6/12/25: Hegseth Threatens National Guard Everywhere, Newsom Stocks Surge, Israel Plots Iran Strike

Summary

Breaking Points with Krystal and Saagar – Episode Released June 12, 2025

Title: Hegseth Threatens National Guard Everywhere, Newsom Stocks Surge, Israel Plots Iran Strike
Host/Authors: Krystal Ball and Saagar Enjeti
Release Date: June 12, 2025

---

1. National Guard Deployment and Pete Hegseth's Congressional Testimony

The episode opened with a deep dive into the recent heated testimony by former Congressman Pete Hegseth before Congress regarding the deployment of the National Guard. The hosts dissected the implications of Hegseth's statements, which suggest a broader federalization of the National Guard across various states in response to escalating protests and civil unrest.

Key Points:

• Federalization Scope: Hegseth indicated that the orders to deploy the National Guard in Los Angeles could set a precedent for similar deployments in other states experiencing unrest.
• Political Motivations: There's an underlying motive to maintain control and suppress dissent, especially in "blue states" where political opposition is strong.
• Comparisons to January 6th: The conversation compared the current National Guard deployment to the response during the January 6th Capitol riot, highlighting discrepancies and potential double standards in federal responses to domestic protests.

Notable Quotes:

• Pete Hegseth ([06:09]):
  "In your opinion, Senator, if you notice, the initial order of 2000 in California was followed by a follow-on order for the additional 2000 with a recognition that the situation there required more resources in order to support law enforcement."

• Saagar Enjeti ([08:00]):
  "No limiting principle on the order that Trump signed. You know, Hegseth acknowledges effectively that, yeah, we could deploy troops, we could federalize National Guard anywhere."

• Krystal Ball ([12:18]):
  "So the answer is yes."
  (In response to a question about authorizing DHS to use drones and military forces to detain or arrest American citizens.)

2. Gavin Newsom's Rising Political Star and 2028 Presidential Ambitions

The discussion then shifted to California Governor Gavin Newsom, whose political maneuvers have significantly boosted his prominence both within the Democratic Party and nationally. The hosts analyzed Newsom's strategic positioning as a potential frontrunner for the 2028 presidential race, especially in the context of growing dissatisfaction with traditional Democratic leaders.

Key Points:

• Debate Performance: Newsom's impressive debate performance against Florida Governor Ron DeSantis has surged his popularity, making him a key figure among Democratic voters seeking strong opposition to Donald Trump.
• Media Savvy: His adept use of social media and willingness to engage with a diverse range of guests, including those from the political right, has broadened his appeal.
• Strategic Missteps: Despite his strengths, there are concerns about Newsom's alignment with donors over core Democratic values, potentially alienating certain segments of the base.

Notable Quotes:

• Harry Enten ([31:39]):
  "Google searches of Gavin Newsom with Donald Trump have gone up 9,700% versus a week ago. More folks are googling Gavin Newsom's name with Donald Trump than ever before."

• Krystal Ball ([39:58]):
  "Mr. Newsom used one of the highest profile moments of his political career to lay out the threat that he argued President Trump posed the nation and how Americans should resist it."

• Lester Holt ([35:00]):
  "And the way Gavin is using social media in a much more direct way, tussling with Stephen Miller and other various Trump officials, even going back and forth with influencer types on the right and asserting his position in real time."

3. Israel's Potential Strike on Iran and the United States' Role

A significant portion of the episode was dedicated to the escalating tensions between Israel and Iran, with reports indicating that Israel might be preparing to launch a military strike against Iranian nuclear facilities. The discussion explored the potential ramifications of such an action, including the likelihood of U.S. involvement and the broader implications for Middle Eastern stability.

Key Points:

• Intelligence and Forewarning: The U.S. has intelligence and possibly diplomatic channels informed about Israel's potential strike, indicating a level of involvement or at least awareness at the federal level.
• Military Implications: The deployment and evacuation of U.S. military personnel from the Middle East underscore the gravity of the situation and the preparedness for potential conflict.
• Diplomatic Efforts: Upcoming talks between the U.S. and Iran in Oman are critical. Success could avert military action, while failure may precipitate a major conflict.

Notable Quotes:

• Donald Trump ([45:10]):
  "They can't have a nuclear weapon. Very simple. They can't have a nuclear weapon. We're not going to allow that."

• Krystal Ball ([48:02]):
  "The Trump administration is trying to posture like, oh, Israel might strike, strike Iran. We have nothing to do with it. Let's say they maintain that, Pasha, Israel does strike Iran. Is anyone going to believe that we had nothing to do with it?"

• Saagar Enjeti ([56:27]):
  "The Trump administration's trying to posture like, oh, Israel might strike, strike Iran. We have nothing to do with it, that this was just Israel acting on their own accord."

4. Implications for U.S. Foreign Policy and Domestic Politics

The convergence of these international and domestic issues highlights a period of significant tension and strategic maneuvering. The potential use of military force by the U.S. or its allies, coupled with internal political shifts exemplified by leaders like Newsom, suggests a complex landscape ahead.

Key Points:

• Military Expenditure: The massive costs associated with deploying thousands of troops domestically raise questions about fiscal priorities and the strategic necessity of such actions.
• Political Capital: Leaders who navigate these crises effectively may gain substantial political capital, influencing future elections and policy directions.
• Public Perception: The public's response to both domestic military deployments and foreign policy actions will play a crucial role in shaping the political narrative and the success of leadership figures like Newsom.

---

Conclusion

This episode of Breaking Points with Krystal and Saagar offered a comprehensive analysis of pressing national security concerns, the rise of influential political figures, and the intricate interplay between domestic policies and international relations. Through expert commentary and insightful discussions, Krystal Ball and Saagar Enjeti shed light on the multifaceted challenges facing the United States, providing listeners with a nuanced understanding of current events and their broader implications.

---

Notable Timestamped Quotes:

• [06:09] Pete Hegseth on National Guard deployment in California.
• [08:00] Saagar Enjeti discussing the lack of limiting principles in Trump's National Guard orders.
• [12:18] Krystal Ball affirming the authorization of drones and military forces for law enforcement.
• [31:39] Harry Enten on the surge in Gavin Newsom's Google searches.
• [39:58] Krystal Ball on Newsom addressing the national threat posed by Trump.
• [45:10] Donald Trump reiterating restrictions on Iran's nuclear capabilities.
• [48:02] Krystal Ball questioning the U.S.'s role in a potential Israeli strike on Iran.
• [56:27] Saagar Enjeti on the Trump administration's stance regarding Israel's actions against Iran.

---

This summary captures the essence of the June 12, 2025 episode of Breaking Points with Krystal and Saagar, highlighting the key discussions, insights, and conclusions drawn by the hosts.

Transcript

[Jenny Garth]

This is an iHeart podcast.

[Lester Holt]

NBC Nightly News legacy isn't handed down or NBC News.

[Tom Brokaw]

I'm Tom Brokaw.

[Sagar Enjeti]

We hope to see you back here.

[Lester Holt]

I'm Lester Holt.

[Tom Yamas]

It's carried forward.

[Lester Holt]

Tom Yamas is there for us.

[Tom Yamas]

Firefighters are still working around the clock. As the world changes, we look for what endures. We are coming on the air with breaking news right now. We look for a constant and from one era to the next. Trust is the anchor for NBC Nightly News. I'm Tom Yamas. A new chapter begins NBC Nightly News with Tom yamis. Evenings on NBC.

[Lester Holt]

How to have fun anytime, anywhere. STEP 1 Go to chumbacasino.com chumbacasino.com Got it.

[Jenny Garth]

STEP 2 Collect your welcome bonus.

[Lester Holt]

Come to papa. Welcome bonus.

[Jenny Garth]

Step 3 Play hundreds of casino style games for free.

[Lester Holt]

That's a lot of games all for free.

[Jenny Garth]

Step 4 Unleash your excitement.

[Krystal Ball]

Woohoo.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Chumba Casino has been delivering thrills for over a decade. So claim your free welcome bonus now.

[Jenny Garth]

And live the chumba life.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Visit chumbacasino.com no purchase necessary vgw group.

[Lester Holt]

Void where prohibited by law 21/ Terms.

[Tom Yamas]

Conditions apply at Designer Shoe Warehouse we.

[Lester Holt]

Believe that shoes are an important part of, well, everything.

[Sagar Enjeti]

From first steps to first dates. From all nighters to all time personal bests.

[Lester Holt]

From building pillow forts to building a.

[Krystal Ball]

Life for all the big and small.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Moments that make up your whole world.

[Lester Holt]

DSW is there and we've got just the shoes.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Find a shoe for every you from brands you love at brag worthy prices.

[Lester Holt]

At your DSW store or dsw.com hey guys, Sagar and Krystal here.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Independent media just played a truly massive role in this election and we are so excited about what that means for the future of this show.

[Lester Holt]

This is the only place where you can find honest perspectives from the left and the right that simply does not exist anywhere else.

[Sagar Enjeti]

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.

[Lester Holt]

We need your help to build the future of independent news media and we hope to see you@breaking points.com Good morning everybody. Happy Thursday. We have an amazing show for everybody today. What do we have? Crystal?

[Sagar Enjeti]

Indeed we do a lot of big things happening here and around the world so we'll update you on those protests. Pete Hegseth had some significant testimony in front of Congress yesterday. Moments did not go so well. So break all of that down for you. Also, Gavin Newsom obviously fit seizing the moment to potentially further his presidential ambitions will break down the political aspect of that as well. All eyes on Israel and Iran. Some very ominous signs that Israel may be preparing to strike Iran. Murtaza Hussein is going to join us to break down those indications and what we can say about that and where those nuclear talks between Trump and the Iranians are as of today. So break all of that down. Very obviously extraordinarily consequential news there. Yesterday we received word from the Trump administration that they have a China deal, we'll call it it seems like it's a framework at this point. We've got some of the loose details, Scott Besant and others answering questions. So we'll tell you what we know about that. We also have some sort of rapprochement with Elon and Trump, him posting yesterday at 3:04am which Emily and I mentioned in the show. We didn't have a chance to fully break it down. He regrets, yeah, he regrets some of the things that he said went too far. Sagar.

[Lester Holt]

Yes, that's right. It appears to have been at high level brokered talks between the White House and between Elon. So perhaps this is, you know, the beginning of the bromance again. We'll see.

[Sagar Enjeti]

You never know. Twists and turns.

[Lester Holt]

We can only hope. No, but you never know.

[Sagar Enjeti]

And we have some big news in the New York City mayoral race, first poll ever to come out that shows Zoran Mamdani leading that race, beating Andrew Cuomo, former governor. We also have some clips from his appearance on the Breakfast Club which are pretty interesting as well. So we'll take a look at that and what that means more broadly for the Democratic Party, the country, all that good stuff. But before we get to any of that, Sagar, today is the last day of the free month trial.

[Lester Holt]

That's right. Unfortunately, it is the very, very last day, or perhaps fortunately for those of you who have been waiting and you've just been hovering there with your mouse, you can go ahead and sign [e-mail] bp free, see what we're all about. You can check out the trial for yourself. You'll get the full show, of course, the AMA access, some of the Friday show exclusive content and so much more. So go ahead and sign [e-mail] the promo code is BP. We deeply appreciate so many of the people who have signed up here. You're preventing Ryan from having to do, what is it, hymns, ads, Hymns ads is the one or the Sagar Jetty parlay, the exclusive Saga DraftKings parlay or fandom. Can you imagine that? The prize picks or any of these other joke sports books that are out there. So AG1 and all of it. So if you don't want to hear that, you can go ahead and sign up at breakingpoints.com, bp free. Use that promo code. All right, let's get to the protests.

[Sagar Enjeti]

All right, let's go and get to the protest. As best as I can tell, protester around the country and including L A pretty quiet last night. You know, the mayor of L A has instituted a curfew and that seems to have calmed things down significantly. So let me show you a couple of clips here from Pete Hegset's testimony before Congress yesterday. So he got asked whether the Guard could be deployed in other cities. He also got asked about the the usage of the national guard on January 6th versus with regards to what is going down in LA. Let's go ahead and take a listen to what he had to say or which guard.

[Murtaza Hussein]

And I'm trying to figure out if you decided to do this collectively in Kansas or any other place, would you need to specify a new sort of fact pattern or do you think this order applies to any Guard anywhere, any service branch anywhere? It's just like I get your justification. We disagree about the circumstances. I'm just trying to figure out did you just potentially mobilize every Guard everywhere and every service member everywhere? I mean, create the framework for that? I understand you didn't. I'm saying what does the document do.

[Pete Hegseth]

In your opinion, Senator, if you notice, the initial order of 2000 in California was followed by a follow on order for the additional 2000 with a recognition that the situation there required more resources in order to support law enforcement. So part of it is getting ahead of a problem. So that if in other places, if there are other riots in places where law enforcement officers are threatened, we would have the capability to surge National Guard there if necessary.

[Murtaza Hussein]

The National Guard was deployed here on January 6th and that was a decision made by the Department of Defense. Do you support that decision? Do you believe that that was the right decision to deploy the National Guard to defend the Capitol on January 6th?

[Pete Hegseth]

All I know is it's the right decision to be deploying the National Guard in Los Angeles to defend ICE agents who deserve to be defended in the execution of their jobs.

[Murtaza Hussein]

But I think it's important to know whether you think it was also important to have the National Guard defending the United States Capitol when there were violent protesters here on the president's behalf to make sure that folks know that you care about protest, whether it's against the president or on behalf of the president.

[Pete Hegseth]

Senator, I was in the Washington D.C. national Guard when that happened and was initially ordered to go guard the inauguration of Joe Biden. But because of the politicization of the Biden administration, my orders were revoked and ultimately because of the politics that were being played inside the Defense Department by the previous administration.

[Murtaza Hussein]

But do you support the decision made on January 6 to send the National Guard here to.

[Pete Hegseth]

I support the decision that President Trump made and requesting the National Guard that was denied.

[Murtaza Hussein]

So you do not. President Trump did not support the decision.

[Lester Holt]

Support.

[Murtaza Hussein]

You do not send the National Guard here to defend the Capitol. I think that speaks to the worry that many Americans have that there is a double standard.

[Sagar Enjeti]

So, obviously, two significant things there. First of all, no limiting principle on the order that Trump signed. You know, Hegseth acknowledges effectively that, yeah, we could deploy troops, we could federalize National Guard anywhere. And you know, really important in the context of there are planned protests this weekend on the day of Trump's big military slash birthday parade. Trump himself said that protesters, not violent protesters, just protesters in general, would be met with force. So Pete Hegseth indicating, yeah, this isn't just about la. We have the option available and I don't think anyone would be surprised if they federalize the National Guard in other places, blue states and cities in particular. The other piece here, actually, good question from Senator Chris Murphy. Because the January 6th riots were, you know, significantly more consequential and violent than what was going down in la. And Pete Hegseth can't bring himself to say that it was the right decision in that instance to bring in the National Guard, but he is fully behind bringing it in la. So before I play the next one, what did you make of that? Soccer?

[Lester Holt]

Yeah, I mean, the Jan6 element is one which always really comes back to bite them because you see a lot of the insurrectionist stuff that is being used right now. I mean, here's the thing. We were critical of that National Guard deployment at the time. If you recall, I was talking about it with Ryan. I mean, all of those images of people sleeping on the floor in parking garages and stuff that actually happened here. We were effectively occupied in Washington for three months and it cost, I don't even remember how many billions and billions of dollars. It was useless. It was a completely unnecessary thing. We have some 5,000 US troops of some kind, either National Guardsmen and. Or United States Marines that are being deployed in defense of this. The crazy thing about the Marines is that we were told that they were actually ready and had been trained and riot control and all this other stuff, but they're actually not the case. They're not even in Los Angeles right now at the moment. So this is a colossal expenditure. For what purpose exactly? I mean, the current estimate is what, some $131 million for a single. I mean, it's not even been a full week of this. So extrapolate that out more. Also, anybody who remembers covering the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the number of support personnel that you need to support anything like this is astounding. And so I think that the more that this continue, and especially if it goes national, it's really gonna be a very easy talking point, I think, for your Democrats, not only to talk about January 6th, but also just the cost. I mean, the cost does matter here where it's like you guys are literally rolling around celebrating a $5 million cut to Zimbabwe. It's like you just blew 100 times that over a weekend deployment to Los Angeles. So, yeah, I think we are trending. We talked about the politics and stuff like that here, especially as violence hadn't happened yesterday. We'll see you over the weekend whenever Buddy's not or whatever. But especially if things begin to go down and you just see more militarized, like images that come out of la, I do think things could turn against them.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Let's go ahead and take a listen to this next part, because he gets asked in addition. Okay, so under what authority the deployment of the Marines in particular, like, what constitutional authority is justifying this extraordinary action with regard to federalizing the National Guard and bringing in the Marines? Let's go ahead and take a listen to how he responds to that.

[Lester Holt]

Just specifically, Mr. Secretary, what is the.

[Murtaza Hussein]

Authority that the administration is using to.

[Lester Holt]

Deploy active duty Marines to California neighborhoods? What authority?

[Pete Hegseth]

The President has constitutional authority. In order to support cite the provision of the Constitution. I'd have to pull up the specific provision, but our Office of General Counsel, alongside our leadership, has reviewed and ensured in the order that we set out that it was completely constitutional for the President to use federal troops to defend federal law enforcement Administration? I would.

[Lester Holt]

Are you prepared to authorize dhs, to use drones and also to authorize military forces to detain or arrest American citizens?

[Pete Hegseth]

Senator, every authorization we've provided the National Guard and the Marines in Los Angeles is under the authority of the President. United States is lawful and constitutional. They are assisting in defending.

[Krystal Ball]

So the answer is yes.

[Pete Hegseth]

Law enforcement officers.

[Lester Holt]

So the answer is yes.

[Pete Hegseth]

Facilities.

[Lester Holt]

So the answer is yes.

[Pete Hegseth]

The execution of their job.

[Lester Holt]

The answer is yes.

[Pete Hegseth]

In the city of Los Angeles.

[Sagar Enjeti]

So won't rule out their use of drones and military forces. Obviously, the first clip where he's like, I don't really know what authority. I'm sure it's constitutional, but I can't really tell you how. Not a great look there. At a time when, you know, the authorization of this is legally contested. Gavin Newsom has already sued. There's actually supposed to be hearings today about whether or not this was a lawful deployment of both the Marines and the decision to federalize the National Guard over the objections of the Governor of California. And, Sagar, I was reading yesterday, I actually didn't realize this. Marines were used in 1992 in the context of. Of suppressing the LA riots. And some of the local cops were like, this was really not great because they're not trained for domestic law enforcement situations. And one of the anecdotes that became sort of notorious coming out of that is the LAPD were like, all right, cover us. To the Marines. Cover us as we go into this house. As we approach this house. Well, for law enforcement, that means, okay, watch. Make sure no one's coming out. For the Marines, it meant, light up the whole house. And the LAPD were like, what the hell are you doing? They're like, you told us to cover you. To us, that's what that means. So just to give one example of how that's why you don't deploy active duty soldiers on American streets outside of truly extraordinary circumstances. Now, the LA riots in 1992, I mean, it is hard to, if you haven't watched anything or read the news about what went down there. I mean, it was insane. Insane. Over 60 people killed, billion dollars in damage, businesses looted. I mean, this was just going on and on. It was a massive uncontrolled conflagration. And you had the Governor of California who said, yes, we need the help. Yes, let's federalize the National Guard. Yes, Federal government, please come in and assist us. Totally different situation here. And I think, Sagar, that is what is so disturbing to me is the attempt to normalize the use of military forces in a domestic law enforcement context and to make it seem normal to have our streets completely militarized in this way. You know, I think you and Ryan made a great point that part of what has conditioned us for this moment also is how all of the local law enforcement in every major city. You can't even tell them apart from National Guard.

[Lester Holt]

It's funny, I see these clips go viral all the time. They're like, look, National Guardsman. I'm like, no, that's Lapdo. For what purpose? I actually, I wrote a piece years ago about Ferguson and about how that actually set the tone for a lot of what we saw. I mean, look, we could debate Ferguson and all that, but I don't think anybody's gonna be sitting around defending Ferguson pd, even at a right or a left wing level. And that's specifically because of this. That's what a lot of the conversation, unfortunately, has actually gotten worse. And that is really, I mean, look, I think it's dangerous in this regard. And again, you know, for the White House, they really do seem to believe that they're on their strongest footing in taking it on. And look, I mean, we did not deny here that the Mexican flag stuff, all of that is not good. I mean, look, there has been some property damage. But, you know, I think contextualizing the scale of this is actually genuinely important, specifically because of the reaction that they're coming here. But look, we can't deny this is something that the White House wants to pick this fight. And in some respects, I'm still a bit torn. I don't know yet how the country is going to react because, you know, I did underestimate how much of this, like, left wing cities out of control stuff has become not only a meme, but like a shibboleth literally across the entire country. Like, if you don't live in a city, you live in the upper Midwest and stuff. These images are everywhere. It's literally like, you know, calling people in San Francisco and be like, are you safe? You know, they really have no familiarity at all with that, and you can't blame them. Probably vice versa as well. I'm just, I'm still kind of trying to tease out and see, like, how this goes. They clearly believe that things are gonna be, you know, for them, but. But also, it's probably about tone setting as well, you know, especially ahead of this military parade here in Washington and New York City. Chicago, Dallas, there's been some other protests, but nothing has really risen to the level of la. And so perhaps that's part of it as well.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah. All right, let's go ahead and get to this next piece where the Trump administration has been threatening to arrest Gavin Newsom. Tom Homan first, you know, said this and then Trump said, yeah, I think he Should. And Trump got another question about this yesterday, whether or not he thinks that Gavin Newsom could be charged and arrested. By the way, the last time he got asked this of like, well, exactly what would be the pretext for arresting him? And he said for running for governor, that was the reason. That was the reason he should be charged and arrested. So in any case, he gets asked about this again. Let's take a listen.

[Lester Holt]

Are you gonna arrest Gavin Newsom?

[Donald Trump]

Well, he's not doing a good job, you know, Arrest. What does that mean, he's not doing a good job charging? Well, in theory, you could, I guess. You know, it's almost like a dissipation of duty. Nobody's ever seen anything like that.

[Sagar Enjeti]

In theory, I could. So that is where that stands. Also Saga this week, they charged this Congresswoman McIver with, you know, crimes that could lead to 17 years in prison in the context of that, you know, situation that unfolded outside of a federal detention facility that ICE was using in Newark, New Jersey. So you've got a lot of authoritarian pieces coming together here. You have the charging this congressman. We have the threats of arrest of Gavin Newsom for existing and doing things that Trump didn't like. You have the federalizing of the National Guard over the objections of the elected governor of California. You have the deployment of Marines. You had that wild partisan speech to troops at Fort Bragg, by the way. We learned more about that. First of all, they were hand selected to make sure they had the right politics. The ones that were behind Trump sold them MAGA merchandise, which is like, I mean, again, I know no one cares about the before times and what things used to be like, but these are things that would just be completely out of bounds. And then you have tanks being rolled into D.C. for his big birthday parade, show of force and strength, et cetera. So lot of authoritarian elements just in your face. Flood the zone with them. This week as we head into the weekend where there are planned, significant protests, they're called no kings protests, that were.

[Lester Holt]

Planned across the country and especially here in Washington. Yeah, I'm actually curious to see. We're getting to that in a little bit as to how the protests and the parade itself might be disrupted because of weather.

[Sagar Enjeti]

But who is going to this parade? They asked a bunch of Republicans and none of them were.

[Lester Holt]

I think it's the military. I think what they're going to do is because remember, the ostensible purpose of the parade is the United States Army's 250th birthday.

[Sagar Enjeti]

It just happens to.

[Lester Holt]

Be, I will not be attending, mostly because of traffic reasons. It's impossible to get into the city. But what you have here in the Northern Virginia area, as you know, is, like, there's what, half the United States military lives around the Pentagon. They're either gonna get orders or they're gonna go. And so with a lot of their families. And so that's why I think the vast majority of the people who will be there in attendance of the grand parade. Shall we remember what the inspiration for this was? Is that all? Because five or six years ago, Trump went to the Bastille Day parade in France, and he was like, hey, this is pretty cool, you know, watching tanks and all that roll down the champs. And that's why he was like, okay, we need to bring this to Washington. I'm actually surprised because it was supposed to be for America's 250th birthday, which I believe is. Isn't that next year in 2026? Yeah. So 1776. So it would have been next year. So July 4, 2026. But I guess he just had to have one for the 250th birthday of the US army, something that definitely the US population knows quite a bit about. I'm telling you, I didn't even know when the 250th birthday was.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Well, America's birthday doesn't fall on Trump's birthday. That wasn't gonna work out. Sagar, as. Yeah, silly you. Yeah, one more piece here. We can go ahead and. Is this a VO or a sag, guys? You can let me know. Pretty troubling in my opinion, given the context. True social post from Trump. Let's go ahead and put this up on the. Oh, it's Asad. So let's go ahead and play this, and you can take a look at the text on the screen. Let me go ahead and read this a little bit to you before we play it, because for those of you who are listening via podcast Podcast, he says, I am more confident than ever that in the days ahead and every generation to come, the US army will heap glory upon glory. You will summon inexhaustible courage. You'll protect every inch of U.S. soil. You will defend America to the ends of the earth in the days ahead. Okay, let's take a listen.

[Donald Trump]

Just a job. It's a calling and a sacred tradition passed down from father to son, brother to sister, and one generation to the next. At every hour of danger, our noblest citizens have answered that call. Time and again, our enemies have learned that if you Dare to threaten the American people. American soldier will chase you down, crush you and cast you into oblivion.

[Sagar Enjeti]

All right, so that was that. In addition, Sagre, you pulled this. It literally may rain on his parade.

[Lester Holt]

Yes, we did, actually. Literal rain on the parade. I'm an avid DC weather watcher. Here we have storm.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Shout out to the Capitol Weather Gang.

[Lester Holt]

Threaten you. Yeah, shout out to the Capitol Weather Gang. If you do live in the DMV area, they are absolutely the best. Threaten the U.S. army's 250th celebration in D.C. on Saturday. A slow moving front may trigger late day showers and storms as the parade concert and fireworks crowds are gathering. Morning looks mostly dry, but heat and humidity are building. I'm gonna say this, I get how in the vacuum that, that truth social post and all that looks troubling. But having covered the Pentagon, the absolute vast majority of like Pentagon agit prop and stuff that they put out is like this. I get where you're coming from. Well, I do. People just know like this type of, this is standard fare for like Obama, for, for, for the first Trump administrator. Basically anytime they're like, oh, the war fighters, the killers, the U.S. army. So just so people know that is what a very average U.S. army.

[Sagar Enjeti]

I don't doubt that's the case. And you know what? But any of these things. Well, not any of them, but some of these things individually, like the military parade.

[Lester Holt]

Yeah.

[Sagar Enjeti]

If this is a normal administration and they're doing this weird asthma. All right. I mean, it's a waste of money. Like, what are we doing? We're destroying the streets in D.C. they really don't need that, like shitty streets anyway.

[Lester Holt]

So maybe we can rebuild them properly.

[Sagar Enjeti]

It's not great. But is it the end of the world? No. Coming in the context of everything else. That's where it becomes, you know, when you see the tanks being rolled into D.C. at the time when they're threatening the use of the National Guard, federalizing the National Guard in cities across the country and they're deploying active duty Marines against US citizens for like incredibly pretextual reasons over the objections of the elected governor of that state. And by the way, they're threatening to arrest the elected governor of that state because he got elected. That's when I see things like that. And they add to a picture that is, to me, deeply troubling. And last thing I'll say, and then we can move on to Gavin Newsom and how he is certainly enjoying his moment in the sun with all of this. You know, there are some There has been a pattern in this administration where it's not just this moment, it's the attacks on the universities, it's the, you know, trying to bring the media to heel. It's even the use of national emergency to justify this wild tariff regime. Like the consistent pattern in this administration has been consolidation of power. And it feels very much like we're coming to a crescendo with that. And also, Sagar, one other note of some of the context which you've gestured at before is the quote, unquote, big Beautiful Bill is wildly unpopular. People see it as a giant giveaway to the rich because that's what it is. And so they're also trying to use this moment of large scale anti ICE protests to refashion and rebrand the big Beautiful bill as being about immigration. And you see Stephen Miller doing this aggressively, going after Rand Paul and the libertarians who are opposed to it and saying, basically, if you oppose this and you oppose border security and you oppose the President's agenda on immigration. So I think that is another one of the political goals that they are trying to effectuate.

[Lester Holt]

There's no question. I genuinely, again, I don't know. I mean, we have polls yesterday we covered immigration. Trump is the strongest issue I saw. Quinnipiac poll more recently showed him underwater. It's a little bit hard to believe. The numbers are a little bit too fantastical. But it wouldn't surprise me if he's moving towards more 50, 50. But there's no question on the bill. I mean, I flagged it from day one. I'm like, look, they're gonna do it and it's gonna be massively unpopular. Yeah, there's just, I mean, that's what the Tax Cuts and Jobs act story.

[Sagar Enjeti]

True.

[Lester Holt]

Part of it was in the first term. We're basically riding up almost the exact same timeline with the passage of the so called Big Beautiful Bill. And tying these two things together does give them a lot of COVID for eventually going home and telling people what it's all about. But of course, America, look, Americans are smart, at least in this regard. Anytime a piece of tax legislation passes, they're like, hey, so what's in this exactly? They're like, oh, okay, got it. You know, not a whole lot.

[Sagar Enjeti]

What a surprise.

[Lester Holt]

And actually, even, yeah, even right now, there's all these stupid fights right now, even in the Senate to make sure that they at least strip like some of the decent parts out of the bill. So honestly, it can be a lot worse.

[Sagar Enjeti]

They want to take out what, like Tax on tips and stuff.

[Lester Holt]

They want to take out tax on tips or at least, you know, restrict it. And then even the salt cap, you know, they want to make it to lower it even more to anger some of the blue states. Just stuff like that, where it's just preposterous. But can I say this? I actually was reading about the new salt thing. It's not a terrible thing. Basically they income raise it so that people who are upper middle class earners in California and in New York are at least grandfathered into a more modest thing. So it applies to the millionaires but not to upper middle class people. I'm like, okay, I think that's relatively fine.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah, that's not bad.

[Lester Holt]

I just say that I just want people to know the current way that this all thing is structured I actually think is quite fair. The income cap it at like 400,000 or something. Basically making sure that high property tax people in New York and California don't get double screwed. I think it's fine. At the same time we're not all shedding tears for people making three or four hundred thousand a year. My point just being that the bill itself is deeply unpopular. A lot of what is all happening with this is effectively like a gambit to distract. But what we will soon talk about looms over all of this is Iran. And actually that is where I would be the most worried. And this is my great hope and I'll say it again, but you know, if there is some sort of outbreak of conflict, then I would hope that people really do take to the streets the way that they did with the war in Iraq. Don't forget millions of people took to the streets across the world to protest that war. And that is also where we could see significant, you know, and the weaponization of this great so called antisemitism machine against people. And if those two things are conflated, saying that war with Iran is bad because it is anti Semitic, that's probably where I worry the most. Especially with conflict on the horizon right now.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Well, I do have some good news for you, which is that Mr. Salt himself, Josh Gottheimer.

[Lester Holt]

Yeah, that's right.

[Sagar Enjeti]

He lost his handed to him in the Democratic primary, came in fourth place with 11% of the vote. So he thought he was really killing it.

[Lester Holt]

Well, those 11%, that is, those are the richest people in New Jersey, I guess.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah, constituents showed up and I'm sure they'll give him more campaign funds in the future.

[Tom Yamas]

Anyway, NBC Nightly News legacy isn't handed.

[Lester Holt]

Down or NBC News.

[Tom Brokaw]

I'm Tom Brokaw.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Hope to see you back.

[Lester Holt]

I'm Lester Holt.

[Tom Yamas]

It's carried forward.

[Lester Holt]

Tom Yamatz is there for us.

[Tom Yamas]

Firefighters are still working around the clock. As the world changes, we look for what endures. We are coming on the air with breaking news. Right now we look for a condition and from one era to the next. Trust is the anchor for NBC Nightly News. I'm Tom Yamas. A new chapter begins. NBC Nightly News with Tom Yamas. Evenings on NBC.

[Tom Brokaw]

And here we have a specimen from.

[Lester Holt]

The early 2000s, a legacy investing platform. Please don't touch the exhibit, folks. It could crash.

[Tom Brokaw]

Ready to step out of the financial history museum? At public.com you can invest in almost everything, stocks, bonds, options and more. You could even put your cash to work at an industry leading 4.1% APY. Leave your clunky, outdated platform behind. Go to public.com and fund your account in five minutes or less. Paid for by Public Investing Inc. Member FINRA and SIPC. Full disclosures at public.com disclosures.

[Jenny Garth]

This is Jenny Garth from I Do Part Two. Can't afford Ozempic? Try WeGovy from FutureHealth. Just $199 and FDA approved for weight loss. No insurance or tricky syringes needed, just results. Visit futurehealth.com that's future without the E. And start losing weight this week. Future Health weight loss data based on independent studies sponsored by Future Health. Future Health is not a healthcare services provider. Meds are prescribed at providers discretion.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Okay, let's go ahead and move on to Gavin Newsom. You know, one of the interesting things here is Newsom really coming into the Trump administration kind of misread the moment with regard to the Democratic base. And we talked about this before he launched his podcast seeing okay, it's the podcast moment. I'm gonna launch my podcast. And then he had on people from the right like Charlie Kirk and Steve Bannon. And Gavin Newsom is actually very good debater. Like I'm not a big fan of Gavin Newsom, but you have to, you know, acknowledge political talent where it exists. He did a great job in that debate versus Ron DeSantis that was, you know, very well received among Democratic base, got a lot of attention, et cetera. So he has the chops to do it and instead he invites on Charlie Kirk and Steve Bannon and basically lets them berate him and he just sort of takes it and it's like, oh, I appreciate that. I appreciate that Democratic base. At that point, we're looking for people who are willing to fight. So that's how Bernie ends up wildly popular at the base. AOC ends up wildly popular at the base. Jasmine Crockett has her moment and becomes this national figure, et cetera. So he wildly misreads the moment. And obviously everyone knows this man has been dreaming of being president for probably his, his whole life, being the sort of sociopathic individual that he is. So he misreads things at the beginning. Now, Trump has handed him this very large opportunity in the national spotlight to stand up to Trump in the way that a Democratic base and a lot of independent voters I think want to see. In a lot of ways, I do think he has met that moment. At the same time other Democrats are like, I mean, the Democratic Party is just so utterly pathetic. I read this thing Sagar, about how they're not sure whether they should pick this fight with Trump and they don't know if this is the place to stay and it might just be a distraction. It's like, could you just have some principle that you're willing to stand for without taking a fucking focus group poll tested situation before you know what to say? It's so pathetic and disgusting to me. And it serves Gavin Newsom because then he ends up being the only one out there in the spotlight. So all of that being said, Harry Enton and CNN took a look at the Google search traffic and how this is all playing into Newsom's 2028ambitions. Let's go ahead and take a listen to this.

[Harry Enten]

That, yeah, let's just start off. If Gavin Newsom wanted to take on Donald Trump and loves the attention, he has 100% gotten it. Take a look here. Google searches of Gavin Newsom with Donald trump. Get this up 9,700% versus a week ago. More folks are googling Gavin Newsom's name with Donald Trump than ever before. And Google searches dating all the way back since 2004. Donald Trump was able to make a name for himself through the Apprentice. Through all of his business ventures. He is now making a name for Gavin Newsom, who seems more than willing to relish in this fight should Democrats oppose Donald Trump. More among Democrats. Look at this. 84%, 84% of Democrats nationwide say they want Democrats to take on Donald Trump more. This is not 2017 anymore where the majority of Democrats want to compromise with Donald Trump. No, they want a fighter with Donald Trump. Top chances to be the 2028 nominee. Look, it's a clown car at this particular point. Point all these candidates squished together. But you'll notice that one name is ahead of the rest, and that's Gavin Newsom at 12%. You see Ocasio, Cortez, 10, Buttigieg, 10, Shapiro, 6%. But Gavin Newsom certainly is up there right now in terms of the candidates who are best in position to get that 2028 nomination.

[Sagar Enjeti]

And this is concerning to me because I'm not a Gavin Newsom fan, you know, in terms of how he's governed in California, basically, if there's a conflict between core Democratic base principles, things like supporting labor unions or expanding healthcare, and donors, he's going with the donors. So that's kind of the way you should understand his governance. So the fact that I think he is doing himself a lot of favors with the Democratic base and I have to say has been much more responsive on social media. He really does sort of understand Sahra, the new media ecosystem a lot better.

[Lester Holt]

I was talking with Ryan, I was like, like, look at this dude. His first interviews. I see Brian Tyler Cohen and Miles tucked. Smart, right? Pod Save America.

[Sagar Enjeti]

We asked him for an interview, by the way.

[Lester Holt]

Yeah, he turned us down. Yeah, we tried. We tried.

[Sagar Enjeti]

He wanted to stay with the solidly liberal.

[Lester Holt]

It's annoying because that's what Dwight does too. I mean, we wouldn't be annoying about it. I'm just. I don't know.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Anyway, we'd ask him some real questions.

[Lester Holt]

Yeah, I would ask him some real questions. Whatever. We can table that. You know, actually, Gavin staff and I back in the day actually had a decent exchange, so they should know I have been fair to them.

[Sagar Enjeti]

He follows me on Twitter, so I thought maybe there was a.

[Lester Holt]

Well, California. California is our largest audience. So California, many of you are constituents of Gavin, so tell Gav to listen to the people. I doubt he will. That's not exactly how things work over there. No, I do think he's actually handling himself quite well. I've always been a newsome admirer for his sheer political talent. I think he is clowned in very unfair ways. I mean, I remember I just thought there was no way French Laundry would ever happen. And I was like, there's no way that he doesn't, that he gets away with this. But he survived. Not only survived the recall election since then, in broadly popular ish, he understands new media. And I think one of the things I underestimated is, look, California is a machine state. The machine produces a lot of horrible politicians. But in general, we shouldn't underestimate the governor of the most populous state in the entire union. That has been a Mistake.

[Sagar Enjeti]

One of the largest economies in the world.

[Lester Holt]

Literally one of the largest economies in the world. I mean, people underestimated Richard Nixon for being from California. People underestimated Ronald Reagan from being from California. Like, California looms large over our politics, always has for a long time. And I think that with Gavin Newsom, that is where his sheer political talent, which was on display with that debate with Ron DeSantis, again, you can debate, like, oh, did he score a point here or there, like, on the merits? It's not really about that, really about his affectation. And the thing I've always said about Gavin is Gavin loves the game more than anything else in the world. He's got the black hole inside of him. That's what you need. Why else are you going on Sean Hannity's show? That's nuts. Why are you texting Sean Hannity during his live broadcast, quibbling with some of the things that Sean says? Because you have to be obsessed with yourself, and you have to need that affirmation more than anything else in the world. And that you can't. You can't teach that. Like, you have to just be born with it. And so I really see that inside of him, and especially now, like, with the way the stars are aligning, Gavin is learning, you know, that that Steve Manning, Charlie Kirk stuff that he was doing in the very beginning, that's really not the most politically effective strategy. And he will now really align himself as, like, a major resistance figure, and he doesn't have the baggage that Karen Bass has. That's another critical thing. Karen is so horribly, you know, just scarred by those fires. But Gavin is the real leader of the liberal resistance right now.

[Sagar Enjeti]

True donkey. And he just has more. Whatever than she has, too. Yeah. I mean, here's the thing that I'm concerned about. The Democratic base, actually. Democratic congressional leaders are underwater with the base that is very different from Trump 1.0. They have been radicalized in a lot of regards. They are disgusted with the Chuck Schumers and Hakeem Jeffries and the people who capitulated. And Gavin Newsom was very much putting himself in that camp with the way that he approached those interviews with Charlie Kirk and Steve Bannon. At first, when I saw his lineup for initial podcast cast guests, I thought it could really benefit him if he was gonna go in and really spar with them. I mean, it doesn't have to be vicious, but if he was gonna get into an exchange and have these viral moments, that would have been really smart. What I'm concerned about with the Democratic base is while they want a fighter and someone who's standing up to Trump, there is a kind of like ideological neutrality. It's not like they specifically want a particular policy agenda. They just want people who get caught fighting. And that's where if you have someone like a Gavin News or a Pete Buttigieg for that matter, who are good at going into spaces on Fox News and tussling with them and good at doing like the performance of standing up to Trump. And again, I hand it to Gavin. I think he's doing a good job in this moment of standing up for California, standing up for his values, not backing down, all of those sorts of things. I think that could be something that a Democratic base would be interested in, even though on the merits in terms of what they offer policy wise, it's like just more of the same sort of status quo liberal type politician. So in any case, he gave his big sort of primetime address. I put this up on the screen. The New York Times analyzed this as having a 2028 subtext, which I think you would have to be pretty silly and naive not to see. They lead this off with when Gavin Newsom stepped in front of a camera Tuesday evening, it was a California governor addressing his constituents both. But by the time Mr. Newsom was finished, it was clear the governor was speaking not only to his state, but to his country and his beleaguered party, to Democrats looking for direction and leadership. Mr. Newsom used one of the highest profile moments of his political career to lay out the threat that he argued President Trump posed the nation and how Americans should resist it. And he suggested he was the man to lead that fight. Democracy is under assault right before our eyes, Mr. Newsom said. The moment we have feared has arrived. And as I said before, the fact that that other Democrats are not so much stepping up to the plate to defend California, not an aggressive way, and are wary of picking this fight with Trump and whatever it really has allowed him to grab and capitalize on the moment. And then to the point of the way, he's using social media in a much more sort of direct way, tussling with Stephen Miller and other various Trump officials, even going back and forth with sort of like influencer types on the right and asserting his position and all of these things in real time. He also posted this Star Wars, I guess not meme, but of reading the Emperor, reading one of Trump's stories. Let's go ahead and take a listen to this.

[Lester Holt]

A once great American city, Los Angeles, has been invaded and Occupied by illegal aliens and criminals. Now violent insurrectionist mobs are swarming and attacking our federal agents to try and stop our deportation operations.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Sagar thought it was kind of cringe. I don't know. I thought it was kind of cringe. I thought it was very funny.

[Lester Holt]

Anything political. Star wars is cringe. Listen, I love Star wars, all right? Like we were talking earlier andor is awesome. Tony Gilroy is absolutely goat status. But unfortunately, when politicians try to invoke the evil empire or any of that stuff, it just. It absolutely doesn't work for me. I will also acknowledge it's the most basic level of like, memeification on the Internet when talking about big stuff. So I have to only assume it will largely go over well with a lot of people. You can always assume the worst. In terms of his popularity, I do think, I think broadly, him and Pete Buttigieg are handling himself very well. It kills me to say it. It kills me to say to what? Watch these two people. But I didn't have enough of a chance to talk about Buttigieg on flagrant. I mean, he did well. Like, it got millions of views. There's a viral video of him where Andrew's like, so what do you want? And he's like, I want you to be able to get up in the morning and be able to go to work. I mean, it was everywhere. And, you know, it led to. There's a new New York Times profile about some of the broadcasters or whatever, but it mentions that interview with Andrew Schultz specifically. We had Bernie Sanders. That was more recently there as well.

[Krystal Ball]

Very.

[Lester Holt]

You know, I mean, these are the people who understand the current media environment and they also. They know how to play. They're willing to take risks. That's something we talked about yesterday on the Theo Vaughn segment. It's like, just take a risk. Like, you know, Schultz was making like hooker jokes at one point. Buttigieg is clearly uncomfortable, but it's like that's part of it. And a lot of people just don't wanna sit there and they don't wanna take it. But with risk comes reward. Trump showed us that's a very effective communication strategy and it's definitely one that should be cemented now at this time. So, yeah, I don't know.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Both of them have that ass Obama cadence, which to me should be just qualifying from the jump just on that, on that alone, let alone their status quo neoliberal politics. But I mean, I will put that in there, especially with Gavin. There is just something about him that reads used car salesman.

[Lester Holt]

Absolutely.

[Sagar Enjeti]

He does read just like typical slimy politician. That's just the vibe you get from. I've always thought he looks like a vampire from a movie and so, you know, you know, it's not a lock in. But he's certainly using this moment to the greatest effect that he possibly can to bolster his chances in 2028.

[Lester Holt]

Absolutely. NBC Nightly News legacy isn't handed down or NBC News.

[Tom Brokaw]

I'm Tom Brokaw.

[Lester Holt]

Hope to see you back. I'm Lester Holt.

[Tom Yamas]

It's carried forward.

[Lester Holt]

Tom Yamatz is there for us.

[Tom Yamas]

Firefighters are still working around the clock. As the world changes, we look for what endures. We are coming on the air with breaking news right now. We look for a constant and from one era to the next, trust is the anchor for NBC Nightly News. I'm Tom Yamas. A new chapter begins NBC Nightly News with Tom Yamas evenings on NBC.

[Tom Brokaw]

You know what's great about your investment account with the big guys, it's actually a time machine. Log in and zoom. Welcome back to 1999. It's time for an upgrade. At public.com you can invest in almost everything, stocks, bonds, options and more. You could even put your cash to work at an industry leading 4.1% APY. Leave your clunky outdated platform behind. @Public.com Go to Public.com and fund your account in five minutes or less. Pay for by Public Investing Inc. Member FINRA and SIPC. Full [e-mail] disclosures.

[Jenny Garth]

This is Jenny Garth from I Do Part Two. Can't afford Ozempic. Try WeGovy from Future Health. Just $199. An FDA approved for weight loss. No insurance or tricky syringes needed, just results. Visit futurehealth.com that's future without the E. And start losing weight this week. Future Health weight data based on independent studies sponsored by Future Health. Future Health is not a healthcare services provider. Meds are prescribed at provider's discretion.

[Lester Holt]

We're very excited now to be joined by Murtaza Hussain. He is a national security and foreign affairs correspondent for Dropsite News. Great. Friends of the show. It's good to see you, man. Thank you for joining us.

[Krystal Ball]

Hey, good to see you guys.

[Lester Holt]

All right, well, you join us at a very, very consequential time, my friend. Let's go ahead and put this up there on the screen. We have major developments across the Middle East. CBS News and multiple other outlets report quote Israel is poised to launch an operation on Iran. So Maaz, what we know so far from inside the administration is that this is being sold, allegedly as Israel is poised to strike Iran without US Approval. But it appears, of course, the US at least has some forewarning, its own intelligence, perhaps even at diplomatic channels. Things are all over the place in terms of what's actually happening. There has been widespread now evacuation, or at least voluntarily evacuation of the departure of dependents in the, in the US Military bases across the region. President Donald Trump has reacted very ominously. I'm going to play this and then we're going to get your reaction. Let's take a listen.

[Tom Yamas]

Could you provide an update on Iran?

[Lester Holt]

We're hearing reports that US Personnel are being moved out of the region within striking distance.

[Donald Trump]

Well, they are being moved out because it could be a dangerous place and we'll see what happens. But they are. We've given notice to move out and we'll see what happens.

[Lester Holt]

Is there anything that can be done.

[Tom Yamas]

To dial the temperature down in the region?

[Donald Trump]

They can't have a nuclear weapon. Very simple. They can't have a nuclear weapon. We're not going to allow that.

[Murtaza Hussein]

Why are US Dependents on military personnel.

[Lester Holt]

Being authorized to be in the Middle East? Some ominous stuff there. Mazi's basically like, yeah, could be a dangerous place. So combined with the Israel report, what can you tell us?

[Krystal Ball]

Yeah, it's unfortunate because about a month and a half ago it seemed like the situation was much more optimistic. And I think I would attribute the change to changing statements from Steve Wykoff and people in Congress as well, too. At the start of the process, Wyckoff was saying that the US Would be okay with the Iranians having low level nuclear enrichment for civilian purposes, which would be monitored and so forth by the International Atomic Energy Agency. And the Iranians are okay with that. They don't necessarily want a nuclear bomb per se. They could have pursued one some years ago. But there are great costs associated with having a bomb. It would piss off many of their neighbors separate from the US Would probably start an arms race in the Middle east as well, too. It could trigger a war, at least for short term with the US or other parties. So they have said they don't want a bomb, but they don't want to dismantle their entire nuclear energy program, which they spend many, many years building. It's an issue of national pride as well, too. So Wyckoff now is taking a very very expressing or conveying a very, very maximalist position, which is kind of like the liberal Libya position. As people remember. Libya agreed to dismantle its entire putative capacity for developing everything which even could be a wmd. And that didn't end very well for Libya. It wasn't a very advisable path. If you look at it from the Libyan's perspective, that's a really polite way.

[Lester Holt]

Of saying getting sodomized on television. You know, I mean, let's be honest about what happened here.

[Krystal Ball]

Yeah, yeah. The Libyans agreed to dismantle and then they were attacked and their leadership was killed and driven to exile and many terrible things. So the Iranians do not want to repeat that. So effectively we have a situation where the US Red line that's currently publicly expressed and the Iranian red line is incommensurate. The US is saying now that they can't have any enrichment at all. The Iranians saying, we'll never give up our enrichment. So in this case, it creates a situation where a conflict would become inevitable unless one side were to compromise or back down. And I think what we saw last couple of days are attempts to maybe do psychological operations saying that the Israelis are going to attack you if you don't compromise on the subject. But so what we've seen so far, the Iranians do not seem to be backing down per se. Today they escalated quite a bit, saying that they may withdraw from their nuclear treaties and take other steps in response to that as well, too. So I think, unfortunately, we've had a situation where a deal was very, very attainable, but now at least last 48 hours seemed a lot less so.

[Sagar Enjeti]

And Maz, how do you assess the likelihood that Israel would. Will strike Iran? Obviously, you have the personnel being pulled from the region. That's one indication. You also have various people now going out and saying, oh, they're really close to, you know, achieving a nuclear weapon, which we always hear, you know, before the war drums start beating. So how likely do you think it is that we are on the precipice of some sort of Israeli action? Also, given the fact that it appears Trump has several. A couple times during the course of this negotiation sort of pushed them off and said, no, you can't strike Iran at the this point.

[Krystal Ball]

Yeah. You know, the Israeli modus operandi is usually to strike when people are not expecting it, not to telegraph it's happening beforehand. So what you see in the last couple of days is a tremendous amount of signaling and telegraphing, which makes me think this is more, at least for now, psychological. They're not necessarily preparing for an imminent attack. But, you know, there are talks scheduled for this weekend between the US and Iran in Oman and Based on what happens in those talks, situation could change. But I think if the Israelis do attack or someone does attack, that they won't be this lead up that's very, very public where they're issuing statements publicly and evacuating people in a very, very notable manner. I think they were to strike, try to use the element of surprise as much as possible. But I think the thing is the Iranians, if they really do believe that the Israelis or even the US is going to attack them, they're going to take preparations beforehand, they're going to try to move as much nuclear material out of the likely to be targeted sites beforehand land. They may withdraw from certain treaties or expel inspectors so they can take their nuclear materials completely into private. So actually, you know, even from the perspective if you want to stop an Iranian nuclear weapon, attacking is kind of a really bad option because the Iranians, it's a huge country, first of all, it's almost 90 million people. It's a very, very big landmass. It's not like Iraq. It's much, much more challenging than Iraq to attack for a foreign country. And the if they withdraw from these treaties, there's not really much you can can do. You can maybe attack them once, but then how do you have to keep attacking them forever really to figure out where the nuclear materials are? The knowledge won't be taken out of the country. It'll still be there. You may have to invade the country even to stop or to root out the new suspected nuclear sites. Attacking Iran would not be a one off affair. It wouldn't be a week long or a couple days or even a month. It would probably take the entire Trump term or even longer beyond that being involved militarily in the country if you really want to stop the nuclear program if they withdraw from the treaty. So I think that a deal really does satisfy everyone's needs. It satisfies their own need to maintain some civilian program. The Trump administration wants to pivot. China doesn't want to have more wars in the Middle East. I think the American public is very, very exhausted and disenchanted with this. So a deal really is the path of least resistance. But because I think that maybe a poison pill has been impoted in this deal based on what we've seen with Wyckoff's evolution of statements, it's moved from agreeing to civilian enrichment and nothing. I think the people in the US who do want a and they suggest they successfully put that change in position in but it's not really a good solution. For anybody. It's bad for Iranians, bad for Americans, bad for Israelis, even to have the major war with Iran for many, many years. But that's the path we're on right now, barring some heroic diplomacy on Sunday.

[Lester Holt]

Well, we can talk about that. So at the very least, there were initial comments that were made that there would be no more or not a sixth round of talks. Now, fortunately for us, we can put this up on the screen. The Omani foreign minister confirmed that talks will happen between Steve Witkoff and between Iran's foreign minister. However, mas at the same time, we do know that Israel's head of Mossad and their minister, Ron Dermer, will be meeting with Steve Witkoff apparently ahead of said meeting. Again, potentially for some coordination of what exactly we don't know. But this last round of talks seems very critical because of the position where US Intelligence now saying that Israel is basically poised to do strike Iran. There's a lot of pressure on the Iranians and the US there. What is your assessment? If this does not come to some decent conclusion in this round, is it even possible for us to have another round or are we gonna see the prelude to, like you said, withdrawing from agreements? I believe Iran just got rebuked this morning by the IAEA over nuclear materials. So things do seem to be trending in a very bad direction unless things go well during these talks.

[Krystal Ball]

Yeah, this is a problem too, that Mossad officials and Ron Dermer have been hovering around the talks from the beginning. They've been in Rome, they've been wherever the talks are happening. They're either briefing Wikoff beforehand or just being in the area to let them know that their position is very, very important in these talks. So, you know, to be honest, I'm not particularly optimistic, unfortunately, about the Sunday talks, talks this weekend. It seems like a last ditch effort. And you know, there is strong, strong, there are strong motivations for both sides to come to some detente. War is not good for the Iranians. War is not good for the US either. I don't think the Trump administration in space wants to see another war like this. But they kind of box themselves in a situation where it's almost, you know, I wouldn't say inevitable, but it's become much more likely than it needs to be. I think that these talks, they're maybe the last effort to see if any sort of compromise agreement can be found. And if not, you could see Israeli strikes anywhere, Iran. But the issue is, you know, if Israel does it alone, quote, unquote, it will still have tremendous US Intelligence, logistics and other support. But also it's very, very likely that the fortified nuclear positions that Iran has cannot be destroyed by Israeli aircraft or munitions. They need American B2s and 30,000pound bombs to actually destroy these. So almost inevitably the Israeli attacks most likely will, will do insufficient damage to the Iranian sites and the US would feel compelled to become involved. And if the Iranians retaliate, which they said they will, that would also create great pressure for the US to get involved to defend Israel as well too, from those attacks. So I think, unfortunately, even though nobody wants it, everyone's so fed up of wars in the Middle east, we are really headed towards a situation where not just a war in the Middle east, but the biggest war we've ever had in the Middle east could be right on our doorstep just in a few weeks. So I think that people in the administration or, you know, supportive communication with the administration should sort of impress as much as they can that how close we are, how unnecessary it all is, and how important this diplomacy this weekend and potentially beyond is to avoid what could be a very, very disastrous situation.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Last question that I have for you, Maaz. The Trump administration's trying to posture like, oh, Israel might strike, strike Iran. We have nothing to do with it. Let's say they maintain that, Pasha, Israel does strike Iran. Is anyone going to believe that we had nothing to do with it, that this was just Israel acting of their own accord?

[Krystal Ball]

I don't think so. There's very, very obvious close coordination with the US And Israel. Also the US Arms, Israel, all the arms come from the US and if Israel were purchased those arms, it would be primitively expensive actually for them to carry out the operations they are now. So there is not really the great acceptance of that. But that said, of course Iran would like to avoid a direct confrontation with the US itself. It said it would target American bases if the US Attacked it. But if there's some plausible deniability, it's kind of useful for both sides to say, well, it was between us and the Israelis technically. But that said, I do think, for the technical reasons I laid out, there is a very strong involvement, even if initially it's only the Israelis directly carrying out the strikes, that the Americans could become the US military could become involved in the conflict directly simply to. Only the US military can really destroy these sites or has a greater chance of doing so. And when, if and when the Iranians retaliate, the political pressure in the US to step in to defend Israel, to attack more sites Inside Iran with American military weaponry. It will be great. And you know, the Israelis, they do punch above the weight for their size, but Iran's a much bigger country than Israel. And really, to balance the scales, the Israelis need America to be involved in the war. And I think the entire strategy of the Netanyahu and Dermer and so forth is to force America into a conflict because they feel they can't do it alone. They can't achieve what they want to alone. And they really need America to be involved in wars in the Middle east for at least another generation. I'd say.

[Lester Holt]

We already have the playbook, right? They blew up an embassy and then the Iranians struck back. And guess who shot down 99% of the incoming projectiles? Not them. It's like this has already happened. In fact, that was the groundwork for this right now. And by the way, if it cost $1 billion just to shoot down some silly drones and a couple of missiles, what do you think is gonna happen if they actually hit nuclear centrifuges and we see real stuff start flying through the air? This is not a joke, as you said. And it's part of the reason why we see this widespread now evacuation of dependent military forces. I mean, the US Embassy in Jerusalem is telling people, don't leave the country now for some time. They are taking this very, very, very seriously. And they don't just do this for no reason. Anyway, we really appreciate your analysis. I hope you're not right. I think you are. I think these weekend's talks are genuine make or break. And I guess we should all just start talking about how Trump is the greatest diplomatic figure and we should give him the Nobel Prize.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Give him the Nobel Prize.

[Lester Holt]

I will personally fly to Stockholm of.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Getting us back in the deal he got us out of.

[Lester Holt]

Please just get us a deal.

[Murtaza Hussein]

Do something.

[Lester Holt]

Because otherwise we're head for bad, bad waters. Thank you so much for joining us, my friend.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Thanks, guys.

[Tom Brokaw]

You know what's great about your investment account with the big guys? It's actually a time machine. Log in and zoom. Welcome back to 1999. It's time for an upgrade. At public.com you can invest in almost everything. Stocks, bonds, options and more. You can even put your cash to work at an industry leading 4.1% APY. Leave your clunky, outdated platform behind. @Public.com Go to Public.com and fund your account in five minutes. Minutes or less paid for by Public Investing Inc. Member FINRA and SIPC. Full disclosures at public.com disclosures this is.

[Jenny Garth]

Jenny Garth from I Do Part Two. Can't afford Ozempic? Try WeGovy from Future Health. Just $199 and FDA approved for weight loss. No insurance or tricky syringes needed, just results. Visit futurehealth.com that's future without the E and start losing weight this week. Future Health Weight loss data based on independent studies sponsored by Future Health. Future Health is not a healthcare services provider. Meds are prescribed at provider's discretion.

[Lester Holt]

Are you still quoting 30 year old movies? Have you said cool beans in the past 90 days? Do you think Discover isn't widely accepted? If this sounds like you, you're stuck in the past. Discover is accepted at 99% of places that take credit cards nationwide and every time you make a purchase with your card, you automatically earn cash back. Back. Welcome to the now it pays to Discover. Learn [e-mail] Credit Card Based on the February 2024 Nielsen report, this is an iHeart podcast.