Loading summary
Transcript159 lines
- [00:00]
A
Early birds. Always rise to the occasion for summer vacation planning because early gets you closer to the action. So don't be late. Book your next vacation early on VRBO and save over $120. Rise and shine. Average savings $141. Select homes only. It's tax season, and at LifeLock, we know you're tired of numbers, but here's a big one you need to hear. Billions. That's the amount of money in refunds the IRS has flagged for possible identity fraud. Now here's another big number. 100 million. That's how many data points LifeLock monitors every second. If your identity is stolen, we'll fix it. Guaranteed. One last big number. Save up to 40% your first year. Visit lifelock.com specialoffer for the threats you can't control. Terms apply. Hey everybody, we've got a great one today. You know, for a change, Brian Tyler Cohn, YouTuber and host of the podcast no Lie with Brian Tyler Cohn, joins me today to talk about Trump's war. Trump calls it a war because it is. He's an honest man, that Donald Trump. He calls a war.
- [01:10]
B
A war.
- [01:11]
A
The rest of the administration, they stay away from war because that opens up the question, well, if it's a war, doesn't Congress have to declare it? So Caroline Levitt doesn't call it a war. She calls it a military operation.
- [01:25]
B
As for the timeline of the military operations with respect to Iran, we have objectives that we have laid out that the commander in chief wants to see achieved. When they are achieved, then it will ultimately be up to the President to end this operation.
- [01:38]
A
Marco Rubio also skirts around the word war by calling it a mission and operation.
- [01:45]
B
American men and women in uniform are conducting an extraordinary mission with extraordinary efficacy and efficiency and impact. The goals of this mission are clear and it's important to continue to remind the American people of why it is that the greatest military in the history of the world is engaged in this operation.
- [02:02]
A
And it's tricky for Vice President Vance, who's known for his anti interventionist beliefs.
- [02:07]
B
Here's his approach in this conflict with Iran.
- [02:12]
A
Now, you can't see it, but he's shuffling his hands, obviously searching for the word until he lands on conflict. I guess that works. Now, Secretary of War Hegseth can't help himself and does call it war. I guess he has to. I mean, he's the secretary of it.
- [02:31]
B
This is war. This is conflict. This is bringing your enemy to their knees.
- [02:36]
A
So in this one instance anyway, Trump is an honest man. The American people are not so keen on this war. First of all, they know it is a war. And of course, the question is, is all of this necessary? Well, it depends who you're talking to. You know, when I called Trump an honest man, I did not mean it. He still says he won the 2020 presidential election. He, he says he took my home state of Minnesota three times in 2016, 2020 and 2024, where he, in fact, lost all three times. Trump does, however, have quite a robust record of saying stuff that just isn't true. The Washington Post kept track of Trump's misleading statements or lies during his first term. Over 15,000. Now, to be fair to him, they did count every misleading statement or lie each time he said it. So whenever he would constantly claim that foreign countries emptied their prisons, mental institutions in insane asylums, and sent them to the U.S. he was lying. There's no evidence of that. And he says it over and over and over all the time. The Trump administration was asked to verify this claim, and of course, they could not. So I'm just warning you not to take Donald Trump's word for anything. For instance, he likes to say he's been exonerated for any crimes regarding the Epstein files. That's not true. He certainly hasn't been found guilty. But there is a file from a woman who alleges that Trump raped her when she was 13. Doesn't mean that she is telling the truth. He's innocent until proven guilty, but he is not exonerated. Well, Brian Tyler Cohen and I do our best to give you the truth as we discuss the screwed up war in Iran, the price of oil, and why Americans seem to be more skeptical of this president than ever. Now, we're taping this on Thursday, and this war is changing every day, so who knows, maybe it'll be over by the time you're listening to this. Well, that would be, that would be something, wouldn't it? Brian Tyler Cohen, everybody. It's a great one. You know, for a change, Contrasting Obama to Trump. Yeah, it's, it's amazing, isn't it? I mean, what we had and what we have.
- [05:28]
B
The whole time that I was interviewing him a couple of weeks back, the only thing going through my head is like, you know, there was a world where we could have nice things. We're not in that world anymore. But to listen to somebody, I mean, I know that the usual thing is like, he can, he can do full sentences and, and, and whatnot, but he really was, I mean, to go from a generational figure Like Obama to just this, this stark raving lunatic, megalomaniacal narcissist. I mean, it really is, it really is night and day. And I hope there's a world where, where we deserve and can have somebody like that again. I don't know where it's going to be. I don't know where on the horizon it is.
- [06:08]
A
We may not have exactly that, but we're going to have. I mean, this, what we have now is we've never had before. I don't know what Andrew Jackson was like as a guy, but I have a feeling that nothing like this. And he didn't enrich his family by $4 billion in.
- [06:29]
B
No. And, and I think that's, that's a big part of, of all of this is like we have so far past the Rubicon here that, to the point where it almost just feels like this is a post legal society, a post democratic society where just outright corruption is, is perfectly acceptable. Where, you know, the President enriching himself and his family in broad daylight. Perfectly acceptable. And it, it can't be that, like we, we have to get back to a point where some of this stuff is reined in. I hope that if and when Democr, you know, the House. Yeah. And we can start investigating some of this stuff. Yeah.
- [07:06]
A
I want to talk about that. What, what we should be investigating because. And we're going to take the House. It seems to me like everything, everything Trump is doing now, Republicans must be going crazy choosing this war at this point and driving up oil price. Anyway, one of the things I was thinking about was contrasting the two Obama and Trump. I don't know if you remember this. Do you remember when Obama, when he was telling the aca, said that if you want to keep your doctor, you can.
- [07:44]
B
Yeah.
- [07:44]
A
And Republicans said, and the press said this is the biggest lie. And he was wrong. He was wrong. In the aca, you weren't necessarily guaranteed to be able to keep your doctor. And it was, maybe it wasn't the one lie he told this year. That year. I mean, I think inadvertently you say things that aren't true. But it might have been. It might have been when there's, when
- [08:08]
B
there is, when there is the question of, like, maybe that was the only lie he told that year. Yeah.
- [08:13]
A
Yeah. And Trump told, what was it, like 35,000 lies.
- [08:23]
B
Yeah. It was like you have to assume that, like everything coming, I mean, at that point, every word coming out of his mouth was like, every sentence was a lie.
- [08:31]
A
So the administration, Secretary Wright of the Energy Secretary has said he did not anticipate that Iran would close down the Strait of Hormuz. So the other day, Trump urged oil tanker crews in the Persian Gulf to show more guts. Did you see that?
- [08:54]
B
I did.
- [08:55]
A
Through the straighter Hormuz blockade, which, by
- [08:59]
B
the way, is, you know, if anyone's got standing to have some guts, it's Donald Trump, who famously, you know, if it wasn't for his podiatrist, he would have been right there on the front lines.
- [09:11]
A
Yeah. You know, in the State of the Union, he gave out some Congressional Medal of Honors, and at one point he said, you know, I'd like a Congressional Medal of Honor.
- [09:23]
B
Yeah.
- [09:25]
A
Why a Democrat didn't yell bone spurs.
- [09:28]
B
Yeah.
- [09:29]
A
I would have gotten a good laugh.
- [09:30]
B
It would have. That would have gotten a good laugh. I mean, it's so sad. At this point, he really is the star of his own play. And he is like, in his mind, he is soldiers storming the beaches of Normandy level courageous. That's how he views himself.
- [09:47]
A
Yeah. And then, of course, when he talks about soldiers dying, what he told his chief of staff told Kelly that what's in it for them guys who die more? Losers and suckers.
- [10:04]
B
Yeah.
- [10:06]
A
It's sad. I got a couple clips. This is him talking about that. So in the first speech where he wore the USA baseball cap to announce that we were going to war, he said that they're going to be our soldiers, were going to have some casualties. And the way he said, I want to play it because of how totally without any emotion is in it, I don't know if that struck you, but let's hear that the lives of courageous American heroes may be lost and we may have casualties.
- [10:43]
B
That often happens in war.
- [10:47]
A
Yeah.
- [10:48]
B
Like, you know, that. That just a fact of life that the guy who campaigned on no new wars in the Middle east is not only going into a new war in the Middle east, but that some people will die. And it is what it is, and that's just how it goes with war. And there's nothing we can do. But also, here's my hat that I made sure to wear, and you can buy it in my campaign website store online for 2999. I don't know if you saw that he also wore a hat when he was attending a dignified transfer.
- [11:19]
A
Yes.
- [11:19]
B
And, you know, the first time I had seen a president attend a dignified transfer, in fact, the first time that a president had been reported attending a dignified transfer was Obama, I think, in early on in his presidency. And he made a point that it was after midnight. It wasn't a big, there was no big show of it. Like he, you know, he only notified a few, a few members of the press pool. But it wasn't supposed to be a big show to like to fluff himself, basically. And Trump, Trump did. I mean, it was in broad daylight. He made sure all the cameras were there. They made sure it led on Fox News. And the guy couldn't even manage to take off his campaign merch. Everybody in America even takes off their hat at a baseball game during the Star Spangled Banner. Like you have nine year olds who know to take their hat off when the Star Spangled Banner is playing to show some basic modicum of respect. And you have the President of the United States presiding over a dignified transfer, fallen service members who sacrifice their lives for the country. And you've got this guy who can't take that basic step, but instead decided that he needed to wear campaign merch because every opportunity is a branding opportunity. Every opportunity is a marking opportunity for him to make another buck.
- [12:32]
A
Do you think he saw it that way? I guess he did.
- [12:35]
B
I mean, how else do you see it? Like you're a grown ass man, you can't take your hat off. Have you never been to a baseball game? Have you never been to a sporting event in the United States?
- [12:47]
A
So this is a war in the Middle East. Americans make some bad associations with wars in the Middle east. And it's also, it's a war. I don't think that Americans minded so much when we bombed their nuclear facility in June. That was pretty quick. We flew. We didn't have two carriers there that came from North America and refueling over the Atlantic. Right?
- [13:12]
B
Yeah. I mean, he got away with. Well, I was gonna say he got away with murder. I mean, literally and figuratively, he got away with murder on that one. Because this is, this is like the third rail at this point. Americans have, I mean, my entire life we've been at war in the Middle East. He ran a campaign expressly against that. And so obviously the last thing that he wants to do is get us embroiled in another war. And it is not without risk to drop a bunch of bombs on Iran, which is a major power in the region. He was able to do it in June. There was really no retaliation. At least nothing. Nothing. You know, that that made the news. And so you could have just declared a win. Right. And then he came forward and said that we obliterated their nuclear capabilities to then go out six months later and say that we had to do this to obliterate their nuclear capabilities. It's like, well, then what? First of all, what was June about?
- [14:05]
A
Well, reported that they now had enough for several bombs and that we had to go back and do it. Right.
- [14:14]
B
So then we didn't obliterate their nuclear capabilities back in June.
- [14:18]
A
Evidently not.
- [14:20]
B
But also, you know, what would have been great is some type of diplomatic solution, some type of agreement that would have prevented Iran from getting nuclear weapons. And if only somebody had had the foresight to put an agreement like that in place. But I guess not. I guess the only solution that we had here was just to bomb the hell out of them.
- [14:38]
A
I voted for that one. And that was the JCPOA, and that was the P5 plus one. The China and Russia and France and Great Britain and US and Germany. Germany wasn't part of the permanent UN because they had been Nazis. They weren't allowed to be. Yeah.
- [15:00]
B
How the tables have turned.
- [15:03]
A
Yeah. And that was a really sound agreement. And they could only enrich to about 4%. Then Trump just dropped out of it.
- [15:15]
B
Yeah, well, because it had Obama's name on it. Yep, that's it. Like, this is, it's. The whole thing is just like America is getting whipsawed around all because Donald Trump is trying to figure out some, like, ego issues because he can't manage to be compared to Barack Obama. Like so much of what we're contending with. I mean, the aca, his whole presidency has been an effort to undermine the aca, which, which is the only thing keeping millions of people insured or giving them access to any semblance of, of health care in this country is the aca. And yet Republicans have been hell bent on trying to dismantle it.
- [15:52]
A
Of course, they just got rid of the subsidies.
- [15:55]
B
Correct. Yeah. For 24 million Americans. If this thing wasn't called Obamacare, do you think that they would have been so hell bent on trying to take these subsidies away from 24 million Americans? I mean, maybe because it impacts working class people, but. But most likely, if this thing wasn't Obamacare, Trump and his acolytes wouldn't be so focused on dismantling it.
- [16:15]
A
So this is just one of the many reasons that going into these midterms that Americans are pissed off as the ACA subsidies, and in some cases their premiums have been doubled. But there's other stuff, too, and part of it is this war.
- [16:35]
B
Part of it is the war. Part of it is the ACA subsidies. We also have, you know, Medicaid's been stripped from 17 million Americans. Food assistance has been cut to the tune of $186 billion. Most importantly, prices have gone up on everything because Donald Trump decided to engage in a trade war that basically serves as a consumption tax for regular Americans. So you get into office on this idea that you're gonna lower costs, because that was the issue that he ran on. That's the issue that he won on. He exploited it on a daily basis. Talked about how rent was too high, housing was too high, food was too high, groceries. He talked about eggs.
- [17:06]
A
Oh, he brags about bringing price eggs down because. And, but, but what happened was, of course, when he took office, we had a bird flu, people. This is the one thing he's brought down, is eggs, because we had a bird flu. When you have a bird flu, you don't have eggs. And so eggs become very expensive. So that's his.
- [17:27]
B
He lucked out on bird flu. Yeah, that was the one thing that he lucked out on. But now, so we're all contending with higher prices, and so he's going into midterms saddled with the baggage, and his party especially saddled with the baggage of, of recognizing that, that the one thing that he promised people would happen. The opposite has happened. He's exacerbated high prices largely on the back of his own policies. And of course, you know, he doesn't care. He's a lame duck president, and now it's his party that has to figure out whether they're going to distance themselves from Trump. Which, of course, if you do that, then you risk drawing his ire and a mean tweet or a, or a, you know, a primary. Anti primary. Yeah, I mean, by then it'll be a little too late for, for a primary, but still, at this point, it's not too late. He can endorse their primary opponents or they can run toward Trump, they can hug him, but then if they do that, they risk looking just as out of touch as he does right now. And so he really put them between Iraq and a hard place, which is why we're expecting midterms to be such a bloodbath for Republicans in the House. And frankly, even the Senate isn't looking good. Because if we're seeing 12, 14, 16 point swings to the left and some of these statewide races, you know, Maine, North Carolina, Iowa, Alaska, Ohio, even with Sherrod Brown, Texas, I mean, you know, if we're, if we're seeing nationwide 10, 12 point swings to the left, that does not bode well for some of these Senate races I wanted to ask
- [18:51]
A
you about, you had a guest on to talk about the gerrymandering in Texas.
- [18:57]
B
Yeah.
- [18:57]
A
And that a number of districts they did were in the border Latino districts there that went for Republicans in 24, but in these primaries, more of them turned out for. For Democrats. And it seems that among Latinos, they got a bump up in 24, but that they're. They are very unhappy. Now, part of that might be immigration, but part of it is everything else, I would think.
- [19:25]
B
Right, right, totally. I mean, the immigration certainly isn't helping. I mean, I know that the way we used to think about Latino communities or immigrant communities is that the only issue that matters to them is immigration. That's no longer the case. The same issues that impact the rest of Americans are the issues that impact the Latino community, like the economy, for example. But, you know, that's still not to say that what's happening as far as immigration is concerned is. Is helping with those communities.
- [19:53]
A
And if anything, Latinos in Texas, I mean, Texas was Mexico. And I think Latinos in Texas have a little bit of different view of immigration. They. They believe in border enforcement, that kind of thing. And they weren't against what Trump was for, I don't think, until they saw what. What ICE did. And, you know, in LA and in Chicago and especially in Minnesota, if the
- [20:21]
B
policy is inhumanity, you're gonna have a real problem in terms of appealing to a wide swath of people. But that's what it is. The policy is inhumanity. The policy is killing people extrajudicially and having no recourse or allowing these ICE agents to kind of slink away with impunity. And clearly that's unpopular. And so that's why we're seeing these swings. I mean, you know, the Latino population, along with everybody else, had really swung toward Trump and Republicans in 2024 in a big way. And so when they. When they redrew these maps, they did it with the assumption that these were permanent realignments. And they're clearly not permanent realignments because, as you mentioned, four of those five districts that they drew in the new Texas map saw bigger turnout from Democrats than. Than Republicans.
- [21:09]
A
And both sides had primaries and very active primaries.
- [21:13]
B
Yeah. Yeah. Oh, yeah. I mean, it's not like one. It's not. I mean, you know, that's exactly right. So it's not like only one side even necessitated turnout. Both sides had a pretty bruising primary. I mean, there were three. Three people running on the Republican side. Wesley Hunt, John Cornyn, And Ken Paxton and then of course, Jasmine Crockett and James Talarico on the left. And so there was big turnout on both sides. And yet still in four of those five districts, we had more Democrats turnout than Republicans. So we may be in a scenario, this big effort to engineer himself a majority, a permanent majority in the House, starting with those five seats in Texas, might return one. And yet that set off a chain reaction where we're definitely going to see at least five seats flip in California. And then, you know, there are a bunch of seats across the country that kind of followed suit. You know, there's still some litigation happening in Utah, but it looks like Salt Lake City is going to return an extra seat for Democrats. Virginia might, Virginia, we might see four more seats. And you know, in that state, of course, that's, that's, you know, counteract.
- [22:13]
A
By Florida.
- [22:14]
B
Yeah, by, by. We haven't seen what's going to happen in Florida, but there's also a seat that was added in North Carolina by Republicans, seat that was added in Missouri by Republicans, two seats that were added in Ohio, but that could have been worse. And so in any case, this is very likely going to be either a wash or maybe we're in a world where this redistricting will turn out a seat or two for Democrats, but certainly not what Trump and Republicans had intended when they sparked this whole thing off.
- [22:41]
A
Okay, we have to break for a commercial. And here it is. You know that friend who still insists on doing everything the hard way, the one paying for subscriptions they forgot about refusing to upgrade their phone because it still works. Well, if you're still overpaying for wireless in 2026, that friend might be you. Let me tell you about Mint Mobile. With Mint Mobile, you're getting the exact same premium wireless coverage and speed that you expect with unlimited talk, text and data, but without that inflated price tag. The big carriers love charging you. It's literally the same service for a fraction of the cost. And right now, for a limited time, you can get 50% off 3, 6 or 12 month plans of unlimited premium wireless. You can bring your own phone and number, activate with ESIM in just minutes and start saving immediately. No long term contracts, no hassle. Plus you have a seven day money back guarantee. So there's no reason not to try it. If you like your money. And who doesn't, Mint Mobile is for you. Shop plans@mintmobile.com Franken that's mintmobile.com Franken upfront payment of $45 for three months, $90 for six months or $180 for a 12 month plan required. That's the equivalent of $15 a month. Taxes and fees are extra. Initial plan term only. Speeds may slow above 50 gigabytes when the network is busy. Capable device required. Availability, speed and coverage varies. See mintmobile.com for details. Talking about the midterms and where we're going, this war, first of all, I think the approval for this war is the lowest of any war we've ever entered, right?
- [24:57]
B
Yeah, I think it's somewhere in the 20s, in the 20, 20 percentile of approval. So it's the lowest. It's the war with the lowest approval at the outset of the war that we've had in modern American history.
- [25:10]
A
And it doesn't seem, and that's at the outset and it's not getting any better. I mean, the way we're conducting this war is they say one thing and I mean, at first it was about, it was going to be about regime change, right? It was going to be getting rid of the ayatollah and that the people, we'd help the people overthrow the regime and we'd be back to, you know, what Iran was before their revolution. That's of course not happening. And then they changed that. They changed that right away because his
- [25:51]
B
son took over who's like, who's not only reportedly just as hardline or more hardline than his father, but now he is presiding over a country or ruling over a country where the United States just killed his dad. If that, if how is that going to help us? He's going to avenge us if somebody's like there, only, only because we've assassinated his father, is that going to, is that going to mean he's going to be less hardline than his dad was, especially as it relates to the United States. So now he has a personal vendetta against the United States, is already more hardline and is of the same regime.
- [26:28]
A
And so okay, so then it became not about regime change, but it became about the nuclear program, which we said we had obliterated.
- [26:38]
B
Right.
- [26:39]
A
But then Wyckoff said that they had now they since then have enriched enough uranium for 10 bombs and that they'd be readying it within a week. So that was over a week ago, I guess. And Also they had ICBMs, Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles that could deliver a nuke to North America. And then that none of that turned out to be true.
- [27:06]
B
Yeah, that just kind of slid by the wayside as well. So what do we, what are we on now? That that is just. Well, now. Now we don't even know if it's a war or an incursion or as Trump has taken to calling it, an excursion, which I thought was like when you were on vacation and decided to go on a boat for. For a day, that's an excursion.
- [27:22]
A
But that's when you go visit Epstein's island with your nannies. With your nannies.
- [27:27]
B
That's right. That's right. Only if you're. Only if you're Howard Lutnick. You bring. You bring your whole family to Epstein Island.
- [27:35]
A
Why didn't Van Hollen. I know when Van Hollen in that hearing asked him about that trip to the island, and Ludnick made it clear that he did go with his family and he went with his nanny, and he did say he left with both his nannies. I like that
- [27:57]
B
when you have to verify that you didn't leave any young nanny.
- [28:01]
A
I didn't leave a nanny there. Hey, give me some credit. But I don't know why Van Hollen said, why did you go out of your way on a podcast to be so disgusted by him that you would never, ever have anything to do with him? And then you had something to do with him. Could you explain that? Yeah, why not take that further step?
- [28:29]
B
I think the explanation is right there in the question. But, yeah, I wish he had asked. But frankly, you know what I think? I think Howard Ludnick is going to testify now so they'll have the opportunity to ask him all the questions that they can. And in fact, these hearings have been interesting because it's not usually the partisan food fight that Republicans are hoping it is, where a bunch of Democrats attack the Republican witness and a bunch of Republicans defend the Republican witness. This has been, you know, there. There are a lot of Republicans who want answers on this stuff, too.
- [29:02]
A
May, for some reason, called Hillary Clinton
- [29:05]
B
with, you know, what a backfire that was. I think we forget how adept Hillary Clinton is during these depositions. I certainly did. And to watch, like, Lauren Boebert fumble her way through questions while Hillary just, just, I mean, handled her was, I mean, pretty bad. And also now, now they've established the precedent, the James Comer precedent, of calling up presidents of the United States and, you know, and their family members and their spouses who have any information related to Jeffrey Epstein to answer questions under penalty of perjury. And Trump knows that that's a problem for him, which is why all of a sudden, when they were like, what do you think about Bill Clinton testifying? He was like, oh, you know, I really like Bill. I think it's a pretty dangerous thing here to call this guy. He's, you know, he, he shouldn't be called. He knows. Exactly.
- [29:53]
A
Well, he's not gonna. He's not. He got them not to have him testify during the Russia investigation. He managed to slip out of that. I. But maybe three years from now or something like that.
- [30:05]
B
Maybe three years from now. And look there, you know, Pam Bondi is not gonna be at the DOJ forever, or maybe she will if Trump has his way. But like, there is a world where, you know, Trump's out of office in, in, in two and a half years, and, and there's no Republican attorney general to protect him. And so, you know, now there is a precedent where former presidents can be hauled in front of Congress under penalty of perjury.
- [30:28]
A
Hey, Peter, do we have. You've seen that we tragically hit that girls school in Iran and 175 people, probably most of them schoolgirls, were killed. And let's play this tape because the first one might be a little bit hard to hear. You can hear Trump, but he's asked about this. They're on Air Force One.
- [30:55]
B
Did the United States bomb a girl's elementary school in southern Iran on the first day of the war and kill 175 people? Based on what I've seen, that was done by Iran.
- [31:06]
A
Okay, well, who is. His claim there is that they buy those missiles that Iran.
- [31:10]
B
Yeah, which I, Which I think was, Was, was, was later disproven. Correct.
- [31:15]
A
These are Tomahawks, and there are, I guess, three other countries that buy Tomahawks.
- [31:20]
B
And, and if I'm not mistaken, Israel wasn't even one of them either. It was like it was. The only player that would have that missile is the United States. And there have been like, independent analyses that have shown that the US Was bombing in that area anyway. And, and even Pete Hegseth, who's perfectly content to lie, would not say what Trump is saying, which is just, you know, this lie that the United States.
- [31:44]
A
Yeah, he was asked on that. And then here's. He's asked a second time here. Can we play that one?
- [31:49]
B
A new report says that the military investigation has found that the United States struck his school in Iran. As commander in chief, do you take responsibility for that?
- [31:59]
A
That is.
- [31:59]
B
What.
- [31:59]
A
What?
- [32:00]
B
As commander in chief, do you. For what?
- [32:02]
A
For the strike on the school in Iran. A milit.
- [32:04]
B
A new report says the military investigation
- [32:06]
A
has found it was the United States
- [32:08]
B
that struck the school. I don't know about it.
- [32:12]
A
Okay. That was, I don't know about it. And that's, you know, five days after
- [32:18]
B
Al, what do you think Republicans and right wing media would have said if an analogous situation took place? And Barack Obama said he doesn't know anything about it, or Joe Biden said he doesn't know anything about a bombing that killed 175 kids at school?
- [32:34]
A
Well, it wouldn't have happened, of course, but it would have been absolutely scandalous. And of course he did know about it. You're told about this, this is part of your job as president, is be told about what happened there. To say, I don't know about this after he's been asked about it. He'd been asked a few times about it.
- [32:58]
B
No. Yeah. I mean, it's just a complete diffusion of responsibility, which is especially ironic because this is somebody who is so hell bent on seizing and keeping power, and yet when he's got it, he doesn't want any responsibility for having wielded it. And so, you know, it's his administration that's responsible for this. But of course, nothing is ever his fault. He'll take all of the credit, none of the blame.
- [33:22]
A
So now evidently they did not anticipate, the Energy Secretary, as I said earlier, did not anticipate that Iran might close the Strait of Hormuz. So this is, of course driving up, has driven up oil and gas. People aren't very happy with this. And, and this is causing a worldwide problem. Right.
- [33:47]
B
Causing a worldwide problem right here in the United States, according to analysis from, from Gas Buddy, which is pretty good source that I, that I follow for, for all things, all things like petroleum analysis. Patrick DeHaan, Americans are going to spend $250 million more on gasoline than they did 30 days ago in a day. So in, in one day they'll spend a quarter of a billion dollars. So $250 million more, all because Trump wanted to impose, you know, a Trump gas tax. I mean, that's what this is. Americans are forced to pay more because one man decided voluntarily that we should immerse ourselves in another war in the Middle East. And, and you know, obviously the consequences for that are pretty obvious. And it's going to have downstream impacts. By the way, when gas prices rise, it costs more to transport goods. Food prices will rise. You know, consumer goods will rise, utilities will rise. And so this is, you know, usually presidents aren't responsible for a rise in gas prices. I mean, you know, you look back to 2022, when gas prices rose, Russia invaded Ukraine. You know, there was the economy reopening in the aftermath of COVID and a lot of those supply chain constraints. And Biden took the brunt of that blame because that's what happened. The buck stops with the president. Even though the president is largely not responsible for. For fluctuations in gas prices, this is an instance where the president is, like, unilaterally responsible for an increase in gas prices, because prior to this, this past week, we wouldn't have been immersed in a war in the Middle east, which would have had, you know, downstream effects.
- [35:26]
A
And the question is, is how long are we going to be in this? And this is out of control. This has expanded to all the Gulf states. Iran is hitting them and hitting their hotels.
- [35:41]
B
He's hitting everybody. Yeah. I mean, Iran seems to be lashing out to other. To everybody else in the region in terms of how long this is going to go. We've got conflicting answers from Trump himself.
- [35:52]
A
And they conflict from within hours.
- [35:57]
B
Correct. Sometimes in the same speech, he will both congratulate himself for. For winning the war that is still going on. And then he'll say, you know, war. War is a tricky thing. It can go on forever. Sometimes there's no end in sight. And so we have no idea how long this war is going to last because Trump has no idea how long the war is going to last. It doesn't seem that there's any plan, any. Any real objective. We're just kind of like at war for the sake of being at war. And again, I don't know if this is too. I don't know if this is for. For Israel's benefit. I don't know if it's for Trump's benefit. I don't know if it's for the oil company's benefit. We haven't gotten that information. And frankly, Trump hasn't even attempted to explain any of this to the American people. There's, like, there's. There's a joke going around that at least George W. Bush had the decency to conjure up a lie for, for how he justified the Iraq war, but we don't even have that. We're just kind of there. Congress doesn't assert its own authority because, you know, Mike Johnson and John Thune are appendages of Donald Trump. They're just extensions of him. They've contracted every ounce of their autonomy over the executive branch. So this is just how it goes. And God forbid they push back even an inch.
- [37:11]
A
And now, of course, Russia is involved in this because they're an ally of Iran.
- [37:18]
B
And the Trump administration can't bring itself to say an ill word of Russia, even as Russia allies itself against the country that we are apparently at war
- [37:26]
A
with, which is pretty insane, we actually should be aligned with Ukraine. Ukraine, by the way, puts out these drones. They've had to do this. They're very good at it, this great technology. And evidently the, the Trump brothers have licensed it or something and are going into the drone business and they'll be selling to our military.
- [37:55]
B
It's almost like they stand to benefit really handsomely from all of these efforts. I mean, is it not crazy that we have a president who's engaged in a war with no clear objective and no plan and really no rationale, and then that war is being serviced by, by a company that the President's sons own.
- [38:15]
A
Speaking of. So let's assume that the midterms go well and at least especially in the House. So that brings up investigations. And so I was, you know, wondering, if you were in charge of investigations for Democrats in the House, what would you go out after?
- [38:39]
B
I mean, where do you begin? First of all, I think an easy one is the Epstein files. I would bring Maureen Comey in because she was in charge of the invest the prosecution of Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell and she was fired. But she has all that information in terms of what was going on. So I would bring her in and start an investigation into why we haven't seen the Epstein files, Transparency act complied with, why 3 million files haven't been released, why we've seen victims names exposed, and just as importantly, why we've seen co conspirators names hidden. We also got some information from Reuters that suggests that the Epstein files themselves were hacked in 2023 from the FBI's database. Which means somebody has the Epstein files that haven't been released that were so bad that the US Government won't release them, and yet somebody has them. Which means that whoever's in those files, if there's a government official, they could be susceptible to blackmail because somebody's got those files and clearly Trump doesn't want them out. So who knows whether or not he's doing something to help some foreign actor or malicious actor to keep those files under wraps.
- [39:53]
A
Trump himself, of course, has said he's been exonerated, right? Naturally, when there are 3 million documents, you know, unless they're all in, like
- [40:06]
B
you said, there are 3 million pages, 3 million documents that haven't been released yet. If everything that's been released, damning as it is, is in the first batch, then what does that say about the second batch? You know, if we even have information about Donald Trump reportedly committing atrocious crimes against, you know, a 13 year old girl at the time, if that's part of this first tranche that has been released, imagine what exists in that second, in that second tranche, especially when we know that this is a White House that is perfectly content to do whatever it can to protect Trump and his friends. Trump is, Trump is on record through Marjorie Taylor Greene saying that he can't release it because his friends will get hurt. So, I mean, that's Marjorie Taylor Greene. This is somebody who's built her entire brand off of her allegiance to Trump. And even she came out and said that Trump doesn't want to release the files because he doesn't want his friends to go to get hurt, which I'd even push a step further. When have we ever known Trump to fall on the sword, to throw himself on the grenade for anybody else like this guy? This guy discards everybody the moment they lose their use.
- [41:12]
A
Well, he wants that reputation of standing up for his friends, but, but he
- [41:15]
B
doesn't, but he doesn't actually do it in practice. He has, he's discarded Rex Tillerson and Ronna McDaniel and Michael Cohen, George Papadopoulos, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Kayleigh McEnany, Mike Pence, Gordon Sondland. I mean, the list goes on and on and on of these Trump officials who have just sacrificed everything for him to then be discarded the moment they lose their usefulness. And so we're, we're supposed to believe that that guy is enduring this daily barrage of bad news as some white knight when it comes to Epstein for other people.
- [41:49]
A
We got take a break for a moment. We'll be right back. You know, I'm always skeptical about skincare products that promise big results, but One skin has genuinely surprised me. My daughter Thomason has been using their products for the last few months and she just loves them. She says the OS1 face topical supplement has improved and maintains firmness and OS1 tinted face SPF is very light and not at all greasy. What really caught my attention about Oneskin is that it's founded by an all women team of PhD longevity scientists. These aren't just marketing claims. They've actually proven their patented OS1 peptide targets the cells that are a key driver of wrinkles, fine lines and loss of elasticity. And this has been validated in four peer reviewed clinical studies, which is pretty rare in skin care. I am, at least I'm told. I also Love that their products are certified safe for sensitive skin. They've even earned the National Eczema association seal of acceptance. So you're getting powerful results without irritation. The best part, everything layers seamlessly into your routine or can replace multiple steps entirely. With over 10,000 5 star reviews and recognition from Fast Company, Bloomberg and the Today show, Oneskin is leading the way in skin longevity. Born from over a decade of longevity research, OneSkin's OS1 peptide is proven to help you unlock your healthiest skin now and as you age, for a limited time, try one skin with 15% off using code FRANKEN@ ONESKINCO. Franken, that's 15% off at ONESKIN Co with Code Franken. After you purchase, we'll ask you where you heard about them. Please support our show and tell them that we sent you avoiding your unfinished home projects because you're not sure where to start. Thumbtack knows homes, so you don't have to, don't know the difference between matte paint, finish and satin or what that clunking sound from your dryer is. With Thumbtack, you don't have to be a home pro. You just have to hire one. You can hire top rated pros, see price estimates and read reviews all on the app download today. Let's talk about some other areas that they should be investigating. Shouldn't there be be investigations of the money that this family has made?
- [44:38]
B
Absolutely. I mean, Trump himself is said to have doubled his net worth. I mean, he's made billions, billions. While in office.
- [44:47]
A
The family has enriched themselves by $4 billion.
- [44:53]
B
You know, they've used their cryptocurrency to just launder unlimited sums of money. Of course all of this should be investigated. And my fear is that the corruption is so prolific that, that it becomes the new normal and we just, we become desensitized to the idea of a president abusing his position to enrich himself and his family. I mean, you and I just spoke a second ago about the fact that his kids are now investing in a company that would service a war effort. And now we have a war effort with.
- [45:23]
A
To serve.
- [45:24]
B
No, no. Objective. And like. And, and those kids are making money off of that.
- [45:32]
A
So we talked about gerrymandering. And so we're saying that that might be awash. Is ICE going to reform now that we've got rid of Nome or is that, that's another thing we should be investigating. Are these detention centers.
- [45:50]
B
The detention centers. The killings. The killings. I mean, we have Americans who've been killed by ICE agents And the administration pre. Cleared all of those ICE agents. They've just decided by fiat that Renee Goode and Alex Preddy are domestic terrorists and that there's not gonna be any legitimate investigation into what happened.
- [46:08]
A
Well, they should have allowed, obviously, the state and Hennepin county to investigate that. And I guess she was asked about that at the hearing where that was her final hearing. But it's. Yeah, it's ridiculous. No, we opened that up to the state and local.
- [46:25]
B
I asked Keith Ellison, the attorney General down in Minnesota or up in Minnesota, whether the BCA is going to be able to investigate. And basically the FBI won't give them any access to any information, but they're still going to power through and investigate whatever they can. So he was committed to the fact that they're going to get some. Some. Some accountability here, but they're going to be able to do it with no help, no input from the federal government, because the federal government, it's already clear what their objective here is, and that's just to protect these ICE agents, regardless of what they've done. In terms of answering your question, is there going to be some change in ice? No. I mean, they'll put a different face on the agency. You know, it'll be Mark Wayne Mullen, someone who's certainly known for his measured approach to things. I think he tried to fight Shawn faint during a congressional hearing at one point.
- [47:18]
A
Teamster guy.
- [47:19]
B
Is the teamster guy.
- [47:20]
A
Yeah.
- [47:21]
B
But no, I mean, look, Christine, like, these edicts didn't come down from Kristi Noem. She was incompetent and. And certainly would take the fall. But these are coming from the top. The fish routes from the head.
- [47:33]
A
I. I can't help but think that if she hadn't shot her dog, that she might be vice president.
- [47:39]
B
Yeah, that is a. That is a. That is a absolutely fair assumption.
- [47:44]
A
Yeah.
- [47:44]
B
Almost worse than shooting your dog. Is writing about it, thinking that you're taking a victory lap, thinking that it's some. That it's some win, that it's some, like some lesson that's going to reflect well on you. Like, there are some things that even in America in 2026 that I don't think the right is going to rally around. And. And shooting a puppy shows that political gravity, the smallest amount of political gravity still exists.
- [48:10]
A
So the Save America Act. Is that what they're calling it now?
- [48:14]
B
That's the. That's this name. Yeah.
- [48:16]
A
That's not going to pass, is it? They don't have. Thune has basically said he's not going
- [48:20]
B
to break the filibuster on that as, as of now. I mean, look, you know, Trump is still applying as much pressure as he can. There are three Republicans who have said that they're not going to support it. So If Republicans have 53 seats and they have lost Murkowski, McConnell and Tillis, that puts them at 50. And so in theory, if they did nuke the filibuster, they'd have it because
- [48:45]
A
they got, they have it.
- [48:46]
B
But, but so far it looks like they're not going to nuke the filibuster for this one. Of course, you know, Trump is now saying that he doesn't want any other legislative priorities to pass until and unless the Save America act gets passed, because that's their voter suppression bill. That's the bill that would send the voter rolls from the state governments to the federal government. And if you're looking to suppress the votes of certain people, it helps to know how people are registered. For example, that's the kind of information
- [49:13]
A
that you would get from the voter rolls. Their, their goal is to get all the voter rolls.
- [49:19]
B
Yeah, and so, I mean, it would, it would mandate that. It would also mandate certain forms of identification like birth certificate or passport. Well, guess who's in charge of renewing those things or, or giving those things if you don't have one in the first place? That's the federal government. And so in effect, that would put the federal government in charge of elections which are supposed to be administered at the state level. There's a very obvious reason that our elections are not administered by the federal government is because those people have a vested interest in, in interfering if they're the ones running.
- [49:50]
A
And it's in, in the Constitution.
- [49:52]
B
And it's in the Constitution. So, so I mean, it's just, you know, the bill is dangerous and it's pretty clear given what's in that bill, why Trump is so hell bent on trying to make it pass.
- [50:05]
A
So how long do you think we're in Iran? I mean, could he just say, people don't like this? I'm going, I mean, is that, that him or not?
- [50:16]
B
You know, it's interesting because he has, the problem is he has a short attention Spanish and there's going to come a point where a, he'll lose interest, be all of the downstream effects of this war are going to bear down on him even further, like gas prices rising. But, but now, as you mentioned before, it's out of control. Like it's out of his hands and Iran is bombing other countries in the region. And, and this is no longer just a limited military strike on, on certain targets like this is, this is out of control.
- [50:52]
A
Well, that's why I think he might be, might be trapped.
- [50:55]
B
Correct. And I agree, I think that it's, you know, even if he were to stop, I mean, there are other players in this who are implicated. There's, you know, the uae, there's Israel, like the rest of the region is being impacted. And of course, as they target ships that are going through the Strait of Hormuz that can have impacts if some ship gets blown up from some country that wants to retaliate. So is he going to be able to cleanly extricate the United States and it's all going to be over? I mean, at this point, every day that this continues, I think is going to get more and more difficult for him to do exactly that?
- [51:33]
A
Well, I think it is, it's a disaster for everybody. It's a disaster for everybody in the region, obviously. And I think they just did not know what they were getting into. Not quite sure why they did it.
- [51:49]
B
I mean, there are a few schools of thought. I mean, first of all, the domestic focus was largely on Epstein. So there's a lot of folks who think that this is a distraction from that news cycle and they've been successful at tamping down focus on the Epstein files. There's also the Israel connection and whether Trump did it because Bibi wanted him to. And Bibi has his own domestic problems in his own country. And also Trump wants to basically bolster a legacy for himself. It's why he keeps slapping his name on things. It's why he's trying to annex territory. I mean, he wants to be remembered as this transformational figure, this transformative figure in global politics, in world history, but he's too ham handed to know how to do it with any accuracy and
- [52:38]
A
it may not bode well for his legacy. No.
- [52:43]
B
Something tells me that engaging in a war in the Middle east isn't exactly the thing that's gonna, that's gonna, that's gonna add that glossy veneer to your legacy that you were looking for.
- [52:52]
A
Well, thanks, Brian. Really appreciate your, you joining us, Al.
- [52:56]
B
I appreciate you. Thanks for having me on.
- [52:58]
A
You bet. Well, I hope you enjoyed listening. That beautiful music is by Leo Kottki, the great Leo Kottke. I want to thank Peter Ogburn for producing this podcast. We'll talk again next week.