Speaker 1: Live from Vall Hartliner and the Crossroads of America. It's
Speaker 1: Tony Katz today. I don't think I need to reiterate
Speaker 1: where I'm at. You can tell me about a low
Speaker 1: key war from now until the end of time. I
Speaker 1: don't know what that is. I don't know what a
Speaker 1: low key war could possibly be. As a matter of fact,
Speaker 1: I don't know if a low key war is winnable. Now,
Speaker 1: if we're talking about economic pressure, if we're talking about,
Speaker 1: as Major Mike Lyons discussed military analyst, the siege mentality,
Speaker 1: Oh sure, I'm down with that. That makes perfect sense.
Speaker 1: But that is not actually low key. That is about
Speaker 1: purpose and keeping yourself on top of it, which may
Speaker 1: include strikes. Just playing a low key and let Iran
Speaker 1: economically fall apart. Well, it's nice in theory. I just
Speaker 1: don't know if it can be done in practice. And
Speaker 1: can you be low key against an enemy that's trying
Speaker 1: to kill you? Which will bring us to the Air
Speaker 1: Force one story, Tony Katz, Tony Katz today, Good to
Speaker 1: be with you. Leland Viddert joins us right now. He
Speaker 1: is the host of On Balance with Leland Vindt over
Speaker 1: at News Nation. Now go check that out every single evening.
Speaker 1: You spent quite a few years studying the Middle East,
Speaker 1: reporting from Jerusalem.
Speaker 2: You were the guy over.
Speaker 1: There back in the day Fox News covering Israel, covering
Speaker 1: the Middle East.
Speaker 2: This is your baliwick.
Speaker 1: Let's start with the Iranian mindset towards the United States
Speaker 1: and towards this war.
Speaker 2: Where would you say they are in this battle.
Speaker 3: They believe they are winning for a number of reasons.
Speaker 3: That they think President Trump is probably weak would be
Speaker 3: a good word, but certainly he is manageable. They believe
Speaker 3: they understand where the pain points are. They think they
Speaker 3: have a actively corralled him into a corner where he
Speaker 3: is unable to escalate against them, and they will continue
Speaker 3: to extract a price and humiliate him because they wont
Speaker 3: him further weakened by a loss at the midterms. That
Speaker 3: is how the Iranians are viewing it right now. And
Speaker 3: they think they are in a better position right now
Speaker 3: than when the war started, because they have proven to
Speaker 3: the Arab world and to the rest of the world
Speaker 3: that they can withstand the American president and they can
Speaker 3: outlast him. I said at the very beginning of this war,
Speaker 3: this was not going to be a war won or
Speaker 3: lost by military might. This was a war won or
Speaker 3: lost by political will, and the Iranians very clearly have
Speaker 3: far more political will than Donald Trump does.
Speaker 2: Does the political will come from.
Speaker 1: An ideological set meaning being Islamis or does it come
Speaker 1: from the protection of knowing that as these kind of
Speaker 1: broken up factions within the IRGC, Because I would argue
Speaker 1: that there is no leadership to negotiate with. I don't
Speaker 1: believe that the Foreign Minister or the speaker there for
Speaker 1: their government has any power whatsoever. You've got these factionalized
Speaker 1: groups within the IRGC, many of whom are working independently.
Speaker 1: There is no way to corral them without troops on
Speaker 1: the ground. And that's where anybody could have made a
Speaker 1: calculation that that's the much more difficult play for the president,
Speaker 1: that we don't seem to have that.
Speaker 2: Desire in place.
Speaker 3: Well, fair points except for the fact that we sort
Speaker 3: of knew that from the beginning, right, and that is
Speaker 3: why the Israelis had a plan in place to continue
Speaker 3: decapitation strikes so that every group that either wouldn't make
Speaker 3: a deal or broke a deal was no longer breathing
Speaker 3: air and was delivered to their personal meeting with Allah
Speaker 3: and number two why they had a plan for the Kurds,
Speaker 3: which are perhaps the longest and best US allies in
Speaker 3: the Middle East, sands Israel a plan for the Kurds
Speaker 3: to begin leading a ground invasion operation start of a
Speaker 3: revolution that President Trump pulled the plug on because Erdawan
Speaker 3: of Turkey called him and said, you know, he didn't
Speaker 3: like it, and Trump went along with it, which is
Speaker 3: wacky that that happened, and I think really horrible strategic miscalculation,
Speaker 3: and Trump pulled the Israelis back. So to your point, yes,
Speaker 3: that analysis is correct. But the reason that that analysis
Speaker 3: is true is because President Trump drastically changed the course
Speaker 3: of the war for domestic political considerations.
Speaker 1: Talking to Leland Vittertert from News Nation. Now you catch
Speaker 1: them on balance with Leland Viddert every single evening at
Speaker 1: nine pm Eastern time is when you catch that show.
Speaker 1: I am one of the people who argues that this
Speaker 1: was the right course, the proper course, and we should
Speaker 1: have I'm glad you brought up the Kurds because I'm
Speaker 1: a believer that yes, we can arm the Kurds, the
Speaker 1: Kurds can work with the Iranian people. In top of
Speaker 1: the IRGC on the ground the Kurds have a desire
Speaker 1: to do so. There was the conversation about whether or
Speaker 1: not the Vice President JD. Vance got in the way
Speaker 1: of that, tried to stop that deal from happening, Which
Speaker 1: brings us to is there a question within the administration
Speaker 1: of these competing forces? Do you think on a real level,
Speaker 1: you've got Rubio over here, You've got Vance over here,
Speaker 1: you have possibly the Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth somewhere
Speaker 1: in a varying amount of places, all vying for the
Speaker 1: present's ear. Is there, in your view, a battle on
Speaker 1: tactic and desire within the administration?
Speaker 3: Sure, and there always is in every administration, there's varying factions,
Speaker 3: whether it be on domestic policy on foreign policy. That's
Speaker 3: not anything new. The problem with the JD.
Speaker 2: Vance world view is that it doesn't work.
Speaker 3: Much like socialism, it has a predictable end. You know, America, first,
Speaker 3: we don't need to be involved in overseas, spending all
Speaker 3: the money back here at home, forget Israel. All of
Speaker 3: that sounds sort of plausibly true, and like, well, of
Speaker 3: course we should do all of those things, until you
Speaker 3: look at what the results have been same with socialism,
Speaker 3: medicare for all. More money in your pocket sounds great.
Speaker 3: Who doesn't think we should be able to have a
Speaker 3: better education system. How can you turn your back on
Speaker 3: in the future of America? And then you look at
Speaker 3: Cuba and Venezuela and you know what socialism does. We
Speaker 3: know what the America First Agenda does. It's what got
Speaker 3: us into World War two. So I think you're right
Speaker 3: that this is this faction issue is playing out more importantly.
Speaker 3: I think for the conversation, President Trump is somebody who
Speaker 3: does not like pain.
Speaker 2: He likes easy.
Speaker 3: Wins, not hard winds. Hard winds are by definition difficult.
Speaker 3: That's why they're they're meaningful. That's why to your point, exactly,
Speaker 3: no other president in forty seven years has taken the
Speaker 3: Iranians on. He did, but was unwilling to endure the
Speaker 3: pain to actually finish this. And it's sort of bewildering
Speaker 3: to me that people who really say that, you know,
Speaker 3: Trump is so strong and he's so committed and everything else.
Speaker 3: This is a man who, when presented with even mild
Speaker 3: domestic political pushback, wants to move on to the next thing.
Speaker 3: And that's fine when you're building buildings because you can
Speaker 3: always find another piece of real estate to buy. It's
Speaker 3: not fine when dealing with fanatical terrorists like the Iranians
Speaker 3: or a fanatical nationalist like Putin er G.
Speaker 2: There was this talk.
Speaker 1: Wall Street Journal had the story that Trump is looking
Speaker 1: to move on. He wants any kind of exit he
Speaker 1: can get, whatever kind of off ramp he can take,
Speaker 1: and he's grown tired of this. I'm not somebody who
Speaker 1: believes that he grows tired of things. He hasn't grown
Speaker 1: tired of securing the border. He hasn't grown tired of tariffs.
Speaker 1: I can point to a multiplicity of things.
Speaker 3: And notes are all easy. They didn't cost him anything.
Speaker 3: They didn't cost him anything to do.
Speaker 2: They're cost inflation, so you know it may.
Speaker 3: Cost him lives. It's a nebulous thing. He can declare victory.
Speaker 3: He can talk about how he's winning, so he needed
Speaker 3: to be fair.
Speaker 2: On the border.
Speaker 3: He is winning, but when it comes to Iran, he
Speaker 3: can't say I'm winning in Iran. He does, and then
Speaker 3: the Iranians, you know, tighten the thumb, screws on the
Speaker 3: straight of horror moves and gas goes up by fifty cents,
Speaker 3: and then he has, you know, a couple of strikes
Speaker 3: for two days, and then goes, oh, the Iranians have
Speaker 3: called me and begged me to stop. Nobody believes this anymore, and.
Speaker 2: That is wholeheartedly true.
Speaker 1: Leland talking to Leland Vidert of News Nation Now check
Speaker 1: out on Balance with a Leland verdict every Monday through
Speaker 1: Friday at nine pm. Look, I'm the guy, and you've
Speaker 1: quoted me before, and I appreciate it. The first rule
Speaker 1: of trumpsm is Trump wins, and the second rule of
Speaker 1: trump Ism is that a deal can always be made
Speaker 1: as long as it adheres to the first rule of
Speaker 1: trump Ism. That has not changed since he was first elected.
Speaker 1: I agree with you. You can't tell people that we're in control.
Speaker 1: He took from the Oval yesterday. The President said we
Speaker 1: controlled the straight of Horn moves one hundred percent, and
Speaker 1: yet West Texas crewed was nearing eighty five dollars a barrel,
Speaker 1: as I to you, is about eighty two dollars a barrel.
Speaker 2: You can't say that you have control when that isn't
Speaker 2: the case.
Speaker 1: And I agree with you that no one believes him,
Speaker 1: and it makes them look bad, It makes them look weak.
Speaker 1: And this is where It gets even stranger because President Trump,
Speaker 1: you and I would agree as not somebody who.
Speaker 2: Ever wants that.
Speaker 1: Look, he never wants that imagery put out there as
Speaker 1: a weakness. So why is he employing a strategy that
Speaker 1: is guaranteed to amplify this idea of weakness?
Speaker 2: Number One?
Speaker 3: He thinks and he believes that he can win by
Speaker 3: declaring victory. And it's worked for him for most of
Speaker 3: his life, right, It's why he declared victory in the
Speaker 3: twenty twenty election. He thought he sort of can manifest
Speaker 3: victory simply by stating it.
Speaker 2: In many cases that's true.
Speaker 3: In a few cases, like when dealing with fanatical terrorists,
Speaker 3: the other side gets to say and the other side
Speaker 3: has decided that they're not going to play ball. So
Speaker 3: I I'm not sure. I think probably. You know, you
Speaker 3: can't teach an old dog new tricks. Very difficult to
Speaker 3: teach an old president that what's worked for them for
Speaker 3: sixty years with phenomenal success. He did win two elections
Speaker 3: as president of the United States. It's very difficult to
Speaker 3: explain why what's been working for him won't work. And
Speaker 3: I think also you have a lot of people Steve
Speaker 3: Woitkoff Jared Kushner among them who are telling him that
Speaker 3: it will work and explaining how it can. And this
Speaker 3: we had Bill O'Reilly on last night, who I think
Speaker 3: has very been very clear headed about this and has
Speaker 3: said how much he thinks President Trump is in a
Speaker 3: fight for his political life and legacy in the fight
Speaker 3: with Iran, and it is a it is. It is
Speaker 3: a fight in which simply declaring victory doesn't work. Roosevelt
Speaker 3: could not just say we beat the Nazis. You actually
Speaker 3: had to beat them. And that is true of iran Is.
Speaker 3: You would pointed out at the beginning. It is a
Speaker 3: very worthy goal. It is something worth doing, needs to
Speaker 3: be done. We'll eventually have to be done because radical
Speaker 3: Islam expansions. Islam is not going to stop, and hasn't
Speaker 3: for fourteen hundred years with trying to conquer the West.
Speaker 1: And I made the point yesterday that if just one
Speaker 1: centrifuge gets started, one bit of uranium gets enriched after
Speaker 1: we declare victory, that's a legacy that's tainted for forever.
Speaker 2: And the president must what makes you think you're not
Speaker 2: enriching uranium right now?
Speaker 1: Well, if you want to sit here and have a Bourbon,
Speaker 1: and we can get into that argument.
Speaker 2: I don't disagree with you at all, Man, I don't
Speaker 2: disagree with you at all.
Speaker 1: And what's possible still on the ground, But that's another
Speaker 1: conversation for another day. Talking to Leland vindder of News
Speaker 1: Nation now you find him on balance with Leland Viddert
Speaker 1: every Monday through Friday at nine pm. We've got a
Speaker 1: series of primaries today, including the one there in Wisconsin
Speaker 1: with Francesca Hung. I know you've written about this in
Speaker 1: your column over there News Nation. Of course your substack
Speaker 1: war notes. People should go check that out as well.
Speaker 1: But this is a question about the DSA. And while
Speaker 1: the president is having this issue I considered an issue
Speaker 1: what's going on with Iran?
Speaker 2: It hurts him.
Speaker 1: Yet I can take a look at all the polling
Speaker 1: in the world. I can see the congressional ballot, the
Speaker 1: generic congressional ballot with Democrats up plus seven and laugh
Speaker 1: out loud at it because they told me that Abdul
Speaker 1: Lsied was up by thirteen plus points in Michigan and
Speaker 1: he beat Haley Stevens by a point. Is the DSA
Speaker 1: a drag on the Democrats? And is there something you're
Speaker 1: looking for in these primaries, whether it's Wisconsin, Minnesota, we
Speaker 1: got a special election in South Carolina, it shouldn't really
Speaker 1: tell us much. Is there something that you're looking at
Speaker 1: in these primaries that could tell us, or that you
Speaker 1: think tell us where the general election might go.
Speaker 3: I'm going to tell you something nobody ever tells you
Speaker 3: on radio or TV. You ready, yep, I don't know.
Speaker 3: Excellent work. Yeah, that's why we have elections. The polling
Speaker 3: was off in Michigan. Primaries, especially primaries with sort of
Speaker 3: an insurgent base, are extremely hard to poll. General elections
Speaker 3: are generally easier to poll. But there's a reason we
Speaker 3: have elections, and we don't have a phone survey of
Speaker 3: a thousand people to decide who wins every Senate race,
Speaker 3: so that we have to wait and see how this
Speaker 3: sort of plays out. I think in the next thirty
Speaker 3: to sixty days you're going to have a better idea
Speaker 3: if there is enough anger Democrats plus seven to make
Speaker 3: up for the craziness of Abduel Siad, who thinks that
Speaker 3: you know, Sharia law may not be a bad idea
Speaker 3: for the United States, but we we don't know how
Speaker 3: this is going to level out. Unquestionably, the Democrats in
Speaker 3: Michigan and nationwide for Michigan have made the calculus that
Speaker 3: they are willing to pour unlimited resources into Michigan in
Speaker 3: behind Abdul Saya. They think he can win, can he?
Speaker 3: That's why we have elections. Franchessca Hong, I think is
Speaker 3: where you may be onto something more significant. And I
Speaker 3: say that because Bernie Sanders and AOC have an endorsed her. Yes,
Speaker 3: she is probably going to win the primary, but she
Speaker 3: is also far far lacking in the political skills what
Speaker 3: you would call being a political athlete to deal with
Speaker 3: all of her wacky stuff from the past, like the Saiyad.
Speaker 3: Don't like Saiyad. He's a generationally talented political athlete. Franchessca
Speaker 3: Hong is not. And it's why Bernie and AOC have
Speaker 3: an endorsed her. It's why you're seeing a much more
Speaker 3: sideline view by establishment Democrats and even by the DSA
Speaker 3: in her candidacy. Does that change when she wins the primary?
Speaker 2: We don't know. Leland Viddert.
Speaker 1: Find him on News Nation NewsNation Now dot com on
Speaker 1: Balance with Leland Viddert every Monday through Friday at nine pm.
Speaker 1: Good to see us. Sir, we'll talk more in the future.
Speaker 1: Keep it right here. This is Tony Katz today. I'm
Speaker 1: going to say something that will shock you to your core.
Speaker 1: Did you know that it was hot in the month
Speaker 1: of July. I wasn't trying to I wasn't trying to
Speaker 1: tell a joke. But if you watch news reports, they're
Speaker 1: amazingly upset. This is dangerous stuff. As a matter of fact,
Speaker 1: it wasn't just hot. It was the hottest July in
Speaker 1: the history of mankind. You don't know that, you weirdos
Speaker 1: Tony Katz, Tony Katz today a pleasure. US just had
Speaker 1: its hottest month on record. This was Axios reporting. The
Speaker 1: data goes back to eighteen ninety five. The average temperature
Speaker 1: in July was seventy six point eight nine degrees fahrenheit,
Speaker 1: topping the seventy six point seven to seven degree mark
Speaker 1: that was set in July of nineteen thirty six. Of course,
Speaker 1: in nineteen thirty six we had all that global warming,
Speaker 1: what with all.
Speaker 2: Of the cars.
Speaker 1: There were cars, there just weren't that many cars, not
Speaker 1: like we have today. Cars, cars everywhere, trucks everyhere. It
Speaker 1: wasn't that And already the global warming was destroying us,
Speaker 1: or or it is a cycle that goes hold on,
Speaker 1: it's twenty twenty six every ninety years. Now, I'm not
Speaker 1: an expert, I'm not a climatologist. But are there cycles
Speaker 1: of weather over centuries? Is that a weird question to ask?
Speaker 2: I don't. I think that's a weird question to ask.
Speaker 1: As a matter of fact, I would say that's a
Speaker 1: rather normal question to ask.
Speaker 2: According to Wheeler's weather cycles, I swear to you this
Speaker 2: is a thing.
Speaker 1: Historical analysis suggests a one hundred year cycle with four
Speaker 1: phases cold, dry, warm, wet, warm, dry, cold, wet, nested
Speaker 1: within larger five hundred year and one thousand year cycles
Speaker 1: that correlate with societal shifts and extreme weather events.
Speaker 2: Listen to me carefully. We should not burn.
Speaker 1: Tires in the middle of the road. We absolutely should
Speaker 1: say to ourselves we can be people who mitigate outputs
Speaker 1: through smart practices, outputs of pollutants, etc. And still get
Speaker 1: desired results. We should never say, because of dear sweet
Speaker 1: mother Gaya, we don't run air conditioning. That's crazy talk.
Speaker 1: Nor should we say, well, we're done using oil and
Speaker 1: what we're on wind and solar. You wouldn't be able
Speaker 1: to hear this show if we relied on wind and solar.
Speaker 1: But it was hot in nineteen thirty six, and it's
Speaker 1: hot now. And you look at the data, and we've
Speaker 1: had hot trends before, all right, it was hot in
Speaker 1: nineteen hundred, then it got a little bit hotter in
Speaker 1: nineteen thirty six, and then it dropped in the fifties, sixties, seventies, eighties, nineties,
Speaker 1: and then it's it's been on a trend and then
Speaker 1: it went down and it went back up.
Speaker 2: Sounds normal. These people just won't be normal.
Speaker 1: They just want to try and scare you to their
Speaker 1: political advantage. This is Tony Katz today. I thought that
Speaker 1: exchange on CNN was worthy of sharing because it's a
Speaker 1: great example of things both internationally, nationally, locally where the
Speaker 1: level of hate is, and more importantly, where the level.
Speaker 2: Of dece is.
Speaker 1: Tony Katz, Tony Katz today, an absolute pleasure to be
Speaker 1: with you.
Speaker 2: Now.
Speaker 1: I have come to the place where I don't pay
Speaker 1: attention to CNN, and while I still have friends and
Speaker 1: colleagues who appear on that show Newsnight with Abby Phillip,
Speaker 1: I'm past it and I would rather that they were
Speaker 1: as well. I can understand why people do cable news
Speaker 1: of all stripes, right.
Speaker 2: I do a lot of News Max these days.
Speaker 1: And I still like the idea that you go to
Speaker 1: the places that disagree because you want to be able
Speaker 1: to share an idea with people who.
Speaker 2: May not normally hear it. I think that's really good. Now.
Speaker 1: Some things I don't Some things I think are just mental.
Speaker 1: Piers Morgan's show, I've never been asked. I've never tried
Speaker 1: to be asked that show is mental. He's got four
Speaker 1: guests or five guests and it's constant screaming, and holy hell,
Speaker 1: is that not for me?
Speaker 2: Don't want it, don't want to be a part of it.
Speaker 1: And if that's what it takes to be a superstar,
Speaker 1: screw that. Well Tony, you got appear on all the
Speaker 1: crazy shows to deal with all the crazies because everybody
Speaker 1: wants to watch the crazy and that's how you get
Speaker 1: all the followers and the clicks. So screw that. I'm good,
Speaker 1: we get great ratings, we have great sponsors, like I'm fine.
Speaker 2: Can't live like that.
Speaker 1: How can anybody on the daily go on to this
Speaker 1: show with Abby Phillip and think that somehow they're doing
Speaker 1: something worthwhile. It's not just some people engage in the
Speaker 1: conversation where there's agreement and disagreement. It is a proactive
Speaker 1: maneuver to shun, stifle and shame right wing voices and
Speaker 1: never confront left wing madness. How many more clips do
Speaker 1: we need to see? And I will say it again
Speaker 1: for the people in the cheap seats. Very worst part
Speaker 1: of it all is that Abby Philip. If she had
Speaker 1: played it correctly with Scott Jennings, she could have had
Speaker 1: the show that everybody had to watch. She could have
Speaker 1: been it and she could have introduced herself in thoughts
Speaker 1: at moments where she could have had strong pushback.
Speaker 2: If she had just kept everybody on the.
Speaker 1: Straight and narrow, let Scott Jennings do what he does
Speaker 1: without the levels of host intimidation, host silencing, the propping
Speaker 1: up of maddening voices she man she could have, She
Speaker 1: could have owned the network instead. It's no thanks, that's
Speaker 1: what it's become. That's what it has become. Now other
Speaker 1: people have joined the fray. Brad Todd does that show.
Speaker 1: I don't know Brad, but I think he's very good.
Speaker 1: Sometimes you see Pete Seat on that show. I know
Speaker 1: Pete and I think for that show, Pete does very
Speaker 1: very good work. Jason Rantce is on that show, radio
Speaker 1: host out of Seattle. I think he does remarkably well.
Speaker 1: He's a talented cat. And there's a guy by the
Speaker 1: name of Jesse Arm. Jesse Arm is with the Manhattans two.
Speaker 1: The Manhattan Insitute is where the smart people are. Love
Speaker 1: love the Manhattans too. And on this show is Jason
Speaker 1: Rants and Abby Phillip has a fill in host, and
Speaker 1: you've got Jesse Arm and you've got Neil Stanage.
Speaker 2: Now I believe I'm pronouncing his name right.
Speaker 1: He is Irish as an Irish journalist, and he's associated
Speaker 1: with the Hill and he is, like far too many
Speaker 1: people in Ireland, a bigot. The jew hate, the anti
Speaker 1: Semitism in Ireland is absolutely through the roof. And so
Speaker 1: here is this conversation that's taking place taking place on
Speaker 1: the show, and I want you to hear this clip of.
Speaker 4: It that has some work to do. Had Haley Stevens
Speaker 4: won that primary, she would also have had work to do,
Speaker 4: particularly with Arab Americans in the state that has the
Speaker 4: highest per capital population of Arab Americans in the country.
Speaker 4: Who believes that the Biden administration disgrace yourself.
Speaker 1: Now, this is a conversation about Michigan and the Michigan primary,
Speaker 1: and he is making the arguments right. The argument has
Speaker 1: been made that because of Abdul el Sayed one, he's
Speaker 1: got a lot of work to do, a tremendous amount
Speaker 1: of work to do to try and grab voters Democrat
Speaker 1: voters who are disgusted with Abdul say Ed because abdulll
Speaker 1: Sayed he's a bigot. Abdul el Sayed is a guy's like, well,
Speaker 1: let's not talk about the killing of the the Iatola
Speaker 1: because it's going to make a lot of people in
Speaker 1: my who are my constituent said, it's gonna be a
Speaker 1: lot of muslim sad said that a terrorist is dead.
Speaker 1: This is what they're going to be said by. Can
Speaker 1: we discuss the madness of this? And of course it's
Speaker 1: okay to note that Abdul Lsayed is connected with these radicals,
Speaker 1: with these leftists, connected with these communists.
Speaker 2: There's nothing wrong with this whatsoever.
Speaker 1: Noah Roffman does Abby Phillips show, and I do. I
Speaker 1: wish he wouldn't, except he's so good at it. And
Speaker 1: this was exactly the conversation that came up.
Speaker 5: There is a lot to talk about when it comes
Speaker 5: to Elsai ed in terms of his past statement, his
Speaker 5: present positions.
Speaker 2: All of that.
Speaker 5: Is it the right political strategy for Republicans to focus
Speaker 5: on his Muslim name, call him an islam S say
Speaker 5: he wants to institute Saria law versus actually just feel
Speaker 5: with the actual policy that he supports.
Speaker 1: Isn't this part of the actual policy that he supports.
Speaker 1: This is all part of him. He has made this
Speaker 1: the part of the election. If you can't say my
Speaker 1: full name, keep it.
Speaker 2: Out your damn mouth.
Speaker 1: That's him, as if somehow abdul Rahman is something we
Speaker 1: cannot say. But hey, he wants to start this fight.
Speaker 1: And as Noah Rofman explains, solfare game.
Speaker 6: Unlike an all of the above when it comes to
Speaker 6: this guy, he says, you know, I'm not a socialist,
Speaker 6: not like those guys. I'm a capitalist. All I want
Speaker 6: to do is nationalize the healthcare industry, eliminate border per
Speaker 6: control and sees wealth, not to use it for anything,
Speaker 6: but just to make the playing field fair.
Speaker 2: But definitely not a communist.
Speaker 6: But yes, they can absolutely focus on what I regard
Speaker 6: as anti Western ideals, like the notion that maybe he
Speaker 6: shouldn't celebrate the death of Ayatola Ali Kamani because his
Speaker 6: constituencies might be sad about that. Like the fact that
Speaker 6: he couldn't issue a condemnation, full throat, at unequivocal condemnation
Speaker 6: of an attempted terrorist attack on a Michigan synagogue that
Speaker 6: would have killed one hundred and four Jewish children without
Speaker 6: condemning Israel in the very same sentence, And like the
Speaker 6: fact that he peals around with a s on piker.
Speaker 1: That is very well said, and what he brought up
Speaker 1: there is key to this conversation I'm going to bring
Speaker 1: you back to with Jesse arm and this guy Niel Stanage.
Speaker 1: It's that in the same sentence he couldn't say, how
Speaker 1: dare these terrorists engage in terrorism against the synagogue?
Speaker 2: You know the guy who tried to drive through the synagogue.
Speaker 1: It is just the truck was too wide for the
Speaker 1: hallways in the synagogue. Oh, I can't just condemn them,
Speaker 1: We have to condemn Israel as well. This is akin
Speaker 1: to when what's your name, ilhano mar the Jew hating
Speaker 1: bigot her or she did to leave I get my
Speaker 1: jew hating. Bigot's confused sometimes. And they were going to
Speaker 1: have this big thing in the house condemning her, and
Speaker 1: instead what did they do. They didn't condemn her anti Semitism.
Speaker 1: They condemned all hate. That's a cop out. You have
Speaker 1: to talk about the thing. The thing is the story.
Speaker 1: So the point that this guy, this Irish journalist Niel
Speaker 1: Stenad just trying to make is that people say that
Speaker 1: abdul Lsayed is going to have to do a lot
Speaker 1: of outreach and bring Democrats to his society only one
Speaker 1: by one percent. He has a lot of outreach issues.
Speaker 1: He is saying, well, what about Haley Stevens.
Speaker 2: She'll have a lot of.
Speaker 1: Outreach issues because she was in favor of the Biden administration.
Speaker 1: The Biden administration did a terrible job regarding what Israel
Speaker 1: and the Palestinians. Abdul Lsayed is on the side of
Speaker 1: the Dssay is on the side of the communists and
Speaker 1: on the side of the Islamists. His words and his
Speaker 1: connection points Haley Stevens is a leftist and yes she waited.
Speaker 1: She likes way too many large scale government policies and
Speaker 1: I wouldn't vote for her in a general election, but.
Speaker 2: She doesn't have anywhere near the outreach to do.
Speaker 1: But when you are obsessed, and when Israel is the
Speaker 1: everything and bringing that up and trying to tear that
Speaker 1: down is the only way you can connect to voters,
Speaker 1: you will bring it up in everything. And that's the
Speaker 1: point that gets made here. This is what this guy,
Speaker 1: this reporter is doing. And Jesse arm and and and
Speaker 1: uh Jason rants also they they're right on this, Like
Speaker 1: what what possibly could you think is real?
Speaker 2: In your statement?
Speaker 1: You hate Israel so much that you think Hailey Stevens
Speaker 1: would have to do the same outreach as Abdul l
Speaker 1: si Ed and the outreach he's going to have to
Speaker 1: do as a matter of share politics and honesty.
Speaker 2: That isn't the case. And then this happens.
Speaker 7: She would have shed the voting for her for human
Speaker 7: rights while shoveling weapons to mister with which to cover.
Speaker 2: But it always goes.
Speaker 8: Back to every single time, which is a perfect example
Speaker 8: of like some of what you're talking about, like the
Speaker 8: coded language and whatnot else, I d has brought up
Speaker 8: a pack and brings it up absolutely every single time
Speaker 8: you can because he wants to talk about the Jews
Speaker 8: and the people that you're talking about, even because they
Speaker 8: support the most oh God.
Speaker 2: Support. So that was Jason rants.
Speaker 1: He's absolutely correct, absolutely positively correct. Every time they bring
Speaker 1: up a pack, it's like an angel gets its wings.
Speaker 2: It's nuts.
Speaker 1: Apak is Americans who yes, support Israel, they ain't even
Speaker 1: shy about it. They support Israel. Well, the problem is
Speaker 1: they're deciding our foreign policy. Qatar gives in multiples more
Speaker 1: money than a pack. Lots of groups give money, and
Speaker 1: of course they lobby. My gosh, this is nothing new.
Speaker 1: If you don't want to vote for somebody because they
Speaker 1: take that kind of money, it's fine. I mean your vote,
Speaker 1: you do it, that what you will. But Apak is evil,
Speaker 1: is boogeyman b s and everybody knows it. And Rance
Speaker 1: is pointing this out. And when the Irish journalist gets
Speaker 1: all angry about it and lying about it and vicious
Speaker 1: about it, it's Jesse arm who steps in with a
Speaker 1: doozy of a line, even because.
Speaker 2: They support.
Speaker 6: We understand that Ireland cares a lot about Palestine, but.
Speaker 2: Some people don't. It's such a good line. You could
Speaker 2: tell when you've gotten under somebody's skin. Chill.
Speaker 1: We understand that Ireland cares a lot about Palestine is
Speaker 1: an absolutely fantastic's a banger. It is such a good
Speaker 1: line because within the line, what is he what he
Speaker 1: is exposing? I don't even know if Jesse he must
Speaker 1: have realized it when he did it, because you realize
Speaker 1: when he did it he exposed posed. What is the
Speaker 1: argument against rational thought? The argument against rational thought is emotional.
Speaker 1: The argument against rational thought is the emotional argument. Just
Speaker 1: scream Israel bad, Just scream Israel murderers, Just scream Israel guilty.
Speaker 1: And allow me to be more clear. I never said
Speaker 1: you had to like Israel.
Speaker 2: I don't care. I mean, that's up to you.
Speaker 1: The people who say we shouldn't give any foreign aid
Speaker 1: to Israel, I've got no issue with those people. My
Speaker 1: question is only what other nations do you not want
Speaker 1: to give foreign aid to? Cutting off foreign aid is
Speaker 1: an absolutely acceptable political discussion. We can discuss whether it's
Speaker 1: the right idea or the wrong idea. You should petition
Speaker 1: your members of Congress if you believe in that, and
Speaker 1: absolutely push them to vote in that direction. I don't
Speaker 1: think there's anything wrong with that at all. But the
Speaker 1: concept of aid, and in all the ways that can
Speaker 1: be given is always not about the nation, and it's
Speaker 1: about what is in our best interest. And that's something
Speaker 1: that these groups never begin to talk about. If we
Speaker 1: want to get rid of all furn aid, fine by me.
Speaker 1: I'm not gonna get upset. I'm not gonna shed a tear.
Speaker 1: Great Now, do we get to lower our taxes or
Speaker 1: are we gonna end up shoveling into other nations through
Speaker 1: some other methodology? I mean, it won't be USA, I
Speaker 1: D because we got rid of that crap. The argument
Speaker 1: that this guy, this journalist Stanage is making is an
Speaker 1: emotional one because his hatred overwhelms his ability to be
Speaker 1: a journalist. Do you think that guy can do any
Speaker 1: type of actual, unbiased reporting. Oh honey, you don't believe that,
Speaker 1: and neither does anybody else.
Speaker 2: No one believes it. That's what makes this so great.
Speaker 1: Now, aren't I contradicting myself that this exposing that took
Speaker 1: place on CEA wouldn't happen if this show didn't exist.
Speaker 1: Do Zabi, Phillips, Shaw and CNN didn't exist? Maybe, but
Speaker 1: maybe the answer is you don't even have these kinds
Speaker 1: of conversations that become these unhinged yelling fests.
Speaker 2: Look, I've been part of that on a lot of levels.
Speaker 2: It sucks. I don't know.
Speaker 1: Maybe there's a good in it that I'm just not
Speaker 1: willing to recognize. Maybe there's a good in it, and
Speaker 1: I just know it's not for me. Maybe this is
Speaker 1: the way you get viewers in today's world, and that's
Speaker 1: just ugly. In any case, It's a good job by
Speaker 1: Jesse arm and Jason Rantz and Noah Rothman right there.
Speaker 1: This is Tony Katz today. Lots and lots and lots
Speaker 1: of primary is going on this evening, and I just
Speaker 1: have no reason to think that the leftists won't go
Speaker 1: further and further and further left.
Speaker 2: Do you.
Speaker 1: I didn't think so, Tony Katz, Tony Kats Today, Good
Speaker 1: to be with you, Minnesota primary. You've got that Senate race.
Speaker 1: I have no reason to think that Peggy Flanagan isn't
Speaker 1: going to pull this out. The lieutenant governor, the one
Speaker 1: who wears a hit job and shows her love of Islamist,
Speaker 1: the one who wears t shirts that say protect trans
Speaker 1: kids and it's got a knife on it because she's
Speaker 1: totally down to be violent. I have no reason to
Speaker 1: think that it won't be her. You take a look
Speaker 1: at the polling in Wisconsin, the governor's race. I have
Speaker 1: no reason to think it isn't going to be Francesca
Speaker 1: Hung and it's not going to go any other way.
Speaker 1: Somebody who believes in data center moratoriums at the first
Speaker 1: coold Lord data center moratoriums. We may disagree on this,
Speaker 1: but can we at least agree that the moratorium is
Speaker 1: a terrible idea. I'll gladly dig into more of this.
Speaker 2: It's just madness.
Speaker 1: Oh also, she's a full on comedy supported by the DSA.
Speaker 1: I will have the results for you tomorrow. Everyone, take care,