Loading summary
Transcript124 lines
- [00:00]
John Podhoretz
You know, they say that every day your business is late to AI, you fall two days behind. But how do you keep up? The competition is only moving faster. Fortunately, there's netsuite Next. Netsuite Next is the next huge leap in how business gets done because AI is built into everything you do. It's a unified suite that brings your financials, inventory, commerce, HR and CRM into a single source of truth. Trusted by over 43,000 customers, AI agents work alongside you to solve problems, handle routine work, and anytime you have a question about anything, ask, just like you're having a conversation with a colleague. If I had the kind of business that was big enough to mandate the use of something like NetSuite Next, I would be there in a heartbeat. And for the first time ever, you can try NetSuite next for for free. If your revenues are at least in the seven figures, go to NetSuite AI commentary built for every industry, ready for every boardroom. NetSuite AI commentary. Some die of thirst no way of
- [01:26]
Sam
knowing way it's going Hope for the
- [01:30]
John Podhoretz
best, Expect the worst Hope for the Best welcome to the Commentary Magazine daily Podcast. Today is Tuesday, June 16, 2026. I am John Pod Horiz, the editor of Commentary, recommending that you go to commentary.org especially our hundreds and hundreds of new subscribers who signed up on our now ended deal over the last two weeks. Go to commentary.org to to sample the pleasures and wonders of our July August issue, which is our 250th anniversary tribute to the United States. We also feature the fact that this is the 372nd anniversary of the arrival of Jews to this continent, or this, or, you know, it became the United States of America to New York, to New Amsterdam. I have a piece in there about whether or not this remains the golden land that the Jews of Eastern Europe thought it was when they made their gigantic migration beginning in the 1880s. And I have a conversation between me and Mayor Soloveitchik about the Jewish history of the United States and the place that the United States has held for Jews since those first Jews arrived and began the congregation that Soli Soloveitchik himself now is the rabbi of in New York. We have an amazing piece by the historian Alan Guelzo on how the world reacted to the Declaration of Independence and the creation of the United States and how the world at the time understood that something unprecedented, historic and epic changing had happened that was a model for other countries and other places to follow a story that is not told the way that it ought to because we have turned so inward when we think about, oh, was it good or was it bad? And what about slavery and all of that stuff that we don't understand, that the world of 1776 and the decades that followed knew that something entirely new had happened on this planet that was going to change the planet, which I think is is pretty remarkable. And there's a lot of other wonderful stuff in this issue, too. So that's our July August issue, available at commentary.org and it will be in the mail next week. And we have a very special cover that we've designed for it. So Collector's edition cover. The person who put that issue out, Executive editor Abe Greenwald. Hyabel.
- [04:13]
Seth Mandel
Hi, John.
- [04:15]
John Podhoretz
Senior editor Seth Mandel. Hi, Seth.
- [04:17]
Abe Greenwald
Hi, John.
- [04:18]
John Podhoretz
Washington Free Beacon editor Eliana Johnson. Hi, Eliana.
- [04:22]
Eliana Johnson
Hi, John.
- [04:23]
John Podhoretz
And joining us today, contributing editor, host of the Breaking History podcast, columnist with the Free Press, Eli Lake. Hi, Eli.
- [04:30]
Sam
Hi, John.
- [04:32]
John Podhoretz
I just realized that hi, Eli sounds like. Hi. Alai, which was once seemed to be a rising sport somewhere in the Northeast and then kind of died away. And I just want to point out that the stadium in which they play Chai Alai is called a frondon, which I only know from signs on I95. And so the word fronton, I've been waiting for it to appear in a crossword puzzle and it never has. And so I. Yeah, I think the
- [05:06]
Seth Mandel
New York Times spelling bee does not recognize that word.
- [05:11]
John Podhoretz
You know, that's very annoying. There are many, many words. There's a word today that they didn't recognize that I'm very, very angry about. Anyway, among the many other things to be angry at the New York Times about the spelling bees, word eliminations, just one of many. Okay, we are now in the selling portion of the memorandum of understanding between the United States and Iran, with the lead salesman being J.D. vance, and the complete disappearance from the political scene of Marco Rubio and others who might have been expected to be voices on this matter. And I have to say that even if you were a believer in this deal, I've yet to find anybody who thinks based on what they're hearing, that this is good. It's amazing to me how universal the concern, worry, puzzlement, all that is. But Vance is not doing a good job, even if you like him. I mean, he said this just yesterday. Okay. The coolest thing about the progress we've made over the last few weeks is you're seeing people within the Iranian system, senior leadership, even IRG officials say, you know what? We recognize the way that we've done business with the United States for 47 years as a mistake. Let's try something else. So the other thing, like.
- [07:04]
Sam
Sure, Jan.
- [07:07]
Eliana Johnson
I mean, one other thing he said is it's, it's really great that we're now talking to the Iranians face to face. And I, our friend Andy McCarthy said it's real progress because the Iranians are now lying to our face rather than through intermediaries.
- [07:26]
John Podhoretz
We, this man is, like I say, the lead salesman of this. And if what he's saying is, it's really wonderful because now Iran is kind of, maybe not be our friend, but at least is kind of like a guy we can talk to. And then we have President Trump with the head shaking, jaw dropping, bizarre of the week in saying that Israel has been hitting Hezbollah too hard and that they should leave the suppression of Hezbollah to the Syrians, which introduces a note of insanity that I already think this deal is terrible. I didn't know that we had traveled into cloud cuckoo land in which a barely existent regime sitting in Damascus that has only been in place for, what is it, eight months, nine months, something like that, and does not even have control over its territory, is somehow going to engage militarily with Hezbollah and prevent Hezbollah from being a threat to Israel. What?
- [08:55]
Abe Greenwald
Well, the key, the key is that. That having Syria take care of Hezbollah means having Hezbollah retake Syria.
- [09:04]
Sam
No, not necessarily.
- [09:07]
Abe Greenwald
Okay, why not?
- [09:09]
Sam
I'm not a fan of, I'm not a fan of Alshara, the ex Al Qaeda leader of Syria. And I think that he may not, he may be a reformed jihadist. I have my doubts. But certainly the Turks who support his military and are kind of like his patron, and certainly many people who were part of his ragtag militia army that managed to oust Assad, which was a good thing themselves, are fanatic jihadists. And they go after Druze and Christians and all that. But the Syrian people, specifically the majority Sunni Arabs of Syria, have a memory of Hezbollah being the shock troops in the civil war. Hezbollah has, you know, literally hundreds and thousands of gallons of blood, Syrian blood on their hands because of the role that they played in the civil war of the 2000 teens. So there is a logic of sorts that, you know, the current regime in Syria would have motivation to, you know, finish the job with Hezbollah. Do they have those capabilities? Is that something that they would want to do at this point? And would they? So those are all open questions. So I still think it's insane, but it's not entirely crazy, because if you're
- [10:42]
John Podhoretz
saying that the Syrian regime doesn't like Hezbollah and the Syrian people don't like Hezbollah so that a completely weak, barely non existent country is going to take on an extremely able military proxy of Iran's and suppress it so that Israel doesn't have to do it. That's the cloud cuckoo land thing. Whether they like hate Hezbollah.
- [11:14]
Abe Greenwald
Right? Well, that's the thing. I mean, the premise of this is that Shirah and his army in Syria go into Lebanon to defeat Hezbollah. So the premise of this is a, is a war between Iran and Ahmed Al Shara. And I don't, I don't think Al Sharah has the chops to win that war. That's my point. I don't think he, I don't think, I don't think if you start, if you have him start a war with Iran, he wins that war.
- [11:45]
Seth Mandel
But it's also, I mean, Trump's out there saying Israel needs, should, should have been doing it in a more surgical way. And yeah, I think you think Syria and Shira are gonna do it in a more surgical, humane way. I mean, the whole thing, it's just Trump riffing and he's always been a fan of Sherra for whatever strange Trumpian reasons. I mean, there's nothing, we've already discussed it as in sane terms too long.
- [12:20]
John Podhoretz
We are dancing around the really important part of what Trump said in this Let Hezbollah do it, which is now his turn on Israel. He is now turning on Israel and he is now adopting the rhetoric, the language and the approach of prior administrations when they talk about Israel's efforts at aggressive self defense in the form of going on the attack to force its, to reestablish deterrence against its enemies, particularly Hezbollah, which is firing missiles, rockets into the north of Israel on a daily basis. Has been during the ceasefire. Okay. He said Israel is fighting Hezbollah too long and too many people are being killed. You don't have to knock down an apartment house every time you're looking for somebody. There are a lot of people in those apartment houses and they're not all Hezbollah. I did not like that. I let them know. I didn't like them striking Hezbollah and Beirut. It was too much. If Israel can't do the job without killing everyone else, he'll do the job. Syria will do the job. Bibi has to be more responsible with respect to Lebanon. This is a disgusting thing to say. And I'm saying openly disgusting. Israel is not engaged with Hezbollah. Hezbollah is engaged with Israel. Israel's efforts against Hezbollah are purely defensive and he Love. He liked it perfectly fine when they blew up half of the neighborhood in Beirut. When? You know, back in September, that was fine with him. Now it's not fine with him because he's trying to get himself the hell out of this situation. And he's turning on Israel, saying, just as Biden said about Gaza and just as Condi Rice said about Israel's Lebanese incursion in 2006, that they're going too much and they've gone too far and they're being indiscriminate, and Israel is the least indiscriminate military on earth.
- [14:17]
Sam
Earth.
- [14:19]
John Podhoretz
I mean, the degree to which this is not an indiscriminate military and that everybody in Daesh in Beirut understands perfectly well that they're living in the crosshairs of a potential Israeli strike and have been given notice about this for almost a year based on what Israel has been up to. Not just blowing up an apartment building because there might be somebody there. Shame on him.
- [14:44]
Seth Mandel
Like what?
- [14:45]
John Podhoretz
I understand he wants out, and I understand for some reason he's buying the line that Iran has been selling him, that the only way to get out of this, according to them, is for Israel to stop its operations in Lebanon to save its proxy from the justifiable efforts that Israel is making to quiet its northern border down.
- [15:09]
Sam
Okay, John, you're right. Okay, I'm agreeing with you. It's disgusting. This is the price of having an inconstant president who flails from one position and doesn't know anything and has no north start. Okay, all true. So I'm agreeing. But I think there needs to be a kind of understanding that we really should talk about. And it applies to both the Iran war, it applies to the Gaza war, and it applies to the Lebanon war. Israel has taken out the leadership of Hamas and Hezbollah and Iran. They have delivered enormous damage. And yet these jihadist dirtbags have managed to reconstitute themselves more quickly than I think anybody, including the Israelis, could have imagined. And I'm not, you know, I'm not against war. You know, everybody always makes fun of me for being a hawk and everything like that. Okay, fine. But there needs to be some sort of understanding that maybe that strategy there has to be modified. And I don't mean that that means that we should try negotiations or being friends or, you know, love bombs. I'm not talking about that. I'm saying that there has to be a new understanding in some ways that perhaps the way to get rid of Hezbollah was something that was tried two months ago, a month ago, when we started to see the beginnings of something with the Lebanese leaders themselves saying Hezbollah had to be expelled. There was an effort to. They expelled the Iranian ambassador, who was the IRGC commander, and they never ended up actually following through. There were things that America could have done that we didn't do, in part because the guy apparently in charge of the policy there is this Tom Barak guy who's terrible. But we could have said, listen, you need to fire the chief of staff of the Lebanese army. He's basically Hezbollah guy. You need to replace it with somebody who is willing to fight. We will support you. Israel will support you. We will coordinate with you. That might have been a strategy that could have worked because you would have had not just the kind of political legitimacy that you would need in order to pull off these kinds of operations, but you might have been able to sort of reach out to even the Lebanese Shia population that understood that Hezbollah was going to bring nothing but misery to their communities, even though they purported to sort of represent them. Ditto for Gaza. There were plenty of Gazans, even though they didn't like Israel. I'm not arguing, like, there's gonna be a Palestinian. Thomas Jefferson. That's not my point. I'm just saying that there were, and we saw this at a certain point in the Gaza war, actual brave Gazans who would go out in the streets and tell anyone with a camera, we want Hamas to leave. This is not working for us. Ditto for Iran. We saw the country in an uprising at the end of 2025. And yes, the Iranians killed maybe 45,000, according to Trump, in a terrible massacre. But we need to have a strategy that, in some ways, both takes on these adversaries from below and above, from the air with the airstrikes, but also with. With coordination with some of the people who have to live under these regimes. And Israel hasn't done it. America hasn't really done this. And I think that we have to just sort of think, all right, well, this strategy of taking out leadership and having these stunning, like, battlefield successes has not purchased strategic success. What is the missing component? Political legitimacy. Is that possible yet? But we need to rethink entirely. And that when you look at it like that, that's why even having these negotiations, even having a memorandum of understanding, having any diplomacy right now with the Iranian regime is the first error. That's the first mistake. The first blunder is that we shouldn't be talking to them. We should be having a very clear strategy that we see an endpoint where Iran has returned to the Iranian people, Lebanon is returned to the Lebanese people, and Gaza is returned to the Palestinian people, and that these are illegitimate organizations and that we ultimately will need a partnership with the people who have to live under these thugs and not just think that we can handle it with our incredible air superiority.
- [20:04]
John Podhoretz
You know, when I go out and people who are listeners to the podcast see me on the street, they're always asking me, is that quince is what you're wearing quince? And the answer is yes, it's usually quince. And why I keep coming back to Quince is because they focus on high quality essentials that feel and look amazing. Think breathable linen and soft organic cotton, particularly for summer. Well made basics but without the luxury markup. It's that rare balance where everything feels elevated but still effortless. Quince European linen pants and shirts. Perfect warm weather upgrade to add to your rotation starting at just $34. Their tees are soft and easy to wear and their lightweight cotton sweaters are perfect for cooler summer nights. Elevate your summer wardrobe. Go to quint.com commentary for free shipping on your order and 365 day returns. Now available in Canada too. That's Q U Y N C for free shipping and 365 day returns. Quince.com commentary. My daughter graduated from college this weekend and interestingly, several of the conversations I had with the parents of other graduating seniors was was it really true what I've said about Brooklyn Bedding on the Commentary podcast that these are the most comfortable mattresses that you've ever experienced? And I said, well, you don't have to take my word for it. And I pointed to yet another parent who was there whose daughter is a friend of my daughter's who came to our house and slept on a Brooklyn Bedding mattress and told her parents that it was the most comfortable mattress that she has ever slept on. So I don't know what more I can say other than to give you the advice of going to BrooklynBedding.com and using my promo code commentary at checkout to get 30% off site wide. This offer is not available anywhere else. That's BrooklynBetting.com and promo code COMMENTARY for 30% off site wide. Support our show and let them know we sent you after checkout. I'm talking about an entire parent body all excited about Brooklyn Betting and you can be one of Those people too. BrooklynBetting.com promo code COMMENTARY. I think that's a brilliant analysis. It misses one key element which is what do Hamas, Hezbollah, and Iran have in common? They're all run by the irgc, or they were all run by the irgc. Therefore, you're saying there could be alliances inside these countries to create the conditions for political revolt and all of that. None of this is possible. No real change is possible because we're not getting rid of the Iranian regime. So Trump doesn't like regime change, and we didn't have a war, but it's
- [23:09]
Sam
part of the same. No, I know.
- [23:10]
John Podhoretz
I know you.
- [23:11]
Sam
Yeah, yes, of course. Start with Iran. I mean, I've been saying this for 25 years.
- [23:16]
John Podhoretz
Encouraging. Right, I know, but there's no sense in encouraging the idea of a political grassroots groundswell inside these three areas that we're talking about. If they're going to be crushed because we and the Israelis aren't in a position to germinate, to cultivate, to allow the garden to grow from which this new tree of peace can emerge. And to be fair to Israel for just a second, in terms of Iran, maybe it was ridiculous. We don't know. We don't know what everything was going on. But Israel did apparently have a regime change strategy that the Trump administration rejected. It said, we can go into Iran and do X, Y and Z at the same time. We have a political idea, a political internal idea of how we can make sure that once we decapitate the regime inside Iran, it's toppled by the people. And we, and we in the United States did not take them up on it. And now that's why we get back to Trump and Israel. Trump is doing what American presidents do when there are complicated problems in the Middle east involving Arab countries and this Persian country and everything like that, which is that at some point they go, ugh, these 10 million people sitting there, you know, in this piece of land the size of Rhode island, you know, rid me of this meddlesome priest. Like I, you know, I got all these other places I gotta worry about. They've got oil. Da, da, da, da, da. Stop doing what you're doing. You know what? You know what? You stink anyway. You're indiscriminate. You're blowing up people in apartment buildings and all of that. And it's like, you know, the one thing that Trump was doing that seemed revolutionary in 2025 and 2026 was rejecting that American framework. That has been the American framework, really, since 1973. I mean, maybe 1982. Let's say that in the end, Israel has to unilaterally give up on its efforts to protect itself for the greater good of its alliance with the United States and the west. And Trump. It looked like Trump had moved beyond that and was changing the terms of the discussion. And now he has snapped back. And, you know, this is only Tuesday, and the agreement is Friday, and Israel is being hammered by Hezbollah as we speak and seems to have stood down a little bit here. But if he keeps on like this, who knows what he'll say by Friday.
- [26:31]
Sam
I mean, it's disgusting. And you're right, this turn from Trump is perilous. But I almost think that we need to think a little bit longer term. Right now, Trump is doing what he's gonna do, and it's bad. But I would put out that because you're right, it all starts with Iran and the irgc. And the IRGC that runs the state of Iran and the proxy networks. If I'm Pierre Omidyar or I'm one of these Iranian Silicon Valley tech billionaires, here's your project. Instead of funding the Bulwark and the Intercept and dabbling like a dilettante in American media, why don't you organize for real the Iranian diaspora, which hates this regime and present so that when the. When the opportunity arises again, there is something that is a kind of alternative in waiting to really be there for a run. Now, Reza Pahlavi, the exiled crown prince, has tried to do that. He has failed. It's notable that Trump never respected him and never really gave him a chance. I'm not here. Let's not adjudicate that today. But this is something where there, I think, are a number of not just Iranian Americans, Iranians all over the world and inside of Iran that with real money behind it, that is not interested in, like, lobbying the US Government for a particular policy, but creating things like strike funds, pursuing the technology to turn the Internet back on when there's an Internet blackout and raising awareness in countries and saying, hey, you're bleeding hearts when it comes to Gaza. You're bleeding hearts when it comes to the girls school on a military base in Iran. Well, what about all of the horrors that are laid at the feet of this regime? And to do that and to do it effectively and to be a kind of create the organization that will be in place so that when we are at another decision point, because there will be another war, that this will be a viable option, because that was missing this time around. So this is an opportunity for the Iranian diaspora. I think it's something that American Jewish philanthropists should see if they can help. I think it's something that Israeli intelligence, American intelligence, should try to continue to try to do. But that has to be the focus at this point, because there is no way out but through. And what Trump is doing is guaranteeing that there will be another war. It'll be just as bad, we will have lost ground. But this is not sustainable. And he can paper it over and J.D. vance can say all kinds of things. I think J.D. vance sounds ridiculous. I think the Iranians are gonna be delighted to humiliate him, and he deserves it for saying things like what he's been saying. But that only gets us so far. We have to have this big picture in mind. And unfortunately, there's a lot of work to do. So that's where I'm at.
- [29:36]
Seth Mandel
Eli, I'm not as certain as you are that there will be another war. To my mind, I mean, Iran will certainly give us all the provocation needed for one. But to my mind, after going through this and having it come to this pathetic end that no one is a fan of, I don't see how there's going to be another war anytime soon involving the union.
- [30:04]
Sam
No, no, the Iranians will make sure there's another war. They'll do something.
- [30:07]
John Podhoretz
No, I'm sure. I, I think they'll be.
- [30:09]
Sam
The Iranians will blow.
- [30:10]
John Podhoretz
It's not going to be our war. It's going to be Israel versus Iran.
- [30:13]
Seth Mandel
That's a different story.
- [30:14]
John Podhoretz
Look at it this way. No, look at it this way. Here's one. Here's one. Machiavellian or long term. This is not a strategy. It's not a political strategy and all that, but Iran is way weaker than it was. They may have re. Helped reconstitute Hezbollah, whatever. Hezbollah. It's not even reconstitution of Hezbollah. Hezbollah has this missile cache. It's built up literally over 25 years. So there are hundreds of thousands of missiles that it had. It's not that it's built them up. It's that the decapitation of the leadership didn't end up destroying the organization. But they have this stuff we.
- [30:54]
Abe Greenwald
Right after, after 2006, after the, you know, the Mid 2 Watts War, they moved everything underground.
- [31:02]
John Podhoretz
Right.
- [31:02]
Abe Greenwald
And so it just became something you couldn't tap out from the air.
- [31:05]
John Podhoretz
Right. So a lot of damages have been done to Iran. The nuclear program has been set back. I mean, that's on it. That's. That's inarguable. We don't know if anybody can. They can actually reach or retrieve any fissionable material, let alone start Reconstituting a serious missile product engagement purchasing program.
- [31:27]
Sam
They're gonna.
- [31:28]
John Podhoretz
They're gonna be $500 billion in the hole as a result of this war. And Israel will now have time to build on what it's learned over the last year about how to fight Iran. One of the things that's gone on is they've had three major military confrontations with Iran in a year. They've been wildly successful. They have honed and figured out how to refuel in the air, do all this stuff that was not ready for them. They're also in a position where their air defenses, and this is really important, are probably going to start getting a lot cheaper because they have a next generation version of the Iron Dome, which will be able to hit much more accurately, not just with lasers and not just, you know, rockets from the ground, but ballistic missiles from the air, and apparently at an unbelievably low cost. So they will have established deterrence, defensive deterrence, with this new system. And now then the question will be, will they have the offensive capability to do what they have to do if Iran really does start going? Because as I think Abe says, we're done with. We are done. We're not going anywhere near that country for another generation. If that.
- [32:59]
Sam
Can I just.
- [33:00]
John Podhoretz
Trump can't do it. No one's doing it. Please.
- [33:02]
Sam
I just want to say something, and I think it's very, very important. Israel is a defense tech leader along with Ukraine right now. And I hope that the Israelis, once they get this new, cheaper missile defense technology, which is something that every nation in the world will want a piece of and will want to emulate, that they will make it extremely clear that, yes, missile defense for Somaliland, missile defense for, of course, America, because we have that. Missile defense for the United Arab Emirates, France, go screw yourself. Germany, all these European countries that wanted to recognize a Palestinian state. Good luck to you. Good luck to you. No Israeli tech for you. You want to play that game? We're gonna play that game. You want to appease your new Muslim population. That is not assimilating. That is lunatic. You want to appease your bored, dilettante leftist graduate students? You want to appease the mobile? Go ahead, you can do it. But guess what? When the missiles come raining down on you, there will be no Israeli defense technology to protect you. That's the rules. You know, decisions, there are consequences, and that's the consequence. Israel should start making it very clear. There was a story, by the way, that the French, like air show or whatever it was they had to cover up everything and they had to make sure they only had this and all these special rules for Israel, go, screw you. We're not even gonna participate. France doesn't make anything we want anyway, so screw it. Screw you, France. That's where I'm at. All right, there you go.
- [34:45]
Abe Greenwald
And Lebanon is France's fault too.
- [34:48]
Sam
Yeah, Lebanon is also France's fault.
- [34:50]
Abe Greenwald
Right.
- [34:50]
Sam
But we should give it to. If the Lebanese, like, okay, go down. I mean, I don't know. We gave up on this great initiative, but if we can get Lebanese leaders that don't get assassinated or forced to leave the country as a result of this appeasement that Trump is doing now, then that would be another thing where it's like where you could say, we're gonna help the Lebanese government because they're in the fight with us. And that's what Israel should say. It's like, yeah, we're gonna share our new wizardry with countries that actually are our allies and help us. And countries that try to screw us are not getting anything. And you can live with that.
- [35:29]
John Podhoretz
Can I give you one proviso? Because you just pointed out what are the two countries that have created innovative defensive posture structure strategies and are teaching the world something new about how to conduct war in the 21st century. Israel and Ukraine. Those countries, those European countries you're talking about are in very good odor with Ukraine. And so if they need defensive technology and they can't get it from Israel, they will at the very least be able to avail themselves of Ukrainian know how to if that's something that they want. And deservingly so in that sense doesn't
- [36:06]
Sam
have this missile defense stuff. That's the thing, right?
- [36:08]
John Podhoretz
True. Okay.
- [36:09]
Sam
Israel has a gold mine there.
- [36:18]
John Podhoretz
Eliana, a friend of mine last night referred to what is going on as the jdpoa. That's our deal. Jdpoa. Jd, Vance poa. Pos. But poa. So the JDPOA means that in this bizarre way, suddenly the entire ground of Trump world has shifted from the it appeared this kind of he loves Rubio and is sick of Vance to Vance as his boy again. And Rubio is nowhere to be seen. How do you.
- [37:02]
Eliana Johnson
I think that's the wrong way to think about it. I think this deal is very much Trump driven. As we know there's disagreement within the administration. We know where those lines fall. But I haven't seen any indication that Trump is resentful at those who counseled him to get into this, except for he's resentful that Israel is continuing to defend itself. However, I do think it's significant, and this is where the JD Vance bit comes in, that he is the one out there selling this peace deal and that we actually haven't seen Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, or any other administration officials out there selling the deal. And he's out there selling it hard and not, I think, particularly convincingly. I think the choice of Vance to sell the deal is one, because he believes in it, but two, it's also a signal to the fiercest opponents of the war in the MAGA movement who are on friendly terms with the Vice President, the Tucker Carlson's of the world, the Megyn Kelly's of the world, the Candace Owens of the world, that we're bringing this thing to a close here. I am announcing it. And actually Vance today is on Megyn Kelly's show, which I think is noteworthy in that she was calling Trump a sexual predator last week. But he's out there trying to make,
- [38:44]
John Podhoretz
well, he has a book to sell. He has a book to sell, making
- [38:46]
Eliana Johnson
peace with these people. So I think it's significant in that way rather than Trump hates Rubio and loves Vance.
- [38:54]
Abe Greenwald
Now, now I'm, I'm wondering, Eliano, does it look to you like my first impression was that Vance was his, his sales strategy is very heavily focused on Partizan MAGA outposts that look like the places he wants to be able to consolidate support for his own run for the presidency. I mean, is that, is that, is that unfair? Is that like how it doesn't feel like he's out there?
- [39:28]
Eliana Johnson
Yeah, they are talking to everyone. They are talking to the mainstream. He was on CNN yesterday talking to Jake Tapper. They are briefing Politico Playbook and the New York Times. And Trump's on the phone with David Sanger. And he's on the phone, he reached the President, reached out to the New York Times. But of course, just in the same way that Democratic administrations brief Midas touch, Vance is going to be briefing Tucker Carlson and the right wing nutcases because he wants to bring them along on this. They are obviously in sell mode. But I think the thing that's significant about this is what the hell are they selling? If we had a deal that was a good deal, they would show the deal. And the thing I was really struck by is the White House yesterday sent around talking points. It's like they're giving people talking points and want people to use the talking points when the people haven't even seen the deal yet. That is like, preposterous.
- [40:40]
John Podhoretz
Well, it's like it's the Nancy Pelosi Obamacare rule, right? We'll know it's in. You know, you'll know what's in the bill after you vote for it. Then we'll tell you. Vote for the bill. And we deemed it passed. And now you'll find out what's in it. Congratulations.
- [40:56]
Abe Greenwald
Someone said to me on Twitter, naasevenishma,
- [40:59]
Eliana Johnson
I think it's worth.
- [41:00]
John Podhoretz
You gotta. I'm sorry.
- [41:02]
Abe Greenwald
As the Jews. As the Jews said when they, when they were offered to receive the. The Torah, that was. They said, NA7. We will do and we will hear. Yes, we trust in God. Our faith is and. And is so strong that we. If this is what God is offering us, we should take the deal and we'll find out, you know, all the details. We'll get to that later.
- [41:24]
Sam
It's more incompetent than that.
- [41:25]
Eliana Johnson
MOU was good. They'd release it and then let people analyze it and then argue for it on the merits. And they'd provide talking points that, from their event, you know, about what is good about it from their vantage point. But that's not what they're doing. And in fact, the talking. The points we've heard the vice president made are. It's cool that we're talking to them face to face. It's cool that they've decided not to be the terrorist monsters that they've been for the last 47 years. I'm not sure what evidence there is for that claim and that the money, the sanctions relief and the money that they're going to get in this $300 billion fund is not American taxpayer dollars. And, you know, to me, I'm pretty sure to you guys.
- [42:18]
Sam
What else does he say?
- [42:19]
Eliana Johnson
Compelling points.
- [42:21]
Sam
What else does he say? He says critics like us are so irresponsible because they're criticizing. They haven't even seen the agreement yet. And I'm like, well, you could publish the deal and then we would all see it, and then you could solve that problem. So that's one of those, like, lunatic kind of moves that, you know, I guess sounded good to Vance. The second thing is, can I just
- [42:49]
John Podhoretz
take something about that?
- [42:51]
Seth Mandel
That criticism is driving me crazy. They're saying, oh, you're criticizing a deal you haven't even seen, for one. Why haven't we seen it? As Eliana points out, if it were any good, we would have seen it. What Vance has said about it already gives us a hint that it's terrible. Three, rather, we shouldn't be negotiating with the Iranians at all, because whatever it says, they're gonna lie about. And finally, if we are negotiating, it means the US Is compromising. And there is nothing about Donald Trump's initial red lines here that justify compromise. If he's compromising on any of those, it's bad.
- [43:43]
Sam
By the way, why the smart move for? Because they're going to listen. They're already preparing it. Barack Obama on Sunday already said this. It sounds like our deal, the JCPOA that we did, was even better. And I've seen that. Well, actually, that's not really fair because Obama legalized a nuclear program and then negotiated a deal where the Iranians agreed not to use their nuclear program to make bombs, whereas Trump largely destroyed the nuclear program along with Israel. And so we're talking about apples and oranges here. So a nuclear agreement has different meanings. After most of the program is rubble, and we should not lose that. Now, Trump should be touting that about how this war removed a major threat. Before the war, Iran could have had enough highly enriched uranium for 11 warheads or whatever it was, and they were very, very close to the breakout time, and now they're years away or whatever he would want to say. That's an argument that happens to be true and it is all justification for the war, which a lot of people are asking themselves right now why we did. They're not making that argument. That, to me, is amazing. Why are they not making that argument? Because they don't want to offend these terrorists.
- [45:20]
John Podhoretz
It's worse than that.
- [45:22]
Sam
Yeah, it is.
- [45:23]
John Podhoretz
Let me read you another quote from Trump this morning. Quote, the current Iranian leadership are very rational people. They are nice to deal with. They are strong and smart people. They are not radicalized and they are looking to help their country. Now, the last person I ever thought in my days on this earth that Donald Trump would evoke, or the last two people that I would not have expected Trump to evoke, were Jimmy Carter and Jesse Jackson. Jimmy Carter and Jesse Jackson. Jimmy Carter out of power would go around Jackson, too, trying to negotiate for hostage releases and stuff like that. And they would flatter the world's most evil people. Talk about how pretty, beautiful their wives were, what gracious hosts they were, how wonderful they were. Trump is now saying Bibi is indiscriminately murdering Lebanese. But the Iranians are nice and they only want to help their country.
- [46:41]
Eliana Johnson
The people who just tried to shoot down and kill two of our pilots last week.
- [46:46]
John Podhoretz
Yeah. And of Course. Who tried to assassinate him.
- [46:52]
Sam
Yeah.
- [46:53]
John Podhoretz
Tried to assassinate John Bolton. Tried to.
- [46:56]
Sam
What's going on?
- [46:57]
John Podhoretz
I'm telling you what's going on. What's going on is he. Something happened and he decided that he went the wrong way and he is ratcheting himself in the other direction. And it's almost as though when he was without restraint in the rhetoric that he was using, the militaristic rhetoric he was using, I only want unconditional surrender. I'm gonna bomb your civilization. Da da da da da. Once he turns tail, suddenly Iran's nice gutter is brave. Another thing that he said today, and you will always be my friend and you were so brave and so wonderful in these talks. And Israel is the bad guy, which is where he's going like this, this, this is the opening this weekend. He went from Bibi is, you know, what the f are you doing? And you're without judgment. And now it's, you're blowing up apartment buildings in Beirut. And the Iranians are really nice. There's so many.
- [48:06]
Abe Greenwald
And I just want to say something about Qatar, by the way, in all this. Qatar's role. Qatar's energy exports are almost entirely through liquefied natural gas. Liquefied natural gas has to be shipped through actually on ships. Right. It can't go. If they build railroads around, they build overland routes. They can't, they can't do it that way. They can't do it via pipelines. Qatar has built this massive fleet of liquefied natural gas carrying ships and they need to go through the Strait. So Qatar is the one that really has the biggest interest here. If, if Qatar, if, if this, if the strait doesn't reopen, Qatar fails first, essentially. And so the idea of having them at the table, I understand, yes, they have interests, but everybody should know that Qatar's interests are wholly its own. It is not, it does. It is not representative of what the Saudis want or can do out of this. And the changes that are made in the future will not come from Qatar. Qatar is entirely reliant on Iran for its exports.
- [49:15]
Sam
Qatar has been, and that's important because there is a potential here, although I am not holding my breath because the Democrats are where they are right now. But if the Democrats win the midterms, which is almost looks like a lock, they're going to do, and they start impeachment, the low hanging fruit is corruption and Qatar is deeply in the middle of it. So if you wanted to explain how it was possible that Trump has done a 180 and didn't pursue a more patient program where he was trying to open up sea lanes in the Strait of Hormuz while coming up with alternative ways to get Asia its energy and other things. Well, it's sitting right there for you. And an ambitious Democrat who, you know, really wanted to make a name for himself in the House could begin to pursue this in hearings. And at that point, then in a weird way, the Democrats would have an opportunity maybe, although, again, I'm not holding my breath to, you know, maybe pivot away from their own, you know, decades of appeasement when it comes to Iran. And look at maybe the fact that, wait a second, the reason why we are, you know, we, we lost this war and we have such a strategic setback after it looked like we were so close to changing the Middle east is because of corruption, which is going to be, I mean, I would imagine that's the theme of 2027. I mean, that's what's going to happen. So they're, I mean, I'm.
- [50:55]
John Podhoretz
Look, yeah, I mean, that's cuz. It's true.
- [51:01]
Sam
Yeah, it's true.
- [51:02]
John Podhoretz
Why does Trump say I love gutter? Because they're giving him a plane? Because they're bribing his sons. Because they're bribing his friends sons. We know this. We all know this. Everybody knows it. And when that wasn't having an effect on larger scale policy, by which I mean geopolitical, the choices that Trump was making geopolitically, not that you could overlook it because you shouldn't overlook corruption, but it was like they were bribing him and he was doing whatever it was that he wanted to do anyway. And now either the bill has come due or they have talked him into something or something. And you'll never have an actual quid pro quo where there's a piece of paper that says, change your policy here because we need to sue for peace now because this Hormuz thing is really starting to bite. So do something. You're never gonna have that piece of paper, but the logic will be unassailable. And of course, the mistake that the Democrats made in his first term with the first impeachment was that it was a very arguable question that was being thrown at was whether or not he had said something on a phone call that suggested, you know, that was bad.
- [52:32]
Sam
And by the way, also in retrospect, we should say it wasn't unreasonable. The original line was like, you're just wanting to incept an investigation into the virtuous Biden family. Like, they're these. What are you talking about? Actually, turns out Hunter Biden was doing a lot of business in Ukraine, and it could have. You know, there were some things the Ukrainian government could have maybe investigated.
- [52:54]
John Podhoretz
My point is, even there, and remember, Nancy Pelosi didn't want to do that. Impeachment. Because even there, even then, you know, it seemed to me that the logic, if you really wanted to, like, get Trump, was to go after everybody renting hotel rooms at the Trump Hotel, totally. To, you know, to get on his good side. And Jared Kushner opening up, you know, basically getting money from the sovereign fund of Saudi Arabia to do business, even as he's being a negotiator for the president. So. But they didn't go that way. And so I have no confidence that they will go that way this time either, because clearly they have their own mishegos that leads them to go. To make the attack in the wrong spot. But you're right that this is a target of opportunity, because I don't know anybody who doesn't think that this is happening again on the right and on the left. I don't know if he's a lame duck.
- [53:59]
Sam
It might be a target of opportunity for a Republican who was. Who's. Who's thinking ahead. I mean, every poll that I see with JD Vance does not tell me that he is a strong national candidate. He alienates lots of people. I mean, like, you know, like, listen, Trump has defied the rules of political gravity, so I don't know what to make of anything. And polling apparently is useless. But at a certain point, one has to say there is an alternative, maybe to Vance. And I'm not entirely sure that Rubio is going to be that alternative.
- [54:32]
John Podhoretz
I don't think he's going to be that alternative. But my concern, then you do have the question of what you wish for and what you get. I mean, you know, if Trump goes, then J.D. vance is president. It was sort of like the whole thing with Biden getting impeached or Obama. Not that. I mean, Biden getting impeached was like, oh, great, you're gonna impeach Biden and you're gonna have Kamala Harris as president, or Biden's gonna have to resign, you know, and then Kamala Harris will be president. Great. That's really exciting. That sounds like a fantastic fate for the United States to have to undergo. Okay, so we've had our rant for today for 51 minutes. Eliana, you have an editorial coming out today in the Free Beacon about a story that seems to have been somewhat overlooked out of Michigan. These indictments out of Michigan relating to the regents of the University of Michigan and essentially a kind of illegal action against them. Can you.
- [55:42]
Eliana Johnson
Yeah. So last week, the Department of Justice announced indictments out of the Eastern District of Michigan against 820 somethings. Most of them were either recent graduates or students of the University of Michigan, all of whom were deeply involved in the anti Israel, pro Palestine protest movement. And what's described in the indictment that the FBI director Kash Patel described, he described it as a campaign of violent criminal acts is hair raising. And it lays out how after the university shut down the illegal encampment, these students who were affiliated with the Michigan chapter of Students for Justice in Palestine and another similar group, organized a campaign targeting university leaders. It was not just the regent, it was also the president of the school, the provost, the chief investment officer, members of the board of Regents, university police officers, local businesses they perceived as being supportive of Israel and literally anyone they thought supported the state of Israel for vandalism, throwing, breaking their windows and throwing noxious chemicals through there, through the. Through the windows, vandalizing their cars, vandalizing the Jewish Federation of Michigan, leaving threatening letters on their doors. And this played out in 2024 and went beyond that, where the FBI obtained electronic messages exchanged between the students showing how they intimidated a witness to all of this. And in my view, this pulled back the curtain on what the anti Israel slash, pro Palestine movement is really about, because this is not the first time that criminality has been the nucleus or at the center of this movement. We had the storming of Hamilton hall at Columbia, where these rich kids occupied a university building and held janitors hostage. We had the Jew exclusion zone at UCLA where a federal judge had to intervene and hold UCLA accountable. And we had the case at Harvard where graduate students accosted a fellow student walking across campus. And I think that we should actually start thinking about this movement as something more akin to the Weather Underground and the Symbionese Liberation army and BLM in the George Floyd movement as a movement that employs terrorist tactics to silence and intimidate other Americans as opposed to a protest movement, because this is not actually a protest movement. And I think it's noteworthy that in Michigan where this indictment took place, the Democratic Party, one of the eight students indicted, had worked for Michigan Senate candidate Abdul El Sayed's campaign. And the Democratic Party nominated to be a regent, the Dearborn attorney, Amir Makled, who is basically a proxy for these lunatics. Over one of the victims of these attacks, a guy named Jordan Acker, whose law firm car and house were vandalized.
- [59:52]
Abe Greenwald
So the macled represented tentifada protesters who were. Who had set up an encampment in Michigan's main square area was a huge fire hazard. They had all sorts of problems. And when the police came to move them out, several of them got in the cops ways and you know, pushed back and all that stuff. And the group of them were arrested and charged for that. And Amir Mahled was their attorney. And that was the case where Dana Nestle, who is the, the attorney general of Michigan, she's Jewish. And Rashida Tlaib and others started planting this story that Nestle could not be trusted to prosecute this because of her bias because she was obviously biased against Palestinians. And it was a very clear reference to her being Jewish. And she eventually did have to drop the charges because the public pressure and the campaign against her became so intense. And Amir Makled was the attorney on the other side who then was celebrating her being bullied off the case because she's Jewish. And I want to make one other point, by the way, about this that I think is, is. Is representative. The, the, the indictments, the, the complaint that Eliana refers to a couple of the members throughout the indictment are. Their conversations are included in the complaint. And in one of the conversations, one says to the other that their, their actions that they were planning and doing could quote, hit RICO territory very quickly, end quote. In other words, they were telling each other what we are doing amounts to federal criminal conspiracy. And what were they indicted on charges of federal criminal conspiracy? They were literally. When we say that they knew what they were doing, that's not a figure of speech. They are quoted in conversations telling each other that they knew exactly what they were doing and the charges they would be open to and the evidence that they would have to avoid leaving on the trail in order to get away with federal criminal conspiracy because they intimidated witness. They knew, they understood that what they were doing was, you know, they were like, we're. We're going to get recode for this unless we're careful. And then they got recode. And it's like, you need to. People need to understand that these activists know. We mean it literally when we say they know exactly what they're doing. They know what they're doing is criminal. They, they know what they're doing is. They know that what they're doing amounts to the charges that they were eventually charged with. So we cannot let anybody say oh, you know, we were indicted for protesting. We were indicted for championing the rights of the Palestinian people. You said you are quoted in your own complaint saying this is federal criminal conspiracy and we have to watch out.
- [62:56]
Eliana Johnson
And in this case, the Democratic Party is a vehicle for these nuts to affect a hostile takeover of. You know, the University of Michigan is like a crown jewel of the university system. So, you know, these previous movements have failed. Weather Underground failed, The SLA failed. If this movement fails, it will not be thanks to the Democratic Party.
- [63:21]
Sam
Well, I. Can I just say I hope that Mike Rogers, who is running for Senate against EL Sayed, has somebody who is clipping some of these scenes from the University of Michigan and saying, this is your Democratic Party. Is this what we want for Michigan?
- [63:37]
John Podhoretz
Well, the primary In Michigan is August 4th. August 4th. So there are, you know, six, seven weeks. The party, if there is a party, which we don't know, is starting to coalesce around Haley Stevens. People are nervous about Abdul El Said's victory. And Michigan. Winning in Michigan is absolutely essential if the Democrats are to draw to the inside straight and take control of the Senate. And it's an incredibly risky thing for.
- [64:20]
Eliana Johnson
Yeah, that would be a pickup for Republicans.
- [64:23]
John Podhoretz
That would be a pickup. And that's basically. That's all she wrote. We talk a lot about Graham Platner. The polling shows that a very close race in Maine. Despite everything that we know about Platner, though, again, we have a long way to go. And Susan Collins, the Republican, historically under polls in Maine and then, you know, like shoots ahead at the end of the game. But you know, that that was true before doesn't mean it will be true now. But I think it is interesting because there does seem to be a sotto voce kind of quiet effort to figure out some way to keep Abdul Al Said from being the nominee. And if he is the nominee in Michigan, despite all of this and despite this effort to say that Haley Stevens would be a better candidate and all of that, the degree of ideological, anti Israel, anti Semitic capture of the party, we will then have it basically regional. It won't be just this, a guy in New Jersey and a guy in Maine. Right. It's gonna be a guy in Michigan. And I don't know what I mean. It is a. It is a contagion. I think we already know that it's a contagion. It can be.
- [65:42]
Eliana Johnson
And I think he's gonna win.
- [65:45]
John Podhoretz
Well, if he's gonna win, then.
- [65:48]
Abe Greenwald
The nomination, you mean?
- [65:50]
John Podhoretz
Yeah, the nomination.
- [65:51]
Abe Greenwald
Yeah. Well, I mean, one of the things you see is that. And this is not scientific, and this is, you know, like saying, well, I haven't seen a lot of yard signs, but I really believe it is significant, which is that you just don't hear about the other candidates anymore. The narrative around this campaign is. Is Abdul El Sayed, by the way, you don't hear the argument.
- [66:10]
John Podhoretz
That is the interesting problem with the negative campaign approach or the approach of, you know, that we all involve it. It's part. Part of what, you know, you write about every day and Eliana publishes about every day, which is, here are the outrages. Look at these. Look at these people. Look at Graham Platner. Look at Adam Hawaii. Look at Abdul El Sayed. And that doesn't hurt them. Like in previous generations, you made it clear that a candidate was an extremist who held views way outside the mainstream. And that was a good approach to
- [66:51]
Eliana Johnson
take
- [66:54]
John Podhoretz
for in a primary to get people to get. To capture the center. And there is no center anymore.
- [67:05]
Sam
Can I just say something? It's interesting to me because I'm engaged in writing my next season of Breaking History right now. But there was a time in American politics when it was kind of like conventional wisdom that dishonorable Republican strategists would paint Democrats as socialists or jihadists, and that this was really unfair. And there was that famous scene in 2008 where one of John McCain's supporters referred to Barack Hussein Obama and saying, he's an Arab. And John McCain made it very clear, no, that's not what we do. You weren't allowed on the campaign. All this kind of thing where, you know, honorable Republicans wouldn't. Wouldn't engage in this kind of demagoguery. And it's just within less than a generation, it's like, I'm not. It's not demagoguery to say that Al Said is sympathetic to Hezbollah and other kind of terrorist organizations that want to just kill Americans. It's not. This guy in New Jersey was a character witness for the blind sheik. So if I say you're a terrorist sympathizer, that is not like, you know, like Lee Atwater making a Willie Horton ad or something. I'm not like there's anything that was overdone at the time anyway. But my point is that that's not, you know, dirty pool. That's just the truth. Those are the facts. And it's amazing to me that it may not work when you have the genuine article. I mean, I hope this is all wrong and like that, you know, Mike Rogers, if he goes up against Said, will win by five or six points or something. And people can say, well, we won't do that again.
- [68:57]
John Podhoretz
Look, it is a state that Trump won. So it's important to note that Rogers is a strong candidate. He's a smart guy, he has an impressive record, and he is a rational conservative candidate in a state that went for Trump. So, you know, this is not, you know, it's a risk for Maine for Michigan to be choosing. I'll say it right.
- [69:26]
Seth Mandel
Can I say something on Eli's point? Because it's so dispiriting? I think it started with the squad. It started with Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib. They sort of bridged the gap between those on the left that people on the right could perhaps unfairly demagogue about. And the El Saids here at the end of the line, the championing of the squad, despite their obvious anti Israel, anti Semitic extremism, anti American, thoroughly anti American, paved the way for that shift.
- [70:21]
John Podhoretz
And remember, Nancy Pelosi did want. When Rashida Tlaib got into the. Was it Rashida Tlaib or Ilhan Omar?
- [70:30]
Eliana Johnson
It was Ilhan Omar.
- [70:31]
John Podhoretz
Ilhan Omar got into the House and said something anti Semitic. Nancy Pelosi wanted to censure her. And they went into caucus, the Democratic caucus, and the Democratic caucus rebelled against
- [70:44]
Sam
the Congressional Black Caucus in particular. Rebelled, yeah.
- [70:48]
John Podhoretz
But the entire Democratic caucus said to Nancy Pelosi, we're not doing this. We're not gonna hand the Republicans a victory, whatever reason they had. And at that moment, the party was captured by the squad. That was the moment at which the effort to say, we are establishing a boundary. You can't go on and say, you know, you're only doing this for Jewish money. Like, sorry, no. And the members of the members of the majority party in the House said, we're not gonna punish her for saying this. But, you know, and they put out a statement condemning anti Semitism and Islamophobia. And at that moment, they owned the Democratic Party.
- [71:31]
Seth Mandel
But, you know, times were different enough that when Ilhan Omar said, it's all about the Benjamins or Israel hypnotizes the world, not to say it's evil, whatever it was that she was called out on that she did say, you know, I'm sorry, I didn't realize that my words evoked certain painful tropes for Jewish people on a. That would never happen today. You know, today you say it's all about the Benjamins. You say it through a megaphone day. And night. And you wouldn't dream of apologizing.
- [72:12]
John Podhoretz
Yeah.
- [72:12]
Abe Greenwald
No. You. Only today to get in trouble, you have to be that candidate who said she wanted to set up camps, put Zionists in campsites.
- [72:20]
John Podhoretz
Yeah, yeah, that. That goes too far. Eli Lake, thank you so much for joining us, as ever. And for. Eliana's already dropped off here, but. So for Eliana, Seth and Abe, I'm John. Pod Horitz. Keep the camel burning,
- [72:47]
Sam
Sam.