Loading summary
Transcript65 lines
- [00:00]
A
We'll get to more on this in a moment. First, remember when AI was just complaining about customer service? Chatbot? Well, now it's showing up in boardrooms, strategy meetings, investor calls, quarterly planning sessions. At this point, every business is asking the same question. How do we actually use AI to become more efficient, more productive, and more competitive? And while there are plenty of companies promising magical AI solutions, the reality is that AI is only as good as the information that feeds it. That's why NetSuite is interesting. NetSuite by Oracle is the number one AI Cloud ERP trusted by more than 43,000 businesses. What makes it different is that it brings together the core systems running your company financials, inventory, commerce, hr, CRM into a single source of truth. Instead of spending time chasing spreadsheets, reconciling reports, manually moving information between systems, NetSuite can intelligently automate routine tasks, deliver actionable insights, help reduce costs, and support faster decision making with confidence. Whether you're in software, healthcare, manufacturing, financial services, or any number of other industries, NetSuite can be customized to fit the way your company actually works. Whether your company generates millions or hundreds of millions in revenue, NetSuite helps you stay ahead of the pack. If your revenues are at least in the seven figures, get our free business guide demystifying AI at netsuite.com Shapiro that guide is free to you at netsuite.com Shapiro Again. Netsuite.com Shapiro we'll get some more on this in just one moment. First, a lot of people think that investing is only for rich people. This is a dumb idea. It turns out that everyone thinks that you have to have everything figured out before you start investing. You need like a finance degree or a gigantic amount of money, or you need to monitor the markets all day long like you're in Wall Street. Well, because of that, a lot of people delay investing for years. And that's one reason why apps like Acorns have become so useful. Acorns is a financial wellness app designed to make investing feel much more approachable. The idea is simply helping people start building healthier financial habits over time. One thing Acorns does very well is making the process feel manageable. You can sign up in minutes, connect your cards automatically, invest spare change through their roundups feature, where everyday purchases get rounded up and the difference gets invested automatically. Acorns also lets users set up recurring investments starting at just a few bucks and choose from diversified portfolios based on different goals and risk preferences. Financial wellness is all about sustainable habits. Acorns also keeps everything centralized in one place, which matters because most people already feel overwhelmed by financial information. Sign up right now. Acorns will boost your new account with a $5 bonus. Investment Join the over 14 million all time customers who've already saved and invested over $27 billion with Acorns. Head to acorns.comshapiro or download that Acorns app to get started. Paid non client endorsement compensation provides incentive to positively promote Acorns tier 2 compensation provided potential subject to various factors such as customers accounts, age and investment settings does not include Acorns fees. Results do not predict or represent the performance of any Acorns portfolio and investment results will vary. Investing involves risk. Acorns Advisors LLC and SEC Registered Investment Advisor View Important disclosures@acorns.com Shapiro get to more on this in a moment. First, there's a point where enjoying good food starts feeling like a budgeting exercise. You find a restaurant you love, the bill arrives. You realize that trying a new restaurant has become a pretty serious financial commitment. That's one reason that Cook Unity caught my attention. The experience is surprisingly close to what people actually want from restaurants in the first place. Genuinely good food made by real chefs. Cook Unity is the first chef led meal delivery service that prepares meals in small batches inside local micro kitchens across the country instead of producing them in giant factories. And honestly, you can tell because the meals don't feel mass produced. The food tastes like somebody actually cooked it because somebody actually did. Cook Unity works with Michelin starred chefs, James Beard Award winners, Food Network personalities who create meals that are then prepared in local kitchens and delivered fresh, never frozen. My wife and I, we like to order out Vietnamese sometimes and food is really good. Cook Unity probably has it and probably has it better to be honest with you. There are hundreds of meals to choose from. The menu is constantly changing whether you're looking for high protein options, gluten free meals, pescatarian dishes, Mediterranean food, Italian food, Mexican food, Thai food, or just something different from your normal routine. There are lots of options. Taste what happens when real award winning chefs make fresh, small batched meals just for you? Go to cookunity.com BEN or enter code BEN before checkout to get 50% off your first order. That's 50% off your first order by using code BEN or heading on over to cookunity.com BEN so here's what we know. The President, vice President and leader of the Iranian Parliament, a man named Mohammed Khaliba, all signed a memorandum of understanding on Sunday night and we still have no idea what is in it. So tonight we're going to continue to talk about what we know and what we don't know and what we should expect next. That plus left wing celebrities singing to themselves, fallout from a UFC fighter calling Michelle Obama a man. And California Governor Gavin Newsom's attempt to turn himself into a resistance hero. This is the Ben Shapiro Show. All right, so we still don't have much information at this point. Like no text to the MoU could have been released. I mean, it's been signed. We know that because that's been announced by the administration. We still have a lot of questions. So here's the thing. Just release it. Then we can talk about things we know, because that's the really cool thing about written agreements. They're filled with words. And those words, we can all read them and they mean things, and then we can understand what they mean and then we can discuss them publicly. Either that or we don't have any choice but to speculate. So here's what we do have at this point, some talking points that were issued from the White House. Now listen, my overall inclination remains to give President Trump the benefit of the doubt. President Trump has a record of doing the hard thing when no one else would. And I've said it a thousand times, President Trump's foreign policy in the Middle east is the best of my lifetime, bar none. No close competitors. No one else would have been able to do the Abraham Accords. No one else would have gone after Soleimani. No one else would have had the courage to deliver Operation Midnight Hammer last year, directed at the Fordo nuclear facility, let alone operations. Epic fury and economic Fury this year. However, as with any war, the question is the end game. And we are being told that we're in the end game. So we just have to sort of analyze based on what we know and what we don't. So here's the thing. At the moment, there is technically no final deal cut. We've been hearing from the White House, from the President, that the war is over, the deal is done. But that isn't actually the reality. It's just not. It's just not real. The White House itself acknowledges this. They put out a set of talking points. The key one to me remains this one right here. Quote, the Memorandum of understanding sets a finite window to finalize the deal. No open ended timeline for Iran to exploit. President Trump knows the regime stalls and uses talks to buy time. He will not allow it. The pressure that brought Iran to the table stays fully loaded. And every option is still on the table. This is the start, not the finish. President Trump holds the leverage until the job is done. And so again, that is a positive sign, obviously, if President Trump is still holding out the possibility that if Iran doesn't do what we want them to do, then we clock them again or we have alternative plans, that would be a good thing. And the President has shown willingness to do that before. In my opinion, he's going to have to show willingness to do that again in the very near future. Because I'll just put it this way. I do not trust the Iranian government. I do not see why anyone would trust the Iranian government given their 47 year long history of taqiyah, to lying to everyone they negotiate with, of pursuing terrorism, of pursuing violence, of pursuing the building of nuclear capabilities under the radar and ballistic missile facilities and all the rest. Ok, so what do we actually know? Well, again, we do not have a big, fully written out document here. The vice president himself, JD Vance, and this is JD's deal. Let's be very clear. This is the Vice President's deal. It does not have support, apparently, according to Axios, from the Secretary of State or the Secretary of Defense or the head of the CIA. This is the Vice President's deal. He's the one who negotiated it along with Jared Kushner and Steve Witkoff. And the Vice President says that it's an mou, a Memorandum of understanding that is one and a half pages. He says it is very general, which is somewhat disquieting. Is it fair to say that it's
- [07:52]
B
not spelled out that they have to end their ballistic missile program or end their funding of the Houthis and Hamas and Hezbollah? That that's left purposely vague. And then the US will come later and say, you know, that we expected this and you're not behaving accordingly. I'm just trying to understand how the deal is written. Yes, the MoU, Jake, is about a page and a half. So it is a very general document. But this has been very much part of the conversations that we've had with the Iranians.
- [08:25]
A
So it's an agreement to agree to agree. It's what I speculated on Monday. What I speculated yesterday was that the agreement would basically be a big nothing burger in attempt to open the strait. Ok, that's what it sounds like. And according to Mohammed Peschkin, who is the President of Iran, he said what has been agreed upon is an important step towards stopping the war and beginning negotiations. A final agreement has yet to take shape. So again, all the Talk about we've reached a final deal. Not even close. The Islamic Republic of Iran has prepared itself for all options. The government's focus, with or without an agreement, is sincere service to the people. The Iranian nation has learned from its martyred imam not to submit to humiliation. So does any of this give me a lot of hope that something long term is going to happen here, something good based on the negotiations led by the Vice President? Not really. And that doesn't have anything to do with Vance? Treating the Iranians as reasonable partners here, as people who are telling us the truth, as people who are committed to peace, is foolish, really foolish. Again, the whole point of millenarian Islamic terrorism is that it is inherently unreasonable. It is a belief system rooted in ideas that are foreign to the west, like that the whole world ought to be Islamic and that Iran is destined to be a global power, and that any agreement that gives up any of those interests is a violation of religious principle. And it's not me saying that. These are members of the top levels of the Iranian government, including, for example, the IRGC Quds Force commander, a man named Ismail Khani, who literally said yesterday, without even a single Kalashnikov bullet being fired over the Red Sea, in the end, American warships did not dare to cross through the Bab El Mandib Strait. This is the greatness of the resistance. Iran's resistance in the Strait of Hormuz immensely increased the courage of our brothers in the resistance to confront America in various strategic locations around the world. This time, if the Americans ever want to aggress against Muslim youths in a different part of the world, they will have to fear not only the Strait of Hormuz and Bab El Mandib, but many other places as well. So again, they're making very clear that they see this as an Iranian victory and that they see it as an opportunity to strengthen the Iranian hold on crucial choke points across the world. The mayor of Tehran, a person named Alireza Zakani, says, quote, the war continues. The war has not come to an end. Our war with America is an existential war. This war has been ongoing for 47 years. It operates on various dimensions, meaning it has an intelligence, security, military, economic, cultural, media, and diplomatic aspect. It is a multifaceted war. But in its military dimension, it is existential because the Iranian nation has rejected the structured order established after the Second World War. The Iranian Revolution has trampled upon it, and America cannot accept that a country would emerge to become a role model and an inspiration for others, preventing the Great Satan from exercising its devilish design. So again, am I deeply, deeply hopeful that, that people who say that they are pursuing a new Islamic civilization, this direct quote, new Islamic civilization, which serves as a prelude to the appearance of the 12th Imam, right? This is the idea that there's going to be a 12th Imam who comes back and ushers in sort of the, the eschaton. It's the end of the world. We hold a civilizational outlook and we consider its prerequisite to be the building of a strong Iran. And they do not want this strong Iran to take shape again. This is the thing they are saying. So do I think a long term deal is in the offing here? I am, I am very, very skeptical. Alrighty. Coming up, we'll get to the vice president and where he thinks these negotiations are going. Does he believe the Iranians? Is he skeptical of them? Are they all turning over a new leaf? We'll get to all of it first. One of the stranger developments of modern life is how casually people accepted the idea that every aspect of their behavior should be tracked, recorded, analyzed and sold. That's basically the business model of large parts of the modern Internet. Every search, every website visit, every click, every online purchase, or all of it contributes to a constantly evolving profile attached to you. And those profiles are worth enormous amounts of money. Well, that isn't normal, because pretty much every time you go online, somebody is watching you, trying to put together all your information and then use it in a wide variety of ways that you don't approve. Most people assume if you open an incognito tab or you clear the browser history that somehow you're invisible online. Well, that's not true. Data brokers are still collecting enormous amounts of information tied to your activity and packaging it for advertisers, corporations, political actors, and anyone else willing to pay. That's why tools like ExpressVPN matter. ExpressVPN roots your online activity through secure encrypted servers, so your browsing activity can't easily be monitored or traced. It also hides your IP address, essentially the identifier data brokers use to build details, behavioral profiles around you. And despite the tech behind it being pretty sophisticated, the user experience is really simple. One click. It works across phones, tablets, laptops, smart TVs. Humans should be allowed to exist without every single action becoming a commercial product. Right now, you can get ExpressVPN at just 3,49amonth. It's less than 12 cents a day. You can get an extra four months of service when you use my special link head on over to expressvpn.com Ben get four extra months of ExpressVPN. That's E x p r e s vpn.com Ben now, the Vice President is skeptical too of at least the Iranian version of what is being pushed publicly in the deal. Here was the Vice President on Good
- [13:22]
B
Morning America and I'd caution Lindsey Graham and anybody else not to believe the hardliner propaganda in Iran that but to believe what's actually in the agreement. But we'll be releasing the text this week and what everybody will see is that Iran doesn't get a dime of money unless they perform their obligations. And the money that we're talking about is fundamentally sanctions relief. We're not giving them American money. Not a single dollar of American money will go to Iran. But what we are saying, George, is we're willing to give significant sanctions relief if the Iranians make the kind of long term commitments that are, are necessary to be a normal country to give up their nuclear weapons program to stop funding terrorist activities all over the Middle East.
- [14:04]
A
Okay, so we'll get to his comments about, you know, Iran getting a ton of money in just one second. The more important point here is he says they're lying about what they are saying about the deal. And then on cnbc, the exact same day the Vice President says that actually Iran wants to turn over a new leaf. There are friends. Now
- [14:23]
B
this is a very interesting thing about these negotiations is you see people, both the hardliners but also the more political people saying our relationship with the United States over the past 47 years has been a mistake. Let's turn over a new leaf. We're of course going to verify that they actually mean it. But if they're willing to turn over a new leaf, the President of the United States has said we want them to be a successful country.
- [14:45]
A
You know, they want to turn over a new leaf. That's, you know, like some dude who just got out of rehab and is trying to fix his life. I mean, sure, that guy just slaughtered 42,000 people in the streets six months ago and fired missiles into Israel, UAE, Qatar, Bahrain, Iraq and Jordan and initiated massive terror waves by proxy groups and also mined the Strait of Hormuz and is still doing all those things, but they really, really, really want to turn over a new leaf. Ok, I mean, all right, I'm skeptical, but I haven't read the mou. Maybe the MOU is magic. Maybe the Vice President pulled a rabbit out of the hat. I gotta be honest. I think that the United States, the most powerful military in the history of the world should not need to pull rabbits out of hats in order to achieve our ends with regard to Iran. But hey, maybe the Vice President was able to do it without further military action. If so, great. So let me return once again to our model of what a good deal would look like and what a bad deal would look like. Because when we are talking about the deal, I need to reiterate this every single day. If we are going to determine what a good deal looks like versus a bad deal, we need to know the standards. So a good deal. And again, these standards were not set by me. They were set by the President of the United States, by the Secretary of State, by the Secretary of Defense and others, and not by me. So here's what a good deal would look like, a good conclusion to this war. One, no nuclear development. Two, no ballistic missile development. Three, no funding of terrorism abroad. Four, the permanent toll free opening of the strait. And five, finally, when all of those have happened and been verified, we can talk about opening up the Iranian economy. That's what a good deal would look like. What would a bad deal look like? It would look like the opposite of that. Continued nuclear development or the possibility of breakout. Continued ballistic missile development, funding of terrorism continued abroad, continued Iranian tolling and control over the strait and funding going into Iran. While all of that happens, that's what a bad deal would look like. So now we get to go through these factors one by one and we will determine. Again, we don't have the text. The minute we have the text, we can analyze the text. This is always my proviso. But all we can do because the text has not been released is to read the tea leaves and the public comments and the media reports, the credible media reports of the coverage and. And what the VP is saying, among others. Okay, so here is what we know. According to Axios on the nukes, the CIA Director John Ratcliffe told President Trump and other senior officials that that intelligence gathered by US Intelligence agencies raised serious doubts about Iran's willingness to make the nuclear concessions the United States is seeking in any final deal. According to three sources familiar with those discussions. The Secretary of State Marco Rubio and the Secretary of Defense, Pete Hegseth, have both expressed concerns and raised questions about the deal in internal discussions. The source says the intelligence reflects the Iranian intentions, are not in line with their commitments under the deal. So the White House is, is trotting out a talking point. Their talking point is that Iran has committed to no nuclear weapon, that Iran has committed in writing to no nuclear weapon that the iaea, the International Atomic Energy Agency will return to verify. Okay, so let's be clear. Iran has already committed in writing not to develop nuclear weapons. They've been committed to the so called non proliferation treaty since 1970 and they've been lying for 47 years about all of this. As far as the IAEA returning to verify, they can say what they want. They said the same thing about the JCPOA and then they immediately started hoodwinking the iaea. Here's the thing about agreements. Agreements as stated before are words on paper. They are only as strong as their enforcement mechanism. So again back to the nukes. The President said originally no enrichment. That standard has obviously changed. President Trump told the New York Times on Sunday, quote, they were still negotiating over whether Iran would suspend its enrichment for 20 years. Trump hinted he might settle for a 15 year suspension but did not want to negotiate via the press. He also insisted that Iran would be forever limited to enriching at low levels that could never be used by the military. Well, that is not no enrichment, is it? Actually meanwhile, JD Van says you remember that all that stuff about the nuclear dust, the President saying we're going to go get the nuclear dust, it's a condition of ending the war and all of that. Well, turns out here's what the Vice President had to say.
- [18:49]
B
The technical details are one of the things that we're going to work on when we start those technical talks on Friday. But absolutely, we're talking about working with the IAEA and working with the Iranians to go in and destroy that enriched stockpile of material. Whether we play an observer role or whether we play a more active role, these are the sorts of things that we'll figure out in technical talks. But what the President has made very clear is the United States will be there to confirm that that enriched stockpile of material is destroyed.
- [19:17]
A
Okay, so he can say all of that. That's great. Now the question becomes will the Iranians actually do all of that stuff? And there is a big difference between the United States will be present at some point during the process and it will be shipped out of the country, for example, or the Iranians get to sit there and then so called water it. Right. Water down the nuclear stock, which is basically the same thing as the jcpoa. Ok, remember point two, point two in a good deal would be no ballistic missile development. You will notice there has not been one sentence said about ballistic missiles or development this entire time in this deal. Not one word. The Vice President hasn't talked about it. The Iranians have apparently said that that is not part of the deal in any way. So that is just not part of it. How about terrorism? How about terrorism? Again, the outside indicators suggest that this deal does not concern Iranian support for terrorism. The White House put out its talking points and actually it seems to achieve the reverse of stopping the Iranian support for terrorism. The MoU, according to the White House, ends the fighting, including in Lebanon. Quote, President Trump brought it inside the peace instead of leaving it to reignite the war, meaning that military operations ended on all fronts, explicitly including Lebanon for the first time. And it has teeth. The ceasefire has to hold before anything else moves forward. The end of the fighting is not a hope, it is a precondition. Ok, but just the other day, Hezbollah literally attacked Northern Israel. Israel then went after Dahiya, which is where Hezbollah's leadership lives. And President Trump called up the prime minister of Israel and yelled at him, according to President Trump speaking to Barack Ravid at Axios. That does not sound as though terrorism is going to stop in any way, shape or form. And then the White House says, quote, with the fighting ended on every front, Iran enters a dialogue with its neighbors to settle conflicts decades in the making. Many presidents tried to unite this region. None could. President Trump is doing it again, building on the Abraham Accords. Ok, the notion that Iran is going to be a part of the Abraham Accords, ok, that's weird because I'm noticing that Muhammad Khaliba, who will apparently on Friday be literally in a photo op with the vice presidents of the United States. I cannot express to you how stomach turning that is. I don't care who the vice President is. I don't care who the president is. Leaders of the United States of America in a photo op with a mass murdering terrorist supporter like Mohammed Khaliba shaking hands six months after he blew away 42,000 innocent people in the streets and weeks after he was his administration, was firing missiles at literally all of our allies in the region and continues to support every terrorist group in the region and is currently continuing to control the strait. Like right now, it is not fully open for business unless the Iranians have, quote, unquote, decided it is. And as we will get to, when it comes to the Strait of Hormuz, it's totally unclear what happens next. Mohammed Khalibaf is literally still praising the struggle of Lebanon's brave fighters. Quote, they can never catch any part of the pillars of resistance alone and isolated. The valiant struggles of Lebanon's brave fighters. And the powerful diplomacy of the Islamic Republic of Iran guarantee the sovereignty and territorial integrity of dear Lebanon and will dismantle the crazy antics and warmongering of the Israeli elite. Spin as we spin. And now again, one of the things worth pointing out here is that they're not defending Lebanon, they're defending Hezbollah. There's a legitimate state called Lebanon. It has a government. Hezbollah is a part of the government because they are a terrorist group that has forced their way in. But they are not the military of Lebanon. They're a terrorist group holding the entire country of Lebanon hostage. Not my point. That is the point of this administration, including the Secretary of State. So if the idea here is that somehow this administration and the deal that has been cut weakens Hezbollah, I'm not seeing it so much. I'm not seeing it. Maybe it's there. Again, we haven't seen the mou. For the thousandth time, we haven't seen the mou. That's not because of me. I would like to see the mou. I think you would like to see the mou. Hell, I think we'd all like to see the mou. But here is JD Vance suggesting that Israel has been participating in the talks with Iran and that they expect everyone to honor the agreement. Ok, if Israel is not a party to the actual talks, which they are not, they have not been included in the talks. If Israel is not a signatory to the agreement, which they are not, how in the world could you tie Israel's hands when it comes to self defense in Lebanon while Hezbollah is firing rockets and drones over the border at Israeli citizens? But here is J.D. vance. Does this sound as though this is somehow going to stop the Iranian support for terrorist groups like Hezbollah? If so, I'm just wondering how they've
- [23:56]
B
been participating in this peace agreement. They've been participating in our talks with Iran. They understand where our perspective is. And what the President has said is that we expect everybody to honor this agreement. There are always, Gail, these, these bumpy mom, ceasefire. Sometimes someone will fire and sometimes somebody responds. We think right now that there are probably people within Iran because of the Internet blackout. They're not even aware that this deal has happened. So we certainly expect the Israelis are going to be a participant in this peace process. But we think it's going to be good for them, it's going to be good for us, it's going to be good for the Gulf coast coalition.
- [24:32]
A
Okay, I can just point out at this point, we haven't seen the mou. The one millionth time we've not seen the mou. I'd be a little surprised if the Israelis have not seen any MOU at this point, considering that the Iranians have seen it and so has Qatar and so has the uae. Apparently. Apparently everyone in the region has already seen it. Shall we say that this is not a popular mou? From what I understand in Israel and again Israel, they were flying jets alongside American jets during this whole operation. Iran was firing at American soldiers during this whole operation. So playing halvesies is a bit strange. Coming up, we'll get to the straight of Hormuz. What's going on there? Is cash going to change hands? How does that work? First, for most of human history, starting a business required permission. Permission from a bank, from investors, from retailers, permission from gatekeepers. Not anymore. Today, if you have a product, a skill, even just a good idea, you can build a business from your laptop. No fancy office, no massive startup budget, no army of employees. The barriers to entry have never been lower. The real question isn't whether you can actually start a business, it's whether you will do it. That's exactly why millions of entrepreneurs use Shopify. Shopify powers millions of businesses around the world and 10% of all E commerce here in the United States, including this business here at Daily Wire. They make it easier to build, run and grow a business without having to piece together a dozen different platforms. Think about everything that goes into selling online. Building a website, managing inventory processing, payment marketing, analytics, customer communication, international shipping, returns. Shopify brings all of that together in one place. From templates to built in AI tools that help create product descriptions, write website copy and even improve products. Photography. Shopify handles the complicated stuff so you can focus on building the stuff that people actually want. It's time to turn those what ifs into with Shopify today. Sign up for your $1 per month trial today at shopify.com Shapiro head on over to shopify.com Shapiro that's shopify.com Shapiro. Okay, so how about the Strait of Hormuz? That's what this whole thing's about in reality, right? I mean it's just about reopening the Strait of Hormuz. And we were told that the Strait of Hormuz is open again. The White House has put out its talking points. They say, quote, the Strait is open free of charge, direct quote. The idea would be that Iran's minds it traffic is restored and the blockade is eased in proportion. American leverage holds the entire way. The President himself put out a truth suggesting ships are starting to move Many loaded up with oil out of the Strait of Hormuzz. They're going along the southern highway, which is totally safe, secure and pristine. There are other areas of travel also. Well, there's only one problem. The Iranians are saying, sure, it's open right now, but at the end of the negotiation we are going to toll it. We're not gonna call it a toll, we'll call it an environmental fee. But we remain in control. And the Vice President himself acknowledges there are a lot of details to talk about, which is weird because it turns out that's actually a really simple thing to talk about. Is it open or is it not? This is a binary question. What exactly is the detail that remains to be worked out? Presumably that is why we are doing this deal in the first place.
- [27:27]
B
Well, our expectation is that the Strait is going to be opened in a toll free way for the long term. And that's the sort of thing that we're going to figure out in these technical negotiations. You know that there are a lot of very important details to figure out that we're actually going to sit at the top table and discuss together and figure out a path forward on these details. For example, they've committed to destroy and dispose of their stockpile of highly enriched material. That's the highly enriched uranium that they accumulated over the Obama administration and over the Biden administration. And what we've said is, okay, let's talk about how exactly we're going to do that.
- [28:00]
A
Okay, we will find out because again, the Iranians are not saying that. So release the text. Okay, how about the cash? Remember, one of the preconditions to a good deal is we don't pay them while they do all this stuff. So the White House released some talking points. Quote, the money Iran can access in the near term is Iran's own frozen funds. Iran wanted tens of billions released up front for nothing. Full sanctions relief and reconstruction are tied to the final deal into Iran's performance. The reconstruction plan is built and funded with regional partners, not by American taxpayers and unlocks only as Iran delivers. Okay, so there are two issues here. One is the immediate release of monies to Iran. The second is the so called $300 billion reconstruction fund. So let's start with the first one, the release of funds. If we release funds or if we tell our Arab Gulf state allies to release funds to Iran, it doesn't have to be American taxpayer dollars. That is us releasing money to Iran. You should recognize at this point that the Obama administration, when they sent pallets of cash to the Iranians, that was money that was, quote, unquote owed to Iran. Okay? That was. The Obama administration's actual argument is that that money was Iran's money and we had just unfrozen it. If you unfreeze money to a terrorist group, that is, in fact, money going to a terrorist group. It does not have to come from American. That's slight of hand. It's rhetorical sleight of hand. I was not earning the impression that you and I would be paying taxpayer dollars to go straight to Iran. But if we press people to release money to a terror state in order for them to continue to toll the straight and to exert control whenever they feel threatened, or for them to rebuild their ballistic missile and nuclear capacities, that is a gigantic mistake. And playing a game where you say, well, at least it's not your money. It. It doesn't matter who. The point of sanctions is to sanction everyone who is doing business with that is literally what they are for. It is not that America was doing hundreds of billions of dollars with Iran before we weren't. We haven't done serious business with Iran here in the United States since the Iranian Revolution of 79. The whole point of the sanctions regime is that it applies largely to third parties. If you unfreeze that, they get money. Okay, how about that $300 billion slush fund? So here is the Vice President acknowledging a potential $300 billion slush fund. Now, we should recognize here this would be with the current regime in place. And Mark Thiessen correctly points out that this is the equivalent of a Marshall Plan for Germany while Hitler is still in charge. Here's the Vice President. The Iranians are saying that they're going to have access to a $300 billion reconstruction fund. True or false?
- [30:37]
B
Well, Ed, that's the sort of thing they could have access to, funded by the Gulf coast coalition. So so long as they honor their end of the obligation.
- [30:45]
A
Okay, now let's just point out, why in the world would the Gulf coast start investing in Iran? Why. Why in the world would UAE and Bahrain and Saudi want to invest in Iran? The answer is they really, really don't. That would be a bribe. That would be them attempting to buy the Iranians out of attacking them and undermining them and trying to destroy their regime. These are enemies. These are generational enemies. The notion that the Emiratis are desperate to invest billions of their dollars in Iran is not true. That's nuts. You can talk to the Emiratis. They will tell you that that is not true. The only reason they would do that is under pressure or under the belief that they are being abandoned and they have to cut some sort of deal with the Iranians. Not only that, there's a report out from Israel Hayom today. It says, quote, the U.S. secretly approved a financial and maritime arrangement between Qatar and Iran under which billions of dollars were paid to Tehran in exchange for free passage for Qatari tankers and ships through the Strait of Hormuz. So in other words, if this report is correct, the United States gave the go ahead while this embargo was happening to allow Qatar to bribe Iran to take its ships out. What great allies the Qataris are. According to Israel Hayom, this was a deliberate and conscious course of action by the US Administration which allowed its navy to turn a blind eye to the arrangement in complete contradiction to its declared policy. The move is intended to ease the crisis in global energy markets and curb up rising oil prices. The secret US approval which the sources said was granted about a month ago, dovetailed with Qatar's interest in opening a direct channel of communication with Tehran. Again, Qatar has been the go between along with Pakistan. So you have an Iranian cutout and you have a Chinese cutout in Pakistan negotiating this deal. While the UAE and Saudi were being hit by missiles and UAV attacks, Qatar assisted Iran financially and remain completely protected. And now a senior official briefing the assembled media. According to Adam Credo of the Free Beacon. This is almost certainly the VP who is calling himself senior official for purposes of media coverage said, quote, we are prepared to release frozen funds and we are prepared to release sanctions and we'll do some small gestures of that in the beginning. If they make some small gestures to us, then show they're willing to meet their commitments as well. So these will be kind of small anties to kind of see the cards, but that'll be based on performance and we're going to get together this week and talk about that. Okay, so just to go back to the five standards of a good deal versus a bad deal. A bad deal would look like continued nuclear development. A bad deal would look like continued ballistic missile development. A bad deal would look like funding of terrorism abroad. Continuing a bad deal would look like continued Iranian control over the strait and tolling of the strait. And a bad deal looked like more funding going into Iran. So we'll wait to see the mou. I will say that the early returns do not look wildly promising at this point. Now the administration in an attempt to say that this is not like Barack Obama's jcpoa. Because of course, the President hates Barack Obama's jcpoa. That is the dumb Iran deal that Obama signed. The administration says this is way better than the JCPOA. The vice president, J.D. vance, says it's not at all like the JCPOA because the Gulf states like this deal. I'd love to hear that from the Gulf states when they are not under the direct missile fire of the Iranians. As the United States prepares to pull out.
- [34:02]
B
There are all of these ways I could explain that this, this, this deal is fundamentally better for the American people than the jcpoa. But the fundamental difference is that the Gulf Coast Coalition, our Arab partners in the region, they hated the JCPOA because they felt that it emboldened Iran to be a bad actor. They love this deal because they feel that it's going to create a totally new dynamic in the Middle East. That's a great testament to what the President and the entire team has accomplished. Again, we got to verify here, George. This is not going to be a short term solution. This is going to require a lot of engagement and diplomacy. But if the Iranians meet us, I think this is going to be a totally new, new direction for them, for the United States and for the whole.
- [34:43]
A
Okay. At this point it is worthwhile noting what was wrong with the jcpoa, because if you're saying it's different than the jcpoa, we should know what the JCPOA was and why President Trump hated it. And then we'll have to analyze whether this deal looks like it or does not. What was wrong with Barack Obama's JCPOA negotiated in 2015 first and provided Iran with a pathway to hundreds of billions of dollars as sanctions were removed. After Iran took initial steps to implement the deal, the regime gained access to up to $150 billion. They immediately used it to bolster terrorism. What would you say if I said, well, as we started to implement the deal, $300 billion would be sent into Iran without any restrictions on its use with regard to terrorism or ballistic missile development. Okay. The JCPOA did not deal with ballistic missiles or terrorism support does this. We have no indicators. The JCPOA provided Iran a clear pathway to a bomb once breakout was attempted. So for example, until January 2031, the JCPOA imposed a cap of 300 kg of 3.67% low enriched uranium. After that, no restrictions. And throughout the deal term, Iran retained its underground uranium enrichment facilities at Fordo and Natanz. So apparently Pickaxe Mountain will remain under. They're not dismantling their current facilities. Yes, we're in a better position because we bombed the hell out of most of its facilities at this point, setting them back years. And that is superior. But that doesn't mean the deal is superior. It means the preconditions to the deal were superior. In other words, the stuff we did during the war is good. That doesn't mean that the deal we're doing at the end of the war is good. And finally, the JCPOA was predicated on Iran complying with the iaea. We have no idea. We have no idea whether in fact that will happen here. Okay, so the White House again has released a series of talking points about how this is better than the jcpoa. First, they say this memorandum is of understanding, is signed, witnessed by a regional mediator. Wow, you mean Pakistan sounds super regional. And the final deal it leads to gets locked in by a binding UN Security Council resolution. Are we really now relegated to a Republican administration relying on UN Security Council resolutions is like the backup plan here? That doesn't seem great. Second, Obama paid Iran to mothball a program that stayed in place, which is why Iran raced forward when the deal collapsed. President Trump is negotiating after destroying it. So again, that is a case for why we did a good job destroying it. And the President deserves full marks for that. But if the idea is they get to keep what they've got and then gradually reconstruct, that is a problem. The JCPOA wasn't nuclear only. Well, apparently this ends fighting, including in Lebanon. Ok, they're treating this at the White House as though this is a victory over terrorism. Again, as stated, the White House talking points say that this ends hostilities on every front and commits the parties to sovereignty and non interference. Hezbollah did not agree to this. I mean, in certain ways this. Actually, if what is being suggested here with regard to Lebanon is real hampers the Israelis more than the jcpo. The JCPO had nothing to do with Lebanon. It didn't. The JCPOA didn't say Israel couldn't attack Hezbollah. Then it says Obama sent pallets of cash. This deal, however, ties relief to performance and keeps reconstruction costs on regional partners, not American taxpayers. Again, that is, that is a, that is a bait and switch. The reality is that the JCPOA again did not have American taxpayers. Sending hundreds of billions of dollars to the Iranians was bad enough that we just unfroze funds that we had frozen. And then it says the JCPOA left Iran's grip on the strait Untouched. This breaks it. Well, I mean, to be fair, the straight was not shut when the JCPOA was signed. And this does not. I mean, we'll see if it completely opens it. That's not what the Iranians are saying. So here in in effect is one of the biggest problems if in fact this deal is not great and we will see the MoU. We will see it. We've been promised it. We need to see it. If the MoU is not great, you know who gets a big win here? Barack Obama for signing the crappiest deal in modern history. Because now Obama is claiming that it just shows if they have to sign JCPOA2 after bombing, it shows what a genius he was to sign JCPOA1. So here is Barack Obama doing that routine today. It is doubtful that any agreement that arises is going to be significant, significantly different or a significant improvement from the deal that we had in the first place and had worked for for a
- [39:23]
B
long stretch of time.
- [39:25]
A
So again, that is going to be the case and the case that he's going to make is that we basically have to leave Iran alone forever. If it turns out that after bombing the hell out of Iran, we come to a deal that looks like JCPOA2, there will never be the possibility of future action in Iran. Cuz every president who doesn't have the stones that President Trump had over the past 10 years, that any president is going to do what Trump did. Here again is Obama making the case for why conceding to the Iranians was good.
- [39:52]
B
Actually, in retrospect, it's a reminder that
- [39:59]
A
on a lot of difficult foreign policy
- [40:01]
B
problems,
- [40:03]
A
the notion that we can just
- [40:05]
B
bully our way or bomb our way
- [40:07]
A
to solutions
- [40:10]
B
may sometimes seem appealing.
- [40:14]
A
But the fact of the matter is, is that taking the time to explore diplomacy and exhaust the possibilities of coming up with deals that don't solve 100% of the problem, but solve 80, 90% of the problem while avoiding the necessity of going to war. You'd think we would have learned that lesson by now, but it seems like every so often we have to relearn that lesson. You know, when Barack Obama is triumphal, that is a good indicator that things are not going well, folks. Ro Khanna doing the same thing. Ro Khanna is. I mean, he's openly been basically calling for Iran to win here. Ro Khanna says the ceasefire agreement with Iran with the opening of the Strait of Hormuz is welcome news. Democrats should support it. I am glad it includes a provision for mutual respect of US and Iran sovereignty. So we do not launch a dumb war of choice. Again, the war is a costly lesson for the U.S. again, when the people who hate Trump the most are taking victory laps. Today, the people who lever on the most are taking victory laps. Let's see the mou. Let's see the mou. Alrighty. In less serious news, so the dumb controversy of the day arises over the big UFC event that the President held on Sunday night. What is the controversy? Well, the controversy is that a fighter named Josh Hokut said that Michelle Obama is a man. Now this guy is apparently kind of like a WWE style clown. This is his shtick. Like he pretends to be drunk at weigh ins and pretends to throw up on himself and he's, he's deliberately provocative. That's what he does. So here he was. And lastly, Michelle Obama is a man. Am I right, America? Ok, I mean, and I guess we're supposed to all be very super duper up. Like, is it great, is it great that America 250A unifying event. You have fighters shouting that Michelle Obama is a man. Michelle Obama, by the way, is not a man. She has biological children. This is silly. Okay, but Dana White put out a response anyway, Quote, unfortunately, one moment threatens to overshadow the positive takeaways from the evening. After heavyweight Josh Hokut took care of fellow American Derek Lewis in the fourth fight of the night, knocking him out in the second round, Hokut, known for playing a heel, went off script. And then he quotes him, says he praised God, made a crude remark about the mother of Alex Pereira, the Brazilian heavyweight who lost his fight later in the evening and finished his monologue. That line about Michelle Obama. The crowd reacted with a mix of laughter and groans, says Dana White. Joe Rogan, who you can see there in the video, did not address hocus slur in the moment or during the rest of the night's fight. I understand the Obamas are public figures, but I'm completely against saying nasty and false things about people's families, said White. Everyone knows my position on free speech, but I hate that kind of nonsense. Ok, fair enough. But you know, people are going to go nuts because apparently if you make a dumb joke about Michelle Obama, it's about slavery or something. Here's the views. Sunny Hostin. I just, I do wanna address the derogatory slur made about the former first lady Michelle Obama because I think it's important to address. And we won't dignify what was said by repeating it. Yeah, but you should look it up and I think the reason that it's important is because for a long time, and the roots are in slavery, black women have been slurred and made to feel that they were unattractive, made to feel that they were masculine, made to feel that they were. They didn't have the femininity that a white woman would have. And so there's this intersectionality between race, racism and sexism that was on full display at the White House. Wow. So it was about racism and sexism. Wait until she finds out that Candace Owens, a black woman, has spent the last several years suggesting and saying openly that Brigitte Macron, a very white lady, also has testicles. It must be because of slavery or something. And all this is super dumb. It's really stupid. But the pearl clutching is, I think, somehow even dumber. The world just keeps getting dumber. I don't know that. You know, I'm a very religious person. Sometimes I have my doubts that God was right in canceling all the floods after. After the Noah story because it feels like we may need a couple things. Things are. Things are not great. You know, Charlamagne, the God, he's not actually a God. He's a. He's a radio host. Nice guy. But here he was praising the Obamas because they were filled with dignity and class. I mean, the selfie stick president was filled with dignity and class. All you do when you bring the Obamas up is remind people of what
- [44:48]
B
is currently missing from the White House, okay? See, the Obamas set a stage standard for decency and class and poise and intelligence in the White House, okay?
- [45:00]
A
That no longer exists now, all right?
- [45:02]
B
You didn't have to agree with the
- [45:03]
A
Obamas politically to recognize that they were
- [45:06]
B
a master class in dignity.
- [45:08]
A
All right?
- [45:08]
B
Truly, grace under fire.
- [45:11]
A
Now that bar is in hell. Going to disagree. There's Barack Obama, who was doing interviews with ladies who bathed in Froot Loops and was doing the selfie stick presidency and inviting celebrities there all the time to the White House, some of whom were doing pot well in the White House and all the rest of it and the sort of rose colored glasses that exist with regards to the Obamas. One of the more annoying things about modern American politics. All right? Meanwhile, while all of this was happening, the left was becoming very. They're so upset about President Trump. It was time. It was time. On Sunday night, as the UFC fight was happening on the lawn of the White House, the left decided it was time for their own counter programming. They were going to sing. Yes, it was time to sing Rise Up, Sing out a concert for the First Amendment. And it starred Broadway inspirational voices and Julia Roberts and Bette Midler. And Joy Reid, famous for her singing. Joy Reid. And also the Singing Resistance, also the rude Mechanical orchestra, which sounds like an orchestra that both plays the computer and farts. And Jane Fonda, famous for her singing as well. Rise up. Sing out a concert for the First Amendment. Well, here was Jane Fonda rising up, singing out. All she was missing here was the North Vietnamese, the Viet Cong. Antiaircraft guns aimed at Americans. The committee was relaunched last October to bring together the entertainment industry. At this moment, when our democracy is in peril in the face of what's happening, we need our industry to be unified, activated, and unwilling to engage in anticipatory obedience. She's wearing a glitter shirt that says Resist on it. And that was some great singing. I will admit that the site, like the website for this thing is a little long. It's rises riseupsingout.com or something, which actually, when you put it all together and you smoosh it all together, tends to read Rise up. Sin gout. So it's an anti gout foundation as well, which I guess is the important thing. Joy Reid is also very upset, but is also singing. I don't know. Is this, is this singing? I feel like, I feel like there's not enough singing. There's a lot of rising up. I mean, there's not even that much rising up, right? I mean, they're just kind of talking to him, but there's a lot of rising up and not so much singing. Here was Joy Reid not singing. And it says behind her on a, on a poster board, the world is watching, but I feel like no one was actually watching. I don't know who is the. Is there a guy named. The world is like World be free is somewhere watching. Who is. Who is watching? Anyway, here's Joy Reid.
- [48:04]
B
ABC paid Trump to settle a bogus lawsuit.
- [48:08]
A
Paramount paid him. Jeff Bezos ripped Democracy Dies in Darkness off of the masthead of the Washington Post and handed Melania a 40 million dollar documentary bribe for a film that nobody but the cult even watched. Trump. He himself posted on his T temu Twitter that my former employer did his bidding when they fired me.
- [48:31]
B
This is corporate media on its knees.
- [48:34]
A
A handful of billionaires consolidating local stations, newspapers, national networks, turning American journalism into what they hope will become a U.S.
- [48:42]
B
version of North Korea.
- [48:43]
A
You know what's hilarious about this is that she was fired from Ms. Now before the Ellisons took over cnn or any of these other assets. And Ms. Now is still run by a company called Versant, which is not a right wing company, and they still fired her. So media consolidation. By the way, corruption in media. Amazing report from Semaphore. That's Ben Smith's outlet. Nick Kristof of the New York Times, a horrible columnist. You remember Nick Kristoff from the Dogs are raping the Palestinians story. Well, now it turns out that Kristof did not make a bunch of disclosures because he was supposed to make disclosures whenever he wrote about the financial supporters of his campaign. And he didn't do that in at least a dozen instances, according to Semaphore. Previous political donations made by some people Nick Kristof mentioned in his columns should have been made more clear to readers, times spokesman Charlie Statlander said in an email. Editors from Times Opinion are reviewing these articles to determine further clarifications for oh good, more clarifications. So many clarifications. So for example, Nick Kristoff wrote favorably of Bill Gates and his nonprofit on a bunch of occasions, neglecting to mention that Bill and Melinda had donated a combined $100,000 to his failed campaign. So yeah, media corruption. It only exists on the right, supposedly. Well, there were more performers. Robert De Niro showed up and again he didn't sing. Which again would I would have been amused if Robert De Niro sang. I would be a little amused. He did not sing. So there was no New York, NY with Liza Minnelli here.
- [50:25]
B
When I hear Trump say, as he did a few days ago, I don't think about Americans financial situation, not even a little bit. I say shut the up. On Wednesday, Trump said I love the inflation. Now say it with me.
- [50:42]
A
Shut the up. Wow, so much resistance and lots of old white people in that audience lot. Old white people. And then Robert De Niro says that he actually doesn't love America because America is an abusive spouse. He is a very, very rich idiot who says words off a teleprompter. But he is. He doesn't love America because America hasn't been good to him in some way. The phrase we all love our country
- [51:09]
B
stuck in my throat because our country isn't so lovable right now. I hate to say it, but loving our country is starting to sound like an abused spouse saying they love their abuser.
- [51:23]
A
Why isn't America? Why is Trump? I mean, I guess according to Robert De Niro, Trump is America. Even if you hate Trump, can't you like the country? Julia Roberts showed up as well to praise Renee Goode. Renee Goode, of course, was the ice watch resistor who was in her car resisting arrest, trying to obstruct operations, drove her car kind of toward an officer under disputed circumstances, was shot. Here is Julia Roberts doing her thing and not enough singing. I mean, if m prom is singing it, rise up, sing gout, then I want. I want singing at the gout fundraiser. Come on, Renee. Nicole Good is not a symbol. She is an American woman, a queer woman who is doing the very best she could do to be good in an unjust world. What does her being gay have to do with any. And I am honored to celebrate her life and her legacy tonight because the life she gave is our responsibility to carry. Well, there was someone who sang, which I'm excited about, because frankly, too much talking, not enough singing. At the gout festival, Bette Midler showed up, and no, she didn't do the last number from Gypsy, but she did sing, and it was not great.
- [52:45]
B
All you f is bound to lose.
- [52:48]
A
You're bound to lose, you fascist. Bound to lose.
- [52:53]
B
Hey there, all your fascists.
- [52:55]
A
Let me put you straight. When you come for the rest of us, we'll fight you at the gate and you will lose, you fascist. Badaloo. I regret asking for it. I have regards. Oh, I think that that voice has passed the sell by date. That was. That was not good. That was very, very not good. It's gonna be a no from me, dog. Nope. It's time for the Simon Cowell impersonation. You sound like an old cow in heat. Not great, Bob. Well, I guess this is what Democrats have. Well, they have something else. They also have cosplaying as Trump. So this is Gavin Newsom's routine. Gavin Newsom has been doing this routine for a couple of years where he goes online and then he cosplays as Trump as the Gavin Newsom press office, where every tweet that Trump sends, he. He then proceeds to flip on his head and say it as though he is on the left, right? Well, now he is trying to mar a lago himself. So he recognizes that one of the things that got the right to love Trump is when the Biden DOJ decided to raid Mar A Lago. And so now he's going to claim that the Trump DOJ is coming after him. According to the New York Times, federal agents have questioned friends and associates of Governor Newsom and his wife. Mr. Newsom said on Monday in a video in which he accused President Trump of using the DOJ to punish a political enemy here was Gavin Newsom pretending that he is now being victimized by the doj.
- [54:22]
B
In recent days, federal agents have knocked on the doors of family, friends, and former employees. Not because they found a crime, because they're simply trying to find one. They're demanding records. They're abusing the grand jury process, digging through years and years of random documents. Donald Trump isn't just coming after me because of my mean tweets. He's coming after me because I'm considering running for president. Because he hates that I've consistently called him out over and over again for his lies and deceit. Donald Trump is simply the most corrupt president in American history, that same corruption our founders warned us against. As we move to celebrate our 250th anniversary, I'm going to keep reminding Americans of what they warned would happen if a man with no character ever held the office of presidency. So let me say it again, Mr. President. Come after me. I'm not going anywhere. And the country is watching.
- [55:27]
A
So, again, this is his routine. The routine is going to be, he's just like, remember when the Biden DOJ went after Trump? It's just like that. Now Gavin Newsom's the victim. He. Well, there's only one problem. Turns out the investigation has nothing to do with Gavin Newsom. The Daily Wire's Mary Margaret Olahan reports that none of the investigations are into Newsom himself. One investigation, which began in 2025, is related to his wife and her taxes. A separate DOJ investigation, which began under the Biden doj, involved Newsom's chief of staff. That investigation involves multiple Newsom staff, according to Mary Margaret. So he's trying to turn an investigation into his wife's nonprofit into. President Trump is trying to get him. He is the victim. I do not think that this is likely to work particularly well for Gavin Newsom. He's going to need a rally around the flag effect. I don't think he's going to get one. Well, one of the things that's very weird is that the president right now is not in high order with the American people. The polling numbers for Republicans are not very good. With that said, the Democrats and their midterm lead is significantly lower than 2006 and 2018, according to Harry Anton. Those were the big Democratic waves of the last 20 years or so. Democrats have an edge, but compared to what we see historically, it's really not
- [56:42]
B
that big of a lead.
- [56:43]
A
I mean, just take a look here, okay?
- [56:44]
B
This is Congress national June polls, Dem
- [56:47]
A
leads, and this is NBC News Midterm
- [56:49]
B
years with the GOP press. Look at this.
- [56:52]
A
They're up by five points.
- [56:53]
B
But that's half the lead they had
- [56:55]
A
back in 2018 when it was 10 points and less than half the lead they had back in 2006 with 11 points when Democrats took back the House in both of those years. And now the Democratic lead is on a single hand. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 points. And it's this type of lead where you say, you know what, Democrats are ahead, but don't count your chickens just quite yet. So why are Democrats having a tough time? Well, the answer remains the same. They keep being crazy. That's all they had to do was not be crazy. And they can't stop themselves. They continue to back the main Democratic Senate candidate, Graham Platner, as more and more and more of his horrible social media posts surface. So apparently some years back he mocked a teen's suicide in a newly resurfaced Reddit post. The May 2012 Reddit thread begins with a photo of a teenage girl hanging out of an upper story window with a young man gripping her arms in an apparent attempt to save her. The post caption says, a girl at my old high school tried jumping from a window because her cousin died the day before. These students saved her. I have hope. He then apparently replied, someone isn't trying hard enough. So great job, Great job, Democrats. You're doing great. Hassan Piker is out there saying that by the end of the midterms, Zoramdani will seem unremarkable because the entire Democratic Party will just have moved that far left. I hope that although Zoron was the
- [58:22]
B
first in New York City, by the end of these midterms, Zoron will seem unremarkable. Because by then we will have elected so many brilliant fighters into legislative offices throughout the New York City and the state.
- [58:46]
A
So I'm just going to point out that if Democrats keep doing this, it's not going to end great for them. Some of the candidates endorsed by Zormandani include one Claire Valdez, a candidate for the New York 7th. Here she is explaining her centralizing principles. So are we ready to free Palestine? Are we ready to abolish ice? Are we ready to win Medicare for all, housing for all, and unions for all? Okay, Democrats, I guess this is the thing that you want. By the way, here is Mamdanian Valdez viewing a portrait of Mahmoud Khalil. You know, they have to look upon the portraits of the people they consider to be the greatest Americans, including People who are not American who just come here in order to protest America and suggest that America is terrible and Israel is terrible and all the rest.
- [59:37]
B
Hey. Yes, Steve.
- [59:39]
A
Magic, you know, from Astoria and Palestinian American. Wow. They're viewing. Gorgeous. It's gorgeous. Yeah, it's so gorgeous. I mean, it is gorgeous. When foreigners come here and take advantage of our systems. It is. It is just the best. It is just the best. And we just keep importing people and we keep sending them to our best universities. It's going great. By the way, Hasan Piker told the Democratic Socialists of America to donate to foreign communists at the New York City rally.
- [60:12]
B
Now, what is this organizing? It's more than just elections. It's work like organizing tenant unions. It's work like international solidarity movements, whether that's donating funds to comrades in poor countries or participating in actual solidarity missions to Palestine or to Cuba and so on.
- [60:33]
A
Yes, we definitely must visit Third World hellholes and give them our money. Democrats keep doing this. It's going to work out great for you. Alrighty. Coming up, we'll get to a thing that I like. Kind of interesting thing. Somebody from the office who is acknowledging that times have changed. Plus the UK doing something actually kind of right. Maybe. Remember, in order to watch, you have to be a member. If you're not a member, become one. Use code Shapira checkout for two months free on all annual plans. Click that link in the description and join us.