← Breaking Points with Krystal and Saagar
Breaking Points with Krystal and Saagar
3/20/26: Bibi Demands Ground Troops, Hegseth Caught Lying, Iran War Master Plan w/ David Sirota
01:18:04
Loading summary
Transcript192 lines
- [00:00]
Podcast Advertiser (e.g., Danielle Robay or SkinnyPop/Martha Stewart ad voice)
This is an iHeart podcast. Guaranteed Human.
- [00:04]
Martha Stewart
This is Martha Stewart from the Martha Stewart Podcast. Ever wonder how to make hosting look effortless? Here's a secret. Getting ahead of the mess with new Reynolds Kitchens Countertop Prep Paper Just lightly wet the counter beforehand so the paper grips and stays in place. Then lay down the Reynolds Kitchen's countertop prep paper so drips and spills stay on the paper, not all over your kitchen counter. You can roll out dough, prep a party spread, or cook alongside family. When you're done, cleanup is as simple as lifting the paper and revealing that clean counter underneath. Effortless. You can use it for cooking and baking prep and even crafting, especially when you need extra working space. Because when the mess is already handled, you can focus on what matters. The food, the people, and the moment. It may look effortless, but now you know. It's Reynolds Kitchens Countertop prep Paper. Take a tip from me. Wet it, set it, prep it. Done. Make it easy. Make it with Reynolds Kitchens Countertop prep paper. Available now in the Reynolds Wrap aisle in Walmart.
- [01:19]
Krystal Ball
Fiesta de Primavera Yega con mazol mas
- [01:22]
David Sirota
iversion y mas gratis and lows Ponto
- [01:24]
Krystal Ball
jardina punto conuna bateria additional gratis al compra una podadora des malesadora oso fladora ego selecta y refresca tus plantas con tierras Stay green de un pied. Ever feel like your bedroom's shrinking? Don't worry, you don't have to sell your favorite things to make space with IKEA Bedroom Storage Solutions. Think dressers, wardrobes, full closet systems, even storage boxes. You can keep it all, your vintage
- [02:03]
Podcast Advertiser (e.g., Danielle Robay or SkinnyPop/Martha Stewart ad voice)
band tees safe, those limited edition sneakers plenty of room.
- [02:07]
Krystal Ball
And yes, your childhood teddy bear gets a spot too. Don't sell what you love. Store it instead with IKEA Bedroom Storage Solutions. Shop now at Ikea US Bedroomstorage.
- [02:18]
Emily Jashinsky
Hey guys, Sagar and Kristal here.
- [02:20]
Krystal Ball
Independent media just played a truly massive role in this election and we are so excited about that. Means for the future of the show,
- [02:27]
Emily Jashinsky
this is the only place where you
- [02:28]
David Sirota
can find honest perspectives from the left
- [02:30]
Venmo Ad Voice
and the right that simply does not exist anywhere else.
- [02:33]
Krystal Ball
So if that is something that's important to you, Please go to BreakingPoints.com, become a member today and you'll get access to our full shows unedited ad free and all put together for you every morning in your inbox.
- [02:44]
Emily Jashinsky
We need your help to build the future of independent news media and we
- [02:46]
Krystal Ball
hope to see you at Breaking Points Dot Com.
- [02:49]
Griffin Davis
Folks, we have an amazing show for you this morning. How we doing? Crystal and Emily doing well.
- [02:54]
Krystal Ball
Ryan is, I think, en route to Cuba is the idea. So just us this morning. Nice.
- [03:01]
Griffin Davis
Ryan is pursuing regime change in Cuba.
- [03:05]
Krystal Ball
I think Emily said he's going to be installed by the CIA.
- [03:08]
Emily Jashinsky
We don't know that he won't. It's too early to say.
- [03:11]
Krystal Ball
That's true. That is true. We have no evidence that he will not be installed as the new Cuban puppet dictator of the United States.
- [03:18]
Emily Jashinsky
So wait, and Comrade Grim, he stopped
- [03:22]
Griffin Davis
in Miami to pick up some expats. He picked up clavicular. Now they're heading over to Cuba. That's exciting. We also have some other housekeeping Sagar later today is interviewing former counterterrorism official Joe Kent. So stay tuned for that. Between the two of them, we've never gotten closer to a host being arrested. Sort of a Don Lemon style situation. So I'm very excited for all that. But we've got a big show today.
- [03:46]
Krystal Ball
You know, you did just inspire a thought, though, Griffin. How amazing would a Ryan clavicular interview actually be?
- [03:53]
Griffin Davis
Really, really good.
- [03:54]
Krystal Ball
Yeah, I mean, I feel like that would be groundbreaking. I don't know. Did you guys just see that? Andrew Callahan. I. I know you did because I sent it to the chat.
- [04:04]
Emily Jashinsky
Yes.
- [04:04]
Krystal Ball
Who am I kidding? You saw it.
- [04:07]
Emily Jashinsky
I also saw the moment where he. He met his biggest supporter on kick because you sent it.
- [04:12]
Krystal Ball
Oh, my goodness. That was really. That was honestly just kind of heartbreaking. Sad all the way around, as clavicular often is, in my opinion. But the, the moment with Callahan where he's clavigular's like, there's really nothing you would change about your face when you look in the mirror and Callahan just like leans back, crosses his legs and he's like, no, not a thing. And clavicular crashes out major cortisol spike and ends the interview. It's kind of extraordinary. Male self confidence is his kryptonite.
- [04:42]
Griffin Davis
Good point.
- [04:43]
Emily Jashinsky
Oh.
- [04:43]
Griffin Davis
Which I think was also. I think, I think Ryan would destroy him then. Yeah. As a, as someone who's tried to upgrade Ryan's appearance myself and he, and you know, hit a wall there.
- [04:53]
Krystal Ball
But yeah, you tried to look smacks for Ryan, got shut down the time
- [04:57]
Emily Jashinsky
you told Ryan to fix his hair and he just went.
- [05:03]
Griffin Davis
But folks, let's get to some far more serious topics here. We have a lot going on in the show today. We have updates on possible ground deployment on or near the Iranian border with US Troops. We've got some oil updates. And we've got some potential contradictions between what Hegseth heard from the fallen soldier's family and what Hegseth has been saying. And then we also have David Sirota coming on to tell us a little bit more about the updates or the phase two of the master plan. So we're excited to speak to him.
- [05:39]
Krystal Ball
Plus a whole bunch more focused on the unitary executive. Like, basically the way that previous administrations over decades and previous operatives over decades have turned the presidency into effectively a monarchy just in time for Trump to come in and want to be king and have the powers to do so.
- [05:57]
Griffin Davis
Really great timing there. But let's start with our friend Benjamin Netanyahu. Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu says can't do a revolution in Iran from the air. There needs to be a ground component as well. He says there are many possibilities for a ground component, but won't share what they are. What do we make of that?
- [06:17]
Krystal Ball
Yeah, it certainly looks like that's the direction we're heading in. And we can talk about some additional reporting about, you know, it's really coming down to the Strait of Hormuz. It's also we now have the Houthis, Ansar Allah, who are saying they are going to join the fight, which means that one of the alternative pathways for oil will potentially also be shut down because they successfully shut down that pathway previously, just using, you know, drones and menacing ships in the area. So, you know, at this point, I think what Netanyahu is acknowledging here is that he has helped to get the US To a point where there is going to be no more significant strategic success without some ground troop component, which he's happy to see our service members go in and fight and get slaughtered and us to be weakened in the region as along with, of course, Iran and the GCC member states being weakened as well. And, you know, I'm always very clear that ultimately this is all Trump's fault. He's the one who ultimately decided to go in. You know, I think a lot of the reporting about, oh, they have different aims and maybe there's going to be a blow up, blah, blah, blah. I put that in the same category as the repeated leaks to Barack Ravid during the Biden, the Brandon administration, where it was, oh, he's very upset with Netanyahu, blah, blah, blah. I think they're similarly absurd that there's some significant break coming between the Trump regime and the Netanyahu regime. But, you know, one other thing that I'll mention here is in Netanyahu's comments which we're going to play some others of that are very interesting that I want to hear Emily's take on for you in a moment. But he did a classic thing of in English. He was like, this thing could be over really quickly. I think in response to a question from Richard Engel, he was like, this could be over a lot quicker than people think. And then in Hebrew to the Israelis is like, this is going to go along as long as it needs to go. We're going to be in here as long as we need to be there. So, you know, very different messages to the English speaking world versus the domestic audience in Israel.
- [08:10]
Emily Jashinsky
And I think the two things that seem right now, fundamental things that seem to have been totally what's the right word here? I don't want to use a word that's too generous, but seem to have been underestimated on behalf of the United States is the Strait of Hormuz and the what Iran would do, how far they would go with the Strait of Hormuz and the ability of anti regime coalition forces on the ground in Iran to stage some type of revolution. And that's where, you know, you do airstrikes. You see the president saying this is for the freedom of the Iranian people. Wait, now know that they were overly confident about what would happen in the Strait of Hormuz. And with those two puzzle pieces being clearly, I mean, the administration, they probably weren't 100% certain about either of them, but clearly they thought the likelihood that they would be able to have a revolution, they would be able to create the conditions for a revolution that would topple the regime if they killed the ayatollah and struck all of these different places and created chaos. The Israelis obviously have a different take on that than our government does. But if you have those two pieces wrong, you can see how you start getting closer and closer to ground troops, which is exactly what people were saying. It's exactly what you were saying on this show. It becomes a spiral and that's, it's so easy for it to happen. But when you have those two puzzle pieces being incorrect, that's how you get ground troops. It's exactly the recipe that people predicted.
- [09:44]
Krystal Ball
It's a, it is the escalation trap, as Professor Pape has laid out for us multiple times on our show, where now the only way that Trump could actually end this war at this point would be not only for him to walk away, but for there to be significant concessions given to Iran. I mean, he would have to not only walk away, but Walk away with his tail between his legs saying, what would you like to make you feel safe and secure? Iranian government that is still firmly in place and now also is directly controlling who comes and goes from the Strait of Hormuz. So it's, you know, I mean he's in a, he has created an absolute mess for himself. And you know, here's some of the indications. This is again Barack Ravine, Mark Caputo about what is being considered Trump Mull's risky carg island takeover to force Iran to open straight. We also have news that more Marines are being rushed to region. There's expected to be some overlap between this new deployment of Marines and the Marines that have already been rushed into the region. So that seems like it could be, you know, leading to some sort of boots on the ground. I did see Emily, do you remember who it was? Or Griffin, do you remember who it was? One of the Republican senators who was like, well if the boots are only on an island, that's not the same as boots on the ground in like mainland Iran. I liked that of boots on the ground. Yeah, I wish I could remember who it was. But in any case, revealed reporting here, the Trump administration considering plans to occupy or blockade Iran's Carg island to pressure Iran to reopen the Strait of Hormuz. Let me also show you this. U.S. warplanes and helicopters is from the Wall Street Journal kick off battle to reopen Hormuz. So this battle has already started Now. US and its allies have intensified the battle to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, sending low flying attack jets over the sea lanes to blast Iranian naval vessels and Apache helicopters to shoot down Iran's deadly drones. According to American military officials, the stepped up operation is part of a multi stage Pentagon plan to reduce the danger from Iranian armed boats, mines and cruise missiles which have halted ship traffic through the waterway. Not exactly Iran is getting the ships through that they want to get through. But in any case, if the danger can be reduced, the US could send US warships through the strait and eventually escort vehicles in and out of the Persian Gulf. But it will still likely take weeks for the US to clear out Iran's web of assets that have harassed traffic through a choke point for 20% of the world's oil exports and a large amount of commercial shipping traffic. And there is a quote in here. They're using these A10 Warthogs extensively in this operation apparently for the military people out there to whom that means something. And there is a quote in here where someone, an analyst as military Analyst says, look, even here it is lowering the threat to the point where ships can resume transiting. The Strait is doable, but it takes time and you are probably never going to get to 100%. We could reach a stage where we're getting ships through and they could still get a lucky shot. So that is the landscape at this point. You know, the battle is already joined, they have already escalated. They're now trying to, you know, restore control over the Strait of Hormuz. The ability of our ships and our allies ships to be able to pass through and it will take a lot of time. It will be very risky and very dangerous. And even after all of that work, even in the most optimistic scenario, you are still going to have the possibility of an Iranian drone coming in and blowing something up with devastating consequences for, you know, for lives and treasure.
- [13:21]
Emily Jashinsky
You know, I saw an update this morning that the death toll right now in Lebanon is around a thousand and Iran is around 1300. And I don't know the breakdown, first of all, I mean, it's, I don't know how confident we are in those numbers or the reports are in those numbers. And I don't know what the breakdown is of civilians to militants. That's 2000 already in this war. That's 2000. I mean, we're in double digits of Americans. That's 2000 people just in the time span of a couple of weeks. And just, we are so numb to people being bodies in the Middle east, in particular, in the Middle east, that's especially after Gaza. But that's, that's, I, it's, it's hard for me to believe how little conversation there is about how much death there's already been.
- [14:10]
Krystal Ball
Yeah, well, and we had a major incident yesterday as well. I can, I can put this up on the screen where an F35 aircraft was apparently struck by the Iranians. This marks a first. This is an extraordinary, this is like the highest tech of our high tech fighter jets. It's supposed to be stealth. The fact that they were able to hit this plane, this jet was apparently very significant. Says US F35 aircraft makes emergency landing after a combat mission over Iran. By the way, there is some, some I think appropriate skepticism about exactly the story that we're being told here that the F35 fighter jet landed safely and the pilot is in stable condition. I have seen some conjecture, they haven't said where or who or any of the specifics. So there is some conjecture over whether that part of this is TR or not. I also saw some conjecture that another F35 may have also been been struck. But this is all still very unconfirmed. What we do know is that Iran was at least able to hit this one jet. And the Iranians released some of the footage that they purported to be from that takedown. They said an F35 fighter jet from the US has made an emergency landing at an air base in the Middle east after carrying out a combat mission over Iran. Aircraft landed safely. Pilot is in stable condition. We are aware of reports that a US F35 aircraft conducted emergency landing at a regional US air base after flying a combat mission over Iran. Aircraft landed safely. Incident is under investigation. CNN reported. Reported two anonymous sources saying the plane, which cost up to $100 million, was likely hit by Iran. So the fact that they can take shots at these things, this, according to the military analysts, is very significant because it makes it much more dangerous for the US to just fly these sorties over Iran because now you're like, oh, they have a capability we did not know that they had. So now we have to plan for that. And that is a, you know, that is a very clear risk for these pilots who are involved. We've already had a number of other aircraft, American aircraft, I saw, you know, upwards of somewhere around 16 that have been damaged or destroyed in a variety of circumstances. Some of the circumstances I can to believe we are not getting the accurate story about including the three that just plummeted from the sky and they're like, oh, oops, friendly fire. We didn't know, you know, something happened. The refueling one is also big question marks there too.
- [16:38]
Griffin Davis
They said it was like, it wasn't offensive or defensive, it was like a neutral error that those three planes went down. Is this like the ghost of Kuwait or something? Like, I'm not really sure what's happening.
- [16:50]
Krystal Ball
One of the theories. One of the theories, again, unconfirmed. But listen, I mean, we just can't believe anything this government says at this point. We'll tell you about some of insanely basic things that Pete Hegseth is out here lying about in a moment. But in any case, one of the theories is that it was actually like a GCC allied pilot that went rogue, a Kuwaiti pilot in particular, and intentionally shot down our fighter jets. That's one of the theories. And to me that's much more plausible at least than the idea like, oopsies, we just had some sort of an unspecified incident and all three of these happened to, you know, crash to the ground in the same day.
- [17:30]
Emily Jashinsky
Definitely doesn't make sense. Definitely does not add up.
- [17:33]
Krystal Ball
Yes.
- [17:34]
Griffin Davis
And this reporter from Newsmax shared some about the accelerated deployment of the Marines and sailors heading to the Middle East. Four officials tell Newsmax the Boxer Amphibious Ready Group and the embarked 11th Marine Expeditionary Unit deploying ahead of schedule. There are roughly 2,500 Marines, 4,000 total service members, seemingly to potentially take or blockade this Kharg island area, which essentially, you know, seems strategically kind of like a kill box for these US Soldiers. Additionally, we have some sought here from Scott Bessant talking about his ideas for Carg Island.
- [18:17]
Pete Hegseth
Let's take a listen, just laser focus on it. As I said, there was a bombing campaign last week. The military assets on Corg island were destroyed. And the other thing I can tell you, if you're an oil worker, you don't want to work there. So all the oil workers are being coerced to stay there. And, you know, we will see what happens with whether that eventually becomes a U.S. asset.
- [18:41]
Griffin Davis
All right, so it could eventually become a U.S. asset, maybe the 51st state. You never know.
- [18:48]
Emily Jashinsky
The Republic of Khargarh. Yeah.
- [18:51]
Griffin Davis
And this is all amidst the fact that they tried to get other countries to come into the Strait of Hormuz to provide backup. They're all like, actually, we're going to hard pass on that. So I guess now we're like, okay, we'll just dump all of our servicemen in there, see how that goes.
- [19:06]
Emily Jashinsky
Well, and I was, I was watching a BBC report last night. This probably sounds obvious to many people, but Iran has prepared for these possibilities for a long time. And they have other ports that aren't just going to that Carg island is not going to us Takeover of Carg island is not going to prevent. So prevent them from using. So it's just, it does look like escalation spiral. It does look like Trump might have some excuse to say this is limited operation. Just like Crystal said, it's not boots on the ground, it's boots on the island as though the island isn't soil. And then from there, your, your boots on the ground. That's a. We all know how that goes. We've all seen how that has gone over the last 20 years.
- [19:48]
Krystal Ball
Well, and first from speaking to Professor Pape, you know, what he warns is, first of all, we were taking a look at the geography of this area of these sheer cliffs to Emily's Point. You know, the Iranians have been gaming this out for literally decades. Thinking about this. They also learned a lot. Well, they learned a lot from the Iran Iraq war, which we of course, were, you know, backing Iraq in. And then we've learned a lot more recently from the 12 Day War. And some of the speculation I've seen is actually this capacity to take down our F35 fighter jets or potentially take them down was developed after the 12 day war. So that tells you they haven't just been sitting there like, I'm sure this diplomacy with Jared Kushner and Steve Wyckoff's gonna work out this time. No, they were clear eyed. They knew that this was very likely, if not, you know, inevitable, and they've been thinking about how exactly to prepare. So taking Carg island is one thing. Maybe you can, you could probably accomplish that, you know, with the US Military. You come in, full force, bomb a bunch of shit, you know, kill a bunch of, Kill a bunch people, and probably some of our service members die as well. But then you also have to hold Khark island, and it's, you know, very close to the Iranian mainland. Would not be hard for Shahid drones, which have been apparently, you know, been able to fly at will basically wherever they want, damage whatever they want throughout this, throughout this war. So you are in a very, very difficult position. And now what? Now you're entrenched on Kharg island and, you know, are you gonna now we're staying there forever. We're claiming this as a US Asset. Not clear that that's going to, certainly not going to topple the regime, as Griffin and Emily, both of you guys are pointing out. They have other options, which again, they, they, they developed partly during the Iran Iraq war. Actually. They, it will definitely be damaging to their economic prospects, there's no doubt about that. But again, they're, this is existential for them. So they're willing to take a lot more pain and be. Because we hold Car island also does not mean that we've cleared up the problems with the Strait of Hormuz, which is a separate and independent issue. It may help, but it's not going to solve that problem. So now a lot of the war focus is around this new problem that has been created in the war where victory is effectively being defined as just getting back to some semblance of the pre war status quo. Although even if you're able, through some, you know, miraculous feat and Iranian collapse, military collapse, whatever, to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, you have still created a situation where you have a more hardline government in place in Iran, which is much more likely to pursue nuclear weapons and much less likely to engage in the future in Any sort of diplomacy with you. And that is just sort of done and baked in at this point, which is part of why this escalation is very likely to continue. Because let's say there is some miraculous off ramp that is achieved right now, the Iranians rationally may very well begin pursuing, you know, a nuclear weapon or moving again in that direction. And Israel will be right here back in D.C. you know, Netanyahu himself and all of his allies saying, you're not going to let this happen. You said there can be no nuclear Iran. You can't let this happen on your watch. And we will be right back here all over again. So it is a very, very grim landscape in front of us.
- [23:07]
Emily Jashinsky
Yes, yes. And it's not. It's, it's sadly going. Everything that you just laid out, Krystal, I was struck by how this is what people were talking about, the likelihood of this happening. Exactly what we're seeing, like the outline of this is exactly what people were warning was going to happen and being called panic ins or whatever else. But, like, just three weeks ago, it was fairly clear that unless Trump did a quick cut and run midnight Hammer thing, which he was not indicating, is what he would do, obviously this was something at a larger scale. This exact pattern. Pattern is probably the right word, is what would reveal itself over the next couple of weeks. And I, it's, I don't think it gives anyone pleasure to be right about that. But it's so, it's going so closely to the script, unfortunately.
- [23:58]
Krystal Ball
Yeah, I wanted everyone to know. Yeah, go ahead. Can you queue up the one where he's talking about, number one, state sponsor of terrorism?
- [24:06]
Griffin Davis
And of course.
- [24:07]
Krystal Ball
Yeah, yeah, you got that ready to go for us?
- [24:10]
Griffin Davis
So we got Pete Hexseth here talking about a little bit of the, of the funding of the Iranian country. Let's take a listen here.
- [24:17]
Pete Hegseth
That's why you had millions of Iranians protesting, because they felt like their condition, quality of life, didn't match what it could be or should be. And what was the Iranian state? There's a reason we come call Iran the number one state sponsor of terrorism. They took the money they make and they invest it in tunnels and they invested in missiles and they invested in launchers and UAV. $200 billion. I think that number could move. Obviously, it takes money to kill bad guys. So we're going back to Congress and folks there to ensure that we're properly funded for what's been done, for what we may have to do in the future.
- [24:55]
Krystal Ball
Incredible. Incredible.
- [25:00]
Emily Jashinsky
That tells you what they think is coming. That's exactly. That is your indication. They are preparing for a long drawn out war at this point. They're asking Congress right now for an additional two. $200 billion.
- [25:15]
Krystal Ball
Yes. And isn't. I think I saw some stats yesterday that's more than we sent to Ukraine in four years of that war. Just for perspective, like this is a massive amount. And he says that that number could move. It's not moving down. The only direction it's going to move is up. I actually saw Lauren Boebert this morning saying that she's a no on the additional war funding. So you know, she then got further pressed. Oh well, do you, you know, do you think that this war should continue? And she's like, that's up to Trump. So she kind of defers on that point. But at least it's saying $200 billion. I don't think I'm voting for that. But the lack of self awareness here, of hegseth within minutes of each other saying that the reason Iran is the number one state sponsor of terror is because they take their money and they spend it on missiles. And then moments later asking Congress for $200 billion for missiles, taking our money and spending on missiles for starting World War three and bombing little girls in grade school. Pretty astonishing. And you know, the American public is so propagandized that I think most people won't even, won't even really notice that it's like it's, it's, it's different when Iran does it than when we do it. You know, it's not the same when they do it. But you know, that is the reality of what our state is becoming. They're asking for a $1.5 trillion defense budget. They already have a one trillion dollar defense budget. And now you're coming back and asking for $200 billion more for a war that we're told has already been a glorious victory. Trump told us we already won this thing, this little excursion just so insane. And you can only imagine what good could actually be done with that money. Instead, I just want to say I
- [26:58]
Emily Jashinsky
just pulled this up. Crystal. This is astounding. So as according to the Council for Foreign Relations. Council Foreign relations as of December 31, 2025, the US Congress has made available $188 billion in spending related to the war in Ukraine, according to the US Special Inspector General for Operation Atlantic Resolve. So think about that. Think about that everyone. Over several years of war in Ukraine, 188 billion, which is a lot of money, by the way. Already a lot of money. We are two, three weeks into, I guess three weeks now into this war in Iran, and they're asking for $200 billion from Congress over a war. I mean, again, Donald Trump said he would end the war in Ukraine. He said he'd end the war in Gaza, but he said he would not start new wars. Not start new wars. And this entire question of whether there was an imminent threat, we're playing semantics with it right now. But I think everybody understands because the Secretary of State and the speaker of the House came out and said it. When the war started was was nudged, at least the timeline was nudged by the Israelis. And I agree with Crystal. I think our government has plenty of agency if that's the case. We chose. We still made our decision. But but the question of whether this is a war of choice or necessity has pretty much been answered. And $200 billion request three weeks into it.
- [28:23]
Martha Stewart
This is Martha Stewart from the Martha Stewart Podcast. Ever wonder how to make hosting look effortless? Here's a secret when prepping for cooking and baking, get ahead of the mess with new Reynolds Kitchens countertop prep paper. Just lightly wet the counter so the paper grips. Lay it down and drips and spills stay on the paper, not on your counter. Cleanup is as simple as lifting it away to reveal clean counters. Effortless it is thanks to Reynolds Kitchens Countertop prep paper. Wet it, set it, prep it done. Available in the Reynolds Wrap aisle at
- [29:04]
Venmo Ad Voice
Walmart with the Venmo Debit Card. A taco in one hand and ordering a ride in the other means you're stacking your rewards.
- [29:12]
Emily Jashinsky
Nice.
- [29:13]
Venmo Ad Voice
Get up to 5% cash back with Venmo Stash on your favorite brands when you pay with your Venmo debit card. From takeout to ride shares, entertainment, and more, Pick a bundle with your go tos and start earning cash back at those brands. Do more stash get more cash Venmo Stash Bundle terms and exclusions apply. See terms at venmo me terms max $100 cashback per month, no matter the occasion.
- [29:34]
Podcast Advertiser (e.g., Danielle Robay or SkinnyPop/Martha Stewart ad voice)
Snack time should be easy. That's why Skinny Pop popcorn keeps it light, airy, and endlessly delicious. SkinnyPop is made from just three simple ingredients, delivering an irresistible taste without being complicated. SkinnyPop's simplicity allows you to freely enjoy as much popcorn as you want. Just open the bag and enjoy. No overthinking. No tough choices. When it comes to snacking, Skinnypop just makes sense. Delicious, deliciously popped, perfectly salted. Skinny Pop. Popular for a reason.
- [30:05]
Griffin Davis
Speaking of Hegsett having a hard time selling this war. We have a clip here where he did a little story from his son on why we have to keep fighting this war.
- [30:14]
Pete Hegseth
My 13 year old son popped into my office last night while I was editing these remarks. He asked about the war and the families I met at Gopher. And I looked at him and I said, they died for you, son. So that your generation doesn't have to deal with a nuclear Iran. It's the truth. They did. So to the families who said, finish this, we will. And I say the same to every American who wants peace through all right?
- [30:50]
Griffin Davis
So the families of the fallen soldiers, they told Pete, you know what? Worth it, let's finish this. Finish the damn job. Except some of the families are disputing that conversation. Father of service member killed in Iran war said he never told Pete Hegseth to finish the job. They go on to say in this article that they are just a little confused and unsure. You know, I mean then these are patriotic families, right? So you know, these are, these are, this is not something that they want to believe that their son or daughter, you know, died for a reason. But they're just, they just are not sure. And that was the conversations in this report that they were asking Pete about. I hope this is worth it.
- [31:38]
Krystal Ball
Just so senseless. And we actually had a video of another parents of fallen service member saying, you know, I actively wanting the war to stop up. So to lie about something like this to me is just so incredibly low. Like to use these service members, families and then to put words in their mouths so that you can use them like a little puppet, you know, to get your talking points across is so disgusting to me. Not to mention obviously the story with his own son is completely and totally fake. And even if it's not fake, I am driven completely insane by the gaslighting here about the timeline. Let us not forget it was the first Trump administration that tore up the Iranian nuclear deal that was working. And it was this Trump administration that twice used diplomatic negotiations as a ruse to attack and start a war with Iran. In that second set of negotiations, we now have multiple people who are involved. We have the Omanis, we actually have one of the British officials involved who said, said this. There were incredible concessions made here. This was a deal that was workable, that went beyond if you were concerned that the original deal with Obama wasn't strong enough, it went beyond that. And they didn't even bother, these clowns to send negotiators that even understood what was being Discussed. So to him, for him to say, oh, we're doing the work to keep Iran from getting a nuclear weapon to make the world, world safe for our children. What total and complete bullshit. You have made it more likely that Iran and by the way, a whole host of other countries around the world pursue nuclear weapons because that is ultimately the only deterrence that may work to keep us from coming in and bombing their countries and murdering their children and their heads of state.
- [33:35]
Griffin Davis
And Doge also cut a bunch of the energy and nuclear scientists that would have been able to analyze and create like a new framework or a new.
- [33:44]
David Sirota
For us.
- [33:44]
Griffin Davis
So thank you, big balls for that as well. Emily, what were you saying?
- [33:47]
Emily Jashinsky
Well, I was just gonna say the idea that Iran's, that you're going to stop Iran from wanting a nuclear weapon so long as Israel has nuclear weapons, it's just not happening. And like that, that is just. In the Middle east, there are multiple countries with nuclear capacity. So if you're Iran, you can't bomb away the sentiment that they want to be. They want to have a nuclear weapon capacity. And you can try to, you could even try to change the. And it's not going to bomb away the sentiment among people in Iran that that's something that they should have, that they need to have. And that, as Crystal was saying in and of itself is the idea that we're not going to be dealing with this in another generation. Unfortunately, tragically, not happening.
- [34:37]
Krystal Ball
Yeah.
- [34:38]
Griffin Davis
And on that note, Emily, we needed your expertise for this next one before we get to Sirota. So we don't know why we're doing it. We don't know who we're doing it for. Actually, we now know who we're doing it for. The spirit of Genghis Khan. Let's take a listen to Netanyahu here.
- [34:54]
Pete Hegseth
Also wrote the Lessons of history. Very brief, 100 page book in which he said, history proves that unfortunately, unhappily, Jesus Christ has no advantage over J. Because if you are, are strong enough, ruthless, powerful, evil will overcome good, aggression will overcome moderation. So you have no choice. If you look at the world as it is today, you have to be blind not to see the democracy led by the United States have to reassert their will to defend themselves and to oppose their enemies in time, while they're still taking time, before the jarring gong of danger wakes them up and wakes them up too late. This is where we are now, the
- [35:49]
Griffin Davis
jarring gong of danger.
- [35:51]
David Sirota
All right.
- [35:52]
Emily Jashinsky
Yeah, that's my band name.
- [35:54]
Pete Hegseth
Bong.
- [35:56]
Krystal Ball
Emily, I know you're always asking yourself, what would Jingus Khan.
- [35:59]
Griffin Davis
Yeah, wwgkd. It's your bumper sticker.
- [36:05]
Emily Jashinsky
Oh, the bracelet. I mean, apparently he's paraphrasing Durant, who was making a comment on human nature. Let me pull up that quote. I have it. Yeah. Nature and history do not agree with our conceptions of good and bad. They define good as that which survives and bad is that which goes under. And the universe has no prejudice in favor of Christ as against Genghis Khan. And that's it. My perspective of that, him trotting out that paraphrased quote right now is that it does. It feels almost like taunting. And you know, Nietzsche would. Nietzsche's perspective on Christ was that it was sort of a slave morality, that the Christianity valorizes weakness. And that's been throughout history, a criticism of Christianity. And whether or not Netanyahu was intentionally trying to poke at Christians and Christians in America, like Tucker Carlson, for example, who are making Christian arguments against, you know, the war in Gaza and the like, I don't know. I would recommend a couple books. Dominion by Tom Holland and Air We Breathe by Glenn Scrivener is a really good one too, about where there's the universalism in Christianity. That it, again, it feels like kind of taunting that Jesus comes along and says, go and baptize. Go make disciples of all nations. All nations, which is historically somewhat unique. And he says there will be one shepherd and one flock, meaning everyone in the world is covered by the sacrifice. And then Paul says there is no Jew or Greek. That's in Galatians. And that, Tom Holland rightly points out, changes absolutely everything. And is it true that Christians have done a poor job throughout history honoring the egalitarianism of Christ's message? Yes, of course. But that's still, there's, there's still a tension between Christianity and other religions because of that. And it does. Netanyahu trotting out that quote is. It feels, it feels like he might have been intentionally trying to poke a bear. Whether it's Tucker or someone else else.
- [38:20]
Krystal Ball
Well, they came out after the fact and were like, felt the need to issue a statement on the Twitter account, the official, like Prime Minister of Israel Twitter account that was like, we meant no offense to Christians. We were just quoting this thing. But you know, the funny thing to me, like coming at this from a totally non religious perspective is this, this dodge that I've seen not just from him, but from plenty of other people who are not even like that sympathetic to him, who are like, he's just quoting something. It's like, just because you're quoting someone else doesn't mean that that like original qu was also a good thing. You know, I mean that's still a choice. You're like co signing this idea. And to me it was just very revealing of what I think is a dominant mindset, not just with Netanyahu, but within Israel. They see themselves as inherently moral, right? Not based on their actions, not based on what they do in the world. Which you know, to me is how you define morality. It's like, what do you do? Do you cause harm or do you cause peace? Like what are you, what are you, are you genociding children in Gaza? Because that seems to have a real bearing to me on whether you are a moral actor. But the view here offered by Netanyahu is we are inherently the good side. So even if we commit evil acts, it's in service of our own inherent goodness. And this is a, you know, I mean this is a supremacist ideology which is what Israel, what Zionism is, is based on as a Jewish supremacist ideology. And a lot of times when he's speaking to, you know, an American audience or Western audience in general, then he'll talk about Western values, talk about Judeo Christian values. So then we get also brought in the fold of the inherently good. And so he's saying here and again, very noteworthy, this is offered in, in English. I think it could be seen as a, as a taunt to Christian. I think that's certainly the case, especially since there's been this, you know, this tension with the Tucker Carlson's of the world, et cetera.
- [40:13]
Emily Jashinsky
And the Pope has called for a ceasefire, by the way. So it's, it's not, it's not just for Protestant Protestants in America. There's a lot of religious backlash.
- [40:20]
Krystal Ball
That's, that is, that's a great point. But so you have that angle of it, but you also have him projecting some American audience. You may be feeling a little squeamish about this, like girls school that you just bombed and murdered all these children, but trust me, you're still the good guys here. You're still, no matter what you do in this war because if you don't act in barbaric ways, in evil ways, then the ultimate evil, the inherently evil under, you know, and what's underneath the surface there is Muslims, Persians, Iranian Arabs, you know, anybody who would oppose the Israelis. If you don't act against that inherent evil in this barbaric way, then those people will win out. It's a, you know, it's a kind of a rehash of his children of the light versus Children of the darkness speech at the beginning of the, you know, the genocidal assault on Gaza, where, again, it's like anything is justified in our attempts here to decimate and destroy the Palestinian people. Because we're the good ones, not because of what we do, just because who we are. And they're the bad ones, not because of their age or who they are or what they do, but just inherently. And that is such an abhorrent, deeply abhorrent, destructive, disgusting worldview to me. But that's what, you know, that is the ideology. That is the reigning ideology in Israel. You have to say at this point,
- [41:46]
Emily Jashinsky
point, I think what turned people like Tucker Carlson and actually like Carrie Prejean Bowler against what they were seeing in Gaza was precisely the part of their faith. And it's emphasized all the time about the vulnerable. And again, this was Nietzsche's contention with Christianity, actually. And Tom Holland has done really great debates on this. People should just pop that into YouTube and watch his debates or read Dominion. It's fantastic. But I think when you see the powerful abuse civilians that are powerless, that's very, very moving to a lot of Christians, not everybody. But like Augustine had or not Augustine, Aquinas had his just war doctrine. And you can make a pretty good argument. And that's probably why Pope Leo has called for a ceasefire. If you look at the United States and Israel's decision to launch this particular war, you could argue that it's violating the Christian tradition of what constitutes a just. And so Netanyahu, who is secular, by the way, that's disputed. I mean, he's a political figure and I think has tried to send different signals at different times in his career. It feels like to your point about the children of the light versus the children of the darkness, he's trying to make this argument that you can use strength and that can be used against civilians because ultimately you're on the. You're on the good side. And that's what's important, is protecting your people. And I think that's attractive to a lot of people around the world. But the more you see, like the girls school, for example, or other civilian abuses of civilians, it doesn't fly with other people.
- [43:36]
Krystal Ball
Yeah, I mean, being absolved for your crimes, I'm sure that does feel good to a lot of people. Like, oh, here's an excuse where you get to act with impunity and, you know, indulge your most barbaric and cruel instincts. But really if you think hard enough about it because you're good, it's all fine. The other thing, and you know, I think there are others who could probably, who could probably lay this out more effectively and with more knowledge than me. But Jonathan Greenblatt recently, in addition to saying all kinds of other crazy crap, he said something about we are no longer the like weak kneed Jews or the knock knee Jew Jews or something like that. And this is an idea that goes back to World War II. Deeply anti Semitic, but in a like sort of self loathing anti Semitic way that the there, there is like victim blaming of Holocaust victims that they weren't strong enough to stand up. And so part of the founding of Israel was the idea that like we're going to create a state that is, it will stand up, that will, I mean committed terrorist acts and ethnic cleansing in order to found the state. And we are going to be barbaric in a way, you know, and cruel and tough and strong in a way that, that you know, our ancestors who were slaughtered in the Holocaust in a way that they weren't. Again, deeply disgusting view but you know, offered by someone like ADL's Jonathan Greenblatt who supposedly is all against anti Semitism, supposed to be his whole thing. And it sort of reminds me of that as well where it's like, you know, we can't afford to have to indulge in these little nice Christian values. We are the good guys and we are going to use whatever means necessary to even if those things look evil to you, but underneath the surface because we're the good guys always and forever, no matter what we do. You know, you, you just don't understand that we're actually fighting evil with evil. And we have to do that because we don't have the luxury of acting other any other way.
- [45:33]
Emily Jashinsky
And just my quick point on that would be that is the story of human history. Like that is what tribalism, that is very historically normal. That is tribalism predating nation states. That's what it is. And liberalism after World War II was precisely conceived to overcome that because it leads to atrocities. And Israel has never been able to because of the trauma that the Jewish people suffered through the Holocaust, the industrial scale genocide that's within living memory of people. That's not like not everybody has been on board with that because there's this constant fear, and understandably so of another genocide coming along. And you know, we don't have to go like that's, that Just took us to a totally different, deeper layer. But that's liberalism was meant precisely to overcome those instincts, will to power style instincts. And that's why we have international groups and treaties and laws. So that's, I think, a fundamental source of tension and has been for the last 100 years.
- [46:37]
Krystal Ball
Well, let me say one last thing before we've got David Sirota waiting here and I do want to get him in, which is that, you know, Hegseth and Stephen Miller and the whole Trump regime, they like to frame the idea of like international law or respect for civilians or rules of engagement as like weak and woke and pathetic and not realistic, blah, blah, blah. Stephen Miller says it the most sort of like directly. Pete Hegseth does as well, though. And Pete Hegseth, you know, one of the things that he's famous for is going and trying to get pardons for war criminals. So that is his worldview. But I think we already see in the Iran war that when we blow up all of the rules of engagement and international norms and, you know, and law and any sort of care and concern for civilians, this puts our own service members at risk. It puts the world economy at risk. I mean, it puts everything on the table. So we're already living with the consequences of blowing up all of those, those, you know, what would be perceived as sort of like woke liberal niceties. It's not just that you get to do what you want to your enemies, your enemies also get to do what they want to you. And in a world where asymmetric power projection is more easily available than it ever has been before, that seems like a pretty foolish, pretty foolhardy and ultimately destructive way to go outside of, you know, any sort of morale, moral concerns, or Morales reality.
- [48:04]
Griffin Davis
Yeah, we should probably try to keep some of these planes in the air before we start acting like Genghis Khan. On that note, why don't we get over to the man uncovering the master plan, David Sirota.
- [48:20]
Martha Stewart
Ever wonder how to make hosting look effortless? Here's a secret. Getting ahead of the mess with new Reynolds kitchen countertop prep paper. Just lightly wet the counter beforehand so the paper grips and stays in place. Then lay down the Reynolds Kitchens countertop prep paper. So drips and spills stay on the paper, not all over your kitchen counter. You can roll out dough, prep a party spread, or cook alongside family when you're done, cleanup is as simple as lifting the paper and revealing that clean counter underneath. Effortless. You can use it for cooking and baking, prep and even crafting, especially when you need extra working space because when the mess is already handled, you can focus on what matters. The food, the people, and the moment. It may look effortless, but now you know it's Reynolds Kitchens countertop prep paper. Take a tip from me. One, wet it, set it, prep it, done. Make it easy. Make it with Reynolds Kitchen's countertop prep paper, available now in the Reynolds wrap
- [49:29]
Venmo Ad Voice
aisle in Walmart with the Venmo debit card. A taco in one hand and ordering a ride in the other means you're stacking your rewards. Nice. Get up to 5% cash back with Venmo stash on your favorite brands when you pay with your Venmo debit card. From takeout to ride shares, entertainment, and more, pick a bundle with your go tos and start earning cash back at those brands. Do more stash. Get more cash. Venmo stash bundle terms and exclusions apply. See terms@venmo me terms. Max $100 cash back per month, no matter the occasion.
- [50:00]
Podcast Advertiser (e.g., Danielle Robay or SkinnyPop/Martha Stewart ad voice)
Snack time should be easy. That's why Skinnypop popcorn keeps it light, airy, and endlessly delicious. Skinnypop is made from just three simple ingredients, delivering an irresistible taste without being complicated. Skinny Pop Skinny Pop's simplicity allows you to freely enjoy as much popcorn as you want. Just open the bag and enjoy. No overthinking, no tough choices. When it comes to snacking, Skinny Pop just makes sense. Deliciously popped, perfectly salted. Skinny Pop popular for a reason.
- [50:30]
Griffin Davis
David, are you there?
- [50:32]
David Sirota
I'm here, yes.
- [50:34]
Griffin Davis
Welcome, David. How are you today?
- [50:36]
David Sirota
Good. Thanks for having me.
- [50:38]
Griffin Davis
Yeah, we're happy to have you. What's going on? You know, we're told that there is. It doesn't seem like there's a big plan with this war, but apparently you have uncovered the master plan. So update us on what's going on there.
- [50:52]
David Sirota
Well, I think the master plan is as it relates to the Iran war. It's like the president woke up one morning and decided to go to start World War iii. And there was no public justification for it. There was no congressional authorization for it. It was just like the king woke up on the wrong or I guess in his. His frame, maybe the right side of the bed. And decided to start World War 3, which is destabilizing the entire planet. And the point of our audio series is to ask the question how is something like that even possible? And how is it that we've arrived at a place where a presence president has a constitution that says Congress declares war and yet we're now where we are, where A war was started almost basically like a World War three esque situation. Right. That wasn't just like one bombing. We're now in like a World War three esque situation without any real authorization at all. And this, the. So it's this question of how did Donald Trump become a king? But it's not really only about Donald Trump, it's how did the President become a monarchy? And I think to answer that question, you have to answer the question of how it started really over the course 50 years ago and how it's evolved over 50 years. We were at this place in our country's history or a similar place to it during and after Watergate. Watergate was seen as a scandal about an imperial presidency that had gotten out of control. Not just out of control in terms of targeting Richard Nixon, targeting his political opponents, but remember that was a time when Richard Nixon had campaigned promising to end the Vietnam War and then secretly, months later, secretly expanded the Vietnam War. It was a time where Richard Nixon started cutting off spending that had been authorized and passed by Congress. Roads were in the process of being made and then the road construction had to stop because Richard Nixon asserted the right to say he could decide what spending moved forward and what spending did not move forward. So all of the fights that I think that we, we've gotten used to now and, and, and these examples of kind of an imperial presidency, we have been here before. But the thing is, is that after Watergate, Congress really pushed back and took back some of that power. I mean, there was the War Powers Resolution, there was the Budget Impoundment act, which was designed to stop presidents from doing what Nixon had done. But there was really a backlash to the backlash that, that started after Congress took power. And there has been an ideology on the, I wouldn't call it the libertarian ripe and in sort of the, the center of the Republican Party, you know, sort of the Dick Cheney wing. Dick Cheney, of course, was the chief of staff to Gerald Ford right after Watergate. This real idea that Congress should never encroach on the President's authority. And that's, I think, part of why we are here today, where we woke up, you know, a few weeks ago and the President decided, hey, I'm just going to start World War War iii.
- [54:06]
Krystal Ball
Yeah, let me go ahead and play for people a little bit of. Or we'll just play this whole trailer for the new season of Master Plan. First season was so incredible. Such extraordinary journalism. I can't wait to dig into this one and see what you've uncovered here. As well. Let's go ahead and play this for everyone so they can get a taste of what they, what you guys have put together.
- [54:27]
Pete Hegseth
I have never been a quitter.
- [54:29]
David Sirota
Once upon a time, an imperial president was cast out of the palace. But all the President's men refused to relinquish the throne's power. So they went to work rewiring the government. They didn't just take back the control goals, they began building something new, something stronger. They gave the President the power to go around Congress to launch unauthorized wars.
- [55:13]
Pete Hegseth
They ignored the law and cut secret arms deals.
- [55:17]
David Sirota
The Pentagon says millions of dollars worth
- [55:19]
Emily Jashinsky
of weapons were turned over to the
- [55:20]
David Sirota
CIA for shipment to Iran. They manufactured vast new executive powers for a war on terror. I would characterize Montana Big as the
- [55:35]
Pete Hegseth
least worst place we could have selected.
- [55:39]
Emily Jashinsky
The Obama administration's continuing a Bush era
- [55:42]
Krystal Ball
policy authorizing killing of U.S. citizens abroad.
- [55:46]
Pete Hegseth
The goal of this master plan was
- [55:48]
David Sirota
to create an all powerful president or a. Some called it the unitary Executive. You're not going to be a dictator, are you?
- [55:55]
Pete Hegseth
I said no, no, no other than day one.
- [55:59]
David Sirota
So when a man longing to be a king took the throne, he inherited unprecedented powers to get his way. And those powers are now turning our world upside down. Welcome to Master Plan Season 2, the Kingmakers. How the president.
- [56:18]
Krystal Ball
First of all, that animation is fantastic.
- [56:21]
David Sirota
Ben Clarkson, the artist is amazing. He's amazing.
- [56:23]
Krystal Ball
Yeah. This is the sort of thing AI could never. AI could never.
- [56:26]
David Sirota
No, no, trust me, the number of screenshots and storyboards that he put up, I saw him draw, that was like, that's the kind of thing AI can never do.
- [56:36]
Krystal Ball
Yeah. That is extraordinary. And one of the pieces I've been thinking about is, you know, on the one hand you've got these actors, you know, Bill Barr being another one of these is really pushing forward the idea of the unitary executive. But perh, perhaps what also the founders didn't anticipate is the way that Congress would just be like, okay, sure, we don't actually want any responsibility. Go ahead. Because the last time they took a vote on war, the Iraq war, it ended up coming back to bite. You know, the vast majority of them who voted for it bite them in the ass. So they're like, we don't really want to take a vote on this war. We would rather just you do it. And then down the road, if it goes poorly, we can say it's his fault and not have to, you know, face any sort of political repercussions for it.
- [57:17]
Emily Jashinsky
Well, and that in and of itself was The AMF was such a broad delegation of power to the Executive that Congress was complicit in that. To Crystal's point, it's such a good.
- [57:25]
David Sirota
It's such a good point. Right, Like. Like, I think the Founders, like, they didn't get everything right. Right. Like, I think this idea that the founders got everything right is. Is sort of this presumption, and it's. It's not actually.
- [57:37]
Krystal Ball
It's like a religion. Yeah. Religious kind of faith. Yeah.
- [57:41]
David Sirota
And where I think they got things from.
- [57:43]
Griffin Davis
Right.
- [57:43]
David Sirota
Okay. Generally speaking, is that the Constitution as a document is, like, afraid of concentrated power. That. That's like the foundational baked in. Like, it's. The theory is we need to, like, disperse power a little bit because you literally do not want one dude having all the power. Okay, I think that's probably, like, good call. Like, you got it right where they didn't get it right. You're. At least for the modern era is the presumption that the branches would protect their. That, that. That. That whether it's the courts or whether it's Congress, that the presumption was that they would jealously. People in those institutions would jealously guard their power as an institution. And I think in the modern era, what we've seen is that actually the institution, especially when it comes to the Republicans, the institution that is supreme for the Republicans is the Republican Party Party, and not the presidency or the Congress or the courts. And so no matter where you are in any of those institutions, the. The Congress, the courts, the presidency, you're serving the larger institution, which is the Republican Party. And so, yes, you're willing to, like, be a judge. The Supreme Court is constantly deferring to executive power when a Republican is in the executive office. Congress is constantly deferring to the Trump administration when the Republicans control it. And I do think your point, Crystal, is so important that. That after the Iraq war, the Congress kind of figured out, like, hey, instead of taking tough votes to stop anything, we can just not vote at all. Like, it's actually easier for us to not vote at all, because who knows when any kind of vote is gonna come back to bite. Maybe, maybe it's the next election cycle, but maybe it's like, three election cycles from now, so they haven't wanted to vote. And I think that's like a really dangerous, dangerous situation. Like, it. It. Not everything was better in the past, but it was better, I think, when Congress felt an institutional prerogative to fight with the executive branch over who gets to decide things, because that Creates like, power and countervailing power, which is supposed to create some kind of balance, which
- [60:04]
Emily Jashinsky
is a really good argument for getting rid of the filibuster, to be honest. What happens with that? Yeah, and I wanted to ask the. Because war powers, the intelligence community, and even just thinking about Watergate, all of that goes into it. When you hear, like as someone on the right, when you hear federal society world talk about unitary executive theory, a lot of what you hear is it's about the growth of the federal bureaucracy. The argument, I think charitably their argument would be that the sprawling federal bureaucracy needs to come under the power of, of the democratically elected president. And the example I always use with Ryan when we kind of get into debates about this is you wouldn't want, given the revolving door like an Exxon Mobil executive or an ExxonMobil, just regular staffer coming into the EPA and under a climate concerned president, making decisions that are undermining the decision of the president or the, the will of the president or the, the policy of the president. So I was, I was gonna ask David, like, how you see the way that this has been intentionally set up and designed to tackle those kind of different arenas where executive power is concerned. There's war power, but there's also bureaucracy, but then there's also the intelligence community. It's kind of a tangled mess. I was curious to get your take on that.
- [61:26]
David Sirota
It's a great set of questions. And look, I think. Let me preface this by saying I think the Democrats, if they ever take back the presidency, I think one of the big questions, questions is, okay, all this power has been concentrated in the White House. Do you use that power or do you use your power in office to not use it or relinquish it? Right. And I don't think it's an acceptable outcome to have where we're in this pattern where Republicans use all the executive power that's there in an aggressive way and grab even more executive power. And then Democrats get in office and either spend their time not using that power or actually relinquishing it, like that's a ratchet effect. That's bad. I think when it comes to domestic policy, the example that you laid out, Look, I, I think that the question over whether a president with a mandate has the power to do what they have promised voters to do is at the heart in part of the, of the democracy crisis. Like when I hear that term democracy crisis, part of what I hear and what I think is about is presidents get into office. I think it's the Democrats often get into office and then don't really make an effort to really deliver on their promises. That shreds the social contract, that harms people's belief that democracy matters and ultimately sows the kind of disillusionment that someone like Donald Trump takes advantage of and says, I will get in and I will use all the power to deliver everything I am promising. Now, I don't think Donald Trump. Trump's actually done that. I think he's betrayed a lot of what he promised. The war is a good example of that. But I think that's, like, the dynamic we're in. And I think. But. But I guess I would say this. I think there's like a middle ground
- [63:12]
Pete Hegseth
between
- [63:14]
David Sirota
the Democrats not really using executive power and being deferential to the. To quote, unquote norms, and Donald Trump so aggressively using executive power that it's, like, sort of completely unprecedented. And I think in some cases, you know, extrajudicial, extra constitutional right. Like, I'll give you. Let me give you, like, one random example. Like, I think of the Obama presidency, and I think, okay, here's a person who used aggressively, in an unprecedented way, executive power to prosecute the drone war, to. To assert the right to put American citizens on a kill list. Right? Like, that's a really, really, really extreme view of executive authority. Right. To ext. Judicially execute American citizens.
- [64:00]
Pete Hegseth
Right.
- [64:01]
David Sirota
Okay. I also think of the Obama administration not using existing unchallenged executive authority to change IRS regulations to close one of the biggest and most egregious tax loopholes on the books, the private equity tax loophole. I think of the Obama administration not using executive authority to require Fortune 500 SEC regulated companies to disclose their dark money spending, something that the Obama administration could have done. So my point is, is that I think there's like, a middle ground here where Democrats get into office and use the existing unchallenged executive authority in ways that don't have to go beyond the Constitution, but are there for the taking. Now, one asterisk on this very quickly, which is I do think actually Joe Biden tried to do some of this at the agency level, like the ftc, the cfpb. And I think what's important, important to remember is, is that the. The opposition to that agenda, you know, antitrust enforcement, et cetera, et cetera, will very quickly switch sides on their views of executive power when it's not their executive right. I mean, it was like the concern, like the cut the. The Chamber of Commerce, some Republicans were Marching into court saying, you know, Joe Biden has no right to, to use the ofTC or the CFPB, and the way he's using it and you, and you're like, you guys are like the Unitary Executive party. And I think this gets to the core of a problem here. It was like, we're talking on the eve of the no kings protest. My question for everyone is, okay, do you not want a king, or do you just not want the king that's not your king? Right. Let's really get to the issue here, and let's really be honest about what each side actually wants. Do you not want kings Kings, or do you only not like the fact that it's not your king? I mean, I'm like. To be honest, I mean, I don't want a king, but, like, I'm torn on this question of, like, what ultimately needs to be done. I do think that at the center of this, again, I go back to it, the democracy crisis. You're totally right. If a president gets elected promising climate policy and then is stuck with an EPA that's implementing ExxonMobil's agenda. Right. Like, that is a, that's not just an example executive power, executive branch problem. That's a democracy problem because the president has promised and gotten elected on those issues.
- [66:27]
Krystal Ball
Yeah, well, I mean, FDR is a great example here. I mean, in some ways, it's kind of unavoidable to not just view the tools in, like, in the, in theoretical terms of, like, this tool's good and that one's bad. I think it's kind of unavoidable to look at the content. You know, is the content of what is being done here good or bad? Right. Some of fans, FDR's things were really bad, actually. But a lot of them on the economic front were very good and they were very popular. And they were in accordance with the will of the people, which the Supreme Court, up until he threatened, you know, them with court packing, was effectively blocking. So, you know, it's. It is a little bit tricky when you get down to it. And also, of course, you raise the prospect very much of, like, okay, well, if Republicans are, you know, throwing out the rules, doing whatever they want, and then Democrats are like, we're just gonna, you know, stay within these boundaries. Boundaries, then that's an asymmetric fight. So let me add. Yeah, go ahead.
- [67:25]
David Sirota
There's an interesting question about the independent agencies that's coming down the pike right now in the Supreme Court.
- [67:30]
Emily Jashinsky
Yes.
- [67:31]
David Sirota
And for those who don't know They're a set of agencies that aren't just like other executive branch like the Department of Homeland Security, hhs, those are normal, regular, non independent executive branch agencies. President has total hiring and firing power, power over them. There are certain regulatory agencies like the Federal Trade Commission that have that, that were designed to, to be slightly more insulated from the political cycles where the commissioners have, you know, five year terms, it's harder to fire them. And, and, and the Trump administration is trying to say that Trump can fire members of these independent agencies. And there's really like a constitutional question, right? They're trying to use the Constitution to superse that such these kinds of agencies can even exist. And this is where I, like, I get the idea that the President gets elected and wants to implement policy and therefore needs to hire and fire. But I also think like, what's dangerous here is that the Congress and previous presidents have set up these particular agencies deliberately to be independent. And my point is, if you want to argue that that's bad. Bad, right. You want to argue, okay, an independent FTC is bad, pass new legislation to change the independence of the ftc. Don't start making constitutional arguments that say the Congress is not allowed to create independent agencies. Right? Like that's where I think we get into like when we're talking about a king. It's like if you want to make the small d Democratic argument that the SEC or the FTC are out of control and not letting presidents implement policies that they campaigned on, then pass legislation to change the structure of those agencies. Don't start making a unitary executive argument that says one line in the Constitution. Article two means Congress is simply never allowed to create these kinds of agencies. I mean, I kind of think in a lot of ways those independent agencies, their independence has served the purpose that they were laid out, that they're supposed to be slightly insulated from the whims of this or that election because they're supposed to be more sort of empirical in their application. But let's like, let's have that debate rather than saying these are not allowed. These are basically illegal.
- [69:59]
Krystal Ball
I mean, if we're going to have an authoritarian leader, I want one that's a lot better than the ones we've been getting lately. I'm looking at, you know, look at China. Like they seem pretty smart over there. I mean, if we're going to have no freedom of speech here either. I don't know, maybe.
- [70:14]
David Sirota
Well, yeah, I mean, that's, that's the problem, right? It's like, well, we got a Good, we got a good key king who makes good decisions. And you know, four years later, you're not, you probably aren't going to get to like, I think that's the theory of the Constitution. Like, you, like, yes, like, like for every good king you're going to have, you're going to have a really, a bunch of really bad ones.
- [70:30]
Krystal Ball
Well, let me, let me ask you about this and this is some, some new news that is pretty interesting. Trump, according to the Wall Street Journal, told inner circle some mass deportation policies went too far. President directs a new approach as some advisors believe immigration is no longer as strong a political as issue for him. He's seeking to lower the profile of his mass deportation effort, has directed his top advisors to adopt a new approach on one of his central campaign promises, they go on to say. In conversations with top advisors and his wife, Melania, Trump has become convinced that some of his administration's deportation policies went too far. Voters don't like the term mass deportation and he's told them he wants to see more attention on arresting bad guys and less chaos in American cities, according to people familiar with the matter. Now, I think a lot of caveats, right? We'll, we'll see what the actual action we will say there what hasn't been another like, city invasion like we saw in Minneapolis. And to bring this back to, you know, to your reporting here in Master Plan now, it looks very clearly like the mass protests and mass resistance in Chicago and Minneapolis and other states and countries across, in LA and other states and, and cities across the country. This succeeded, you know, it, it worked as a check. So Congress may have left it down, the Supreme Court laid out the red carpet for this, you know, bullshit cruel and unusual and, but the people really, you know, rose up and made it very, made it very difficult and created a lot of public awareness where they're right, that the politics of this have completely shifted since Trump came back in office. So even as they've consolidated in all this power in the executive branch and even as this president and his cronies seem to act like they're never going to have to face voters again, which is kind of scary. Gary, how much of a check do the people still serve, you know, for Democratic accountability on the unitary executive?
- [72:23]
David Sirota
It's a great question. I, I am heartened by, by the news this morning. I, I will say I, I do think that it's not a coincidence that Trump initially pulled the deployment in Minneapolis, but back when Democrats finally started talking about cutting off funding. I, I do think that's, that's, that's a little part of, That's a great point. You know, I do think that like Congress's power of the purse.
- [72:52]
Krystal Ball
But why did Congress do that?
- [72:53]
David Sirota
Exactly.
- [72:54]
Krystal Ball
Because they were under pressure from the base.
- [72:56]
David Sirota
Exactly.
- [72:56]
Krystal Ball
It wasn't just, it's like a domino.
- [72:59]
Griffin Davis
That's right.
- [73:00]
David Sirota
You're totally right. So it's like public pressure on Congress to use its actual power, its unchallenged power of the power of the person purse. Ultimately, all of that colludes to, to back a president office, at least momentarily. I should mention, I think this is important. Another important lesson when it comes to the power of the purse for the Iran war, that public pressure on Congress to, to not just pass resolutions of, or try to pass resolutions of disapproval of the war, but to actually defund the war is going to be incredibly, incredibly important. Like this idea that the, that Democrats can, can say I'm against the war, but I'm going for the $200 billion supplemental for the war is a lot of nonsense. And everyone should be focused really on that specific thing. The Democrats trying to carve out this like, middle ground. Like, you know, I can be against the war, but I don't want to, quote, unquote, undermine the troops by defunding the war. That is a nonsense position. So I guess it's to say the more pressure there is in public, the more it will create a more fortified opposition in countries Congress, and the more I think Donald Trump will be constrained. Now I do think ultimately if Trump wants to continue seriously illegal, unconstitutional and wildly unpopular policies, he can, and ultimately we have to mention it like the question of impeachment should be real. Like, I think this, ultimately we are, I think we're headed towards this question, especially on the Iran war, of if he never comes to Congress for a declaration of war, there is no explicit authorization and this war drags beyond the war powers act's 60 to 90 day time threshold. There is a big question of like, what to do. And what I worry about is like, if the Congress actually passes the war supplemental bill, is that interpreted legally and certainly within the administration as the authorization they need? In other words, is just a funding bill explicitly for the war. Does that become the Iran war's Gulf of Tonkin resolution? And if it does, then, then you've taken a legal, a legal tool off the table.
- [75:29]
Krystal Ball
Yeah. I don't know if you guys saw Scott Jennings doing his thing on CNN yesterday and I can't remember who he was fighting with, but they got into this fight over whether this was a war or not. And he said America hasn't fought a war since World War II.
- [75:46]
Emily Jashinsky
Oh my gosh.
- [75:47]
David Sirota
Yeah, I was, I mean that, that's where we are. Like we're, we're, we're, we're still. It's a military incursion. A military.
- [75:53]
Krystal Ball
I mean, and Iraq was. And Afghanistan was. And Vietnam mean, it's like, you've got to be kidding. And whoever was, I wish I could give credit to him because off the top of my head I'm forgetting who it was. But he was like, I think the veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan would have something to say about whether they were set to fight and die in a war or not. So you know what's interesting? Orwellian abuse of language. Yes.
- [76:16]
David Sirota
So interesting that you bring this up. There was a debate inside of the Reagan administration that we uncovered in our reporting for Master Plan in which it was, John Roberts as a young lawyer, it was over whether to classify the Lebanon military operation and the Grenada military operation, both initially conducted without congressional authorization, whether to allow it to be classified as a war for purposes of providing veterans benefits and the like war, combat war service benefits to the, to the, to the soldiers who, who were in that. And it was a debate over. Well, if we, if we say they were war, wars and we didn't get a congressional authorization for a war, how does, like it's sort of a legal gray area. And I think what's, what's. I bring it up only to, to, to, to say, look, these issues have been debated before inside of the executive branch, at least in like a serious way. Like, it was interesting to see John Roberts taking the idea that Congress has war making authority like that was a serious thing. I think we're so far away from, from that now where it's just presumed that Congress doesn't really have in any real way war making authority. And I just go back to this idea that really ultimately what we're learning is the only real power that Congress has. It may, there may be a line in the Constitution to declare war. The only real power it has here is the power of the purse. Like, I just, I know it's like it's so important to underscore, David.
- [77:53]
Griffin Davis
So if you're saying that democracy is the antidote to these, this, this master plan, well, that seems like something that we have to solve them. We got to get a rid of democracy. Where does the SAVE act fall into this master plan in terms of, you know, depressing votes, making it more difficult to vote. What Is your reaction to the current safe plan? Do you think it will take pass
- [78:18]
Emily Jashinsky
if Congress actually, the democratically elected representatives of Congress actually pass? It is the question too.
- [78:23]
David Sirota
I know, I know. Well look, I, I think the, the when we use the term master plan, what we're really talking about is there's a handful of powerful interests, oligarchs, billionaires, etc, corporations for, for a very long time. If you're one of those, those powers, you look at democracy as the problem, right. Democr. Because you need increasingly unpopular policies to maintain your wealth and power. To maintain a concentration of wealth and power in a small handful of a small group of, of players. One way you do that, that was season one of Master Plan. You legalize corruption so that the elections can be bought. So that it is less a one person, one vote democracy and more a $1, one vote democr democracy. So that the election choices, no matter what they are, deliver the unpopular policies you need. The second thing you do is you try to concentrate power in, as in, in one person's hands. The, the President so that the president. So you don't have to deal with a Congress, you don't really have to deal with a, with the courts. Like that's hard to do. Congress members have to go back to their districts every two years and deal with actual people. So, so part of the way to subvert democracy is to constitute trade power. The, the, the final part of this is to simply make it harder if not impossible for people to actually even vote. Right. I think, I think, and I think that's you know, what the SAVE act represents. And I think it's easy to like presume that the motive here is just like, you know, Dr. Evil Motives. Right? Like it's just people like, like the people pushing this just are evil because they want to be evil. No, it's actually a motive of self interest. We want to maintain power knowing that the policies that maintain our power are unpopular. So we have to do all of these things to essentially keep that power. Because if we allow, you know, an actually flourishing democracy to operate, we're not going to get the unpopular policies that we want. I mean Lewis Powell in the Powell memo in season one of Master Plan, I mean he lays this, this out, I mean literally. Like the problem that the conservative movement saw at the time was the government has become too responsive to the people. Like the government is passing all the. Ralph Nader is getting all these things passed that we the oligarchy do not like. And the problem is that the government has become too responsive to what the public wants. And I think ultimately this question. Question of. Of we originally struck a balance like the Constitution was supposed to strike a balance. Like you don't want the hot passions of. Of every whim that the public wants to be legislated at any time, because that can get out of, you know, that's mob rule. So there needs to be like, some, you know, small R Republican checks on that problem, you know, representative democracy. But I think we've swung so far to the other side that we're now at the same stage of talking about making it harder for people just to cast votes. I mean, that's really how far this plan has gone.
- [81:43]
Krystal Ball
David, where can people find Master Plan Season 2? And where can they support you guys over at Lever News?
- [81:50]
David Sirota
Thanks for asking. Go onto your phone right now. Pull up your podcast app. Whichever one is your favorite app, just type in Master Plan. Subscribe, go listen to episode one. If you don't have a podcast app, just go to Master Plan podcast dot com. All. All the episodes will be there. That, and we are the lever. So you can find all of our reporting@lever news.com and just a. A huge thank you to Breaking Points and Breaking Points Audience for always being such great supporters of our work and letting your audience know about our work. We are independent investigative journalists. It's not easy to get our work, our. Our work out there, but you guys are a huge help and we really, really appreciate it.
- [82:29]
Krystal Ball
Well, we have a podcaster, Serota.
- [82:31]
Emily Jashinsky
Your podcasts are incredible narratives.
- [82:33]
Krystal Ball
They are really excellent.
- [82:34]
Emily Jashinsky
So storytelling is so good.
- [82:36]
David Sirota
I appreciate it. Thank you so much.
- [82:38]
Krystal Ball
Great to see you as always, David.
- [82:39]
David Sirota
Great to see you guys. Thanks again.
- [82:43]
Griffin Davis
All right, that'll do it for us here in the first half of the show. If you want to see the second half, you all know the deal. Emily, where do they go?
- [82:50]
Emily Jashinsky
Breaking Points.com, of course. Where else?
- [82:54]
Griffin Davis
Of course.
- [82:54]
Krystal Ball
Where the Breaking Points 26, though. So sorry, guys.
- [82:58]
Emily Jashinsky
They've been liberated. They're taking Cuba with Ryan.
- [83:02]
Griffin Davis
That's right.
- [83:03]
Krystal Ball
One last thing before we get over to the premium section, though. Thank you to everybody who submitted questions for Sagar for the Joken interview. I know he was going over them. Griffin, I'm sure you dug into them as well. And he was saying, like, there's actually a lot of really good questions here. So really appreciate that input and if you want to be able to, you know, contribute to such things in the future. Right. Points dot com. That's how you do it.
- [83:24]
Griffin Davis
Yeah, absolutely. Yeah. Start doing our job for us. Really Good stuff.
- [83:30]
Krystal Ball
Yes. Please pay us money and then also do our job for us.
- [83:36]
David Sirota
We're going to be doing a lot more.
- [83:37]
Emily Jashinsky
Sagar created.
- [83:38]
Krystal Ball
How is this pitch going?
- [83:39]
Emily Jashinsky
Yes, it's. It's going perfect. We should in all credit to Sagar. He created a massive list of his own questions for Joe Kent and then he got great audience questions. And now there's a great synergy happening behind the scene.
- [83:50]
Krystal Ball
Yes, indeed. Yes.
- [83:52]
Griffin Davis
All right, we'll see y' all in the second half.
- [83:54]
Krystal Ball
Hey, if you like that video, hit
- [83:55]
Emily Jashinsky
the like button or leave a comment below. It really helps get the show to more people.
- [83:59]
Krystal Ball
And if you'd like to get the full show ad free and in your inbox every morning, you can sign up@breAKING POINTS.com that's right, get the full show.
- [84:06]
Emily Jashinsky
Help support the future of independent media@breakingpoints.com
- [84:10]
Martha Stewart
Ever wonder how to make hosting look effortless? Here's a secret. Getting ahead of the mess with new Reynolds Kitchens Countertop Prep Paper Just lightly wet the counter beforehand so the paper grips and stays in place. Then lay down the Reynolds Kitchen's countertop prep paper so drips and spills stay on the paper, not all over your kitchen counter. You can roll out dough, prep a party spread, or cook alongside family. When you're done, cleanup is as simple as lifting the the paper and revealing that clean counter underneath. Effortless. You can use it for cooking and baking, prep and even crafting, especially when you need extra working space. Because when the mess is already handled, you can focus on what matters. The food, the people and the moment. It may look effortless, but now you know it's Reynolds Kitchens countertop prep paper. Take a tip the of for me. Wet it, set it, prep it, done. Make it easy. Make it with Reynolds Kitchens countertop prep paper. Available now in the Reynolds Wrap aisle and Walmart.
- [85:19]
Emily Jashinsky
Are you really buying a car online on autotrader right now?
- [85:22]
Krystal Ball
Really? I can get super specific with dealer listings and see cars based on my budget.
- [85:27]
Emily Jashinsky
You can really have it delivered or pick it up. Mommy's walking. I think kid is walking up the slide. Really?
- [85:32]
Krystal Ball
Autotrader Buyer card online? Really?
- [85:35]
Podcast Advertiser (e.g., Danielle Robay or SkinnyPop/Martha Stewart ad voice)
Hi, this is Danielle Robay, the host of Bookmarked by Reese's Book Club, a podcast by hello Sunshine and I Heart Podcasts. I'm partnering with Simple Mills and I've just found my new go to reading snack, Simple Mills Almond Flour crackers. Think of this as a quick book style review because these crackers deserve it. The premise? A snack that feels light, not heavy. Made with almond flour sunflower seeds and flaxseeds. Nutrient dense ingredients your body can use. Not empty carbs and the taste Crunchy, classic flavors that leave you feeling energized. For a good plot twist, try Popums Cheesy, Airy, Poppable Crackers Packed with Veggies. Final Verdict these are a shelf staple. Find simple meals at your grocery store. This is an I Heart podcast. Guaranteed human.