C (3:40)

We have allegedly a ceasefire to negotiate. But based off of our own 15 point plan and their 10 point plan, that is allegedly different than the one they'd given us before.

B (3:50)

Yes. So what is also interesting here is what happens to the Strait of Hormuz. Okay, so previously oil tankers were able to navigate the Strait freely. That was what was the previous status quo. Now it looks like what could be the case is that there will be tolls exacted upon tankers that go through the strait. President Trump has told Jonathan Karl that that could be more of a joint venture.

C (4:18)

That sounds like something he'd get on board with.

B (4:20)

It does sound like something he'd get on board with. Iran.

C (4:22)

Let's team up to do tariffs.

B (4:23)

Yeah, tariffs. So why this is noteworthy is again, the previous status quo, you go through freely, now you gotta pay a toll. Maybe it's a joint venture, US and Iran partnering in that. Maybe Iran just charges them unilaterally. We're not sure how this is gonna shake out, but it is a massive new precedent to be set. Means there could be tolls exacted on straits and canals all through the world if this ends up taking place. So that's something that we need to keep a lookout for in the future. It's relatively nominal. And if you get peace and you get the straight back opened and you get tolls, I suppose that's a deal a lot of people would probably be willing to make. All right, well, where we're at now though.

C (5:07)

But the big problem now is we say this, there is a ceasefire. It is timed to last for two weeks while they negotiate. But as we said, it might not last till the end of this program because it's not 100% clear if it's going on right now.

B (5:22)

Well, this is the news.

C (5:23)

There are still a lot of reports of explosions, missiles being fired at Israel, at Kuwait, at other targets. And then this is also a big one. There is a disagreement over the scope of the ceasefire. In addition to the air campaign and missile campaign against Iran and in the Gulf, there's also been an Israeli ground operation and bombing operation in Lebanon, in fact, that I believe has killed more people than the Iran missile exchanges. And Iran and Pakistan claim that that part of the conflict is covered by this ceasefire, but Israel claims it's not. And now just breaking in the last few minutes, the United States says it's not. And that's a pretty big point of disagreement.

B (6:08)

Well, and why this matters is because now Iran is reportedly threatening tankers that are trying to navigate the Strait. So the Strait is, for all intents and purposes, once again closed. Now, a few tankers I believe got through earlier, but it is now halted. That movement has been halted because they are claiming Israel has violated the terms of the ceasefire. But we just don't know if Hezbollah in southern Lebanon was included at all. So there's disagreements on that. We've got a lot to unpack here. There's, I think, a really important press conference that's going to be had at 1pm Caroline Levitt, White House press CONFERENCE so we are going to be throwing to that live later in hour two, because there's a lot of details that remain unclear. What are the details of the new 10 point plan? How much does it reflect the previously reported 10 point plan? What's going to happen with the Strait of Hormuz? Are we really seriously looking at charging tariffs and tolls to navigate the Strait? There's a lot to unpack here, but I think most importantly, this is what's going to happen. And Blake and I were talking about this right before the show started. Everybody's going to declare victory, Right? So we're seeing reports that they are waving Iranian flags in Tehran and that they are claiming victory. Pete Hegseth gave a press conference this morning claiming victory with a capital V. Sometimes in war there is not really a clear victor. And I think that's one of the, this is one of those instances. Would Iran have preferred to not been bombed and have 80 to 90% of their military apparatus destroyed, their manufacturing apparatus destroyed? Of course. But would, could you make the argument that this was a bit of a Pyrrhic victory on behalf of the United States in the sense that, yes, we have air superiority, we decimated much of their military industrial complex, but the Strait was open before and now that remains in question. And if we remove sanctions on Iranian oil and energy and other products that they make from its petroleum, will Iran emerge stronger in the wake of this? And that's a huge potential here.

C (8:18)

I spoke with a friend of mine who's good on foreign policy stuff, and he says the likely long term goal here probably to get a permanent peace deal might have to be, you would agree, which Iran has been fighting for, for basically the ideal deal we could make is they actually do back off from their nuclear deal, but in return we do fully regularize our relationship with them, which means you remove sanctions, you normalize trade and yeah, you let them toll the strait. They're saying it might be $1 per barrel for oil going through it. So that's not massive. That's about maybe like a 3,4% tax tariff on all oil going out. But I think you have to say we said at the outset the best way to sell this war is if it is the last war the US fights in the Middle East. And the only way that's going to happen is if we have a government in Iran we can treat as a normal country.

B (9:09)

Lots of news coming in. We're taking it all in. There's a new truth from President Trump that I want to get here. Says numerous agreements, lists and letters are being sent out by people that have absolutely nothing to do with the USA Iran negotiation. In many cases, they are total fraudsters, charlatans, and worse, they will be rapidly exposed after our federal investigation is completed. There is only one group of meaningful points and we will be discussing them behind closed doors during these negotiations. These are the points that are the basis on which we agreed to a ceasefire. It is something that is reasonable and can easily be dispensed with. It is very much like fake news. CNN last night headlining a source that had no power or authority to write a letter claiming great authority, President Donald J. Trump. So a lot of back and forth about what the actual source is here. Blake, who what the 10 points are. Again, just to underscore the point, to make it extremely clear, they're calling it the foundation for a negotiation, not that the points have been agreed to. President Trump says many of the points have already been sort of sorted out, but there remains some sticking points. Obviously, I think that it has to be a different deal than what was previously reported because the previous one was completely unworkable. There was things that we would never agree to in that previous 10 point plan. So President Trump doing his best to clarify this. Okay, I Want to get into this New York Times expose because every, everybody that I know was sending me this thing yesterday. It was going all around basically. And Blake, fill in the gaps that I miss here. It explains that Bibi Netanyahu, in an extraordinary moment, was essentially presented his case and the intel behind his pitch to attack Iran. And he did it in the Situation Room. He did it in the Situation room before. Obviously all this happened in February, which as far as I'm aware is the first time a leader of a foreign government had done something like that. Inside the Situation Room, gathered around the table was obviously President Trump, his chief of staff, Susie Wiles, Pete Hegseth, Marco Rubio, JD Vance apparently couldn't make it back in time for this initial meeting. Who else am I missing? John Radcliffe from the CIA, Raisin Cain, Joint Chiefs. So it was an extraordinarily small meeting, but with all the firepower in the US Military, with Bibi Netanyahu doing a pitch in the Situation Room. And he presented four points basically that he thought that they could do a decapitation move, take out the leadership, that they could essentially wipe out the military of Iran really successfully. But then points three and four were, were more controversial, basically. Blake, I don't know if you want to.

C (11:57)

Well, he claimed it was a four point plan. It was take, yeah, as you said, take out the ayatollah, take out the military. But then he had this bolder claim that they would be able to launch uprisings within Iran, either invasions by Kurds or just dissidents within the country. And then point four, there would be a full regime change to a secular leader who would be pro Western and friendly to the United States.

B (12:17)

This is where it gets really interesting. So gathered around that table were the characters I just mentioned. They meet afterwards, then JD Vance makes it back, gets a briefing. Now he's part of this discussion. And essentially John Ratcliffe, Marco Rubio and J.D. vance all called BS on points three and four. And Raisin Cain made an observation that I think is one of those things that is going to linger in our collective consciousness for a long time. He said the Israelis tend to oversell and under deliver their intel is inflated. So what happened is they go around the table again. They meet, I think basically within that week. J.D. vance says, you know what I think, sir? President Trump asked for everybody's opinion. J.D. vance says, you know what I think, sir? It's a bad idea, but if you do it, I'll support you for a number of reasons. Marco Rubio says, if you want to Go in for points one and two, then I think you should do it. But if you think 3 and 4 are gonna happen, you shouldn't. Cuz he called it BS, but he used the real word. Raisin Cain is sort of described as this guy who's not offering his opinions necessarily on whether he thinks it's right or wrong, but he gives the details to the question the President asks. And I think there's some reticence there. Susie Wiles said, you know, basically described

C (13:39)

as somebody that stands out.

B (13:41)

Yeah.

C (13:41)

What stands out here, if you read it, is at least in this report by the New York Times, which is presumably based on a bunch of the people involved in these conversations talking to the New York Times or their staff talking to the New York Times. No one is really willing to take ownership for launching the war other than the President himself. The narrative told in this story is almost everyone around the President is skeptical, but the President wants to go for it.

B (14:08)

Right?

C (14:09)

That is the story they tell.

B (14:10)

So it's obvious to me that the story has been worked. But we have not seen much pushback from the administration saying it's not true. We haven't seen pushback from the staff saying it's not true. We haven't even seen, as far as I am aware, any pushback from the Israelis. So I would say the basic structure of this agreement is true and it reflects other things that I'd sort of heard privately about who was rushing in or who wasn't rushing into this thing. I think the takeaway for me are, is a couple things, but namely there's been a lot of debate whether or not President Trump got, quote, unquote, dog walked into this war. My conclusion, based on this report and this expose, plus all of the footage that we've seen of President Trump throughout the years, is that, no, I think maybe there was confirmation bias. You could make that argument. But President Trump seems to have basically made the decision that he wanted to do this. He's wanted to hit Iran for a long time. And I will say this, this is my last point and I'll get your take. Blake, do not underestimate the significance of Iran attempting to assassinate President Trump. Whether they actually did attempt it or signaled their intention to do it, that will leave a incredible, indelible imprint on anybody's psyche. And I think you take that back to the fact that older Americans remember being insulted by Iran, the Iranian hostage crisis and the like, and it's been a thorn in the side of the United States for long enough that I think President Trump was the man who wanted to make this decision, whereas you get younger generations like JD Marco, they were less enthusiastic. Blake, your take.

C (15:53)

I think that's very possible and you want to be careful with that. I'm taken back to when we overthrew Saddam Hussein, which a lot of the argument from the left was Bush did this essentially for sentimental reasons that his dad hadn't taken out Saddam and that was why he'd lost reelection and he had to go back and finish the job. There was a lot of. There was a big lobby to overthrow saddam well before 911 happened. Like 911 essentially just offered the excuse to do it. And if you're correct, that's kind of the feeling I get. Here you are. The President has thought about Iran for literally decades. He does remember the hostage crisis. Those are things that would all motivate him. But that's not necessarily the best reason to launch a war which was really expensive and risky.

B (16:42)

And I think there's a couple other takeaways here. I do think there is a possibility here with after Venezuela, maybe there was a sense that this would be a greater risk, but the glory would be even greater as well and that we could get in, get out quickly. I think other people like J.D. vance, Marco, Rubio, Ratcliffe had a little bit more hesitancy because this is the line.

C (17:05)

This is a line that's worth emphasizing. It also reports in the same article that he called Tucker Carlson and he said it's going to be okay. Tucker asked why and he says, because it always is.

B (17:16)

Talks in Islamabad begin on Friday. We'll see how those go. America is entering its 250th year and the direction of this country is being decided right now. In our culture and our economy and who we choose to support matters more than ever. Most wireless companies don't care who you are or what you believe. They just want your money. Patriot Mobile is different. For more than 12 years, they've stood with Americans who believe freedom is worth fighting for, funding the Christian conservative movement when others stayed silent. And here's the deal. You don't have to give up quality or service when you switch to Patriot Mobile. They deliver premium priority access on all three major U.S. networks. So you'll get the same or better coverage than you have today. Think switching is a hassle? It isn't. Keep your number, keep your phone OR upgrade. Their 100% US based support team can activate you in just minutes. Still paying off a device, Patriot Mobile even offers a contract buyout. This is a defining year. We gotta Work together to save our country. So go to patriotmobile.com charlie or call 972 Patriot and use the promo code Charlie for a free month of service. That's patriotmobile.com charlie or call them at 972patriot using the promo code charlie and switch. Today, one of these folks out in our movement that I would love to have a barbecue with is Jonathan Keeperman. You might know him as Lomez. He is a sage of wisdom and advice and just good insight and we wanted to have him on because so much has been made about the MAGA fracturing over the conflict in Iran and we're not through it yet. We're not through the Strait of Hormuz yet. We're not through this yet. I don't think so. Jonathan, welcome back to the show. It's so good to have you, man.

A (19:03)

Blake and Andrew, it's great to be here. I appreciate the praise. I always love hearing that from you guys. So I could get used to hearing that every day.

B (19:09)

I try to, you know, it's, it's. I'm trying to bait you back on.

C (19:12)

We've got a visual here running from left to right, like no hair, medium hair, extremely large amount of hair.

B (19:19)

Huh?

A (19:20)

This is after peptides. Okay. They have peptides for this.

B (19:23)

So listen, I just got a haircut not long ago. Okay. I could.

C (19:27)

Okay, whatever you say, Andrew.

B (19:28)

Yeah. So Jonathan, let's just get your viewpoint first of all on where we're at with the ceasefire and then we'll get into the way the movement has reacted to it.

A (19:39)

Yeah, I mean, you know, just to set the table for your listeners, you know, this is something I talk about quite a lot on the show with Chris Rufo. We have a show on the Blaze and we've been talking about the Iran war and I share, I think your guys perspective, not to speak for you both, which is that I was always skeptical of this as a military operation. It was unclear to me what the objectives were. It was a bit unclear to me how we were meant to achieve those objectives and certainly what the day after was look might look like. And I was also maybe primarily worried that this would distract from domestic priorities. There's a domestic agenda that we want to see this administration not just continue to pursue but achieve it at a significant rate as we head into the midterm. So I want to see us refocus our efforts on that. But I will say I was never a doomer about this war and I think like everybody today, I'm going to claim some kind of vindication, maybe prematurely, but that is just to say that I never bought the sort of catastrophe scenario that many people were selling. I think what we saw yesterday, even if this ceasefire doesn't hold permanently right now, even if these negotiations take several weeks to get going and start to produce results, that at least the markets, oil prices took a nosedive yesterday after this was announced, the stock market is on a historic upward trend. Now, after these announcements suggest to me that there was always a way out of this, that Trump at any moment could essentially fold the hand. Okay. And that might not sound well to the administration, administrative boosters, but it's. That's really what Taco means, I think, is a willingness, when you know the cards aren't in your favor, to just fold the hand. And so if that's what this means here, that Trump is going to hold, fold the hand and we just cut our losses and can get out of this. While in the grand scheme of things, it might not be a high point for this term, it's not going to be, I don't think the catastrophe that, that many have been selling online. So that's, that's one part of it. And I think the other thing I learned, or that we're learning, and that has been clear all along, but, but maybe certain people have neglected in this equation, is that Iran is an irrational actor. Okay. We may not like them, we may not like what they do, we may not like their point of view and some of the geopolitical objectives that they pursue, but they are motivated by survival. And when you're dealing with a counterpart who is motivated by survival, you can predict what they want and what they will respond to. They will respond to certain kinds of incentives. And I think we are seeing that here with the ceasefire, as imperfect as it may be. And what this all redounds to, in my view, is that we actually have a lot of optionality here. We're in a situation where there's a lot of opportunity to maneuver and negotiate. And this is really, of course, where Trump shines at the negotiation table. So I'm, I'm cautiously optimistic that this could resolve itself and more or less from a domestic political standpoint, be forgotten by, let's say, mid June, which would be, I think, ideal and set us up for midterms rather well.

B (23:15)

Yeah, and I think I really agree with that. I was never a doomer on it. I've always been skeptical about this war, Blake likes to say, and I agree with it, that you can always start a war. You can't always decide when to end it. But I would say that as far as ending a war, we had more, as you say, optionality here than a lot of other scenarios that you could imagine. And we kept saying Trump could simply just declare victory and get out. I mean, essentially that's what he was kind of positioning, I believe, with the Strait of Hormuz, saying, hey, we don't get any of our energy from there. It's your guys problem. NATO, if you guys want the straight open. And I think we're gonna kinda see some of that when it comes to whether they're tariffed or whether it's a joint venture, whether we allow Iran to put a toll on these tankers that go through. Not ideal. It sets a bad precedent, I think, for energy and trade throughout the world, but it's also not a doomsday scenario.

C (24:05)

I think if the president, I think the one thing he seems consistently fixated on is the nuclear weapon part. I think if he can credibly claim, I have made it so this will never happen, or it will take an extremely long time to happen.

B (24:17)

I agree.

C (24:17)

He's ready to accept a lot of other things.

B (24:20)

I totally agree. I think what's gonna happen out of this, and then I'll throw to you, Jonathan, is the negotiations that are gonna go on in Islamabad, apparently starting Friday. There's some question of whether or not security is such that J.D. vance can participate. But Jared Kushner with Witkoff, I think they are going to demand that there are actual American forces or observers or whatever that goes on with this IEAE or whatever. Maybe I got the acronym wrong that goes in and actually removes it, physically removes it, and observes the removal of that. If they can negotiate that in all of this, you're right, Blake. I think they're gonna be willing to put up with a lot, including removing sanctions. There's tolls through the strait. Jonathan, your take.

A (25:01)

Yeah, I just think that, you know, Blake's right, and ending a war is difficult, but what you want in this situation is for everybody to be able to walk away. Both sides need to be able to walk away. Saving face to their own people, their own constituency. Iran can tell their people that they made the Great Satan blink, okay? And that's all they need. And they survived. There was no regime change, so they're still standing. That is a win, sort of regardless of anything else that happens from their end. From Trump's point of view, the big headline item here, and I think really the thing that's motivating him maybe even more so than the nuclear material, the uranium, is that he got the Ayatollah. The Ayatollah has existed as this sort of bogeyman for people Trump's age, going back to the Cold War. And, you know, Trump got another notch on his belt. He got the Ayatollah. Their military capacity is badly degraded. Obviously, it can still do some stuff like control the Strait of Hormuz, but it's badly degraded. If he can get just some compromise, even rhetorical compromise on the uranium stuff, I think both sides can walk from this. And again, while it's not a win per se, it's not a huge W. It's not the thing we're celebrating going into midterms. It's largely forgotten, I think, in several months.

B (26:20)

Yeah. And I just. I do think that you could actually, you know, spike the football pretty large in a big way, loudly, if you do get the concessions on nuclear. And I think, because that. That has been the one most consistent drumbeat from President Trump when it comes to Iran. You can't let Iran have nuclear. If we get massive concessions there, but we have to give over, give concessions back, for example, on sanctioning their oil, then that would be something that he could tout, I think, decisive in the end.

C (26:53)

Iran getting nuclear weapons is the only thing that keeps us obsessed with them. Even if they're an annoying government, frankly, even if they're a government that funds terrorist activities, it makes them evil. But there's a lot of evil governments.

B (27:05)

I'm just saying they killed upwards of 50,000 of their own people during the protests. And the question is, then, Jonathan, if we remove sanctions on their energy and their petrol, chemicals and stuff like that, are we actually going to potentially create a monster out of Iran? I think that would be the one question, because are they going to be stronger? One of the questions that we have remaining out of this is are they weakened? Will the people actually, you know, topple the regime eventually?

A (27:31)

You know, this may run counter to, you know, most people's preferences, but I think regularizing relationships with anyone is a good idea. And if we can regularize economic relationships with Iran, maybe there's some rough water that we have to pass through and they abuse that for a period of time. But I think in the long run, that's the only way out of this. Okay. We need to have a sort of global landscape where these countries participate in the broader global economy. That is a win. And I think this larger narrative, the larger foreign policy narrative, the Iran specific story, gets captured by what's going on everywhere else. With Venezuela, we'll see what happens. With Cuba, we'll see what we can strike a deal maybe with China, which I know is on the table and coming up soon. So I think this can all work itself out. And it isn't necessarily the case that removing sanctions is going to be some sort of catastrophic moment.

B (28:26)

Charlie had an absolutely relentless passion for learning. I saw it up close and personal in every waking moment, every spare moment that he could. He. He had a book open, he had a podcast open, he had a Hillsdale online course open. He was always diving into new ideas, absorbing information, studying up and sharpening his skills. That's why I love Dr. Arne. At Hillsdale College, they shared a deep understanding that learning is the key to shaping your character, creating courage, and changing lives. Charlie never stopped learning, and neither should you. Through Hillsdale's online courses, he spent time studying the classics, the American founding and the enduring truths of the Bible. Now it is your turn. With Hillsdale's free online courses, you can follow in his footsteps, learning from real professors and challenging yourself with rigorous coursework that's free and accessible to anybody who's willing to learn. A great place to start is their brand new course on logic and rhetoric. Learn from Hillsdale professors how to speak masterfully, make a powerful point, and see how how clear thinking leads to better decision making and more effective speech. Don't wait. Go to charlieforhillsdale.com to enroll today. It's completely free. This is a real good one, by the way. Logic and rhetoric. Pick up the mic, carry it forward. Learn like Charlie. Start right now@charlieforhillsdale.com Jonathan Kieperman, also known as Lomez. He's the founder of Passages Press and host of the Rufo and Lomaz show at Blaze. So check all of those things out. So I want to talk about the movement. There's a story out of Axios. We could throw the graphic up right now where it's talking about the MAGA media world that helped create Trump. MAGA media's great unraveling. Of course there's a picture of Tucker, Alex Jones, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Matt Walsh and Cerno. Pretty sure it is true to say that this has caused a massive amount of consternation, hand wringing and actual attacks on the President. Where do we go from here?

A (30:34)

Yeah, I mean, look, I saw this article earlier and that's certainly an important and early faction that supported Trump, but this is a huge coalition and it's a big tent. I'm a big tent guy and we all have to accommodate ourselves to the fact that we are in a big tent coalition and that consists of, you know, libertarians and people who are very strongly opposed to the Iran war and want to see us from a foreign policy perspective, retrench and retreat back into America. There are immigration hawks, of which I count myself among. There's the culture warriors. You know, you have young people, old people, and there are a lot of just diverging interests here. And all of us are in some sense subservient to the interest and will of Donald Trump. He's the guy at the top. He's the guy that calls the shots. And sometimes when you're within that coalition, you're going to get a little bit of what you want, sometimes you're going to get a lot of what you want. And sometimes you're going to have to compromise and give up on the things you want, because other members of that coalition are going to win the argument on any given issue. And I think regardless of what's happened here, and I would really strongly urge even those who are strongly opposed to what's going on Iran to consider that we'd be much worse off if the Democrats win. We'd be much worse off if Kamala Harris was president and if the Republicans lose office in the midterms. I don't believe in the acceleration thesis at all, which is that you have to lose in order to win at some point in the future. No, you win by winning. You win incrementally within that coalition. You make your argument, you try to win on the issues that matter to you the most and be willing to compromise elsewhere. And remember that your ego just isn't very important in this equation. And so what I hope is, as this starts to die down, as it becomes a less salient centerpiece of what's going on in the news every day, and it's the thing you see when you scroll that will start to coalesce around more shared objectives. We get back to this domestic agenda that I was referencing earlier. So that's my hope. That's what I think will happen. And I think, you know, members of this coalition are just going to have to learn to get along.

C (32:59)

So I'm hopeful that you're right, Jonathan, but I guess I want to sound a note of concern, worry, caution. First of all, I think you and I both know this already was a super salient issue before the Iran war broke out. We've definitely got voices that are all Israel all the time, all the Jews all the time. Let's be frank. And on top of that, it's also some of it's going to be difficult to walk back. We have people, it wasn't just people opposed to the war. We had people saying 25th amendment, use the 25th amendment, people saying these are war crimes. We need a Nuremberg. We have people honestly sounding very liberal in their overall statements, I guess, when they're saying we shouldn't be criticizing Islam or whatever. But lastly, Vault, there's a concern I'm seeing where I think there's a lot of voices on the bigger right that you say we wanted to unite around these domestic goals. But a lot of stuff is so not policy, not politically driven at all anymore. And that's something that really concerns me. It's when they're very centered on maybe their latest outrage stuff, but not as much on what are we actually doing on immigration, for example.

A (34:13)

Yeah, look, I don't want to sound too Pollyanna ish here, and I recognize that some of this is sort of hopeful thinking and that there are real headwinds facing this coalition. And I think some of the impolitic and sort of imprudent things that people were saying online, well, a lot of that is just sort of siloed off in a. This is my view. Maybe I'm wrong about this, but I some of this is just siloed off in the online milieu that we operate in and we're highly responsive to, but doesn't necessarily translate into broader conservative GOP politics. That's one. And I think, too, you know, I'm operating under the assumption, which is just I've seen over time, that people have incredibly short memories. And a lot of the people who are now in Trump's favor and are directing policy decisions, you know, six years ago or 10 years ago or whenever it was, were saying precisely the same things about Trump that some of his more recent allies are saying about him now with regards to Iran. So there's a lot of movement within the coalition. People say things that are regrettable. I hope cooler heads will prevail. I think there is time to subtly sort of walk back some of the inflammatory rhetoric that's been bandied about online over the last several months with regards to Iran. So, look, we have a long way to go. The midterms really haven't ramped up yet in terms of messaging. I think it's going to be really important for GOP strategists to take a very hard look of what's important to this coalition, what can be the shared interests and just Hammer that stuff over and over and over again and try to recreate the sort of enthusiasm that if people, again, people don't remember. I mean, it was in January, the State of the Union speech, that was maybe the high watermark of this first term. Everybody was really enthused. All of the right things were being said. There was this sense of coming together over a shared domestic agenda. I really do think we can get back to that. Maybe we lose some people. Maybe this war and what's gone on creates some attrition within the coalition, but I don't think it has to be a fatal blow.

B (36:25)

Jonathan, when I interpret what you're saying, and I hate to be this gruff with the audience, with the movement, with the coalition, it just sounds like you're sort of compelling or begging people. Maybe not begging. I'm begging them to be grownups, to behave like adults.

A (36:42)

Yeah.

B (36:43)

There's this speech that Vice President Vance gave this morning where he's warning against.

A (36:49)

I was just gonna reference that.

B (36:51)

Yeah. So let's go ahead and play this clip and then we'll get your take 17. Resist the temptation to think that victory is immediate or that we're going to win back our civilization through instant gratification. I think a lot of people, this is particularly true in the United States of America. If they see something that the administration does they don't like, they say, oh,

A (37:11)

that's not what we voted for.

B (37:12)

We're going to check out of politics. No, no, no, no. That's the exact wrong response. If we do something you don't like, the response should be to get more involved, to make your voice heard and

A (37:23)

to try to push things in the direction that you want them to be pushed.

B (37:26)

Our civilization was not built overnight. It's not going to be saved overnight.

A (37:31)

And so what I'd encourage you to

B (37:32)

do is stay involved, be patient, and don't let disappointment turn to checking out of the system entirely. There's way too much of that. We call that black pilling in the United States of America. And blackpilling is how you give power to the forces that are trying to destroy what our ancestors built. Why I think this is so important, Jonathan, is because. Let's go back to this Maggie Haberman, Jonathan Swan piece, New York Times. J.D. vance was the most ardent anti Iran intervention voice in the administration. He did not get what he wanted. He did not. That is very clear. And here he is saying, don't give in to cynicism. Stop demanding immediate gratification. You're not gonna get everything you want I just find it wild that we have so much of this like main player syndrome going on where everybody expects that their viewpoint to be expressed in the press. If you want that, go run for president.

A (38:27)

Yeah. And look, man, I think it's egos. I think there's something about the media environment we're in that is hyper focused on whatever's happening right now to the exclusion of the longer timeline. And so there's two pieces of this JD Vance clip that I think are so important to take away. And I just, I really love J.D. vance. I mean, he couldn't have articulated it better. One is what he said leaves room for the internal coalitional debate. It's not to say that you just have to be in lockstep with everybody in your coalition at all times. There's room for disagreement, there's room for debate. And by the way, go out and win the argument. Try to do what you can to influence the administration to your side. That's fine as long as we're all on the same side at the end of it. Part two is this is a long game. We're not going to undo what's happened to this country over the last couple of decades in, in one year, in one term, in one policy decision. This is something that is going to take multiple administrations. This is going to be something that takes multiple generations of GOP coming together to figure out how to undo, first of all, all of the bad things that were done previously and then come up with better solutions and better alternatives so that, yeah, frankly, we can just live in a normal insane society again. So I love this clip and I encourage everybody to take these words from J.D. vance to heart.

B (39:57)

I think you're right. I think the timing of the clip too was really important. So listen, we've only got a couple more minutes here with you. Jonathan Kuberman, Lomez on X. Great follow, but tell us what's going on with Passages Press too, because there's so much happening. I see you pictures online with like stack of books next to you and give us the update.

A (40:20)

So yeah, Passage, we are, right now there's a huge sale, so go to Passage Press. Buy all the books in our backlist, up to 50% off on these bundles. We got books for kids, these great Hardy Boys books and other kids books. We got books for all interests, history books, war books, etc. We got 40 over 40 books coming out the rest of this year. We got a great new homeschool classic curriculum imprint coming out that's going to be launching next week. That I'm really excited to get in people's hands. We are making American literature great again. Okay? That is our goal at Passage Press. So please visit, please support the cause. Blake and Andrew, I got a big box I'm sending you guys right now, so you'll have a bunch of stuff coming to your office soon. Okay? A bunch of swag.

B (41:05)

I love that here.

C (41:07)

They've got, they've got, yeah, Hardy Boys, Robert Howard. That's Conan the Barbarian, H.P. lovecraft, Masterworks. There's a lot of stuff. And I really want to emphasize this point. People should check this out because we complain so much about rotten culture. And one of the worst is books. There's a lot of trashy books out there. There's not enough good quality stuff that reflects our values, especially in high quality form there. I will say passages books, they are good books. They are nice to have on your shelf. And I'd strongly encourage everyone to buy some support. Jonathan's business support.

A (41:42)

Thank you, Flake. I love this. Okay, I'm coming back on. Okay. The next time you ask, I promise.

B (41:47)

See, look, it's. I tell. I'm trying to tell you, man. You know, I. I'm always like, throwing out invites to Jonathan. He's like, ah, I'm a little busy. I'm busy. So finally he was like, hey, you caught me on an off day. Like, this is actually good. But. And then last thing here, and then we're gonna. We're gonna cut over and see if we can grab this press conference. You've got Rufo and Lomez. How do people watch that?

A (42:09)

Yeah, go to the Blaze. Rufo and lomaz. It's on YouTube. It's on the Blazes site. Uh, it's a biweekly show. It's me and Chris Rufo just chatting, figuring out what's going on, trying to keep this coalition together, trying to make sense of all the complications in our current politics and culture and everything else. And then we also do an interview segment Blake was recently on with Chris last week. So we got a lot going on there. And please. Yes, check it out.

B (42:34)

Awesome. Jonathan Keeperman. And Keeperman, I think that's you're trying to keep the coalition together right now. You know, it's hilarious.

A (42:42)

Determinism.

B (42:45)

I know. I view myself as about as far right as you can go on most issues, especially like immigration and. Yeah, I'm, you know, up and down

C (42:54)

the line as far right as you can go, which is just a bit left of me.

B (42:56)

Yeah, I know. This is our internal debate. Blake's like, you're more moderate. But this is my point. It's like, it's crazy to feel like we're these like moderate voices when you got part of the former coalition. I don't know what gonna emerge as that's, you know, calling to basically coup the president because they don't agree with his policies. So, like, all of a sudden I have to be like a squish moderate and I hate it. I can't wait. Like so. All right, my friend, we'll see you soon, I hope.

A (43:23)

All right, guys, really appreciate it. Take care.

B (43:25)

Thanks for the time, man. Folks, let me tell you something straight up. I'm extremely picky about what I put in my body and what companies we support here. Blackout Coffee checks every single box. This is a family run American company roasting fresh coffee in the usa built by people who believe in hard work, freedom, and America. No global corporations, no fake activism, no lectures, just darn good coffee made by Americans for Americans. This is coffee that actually stands for something. And I drink it every day right here on the show. From morning reaper and brutal awakening to 1776 dark roast and their two a medium roast. They've got something for everyone. They even have instant coffee. Real blackout coffee with no machine. No mess. Just add water, stir, and you're ready to roll. Go to blackout coffee.com Charlie and use code Charlie for 20% off your first order. That's blackoutcoffee.com Charlie blackoutcoffee.com Charlie. And for an even better deal, sign up for Blackout Coffee subscriptions, save money, get free shipping and earn free coffee through their rewards program just for drinking what you already love, your coffee shows up fresh on schedule and you never run out.

A (44:36)

That's blackout coffee.com Charlie. Check it out. Promo code Charlie.

B (44:42)

We are awaiting the start of the White House press conference. We don't take all of them on the show, but I think today is a truly important day because we're gonna define, we're gonna hopefully learn what the White House is defining as victory. Again, you can have war in the modern era where it doesn't. It's not as clear as, like, you know, World War II, right, or the Civil war. We're used to these grandiose celebrations, the theatrics of signing a surrender. That doesn't happen in modern warfare nearly as much, obviously. We saw it in Venezuela where Maduro was captured and taken back. I mean, that was fairly clear cut, but it's not always clear cut. And so you have to define your objectives. And you have to then, you know, get press conferences up and running and declare victory. This is why I think Hegseth, you saw him out this morning and explaining why he defines this as a victory. And obviously this is part of the PR spin both sides. Listen, I think, again to Blake's earlier point in hour one, we may not see this ceasefire even hold through the end of the show, but I think that given the calculus of a current moment, I think that administration would be loathe to reignite hostilities, kinetic operations, because I think there is an understanding that Iran is really willing to sort of wait out and take the barrage, take the punishment. But here's Pete Hegseth. Sat 3. Iran begged for this ceasefire and we all know it. Operation Epic Fury was a historic and overwhelming victory on the battlefield. A capital V military victory. There's a little bit of defining, though, military victory. He didn't say it was a political victory. It's not regime change. I think what is going to be very interesting in this press conference as we await it, you can see there in the bottom of your screen, it's going to be very interesting to see what happens specifically with nuclear. Right. Nuclear is I think if we can get that chess piece off the board, we can, I think, objectively declare some semblance of a victory and say, listen, maybe the strait isn't cleared out. Maybe we didn't get regime change. Maybe we remove sanctions and they are gonna get more money flowing into the Iranian regime. But the Ayatollah is gone. Most of their main leadership is gone. Maybe we'll have to Lomaz's point in the previous hour. We're gonna establish regular relations, normalize relations with whatever is left intact in Iran. And that's not a bad thing. All right, So I think I'm waiting for clarity. I think the world is waiting for clarity. I don't know, Blake, what are you hoping to see? Because sometimes these press conferences, you don't get much specific. I think today's going to be a bit different.

C (47:25)

Well, yeah, I think, as you say, we're going to see them define not just what victory is, but hopefully set terms for the ceasefire that can hold. I think they're probably going to get grilled over strikes still happening over that disagreement over Lebanon. And that's probably going to be the most difficult answer they can give, because that's going to be what people do, break the ceasefire wide open again. We'll probably also have to see how aggressive their posture is on if the ceasefire starts breaking down. Are they ready to fully resume everything. Are we back to the threats or do we think Trump is seizing an off ramp aggressively where if the ceasefire starts going south, he's still not inclined to raise back up all of America's military operations?

B (48:11)

Yeah, I mean, we know already reporting is that Israel, the leadership of Israel is not happy with this ceasefire. They very much want to be able to continue operations in southern Lebanon to take out Hezbollah. I think it's also a, like I mentioned before, it's a clear indication that Iran sees Hezbollah as an extension of the regime. So, you know, if there was any doubt, let there be no doubt, that Hezbollah is an extension of the regime in Lebanon. And Israel is not happy with this, but they're kind of, Trump's got them cornered a little bit. So I think that's going to be another question here that Caroline Levitt's going to have to navigate. What are you going to do with Israel? Israel is a X factor question mark on the board. Obviously, their proximity to Iran is much closer than our own. So they want to see this regime toppled. There's no doubt in anybody's mind, really. So we'll see how she handles that. But again, questions on the board. Nuclear, straight to Hormuz. Hezbollah, can the ceasefire hold? Is JD Vance going to be present in Islamabad for the Friday peace deal negotiations or is there some security concern? What is the security concern? So there's a thousand questions that she's going to be confronted with and maybe it will be a grilling. But I think we, I'm most curious to see, what is the ten point plan? Are we gonna get any clarity on the ten point plan? The White House has already said It's a different 10 point plan than has been reported and circulated.

C (49:38)

It is funny how I don't think there's been any public versions of the ten point plan. Yeah, there's all different places reporting alleged hears divisions.

B (49:46)

I think that's why President Trump issued that truth today, saying that they're all fake, basically. So take it all with a grain of salt. Keep your wits about you. This is all a litmus test. All right? This is all a litmus test. Are you going to catastrophize? Are you going to doom and gloom or are you going to keep your wits about you? I'm very proud of us on this show that we've kept our wits about us and we're calling balls and strikes. We're not rushing into war. We certainly are glad that this one could be on the precipice, on the threshold of being over. I think that's a good thing and we should celebrate that. But it is fragile. It is very fragile. And we've got to see right now the strait is essentially halted. It's closed. So is there going to be immediate action taken by the administration to get that reopened? We don't know. And I think it's also very telling. Here we are. This was supposed to start at 1:00pm Eastern, this press conference, and we're already at 1:12pm Eastern. So it's already been delayed a bit. We kept this segment open for, for this press conference today and it's delayed, which means there this is a very active and moving situation. And I bet we're working with wet cement here.

C (50:57)

Wet cement indeed. Yeah. And then how quickly does it dry?

B (51:00)

But yeah.

C (51:01)

Did you ever, did you ever read Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy growing up? It's, I don't know if maybe it would age badly. It might not be funny anymore, but it's what's funny about this. I watched the, well, I'm just with the black pilling thing. I just the thing you'll remember is that the Hitchhiker's Guide of the, of the title, it's this book and it just says on the COVID don't Panic. And I think that would be good to have on a lot of things in the right. Maybe we could add it to these pocket constitutions that we have.

B (51:29)

Don't panic on the article 1 section 1. Just to give you a quick market update, though, oil is down $18 a barrel. It came down at about, I think it was about 110. It settled yesterday. So it's at $94 a barrel. It's down 16%, which is good news. And then the markets are surged 1200 points. The Dow is up 1200s and P 500 is up two and a half points, up 167. And the Nasdaq is up three points at 670 points. So the markets like what they're hearing despite some of the uncertainty, despite the fragile, very fragile piece that we've reached. Let's hope that it continues on. Let's hope that Caroline Levitt has some updates for us that will lead us to have additional reason for optimism. But right now, I think, right now, I think a lot of the calls Yesterday for the 25th Amendment, a bunch of Democrats got together. What did the number get up to like 70, 80 Democrats calling for President Trump's impeachment, a lot of that has settled and today is a new day. So I'm very, very interested to see what is revealed in this press conference. All right. I want to while we're waiting on this press conference to get started, it's important to realize what some of the rhinos in the house tried to do while we were all distracted by the war. Well, we weren't so distracted that we didn't notice. We had Nick Sorter on yesterday talking about it. And that's when I discovered that it wasn't in fact called the Dignity Act. It's called the Dignity Act. They had the audacity, the shamelessness to put a Spanish word on an amnesty bill while we were all distracted with Iran. Let's hear Rep. Maria Salazar in her own words, Sat.12 we give them dignity.

A (53:20)

At some point in the future, another legislator will write another law to give them paths to citizenship.

D (53:26)

Right now what we need to do do is to buy peace for these people, allow them to stay to continue working because they are needed.

C (53:35)

It's just insane. It's we actually won an election on saying we're going to enforce the border, we're going to do deportations. And every single time Congress comes up, they're like cockroaches or something and they just come out and say actually what the people wanted was mass amnesty.

B (53:52)

Yeah, it's the exact opposite. And what I've realize from this is that there will always be a push. It doesn't matter how much the base wants the moneyed interest in ag hospitality. Other sectors are going to continue pushing for amnesty because they want cheap labor.

C (54:08)

You literally just have to learn to tune them out. You just like they're going to say it no matter what. They will always say it. So you just have to ignore them. You have to say thanks. You say that every time. We're ignoring you.

B (54:18)

So Rep. Maria Elvira Salazar, who should be primaried by the way, like this woman, I don't care who endorsed her. Okay, I guess she's got a Trump. I don't care. She needs to be primaried because you cannot represent the grassroots and the movement of the Republican Party if you're going to continue pushing garbage amnesty and try and you know, to quote Ron DeSantis, don't pee on my leg and tell me it's raining. That's exactly what's happening here. Brandon Gill, who's gonna come on the show tomorrow, said, this is an amnesty bill. She fires back said, read the bill before you open your mouth. Calling the dignity act amnesty isn't just wrong, it's a deliberate distortion. No, what you're trying to do. Calling it the Dignity act is a deliberate distortion of an amnesty bill. And I love that there's a community note on her X feed here. It says it grants amnesty, permanent residency, Dream act, deferred action and legal status. Dignity program halts deportations, wipes three to ten year bans, Creates inspected and admitted loopholes, grants Attorney General power to terminate deportation for family hardship. Are you kidding me? Who? They're all going to claim hardship.

C (55:27)

They're always. You can't really give in these flexible definitions of things. We've seen that with asylum, we've seen this with refugee status. We see it. I mean, that's also how all the fraud that works in all these blue states, you create a vague category that everyone can claim. And if it's not really aggressively enforced, it quickly breaks down and we know it won't be. You have these immigration judges and if you install a sympathetic actor, you basically have the inmates running the asylum. Everyone's able to claim the benefit.

B (55:56)

Get this. It allows every illegal alien deported by Trump since January 2017 to return to the USA. They can apply for their new date Dignity status dignidad from their home country and then return to the usa. It also ups caps on certain immigration visas, so it increases our immigration. Then it provides funding to lawyers that are gonna argue on behalf of these illegals to get back into the country. This is a treasonous behavior, betrayal of the American voters.

C (56:32)

Get this woman out of my party.

B (56:34)

And by the way, I'm gonna have Rich Barish join maybe tomorrow if he' because he's got a backstory on some of this polling that's being circulated around the administration that is warning them against using the words mass deportation. I want to hear your thoughts. Send us an email. Freedom CharlieKirk. Right now. Do you like the term mass deportation? Do you not like it? Do you understand the rationale behind maybe not using it as much? Okay, I want to hear all your viewpoints. Do you think it's bad pr? Listen, there is an argument to be made that we lost some of the PR wars, right? Masks on ICE agents. That's one of the things that I've heard actually does poll very badly. Okay, well, maybe there's some room to maneuver here, but you are not going to convince me that mass deportations and the reclaiming of American culture and sovereignty is not popular across the board. It is one of the issues that has been, I think, undervalued under appreciated the most in American politics since Trump came down the golden escalator. He saw it, he called it out and Caroline just walked out. And Trump deserves a massive amount of credit for changing the discourse on that topic alone. And we were going to, we're going to die on that hill. That's the Hill you die on. It's mass deportations and our sovereignty. Let's go ahead and take the Caroline Levitt press conference.

D (57:52)

Good afternoon everybody. Good to see all of you here today. Before, before I discuss the ceasefire with Iran, I have a quick update from the first lady of the United States. Yesterday marked the very first conviction under the Take It down act, landmark legislation that First Lady Melania Trump played an instrumental role in getting passed that protects victims from non consensual AI generated sexually explicit images, cyber stalking and threats of violence. This is a huge achievement for the first lady and I know the President is very proud of his wife's efforts in getting this critical legislation passed to protect America's youth. So we thank the first lady for her efforts and we hope that others will report on this historic conviction yesterday. With respect to the two week cease fire announced by President Trump last night. This is a victory for the United States of America that the President in our incredible military made has happen. From the very beginning of Operation Epic Fury, President Trump stated this would be a four to six week military operation to dismantle the military threat posed by the radical Islamic Iranian regime. Thanks to the unbelievable capabilities of America's war fighters, the United States has achieved and exceeded those core military objectives in just 38 days. The US military destroyed Iran's defense industrial base, crushing the regime's ability to manufacture weapons that they and their proxies use to maim and kill Americans and terrorize the world. Iran's ability to build and stockpile ballistic missiles and long range drones has also been set back by years compared to where it was six weeks ago. Prior to the launch of Operation Epic Fury. We destroyed the vast majority of Iran's ballistic missiles, launcher vehicles and long range attack drones through more than 450 strikes on ballistic missiles and approximately 800 strikes on Iran's drone launching units and storage facilities. In total, more than 13,000 targets across Iran were struck. Again, this is in the matter of just 38 days. Meanwhile, the Iranian navy was completely annihilated. The United States destroyed more than 150 naval vessels in total, including 16 entire classes of Iranian warships. Despite once being the largest undersea force in the Middle East, Iran now has zero submarine vessels, 97% of Iran's once massive inventory of marines, more than 5,000 naval mines has also been targeted and destroyed. Iran's air forces are functionally and operationally irrelevant at this point. After the United States maintained total air dominance over their country for weeks on end. To underscore the significance of this, before Operation Epic Fury, the Iranian Air Force would fly between 30 to 100 flights per day. Today that number is zero. Iran's ability to fund and support its terrorist proxies has been greatly reduced. At this point, Iran can no longer distribute weapons to its proxies in the region. And most importantly, Iran will not be able to acquire nuclear weapons. Prior to the start of this successful operation, Iran was aggressively expanding its short range ballistic missile arsenal through these weapons and its navy. Iran was attempting to build a military buildup around their country that would pose an imminent and existential threat to the United States military assets in the Middle east, our allies in the region, and ultimately the free world. Iran was pursuing this dangerous and aggressive strategy for one reason. To hold the entire world hostage to its terrorist ambitions. The Iranians aimed to use their expanded military capabilities and as a shield around their country to continue achieving their ultimate goal, internally building nuclear bombs. But their murderous and evil plans have been blown up, quite literally and figuratively, along with their military, their nuclear program and most of their senior leadership, including the former Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ala Khamani. Their commanding control structures were also massively disrupted after being struck more than 2,000 times. Many of their remaining leaders are paralyzed in fear and no longer enjoy the freedom to move around their country freely and meet openly. Thanks to the unmatched excellence of our warriors at the direction of the Commander in Chief, the world has just witnessed a historically swift and successful military triumph. President Trump started Operation Epic Fury with strategic military objectives in the United States. States has clearly achieved them. As we mark this progress, we also remember and honor the 13American heroes who laid down their lives in this noble effort. I know President Trump and our grateful nation honors their ultimate sacrifice and we will never forget them. May God bless their families. The valiant efforts of all of our incredible service members created maximum leverage for the President of the United States, allowing he and his leadership team to engage in tough negotiations over the past couple of weeks that have now created an opening for a diplomatic solution in long term peace in the Middle East. The President's maximum pressure and the leverage created by the success of Operation Epic Fury led to the Iranian regime asking for and ultimately agreeing to a ceasefire proposal with the United States. Iran could no longer tolerate being bombed or taking the gamble of what was to come. Following President Trump's 8pm deadline last night. Iran has agreed to open the Strait of Hormuz. And as the President said, we have received a proposal from the Iranians that has been determined to be a workable basis on which to negotiate. I've seen a lot of inaccurate coverage today from the media about these negotiations and these plans already. So let me be clear and correct the record. The Iranians originally put forward a 10 point plan that was fundamentally unserious, unacceptable, and completely discarded. It was literally thrown in the garbage by President Trump and his negotiating team. Many outlets in this room have falsely reported on that plan as being acceptable to the United States, and that is false. With the President's deadline fast approaching and the United States military completely decimating Iran with each passing hour, the regime acknowledged reality to the negotiating team. They put forward a more reasonable and entirely different and condensed plan to the President and his team. President Trump and the team determined the new modified plan was a workable basis on which to negotiate and to align it with our own 15 point proposal. The President's red lines, namely the end of Iranian enrichment in Iran, have not changed. And the idea that President Trump would ever accept an Iranian wish list as a deal is completely absurd. The President will only make a deal that serves in the best interests of the United States of America. And he, as a negotiating team, will focus on this effort over the next two weeks. So long as the Strait of Hormuz remains open with no limitations or delays, these extraordinary, extraordinarily sensitive and complex negotiations will take place behind closed doors over the course of the next two weeks. I would strongly advise the media against running with narratives that have no basis in fact. What Iran says publicly or feeds to all of you in the press is much different than what they communicate to the United States. The President and his team privately never underestimate President Trump's ability to successfully advance America's interests in broker peace. President Trump has a proven track record of achieving good deals on behalf of the United States and the American people. And he will only accept one that puts America first.

B (65:52)

Listen, if faith and values are important to you, they should be a part of how you date. It's that simple. Not something you figure out later when you're like three, four months down the road in a relationship. You see, most dating apps are built around casual connection, instant gratification, no long term vision. And that's just not what many of you are looking for, thank goodness. That's why I like Upward. It's a dating app designed around faith and shared values, people who care about commitment, integrity, marriage and family, the things that we really value. On this show, you're starting from common ground instead of trying to negotiate your core beliefs months into a relationship. That kind of clarity matters. If faith is central to your life or even if it's something that shaped how you were raised and how you see the world, Upward connects you with people who take that seriously. So if you're tired of the confusion and ready to date with intention, with marriage and family in mind, download Upward and start building on that right foundation, because strong relationships start with shared values. Download the Upward app today.

D (66:55)

With that, I will take your questions today. I'm sure you have a lot of them. In our new media seat, we have Shane Harris with the AMAC Newsline. Shane, thank you for being here. Why don't you kick us off?

B (67:03)

Yeah, thanks for having me. Caroline, two questions for you. First, following the President's announcement of the

A (67:08)

ceasefire, if this is indeed the end

B (67:10)

of hostilities in Iran, what is the

A (67:12)

President's message to the American people about

B (67:14)

what was achieved for our country through operation epic fury?

D (67:17)

Ms. Sure. I think I just laid out a significant portion of that, in my opinion remarks. Six weeks ago, the president looked the American people in the eye directly and he told them that he launched this operation to take out the imminent threat that was posed by Iran and that threat has now been greatly destroyed. Their navy, their missiles, their defense industrial base and their desire and their plan to build a nuclear bomb inside their country is no longer going to be allowed can no longer happen thanks to the remarkable success of Operation Epic Fury over the course of the last 38 days. That has been absolutely achieved. And now we're moving into the next phase of this, which is a negotiating period to put some fine points on this and to hopefully broker an agreement that can achieve long term peace in the Middle East.

B (68:00)

Yes. And then second, what is the President's message to American seniors who have a

A (68:05)

much higher voter participation rate and they're

B (68:07)

likely to be a key swing vote

C (68:08)

in the midterm elections?

D (68:09)

Ms. Well, the President loves our seniors across the country and as you know, the president signed the one big beautiful bill, the working families tax cut, last year, which greatly reduced taxes on Social Security for our seniors. In fact, thanks to the working families tax cut, nearly 90% of seniors will no longer pay tax on their Social Security. That's a huge win for our seniors and also for our middle class and working families across the country with the no tax on tips provision and the no tax on overtime next week is tax week. You'll hear a lot from the president about how his policies have benefited the American people. And I'm proud to report that the president will be traveling next week to the great states of Nevada and Arizona to tout this historic accomplishment over the course of the next week. Thank you for being here, Shane. Gabe, thank you.

B (68:54)

Caroline, Iranian state media is saying that Iran has now closed off the Strait of Hormuz today in response to Israeli attacks on Lebanon. What's the White House response to the to that? And you just listed many military successes. I understand that, but strategically, how is the administration arguing that Iran does not have more economic leverage now than it

A (69:17)

did before the start of the war?

D (69:18)

Ms. Sure. Well, with respect to the first reporting out of Iranian state media, the president was made aware of those reports before I came to the podium. That is completely unacceptable. And again, this is a case of what they're saying publicly is different privately. We have seen an uptick of traffic in the strait today, and I will reiterate the president's expectation and demand that the Strait of Hormuz is reopened immediately, quickly and safely. That is his expectation and it has been relayed to him privately that that is what's taking place and these reports publicly are false.

B (69:50)

Caroline, the president yesterday threatened that a whole civilization would die if a cease

A (69:55)

fire deal wasn't reached, understanding that Iranian

B (69:57)

leaders have previously said death to America. But why is it appropriate for the president of the United States to use that kind of language when talking about civilian targets? And was the president mocking Islam by signing off his true soldier post over the weekend, Praise be to Allah. Wouldn't that antagonize Muslim allies across the world?

D (70:16)

Ms. Well, I understand the questions about the president's rhetoric, but what the president president cares most about is results and in fact, his very tough rhetoric and his tough negotiating style is what has led to the result that you are all witnessing today. Iran publicly acknowledging last night that they have agreed or that they wanted this cease fire with the United States because they no longer could tolerate being bombed by our very powerful and lethal military and that they have committed to the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, which the president will hold them accountable for. And it's something the administration is closely monitoring in real time.

B (70:50)

Danny, should the world not take his word seriously?

D (70:53)

Ms. The world should take his word very seriously in understanding that the president is always most interested in results. And it was the Iranians who backed down, not President Trump. He said that they would face very grave consequences, as you just laid out by the 8pm deadline if they did not agree to reopening the Strait of Hormuz. And what did they do last night? They agreed to reopen the Strait of Hormuz. Danny.

B (71:15)

Thanks, Karen. Would President Trump like to see Lebanon included in this peace deal? Because, as you know, there have been increased Israeli strikes on Lebanon today with dozens of casualties there.

D (71:24)

Ms. Sure. Lebanon is not part of the cease fire that has been relayed to all parties involved in the cease fire. As you know, Prime Minister Netanyahu put out a statement last night in support of the cease fire, in support of the United States efforts, and he's also assured the president they'll continue to be a helpful partner throughout the course of the next two weeks.

B (71:42)

Is there any thought, though, that the president might like to see Lebanon included at a future date, given that it seems to be causing or potentially undermining the Iran ceasefire?

D (71:52)

Ms. Again, this will continue to be discussed, I am sure, between the president and Prime Minister Netanyahu, the United States and Israel and all of the parties involved, but at this point in time, they're not included in the ceasefire deal. Jeff.

C (72:04)

Thank you, Caroline. Will the US Take part in talks with Iran in Islamabad on Friday? Ms.

D (72:09)

I can announce that the president is dispatching his negotiating team, led by the Vice president of The United States, J.D. vance, Special Envoy Witkoff, and Mr. Kushner, to Islamabad for talks this weekend. The first round of those talks will take place on Saturday morning local time, and we know we look forward to those in person meetings.

B (72:29)

What role does the President see for

C (72:30)

the US in monitoring or helping with this rate of foreign Ms.

D (72:35)

I think the President commented on that this morning. We're going to continue to monitor it very, very closely. We will be helpful in any way that we can, but we fully expect Iran to do this, and the President has made that quite clear as well. Again, as his statement said last night, this cease fire is subject to the safe reopening of the Strait of again, this was just determined last night. We understand things take time, but that's the President's expectation and he will hold everyone to it. Sure. In the green blazer.

A (73:04)

Thank you.

D (73:05)

Sure. And then in front of you. But Andrew, you can go ahead. You're not wearing a green blazer.

B (73:10)

I am actually wearing a green blazer.

D (73:12)

It looks a little brown to me, but go ahead.

B (73:16)

Fair enough.

A (73:17)

So regarding the President's response rhetoric, when the US invaded Iraq in 2003, George W. Bush said in a message to the Iraqi people that the military campaign was directed against the lawless men who rule your country and not against you. Yesterday, the president threatened to destroy Iran's civilization, the entire civilization, not the Iranian government, but the Iranian civilization, the Iranian people. The US has been a moral leader for most of its history by fighting wars against other governments, not against civilizations. How can the president claim that America can ever have the moral high ground

B (74:03)

if he's threatening to destroy civilizations and

A (74:06)

not casting wars as fights against other governments?

D (74:10)

Andrew, I think you should take a look at the actions of this president over the course of the past six weeks and the actions of our brave men and women in our United States military who have taken out the essentially taken out the military of a rogue Islamic regime that has chanted death to America for 47 years, that has killed and maimed thousands of American soldiers over the course of the last five decades. The president absolutely has the moral high ground over the Iranian terrorist regime, and for you to even suggest otherwise is frankly insulting.

A (74:41)

With all due respect, Caroline, with all

D (74:44)

due respect, there is just given what we've seen in Lebanon today and the increased attacks from Israel, I mean, is there any concern that Netanyahu is trying to kill the cease fire? Ms. The President spoke with Prime Minister Netanyahu last night, and in that private conversation, Prime Minister Net Netanyahu relayed exactly what he said to the world publicly that he supports the president and Israel remains a key ally and partner to the United States. They've been a tremendous partner over the course of the past six weeks, and we thank them for their heroic efforts as well. And the President had that conversation last night and that was relayed to the world publicly as well. Reagan, go ahead. Thank you, Caroline. I have a question for you on Iran and I have a question on the Dignity act as well. Sure. On Iran, it's been reported that the cease fire was struck after the involvement of two unlikely factors. JD Vance, in China, what role did those parties play in striking a deal? Ms. Well, Vice President Vance has played a very significant and a key role in this since the very beginning. Of course, he's the President's right hand man. He is the vice president of the United States. He's been involved in all of these discussions and as I just announced, he'll be leading this new phase of negotiations in Islamabad later this week. With respect to China, there were conversations that took place between top levels of our government and China's government. The president has great respect for President Xi and a great working relationship with him and with that country, and he looks forward to visiting China in just a few weeks. And on the Dignity act, it's getting a fresh push through Congress. It would give some illegal immigrants in the country a path to citizenship. What's the White House's position on this legislation and would the President sign it if it made it to his desk? Ms. Honestly, Reagan, I haven't spoken to the President about the legislation, but I will have that conversation and we'll get you our formal position on it as soon as we can. You're welcome. Go ahead.

A (76:40)

The President suggested in an interview this morning that he would support a joint US army the charge tolls for ships going through the strait. Does the President believe that the US should earn revenue from the Strait of Hormuz going forward?

D (76:53)

Ms. It's something it's an idea the President has floated, as you know, and it's something that will continue to be discussed over the course of the next two weeks. But the immediate priority of the President is the reopening of the strait without any limitations, whether in the form of tolls or otherwise.

B (77:08)

On the highly enriched you uranium, has

A (77:11)

Iran given the administration any indication that it would simply turn over the enriched uranium, or is this an expectation the

C (77:19)

president has that he would have to

B (77:21)

send in ground troops in order to do that?

D (77:23)

Ms. This is on the top of the priority list for the President and his negotiating team as they head into this next round of discussions. And as I said in my opener, that is a red line that the President is not going to back away from and he's committed committed to ensuring that takes place. We hope it will be through diplomacy. Have they given any indication that they

A (77:41)

would turn it over?

D (77:42)

They have. They are, yes.

B (77:44)

Trevor, the latest news out of Iran is that the air defenses have been activated in several cities, including Isfahan, and that explosions have been heard in Isfahan. Who is bombing Iran right now?

D (77:55)

Ms. Were those reports just as of a few minutes ago?

B (77:58)

Yes.

D (77:59)

Okay. So obviously, I'll have to go back and check with the national security team. I'm standing out here with all of you, but I will do that and we will get you an answer, okay.

B (78:06)

On the civilization question that we've been talking about.

D (78:09)

Ms. And I would just add to that point again, I haven't seen these reports. I'm not verifying them. Not that I don't trust you, Trevor, but I want to go back and check with the experts here at the White House. I would just say and I would echo what the vice President said this morning. This is a fragile truce. Cease fires are fragile by nature. We've seen this with respect to the 12 day war with Iran and Israel last year, it takes time sometimes for these ceasefires to be fully effectuated. And one of the results of Operation Epic Fury was we completely dismantled Iran's command and control center, which makes it difficult for them to pass messages up and down the chain. And so we understand that I would caution a little bit of patience, but of course, we want to see the ceasefire effectuated and abided by by all parties as quickly as possible.

A (78:53)

Thank you.

B (78:53)

And American presidential administrations going back to Ronald Reagan have said this formulation about nuclear war, that a nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought. Is that still the view of this administration, given the President's comments about civilization?

D (79:07)

Ms. I have no change in our view on that policy. Katie. Thanks, Carolyn. I'm just given the gravity of what he said yesterday, what was your understanding of what he meant when he said civilization is going to be eliminated? Ms. I think it was a very, very strong threat from the president of the United States that led the Iranian regime to cave to their knees and ask for a cease fire and agree to reopening the Strait of Hormuz. So it was a very strong threat that led to results. And as the secretary of war stated at the Pentagon this morning, it was not an empty threat by any means. The Pentagon had a target list that they were ready to hit go on at 8pm last night if the Iranian regime had not agreed to open the strait, which they did, and I think that's something we should all be grateful for. Why is the United States as a moral leader in the world, given that he's I was asked this exact same question by your colleague Andrew in the back, and I think, again, the insinuation by anyone in this room that Iran somehow has the moral high ground over the United States of America is insulting, considering the atrocities that they have considering the atrocities that they have committed against our people and our military over the past five decades. John, go ahead.

B (80:18)

Thanks a lot.

C (80:19)

Caroline, two questions for you. One has to do with a statement, a joint statement put out this morning by some of America's European allies, our NATO allies.

B (80:28)

And in that joint statement, they said

C (80:30)

regarding the Strait of Hormuz, our governments

A (80:32)

will contribute to ensuring republic freedom of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz.

B (80:38)

What's the administration's reaction to that joint statement? Does that smooth things over when the president meets with NATO Secretary General a

C (80:45)

little bit later this afternoon?

D (80:47)

Ms. I have a direct quote from the president of the United States on NATO, and I will share it with all of you. They were tested and they failed. And I would add, it's quite sad that NATO turned their backs on the American people over the course of the last six weeks when it's the American people who have been in funding their defense. As you know, President Trump will be meeting with Secretary Ruta in a couple of hours here at the White House, and I know he looks forward to having a very frank and candid conversation with him.

C (81:11)

And then secondly, in regards to this conflict, 38 days, as you pointed out,

B (81:16)

President Trump has said that there's been regime change. Has that regime change led to more freedoms for the Iranian people?

D (81:25)

I think that's a a question that's being asked a little bit too early, Jon, and we hope that is the case, but it's something that has yet to be seen.

B (81:35)

Caroline, on this scar of polling by

A (81:37)

the Iranians in the Strait of Hormuz, I've heard you talk about a number

B (81:41)

of red lines that the president has in this negotiation, but I haven't heard

A (81:44)

you say that Iranian tolling in the

B (81:46)

Strait of Hormuz is a red line. Would it be acceptable to the United States at the end end of all

A (81:52)

this if the Iranians are able to charge poles in the strait of Horus?

D (81:55)

Ms. I think the president was very clear and simplistic in his language last night in his Truth social Post where he said that this cease fire is subject to the free, safe and immediate reopening of the Strait of Hormuz. That's very plain language and it should be taken at face value. Carrie, go ahead. Without limitation, including tolls? Yes. The quick follow up on the attorney why would the US Allow Iran to collect tolls in the Strait of Permits? It's not something that we've opposed for a number of years now. Ms. Again, that's not something we've said that we've definitively accepted. The joint venture is something that was proposed by the president, but he was very clear in his statement last night he wants to see the strait reopened immediately without limitation, and that's something we're going to hold them to. Second question on family and friends in Iran. I myself am Iranian and I've been talking to them through the blackout. One of my family members yesterday said goodbye to me. So what message should we be sending Iranians when they message me saying what should they be doing right now? How should they stay safe because they really don't know what to do? Ms. I think the President's main priority and my main priority as his spokeswoman is to make sure that clear message is messages are sent to the American people, of course, which is my job today with respect to the Iranian people. The president has taken out the imminent threat that was posed by their military to the United States, to our allies in the region, to our forces in the region. And of course, as the president has long said, he hopes that Iran will be a country of peace, of prosperity. And we're moving into this next round of negotiations to hopefully come to an agreement with this new regime that will create long term stability in the Middle East. He has said that they should stay inside of their homes and also take back their country. So how there's a contradiction there. So how do you address that? Again, we're moving into this next round of negotiations with the remnants of the regime and those that we are speaking with now to hopefully reach a place of peace long term for the region and that includes the Iranians people as well. In the blue, go ahead.

B (84:04)

The White House issued posted the statement

D (84:07)

from the Iranian government that passage in the strait will be coordinated with Iran's armed forces. As of today, who controls the Strait of Hormuz? Again, these statements were put out 12 hours ago. We expect that the strait will be opened immediately. As I said earlier, we have seen an uptick in traffic in the strait and it's something that we are monitoring minute by minute, hour by hour as the days go on. Who controls the strait right now? One, on the deportations of Iranian officials on negotiations. Are there still security concerns about Vice President Bance being part of these peace talks? Steve Witkoff, Jared Kushner. And then two, given the ongoing deportation of General Soleimani, does the Trump administration plan to deport more relatives or people in the families of Iranian officials that are in the U.S. Ms. Certainly anyone who is here fraudulently, I understand one of the individuals who their visa was revoked by Secretary Rubio and they were deported by ice. They had a fraudulent asylum claim. That's against the laws of the United States. So anyone who is here illegally or fraudulently is subject to our nation's immigration laws and will be removed from our country. And I know this continues to be a top priority for the State Department, working in conjunction with the Department of Homeland Security with respect to the safety of the vice president. We fully trust the United States Secret Service to do their job to keep the vice president and the president's negotiating team safe. They do a tremendous job and we fully trust them to do that. In the back, go ahead.

B (85:40)

President Iset, Cuba is next.

A (85:42)

What's the message to the American people regarding Cuba and what can Cubans expect

B (85:45)

in relation to this statement?

D (85:47)

Ms. Well, look, I think when President Trump said that and he later clarified after making that statement that he meant the Cuban regime is bound to fall. The country is very weak, they're in a very weak position economically, obviously financially, the Cuban people are fed up with their government, as they should be. And these talks and discussions continue continue to happen at the highest level of our government. I don't have any updates or announcements for you with respect to Cuba policy today. Good to see you. Thank you. Caroline. Secretary Hexa said this morning that US Troops would be sticking around. Can you expound upon that, what we should expect from U.S. troops in theater for the next two weeks and beyond? I would defer you to the Pentagon for any specifics on assets that have been in place in the Middle east, but take the secretary at his word and also the president has reiterated this as well in his own words that we're not going to move anything immediately. Again, this is a two week cease fire where we hope at the end and we expect at the end we'll have a good agreement between the United States and Iran. But in the meantime, we're going to ensure that our military is always at the ready of the commander in chief. I'll take a couple more in the back on NATO. I'll take your question. Go ahead. Thank you. Caroline.

A (87:01)

On NATO, can you tell me, is the United States still considering withdrawing from NATO?

D (87:06)

Is that still a possibility?

C (87:07)

Ms.

D (87:07)

It's something the president has discussed and I think it's something the president will be discussing in a couple of hours with Secretary General Ruta and perhaps you'll hear directly from the President following that meeting later this afternoon. Thank you, everyone.

B (87:19)

All right. Welcome back. A lot of information there. We're told just to, I think hit some of the high water marks here, that the Strait of Hormuz is open for all intents and purposes. The president continues to demand that the strait is open safely, securely and immediately. That was apparently the linchpin to getting the ceasefire two week ceasefire accomplished in the first place. We're told Lebanon is not a part of the current framework, so Israel is free apparently to continue attacking southern Lebanon and Hezbollah there.

C (87:54)

We'll see if Iran agrees.

B (87:55)

We'll see if Iran agrees. We are told that J.D. vance is, in fact going to be participating in the peace negotiations in Islamabad starting on Friday, along with Special envoy Witkoff and Mr. Jared Kushner. I think those were the big points. There was a lot of questions about America's, you know, the moral equivalency because of President Trump's truths. You know, are we any better than Iran? Of course. Course we are. We don't kill 50,000 protesters on the streets when they're protesting the government. So a lot of insanity there. There was a reporter there going like, my auntie from Iran called me and asked if she said goodbye. Like, listen, it's so annoying. The press was very annoying there. She does a great job putting up with their garbage. But, yeah, what were your main takeaways for that?

C (88:43)

I thought the most interesting thing is they did ask about NATO and the president did express, or I should say Levitt. She expressed a lot of disappointment with them. The line was like, they had the chance to step up and they failed. I do wonder if we'll see more discussion of that. It could, of course, be another play by the president. He's always wanted NATO to contribute more generally, step up for their own defense.

B (89:09)

Mark Ruta, the Secretary General of NATO, is meeting with the president to today. So he's at the White House and he's been somebody that understands Trump, that seems to have embraced Trump more fully with all of his quirks and idiosyncrasies. So I happen to think that NATO will continue on. Our involvement in NATO will continue on. But, yeah, this was a big blow to that alliance, I think. And again, we could argue Trump calls it a paper tiger. I think it's yet to be seen if NATO is going to live up to its promise or not.

A (89:47)

For more on many of these stories

C (89:49)

and news you can Trust, go to charliekirk.com.