government operations, including voting. What do you make of that assessment? Well, I mean, these are certainly things you always have to be concerned about. But you know, I still believe that the right people will do the right thing, certainly in the military if any of these begin to come to pass. So particularly the voting booths, you know, I don't see the US military being brought in to, you know, keep people away from certain voting booths or to force people to vote in a certain way. I think the American people, I think that's a red line for the American people writ large. Are my concern about the American military being used in, you know, civil protests? Of course, you always have to be concerned about that. Once again, normally the way it works is, you know, if you have a situation in LA or any of the big cities, the governor needs to request the president to bring in, you know, the troops if necessary. That's part of, you know, the state's rights. And the president is not supposed to be able to deploy active duty military troops into a state without the approval of the governor. Now I think again, there are some nuances to that law that I'm not a lawyer, so I'm reluctant to get into the fine print. But I know that again, there is a lot of consternation and confrontation about that. What I'll tell you about our military, Gary, though, is the senior leaders that I know in the military. They understand that they have an obligation to the Constitution, not to the president. So if there is a violation of the Constitution, under that oath, we have an obligation not to follow those orders. But what is the violation of the Constitution? Because you kept talking about new answers and about your difficulties to identify these violations because you're not a lawyer. So I hate pushing you, but what is the red line for those who in command when they will face this kind of dilemma that is, yes, it looks constitutional, but some of you actions may lead to the destruction or just abolishment of fundamental constitutional rights. Yeah. I mean, it's a tough question to answer, Gary, because it is one of these ones where, as a leader, when you see something that isn't right, you generally know it. I don't need a lawyer to tell me exactly what I shouldn't do on the streets of the United States of America if I'm a military officer. We've been taught how to behave. We understand what our leadership roles are and we understand what we shouldn't do. Now, do we have lawyers? Of course we do. The lawyers I've always had have been fabulous officers and have never, ever, sighed away from telling me their view of the law as they understand it. And if they think that something that I was about to do was inconsistent with the law of armed conflict of the rules of engagement or the Constitution, they did not hesitate to let me know that. Now, again, then your role as a leader is to say, okay, you have given me your opinion. Now I've got an obligation to do what is right. And if you can give me the facts and you say that I am clearly violating the law, then you don't do it, then you don't take that action. And I realize I'm waffling around this because right now, as we saw with troops being deployed to Los Angeles earlier this year, I am concerned about some of the authoritarian moves that the government has taken, where I have kind of faith and a little bit of confidence, and a little bit more confidence is in the American people. And again, we also have to recognize that the American people voted for this president. I spoke out a fair amount during Trump's first term. I did. And I was happy to do that. And then we had the next administration, and then the American people came back and they voted Trump back in office. So the American people have spoken. Now maybe this is what the American people expected. You know, I don't know. But what I have to do in my position right now is I have to ask myself, what did not I see that the other people who voted for Trump did see? And what do they want done? Is this the America that they want to move towards? It's not the America that I think is right. But I'm not the sole voice in America. So it's going to require these people, these people that voted for President Trump, it's going to require the Republicans on Capitol Hill to decide whether or not they are going to let this administration continue down this path towards a more and more authoritarian government. And again, I have confidence that the American people will understand and see what those red lines are and they'll say enough is enough. You point out it's about the mandate received from American people. I couldn't agree more. Donald Trump is duly elected president. But we know that he also has a record. And one of the records, and as we know today is a loyal to test for people being selected to serve in this administration, is election denialism. So Donald Trump still repeats that elections of 2020 was stolen. So they have no face in the electoral system in America that eventually brought Trump to power and judging from their assessment of 2020 elections. And also from many of their moves that are aimed at limiting ability of American voters to take part in this in the duly democratic process and to express the opposite opinion, I suspect that they may go as far as it takes to influence the elections, be turn elections in 2026 and seeing the troops on the streets. I believe it's a part of what Donald Trump has been doing very successfully for four four decades. Normalizing things that were absolutely unacceptable in the minds of many Americans. So we already saw the troops in the streets. They have not yet influenced the elections. They have not yet arrested the duly elected governor. But I doubt very much that Donald Trump will stop short of doing whatever it takes to secure his powers if midterm elections could go wrong way from his perspectives. What do you think? Well, one, I don't deal in hypotheticals. So I think we have to wait till the midterm elections. But here's what I will make clear. I mean, I'm obviously not a fan of this administration in President Trump. You know, let's take it from a foreign policy standpoint. One, I believe from a foreign policy standpoint that again, you need to have strong alliance of that you need to treat your allies and your friends with respect. But I think it is more than that when you look at the foreign policy. This is about, you know, if we are going to be the good guys and we need to do things that reflect what it, you know, what goodness looks like. And you know, when you are petty and vindictive and transactional, that does not strengthen your foreign policy hint. And of course, now you take a look at the economy. These reciprocal tariffs certainly have not strengthened our economy. They will, we'll see. But, you know, I reflect back on the Wall Street Journal and other conservative magazines and news outlets that have said that tariffs are a horrible thing. So we're going to see how that plays out. Domestically, of course, I'm concerned, Gary. I am concerned about the fact that the Republicans in Congress aren't stepping up and making, you know, strong decisions. They seem to be incredibly weak need. And the fear, and there is a climate of fear to your point, there is a climate of fear that is kind of echoing across the country that is of great concern to me. This sense that yes, you have to be a Trump loyalist or you will pay the price. This is not a good way to run a country. One, what I have found in my time and leadership positions is you need people that will speak truth to power. You need somebody that will turn to the leader and say, this is a bad idea. No, you shouldn't do this. The great thing about the American military and in my experiences, I never had trouble speaking truth to power when it came to talking to my senior officers, to the secretaries of defense or to the President of the United States. I didn't always agree with the President that I worked for. And I worked very closely for President George W. Bush and for President Barack Obama. I didn't like a number of their decisions, but I always respected them as men and as presidents because they thought they were trying to do what was right for the country, not right for themselves, but right for the country. So yes, I have a lot of problems with the direction of the country today, but I do fall back on the fact that the President was duly elected. And my expectations are when the American people are no longer satisfied with the results because, by the way, we haven't seen a lot of results. All the promises are not coming to fruition. So the American people, when it comes to the midterms and to the general election, are going to have to ask themselves in all honesty, are we really better off? It's the old, are we better off today than we were two years ago for the midterms and four years ago for the general? And if the answer to that question is for most Americans, yes, we think we're better off than the American people have spoken. But if the American people come back and say no, we're not happy with the trend of becoming more authoritarian. We're not happy with the fact that the economy is not doing as well as it was under the previous administration. We're not happy with the fact that you intimidate and belittle heads of state. Then they will vote another party into office. And that's the way the system works. And when I have an opportunity to talk to large groups of people and they complain about this, I tell them very quickly, well, guess what? It's on us. We are the democracy. We are the people. If you don't like what's happening, vote somebody else in. Be respectful. Be civil. Be peaceful. But vote somebody else in. Or use your civil voice. Protest peacefully. Write your congressman. Write your senator. Do everything you can to change the state of the way things are if you're not happy with the way it's going. That's how democracies and civil societies work. So with the crisis of confidence among American people regarding the political system and political leadership, so the military is the only institution in American life that still has the face and trust of the majority of Americans. And I'm a good scholar of American history. And it has occurred to me that quite regular. It's every 80 years. The country elected the general. So Washington, we may also add general grand general, Eisenhower. So can you see the appeal of such a figure today? Someone who comes from a place of unifying different factions of the country at the time when both parties feel hollow and so far to run. Unfortunately, just isn't realistic. I don't know that it has to be a military figure. I think to your point, though, Gary, I do think it needs to be somebody who has a different vision for America, who's vision for America really has to do with, again, the qualities and the principles on which this country were founded. And I do believe as I travel around the country, which I do every week, I travel all around the country. And everywhere I go, I meet good people. I meet great Americans who, what they want is they want, you know, they want opportunity. They want a good education for their kids. They want their streets to be safe. They want things that, to them, are important for their community life. But they also want America to be respected. They want their administrators. They want their governments to act with decency. They believe in the qualities and the values that we raise our kids to believe in. They believe in honesty and integrity and things that are important. And so I think whoever, you know, presents themselves as a candidate next time around, you know, they do need to be somebody that says, look, if I'm going to be the president, I'm not going to be the president of the Republican Party or the president of the Democratic Party. I'm going to be the president of the United States. And whether you like me or not, I'm going to do everything I can to take care of you because that would be my job. You know, your job as the president first and foremost is to take care of the American people, not just the American people that like you, but the American people that don't like you, not just the American people that voted for you, but the people that didn't vote for you. This is your job is to take care of all American people whether they voted for you or not. And so you need somebody that comes in that to your point believes that they have a responsibility to all Americans, not just to one party or one philosophy, if you will. And if you can find that person and certainly absolutely does not need to come from the military, it can come from any sector of the country. But I do think you need somebody that is prepared to stand on those values, recognize that, you know, what is important to the American people, which is the economy and education and transportation and infrastructure. And again, yes, national security and our borders, these are all important issues. But I think the single most important issue for most Americans is, you know, can you take care of me and my family and our community and how best can you do something like that? But he just described this, this is the growing crisis of confidence. And you point it out that the president, someone who could drive the country out of the crisis and to continue this never ending quest for perfect union, should not be associated with political elites that comes from one party or another. Because recently, I think it's after the end of the Cold War, we saw the steady increase in tribalism. And instead of being president for the country, so we could see that one president after another became more and more, you know, related to the, to his base, to its more and more partisan. And I think that's it's while Bill Clinton and Bush 43, they still try to be the president's for the whole country, though. I think the split was already quite obvious. Obama, Trump and Biden, you know, I think they just, they serve the party interests. And of course, with Trump is now is reaching a climax, basically ignoring the opposition and ruling as if it's a one party system, totally ignoring the opposition. So yes, it may be somebody not from the military, but since the military is the most respected and trustworthy institution, I think the, looking at the military and the top brass people with reputation, people who believe that were the good guys is, is a very very natural choice. And I guess you sense, you know, where this line of questions is going. And I can ask you directly, would you consider stepping in and running in 2028 to drive America out of its current crisis and chart a new course forward? Well, thanks Gary. I appreciate that. You know, I've got absolutely no plans to run. And as I tell people, I've been married for 47 years. And if I want to make it to 48, I probably ought to stay here in Austin. So, you know, right now, no plans for 2028. I have to pass a question from one of the guests in the show. So my friend and great Paul Stofrancklunds, who was also teaching at West Point. And we talked about political leadership. And he was quite pessimistic about the American future providing, we will not, you know, break the cabal of these two parties and these political elites. And he put this question just in a very direct way. So why isn't now your time? Well, you know, the fact of matter is I'm not a politician. I'm certainly not. That's good news. I mean, that's the bill. That's exactly the point. That's what the country needs. Well, you know, it's, you know, people will come up and sometimes say, well, you know, Eisenhower did this. That's how for goodness' sake. He did. I'm not Eisenhower. Yes, but let's be real. I mean, I ran U.S. Special Operations. I like to think I was a good officer, you know, comparing me or, frankly, any other officer in the military today to an Eisenhower or a grant or a Washington. It's just silly. So, you know, part of this is, you know, again, I have absolutely no plans to run. Are there some, you know, retired officers out there that could be good representatives for the country? Yeah, I do think there are. And, you know, and maybe one of them will find this opportunity as a calling for them. We need a good guy. We need someone who believes that we are the good guys and someone who has this impeccable reputation. And I think it's, again, it's a moment to rescue, not just this country from sliding down this, the wrong path, but also, you know, restoring global American leadership. And I hope we continue the conversation. But as of now, thank you very much for joining us and for this frank and very educational, both educational and entertaining conversation. Well, thank you very much, Gary. It's always great to be with you. At times over the last several months, my guest and I have reflected on how the skills of a chess grandmaster do not apply so neatly in the world of politics. But one area in which they are undoubtedly valuable is analysis. Cache analysis served me well in my chess career. As it does now in my work promoting democracy around the world. So let me analyze some of what I've learned across these conversations as we explore the rise of Donald Trump and Trumpism as a phenomenon. First, the challenge we are up against. Three and open societies have failed to leave up to their ideals and failed to defend their values from threads, bows, internal and external. This has made dictators of authoritarians even more bold as we have seen time and again in recent years, most starkly in my view in Russia's war in Ukraine. We must see this war for what it is, a fight for the future of democratic ideals, not just in Ukraine, but in the world. Second, the response of our political systems to this challenge. Our international institutions build during the Cold War are powerless in the face of the threads. Our leaders, executives and administrators fail to stand on principle or update their strategies for the modern world. Our political parties are brittle in the spirit of the question, well they are up to the task. This adds up to a crisis of values. An effective response to this crisis requires big picture thinking, understanding how these issues are connected and committing to the values we want to see flourish, freedom, democracy, opportunity. My guess this season has been diverse, experts in politics, policy, business, tech and advocates, because this is a crisis that defies need categorization. I hope their stories have helped to shed light on how complex and far-reaching the roots of authoritarian thread are. With the challenges that spans every work of life, the solution to must be all-encompassing. Every one of us can make a contribution and a difference. It is not enough to hope democracy will prevail. Each person must embody democratic values and fight for them. If you are ready to do that, join the fight with me. I invite you to learn more about the work of the organization I found in a new democracy initiative. What we take on the task of breaking through partisan echo chambers to raise the urgent alarm about rising authoritarianism. I speak out because I saw democracy fall in my home country of Russia, but I'm not alone. RDI brings political dissidents from over 40 different repressive countries to speak to students, business leaders and public officials about their experiences. On RDI's sub-stack, the next move, we work with our partners in the pro-democracy camp to identify the threats, connect the dots and plot out our game plan. Every week I talk to ordinary Americans there, disagreeing, learning and refining our strategy. Now we think this podcast, you have already taken the first step, understanding the problem. Now let's build something new and positive and let's win. Thank you. This episode of Photocross in America was produced by Arlene O'Revaller. Our editor is Dave Shaw, original music and mix, Baroque smircia. Fact-checking by Inna Alvarado. Special thanks to Polynica Sparrow and Mick Gringer. Collegiate the Bay is executive producer of Atlantic Audio. Andre Evalles is our managing editor. I'm Gary Kasparov. Thank you for listening.