Blog

The Other Side of the Slap

I spent a lot of time dealing with the victim of violence. That betrayal only a lover can express, the sinister switch from affection or at least the performance required to invent love, to twist into a tantrum of rage. The bruising and cuts, a secondary blistering to a pain that seldom heals. Perhaps can not heal.

I would die for you, I would kill for you,” such men squirm, maybe they believe it. At least when they are forged inside of their own egotistical certainty. Yet, despite such promises, they don’t protect their lover-victim from themselves. The imbalance is perhaps a calculation of ownership, ‘she’ in this case is a possession, to be owned and kept. No self ownership or agency for herself, just a being to be protected, a prisoner to such affections.

The idea of self owner ship has in itself been eroded by ideological coercion, before that it was defined by a religious one. And in this case it’s enslaved romantically.

When I coached and helped those who had experienced such intimate violence, near all ladies, find their voice from beneath the dried tears, hidden bruises. Help them, as one put it when she saw me bashing the heavy bag, “I wanna be able to do that,” it was with consideration to such betrayal and distrust. If the man who claimed to love, who said. “I do,” and even shared children with could beat, bludgeon and in some cases rape with hateful spite, then how could one trust anyone else?

To sleep with the enemy, or torturer. To share a life and house with an abuser. Was in the past common. It’s less accepted now. It was in the era before women’s liberation and liberal values, it’s an obligation in some cultures for the feminine to yield. In many parts of the world, rape, violence are masculine rights. Whether through culture, religion or even mutations of both are empowered by the writ of law.

Yes, women can and do abuse men. Domestic violence occurs against men. Males have been killed and beaten, or maimed by their female partners. John Wayne Bobbit, was after all for a time a household name. I am well aware of this. That does not relate to the particular interactions that I am about to share.

As an inflection of hearing and doing my best to help some ladies over come their betrayals and experiences, I had a conversation with two men who had been the attackers. I came across each for books that I was writing.

James, seemed likeable enough, a little flabby with a salt and pepper beard and the body shape of a man who liked to lift heavy weights but never said no to a late night snack. Or beer. It was the beer, and other forms of alcohol that he claimed to be his demon. The excuse needed to rationalise a temper and inconsistent arrogance.

“I had a problem, I’m better now,” he mentioned about his drinking.

He never served time for what he did to his wife, now ex. It did make it hard for him to see his two kids. He told me that one of them was present for one of the beatings.

“I can admit now that it was wrong, that’s easy for me to do so. Around the time that it all happened, I would never even think about it. I had so much anger and then I felt ashamed, or I would need to get drunk and feel sorry for myself.”

His wife had a broken nose and black eye after one of the attacks. He said that he only hit her on three occasions, at least that he recalls.

“I was only charged for the time she went to hospital. In some ways, she enabled me. I mean, not to blame her. It was all my fault, I mean she let me do it again and again.”

“What was she meant to do? Fight back?” I asked him coldly.

“I don’t know, not let me come back to her. Not accept my apology. It was when she kicked me out and stopped me from seeing our kids, that’s when I got sober.”

“The violence and abuse was all a self-help exercise for your benefit?”

He chuckled with unease, “no, I mean, you know, I saw who I was really after.”

“Because you faced a consequence for your actions?”

“I guess.”

“And when your eldest daughter saw you hit her, what do you think that did to her?”

He fidgeted, “It happened fast, I didn’t know she was there. Listen, I would never hit my kids. I could never hurt them.”

“But, you could your wife?”

“I’m not that person now.”

I was meant to be interviewing James for my book, Degenerate, he was in the BDSM realm. The violence for him after his ex was now seemingly consensual. He liked it rough, at least to be the one doing the violence, not to receive it. I doubt his pug-like jaw could take a shot. It did not take much for him to open up about his past, his own trauma as he saw it.

“I have so much guilt for what I did.”

“You should.”

He nodded, a cigarette in his fingers, as he stared at the road while we leaned against his car.

“I am not like that now.”

The rest of the conversation ran into subject matter for the book. A conversation that I did not include in the book, and it would be inappropriate to pollute this writing with any of it. For him, perhaps in some way, the sex and violence or at least how he expressed himself was entwined.

Gavin had been in an out of the remand centre for assault, domestic violence and drug related offences. On home detention when I spoke with him, his stories bubbled in and out of any believable truth. I found when someone wants you to like them, they will attempt to finish your sentences in agreement with you, or change what they have already said to align with your words. Gavin did this on a few occasions.

I was going to write a follow up book to, Degenerate, and call it, Dangerous. The premise being I would find and investigate and interview people who indulge in criminal behaviour or, have particular beliefs and world views which go against the societal grain. I had made some contacts and did begin with that expedition but, burn out and an inability to spend money and time on an enterprise that would go unread deterred me from pursuing it.

As for Gavin, he had tattoos crawling up his neck, and inked words on his knuckles and up his forearms. The usual poetic mastery such as “loyalty,” “honour”, “FAFO (Fuck Around, Find Out)” and “I love Mum.” Maybe not, that last one.

At times his eyes held a yellowed hue like egg yolk, his breath puffed with whatever vape he was sucking and with the marinated perfume only green teeth could produce.

“We were having a break, and she betrayed me, was hard to tolerate,” he sucked the kiwi-strawberry scented vape form his couch.

His on again, off again, girlfriend had been seeing him for about six years. He had been charged with assault against her, and she even had a restraining order against him but the romance or co-dependency ensured that she would come and visit him while he was on home detention.

“Was this the first time you assaulted her?”

“Nah, she made all that shit up. I was done because I wrote threatening things to her in text and left a voice message.”

“That’s why you were charged.”

“Yup.”

“And the more recent time?”

“We had a break, and I was seeing a younger bird. She was all messed up and needed to have a hit of the pipe before we fucked. That girl has a head full of mess. Was fun but she was attracted to this,” he pointed to his bikie aesthetic, the tattoos, jewellery, and lifestyle. Perhaps free ‘gear’ also. In her case it seemed to be nitrous oxide. Two bottles stood erect on a nearby bench top.

“And your ex was seeing someone else?”

“No, she was chatting to a bloke from another group.”

I have refrained from mentioning which bikie group he belonged to and the other man was involved with.

“She seems to have a type.”

“I know right,” he began to pack his pipe with the putrid leaf of weed.

“And it was because of this, you felt betrayed?”

“Yeah, she knows what my business is. You can’t fuck around with rivals like that.”

“She doesn’t mind that you were sleeping with another girl?”

“Nah, we were taking a break.”

“And when you found out about this other guy, that’s when you snapped?”

“Yeah, bro. She was pushing me and getting in my face. I just lost it and hit her a few times to calm her down. She left crying and threatening me.”

I really try not to insert myself into such conversations while attempting to be objective, so I let him continue. According to his house mate, a child hood friend of Gavin’s, he had also threatened to cut her head off with an axe as well as break her fingers so that she could not text anyone again. Another reason why writing a book like, Dangerous, was going to be so difficult for me, because retaining any objectivity would be too hard.

I wanted to rip his throat form his head. I am no white knight, just a man. Here, I am trying to pack aside that inclination and use my pen, or keyboard instead.

“Then we were over, I told my mates and they said I had done the right thing. No need to have a bitch like that.”

“Did you or do you still love her?”

“Yeah, I do. That’s why I am so angry.”

“If you loved her, then why can’t you let her go and not keep putting her and you through this cycle of violence and screaming?”

He sucked the pipe, plumes of smoke wafted about his face while he stared at me with glassy eyes, “because I love her.”

“She isn’t your possession.”

“I know what’s best for her.”

“Hitting and threatening her, is best for her?”

“I didn’t want to do that. I just lost control.”

“Are you in control now?”

He nodded.

“And if she walked through the door, and told you what she had been doing and who she had been speaking with and it was not something you wanted to hear?”

“I’d be fucking pissed.”

“And what would you do?”

He rocked back and forth in his seat, “I don’t know.”

“Would you remain in control of yourself?”

He could not answer. I knew the answer. His ex knew the answer. Maybe, beneath the ink veneer, the lies he told himself and the stench of weed, he also knew the answer.

The Kyle Anzalone Show: Trump Meeting in Situation Room to Decide on Iran Deal

A deal with Iran sounds simple until you read the fine print. We dig into the reports of a memorandum of understanding that would reopen the Strait of Hormuz and lift parts of the pressure campaign, then ask the uncomfortable question: is this “freedom of navigation,” or is it a new normal where Iran and Oman set the rules and the fees at the world’s most important oil chokepoint?

From there, we get specific about the nuclear issue that could make or break everything. What does it actually mean to “destroy” enriched uranium, and what options exist that are technically real, verifiable, and compatible with the Non-Proliferation Treaty? We talk through downblending, fuel grade caps, IAEA oversight, and why political slogans can’t replace inspection regimes. We also push back on the postwar victory narrative and the attempt to relitigate the JCPOA instead of facing what changed on the ground.

Then we move to the part many leaders try to bracket off, but can’t: Lebanon and Gaza. If a ceasefire is supposed to apply to Lebanon, does that require Israel to stop bombing and withdraw from the south? And when an Israeli soldier describes Gaza with no meaningful civilian rules of engagement, alongside UN reporting on detainee abuse, what does that demand from U.S. policy and public honesty?

The Kyle Anzalone Show with Daniel McAdams: Axios Says US–Iran Deal Reached as U.S. and IRAN Trade Missile Fire

Congress is hollowing out, and the consequences show up first in foreign policy. Dan McAdams returns to talk with us about what Thomas Massie’s primary loss signals for antiwar oversight, why the Ron Paul era of forcing floor debates through appropriations fights is largely gone, and how that vacuum makes it easier for Washington to slide into the next conflict without friction.

We dig into Iran and the so-called ceasefire: the strikes, the responses, and the familiar pattern of narrative manipulation where the U.S. can provoke, then rebrand escalation as “defense.” We also unpack the latest claims of a draft Trump Iran deal, why leak-driven reporting deserves extra skepticism, and how media pipelines can function like message distribution for competing interests rather than real journalism.

From there we move to Israel and Gaza, including Netanyahu’s comments that point toward annexation, the U.S. role in funding and arming the campaign, and the way Lebanon and Hezbollah complicate any regional settlement. We also discuss harrowing firsthand accounts of Gaza’s blockade and a political paradox: anti-intervention voices are breaking through culturally, but votes and power haven’t caught up yet. Finally, we zoom out to Latin America, from Javier Milei and BRICS anxiety to U.S. drug war strikes in Guatemala and the danger of normalizing kill-first policy without due process.

Trump Continues to Test Limits of Iran Ceasefire, How Will Tehran Respond?

A ceasefire is supposed to lower the temperature, not provide new vocabulary for the same war. We unpack reports that the U.S. bombed targets in Iran after a ceasefire and why calling it “self-defense” can still function as a direct escalation. I walk through what those strikes signal, how each side tries to define the rules midstream, and why Iran may tolerate only so many “limited” hits before choosing a bigger response.

From there, we get specific about the hard constraints behind the headlines: weapons stockpiles, interceptor burn rates, and how long it can take to replace key munitions. That context changes everything about threats, deterrence, and the realism of returning to a high-intensity U.S. Iran war. We also break down Marco Rubio’s public talking points on Iran’s nuclear program, what U.S. intelligence and international monitoring have said, and the reported outlines of a possible memorandum of understanding that touches sanctions relief, frozen assets, and shipping through the Strait of Hormuz.

Trump’s White House remarks add another layer, including talk about Hormuz control and a shocking shot at Oman, one of the most important mediators in U.S. Iran diplomacy. We connect that to the bigger regional picture, including Israel, Lebanon, and the Washington voices pushing to keep the fight going. Finally, we pivot to Jill Biden saying she feared Joe Biden was “having a stroke” during the 2024 debate and what that raises about cognitive decline, transparency, and the massive war powers concentrated in the presidency.

The Kyle Anzalone Show Trump Has Allowed Netanyahu to Control Negotiations, and it’s hurting Americans

Memorial Day brings out a lot of scripted lines, but we want to talk about the part that gets avoided: what American wars actually cost, who pays, and how often the public is left holding the bill while elites chase ideology, influence, and profit. We start by looking at the human consequences for service members and veterans, and why so many deployments overseas end with the same problems still on the table, just with more graves and more resentment.

Then we shift into the biggest moving story right now: Iran negotiations, the Iran nuclear program, and why the phrase “on the brink of a deal” can be more propaganda than reality. We break down uranium enrichment in plain language, what the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty allows, and why demanding “zero enrichment” is not a technical detail but a deal-killer. We also explain how Lebanon and Hezbollah change the endgame, why escalations in southern Lebanon can function as sabotage, and how the Strait of Hormuz becomes real leverage that reshapes every calculation.

We also react to Trump’s messaging, including his push to fold Iran into the Abraham Accords, what those normalization deals have meant in practice, and how they can drive an arms race while adding impossible complexity to already fragile diplomacy. Along the way, we play and respond to clips featuring Cory Booker, plus a debate moment where Mearsheimer and Walt confront Pompeo and Nuland’s talking points, and we close with a quick look at Thomas Massie signaling a possible national run.

Obsession (2025) a review of sorts, or maybe just my thoughts…

Obsession (2025) a review of sorts, or maybe just my thoughts…

It was refreshing to walk into a full cinema for a film that was not attached to a video game or some 20th century property suffering through needless cannibalism. Alas, Blumhouse has managed to produce another hit with a small budget, slim cast of relative unknowns and a plot that revolved around theme and characters. I did not enjoy this movie, but that does not mean I do not recommend it.

Obsession, is being touted as a horror. I think it could pass for this, but it fits more into the psychological thriller category with extremes of gore. It is a slow burn, with needless exposition. For example, we will see things happen and then the next five minutes revolves around the characters explaining what had occurred. While this is not a verse, chorus, structure that modern double screening cinema is required to do for present audiences, ie those distracted by scrolling or who have the film on in the background while they game, cook or re-arrange their jars of stewed peaches. I feel in the case of Obsession, the writer wanted to reiterate elements that were occurring.

Spoilers ahead.

This movie is in some ways a layered litmus test. In the era of mental health to the point of identity obsession. This film reveals a strange disconnect for many who really don’t understand the deeper terrors for those enduring true trauma or who are prisoners against their will.

I suppose we need to address the plot and characters. Swear words follow.

Bear, is the protagonist. He is an insufferable cunt. Every sentence he speaks sounds like fingers drawing down a chalkboard and what words he spews tend to revolve around his own self interests. His cat dies early in the film, he is living in his grandmothers home who had also recently passed. Somehow, the feline managed to find her medication and in true Chekhov gun fashion, the pills killed the cat. And rest assured, there will be a real Chekhov gun to follow. Bear is upset that the cat is dead. Clearly he has emotions. We see him cry. So, the writers want us to know that he is not without emotions.

Bear also likes a girl, a member of his friend group, Nikki. She and two of his other friends went to school together and now work in a music shop. Ian and Sarah are the other two friends. The shop is owned by Sarah’s dad, who it seems generously hires her three friends. We know Bear likes Nikki because in the opening of the film, he is rehearsing what he will say to her while a waitress pretends to be her and Ian watches on. It’s sort of a lazy scene but gives us an idea of how, Bear feels about Nikki.

Bear is awkward and clumsy to the point of obnoxiousness. Nikki considers him as a sibling, perhaps her slightly dimwitted friend who she is protective over. Nothing about his character development suggests any charm, he is barely attentive and fixates on his wants, and while others talk to him, he seems to struggle with hearing them. But, he is infatuated with Nikki. And for some, this apparently is…sweet? Romantic?

Nikki we are shown is compassionate, this is framed with her empathy for a homeless person. She has ambition, she wants to be a writer and is filled with hopes and desires. She tells Bear about her intentions to leave their town and find something more, love, or passion that may help her with the book she is working on. She is trapped and wants to be free. Instead of being happy and supportive of his friend. Bear is frightened. This is a ticking clock for our narcissistic person, he wants her to stay and he now has a limited time frame to tell her his feelings.

During a conversation on the phone, Nikki mentions that she has lost her crystal necklace. Bear soon finds himself in an alternative lifestyle shop, the type to sell crystals and other metaphysical paraphernalia. In Blumhouse style, there is humour and with some Millennial writing imbued to remind us not to take things too seriously, and to even laugh at times, we have such dialogue. Bear finds a wishing willow, he blathers and molests the shop clerk with the sounds that come from his mouth. Later on, he drives Nikki home from work and the insufferable protagonist ends up meandering and mumbling, sputtering and losing and missing and fucking up for several minutes with Nikki. So, once she leaves him to stew inside of his car, he breaks the wishing willow and casts his evil, “I wish Nikki Freeman loved me more than anyone in the entire world.”

Freeman. Nice work with that one writers.

Nikki is then standing on the porch, and this is where the independent, intelligent human being that she was, turns into a doll for audiences to squirm and point at her as though she is a freak. To see her actions, her presence, her expressions and so on as creepy, or freaky as she was apparently called in school. Freaky Nikki. A name she mentions not liking.

Nikki who was once a creative and vibrant human being, filled with energy and ambition. Hopes and dreams. Becomes a possession to Bear. His wish traps her and tortures her spirit and mind. She must love him. She has no choice and while the film’s title and trailer frames it that Bear is somehow a victim to her obsession, she being a villain or monster and he simple the innocent from his own tragic misstep. Perhaps, we should view it in the reverse.

It was his obsession with her. His infatuation and entitlement which deranged into a whimsical wish that now transformed her from a human being, into his kept doll. Over the days of their ‘relationship’, she barely leaves his side. We can see that it pains her when she is not with him. In one scene, when he leaves the house for most of the day for work, she remains standing with a frozen smile. Soiling herself, urinating and vomiting as she remains locked in place, waiting for his return.

I told you not to be weird,” our uncaring cunt says. Her pain and indignity barely registering to his embarrassed need. She apologises and promises to clean up the mess, as she showers. What pride she once had, washes down the drain. While our selfish ‘hero’ stands outside moaning some dialogue to her.

During the night, as she sleeps when the real Nikki whispers and struggles, we have the East Asian depiction of ghost imagery, a slender dark figure of a girl standing, featureless and watching. It’s a trope in the West now, since The Ring. Nikki performs this for the audience. Because, to be creepy and weird is now horror. She stands there to watch him sleep, and moves awkwardly. Again, for the audience so we have those boxes ticked. But, alas, why would she be doing this, if not in turmoil and twisted inside a misery.

In another night time scene, Bear rapes his victim as she lays with a frozen smile, a tear on her cheek. For the rapist sympathisers in the audience, it’s his privilege to take her body while her mind remains imprisoned. He thrusts and takes his possession, once he has finished, thankfully for her, a minute at most, she says what needs to be said to placate her kidnapper. In earlier scenes we have moments where the real Nikki breaks free, screaming, scared. Again, token jump scares, or, a revelation as to who the actual monster in this film is.

Other weird things occur, moments of discomfort. Including while at a party, Nikki reciting prose expressing her peril. The drunk, stoned and illiterate friends roll their eyes or watch aghast. Bear, watches on, he is embarrassed. Then, as drama arises she smashes her face with a glass bottle cutting herself severely. Bear lays back watching. Poor me, the piece of shit thinks while the woman imprisoned by his wish self harms, and mutilates herself. For some reason he argues with someone at the hospital and takes her home. Never tending to her wounds. The piece of shit has shown he has the ability to use search engines, and seek information as to how one may apply first aid. Instead, she remains in pain and with cuts on her face. Poor Bear, doesn’t care. Her disfigurement encapsulates the ruination of her being.

Other things occur which continues to reveal how vile Bear is as a human being. And, the anguish of Nikki. At one point while she is asleep, she is talking to him as her true self, pleading with him. She wants it to end. Bear makes it about him and leaves his victim to suffer. No doubt after he had raped her again.

Sarah, the other friend likes Bear. No idea why. She shares a scene with him where she is hopeful that she will get accepted into university. Another character unlike Bear who has ambition. While his victim is at home in bed, he is sharing in an intimacy with Sarah and she reveals her feelings for him and he has a realisation that attraction and even love is something that should be consensual.

Then Nikki strikes, we need that jump scare, though was it? She bashes Sarah’s head into the steering wheel. Comically graphic, and putrid as a character we had come to know, is reduced to a pulped corpse. Nikki tells Bear he has to help her hide the body, he does so. Then, he goes to his friend Ian’s house and explains what we have seen. To return back home to Nikki. Who has stripped Sarah naked, is wearing her clothes and has inked her skin and pierced herself so that she may look like the corpse in the hopes of being like Sarah was, and thus more attractive for Bear. Unfortunately, Sarah is laid bare her corpse naked, exposed and a further indignity.

A pistol that was mentioned earlier in the film, finds itself now in Nikki’s possession who shoots Ian the moment he walks through the door. Bear does what he should have done even before he made the wish and attempts to shoot himself. Again, he lacks any courage. So, he swallows the pills that killed his cat. Thankfully he dies. Hopefully painfully. Nikki, is now free of his curse.

What she ‘wakes’ to is sudden horror. Pain, her friends are dead and there is no way any investigators will believe her story. She is now likely to be imprisoned as a murderer or so traumatised that she becomes a prisoner of her experiences and memory. The end.

I did not want to review the movie and write out everything that happened, only to highlight some points. There were moments where people laughed at scenes when Nikki was doing something ‘weird’, I would like to put this down to that awkward release that occurs at time. Then, again, I feel some may see this as a movie where Bear is the victim. The obsession with unrequited love fills music and fiction to the point of accepted entitlement. Stalking and obsessive behaviour can be framed as romantic, depending on the perspective. If the love is not returned, such behaviour is eerie and unwelcome.

The tragedy of the movie, is not in the wisher getting what he wanted, and it turning out to be more complicated and terrible than he had hoped. It’s in the coercion of another, who is not viewed as a human being with self agency but simply as a thing to own and have. In 365 Days, our abuser kidnaps the woman he is infatuated with. Telling her that she has a year to fall in love with him. It only takes a few days because he is ‘hot’ but above all else rich. Tall dark, handsome, badboy (he is a child trafficker and drug dealer, but he owns a million dollar plus yacht, so hot.) The woman he kidnaps falls in love with him, naturally. She is an insert for the intended audience.

His wealth and lifestyle seduces her. Even if he kidnaps her and takes away her agency to begin with. This is nothing like that. Nikki has no choice. The very actions and motions her character makes during the movie are moments of degradation and the destruction of the human spirit. Because it’s a low budget horror movie, made to entertain and even give the audience some giggles, it’s also a mirror to how people view others. How they really think about trauma and abuse. We live in an age where mental health is a monetised commodity and used as a grandiose act of self interest, but sincerity tends to be lacking when it’s a very real thing. Because many victims hide in plain sight and, sometimes they may do things that appear ‘creepy’ or ‘weird’.

Nikki is the victim. Bear, is the monster. I recommend this movie in the same way that I do, The Housemaid, which may be advertised as a sexy film because, again our abuser is rich and hot. It shows a type of abuse and control that is often inflicted in plain sight. Power, wealth and the institutional ‘importance’ of the abuser tends to allow for it to continue on. While that is a film which is more than it at first seems, it is both entertaining, a little convenient at points, especially at the end but should leave one with lingering thoughts.

Obsession, was for me initially boring, then twisted into a layered character story concealed in schlock horror. I am glad I saw it. I felt a disdain and desire to rip Bear’s throat from his skull and empathy for Nikki. While in the latest Guy Ritchie action, I forget it’s name now. I felt nothing. In the Minecraft film, all I felt was my seat moving from the kicking feet of excited males-boys at every reference to a video game I have never played. I felt something from this movie and that is what cinema should be about, it’s not meant to be just entertainment or bubble gum chewing. It should invite us to think or experience discomfort. Go see it, or don’t. I hope movies like this give the audience an obsession for story telling again.

The Kyle Anzalone Show: Trump Has Lost in Iran, What Will He Do Next?

Trump says he wants “few people killed,” then talks like bombing Iran is a weekly calendar event. That contradiction is where we start, because the public narrative around the Iran war keeps snapping from all-out threats to last-minute “negotiations” as deadlines magically extend. I walk through why that cycle looks less like strategy and more like a president boxed in by bad options, public messaging, and allies with their own priorities.

From there, we get into the part most outlets blur: the difference between political victory laps and what US intelligence and reporting suggest on the ground. If Iran can rebuild its drone program faster than expected and still holds a large share of missile and launcher capacity, then “we crippled them” becomes a dangerous story to believe. We also talk about what Iran likely learned from recent strikes and why modern drone warfare and air defense evolve at a pace that makes simple claims obsolete.

Then we widen the lens to the power side of the equation: can Trump actually control Netanyahu, or is Washington being pulled by Israeli pressure through Congress? I connect that to a Washington Post-reported defense strategy that burns through American interceptor stockpiles, and to the Thomas Massie primary loss, where massive spending and media targeting mattered more than most people want to admit.

If you want clear Iran war analysis, Strait of Hormuz leverage, uranium enrichment stakes, and the US politics that shape it all, hit play. Subscribe, share the show, and leave a review, what’s the one detail you think the mainstream story keeps avoiding?

Podcasts

scotthortonshow logosq

coi banner sq2@0.5x

liberty weekly thumbnail

Don't Tread on Anyone Logo

313x0w (1)

313x0w (1)

313x0w (1)

Pin It on Pinterest