Speaker 1: Welcome to today's podcast sponsored by Hillsdale College, All Things
Speaker 1: Hillsdale Hillsdale dot ed or I encourage you to take
Speaker 1: advantage of the many free online courses there, and of
Speaker 1: course I'll listen to the Hillsdale dialogues, all of them
Speaker 1: at Hugh for Hillsdale dot com or just Google, Apple
Speaker 1: iTunes and Hillsdale Morning Glory and eaton Grace America. Welcome
Speaker 1: to the Big Weekend Pod. A lot to talk about
Speaker 1: because there's a lot of news about the war that's
Speaker 1: not a war. It's a ceasefire that may have an
Speaker 1: end in sight. It certainly the guns have fallen silent
Speaker 1: and the bombs of stop dropping in Lebanon. It appears
Speaker 1: as though this trade of horn news is open boided
Speaker 1: oil drop like a rock, but not to where it
Speaker 1: was pre war. Looks like a big win for Donald Trump.
Speaker 1: But everybody sees things differently depending on what they read
Speaker 1: and who they listen to. If you stay tuned, you'll
Speaker 1: hear from John Ellis of News Item, Eli Lake from
Speaker 1: Breaking History. Matt Continetti is back, of course from the
Speaker 1: Wall Street Journal, where he writes his column for The
Speaker 1: Free Expressions Vertical, and from the American enterprise and student
Speaker 1: of course, Ben Dominic, editor of the op ed section
Speaker 1: over at the Daily Wire, Big Ben Show Podcast or Extraordinary.
Speaker 1: We all have our takes on the big news that
Speaker 1: came out Friday and whether or not we quite believe
Speaker 1: it or what to make of it, but we'll bring
Speaker 1: in all sorts. I think it's an enormous win. The
Speaker 1: world is much better off than it was on February
Speaker 1: twenty eighth, extraordinarily so. But that doesn't mean the challenge
Speaker 1: presented by the Islamic Republican of Iran is over. In
Speaker 1: the Iranian people are certainly not free. There's lots more
Speaker 1: work to be done because there's still crazy What Secretary
Speaker 1: would be have said, these people are lunatics, So we
Speaker 1: can't lose sight of that these people are lunatics. And
Speaker 1: I think you'll hear that a lot coming up on
Speaker 1: the Big Weekend Pod. Thank you for listening, Worried even
Speaker 1: Grace America. Good Friday to you. And since I promise
Speaker 1: you clarity, I begin by saying we have no clarity
Speaker 1: on what's going on inside the trade of horror moves,
Speaker 1: but we do have a lot of posts from President Trump,
Speaker 1: a lot of news to get through today. But I
Speaker 1: begin as I do most fridays, with John Ellis, founder
Speaker 1: and editor in chief of News Items. John, your ears
Speaker 1: might have been burning today. I was with a high
Speaker 1: tech exec. I said, you know, five years ago I
Speaker 1: got twenty subscriptions. Now I get news items in two subscriptions.
Speaker 1: And that's basically what's happening everywhere with everything. Do you
Speaker 1: think that the retirement of read Hastings today or the
Speaker 1: announcement of the Vitalian June, marks the end of one
Speaker 1: tech era and sort of the opening of another. I
Speaker 1: think so.
Speaker 2: I first met Read in New York City, and I
Speaker 2: think it was two thousand and one, and he was
Speaker 2: just starting up Netflix and was doing a press tour.
Speaker 2: I was a columnist for Fast Company at the time,
Speaker 2: and I had dinner with them two years I wrote
Speaker 2: a very flattering column about him, and I had dinner
Speaker 2: with him two years later. And he had a problem,
Speaker 2: which was people had the red envelopes and they would
Speaker 2: send them back. If they lived in San Francisco, they'd
Speaker 2: send them back and they'd get them by Friday day
Speaker 2: before the next weekend. But if they lived in Amarillo, Texas,
Speaker 2: they sent him back on Monday. They wouldn't get him
Speaker 2: for like eight or nine days. So what to do.
Speaker 2: He had a choice to make. Should he build out
Speaker 2: more distribution channels or distribution sites or should he just
Speaker 2: wait for the whole thing to go digital? And he
Speaker 2: asked me what I thought, and I said, I really
Speaker 2: don't know, and he said, well, I think I have
Speaker 2: to go with my customers. And so they built out
Speaker 2: distribution centers, knowing that it would all be done on
Speaker 2: the internet, you know, in five or seven years, to
Speaker 2: make their customers happy. And that kind of executive leadership
Speaker 2: I don't think is prevalent today.
Speaker 1: I guess I know that he is an enormous Democratic donor.
Speaker 1: I was already kind of grateful for him for helping
Speaker 1: start the nudge of Joe Biden off of the good
Speaker 1: Ship White House back in twenty twenty three thank you
Speaker 1: or twenty twenty four one of the first and nudge
Speaker 1: President Biden off the ticket. But I really appreciated the
Speaker 1: red envelopes when I had small children. That was like,
Speaker 1: rather than go to Blockbuster to get the red envelope.
Speaker 1: That he was a genius and I'm glad he went
Speaker 1: with the customers. May he enjoy his retirement. Interesting, Netflix
Speaker 1: is down ten percent today when the market is about
Speaker 1: to close up three percent for the third straight week
Speaker 1: because of the news that the President's been posting on that,
Speaker 1: but hard not to note a real entrepreneur retiring at
Speaker 1: sixty five. Good on him. He'll go make this shit
Speaker 1: for Democrats. Let's talk about the dark side of the future, John,
Speaker 1: because I read news items this morning, I sent you
Speaker 1: a note saying we got to talk about Mythos. This
Speaker 1: is creepy, scary. Tell people about it.
Speaker 2: Well, it's the latest model of the AI model, brought
Speaker 2: forth by Anthropic, which is one of the three or
Speaker 2: four major AI companies, And basically what they found is
Speaker 2: that this new model called Mythos or Mythos is able
Speaker 2: to autonomously break into self computer software systems in government
Speaker 2: and infrastructure in businesses and financial institutions.
Speaker 1: In theory, it could disrupt the.
Speaker 2: Global financial system, the functioning of the US government, and
Speaker 2: it was dangerous enough that Anthropic decided not to release
Speaker 2: it to the public, which it had been planning to
Speaker 2: do in which has spent a lot of money developing
Speaker 2: the product, obviously, and instead engage the US government and
Speaker 2: leading technology and Financial services company to say, look, we
Speaker 2: have this, we have this unbelievably capable AI model that
Speaker 2: could destroy your business essentially or destroy your governance, and
Speaker 2: so we got to work together to make sure this
Speaker 2: doesn't happen. It's a major, major development, and the reason
Speaker 2: people are paying so much attention to it, I think,
Speaker 2: aside from being able to you know, rob a bank,
Speaker 2: is that it's a harbinger of what's to come in
Speaker 2: the world of AI, which is that it's, you know,
Speaker 2: the horse has left the barn and we don't know,
Speaker 2: you know, we don't know where it's going, and we're
Speaker 2: not sure that where it's going is where we want
Speaker 2: to be.
Speaker 1: Now. You also point out to me there is a
Speaker 1: split in people who watch AI on the US side,
Speaker 1: the David Sachs led White House Yah Yago Go AI
Speaker 1: team and then the critics of Brave New World. It's
Speaker 1: going to destroy us all and eat humanity. I'm actually
Speaker 1: with Sacks on this. I don't think we can allow
Speaker 1: the People's Republic of China to get a lead here,
Speaker 1: even though they're going to develop their own meathos or
Speaker 1: those aren't they Yes, they will.
Speaker 2: The you know, the argument that Sacks and others make
Speaker 2: is the answer to everything is China. If we don't
Speaker 2: stay ahead, China will get ahead. They'll be able to
Speaker 2: crack into our financial system, governments, et cetera. So we
Speaker 2: have to press forward. Sorry, but we have to. There's
Speaker 2: no other choice. The opposite side of that is it's
Speaker 2: a major league losing political issue. People in you know,
Speaker 2: the electorate by really large numbers doesn't trust AI, doesn't
Speaker 2: trust the companies that are that are producing AI, and
Speaker 2: it doesn't trust the leadership of those companies. So it's
Speaker 2: a It's a tight spot for the administration because they
Speaker 2: want to do what David Sachs thinks they should do,
Speaker 2: but they fully understand it could cost them a lot
Speaker 2: politically in November and beyond.
Speaker 1: You know, I have been taking meetings with tech execs
Speaker 1: because they like to talk to broadcasters for a decade
Speaker 1: and people from Mark Zuckerberg and Peter Thiel to the
Speaker 1: new high tech people in DC and their their opposite.
Speaker 1: I'm always humbled by it because you know, it's so
Speaker 1: far removed from what you and I grew up on,
Speaker 1: but it's it's inevitability is something to which I'm resigned.
Speaker 1: Are you you.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I'm actually of the view that we have to
Speaker 2: strike a grand bargain with China. They're going to get there,
Speaker 2: We're going to get there. It doesn't really matter who
Speaker 2: gets there first. And I think the only way to
Speaker 2: put guardrails around this is to have the two superpowers
Speaker 2: enter into a pact that says this is what allowable,
Speaker 2: this is what's not allowable, and if you go with
Speaker 2: not allowable, you will incur the full wrath of China
Speaker 2: and the United States.
Speaker 1: Now that had not occurred to me. Maybe they'll talk
Speaker 1: about that in Beijing in May. John, Let's go to
Speaker 1: the fourteen prominent people US and global that got their
Speaker 1: favorability ratings this week. Not surprisingly, Poblo the fourteenth is
Speaker 1: the most popular person. Is this among Americans? This is Americans? Right, Americans? Yes? Yeah,
Speaker 1: so Leo gets the best and what I'm not surprised
Speaker 1: that Zelenski gets a plus eighteen. I am a little
Speaker 1: bit surprised that Emmanuel McCrone and AOC are at fifty
Speaker 1: to fifty. I didn't think anyone in politics could be
Speaker 1: at fifty to fifty. I thought they all got tarnished.
Speaker 1: Are you surprised by those numbers. Bernie's different. Bernie's like
Speaker 1: your crazy uncle that everybody loves and he can't hurt anyone,
Speaker 1: But AOC she can hurt people.
Speaker 2: I think there's I think the poll was taken in
Speaker 2: August of last year. Pope Leo had just been installed,
Speaker 2: if you will, and you know, his numbers were through
Speaker 2: the charts at the AOC was surprising to me. But
Speaker 2: I think that there is in the context also of
Speaker 2: AI overlords. I think there's a resurgence on the left
Speaker 2: and AOC is sort of I don't think people are
Speaker 2: so much favorable of her as they are favorable of
Speaker 2: the idea of taking on the new overlords. It's a
Speaker 2: huge political issue of merging and it popped up in
Speaker 2: that poll. Bernie, you know, had a net positive of
Speaker 2: plus eleven. He was the highest rated public figure in US.
Speaker 1: My theory on that, after I read your brief, is
Speaker 1: that he has been who he is for a long time.
Speaker 1: He's authentic. He might be authentically wrong and he is
Speaker 1: about matters economic, but he's who he is and he's
Speaker 1: always been who he is. You think that figures into it,
Speaker 1: Just be yourself. Oh, I think absolutely.
Speaker 2: I think it's absolutely Bernie has, you know, staked his ground.
Speaker 2: He hasn't moved. He doesn't change with the winds. He
Speaker 2: fighting the same battles he fought ten years ago, and
Speaker 2: he's completely transparent about it. He said, you're a socialist,
Speaker 2: and he says, yes, I am. So that's a whole
Speaker 2: lot better than most.
Speaker 1: So I want to conclude by asking you for your
Speaker 1: We don't know what this deal is that the President
Speaker 1: is apparently negotiated with whoever is running the Islamic Republic
Speaker 1: negotiation team. Are you what's your spidey sentence on this.
Speaker 1: I'm going to talk with Eli Lake. I'm sure his
Speaker 1: will be negative. Matt Continenties will be balanced. Ben Dominic
Speaker 1: shall be a little bit worse. What's John Ellen's thing.
Speaker 2: I think that there will likely be a deal announced
Speaker 2: in the next two or three days. It's unclear to
Speaker 2: me whether you know the Iranians will honor the deal,
Speaker 2: but I think that both sides have had enough. I
Speaker 2: think President Trump doesn't want the war to end. I
Speaker 2: think the Iranians want to stop getting bombed, and so
Speaker 2: clever diplomacy should make it possible for them to come
Speaker 2: out in a press conference and say we've arrived at
Speaker 2: a deal. And whether that means, you know, long term
Speaker 2: peace or whatever, we don't know. But I think they
Speaker 2: will be able to say at the end of the
Speaker 2: weekend that a quote deal end quote has been reached.
Speaker 1: It will be so interesting to get to the fine
Speaker 1: print of that, and we'll be talking about it next week.
Speaker 1: In the meantime, I'll be reading about it in news
Speaker 1: Items every morning. If you're not a subscriber, I recommend
Speaker 1: it to you. John Ellis always good to talk. You
Speaker 1: follow John on at chat Ellis Items. You can go
Speaker 1: to newsdash Items dot com if you want to find
Speaker 1: out what I'm talking about there, And I'm coming right
Speaker 1: back with Eli Lake for a take on the deal.
Speaker 1: Don't go anywhere. Welcome back in America. I'm Jude Hewitt.
Speaker 1: I know there's been a lot of announcements today from
Speaker 1: the President and from the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps spokespeople,
Speaker 1: and I don't know what to make of it. So
Speaker 1: luckily Eli Lake is here to tell us whether we
Speaker 1: like or don't like the deal that may not be
Speaker 1: a deal. What do you think, Eli, You're the first
Speaker 1: hot take I get.
Speaker 3: I'm still waiting for details, but I would say overall,
Speaker 3: I'm pretty satisfied with this. The strait is opened, at
Speaker 3: least that's what the Iranian FIGN minister has said. Trump
Speaker 3: says he's got a deal for the highly the the
Speaker 3: sixty percent enriched uranium that we will go and get it.
Speaker 3: I'm I don't like that the Iranians have interpreted the
Speaker 3: ceasefire in Lebanon to be in a seceding to their demands.
Speaker 3: But then again, Trump also said he wasn't going to
Speaker 3: pay twenty billion or whatever for the uranium. So I
Speaker 3: don't know what what what kind of sanctions really there is,
Speaker 3: but you know, we have to take a step back.
Speaker 3: The United States destroyed their you know what's the most
Speaker 3: conservative vest may maybe about half of their missile launchers
Speaker 3: and and and ballistic missile ballistic missile stocks. It destroyed
Speaker 3: their defense industry that produces those missiles. Most of the
Speaker 3: nuclear program is now demolished. According to Benjamin and Yahu
Speaker 3: this week, what he said was that there are no
Speaker 3: active enrichment facilities right now in the country. The Iranians
Speaker 3: have lost their navy and their air force and their
Speaker 3: one piece of leverage. I think Trump turned the tables
Speaker 3: on in a kind of jiu jitsu move and blockaded
Speaker 3: the blockade, forcing the Iranians to get serious. And I
Speaker 3: think that's one of the main things that pressure them.
Speaker 3: They are more diplomatically isolated than they were at the
Speaker 3: beginning of the war, and you know their proxy network
Speaker 3: at this point. Even if the war, even if the
Speaker 3: ceasefire is an end to this particular round between Israel
Speaker 3: and Hesba, loss suffered a lot of losses, particularly their
Speaker 3: senior commanders in the last major bombing run that the
Speaker 3: Israelis did. So I think overall, this looks like a win.
Speaker 3: And by the way, you he did it with no
Speaker 3: troops on no boots on the ground.
Speaker 1: It it looked like an enormous win. But I'm cautious
Speaker 1: because the and It is a salesperson and he will
Speaker 1: over promise an underdeliver politically to people. And I don't
Speaker 1: think he would dare do that with this, given his
Speaker 1: record on the JCPOA. You think that might caution him.
Speaker 3: Can I say something on the JCPOA thing, Yeah, it's
Speaker 3: apples and oranges. I see this from all the former
Speaker 3: Obama people like, oh, we could have had this, we
Speaker 3: did have this.
Speaker 1: I'm like, no, you didn't.
Speaker 3: The program that the JCPUA legalized you is now no more,
Speaker 3: is now in ruins. So we're talking about very different
Speaker 3: things in some ways. I mean, of course, I don't
Speaker 3: want to recognize Iran's so called right to enrichment, which
Speaker 3: doesn't really exist in any way in the NPT the
Speaker 3: Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty, but like leaving that aside, like you, great,
Speaker 3: you have a right to enrich and you don't have
Speaker 3: a faciity you don't. It's going to take an enormous
Speaker 3: amount of rebuilding to do it. And as you pointed
Speaker 3: out on earlier shows this week, which have been excellent,
Speaker 3: you know, the Central Bank of Iran is saying it's
Speaker 3: going to take twelve years to rebuild their economy. They're
Speaker 3: expecting a kind of hyper inflation. Their real is still
Speaker 3: worth nothing. They still they're having trouble paying their salaries
Speaker 3: of their security forces, let alone the rest of their government.
Speaker 3: I mean, there's so many hurdles ahead that to compare
Speaker 3: it to the JCPUA is just it's two different galaxies.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I go back in fifteen months and I say
Speaker 1: to people, are you glad that we have had the
Speaker 1: last fifteen months, as the world say, for undeniably so,
Speaker 1: and there's just a jig break though. I want to
Speaker 1: play for your secretary Rubio. I played this for everyone
Speaker 1: this week. There's Marco Rubio on the IRGC.
Speaker 4: These people are lunatics, they are insane, They are religious
Speaker 4: zelots who can never be allowed to possess a nuclear
Speaker 4: weapon because they have an apocalyptic vision of the future,
Speaker 4: and all their neighbors know that, by the way, which.
Speaker 1: I play that again and again, because to me, it's
Speaker 1: the most important takeaway that is not physical. It's it's knowledge,
Speaker 1: it's it's communicating with the American people. You've got to
Speaker 1: be realistic about who these people are. They're fanatics. Do
Speaker 1: you think the country has that message now?
Speaker 3: I hope they do. I think that it's starting to
Speaker 3: get through. And there was a really simple way to
Speaker 3: talk about this. You really to look at it like
Speaker 3: Midnight Hammer and Epic Fury, and it's like one war
Speaker 3: you know between you know, sort of two wars, but
Speaker 3: it's really one war. And we you know, between the
Speaker 3: two wars and what was done the press, you know,
Speaker 3: the United States and Israel have managed to make sure
Speaker 3: that Iran will not have a nuclear weapon for at
Speaker 3: the very least several years, and they won't have the
Speaker 3: ability to protect a weapons project from a huge, sort
Speaker 3: of insurmountable style.
Speaker 1: Of ballistic missiles.
Speaker 3: The other thing that we have to worth watching here
Speaker 3: is that, yes, the Chinese and the Russians helped a
Speaker 3: little bit, but there was a lot more they could
Speaker 3: have done. So where does Iron now stand with the
Speaker 3: you know, axes of dirtbags.
Speaker 1: Yeah, we have no idea. That's another They could be
Speaker 1: so shatteredy live Hamaj shattered. Im Segal was writing about
Speaker 1: this today. We don't know how badly shattered there Hezblah
Speaker 1: has been shattered. So that's baby Bear, Mama Bear, and
Speaker 1: now big Bearry Iran. It's just shattered. But we don't
Speaker 1: know how shattered it is, and I don't know that
Speaker 1: we'll ever know, will we.
Speaker 3: Well one indicate one explanation as to why the Iranians
Speaker 3: were willing to open the strait, which was their last
Speaker 3: trump card, is because they had a couple of days
Speaker 3: to kind of look around and assess the damages. The
Speaker 3: other one is that the Chinese made it very clear
Speaker 3: you are under no circumstances allowed to mind the straits,
Speaker 3: that if you do, we will cut you off and
Speaker 3: that's the end for them. So I think there is
Speaker 3: a difference between mining the straits, which would shut the
Speaker 3: straight up rooms down for months, you know, on end,
Speaker 3: versus the harassment of drones and cruise missiles and fast boats.
Speaker 3: I'm not saying that other, but the other threat.
Speaker 1: Is not as serious the second one is.
Speaker 3: So at this point, you know, I just think the
Speaker 3: Iranians are in such a difficult position. My hope is
Speaker 3: is that we really turn the screws and we get
Speaker 3: as much as we can. I wrote a column earlier
Speaker 3: this week saying that one of our one of our
Speaker 3: asks and demands of the Iranians should be release your
Speaker 3: political prisoners, turn on the internet and stop the executions.
Speaker 1: That would be I think a great signal to the
Speaker 1: Iranian people and let us in to pick Axe Mountain.
Speaker 1: I know Mark Dubowitz, I don't know him, but I
Speaker 1: know he's going to post at some point, what about
Speaker 1: pick Axe Mountain? What do you think about pick Axe Mountain?
Speaker 3: I think that, uh, my understanding is that it's it's
Speaker 3: not online, and I think that it I don't know
Speaker 3: why we didn't hit it in the run but my
Speaker 3: assumption is is that because even our best bunker busters
Speaker 3: couldn't get to it. So maybe that's but you know, again,
Speaker 3: they've lost so much of their program at this point,
Speaker 3: and I think that we will have eyes on that
Speaker 3: area that it's gonna be very difficult to restart it.
Speaker 3: But yes, Pickack Mounts, Pickaxe Mountain is a real problem,
Speaker 3: and my hope is is that you know, we will
Speaker 3: we will have some way to deal with it. But oh,
Speaker 3: you know, I'm going to look for you know, whatever
Speaker 3: happens is better than the JCP away.
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, of course. But I'm going to look for
Speaker 1: your detailed assessment in the Free Press as soon as possible.
Speaker 1: I don't know if you work weekends or Breaking History
Speaker 1: can be out. Oh I've been working the weekends. Oh good.
Speaker 1: I am looking forward to your assessment in the Free
Speaker 1: Press tomorrow. Because one of the people I read along
Speaker 1: with the Foundation for the Defense of Democracy and Aaron
Speaker 1: McClain is Eli Lake. Follow him on Exit, Eli Lake,
Speaker 1: read him in the Free Press, Listen to his podcast
Speaker 1: Breaking History, and come right back to today if you hear
Speaker 1: a show. Welcome back America. I'm Hugh Hewett, Matt Continetti
Speaker 1: is with the Wall Street Journal with the American Enterprise Institute,
Speaker 1: and he's back on the commentary podcast at least weekly,
Speaker 1: which I agree to. That made me very happy. Matt
Speaker 1: dare you back talking at length with your fellow commentator
Speaker 1: commentary people, And I hope you keep doing that. I mean,
Speaker 1: I want to get to the serious stuff, but really,
Speaker 1: no turning you around. On the arch that the President
Speaker 1: is proposing for the Arlington side of the Memorial Bridge.
Speaker 5: Well, Hugh, I don't oppose the arch in principle. I
Speaker 5: just think that it should be scaled down just a
Speaker 5: little bit. In my view, I'm not as grandiose maybe
Speaker 5: as others. I think the proper size for the arch
Speaker 5: would be smaller than the two hundred and fifty feet
Speaker 5: proposed by the President, which would make this Memorial Arch
Speaker 5: the largest, the largest in the world, and almost as
Speaker 5: tall as a Capital Dome. I'm one of those guys.
Speaker 5: The Capital is my favorite building in America, and I
Speaker 5: don't think anything should approach the Capitol Dome and height
Speaker 5: in Washington, d C.
Speaker 1: Well, my only objection to the idea is and I
Speaker 1: really have no objection because I'm too old to really
Speaker 1: care about what the city looks like for the next
Speaker 1: fifty years. Is that the traffic going on in Memorial
Speaker 1: Bridge is already terrible. And if they build that dog
Speaker 1: on thing, I want them to do it after I've retired.
Speaker 1: Now let's get to the serious stuff. You wrote a
Speaker 1: Wall Street Journal column nine hours ago on the Trump doctrine.
Speaker 1: I was going to spend the whole time talking with
Speaker 1: you about it. However, we now have a deal. Is
Speaker 1: the deal that is emerging via the President's posts and
Speaker 1: buzz and the Iranian replies and Israeli media, is that
Speaker 1: part of the Trump doctrine? Is it a logical extension?
Speaker 5: Well, I think we have to wait to see what
Speaker 5: the deal actually is. To listen to what President Trump
Speaker 5: is posting, I think the signs are very good that
Speaker 5: we would obtain the remaining enriched uranium that's buried underground
Speaker 5: after Operation Midnight Hammer last year, and that the Strait
Speaker 5: of Hormus would be open to all traffic. Those two
Speaker 5: points would be real wins for the President, and I
Speaker 5: expect that they will come to some agreement in the
Speaker 5: coming days. I still look for other elements in a deal.
Speaker 5: There need to be radical restrictions on the Iranian missile
Speaker 5: program so that they're unable to replenish the stocks of
Speaker 5: missiles that we destroyed during Operation Epic Fury. I'd also
Speaker 5: want to see them have limitations on support for terrorist proxies.
Speaker 5: And of course, as Eli Lake was saying in the
Speaker 5: previous segment, there are things that we should be demanding
Speaker 5: that would help the Iranian people, including reopening the Internet
Speaker 5: in Iran, the information straight, if you will. So, I
Speaker 5: think what we're experiencing right now is a tremendous amount
Speaker 5: of leverage that this president has over these negotiations. I
Speaker 5: think that the blockade was a essential tactic in order
Speaker 5: to force the Iranians' hands, and I think the Iranian leadership,
Speaker 5: what is left of it, has been beginning to discover
Speaker 5: just how much damage Operation Epic Fury and Operation Roaring
Speaker 5: Lion wrought on their country and how they are in
Speaker 5: an economic tailspin that is likely to grow only worse
Speaker 5: if they don't concede.
Speaker 1: So, Matt, here's the problem in evaluating the deal. If
Speaker 1: you're somewhat of my generation, We've never beaten the Iranians,
Speaker 1: all right, So I got out of college in seventy eight.
Speaker 1: They took our hostages in seventy nine, and they released
Speaker 1: them when Reagan was elected president. That wasn't really a win.
Speaker 1: They were afraid, they let them out, and we were
Speaker 1: embarrassed for four hundred and forty four days. I don't
Speaker 1: think we've ever beaten them, so I'm kind of reluctant
Speaker 1: to say we've won. Do you think that it's going
Speaker 1: to be a general apprehension among the commentariat.
Speaker 5: Well, in the anti Trump commentariat, of course, we've been
Speaker 5: losing since the very beginning of Operation Epic Fury. I
Speaker 5: think more generally, yes, there will be apprehensions about dealing
Speaker 5: with the Iranians. As Senator Cotton likes to say, the
Speaker 5: Iranians regime has never won a war, but it's also
Speaker 5: never lost a negotiation, and so you have to be
Speaker 5: very tough in these negotiations, and you need to demand
Speaker 5: results before any relaxation of pressure occurs. And that's what
Speaker 5: I'm really looking for. How real are these Iranian promises
Speaker 5: and will they be verified before we begin to think
Speaker 5: of relaxing, relaxing the blockade, releasing frozen funds, or much
Speaker 5: less drop some of the sanctions that have been imposed
Speaker 5: in Iran. Because of their just atroc behavior over the
Speaker 5: decades in the region and in the world. You need
Speaker 5: results first, and you can't let the pressure up until
Speaker 5: we get them.
Speaker 1: If the blockade is still in place, I have to
Speaker 1: think the Iranians have or the irgc have just thrown
Speaker 1: in their hand because well, I'll talk to Matt about
Speaker 1: it during the break. Don't go anywhere, America. Stay tuned.
Speaker 1: I want to get his take on the blockade and
Speaker 1: it being placed. What does that mean? I have one take.
Speaker 1: We'll see what Matt Continenty thinks. Stay jammed. So I'm
Speaker 1: back with Matt Continenty of the Wall Street Journal in
Speaker 1: American Enterprise Institute. Now he's back on the commentary podcast
Speaker 1: once in a week. By the way, Matt, is that
Speaker 1: a given day any week, is there going to be
Speaker 1: Wednesdays or Thursdays. It will be.
Speaker 5: Thursdays, Hugh where I'll appear on the commentary podcast. I
Speaker 5: don't want to interfere with my appearances on the Hugh
Speaker 5: Hewitt Show my top priority.
Speaker 6: And then I'll do this.
Speaker 5: I also appear on I also app here on the
Speaker 5: Wall Street Journals podcast on Wednesdays.
Speaker 1: So you know you can have a whole week.
Speaker 5: Of CONTINENTI means you have to keep pressing different buttons
Speaker 5: and searching different podcasts online.
Speaker 1: Well, when we come back on the network, I'm going
Speaker 1: to have you explain why you recommended a sci fi
Speaker 1: novel this week, because I don't like sci fi. But
Speaker 1: here's my take on the blockade being left in place.
Speaker 1: The Iranians can have no leverage if the blockade is
Speaker 1: still in play. They're basically begging us, aren't they. If
Speaker 1: the blockade still there, they have to give us what
Speaker 1: the President says. Otherwise they're going to just run out
Speaker 1: of money completely. They got nothing.
Speaker 5: That's why I think Trump used the right policy here.
Speaker 5: He trumped the Iranian closure of the Strait of Hermuz
Speaker 5: by saying, look, if you're not letting the commercial chips out,
Speaker 5: we're not going to let any of your ships in
Speaker 5: or out. And this is a stranglehold on the IRGC,
Speaker 5: the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, and it's going to deprive
Speaker 5: the Range economy of huge amounts of funds. And remember,
Speaker 5: because that economy is so controlled by the government, you're
Speaker 5: really just depriving the terrorists of funds. And so what
Speaker 5: makes Operation Epic Fury interesting here is unlike Operation Absolute
Speaker 5: Resolve of Venezuela, where the blockade preceded the change in leadership.
Speaker 5: Here we remove the leadership Iotola Kameni and forty top
Speaker 5: officials in the opening minutes of the operation and then
Speaker 5: sustained thirty eight days of intense and punishing bombardment of
Speaker 5: Iran before we impose the blockade. I think that makes
Speaker 5: the blockade hurt even more than the blockade of Venezuela
Speaker 5: hurt the Maduro regime. And it means why that we
Speaker 5: need to keep up the blockade until we see verifiable
Speaker 5: results in concessions on the ground from the Iranian.
Speaker 1: Government, hopefully in the form of that highly enriched uranium
Speaker 1: being turned over to not to a third party country,
Speaker 1: but the United States. I'll be right back with Matt
Speaker 1: on the other side of the break. Don't go anywhere,
Speaker 1: stay tuned to the Quit Show. Thank you for listening
Speaker 1: to highly concentrated Hugh, and don't forget one of our
Speaker 1: great sponsors is Consumer Seular one eight hundred forty four
Speaker 1: fifty four, eight hundred forty four fifty four. When you
Speaker 1: call them, and you should, because you should want to
Speaker 1: save money, make sure you use my promo code Q Hugh.
Speaker 1: You'll get your second month free if and when you
Speaker 1: switch to Consumer Cellular. Whatever plan you switch with, you'll
Speaker 1: get your second month for free. I want you to
Speaker 1: call and investigate because you're probably paying too much for
Speaker 1: whatever you're doing right now. With Consumer Cellular, well, you
Speaker 1: can go online Consumer Cellular dot com slash you. They've
Speaker 1: got great plans for every kind of person in every
Speaker 1: kind of data usage. However, they really target people who
Speaker 1: are fifty years and older. Listen to this. You get
Speaker 1: a single line with Consumer Cellular with unlimited talk, text
Speaker 1: and data for just thirty five dollars a month. That's
Speaker 1: a single line if you're fifty years and older for
Speaker 1: with unlimited talk, text and data for just thirty five
Speaker 1: dollars a month. When you call Consumer Cellular eight hundred
Speaker 1: and four one one forty four to fifty four and everybody,
Speaker 1: he can be under fifty, you can be over fifty.
Speaker 1: Everybody gets their second month free when you use my name, Hugh.
Speaker 1: Welcome back in America. I'm Hugh Hewitt. Matt Connetty. It's
Speaker 1: still with me. He of the Wall Street Journal Free
Speaker 1: Expressions column. He of the American Enterprises too now Thursdays
Speaker 1: on commentary podcasts most Fridays when we are lucky right
Speaker 1: here before I go back to the latest announcement by
Speaker 1: Admiral Cooper, head of Suncom. Matt Contnetty on your return
Speaker 1: to the commentary podcast, you got to do a recommend
Speaker 1: and you recommended sci fi. Now, I've never even read
Speaker 1: enders book or whatever that thing is by Orson Scott Card.
Speaker 1: What in the world are you doing recommending sci fi?
Speaker 1: I've always thought it was a big time waste. Even
Speaker 1: though I like fantasy. There's epic stuff in fantasy. What's
Speaker 1: in this sci fi? I can't help it, Hugh.
Speaker 5: I'm a I'm a genre fiction freak. I love mysteries,
Speaker 5: I love thrillers, and I've also loved science fiction since.
Speaker 1: My youth.
Speaker 5: You know, the saying goes, the golden age of science
Speaker 5: fiction is twelve years old, and if you discover it
Speaker 5: then you never really get rid of it.
Speaker 1: And I think, this book, what's this book?
Speaker 5: Oh? This book is called The Faith of Beasts. It's
Speaker 5: part of a trilogy by the creators of The Expanse,
Speaker 5: which is a very popular sci fi book and television franchise.
Speaker 5: But I just say this you know, in many ways,
Speaker 5: science fiction is the most political of genres because it's
Speaker 5: the easiest way for authors to explore different political systems,
Speaker 5: different forms of government, and you get to see kind
Speaker 5: of the play of parties and intrigue in a vast landscape,
Speaker 5: as opposed to kind of historical fiction or His Street
Speaker 5: here at Home, which of course I read a lot
Speaker 5: of as well.
Speaker 1: Where do you put epic fantasy? You don't include that
Speaker 1: in sci fi? Do you? They have magic and dragons
Speaker 1: and stuff like that game.
Speaker 5: Yeah, if there's magic, if it's if there's magic, it's
Speaker 5: not science fiction. That's the general rule of thumb. And
Speaker 5: I'm not. I'm not actually a fan of a fantasy.
Speaker 5: My my wife is big into those romanticy novels, but
Speaker 5: I'm not. And the only real fantasy series I've ever
Speaker 5: really liked is The House of the Game of Thrones,
Speaker 5: the You and.
Speaker 1: You're You're the Same era. Ross is a big lover
Speaker 1: of fantasy, epic fantasy series, and we've gone down many
Speaker 1: rabbit holes together. You two ought to have a Battle
Speaker 1: of the Titans from.
Speaker 5: Your era one of the many areas where Ross and
Speaker 5: I disagree despite being friends. Fantasy and science fiction. We
Speaker 5: we differ on that. We just don't get a lot
Speaker 5: many things.
Speaker 1: Dogs and cat that's tox all right. Here's what Brad
Speaker 1: Cooper said. The US military has completely halted economic trade
Speaker 1: with Iran by sea and has stopped nineteen vessels from
Speaker 1: trying to evade the blockade. Animal Cooper said earlier today. Quote,
Speaker 1: we are watching every Iranian ship in every port, Cooper
Speaker 1: told reporters today. We're able to sustain this as long
Speaker 1: as necessary. That's music to my ears, Matt continetty, because
Speaker 1: it will mean the end of the regime. Maybe not today,
Speaker 1: maybe not in twenty twenty six. But they can't make
Speaker 1: it to the end of the Trump years without any money,
Speaker 1: can they? No, not at all.
Speaker 5: And look here, we know that the Iranian economy was
Speaker 5: in free fall prior to Operation Epic Fury. One of
Speaker 5: the reasons for the public uprising that led to President
Speaker 5: Trump saying help would was on the way was this
Speaker 5: collapse of the Iranian economy, lack of electricity in Tehran,
Speaker 5: lack of water, potable water in Iran. And now think
Speaker 5: of the situation. Not only is there the devastation wrought
Speaker 5: by the bombing campaign, the complete destruction of the defense
Speaker 5: industrial base, the kind of chaos that the command and
Speaker 5: control has been set into since the military operation began.
Speaker 5: Now you have this blockade that is really exerting a
Speaker 5: strangerhold over the Iranian economy, which is so dependent on
Speaker 5: sea traffic. And so this means that we have the
Speaker 5: upper hand in whatever negotiations we follow. And it also
Speaker 5: means that the situation for the Iranian regime is bleak
Speaker 5: and will turn ultimately, I think, totally black, And that
Speaker 5: is another form of leverage. In addition to the economy.
Speaker 5: In addition to the fact that, as Pete Haggs has
Speaker 5: said yesterday, we are ready to resume the bombing campaign
Speaker 5: if necessary, we also have the Iranian people still waiting
Speaker 5: in the wings, and they've risen up against this government
Speaker 5: time and time again. We're now in a position where,
Speaker 5: if it happens, we can help them and that will
Speaker 5: be the ultimate source of peace in the mid at
Speaker 5: least the end of the current Iranian regime.
Speaker 1: I agree with that. Now, the counter narrative from the
Speaker 1: anti Trump folks is that the hardliners are now in charge.
Speaker 1: I kind of laugh at that. If it were not
Speaker 1: so sorrowful, how much more hardline can you be than
Speaker 1: ordering the murder of thirty thousand people. I mean, they
Speaker 1: can't get more hardline than what we wiped out. Am
Speaker 1: I right about that? Yeah?
Speaker 5: I mean the myth of the Iranian moderate has been
Speaker 5: kind of a fantasy that has gripped the imaginations of
Speaker 5: so many analysts in the West for so long. One
Speaker 5: I'd say, I'm not even sure we know who is
Speaker 5: in charge in Iran. I think that was one of
Speaker 5: the problems that faced Vice President Vance last weekend in Islamabad.
Speaker 5: So he has told people in interviews that every time
Speaker 5: the group he was dealing with made some concession, they'd
Speaker 5: have to check back with others in Iran, and it
Speaker 5: led the Vice President to conclude that he might not
Speaker 5: be dealing with the right people. We really don't know
Speaker 5: what the state of play there is, but we do
Speaker 5: know that, as you say, the people who remain are
Speaker 5: dedicated Islamists, they are revolutionaries. This ideology has been entrenched,
Speaker 5: and this is a regime that begins every day saying
Speaker 5: death to America, death to Israel, and says the same
Speaker 5: thing at the end of every day. And so yet
Speaker 5: you can't get more radical than the regime we had
Speaker 5: prior to Operation Epic Fury. And the truth is, it
Speaker 5: doesn't matter how radical they are as long as they
Speaker 5: do what Donald Trump is asking them to, and that
Speaker 5: is give up the nuclear material, open the strait, limit
Speaker 5: your missiles, end the support for proxies, and be more
Speaker 5: responsive to the needs of your people. You can still
Speaker 5: be an ideologue. What matters to Trump is not what
Speaker 5: you believe, it's what you do. And that's why his
Speaker 5: having the high cards right now is so important.
Speaker 1: So, Matt, you're against the triumphal arch at the height
Speaker 1: that it is. What do you maka like? There's Trajan's
Speaker 1: column in Rome, and do you think maybe we should
Speaker 1: just whisper the Trump column somewhere?
Speaker 5: Well, you know, look, people have often talked about there's
Speaker 5: room for that fifth face on Mount Rushmore. You know,
Speaker 5: I've always thought that would be the best tribute as
Speaker 5: to have him up there. Yeah, this president, on the
Speaker 5: trajectory he's in, is going to be recognized as a
Speaker 5: world historical figure, someone who changed the whole condition of
Speaker 5: the United States, the shape of global politics. If he
Speaker 5: leaves office having changed the regime in Venezuela and Iran
Speaker 5: and Cuba, and ended the border crisis and given US
Speaker 5: leverage over China. He will have a remarkably historical presidency
Speaker 5: and deserve some type of monument for sure.
Speaker 1: Yeah. I don't think of Colin, but you're right. Just
Speaker 1: recognition is enough at one point, Matt Continetti, thank you.
Speaker 1: Follow Matt on Exa. Continetti read them in the Wall
Speaker 1: Street Journal and has worked at AAI. I'll be right
Speaker 1: back in America. Steak morning, glory and even grace America.
Speaker 1: I'm Hugh Hewittt, joined by the opinion editor of The
Speaker 1: Daily Wire, the host of The Big Ben podcast, Fox
Speaker 1: News contributor Extraordinary, Ben Dominic. Ben. Good to have you back,
Speaker 1: especially on a day of such breaking news. I want
Speaker 1: to begin with my proposition, we've lost muscle memory of
Speaker 1: winning battles and wars. We did that in two thousand
Speaker 1: and three with the March to Bagdad, and after that
Speaker 1: was a twenty years log to nowhere. Two thousand and one,
Speaker 1: it was a quick victory over the Taliban that never
Speaker 1: became a real victory before that. It was nineteen ninety
Speaker 1: one and it was a great one hundred hour war,
Speaker 1: but it didn't dislodge Saddam. Do you think we might
Speaker 1: be afraid to declare victory here over Iran because of that.
Speaker 6: I think you're very much on the right path with that,
Speaker 6: And I think a big part of that is that
Speaker 6: you know, you, I mean, you saw it used to
Speaker 6: great effect, that natural hesitancy by the legacy media. I
Speaker 6: mean just openly, you know, declaring that right from right
Speaker 6: off the bat, that this was going to be something
Speaker 6: that led to see that ultimately it could lead, you know,
Speaker 6: perhaps to the exiting or the end of the entire
Speaker 6: Trumpian agenda. That's even been you know, on some magazine covers,
Speaker 6: including What I Used to work for, not go on wood.
Speaker 6: But one of the things that I think is really
Speaker 6: indicative about this is that this is a moment when
Speaker 6: the president has a ton of confidence in his ability
Speaker 6: to get a good outcome, and the fact that we
Speaker 6: have become so reluctant to use American military might in
Speaker 6: the way that it was used in this case. There's
Speaker 6: some healthy aspects of that. You don't want to give
Speaker 6: into hubris, you don't want to be naive about what
Speaker 6: you can achieve. But I do think that to a
Speaker 6: certain degree, this this is a demonstration of how the
Speaker 6: hesitancy on this part, on the part of people within
Speaker 6: the populace in America was used and exploited by the
Speaker 6: legacy media in ways that was not actually reflective of
Speaker 6: the facts.
Speaker 1: If it wasn't Donald Trump, if it was you know,
Speaker 1: President Gretchen Whitmer, or President Gavin Newsom, or anybody that
Speaker 1: was a Democrat or even you know, a pre Trump
Speaker 1: Republican President Romney. If they had done this the last
Speaker 1: six weeks, what would legacy media be saying.
Speaker 6: Gretchen Whitmer would be on the cover of every magazine.
Speaker 6: She would be depicted as this warrior queen to achieved
Speaker 6: something that none of her male predecessors was willing or
Speaker 6: courageous enough to do. You know, our own iron lady.
Speaker 6: I mean, I can't even imagine the perlative that would
Speaker 6: be launched in her direction. And if you don't think
Speaker 6: that The New York Times would be saying that she
Speaker 6: should be nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize, I just
Speaker 6: I think you're out of your mind. This is this
Speaker 6: is a situation where that level of animosity I think
Speaker 6: was from the beginning something that led them to reject
Speaker 6: the idea that we could even achieve this type of goal,
Speaker 6: that we could be in a situation where we would
Speaker 6: be sucked into a quagmire after six weeks. It's absolutely
Speaker 6: nuts when you consider it, if you step back from it.
Speaker 6: But I think that they were counting on people not
Speaker 6: having the willingness to do that and to play on
Speaker 6: their fears as opposed to what we actually know about
Speaker 6: what is possible and what this president is capable of.
Speaker 1: Now. The most important fact that I'm certain of is
Speaker 1: what Admiral Cooper said earlier today. He said, we are
Speaker 1: watching every Iranian ship in every port. We're able to
Speaker 1: sustain this as long as necessary. Backing up the President's
Speaker 1: statement that the blockade is still in effect, That to
Speaker 1: me is something I can measure that I can stand by.
Speaker 1: The blockade's still there, so the Iranians had no leverage
Speaker 1: at this table, none zero. Is that how you read it.
Speaker 6: I absolutely agree with that, and I think that that's
Speaker 6: I mean, obviously, to comment from you know, a military
Speaker 6: man as opposed to just someone who has you know,
Speaker 6: a political acts grind or anything along those lines. I
Speaker 6: think that this is a situation that we have to
Speaker 6: continue to monitor. But if you know, the things stay
Speaker 6: as they are, if they continue to look in the
Speaker 6: direction that they are looking. You know, I just think
Speaker 6: that there are a lot of people who should be
Speaker 6: holding their hat in their hands, and they're not going
Speaker 6: to by the way. They're going to try to get
Speaker 6: away with this the same way that they always do.
Speaker 6: And I think it's going to take a lot of
Speaker 6: people demanding that their feet beheld the fire and that
Speaker 6: they say, look, you know, you were wrong about this.
Speaker 6: You were clearly wrong about this. What did you learn?
Speaker 6: And I think that you know, we and it was
Speaker 6: my own skepticism about what we can achieve in certain areas.
Speaker 6: I've had to temperate with the fact that the US
Speaker 6: military and the people who who lead it have been
Speaker 6: running the game over and over and over again as
Speaker 6: long as I have been live. And that's something that
Speaker 6: does have a great benefit to the American people when
Speaker 6: it comes to addressing these types of problems.
Speaker 1: Well, let's go back in remind people the first criticism
Speaker 1: of the president's decision too, with Israel strike Iran, the
Speaker 1: straight of horror moies is closed and they didn't have
Speaker 1: a plan. That may be the dumbest take of all,
Speaker 1: because the Pentagon has plans for every country in the world,
Speaker 1: including our own. They just have plans on top of
Speaker 1: plans on top of plans. Do you think we'll see
Speaker 1: anybody retract I wish to extend and refine my remarks.
Speaker 6: I mean, unfortunately, you I just don't. And I think
Speaker 6: that that's going to include a lot of people, by
Speaker 6: the way, who were previously, particularly within the US Senate,
Speaker 6: within the US political leadership, just you know, a few
Speaker 6: months ago, criticizing the president for not doing enough. That's
Speaker 6: the greatest aspect of the statistic is I mean, it's
Speaker 6: not hilarious, but it's it's just an indictment of the
Speaker 6: fact that there were so many people who said, you know,
Speaker 6: this president doesn't actually have the willingness to go help
Speaker 6: the Iranian people, He doesn't have the willingness to go
Speaker 6: after this regime. They always return to this idea that
Speaker 6: either the president is an out of control figure who
Speaker 6: doesn't understand the limits of what he can do, or
Speaker 6: he is someone who's actually, you know, just on some level,
Speaker 6: a petty coward who is only going to speak in
Speaker 6: sort of boisterous terms but isn't actually going to achieve anything.
Speaker 6: And they can't ever choose in between. They just go
Speaker 6: back and forth between the two binaries, when obviously both.
Speaker 1: Of them are all there. But it's a complicated picture.
Speaker 1: I just talking with Matt Contenetty last hour, and if
Speaker 1: in fact this is the win that I sensed that
Speaker 1: it is, because the blockade is still there and the
Speaker 1: Iranians have thrown in their hand, If it's that sort
Speaker 1: of historic win, Matt's argument is the world historical figure.
Speaker 1: If he brings in Venezuela, flips Iran on its back,
Speaker 1: and takes Cuba back to capitalism, it's going to be
Speaker 1: a pivot point and the people he deranged, they're going
Speaker 1: to have to deal with it. Ben can they.
Speaker 6: I don't think that they can at this juncture. And
Speaker 6: but the one thing I will tell you, Hugh, because
Speaker 6: it's been one hundred percent certain in my life and
Speaker 6: you know this to be true, there is nothing more
Speaker 6: powerful as a motivator for the leftist and legacy media
Speaker 6: than strange new respect. I remember the way they talked
Speaker 6: about George W. Bush. I remember the play that they
Speaker 6: that they look back at Ronald Reagan. I don't remember
Speaker 6: the way that they have that they have you know,
Speaker 6: revised their remarks about this person and I know, I
Speaker 6: know this seems crazy. I know, it just seems absolutely ludicrous.
Speaker 6: They're gonna do the same thing that Donald Trump. Say
Speaker 6: what you will about JD. Van, say what you will
Speaker 6: about Marco Rubio. But they, you know, I mean Donald Trump,
Speaker 6: he was you know, he was from New York. He
Speaker 6: was much more moderate. And they will absolutely run this back.
Speaker 6: They will and that way.
Speaker 1: It's the sand trap that both Nance and or Rubio
Speaker 1: or anyone else who wants to be president, and I'm
Speaker 1: Republican side will have to hit over. Now, there's one
Speaker 1: more counter narrative I want to do with you before
Speaker 1: we talk about the impact on the Democrats on the left,
Speaker 1: which is significant if this is a big victory. The
Speaker 1: counter narrative is, oh, he just promoted more hard line people. Now,
Speaker 1: the ractional response that is, how much more hardline can
Speaker 1: you get than mowing down thirty thousand minimum of your
Speaker 1: own people in the street. The answer is you can't
Speaker 1: get more hardline than that. But we're seeing that already,
Speaker 1: ben hardliners are in charge. What do you make of that?
Speaker 6: I think that if you're making that argument today, I mean,
Speaker 6: just take a look in the mirror. I mean, we
Speaker 6: were talking about people who were not just willing to
Speaker 6: say all the things that they've been saying for decades,
Speaker 6: not just to engage in the type of support for
Speaker 6: terror that killed so many people around the globe, but
Speaker 6: also people that people that you know, we're very much
Speaker 6: confident in the persistence of their regime to a point
Speaker 6: that they were willing to meet in these ways that
Speaker 6: led ultimately to their demise. These were people who didn't
Speaker 6: feel like they had anything to fear from the Americans.
Speaker 6: And to look at this new situation, do you think
Speaker 6: that the people who are in charge now, even if
Speaker 6: they echo the same sentiments, even if they talk to
Speaker 6: people within the government, the analysts and the like the
Speaker 6: Vindomins of the world today, and when it comes to Iran,
Speaker 6: that they are going to actually not have any lessons
Speaker 6: taken away from the way that their regime was absolutely
Speaker 6: decapitated by these approaches. Of course, they're going to take
Speaker 6: the lessons from that, and that's going to alter their behavior.
Speaker 1: If you're an Iranian ordinary person, someone who runs a
Speaker 1: convenience story you can't get gasoline, someone who who sells
Speaker 1: wholesale flower and you can't get flowed. Are you happy
Speaker 1: or sad that Trump made these announcement today.
Speaker 6: I mean, I think at this point, there's no question
Speaker 6: that you're happy. I mean, this is what we've seen,
Speaker 6: as much as they have tried to limit the access
Speaker 6: to the footage and to the information that has come
Speaker 6: out during the course of this war or that there
Speaker 6: you know is a is a reaction on the part
Speaker 6: of the Uranian people that indicates enormous support and enormous
Speaker 6: hopefulness about what could happen going forward. They have hope
Speaker 6: now for the first time in a very long time,
Speaker 6: and that's a very good development. You know. At the
Speaker 6: same time, we're going to have to We're going to
Speaker 6: have to see what happens. That's not something that America
Speaker 6: has control over in terms of what comes next, to
Speaker 6: the same degree that we've had control over what's been
Speaker 6: going on in these past few weeks. Much better, I
Speaker 6: think than anyone was willing to acknowledge. This is something
Speaker 6: that you know is going to have an enormous import
Speaker 6: for the world as a whole. You know this, You've
Speaker 6: talked about it, and we are going to have to
Speaker 6: monitor it and see and let's hope that this has
Speaker 6: the kind of outcome that is possible.
Speaker 1: I'm going to talk with Ben during the break. He'll
Speaker 1: be back on the other side because I got to
Speaker 1: talk with him about the New Quad as well as
Speaker 1: the old Quad right after this and NATO Siga. I'm
Speaker 1: back with Ben Dominich during the break here on the network. Ben,
Speaker 1: I want to play for you Secretary of State room
Speaker 1: early on in the sixth Week War. This is what
Speaker 1: the Secretary had to say.
Speaker 4: These people are lunatics, they are insane. They are religious
Speaker 4: zelots who can never be allowed to possess a nuclear
Speaker 4: weapon because they have an apocalyptic vision of the future.
Speaker 4: And all of their neighbors know that, by the way,
Speaker 4: which is why all of their neighbors have been supportive
Speaker 4: of the Now.
Speaker 1: After the break, I'll talk about the new Quad, Saudi Arabia, UAE,
Speaker 1: Israel in the United States. But I think it's a
Speaker 1: strategic win to have the Secretary of State speak this
Speaker 1: bluntly about the IRGC and the mulis. What do you
Speaker 1: where has he been this week? Men?
Speaker 6: You know, I think that this is a stitution. You
Speaker 6: know that the president you know, certainly is out there
Speaker 6: in front. Marco Rubu has decided, I think after getting
Speaker 6: a you know, a series of plaudits you know, from
Speaker 6: myself included in you as well, that I think you
Speaker 6: wanted to take a little bit of a step back
Speaker 6: and focus on the job. I really wish that that
Speaker 6: was a little different. I wish that he was out
Speaker 6: there a little bit more advice for and has been
Speaker 6: out there quite a lot this past week and a
Speaker 6: half on things that didn't necessarily go well, you know,
Speaker 6: for him. But I think that this is, you know,
Speaker 6: a situation where the sectuary of State that decided I'm
Speaker 6: going to focus on my job. And that's I think
Speaker 6: an indication that you know, as many of us have suspected,
Speaker 6: you know, as much as that there remains a call
Speaker 6: out there a group of people who would like to
Speaker 6: see him run for president, who would like to see
Speaker 6: him contend against jd Vance potentially in the primary, that
Speaker 6: he is still reluctant to do so, at least at
Speaker 6: this stage.
Speaker 1: Well, there's a narrative that the president sends Rubio to
Speaker 1: deal with our enemies, and he sends Fans to deal
Speaker 1: with our friends. But that's been flipped. So now I
Speaker 1: really have no idea who's doing what. But do you
Speaker 1: expect the Vice President to go back to Islamabad this weekend.
Speaker 6: I don't know. I mean, I honestly don't know that
Speaker 6: the vice president wants to be stuck in a situation
Speaker 6: where he could come back, you know, with half a
Speaker 6: loaf or something along those lines. But it would be
Speaker 6: I think, in his interests to go there and to
Speaker 6: achieve some things, because that's something people will look back
Speaker 6: on if he's able to do it, if he's able
Speaker 6: to pull it off, and that's I believe the better
Speaker 6: way to run, and to build the case for running
Speaker 6: as opposed to playing it safe all the time.
Speaker 1: I agree with that. I hope he's on the plane.
Speaker 1: I hope they go back and get the details ironed
Speaker 1: out so that we know we get the highly enriched uranium.
Speaker 1: Don't go anywhere, America. I'm coming right back with Ben Dobbin.
Speaker 1: My friends, you've probably seen the headlines are worse. Your
Speaker 1: latest cell bill, big wirelesses raising rates again. That means
Speaker 1: you could be paying more for the same service or
Speaker 1: getting pushed into a pricier plan that you simply don't need.
Speaker 1: That's the right. There's a better way, and it's called
Speaker 1: consumer cellular. Millions of Americans have already made this switching.
Speaker 1: For good reason. Consumer Cellular is consistently ranked number one
Speaker 1: in customer satisfaction because they treat you like a customer,
Speaker 1: not a number. With Consumer Solul, you get flexible, affordable
Speaker 1: plans to fit your life, not the other way around.
Speaker 1: No long term contracts, no hitting fees. You can keep
Speaker 1: your phone and use a new one, so don't let
Speaker 1: big wireless dictate what you pay. Take control today. Visit
Speaker 1: Consumer Sellular dot com slash Hugh and use the promo
Speaker 1: code Hugh hug h for your second month for free,
Speaker 1: or call eight hundred four one one forty four to
Speaker 1: fifty four again. Remember my code is Hugh. If you're
Speaker 1: over fifty, listen to this. You can get a single
Speaker 1: line with unlimited talk, textan data for just thirty five dollars.
Speaker 1: I'm a consumer Sellular dot Com slash q Welcome back America.
Speaker 1: I'm Hugh Ewett. We have been dominant chapinion page editor,
Speaker 1: overt Daily Wire. He's the host of the Big Ben podcast,
Speaker 1: Fox News contributor Ben. I want to go way out
Speaker 1: now to thirty thousand feet. Uh Nato is in the
Speaker 1: rearview mirror in my view right in front of US.
Speaker 1: Is the new is the quad that we know about Japan, Australia,
Speaker 1: India and the United States, and quad adjacent countries like
Speaker 1: South Korea and Philippines, Taiwan and Singapore. Now I think
Speaker 1: there might be a new quad which is the US, Israel,
Speaker 1: UAE and Saudi Arabia, and they're adjacent country like bob
Speaker 1: Rang and Kuwait. And I think that might become the
Speaker 1: local gendarmerie for in the Middle and Near East. What
Speaker 1: do you think.
Speaker 6: I think that that has a level of potential that
Speaker 6: you know, even a little while ago, would not have
Speaker 6: seemed real, realistic at all, But I think that now
Speaker 6: has to be considered as a possibility, a very real one.
Speaker 6: Of Course, those relationships are ones that I think are
Speaker 6: fundamentally extremely transactional, and we have to understand that about them.
Speaker 6: They don't have necessarily the level of camaraderie and of
Speaker 6: joined at the hip nature of the other quality you mentioned.
Speaker 6: But I think that this is also a situation where
Speaker 6: the level of interest, the level of shared interest, is
Speaker 6: too high not to cooperate to a greater degree. And
Speaker 6: what we've already seen are indications that I think are
Speaker 6: very positive in this vein. If we can continue to
Speaker 6: see that relationship grow, it certainly could become a force
Speaker 6: for real stability in the region going forward, and one
Speaker 6: that I think would really take the load off a
Speaker 6: lot of things that America has had to do in
Speaker 6: a sort of single shock capacity going back for many years.
Speaker 1: Okay, so that takes us to the blast radius of
Speaker 1: the significance of the Six Week War, which is NATO
Speaker 1: maybe the second most injured party here, all right, Iran
Speaker 1: number one as well, I guess number one A. But
Speaker 1: here is the president of Finland, alex Stuff, who was
Speaker 1: very he gets along well with Trump. But he was
Speaker 1: given an interview in I think a European network. Here's
Speaker 1: what he had to say.
Speaker 7: I think at the end of the day, the United
Speaker 7: States will find themselves in quite a lonely place. I mean,
Speaker 7: I'm the most pro American president in Europe. I'm an
Speaker 7: avid Transatlanticist. I want the relationship to work, but I
Speaker 7: fully also realized that, you know, with certain patterns behavior,
Speaker 7: there is going to be a feeling of Okay, if
Speaker 7: you treat me like that, I don't feel very good
Speaker 7: about it. And we can see that with the European States,
Speaker 7: we can see it with you know, Golf.
Speaker 1: States and many others.
Speaker 7: So I hope that it's in the interest of the
Speaker 7: United States if it wants to continue to be one
Speaker 7: of the world hegemons to have close friends and alys.
Speaker 1: Now I call I throw a flag on that Ben.
Speaker 1: The Golf States love us right now.
Speaker 6: That very just.
Speaker 1: That's just because the Golf States love us right now
Speaker 1: and our patriots. Canada and NATO are not high on
Speaker 1: my list, but I got the frontline states like Finland
Speaker 1: and Poland and Sweden might have a little bit more
Speaker 1: in the game with us. What do you make of that?
Speaker 1: Is your bloss it's mine. You know what.
Speaker 6: Whenever you go to one of these European leaders to
Speaker 6: ask this type of question and they start talking about it,
Speaker 6: there's this word that they use all the time, and
Speaker 6: it bothers me. That word is feelings. Yes you've heard
Speaker 6: it again, And to me, it's like, this isn't about
Speaker 6: feelings that we don't actually care about that aspect. This
Speaker 6: is about shared interest. This is about what is in
Speaker 6: America's interest and what you are willing to do, and
Speaker 6: we are going to cooperate you to the extent that
Speaker 6: it is in America's interest and that's something that I
Speaker 6: think the Europeans really need to understand because feelings, I mean,
Speaker 6: just like the idea that they're going to continue to
Speaker 6: be insulted by different I mean, at a certain level,
Speaker 6: it's saying we care more about the tone of a
Speaker 6: truth social post than we do about the interests of
Speaker 6: our country and of the West, and that is just
Speaker 6: a ridiculous and inconceivably stupid position to occupy.
Speaker 1: That's well put, inconceivably stupid. They just took off the board,
Speaker 1: the president and the American military just took off of
Speaker 1: the board the third greatest threat to peace loving countries
Speaker 1: in the world. And that's fine, China and Russia and
Speaker 1: maybe a team in number two because they're let me
Speaker 1: go to the only people who are below the NATO
Speaker 1: non interventionist, not our problem people, and that's the Democrats.
Speaker 1: Did any Democrat not named John Fetterman come out and
Speaker 1: support of the president's policy towards Iran? One? Did anyone? No?
Speaker 6: I mean, it's just and and by the way, I
Speaker 6: want to point out again that these are the same
Speaker 6: people who were saying just a few months ago that
Speaker 6: the president was that he was wrong not to raise
Speaker 6: up you know, his standard that he that he was
Speaker 6: going to you know that he was promising things that
Speaker 6: he couldn't deliver on. And the other thing is, by
Speaker 6: the way, I mean you mentioned the last time that
Speaker 6: we talked, you mentioned Mark Warner. Mark Warner has been
Speaker 6: around long enough to know what a threat that Iran
Speaker 6: really represents and the facts that he even he can't
Speaker 6: even come out and say that he supports a policy
Speaker 6: that ultimately is likely to lead to what he always
Speaker 6: claimed he wanted it to see, all these people said that,
Speaker 6: you know, the threat of the of a nuclear Iran
Speaker 6: was so existential that I needed to cut this ridiculous
Speaker 6: deal with them before. And now what are they going
Speaker 6: to say. They're going to say that this was a
Speaker 6: wrongheaded war, that it's a catastrophe, that it's a travesy.
Speaker 6: Look at Chuck Schumer. I mean, come on, how can
Speaker 6: you take him seriously after all the years when he
Speaker 6: was clearly of the mind that a're on with such
Speaker 6: a threat, and now he can't even say that because
Speaker 6: his base will hold him to account if he does.
Speaker 1: Okay, So, last question, Bett, did the Democrats price in
Speaker 1: in November win off of the war and the gas
Speaker 1: height price too quickly, because right now oil is down
Speaker 1: to eighty four dollars a barrel. If it stays, if
Speaker 1: the Strait stays open, and we've got Donald Trump welcoming
Speaker 1: the highly enriched uranium and the internet's back on in
Speaker 1: Iran in three weeks, did they just bury themselves?
Speaker 6: I don't know that we can say that. I do
Speaker 6: think that things get lost in the shuffle, and the
Speaker 6: truth is that, as you know, voters make up their
Speaker 6: minds typically in the first six months of the midterm year.
Speaker 6: Republicans are going to have to get out there and
Speaker 6: make the case to themselves. And I think that that's
Speaker 6: something that we haven't seen them do to a great
Speaker 6: degree when it comes to the House, which is all
Speaker 6: a kerfuffle over so many different things and doesn't seem
Speaker 6: to really be keeping their eye on the ball. I
Speaker 6: think that the truth for Republicans at this moment is
Speaker 6: that they need to take this win and run with
Speaker 6: it as much as possible, make the Democrats on the
Speaker 6: other side of it, and if you know, if the
Speaker 6: voters see I think that this turns around in a
Speaker 6: way that is beneficial to them in their household then
Speaker 6: I think that there's possibility that they can actually, you know,
Speaker 6: achieve something better than what we certainly thought even a
Speaker 6: few months ago.
Speaker 1: So Republicans have to learn to say we won, we
Speaker 1: won conclusively, we want in a way that you can't
Speaker 1: see see.
Speaker 6: Then they have to make arguments to you, and that's
Speaker 6: that's something that they seem to that's not something that
Speaker 6: they tend to do.
Speaker 1: They like to only.
Speaker 6: Argue amongst themselves, So it's a real problem for them.
Speaker 1: I just would turn Ruby l loose and the vice
Speaker 1: president loose, and the president. By the way, the more
Speaker 1: interview it gives at length as opposed to true social post,
Speaker 1: the better off he is. Ben Dominich, is great to
Speaker 1: talk to you on a victory Friday. We used to
Speaker 1: call that in high school football, you have a victory Friday,
Speaker 1: and that was always good to have. Good to talk
Speaker 1: to you, Ben Dominich. What I hope the weekend proves
Speaker 1: that we are right in our optimism. Thank you for
Speaker 1: joining me.