← The Morning Meeting
The Morning Meeting
"A Whole Civilization Will Die Tonight": Trump Gives Iran Final Warning as It Rejects Ceasefire Deal
01:01:06
Loading summary
Transcript112 lines
- [00:04]
Mark Levin
The 8pm deadline, Eastern Time, might have been an 8am deadline. I got a tip this early this morning that the President might not wait, feeling that the Iranians were not going to negotiate in good faith. So he's posted on True Social. We'll show you that in just a moment. It's quite. It's quite something. And there's widespread reports that Carg island is under military attack of the military sites, not the. Or the energy sites, not the military sites. And there may be more attacks before 8pm tonight. Joining us now, our two co hosts for today, Eric Erickson. Eric, Kevin Walling. Gentlemen, just quick response, Kevin, are you thinking that a negotiation settlement is out of the question now or still possible?
- [00:43]
Kevin Walling
It looks that way, especially with your reporting right now about what's going on on Cargill Island. The President is actually going in and not backing down this time.
- [00:52]
Eric Erickson
I think that war is. More war is coming.
- [00:55]
Mark Levin
Yeah. Okay. Let me run through the day book and then we're gonna get a full conversation about where we are. We'll show you what the President posted this morning and why it seems significant to many. The Vice President's already talked this morning. He's in Hungary with Orban. We'll listen to him and then we'll be eager to hear what you all think about what's going on. Please raise your hand. If you're interested in getting in the conversation. Please put in the chat. If you spot any tweets you think we should know about or true social posts, let us know. And if you're watching on x or on YouTube on this day, as all days, with the prospect of human children, as human shields and other horrors of war before us, please no smack in the chat. Peace, love and understanding for all. The President's at the White House today. Executive Time now participates in a policy meeting, closed press at 4pm and then is having lunch with Sergio Gore, his ambassador to India, close friend of his, who was up until relatively recently the White House personnel director. Not sure why that's on the public schedule. If this schedule holds, we will not see the President today. Although, as I said, we've already seen the Vice President. He is meeting along with his wife, both in Hungary, to support Orban in his uphill climb to win the election on the weekend. And he's talked, as I said already. We'll listen to that in a moment. House and Senator out. There's extraordinary amount of chaos going on, particularly with Speaker Johnson as he navigates about seven different thorny issues and no real majority. Georgia, where Eric Lives is holding their runoff today for the House seat held by Marjorie Taylor Greene. Polls close at 7. Britain hosts a meeting of allied military officers to discuss plans for securing the Strait of Hormuz. Today around 11, the UN Security Council is going to get ready to vote on a resolution to protect commercial shipping in the Strait of Hormuz. Durable good Orders came out. They were disappointing. Dow is down, Dow futures are down, oil is up and oil futures are way up. So let me just get a quick sponsor in here and then we're going to go the the news. Thank you for your patience here as we navigate a fluid situation. Cozy Earth will give you 20 off everything on the site as Mother's Day approaches. Do yourself a favor, do all your Mother's Day shopping right now. Grab your other device and type in cozyearth.com and use the promo code morning for 20 off everything you want to get to create comfort designed for the women in your life. From Cozy Earth. From the bathrobes to the slippers, the bubble cuddle blanket, all great gifts. I'm giving two of those three already and I may double back for the third. Let's Mother's Day be a reminder that the women in your life, the moms in your life, deserve some special treatment. No better special treatment than the products from Cozy Earth. Go to cozy earth.com again use the promo code two way right now for 20% off everything on the site. And when you get the post purchase survey say I took a break from the war to buy my mom and mom's in my life some presents again cozyearth.com promo code two way thank you for your attention to this matter.
- [03:52]
Matt Ebert
I started with one shop. No college degree, no big investors. It was just a willingness to work. Over time that one shop turned into a multi billion dollar business called Crash Champions. All the lessons I learned along the way came from the grind and that's what my show podcrash is all about. We have real conversations with people who've built things the hard way. We talk to founders, athletes and blue collar leaders who kept going when things got tough. You'll hear stories of grit, leadership and growth. Plus real world lessons you can take back to your team and your life tomorrow.
- [04:26]
Mark Levin
When you get momentum, you step on the gas. That's how you get separation from everybody else.
- [04:31]
Kevin Walling
I was at Harvard Law School as blah blah blah. I looked up.
- [04:33]
Mark Levin
Let me tell you something. There's kids in my neighborhood putting in
- [04:35]
Kevin Walling
Sheetrock that are smarter than you.
- [04:37]
Mark Levin
AI is going to disrupt a lot of stuff.
- [04:39]
Kevin Walling
It is never going to disrupt physical
- [04:42]
Mark Levin
blue collar trade skill.
- [04:43]
Eric Erickson
And the guy just looked at me
- [04:45]
Kevin Walling
and he said it's bloody impossible. So I asked him this question.
- [04:48]
Eric Erickson
I said it's impossible.
- [04:49]
Matt Ebert
Unless that's Podcast with me Matt ebert, watch on YouTube and listen wherever you get your podcasts.
- [05:00]
Mark Levin
All right, gentlemen, there's a lot to show and let's just try to work our way through it, starting with the most important thing, which is the truth social post that the President put up just a little while ago within the Last hour is 103 please. I'll read it. And then Eric, I'd love to know, have you parse it and say what's what where you think that leaves us as compared to before this, knowing that currently, again, they're widespread reports that Carg island is under attack by US And Israeli forces. A whole civilization will die tonight, never to be brought back again. I don't want that to happen, but it probably will. However, now that we have complete and total regime change where different, smarter and less radicalized minds prevail, maybe something revolutionarily wonderful can happen. Who knows? We will find out tonight. One of the most important moments in the long and complex history of the world. 47 years of extortion, corruption and death will finally end. God bless the great people of Iran. Eric there's elements in there that suggest war and some that maybe suggest he's pushing still for peace. How do you read that complex?
- [05:59]
Eric Erickson
I read it as a negotiation tactic, the back and forth. I actually am increasingly embracing the idea that Trump is doing the madman theory of make him think he actually is crazy even though he's not, and maybe they'll fold. I think the problem for the president and a lot of the foreign policymakers in Washington is that the Iranian regime is not crazy. They're actually fundamentalists. And they really do believe the apocalyptic rhetoric about bringing about the end of America and Israel to bring back the Mahdi. And that's rational to them and to secular Westerners, including the president. They don't understand this. So the president's trying to out crazy people that secularists would say is crazy. Ultimately, I think this leads to bombings or the president gets further stigmatized as Taco. And I don't think he's going to chicken out on this. He understands at the end of the day, regime change is fundamental because the Democrats, if anything, have moved the goalposts so much that the only way for them to be able to credit the president with winning now is to actually change the regime.
- [06:55]
Mark Levin
Kevin?
- [06:57]
Kevin Walling
Yeah, I mean, I agree a lot with what Eric was saying. You do have a fundamentalist regime that again, and I go back to the 1980s when they were throwing literally their children, 11, 10 year olds at the Iraqis during that eight year war. When you have that mentality of a regime that doesn't care about the health and safety of their own children, the next generation in that country, you're not dealing with a rational individuals or rational government on the other side. And I do think the president is going to. And there's some reporting right now on the forescreen that Israel is already targeting some of the bridges and infrastructure right now. Mark to your point, not waiting to that 8pm deadline. Israel already issued warnings for Iranians to stay off the, the highways and the railways. And it looks like some of the element of that is already going on even before that deadline.
- [07:48]
Mark Levin
Yeah. So there is the intermediate position, maybe some bombing today as negotiations take place. Here's the vice president a little while ago with Orban at a press conference and he says openly he's in communication with Steve Wyckoff about potential negotiations which involve lots of different countries, not just Pakistan and Turkey, but reportedly China as well and a lot of others, Oman, et cetera. Here is the vice president today, moments ago, really, with Orban in Hungary. 122, please.
- [08:27]
Vice President
So you asked if there's new information and I don't unless I have a text message from Steve. I do have a text message from Steve Woodkoff. Wouldn't he like to know the subject of this message? But no, I need to read it first before I talk about it. But here's, here's what time is it United States right now? Okay, that makes sense. All right.
- [08:48]
Eric Erickson
Okay.
- [08:48]
Vice President
So, so Natalie, on this question of the deal, I really think there are two pathways. The president's been very clear about this. There are two pathways that this thing is ultimately going to end. First of all, the United States has largely accomplished its military objectives. There are still some things that we'd like to do. For example, an Iranian ability to manufacture weapons that we'd like to do a little bit more work on militarily. But fundamentally the military objectives of the United States have been completed. So that means, as the president has said, very shortly this war is going to conclude. And I think the nature of the conclusion is ultimately up to the Iranians. I think there really are two pathways, and I'm oversimplifying this a little bit, but I think pathway one is where the Iran Iranians decide they're going to be a normal country. They're not going to fund terrorism anymore. They're going to be part of the, of the world system of commerce and exchange. And that's going to mean much better things for them economically. It's going to mean better things for the peace and safety of the world. It's going to mean a lot of good things for a lot of people all over the planet. That's option A. Okay. Option B is if the Iranians don't come to the table and they stay committed to terrorism, to terrorizing the their neighbors, not just Israel, but of course their Arab neighbors too, then the, the economic situation in Iran is going to continue to be very, very bad and frankly it will probably get worse. And so what the President has asked his entire team to do, particularly Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner, is to figure out what are the contours of a potential deal, what are they willing to do? Because militarily it frankly doesn't matter one way or the other to us. It's fundamentally a question of what does this look like afterwards. And that has been what the negotiations been focused on. And the President's been also been very clear that while the Iranians are trying to exact as much economic costs through the Straits of Hormuz, the United States has the ability to extract much greater economic costs on Iran than on, than Iran has on an ability to extract costs on us or on our friends in the world. So I hope that they're smart. The President has set a deadline for about 12 hours from now in the United States. We're going to find out but there's going to be a lot of negotiation between now and then and I'm hopeful that it gets to a good resolution.
- [10:52]
Mark Levin
All right. A lot of negotiation, a lot to get to. Let me get through this here. The, the negotiators, the intermediaries have a great incentive to suggest negotiations are going well. They want to get a deal. The President has an incentive to say well, it's possible because he doesn't want to be seen as close minded about negotiations. Here's a Tweet about the. 114 please from one of the negotiators about the prospect of a deal today. 114 please. Caution is warranted. But signals coming out of Islamabad point to a possible breakthrough in the coming hours with Egypt, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and reportedly Beijing now involved in the process. A ceasefire could be closed still early, still fragile and handle with care. Now here's a tweet from the Iranian Ambassador to Turkey. 115 Pakistan Positive and Productive endeavors and goodwill and good office to stop the war is approach a critical, sensitive stage. Stay tuned for more that suggests again, perhaps the Iranians want to negotiate or perhaps they, like President Trump, don't want to be seen as being opposed to a deal. Here's why a deal seems extremely far fetched to me. Washington Post correctly reports this. Where is this one? This is 108 please. The United States put forward a plan, 15 point plan. Okay, the, the Iranians put a plan out yesterday. We don't know the whole thing, but it's ridiculous. It includes things like Congress will have to sanction the approve and assert that there's going to be peace and no more bombing. As if Donald Trump's going to go to Congress. As if the Congress is going to do that. It's ridiculous anyway. Washington Post. A regional official familiar with the messages, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said there is no common ground between the US And Iranian lists and Iran doesn't want a ceasefire. The US Would take a ceasefire even though Donald Trump hasn't fully signed off on this. I'm told the US would be open to a ceasefire and opening the strait and then try to work things out, but Iran doesn't want that. Iran wants a Congress approved full on agreement. So Eric, how could there be a deal today that would be acceptable?
- [13:03]
Eric Erickson
I don't see that there could be without the Iranians folding on a lot of these things. And this is a war for survival for the regime in Iran. They also understand that if they're weakened enough, they're terrified of their own people, the majority of whom don't support them. So how do the. How, how do you get both sides together when you have one side that is fundamentally premised on the annihilation of Israel and the other wants to stop that? These are irreconcilable positions and they always have been, which I just think all along the plan has been to try to bring regime change. I mean, the President had that statement yesterday about they were attempting to arm the Iranian people, which I had heard from the administration. They were doing. And the Kurds kept the gun. So they're still trying to overthrow a regime that wants to kill all the Israelis and us. How do you reconcile it without war, Eric?
- [13:52]
Mark Levin
Kevin, do you see a prospect of any sort of deal today just like the best?
- [13:56]
John Norton
No.
- [13:56]
Kevin Walling
And again, we also have to remember both sides are engaging in maximalist positions in terms of what they're putting out there and pontificating about in the media and on social media. And again, I think it's also a head fake from that Iranian ambassador that you mentioned that message saying, saying that we're reaching this critical stage. It's been productive so far. I think that's trying to see some of the moral ground, the high ground, that if we go in and attack these positions and take out some of the energy infrastructures, water infrastructure, what have you, they can say we were again, negotiating in good faith, just as they did during the situation with Oman when we were in conversations with them six weeks ago, and that America is acting alone with Israel now. So I think, obviously there's a lot of head fakes going on, but you have these maximalist positions on both sides without any kind of middle ground, certainly both behind the scenes and what's playing out in front of the cameras.
- [14:58]
Mark Levin
So this morning on Morning Joe, Richard Haas and Jake Sullivan asserted that attacks on Iranian targets, like energy, will make it less likely that the Iranians will come to the table, that the people of Iran won't like it, and that the, the mentality of the leaders of Iran, whoever they are, is such that if you strike them and try to destroy their country, they're not. They're going to be less likely. I don't know how somebody makes that judgment definitively. I could argue it either way. But I'd like to hear from you two. Kevin, first. The alternative argument, of course, is you got to bring them to their needs. You have to make them see that they have no alternative but to give up the lives that they've had, or they'll be killed and their country will be destroyed. So do you have a position between those two, or you, like me, think there's really no way to know?
- [15:49]
Kevin Walling
I mean, the striking thing to me is, you know, we were so in awe back on December 28, in the days after seeing these massive movements, you know, in the public square where Iranians were slaughtered by the regime in the tens of thousands. The fact that we're not seeing that element of a public engagement, obviously you had the former shah's son out there still trying to rally the troops from outside the regime and outside the country's borders. But the fact that you're not seeing that kind of movement on the ground, that's what gave us so much hope. That's why the president said hope is on the way. And you shared this great piece from the AP, Mark, yesterday, traveling through the country where you still see Iranian flags flying of the regime on buildings that have been caved in, destroyed by our forces and Israeli forces, and really, a Rallying cry of the people. Supposedly, again, this is all monitored through the monitors of the Iranian regime when it comes to press and stuff like that. But the fact that you haven't seen that level of public engagement, taking on the regime directly is surprising to me. And I don't know if now targeting, you know, and making their lives more difficult will have that effect.
- [17:01]
Mark Levin
Eric, do you have a point of view to tax on. On these, on these assets, make it more or less likely they'll negotiate?
- [17:08]
Eric Erickson
I think that they're not going to negotiate regardless of what you do. So you might as well get rid of the regime. You know, you've got several million people in Iran who support the Iranian regime, and they are armed and they are allowed to voice their support for the regime. But you have 10 times more who don't, who live as hostages in their own country. I grew up with a lot of refugees in Dubai from them. When I was in fifth grade, the Iranians tried to blow up my school. They tried to blow up my dad's oil platform when I was in ninth grade. This is a fundamentalist regime that is evil, the very essence of the word. And they're not going to negotiate. And the idea that our foreign policy establishment, which frankly got us to the point where Iran is on the verge of nuclear weapons by constantly coddling and believing them, because the secular elites, including Jake Sullivan, do not understand the nature of the regime they're dealing with. They treat everything as sort of some sort of rational, Western, secular view. And clearly these people don't really believe the things they say they believe, when in fact they do. We're on the verge of Iran having nuclear weapons, which they would use. I heard someone the other day say that, you know, really, the Iranians, that they just want to have nuclear weapons so we can't bully them. This is a country that funds terrorism around the world and calls for the death of the United States and Israel. They want weapons not because, like North Korea, they want them because they actually want to use them. And we're here because of people like Jake Sullivan. And by the way, I just got to say the regime is dead. The backups to the regime are dead. The backups to the backups of the regime are dead. So who are these people even talking to to get an idea of what the Iranian regime actually thinks and wants right now?
- [18:45]
Mark Levin
There's a name that was reported this morning. I gotta. I gotta find it and call it up. That's who they say people. People are negotiating with. But let me look, let me look at the name real quick.
- [18:57]
Kevin Walling
But to Eric's, but to Eric's point, you know, the regime doesn't even care about its own people, right? So again, if we think that's going to be a leverage point, you know, you know, again, to bring the regime to the table, to Eric's point, I don't think they're ever going to negotiate and regime change is the only way forward here because again, when you fundamentally don't care about the well being of your own people, then you know, you're going to do these things that strike at the heart of their, their safety and their well being without a care in the world.
- [19:28]
Mark Levin
I've got two new pieces of news to share with you. But the name of the person who is now being reported is dealing with the international mediators is Ahmad Vahedi, the new head of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. I don't know if that's true. I don't know much about him. But the President continues to refer to people who are more reasonable to deal with. Okay, here's the news, ladies and gentlemen, first of all, Reuters is now speaking to a senior Iranian source, don't know who that is, who says to Reuters, flexibility will be shown. When we see flexibility from the US Side, okay, there's not going to be flexibility from the US Side on certain bottom line things like access to the nuclear material and ending their missile and terrorism program. So again, I don't, I don't even understand how these conversations are happening now when they seem so far apart. And the Vice President reaffirmed today something that I've been reporting, I think exclusively maybe for a while, which is conventional weapons that have never been used in this kind of battle are waiting to be used. And I believe the President, in his, in his statements of the last 48 hours is referring to this. Here's what the vice President said at his later in his press conference. He said, I hope they make the right response. They've got to know we've got tools in our toolkit that we so far haven't decided to use. President can decide to use them and will decide to use them if the Iranians don't change their course of conduct. So this, when the President talks about this being one of the most historic days in the history of the world and eliminating a civilization, we could see a type of warfare today could see we've never seen before on this planet. Don't know what that would involve. Not nuclear weapons, but, but some sort of con. I'd say maybe conventional weapon of Mass destruction. Eric, what does the President do if his. If the CIA tells him the Iranians have. Have in fact put children in front of targets as human shields? What does he do then?
- [21:25]
Eric Erickson
That's the hard one, and they probably will. It's the nature of the regime. You know, the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps has power plants tied to a lot of their facilities that we haven't bombed. And you could go after those facilities, but that's probably where they put the kids. And in that case, I think the President still does it and blames the Iranians. The problem here for this administration is that they're not losing the war, but they are losing the propaganda campaign. And the media, the democrats, the Iranians, the social media influencers, even some on the right are savaging the President on these things. And they will, with the body count as well, with pictures of kids, the accidental strike on the school, apparently they'll amplify these things, and the President's gonna have to be able to deal with that. At the same time, this is the nature of the Iranian regime. If we can't attack Iran because they put innocent civilians in harm's way, you can't attack Iran. And that gives Iran maximalist leverage against the United States. If we're not willing to attack because they do these atrocious things, which they already do.
- [22:31]
Mark Levin
Eric, if you were an advisor to the president and he asked you what to do with that information, what would you say?
- [22:36]
Eric Erickson
I would say bomb Iran. The only way to stop Iran is to execute regime change. You still got to figure out how to arm the Iranian people. Who. I think the President is right. From a statement yesterday. You don't have to arm all of them, just a portion enough that the regime knows that they'll shoot back.
- [22:51]
Mark Levin
Kevin, what would advice.
- [22:52]
Kevin Walling
But Eric, But Eric, does that. Does that involve some level of boots on the ground to arm these folks and make sure that we're arming the right folks?
- [22:59]
Eric Erickson
You know, probably at this point is going to have to. And this is. This is where you can relitigate whether or not we should have done this to begin with. Because the situation now is we have a tiger by the tail. We haven't defanged it, we haven't declawed it. We let go of it. It's going to maul us and try to kill us one way or the other, even if it takes some time. So should we have gone in? We can argue about that historically, but we're there now. We might as well get rid of the regime. The problem is how do we do it? And I do think we can use proxies to arm them. However, we've determined now the Kurds are not as reliable as we thought they were, since they were the proxies by whom we were arming the Iranians. We don't need to flood the country with soldiers, but we may have to send special operators in to negotiate with certain groups.
- [23:43]
Mark Levin
Yeah, I'm sure some are already there doing just that. But maybe, maybe more need to go. Of all the things the President said yesterday, and again, we always be forward looking here, but sometimes you got to look back to be forward. Of all the things he said yesterday, talking four different times to reporters at the Easter Egg Roll and then at a long press conference, the one that made me tip my. My sense of, sense of where this is headed, along with my reporting towards a military strike and then the negotiations are not real is a phrase the President used yesterday. And this is a view he's had about Iran, by the way, for four decades. This is 112, please.
- [24:21]
Carvana Advertiser
They say there might be eight. I don't know. I don't know. I think there might be none because they're very good bullshit artists. That's why. For 47 years they've been bullshitting other presidents and they haven't done the job. And people are looking, living in hell. You live in that country, they're living in hell. No, I think that 47 years of this stuff is long enough.
- [24:45]
Mark Levin
Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner came out of their previous negotiations saying to the President, these guys are bullshit artists. President didn't need convincing. That's what he thinks about them. And here's a polymarket. Will there be a ceasefire by April 30? 116. Will Poly Market that? Will the US and Iran have a ceasefire by the April 30? That's three weeks away. Poly Market wagers say 30% chance that there'll be a ceasefire by then. One more pie market. And because I want to talk about the straight up Hormuz, Will traffic return to normal by the end of April? So again, same time frame, 1:17, 16% chance. Now, those seem to me to be a little bit dissonant because if there's a ceasefire, there's going to be. It's going to have to involve the strait being open to some extent, maybe not a full return to normal. Kevin, the strait has gone, in the President's estimation, to the biggest problem, to no problem at all. Now, the centerpiece of the US request for a 45 day, cease fire and an opening of the strait. Where, where, where does the strait stand, do you think, in the administration's calculations about, about next steps?
- [25:53]
Kevin Walling
Well, I don't think these polymarkets factor in the fact that the Europeans are now on a zoom with their military folks talking about it. Certainly we're going to see some action from that. Listen, again, I think the president has been all over the place to some degree on the straight. Open it up, go in, you'll love it. This is. Open it using expletives in that post on Sunday. And again, the Iranians know this is the single choke point that they have this and their abilities still with some missiles to target allies in the region. We saw some missile attacks in the UAE reported overnight yesterday targeting energy facilities. So this is the only choke point that they have and they're going to continue to exercise that, I think effectively against us. And I don't see a solution there in the short term.
- [26:39]
Mark Levin
Eric.
- [26:41]
Eric Erickson
Yeah, look, I think the Strait has always been the big issue and it doesn't affect us as much as it affects the rest of the world. Only 8,9% of the oil that flows out of the Strait of Hormuz heads west beyond Europe, so. But it definitely affects global markets for oil. So we've got to figure out a way to reopen it. And again, I've always thought Carg island was largely just the distraction because the Abu Musa Islands that sit in the Strait of Hormuz or where Iran has military bases and airstrips on every island there, you've got to target those islands to be able to open the straits.
- [27:13]
Mark Levin
China and Russia have been pretty silent.
- [27:16]
Kevin Walling
And Mark maybe to your point too, we're going to see some of that new military kinetic hardware, what have you in those operations that you've, that you've talked about the last couple of weeks previewing potentially some new weaponry on the, on the battlefield.
- [27:30]
Mark Levin
China and Russia have been relatively quiet. Widespread reports that the Russians continue to help the Chinese, the Iranians in all sorts of ways and, and the Chinese role is a little bit more opaque. China would like things open, some oil's going through. I will point out, forgotten in many quarters, not here, that the, the President said he was given a gift of tribute by the Iranians, that a number of ships that the US would want to go through the strait would go through. I was then told that many more than the dozen or so or 18 or so that the President said he'd been gifted were expected to go through. As far as I know that hasn't happened, ladies and gentlemen. And this goes back to the President referring to the Iranians with the pejorative he did. He doesn't trust them. So unless he really just wants to cut him a break here today and say even though we're not close to a deal, talking is continuing and so let's, you know, let's let the civilization live for another day unless he just wants to cut him a break, there's just no basis to think that there's that the status quo of these talks is going to lead to anything through these intermediaries as well meaning as they might be. And, and as we said that are the strikes are already underway. Here's the Reuters Deadline 120 Please about the attacks on Kharg island and I'll just say I tweeted this a little earlier today. US Strikes military targets on, on Iran's Kharg Islands. Remember they previously hit military targets, not the energy targets. And so this is, this is not an escalation in that case but Israel continues to its targets, including reportedly energy targets. What I tweeted earlier today is the President, as we all know is a master of wanting a surprise attack and the 8pm deadline might have been bogus. He doesn't need to stand, he didn't need to hold to that. He doesn't need to give him till 8pm to start doing this. And of course the attacks simultaneous with attempts at negotiations. If you believe that the Iranians can be moved here or are maybe carrot and stick at the same time. Mike Lawler was on CNN after the President's true social post came out and John Berman asked him repeatedly, do you agree with the President that it's okay to destroy a civilization? And I'll just paraphrase what Mike Lawler said. He didn't want to answer and play that game, but how do you think. And Ron Johnson, a big supporter of the President, senator from Wisconsin came out and said he did not agree with attacking these civilian sites, energy sites and whether they're dual use or not. He was pretty emphatic on that. And then the two Murdoch papers editorial boards are split. The New York Post says yes, hit these targets. Paul, you go at the Journal says no, don't hit these targets. It'll only serve to move the hearts and minds of the Iranian people away from, away from supporting the US and opposing the regime. So Eric, if we think about the markets, Republicans in Congress, what are those two constituencies of the president think if he goes all in here tonight and starts hitting energy Targets, I think they'll
- [30:46]
Eric Erickson
ultimately, the Republicans will defend him. The markets will not be happy with it, although ultimately I think the markets will realize that the more stable option is for regime change. And I think international markets will recognize the stability you get from the Middle east without this regime would be good. The Republicans in Congress will ultimately circle the wagons around the President. They may demur as to whether or not they actually like some of the targets, but the overall mission they'll support.
- [31:14]
Mark Levin
The Dow is about to open. We'll watch it. They're down 112 as we move a minute away from the open. Kevin, thoughts on those two constituencies, the market and Republicans in Congress if the president does effectively move to destroy a civilization with Israel tonight?
- [31:30]
Kevin Walling
Yeah, I would say earlier on, the president maybe cared about that. The interesting thing in that press conference yesterday in the Brady briefing room was he was asked to some degree about the nature of this effort and he talked in kind of messianic terms that this is almost like God's ordained plan that the US Will take out this regime or take out and support the Iranian people. So he's now talking about it in this kind of language, which then speaks to me that, you know, he really doesn't care about what Republicans on the Hill think, really what the markets think, really what, you know, legal scholars out there saying if we attack civilian infrastructure, what that means in terms of war crimes and things like that, that he is now on this, this mentality in terms of the, the, the nature of this conflict now heading into its six week.
- [32:18]
Mark Levin
Eric, is Oceana Gold, is that one of your sponsors? You ever heard of that?
- [32:21]
Eric Erickson
Nope, not, not mine.
- [32:23]
Mark Levin
Not yours. All right, they're ringing. I just want to make sure they're ringing the bell today. And then at the Nat, I guess it's a NASDAQ bell, right? First was, first was Wall street, this nasdaq. I know you want to ring the bell on this day of all days, but that's what happens. All right, we'll, we'll watch and see what happens. Bitcoin is down. I see that, but we'll watch and see. I can take that down, but we'll continue to watch it and just chime in once we see some movement after the open air. All right, a couple more topics for us and then we're going to get to your questions. If you're here on the two way platform, we want to be in on the conversation. Whether you've raised your hand in the past or not. Please raise your hand if you'd like to participate. Eric, just your. Your kind of impressionistic read of the president. There's a report overnight, I think, in Axios, that the president's the most hawkish person. He said yesterday that God supports the United States in this conflict. Does he seem at peace? If it does, and, you know, he's used excitable and profane language in the last couple days, but does he seem to you, as someone who studied him closely, at peace with the possibility of destroying a lot of the Iranian economy, a lot of the ability of Iran to function as a society?
- [33:30]
Eric Erickson
Yeah, I actually think he does strike me as his mind is made up and determined. And I've got to say, Mark, and this is. We have this Twitter interaction a little while ago. I, I really do think he went into this with regime change. We talk a lot about the Israelis. We don't talk enough about the Saudis. He has a very good relationship with Mohammed bin Salman. And for those who don't appreciate this, the Saudis are considered the custodians of Islam and the custodians of Mecca. They have to allow any Muslim into their country to visit Mecca. They do not want a destabilized Iran. Israel would be perfectly happy with the destabilized Iran. Saudi Arabia would not. They don't want that violence spilling over into Saudi Arabia next year for the Hajj. So you've. You've got two of our major allies in the Middle east who Donald Trump has brilliant relationships with, both wanting a different regime. I think he's at peace with it.
- [34:22]
Mark Levin
Yeah. And, of course, we've heard reports consistently for the last week or so that the Gulf states, or at least some of them, also say we've crossed the Rubicon. There now needs to be regime change because we need stability back, and the only way to get stability back is regime change. Kevin, does the president seem at peace to you with. With what would be one of the most momentous military decisions made in the last 50 years?
- [34:45]
Kevin Walling
Yeah. Again, I think this president has always also wanted to be a wartime president. That's, you know, where, you know, American greatness has been, you know, in the past in terms of FDR and Lincoln. And I think in his. In his mind, he ascribes himself to that. And I think, you know, in the language that he said yesterday, they've been bullshit artists for 70, 47 years. All my predecessors have failed to deal with this. He thinks of it now in this mentality that he is the chosen one in order to do this. And I think also driving this has been the incredibly effective US military and the fact that sadly we've lost 13 service members in this. But the, the extent of the military attacks and their effectiveness, the fact that we have seen so little life in every American life on the battlefield is critical. But I think that he has been enthused by just the raw lethality of the American military. And that has also encouraged him that we haven't seen the higher level of casualties that a lot of people predicted, whether it be American service members or our allies in the Gulf. That you haven't seen that level of death and destruction on our side at least I think is also encouraging the president to go harder and deeper and take the fight more to this regime.
- [36:02]
Eric Erickson
Hey, Kevin, I just real quick, Kevin, would love to pick your brain on this one. I noticed after that Incredible Rescue. So four of the 47 Senate Democrats said something favorable about the military. But I'm kind of flabbergasted by the lack of Democratic statements. Even if they disagree with the president and wanted to attack the president. Just the speaking up in defense of the military. Does that strike you as odd?
- [36:29]
Kevin Walling
Yeah, it doesn't strike me as odd because I think right now my party will do and say anything against the president, even at a time of war. And I've criticized the party quite a bit in terms of Trump derangement syndrome, where you can thread the needle and be pro military and praise the incredible lethality of this military in one breath. And also question, you know, some of the motives for going into Iran in the first place. I get that argument. But the fact that you haven't seen so many Democrats lined up in support of the military going to Dover, you know, by example, in terms of lending their support to these service members is something I call out all the time on my side.
- [37:08]
Mark Levin
The Dow's opened down about 100 points so far. And sirens in Israel in at least two locations of possible Iranian attack. Kevin mentioned the AP story. Rare reporting inside Iran. A team of AP reporters was able to drive with a minder through the country from the north to Tehran. It's a great story, but it's all impressionistic. We don't really know what the Iranian people are thinking. And again, the president gets reports that the Iranian people are excited about more strikes. But that's not the CIA taking a survey. That's just chattering. The US of public opinion is the last thing I want to talk about. Really don't know what's up with. There's the AP story. 12 hour drive through Iran offers glimpses of destruction, defiance in daily life. I don't know what's going on with American public opinion. I read all the polls, but that story's moving too quickly. People are going to be against war. I don't think you really have a granular sense of what's actually going on. At least I don't. Kevin, how would you characterize the extent you can glean it from travel or talking to folks or talking to normies in your life? What does the American public think about the prospect of annihilating Iran?
- [38:17]
Kevin Walling
I think honestly, going into the six week our attention spans are so short that we've already moved on. I traveled internationally last week. So, you know, met a lot of people, not just Americans. You know, they had some interest in talking about the state of the war. But you know, to some degree, people it's not affecting everyday life to the extent that a lot of people I think going into this war thought it would, whether it be gas prices or inflation. And it shows the resilience of this economy. The president has thrown a lot at this economy, whether it be coming up on the anniversary of the Tariff Day, Liberation Day and things like that, that we haven't seen it brought back to the American people to an extent where they feel it in their everyday lives. And I think they just have generally moved on. You've seen some dip obviously in the polls across the board, obviously with independents. That's the number that I think the White House and Susie Wiles and James Blair look at the most because I think that's what is going to be determinative of the midterms. Democrats are going to feel some way, Republicans are going to feel the other way. Republicans have uniformly stood behind the president. That dip from the independents is what I think is giving the White House some caution in terms of their political thinking. But the American people generally, I think, are not necessarily super invested or, or interested in in the direction of this war.
- [39:34]
Mark Levin
Eric, you have an august readership and listenership. It's not necessarily a full cross section of America, but it's, it's a range of opinions. I'm sure some of your readers and listeners agree with Tucker, who eviscerated the president last night. What do you what's your sense of your own constituency and the wider American public on this?
- [39:52]
Eric Erickson
So I, I do hear from a lot of callers from my show. I'm one of the last, I think talk radio shows that still takes calls sellers from around the country and a lot of people, they wish we hadn't have done it had not have started this war. A lot of them wish that if we're going to do civilizational destruction, Congress should at least have a say in it. But also there's a real recognition that we started it, we got to finish it. A half measure here with the Iranians would be kicking a fire ant nest without or a hornet nest without, getting rid of the hornets of the fire ants. So people recognize that. At the same time, I do think, largely I'm with Kevin, that most people don't feel it in their daily life other than gas prices. And their gas prices are lower than the worst part of the Biden administration. So it's affecting them to a degree. But this war is an abstraction. There isn't a massive call up. People don't know soldiers who were going like they did to Iraq and Afghanistan. It has become a distraction. We'll see if that lasts or an abstraction. I will say this, though. If the President is able to topple this regime, when you look at American polling that a majority of Americans dislike Iran and think it's a rogue regime and should go away, you're gonna have 40% of America that never credits the President with anything because that's the nature of the business right now. But there will be independents who will credit the president and if it measurably then improves markets, I think he benefits by it. But it's gotta happen in the next month or two.
- [41:20]
Kevin Walling
Eric, that's interesting that the point you bring up with your listeners too, that some of them are interested in Congress's role and that really Congress for centuries has ceded power to the executive on that front. But it is interesting. You've got really intelligent listeners picking up on that element of Article 2, Article 1, dynamics at play here.
- [41:43]
Eric Erickson
Listen, I hear that a lot from people just that is Congress going to get involved in this? My real concern honestly is that Republicans and Democrats may scuttle the budget process here to try to cripple this effort. With the antagonism for voters, Republicans are starting to get scared of their own livelihoods and reelection campaigns.
- [42:02]
Mark Levin
For those who believe that President's provocative rhetoric or actions encourage Iran to negotiate by forcing them to the negotiating table, Reuters is now saying that Iran has closed all diplomatic and indirect channels of communication with the US Suspending the exchange of messages following the President's quote, whole civilization will die tonight. Post the back channel. Mr. Witkoff and Mr. Raichi. That has been one of the back channels and that according to Reuters, that is now done as well. And the vice President just talked about carg. We're trying to pull that up and the attack there. Okay, quick word from another sponsor and then we're gonna, we're gonna go to you. So please raise your hand if you want to end the conversation. And again, if you've never raised your hand, please feel free to. This is a forum for everybody very happy to have as a new sponsor given the time of year, it is True Work. True Work makes clothes that work with you when you're going outside. Whether you've got hard work to do in the garden or construction or anything you're doing building something, go to true work.com that's T R U W E R K dot com. Use the promo code. Two way 15% off. It's performance workwear brand that you'll just, you'll put it on and you'll see. It's just. You can do a lot more work around the house. Work outside wearing this as compared to normal clothes. Cotton blends normally restrict movement and get soaked after just a few raindrops. True Work uses advanced performance fabrics designed specifically for job site work. And of course, spring is a time when we're all going to be outside doing stuff. Four way stretch for bending, kneeling and climbing. Water resistant, functional pockets everywhere. I have yet to fill up all the pockets on my pants because they're just too many right now. You can get a sense of what this stuff is by going to truewerk.com code2way t r u e w e r k.com code2way for 15 off. Built like it matters, because it does. Try it. If you've got. If you're doing workarounds at the yard or anywhere else, give it a try.
- [44:08]
LifeLock Advertiser
It's tax season and at Lifelock, we know you're tired of numbers, but here's a big one you need to hear.
- [44:14]
Eric Erickson
Billions.
- [44:15]
LifeLock Advertiser
That's the amount of money and refunds the IRS has flagged for possible identity fraud. Now here's another big number. 100 million. That's how many data points LifeLock monitors every second. If your identity is stolen, we'll find Fix it. Guarantee one last big number. Save up to 40% your first year. Visit lifelock.com podcast for the threats you can't control. Terms apply.
- [44:38]
Mark Levin
All right, to your questions now, please come on in and let us know what's on your mind. We start with Professor Kennedy. Professor Kennedy, who loves. Who loves a good story, but does not like war.
- [44:49]
Eric Erickson
I love war.
- [44:50]
Kevin Walling
Hey, Professor.
- [44:52]
Professor Kennedy
Sorry, I'm a hawk. Good morning, everyone. Good morning, Two way community. Eric, I agree with you about these islands. I just don't. You know, I'm not the military strategist in the bunker there figuring it out for us. So I trust our generals and trust General Kane, but I would just think that I'm always been a supporter of taking Karg as more of a symbolic move than, you know, just take, you know, that we own the oil, more of like we can own it if we want. And I think we should destroy that jask or oil terminal as like a little donation to you know what, now you're just limited to Kharg and then wipe out that islands to help open up the strait. What do you think?
- [45:38]
Eric Erickson
You know, I think the President's hesitant to do anything to destroy Iran's oil infrastructure, which any new regime would need. It would be costly to rebuild. But for those of you who don't know, I did this telestrator on my show the other day. So the Strait of Hormuz is the deepest water of the Persian Gulf. The Persian Gulf is actually really shallow. It's about 150ft deep. An oil tanker, fully loaded can sink down to about 120ft deep. So that's why Iran controls so much. It doesn't just have the largest coastline with the Persian Gulf. That's where the deepest water is. And the channel through the Strait of Hormuz goes up and around. That's the deepest water. The current there is so fast, the Iranians can't actually mine the Strait of Hormuz because the mines wouldn't be able. They couldn't protect their own ships from the mines. They would get out of control. So it's back in. Most ships go north of the Abu Musa Islands and they mine that territory. If you control those islands in the Abu Musa Strait, right as you come out of the Strait of Hormuz, you've suddenly wiped out Iran's capacity to control the Strait of Hormuz. And I've kind of been baffled why in the last 35 days we haven't really started striking those islands harder. We focused on Kharg, which is more symbolic. And again, the Persian Gulf is so shallow that you have to export the oil to Kharg island to get a deep water port to get the oil out. That's significance Clark Island. But it's way up here and you've got the rest of the islands are down here, 300 miles away that actually control the strait.
- [47:05]
Mark Levin
Well, it's not symbolic though. If your goal is to destroy their economy, then it's true, but.
- [47:10]
Eric Erickson
And Again, I don't think that it would be wise to destroy the oil output because if you do want a new regime, they're going to have to get money. And that's the easiest way for them to get money.
- [47:19]
Mark Levin
Yeah.
- [47:22]
Kevin Walling
Not just the new regime, but also the President has teased quite a bit. And again, I think we've talked about this before, going back to the war in Iraq under the George W. Bush administration. He, you know, Trump has said for a long time we should have gone in and taken that oil. So I don't think he wants to, to that point, target those. And again, the Iranians have spent decades hardening their positions, specifically on those islands. So it is a little bit more of a difficult scenario because they know just how much of a choke point those islands are. And those positions are very encased, very hardened. And that's why the, one of the reasons why this trade isn't reopened.
- [47:57]
Mark Levin
I haven't seen this, but here's the vice President talking about the assault on Carg today from, from his press conference.
- [48:04]
Vice President
So you asked about Carg Island. You know, my understanding, you know, having talked to Pete and General Kane about this, is, is that we were going to strike some military targets on Carg Island. I believe we have done so. The President's deadline is, has been followed by, by us and everybody else. And he said very clearly we're not going to strike energy and infrastructure targets until the Iranians either make a proposal that we can get behind or don't make a proposal. But he's given them until Tuesday at 8 o'.
- [48:31]
Kevin Walling
Clock.
- [48:32]
Vice President
So I don't think the news in Carg island is, represents a change in strategy or represents any change from the President. United States. He continues to say the deadline is 8 o'.
- [48:41]
LifeLock Advertiser
Clock.
- [48:43]
Mark Levin
Hopefully he's having a quick dinner with sergio tonight at 7, so they're not having to watch the war over, over dessert. All right.
- [48:53]
Kevin Walling
I do think, but talking about the President's plans and stuff like that, it was interesting to me, Mark, that the president stayed in D.C. this entire weekend.
- [49:02]
Mark Levin
Yeah.
- [49:03]
Kevin Walling
And I think that also had something to do with the planning going into this week.
- [49:07]
Mark Levin
I agree. Nicole, welcome in. Tell folks who don't know where you are what's on your mind for Kevin and for Eric.
- [49:13]
Nicole
Good morning, guys. I am in Tennessee. I think that it's been interesting because while we are certainly showing a military advantage over Iran, it seems like they can't fight back in that way. And so they're taking more of an economic or political front towards the war and I think that up until this point we haven't really been waging war back in that way. And so when I see these threats about some of this infrastructure, I see that it's us trying to take the war back in those venues. And I do see that there is obviously this threat to the Iranian people. But I just am curious personally I don't think those talks were ever going to get anywhere. And I just am curious what level of pressure you guys think, whether it's political or economic or military is actually going to create an outcome or enough force that is going to turn out an outcome we're looking for.
- [50:17]
Mark Levin
Great question, Nicole. Kevin.
- [50:19]
Kevin Walling
Nicole, it's a really great question and I don't know, to answer your question, what level that we will have to go to to bring the Iranians to the table. I don't think, as Eric has said before, that that's really any possibility with this regime that again cares to zero degree about the health and well being of their own people. So if you don't have any kind of leverage like that to bring a regime to its knees and to negotiate in good faith, I don't see any scenario where that's going to happen. I think, Nicole, you bring up a good point too that we have to this degree targeted only military operations, facilities, ships, what have you and what is the Iranians done right in response, targeting our allies and their economies and their energy producing and their hospitals and things like that. So there is no moral equality to this regime based on what you're seeing. And again, when you're dealing with a regime like that, I don't think there's anything necessarily, especially in the short term that will bring them to their knees and bring them to the table.
- [51:22]
Mark Levin
Eric?
- [51:23]
Eric Erickson
Yeah, look, I very much agree with Kevin here. I don't know that we know the answer, but part of it has to involve the Iranian people themselves. I mean the President very much, as opposed to heavy boots on the ground in Iran. And I think the general consensus has been it would be a bad idea. So empowering the Iranian people, giving them weapons is part of the strategy that has to be deployed. And thus far we've apparently been taken by the Kurds who we thought we could work with to be able to do that.
- [51:51]
Mark Levin
Nicole, thank you. I'll just say I think the Iranian American community and the ones in London as well, they should be raising a huge fund for economic reconstruction. The US Government should have a plan on the table, ideally with other countries, the Gulf states too, because I think the moms and Dads in Iran who just wanted better lives for their kids, who were in the streets protesting against the government before the war started were doing it mostly because of economics, not because they don't like the totalitarian regime, although many of them don't. But what forced them into this treat was the economy. And I think the only way to win the hearts and minds is not, is not the bombing, although that could bring them to the table and could be encouraged by some people. The real way to flip this and to have real regime change rather than what the president's calling regime change is to, is to say the international community will give you a country, a real country where your kids can have a real opportunity. And that's not happened. And I'm disappointed in that. Thank you, Nicole. My friend Bill Hemmer, who's a great reporter over at Fox News, says this. Senior officials say a senior Trump official said, quote, we are absolutely in touch with Iran. Absolutely. The talks have been positive. If we get lucky, we will have something by the end of the day. Again, I'm not sure how current that is and I'm not sure it's meaningful because I don't see where the, where the deal is. But, but we should, we, we've all leaned into the prospect of war and I think we should hold open the possibility that there, there could be a deal for whatever reason. There could be something that's a placeholder. There's not going to be a full fledged deal today, but there could be something that's a placeholder that causes the president to hold off. And if he can get enough of a fig leaf to do that, he'd rather do that. He'd rather do that than destroy a civilization. I'm quite sure of that. But we'll see.
- [53:36]
Kevin Walling
Mark? What, Mark, what do you think that would look like? Is it other ships that they allow through the strait, A ceasefire? What? You know what?
- [53:43]
Mark Levin
I think the Iranians want to accept a version of a 45 day cease fire with ships going through and maybe, maybe some sort of agreement to not hit certain kinds of targets. But I don't know how the Israelis agree to that. You know, I don't think they're interested in that. But that's a separate, a separate, that's a good point. Brennan, welcome in. Thanks for being here. Tell folks who don't know where you are what's on your mind for Eric. Thank you. I'm calling in from Rhode Island. I want to get your take on. I sort of see this through degrading, co opting or eliminating as many of China's allies as we can before they feel they're ready to go on Taiwan 100%. So I sort of see this with that lens. What do you guys take on that? Eric?
- [54:30]
Eric Erickson
Look, I absolutely think that part of the entire strategy the President has had is. Is realigning the world to deal with the Chinese problem between Venezuela, which now China has to pay regular price for gas. I saw the other day that in Hong Kong, it's $16 a gallon for gasoline. Now in mainland China, not that expensive, but still much more expensive than us. You're curtailing the Iranian oil flow to China and you're also at the same time depriving Russia of its top outside arms manufacturer. Side note, I still think the President's going to have to deal with the Russians and stop coddling Putin because they we were able to fly B52s over Iran and refuel them in midair over Iran for two weeks without being impinged by weapons. And suddenly they had missiles to take out an F15. Someone sent them the radar and systems, probably the Russians. But we're totally trying to realign the world, understanding our position and our capabilities and hurting the Chinese. And I would note as well, the Chinese did send Iran weapons based on multiple press reports, and they all failed. So the big red flag that the Chinese may not be ready or capable, which I don't think it's a coincidence we saw more disappearances and purges in China after the supposed weapons failures in Iran.
- [55:48]
Mark Levin
Brandon, thank you. I want to get John Norton in. John, welcome in. Thank you for being part of Two Way. Tell folks who don't know where you are and what's on your mind. Got on you first, John. Okay.
- [56:02]
John Norton
In Pennsylvania. And my mind keep on the whole discussion of military victory versus political victory, my mind keeps going back to two words, Tet offensive, in which which was a huge military loss for the North Vietnamese but ultimately a political victory. And the North Vietnamese clearly understood that. That the war was about a political victory in the United States in order for them to prevail. I think they were ultimately right on that, actually. So that, you know, history rhymes, doesn't repeat, but that's a rhyme that I keep hearing.
- [56:43]
Mark Levin
Yeah. John, thank you for that. Kevin, thoughts on that historical parallel and the dangers there for the U.S. yeah,
- [56:48]
Kevin Walling
John, it's a really good point. Interestingly enough, you know, you saw the no Kings march the other weekend in the States across many cities and stuff like that. That and you know this. Obviously the war was on different placards and signs and stuff like that, but not to the extent that we're seeing, you know, during the Vietnam era in terms of buses having to line the White House grounds to keep protesters out. And again, I think that the American people have just been, you know, kind of acquiesced to what's going on to some degree. They, you know, they voice concerns in polls that they get and things like that. But you haven't seen kind of any kind of massive movements in the streets, mostly because I think to some degree people understand this is not a good regime. Not that the Viet Cong and the North Vietnamese were a good regime, but the fact that there's not a lot of sympathy, I think for this regime is one of the critical points in this. And the fact that obviously you saw that a few years into the conflict in Vietnam, in the war, and we're entering the sixth week here with the war in Iran and we'll see if anything bubbles up from the American people. But it's a really good point.
- [57:54]
Mark Levin
John. John, thank you. Thank you for coming on. Real quick, tell you what's coming up right now. I'm rolling into the second hour of the morning meeting on SiriusXM channel 111. We'll have plenty of time for calls today, so give me a call if you'd like to be part of the conversation. New episode of Next up drops later today. The latest edition of my 8 for 28 of the most likely Democrats to win the presidential nomination as well as coverage of Iran. And then special time tonight for two way tonight, 6pm eastern time. Closer to the deadline, 6pm eastern time. It'll stream here on the two way platform at 6pm as well as on YouTube live at 6pm Please don't send me emails at 5:05 asking me where I am. Where I am is Getting ready for 6:00pm Eastern Time. Please join us then. And morning meeting tomorrow. Larry o' Connor and hi Amore will be here. Eric, for those individuals living under rocks, how do people subscribe to your content?
- [58:47]
Eric Erickson
You know, they can go to Eric Erickson.com or the easiest way is to text my name, Eric.
- [58:51]
Mark Levin
Eric to 337-773-3777. Eric, always so grateful to you and you make for time for us because we know how busy you are. So thank you for being here. Kevin, thank you. Thank you for making time again. I'll see everybody on SiriusXM in just a couple minutes. And then tonight at special time two way tonight 6:00pm Eastern time. See you then. Thanks, everybody. Have a great.
- [59:31]
Carvana Advertiser
Hey, sweetie. Your mother showed me this Carvana thing for selling the car. I'm gonna give it a try. Wish me luck. Me again. I put in the license plate. It gave me an offer.
- [59:40]
Mark Levin
Unbelievable.
- [59:41]
Carvana Advertiser
Okay, I accepted the offer. They're picking it up Tuesday from the driveway. I haven't even left my chair. It's done. The car is gone. I'm holding a check anyway. Carvana. Give it a whirl. Love ya.
- [59:53]
Kevin Walling
So good you'll want to leave a voicemail about it.
- [59:56]
Mark Levin
Sell your car today on Carvana. Pick up. Fees may apply.