Allies are turning as America surrenders

Summary

The David Pakman Show – Allies Are Turning as America Surrenders

Date: June 18, 2026
Host: David Pakman
Notable Guests: Sarah Matthews (former Deputy White House Press Secretary), clip reactions from Trey Gowdy (former Republican Congressman), and segments referencing Donald Trump, Marco Rubio, J.D. Vance, and others.

---

Overview of the Episode’s Main Theme

This episode of The David Pakman Show focuses on the global political fallout from President Donald Trump’s much-criticized Iran deal, his perceived cognitive decline, and growing Republican dissent. David Pakman dissects the deal’s details, the emerging Republican unease, Trump's confused public moments at international events, and the broader implications for America’s standing in the world and domestic politics. The episode features a substantive interview with Sarah Matthews on the administration’s messaging, political blame-shifting, and the economic impact of Trump’s foreign policy.

---

Key Discussion Points and Insights

1. Republican Allies Turn on Trump Over the Iran Deal

• Conservative Discontent: Trump's allies, including Fox News, Trey Gowdy, Megyn Kelly, and Mike Pence, are openly critical of the new Iran deal (00:00–07:34).

  • Pakman highlights the rare sight of right-wing media and GOP figures lambasting a sitting Republican president's major international agreement.
  • The critique centers on the perception that Iran, despite “losing the war,” is emerging richer and more empowered, with the US surrendering leverage.

• Substance of Deal: Trey Gowdy questions why Iran receives economic relief and sanctions lifted immediately despite being the losing party (02:51–05:00).

  Quote (Trey Gowdy, 02:51):
  “Iran is a richer country as a result of this MoU and they lost the war. That’s the part I can’t get my head around.”

• Pakman’s Analysis:

  • The host hammers home the irony that Trump, after years of decrying Obama’s nuclear deal as weak “appeasement,” has produced an even softer deal.
  • “If Obama’s deal was appeasement, what are we calling this? It is a major and complete loss. And even Trey Gowdy realizes it.” (07:34)

---

2. Trump’s Cognitive and Performance Issues on the World Stage

• International Summit Embarrassments: Pakman plays extended video clips demonstrating Trump’s confusion and apparent cognitive decline at a G7 summit (10:12–13:00).

  • Trump reportedly wandered in with the South Korean delegation and had to be redirected to his seat.
  • Multiple instances of him forgetting names, losing his train of thought, and needing “English to English” translation from Marco Rubio.

• Audience Reaction: Pakman mocks the defense from MAGA supporters demanding “full context,” concluding the unedited footage makes Trump look even more disoriented.

  Quote (Pakman, 12:02):
  “What was left out from the context that makes Trump look with it and really good… is Trump coming in and believing himself to be part of the South Korean delegation. He doesn’t look like the guy in charge.”

• Comparisons to Biden: Pakman points out the double standard: after years of Republican attacks on Biden’s mental fitness, Trump now displays similar or worse symptoms (12:46–14:00).

---

3. Bizarre and Controversial Public Statements

• The “Shot Your Load” Incident: Trump’s inexplicable offhand comment to a reporter named Steve draws Pakman’s ridicule (19:27–20:12).

  Quote (Trump, 19:27):
  “You shot your load pretty much, Steve, right? Pretty much. But going well.”

  Pakman’s commentary:
  “This guy’s out of his mind. What on earth is he talking about?”

• Normalization of Surrender: Trump suggests if other countries have ballistic missiles, maybe Iran should too (21:05–21:28), a position contrary to years of Republican hawkishness.

• Awkward Press Conferences: Repeated inability to explain or defend the deal, and referencing “down blend” and “up blend” of uranium in a nonsensical manner.

---

4. Delegation and Blame-Shifting Inside the Administration

• Blame Game Tactics:

  • The emerging narrative of blaming J.D. Vance for the deal’s shortcomings.
  • Sarah Matthews (former Deputy WH Press Secretary) explains how Trump always siphons credit but assigns blame elsewhere (36:35–38:39).

  Quote (Matthews, 36:35):
  “The strategy always comes from Trump at the top. If something goes right, then he gets to claim victory. If something goes wrong, it wasn’t his fault and he’ll find someone else to take the fall.”

• Comparison to Previous Administrations:

  • Matthews draws parallels with how Kamala Harris was tasked with the border crisis under Biden, and how VP teams get thrown under the bus (39:34–42:41).

  Quote (Matthews, 39:34):
  “They always give the Vice President something they don’t want to deal with, that they know is a catastrophe.”

---

5. The Iran Deal’s Political and Strategic Implications

• No Enforcement Mechanisms:

  • Instead of written enforcement, Trump threatens vague military retaliation (32:36–33:02).

• Loss of Leverage:

  • The deal’s 60-day negotiation window puts Trump in a bind ahead of the election, ceding leverage to Iran (43:11–43:35).
  • Pakman and Matthews agree Iran knows Trump can’t escalate close to election day without severe political risk.

  Quote (Matthews, 43:35):
  “They have the power, they’re in control… The optics aren’t great for Trump and the Republican Party.”

• Middle East Allies’ Perspective:

  • Pakman disputes claims that Middle Eastern countries support the agreement because of its merits. Instead, their desperate desire to end hostilities drives support (61:08–61:47).

---

6. Economic Consequences and Political Messaging

• Sticker Shock Summer Campaign:

  • Matthews discusses efforts to link gas price rises and inflation directly to Trump’s war with Iran and his tariffs (47:20–50:34).
  • She contrasts “optional” Trump-led disruptions to inflation spikes under Biden, which resulted from unavoidable externalities (COVID, Ukraine war).

  Quote (Matthews, 47:20):
  “This administration is trying to gaslight the American people and tell them that we inherited these prices… that just isn’t the case.”

• Persistence of Higher Costs:

  • Even if the deal ends the war and reopens the Strait of Hormuz, Matthews warns prices will not rebound immediately due to lasting economic disruption (50:34).

---

7. Rubber-Stamp Republicans, Buyer’s Remorse, and Political Implications

• GOP Cowardice:

  • Matthews criticizes congressional Republicans for enabling Trump, only breaking silence after they retire or lose primaries (51:58–54:51).

  Quote (Matthews, 51:58):
  “We only seem to find Republicans find their voice when they’re either retiring, or they lose their primaries… if you’re not pushing back on it or condemning it, then you’re endorsing it.”

• Pakman’s Election Message:

  • Voters are urged to hold their representatives equally accountable for rubber-stamping Trump’s actions.

---

8. Memorable Moments & Notable Quotes

• Trey Gowdy’s Deadpan Critique (02:51, 05:00, 07:00):

  • "I read this MOU 48 hours ago, and I didn’t believe it. I thought somebody was spoofing me..."

• Rubio’s Mortification:

  • Pakman dissects the “look on Marco Rubio’s face” as he stands beside Trump during a press conference, seemingly realizing the political disaster unfolding (64:21–64:37).

• Trump’s Stream-Of-Consciousness and Incontinence Rumors:

  • Segments detail Trump’s incoherent rants and possibly embarrassing bodily incidents at major global events (25:54–27:05, 26:07–26:40).

  Pakman’s dig (27:05):
  “Oil is dropping like it has never dropped before at levels when in numbers… I understand why people are worried that what happened is Trump simply doesn’t understand the deal that he has signed with Iran.”

---

Important Segment Timestamps

• 00:00–07:34: Republican allies publicly question the Iran deal
• 10:12–14:00: Trump’s G7 confusion and cognitive concerns
• 19:27–20:12: The “shot your load” comment and Pakman’s reaction
• 21:05–21:28: Trump rationalizes Iranian missile capability
• 32:36–33:02: No enforcement in the Iran deal; reliance on threats
• 36:35–38:39: Sarah Matthews on blame-shifting and deal-making in Trump’s White House
• 43:09–43:35: Iran’s leverage and electoral timing
• 47:20–50:34: Economic consequences, Sticker Shock Summer explained
• 51:58–54:51: Congressional Republican complicity and buyer's remorse
• 61:08–61:47: Middle Eastern states' support for the deal is a consequence of Trump’s chaos, not its substance
• 64:21–64:37: The look on Marco Rubio’s face amid deal fallout

---

Conclusion and Takeaways

The episode paints a stark picture of a White House—and a Republican Party—in political freefall due to a disastrous foreign policy blunder. Once-confident allies bluntly critique Trump from within his own camp, while international embarrassments and misstatements pile up. David Pakman highlights not just the policy failures, but also the mounting evidence of Trump’s inability to lead effectively—mentally, diplomatically, and politically. Interview insights from Sarah Matthews offer a rare glimpse behind the curtain at the blame games, press strategies, and moral exhaustion inside Trump's administration.

---

For listeners who want to understand the political and real-world consequences of Trump’s Iran policy, the unraveling GOP coalition, and the increasingly surreal state of American leadership, this episode delivers a sharp, critical, and often grimly humorous account.

Transcript

[David Pakman]

Donald Trump's allies are asking questions they never wanted to have to ask. What exactly did the United States get from this Iran deal? It seems like not very much. And we now have even Fox News conservatives openly wondering, why did Iran get so much if they supposedly lost the war? It doesn't make sense. And Trump struggles to explain the terms of this agreement. We're also going to look at the full video of this international summit moment where Donald Trump looks confused. Right wingers said it's out of context. Except when we add context, Trump looks even more disoriented. And then, this is one of the weirdest things I've ever seen. Trump says, I think to a reporter named Steve that Steve shot his load on live television. It's one of the most bizarre clips that I have ever seen. And we will examine a remarkable series of moments where the president struggles to finish sentences, forgets names, needs Marco Rubio, who speaks Spanish to do an English to English translation, and generally just appears disconnected during a chaotic press conference. And speaking of Marco Rubio, wait until you see what a show today, the look on Marco Rubio's face when he realize Trump screwed him. What a show today. Hopefully they allow this one to be published. We were told we would win again if Donald Trump became president. And we look like the losers because on the Iran deal, we are the losers. And Republicans are noticing it. These are the sorts of criticisms which really should make this administration nervous. Because if Ms. Now attacks your deal, fine. If Cory Booker attacks your deal, well, you would expect that. If anti Trump commentators say this is a flaccid, shriveled deal, then fine. But we have former Republican Congressman Trey Gowdy on Fox News going, what exactly did we get here? If Iran lost, why do they get so much stuff? They're asking to wait a second and evaluate this thing. Just so people know, these videos have not been vertically compressed. This is the natural appearance of Trey Gowdy. I'm not saying anything about it one way or the other. Maybe you like the way he looks, maybe he doesn't. But I know when, when he comes on screen, sometimes people write in, they go, david, you're messing with that video. You're compressing it to make his face seem narrow. We are not. Ok, let's take a listen to what Trey Gowdy had to say.

[Trey Gowdy]

The fact that the money would come from the Qataris or from Saudi Arabia and not US is still going to be used for weapons. And I'm pretty sure that the lifting of economic sanctions takes place immediately and I'm pretty sure that the removal of the blockade takes place immediately. So, look, Iran is a richer country as a result of this MoU and they lost the war. That's the part I can't get my head around. They lost and they're coming out of this richer with this little phrase called down blend, which they're just going to wait him out and hope for a president that is focused on something else, and then they're going to upland again. This is never going to change until you remove it all or remove the regime.

[David Pakman]

Listen, Trey Gowdy is not a guy I revere, he's not a guy I even respect. But he's getting to a sort of central core of this entire thing, which is if as Donald Trump says and as J.D. vance say, and if all of them say Iran was defeated, they're weakened, they're isolated, they're completely, totally desperate, why are they ending up better off than they started this war? Which, by the way, the war wasn't started by them, it was started by Trump. And then getting access to hundreds of billions of dollars in reconstruction money, released sanction money. Usually the winning side gets to extract concessions from the loser and usually the loser has to make the concessions. And they go, well, listen, we lost a war. We're not in a position of strength. It seems from the MoU that it's Iran that has all the leverage. Now, what some military analysts are suggesting is that the United States has really depleted our stock of certain types of missiles. It doesn't appear as though we're successfully beating back Iran's drones. Iran has the willingness and the wherewithal to just kind of keep going to. Trump knows he can't do boots on the ground. So there's sort of like a what are you going to do? We're running out of missiles. We're not doing boots on the ground. That gives Iran leverage, leverage they would never have had had Trump not started this war in the first place. Gowdy making it very plain and simple, how are we better off? How is the United States better off today than before Trump started this ill advised war?

[Trey Gowdy]

Well, I'll tell you two things that do not reassure the American people, and that is some international atomic nuclear agency which people have zero confidence in. And the only thing we have less confidence in would be the United Nations. So I saw both of those entities in this MoU. Look, as you know, Senator, I was a country prosecutor. I rely on other people for expertise. I've heard from the President have tremendous respect for him. I'D like to hear from Marco Rubio, and I'd really like to hear from John Lee Ratcliffe on the intelligence of whether or not Iran thinks they got the better of us, because I guarantee we got the best intelligence community in the world. I'd be really interested in what their reaction to this MOU is. It might be, I can't believe we got this because we were losing. I mean, we had them, Sandra. We had an economic stranglehold on that country. So you go back to the status quo ante before the blockade. How are we better off?

[David Pakman]

It's a great question. And I know a lot of people, when they see and hear Trey Gowdy, they go, man, he sounds like Kermit the Frog and he looks like his face was compressed into the thickness of a sheet of paper by a vice. But he's saying things that are accurate. What changes can we identify that now make the United States safer? Trump and Vance are arguing, well, now they will never have a nuclear weapon. I don't know that that's even really in the deal. And, and we had a deal before to prevent them from getting a nuclear weapon. What has really changed that makes them less capable in a tangible manner. Trump goes, I don't even know that it's worth going back and getting the enriched uranium. Also importantly, what changed thanks to this multi month war that was not achieved under a previous agreement, which Donald Trump got us out of. And then finally, here's Trey Gowdy saying, I read the letter. I read the MOU 48 hours ago. I thought it wasn't real. It's so bad, it must. I thought it was fake.

[Trey Gowdy]

Sandra, it's wonderful to see you. I was a little surprised, honestly. We literally had our foot on their throat, militarily, economically. And I read this MOU, if you will, I guess about 48 hours ago, and I didn't believe it. I thought somebody was spoofing me when, when I saw it, because I see what we're giving up. And then I see this word down blend. And I'm not the smartest guy in the world, Sandra, but if you can down blend, then you can up blend. And how long would it take Iran to up blend? Because Donald Trump is going to be gone in January 2029.

[David Pakman]

But Trump spent nearly a decade telling voters the Obama deal was a catastrophic surrender. And he mocked it and he said, it's terrible and Obama lacks strength and all of this stuff. He became president, he withdrew from the Iran nuclear deal. Iran obviously goes back to enriching uranium But Trump says, don't worry, we're going to get something better. And then he bombs in 25 and does the war in 26. And so naturally, people would compare the current proposal to what we had at the beginning and to what Donald Trump himself established as the goal. And, and every time we get another detail, we realize that it's a disaster. If Obama's deal was appeasement, what are we calling this? It is a major and complete loss. And even Trey Gowdy realizes it. And I want to reiterate, over the last couple of days, we've heard from Megyn Kelly skeptical of this deal. On tomorrow's show, we're going to hear from Mike Pence skeptical of this deal. Today we heard from Trey Gowdy skeptical of this deal. This is not, oh, look, the brightest minds realize that this is a scam. No, we don't agree with Megyn Kelly on almost anything, nor Trey Gowdy, nor Mike Pence. It's, this is so bad that even the allies of the president realize they can't pretend that this is good. If Megyn Kelly or Trey Gowdy or Mike Pence were to go, this is phenomenal. The United States is now safer thanks to this deal. Nobody's going to believe that because the deal is surrender signed at Versailles, which is a detail that we'll get get back to. They know that they can't defend this thing because it is completely indefensible. All right, There were a bunch of people who wrote to me, Magaz, saying, david, you dishonest son of a bang and son of a boom. You played a truncated out of context video of Donald Trump to make him seem confused. And if you give us the full context, you realize that Trump is completely aware of what's going on. Well, let's explore that. Let's, let's validate the claim from the angry magazine writing anti Semitic sweet nothings to me. Here is the video I played yesterday of Donald Trump arriving late to a G7 meeting. Everybody's already seated. Trump doesn't seem to know what's going on. And he just looks at people and goes, I'm the boss. This was the clip we played yesterday, which is supposedly out of context.

[Trey Gowdy]

Hello, I'm the boss.

[Donald Trump]

How are you? Good, thank you.

[David Pakman]

I'm the boss. And the mag has wrote it and said, david, you dishonest piece. You've got to show the full context. Tell the full story. Which shows that Donald Trump knew exactly what was going on. Well, I don't know about that. We now have the full clip. And they love to say that if you show the full video, it completely changes our interpretation of what was taking place. The clip you played started in the middle of the story. Well, here's the video of what happened right before. And what you see is that Donald Trump, seemingly believing himself to be South Korean, walks in, I guess thinking he's part of the South Korean delegation, blindly follows Lee Jae Myung to his seat and has to be again redirected. The full context reveals that multiple times during the G7, Trump had to be told, no, no, no, sir, right this way. You're going in the wrong direction. Look at the confused Trump following the South Korean delegate.

[Donald Trump]

Oh, I love prison.

[David Pakman]

Oh, God.

[Donald Trump]

Look at the.

[David Pakman]

Sir, everybody over here is South Korean. Please follow me.

[Trey Gowdy]

I'm the boss.

[David Pakman]

I'm the boss. What was left out from the context that makes Trump look with it and really good that the magas were furious with me over is Trump coming in and believing himself to be part of the South Korean delegation. He doesn't look like the guy in charge. What's fascinating in these videos is that you see Trump. He just looks like he is following and following in a very confused way. Am I even in the right room here? And once you see the whole context, it gets even worse. Now, the reason that all of this gets attention, and I understand the magazine mad, because their guy seems to have a barely functioning brain. You know, the hamster wheel is spinning, but the hamsters are long dead. This is the opposite of the narrative that they put forward about their guy. And these are the sorts of things they accused Joe Biden of suffering from when Biden was president. So there's a pattern here. Moments of confusion, losing his train of thought, not recognizing people, mostly sitting rather than standing. Limiting his schedule to 12 to 5 limited public appearances. Questions about physical sharpness, questions about cognitive sharpness. No one incident proves anything. But when you spend years making age, cognition, and mental fitness the central policy issue, especially when talking about Joe Biden and then you're confused. You're wandering around with the South Koreans. You've got to be redirected after a picture. Sir, come this way. During a picture, can everybody look at the camera? And. And Trump is completely in profile, hunched over, looking the other way, vacant look in his eyes. He wanders in with the South Korean delegation. The context makes it worse. And in fact, in this particular situation, it makes it considerably worse. Now, there is. You know, I would respect the magazine more if instead of writing to me about Joe Biden, who hasn't been president now for nearly two years. Write to me about Trump and say, listen, I prefer Trump on immigration. I prefer Trump on men and women's sports. I prefer Trump on foreign policy. But he is declining and he's declining rapidly and significantly more than Joe Biden. I would respect them for that. I can come to the table and say you didn't like Biden, you prefer Trump's ideas, but you're acknowledging that something is very wrong with this guy. The, the, the insistence that there's that Trump is in better physical and mental shape than Obama at age 47. You just don't sound believable, Obama. And by the way, I am wearing my Obama T shirt. I know it's very triggering to people. I am, I am wearing that T shirt today because it is such an auspicious day for that sort of shirt. What would the opening of the the Obama library and everything come on magazine just write to me and go, david, you know what? I like his politics, but he's losing it. He's cracking. His brain isn't working. I will respect you far more. I don't expect them to do that. Think of how much personal information you put into your favorite AI chat bot. They track everything you say on the app. Many of them sell the data to to ad companies, and they use your personal info to train the AI. So your personal life lives inside the chat bot forever. Creepy stuff. Which is why I recommend Venice. It's sort of like a VPN for AI. Our sponsor, Venice, gives you access to all the best and latest language models, chat, GPT, Claude, Gemini, Grok, Deep Seek, as well as leading image, video and music generation models all in one place. But you can use them privately and anonymously and it's completely uncensored. On Venice, you can ask the AI for anything and it won't say no. Nothing is tied to your identity because your prompts are encrypted. They never even leave your device, so no corporation or government can spy on you. And those conversations Access the world's leading AI models privately. You'll get 20% off any plan. When you go to Venice AI/Pacman and use the code Pacman. The link is in the description Health routines can get complicated. There's another powder or a capsule or a tracker or a protocol. And then the routine is so complicated that it becomes the obstacle to just sticking with it. This is why I like AG1 Pro, its targeted support for my supplement routine with no additional steps. AG1 Pro is an advanced daily health drink from our sponsor AG1 starts with AG1 next gen as the foundation adds three research backed ingredients in meaningful doses if you want them. Five grams of creatine monohydrate, calcium, HMB and Zinc carnosine. The creatine helps build lean muscle when you strength train calcium. HMB helps support the maintenance of muscle mass and Zinc carnosine supports gut barrier integrity. That's on top of the daily nutritional support that AG1 Next Gen gives you over 80 vitamins, minerals, probiotics and antioxidants. The appeal for me is just fewer bottles. It's just a practical way to to cover my basis. You've got your foundational, nutrition, muscle support. It's all in one drink. Visit drink ag1.com/pacman to get a free Ag1 Pro Yeti Shaker in your Ag1 Pro Welcome Kit. The link is in the description the David Pakman show is primarily an audience supported program and I have to thank Listen to this. The 942 new members that signed up last week during our one day membership drive. The White House put me on a list. They want to shut it down and 942 of you came through and said I stand with you David. If you missed that special and you still want to take advantage of it, we'll offer it. Just write in info@david pakman.com and say, David, I need that code. A reminder Monday, the preorder campaign for my forthcoming book Pay Attention, which we expect the Trump administration will tell Amazon not to sell again because they've done it to my books in the past. The preorder campaign will begin. There will be signed books available. All of that on Monday. Show up ready on Monday to help build this thing. More about the book on Monday. This is one of the most bizarre videos I have ever seen. Donald Trump, apropos of nothing, said that Steve that Steve shot his throat. Oh, this is going to be a tough one to get through. I don't have any explanation for this. I could not stop laughing at this video last night. Night. Take a look at this.

[Donald Trump]

The press conference seems to have gone well. You shot your load pretty much, Steve, right? Pretty much. But going well.

[David Pakman]

This guy's out of his mind. What on earth is he talking about? What on earth. Hey, Steve Schott is loaded. The press conference.

[Donald Trump]

He's out of his mind.

[David Pakman]

He's completely deranged now. Was he talking to a photographer? Does he mean that the entire Does Trump think that there are roles of film and the entire roll of film was was consumed with with photographs I

[Donald Trump]

have never seemed anything like, well, you shot your load pretty much, Steve, right? Pretty much. But going well, seems like.

[David Pakman]

Guys, I don't. Did you see what, what Steve did in that meeting? It was absolutely insane. What. Steve, I. What is wrong with this guy? What is Trump talking about now? It then became even more dystopian once we got the extremely unusual declarations out of the way. I don't think I've ever heard a president say that. That's what happened. Trump seems to kind of say, listen, if other countries get to have ballistic missiles, I guess Iran should too. This is the pathetic shriveling of a surrender, a complete. And listen, if we get to have nukes, why don't they. Oh, but I thought that was the whole point, that not everybody gets to have all the same stuff, a complete surrender. Ladies and gentlemen, the press conference, you said you don't mind Iran having ballistic missiles.

[Donald Trump]

Can you elaborate on that?

[David Pakman]

I want to make sure we understand your position.

[Donald Trump]

No, I want to. I'm saying that if other countries, countries have them, it's a little bit unfair for them not to have some. A ballistic missile is not the same thing as what we're talking about when we talk nuclear. But if Saudi Arabia and Qatar and they all have some, I would say in relative proportion, I think it's okay.

[David Pakman]

Why? Where did this new Trump come from? Well, I'll tell you, this is a Trump who realizes he lost. Has anyone lost an optional war of their choosing this battle badly in recent history? Think about how radically different this sounds from the Trump who has been talking about Iran for nearly a decade. Trump says Iran's an existential threat. The Obama nuclear deal doesn't go far enough. Every concession to Iran is dangerous. Giving them a single dollar in sanctions relief is dangerous. We got to get out of the Obama deal because it's so weak, it's so soft, I've got to get a better deal. And now Trump's going, listen. I mean, after all, if other countries get to have missiles, they should at least have some, right? What does this relate to? This goes back to one of the ever shifting supposed goals of this war, which was to eliminate Iran's ballistic missiles capability, which obviously they're not going to be able to do. Imagine if Barack Obama or Joe Biden ever uttered the sentence, if other countries get to have missiles, Iran should get to have some as well. Mind blowing surrender, Trump. Then it was just confusion after confusion. Trump saying, I signed it, I signed the MoU as he departs from Versailles and we'll Talk about the historical significance of that as well. And it doesn't sound like he wants to answer a question about Israel.

[Donald Trump]

He said it.

[Trey Gowdy]

The stories made in Versailles.

[David Pakman]

I signed it. In Versailles. I signed it. He keeps making these statements that are completely at odds with the arguments that were used for years against Barack Obama's nuclear deal. If Iran can keep significant capabilities, if Iran gets economic benefits, if Iran gets sanctions relief, if missile programs are no longer a deal breaker, if getting the enriched uranium back is no longer a deal breaker, it is logical for all of us to ask a really simple question. If this is okay, what was so bad about the Obama deal that was in place in 2015, that Trump got out of in 2018? Every single detail that comes out makes it harder and harder to distinguish Trump's approach from what he condemned. Because we went through an optional war at great cost, human and financial. I know it's mostly Iranian civilians, I understand. But still people, right? Physic, Human and financial cost. Increase the cost of gas for the average American. Increase the cost of heating oil for the average American through the economy into this thing that's being shaken around for what? For a deal that is not even as strong as the one that was widely condemned when it was Barack Obama. Give me a break, guys. This just. Just write to me magazine, tell me you were wrong. This is not the anti war guy. This is not the strong negotiator. This is not the guy who understands foreign policy. He's just a buffoon who. Who I guess you liked better than Kamala Harris. Admit that that's what this is about. And as the day went on and earlier, the concerns around Trump's capacity to even understand what he signed became a growing issue. Before we move on, let me just throw in, because I'm trying to be. I don't know that this is charitable. Like maybe Trump's just demented and he's not actually that. That stupid. There's another possibility, which is, does Donald Trump lack the cognitive wherewithal to even understand why this deal is so bad? Is it a possibility that what's happening here is a brain problem rather than cowardice and impotence? Let's explore that next. Once again, I. I can't believe that this is a situation we're in. Once again, there were questions as. Whether. As to whether Donald Trump suffered an episode, another episode, of fecal incontinence during an event in France at the G7. I know that it's. Once again, the whole, did Trump poop his pants?

[Donald Trump]

Thing.

[David Pakman]

Donald Trump's body made an unusual sound in the middle of ranting about a rigged election. How does this keep happening?

[Donald Trump]

We ended up with the original members. But then when the election was, oh,

[David Pakman]

it's happening again, ladies and gentlemen. Oh, my God. How is. And listen, I don't know that we're going to be able to. To glean that much from Howard Nutlik and Marco Rubio's facial expressions, but there are those who wrote to me and said they both seemed to tense up when they heard it.

[Donald Trump]

Original members. But then when the election was.

[David Pakman]

All right, so Trump's body is making unusual noises, and then all of a sudden, he can barely complete a full sentence. And there were questions as to whether he was having a medical event during this presentation. Let's take a listen.

[Donald Trump]

And oil is dropping like it has never dropped before at levels that went in numbers down. $7 down.

[David Pakman]

Oil is dropping like it has never dropped before at levels when in. In numbers. I understand why people are worried that what happened is Trump simply doesn't understand the deal that he has signed with Iran.

[Donald Trump]

$8. They've never seen anything like that.

[David Pakman]

$8. Trump insisting that before he came to power, the United States was a laughingstock, a mere laughingstock with a Biden presidency that was not really a presidency where he could only talk about the ice cream flavors that he likes. But what we have happening is Trump saying, you can walk from Qatar to Iran when you can't. We have Trump potentially soiling himself again. We have Trump saying a reporter shot his load during a meeting and he wants to talk about Biden.

[Donald Trump]

It's bigger and better and stronger. We're more respected as a country right now, I think, than we ever have been. And we were a laughingstock two years ago. They would laugh at us. We had a man that should have never been there. You know that? A man that would walk up to a podium once every year and they'd ask him, what flavor ice cream do you like? I like vanilla. Then he'd try and find the stairs, which he couldn't find most of the time, and he'd leave. This is very unfair reporting. And then you said you didn't know about that. You didn't know there was something wrong. We can never let that happen to our country again. To me, the worst. We had the worst inflation ever. We had the worst in prices and the costs.

[David Pakman]

Not exactly a projection of strength and virility, that I can assure you. One of my favorite things that happens with Donald Trump, there are, like, TikTok pranks with this concept. When Trump needs English to English translation. It is absolutely one of my favorite things. Trump takes a question from a Japanese reporter. The guy is speaking clear English. Trump can't understand it. And then Marco Rubio, who speaks English and Spanish, comes in to translate, but he's doing English to English translation. This is one of my favorite things.

[Trey Gowdy]

Did you ask other G7 nations to send military force? And what specifically are you asking of Japan or where are you from? I'm from Japan.

[Donald Trump]

From where?

[Trey Gowdy]

Japan.

[Donald Trump]

And I just left your Prime Minister. Japan's doing very well.

[David Pakman]

I just left you, Prime Minister.

[Donald Trump]

She's my biggest fan, I have to tell you. She thinks I did a great job. You have to call her and ask her. She's doing a very good job, by the way. Go ahead.

[Trey Gowdy]

And military support is no longer necessary.

[Donald Trump]

What do you want to know? Go ahead, just tell me. What do you want to know?

[Trey Gowdy]

Okay, my question is, did you ask other disability nations to send military force? And what specifically are you asking of

[Donald Trump]

Japan to send the air Force? For what?

[David Pakman]

I don't know.

[Trey Gowdy]

Why?

[David Pakman]

When? Why is this so insane? What? And now he turns to Marco Rubio, and Rubio is going to try to understand it, explain it.

[Trey Gowdy]

Military.

[Donald Trump]

Oh, other countries, not just Japan. No, no, I don't need. We don't need it.

[David Pakman]

I've never seen anything like this. But by the way, how does Trump understand his own wife if he can never understand the reporters? There was an incident with an Indian reporter who spoke far clearer English than Melania, despite Melania being a genius, supposedly, and living in the United States for 30 years and speaking seven languages. How does Trump understand Melania if he doesn't understand this? I don't know why I find it so insanely funny when Trump needs English to English translation. At another moment, by the way, Trump seemed to forget J.D. vance, his name. Searching around for a man, a person, a good person.

[Donald Trump]

JD Made a statement as a.

[David Pakman]

A man. Yes. A person. Yes. A good person. Well, I don't know. Jd. JD did it. And this was sort of building to this new thing we're going to dive more deeply into, which is Trump wants to have the credit of ending the Iran war if it looks good. But if the deal goes south, he wants to be able to blame J.D. vance. And he's sort of joking about it, but they're actually starting to do some element to this where you send the vice president, if it works out great, you look like a genius for sending him. And if it doesn't work out, it's

[Donald Trump]

the vice President, I like that idea. Sure. Well, this way, if it works out, I'm going to take the credit. If it doesn't work out, I'm blaming jd. You better be careful, jd. He's going to turn his plane around and get the hell out of here. Yeah, I like that idea.

[David Pakman]

I think now Trump is sort of joking to the extent that Trump jokes, but they're actually already kind of starting to do this. A reporter brings up, on the one hand you're making a deal with Iran, and on the other hand you're threatening to bomb Iran. But the deal doesn't seem to contain any enforcement mechanism. So will it just be kind of like willy nilly and Trump goes, now we don't need any enforcement mechanisms. Like, I'll just decide, I'll bomb the hell out of you if I decide I want to. So you're threatening to bomb Iran if

[Sarah Matthews]

they don't comply, but there's nothing enforceable in the deal itself, is that correct?

[Donald Trump]

Doesn't have to be. I let him know, I said, look, if you don't adhere to the agreement, I don't want to do that, but we're going to bomb the hell out of you. And I don't think that they're going to veer from the agreement. What else am I going to do? Am I going to say I'm going to take you to court, Let me take you to court. Let me just. Let me sue you now, we're going to bomb the hell out of them if they violate the agreement. I don't.

[David Pakman]

It's a gentleman's agreement, I guess, with a guy who is the furthest thing from a gentleman that maybe I've ever seen. Now, finally, just by way of demonstration, I'm not going to torture you and play the entire thing. I have a six minute stretch of Trump just rambling. I'm not going to play all of it. We'll just randomly dive into it and just look at the complete lack of syntax and connection to anything. And the look on Marco Rubio's face is one of the most interesting things. I'm going to get back to the look on Marco Rubio's face later from the Middle East.

[Donald Trump]

You know, if people want to invest, and again, they don't have to invest at all. But if they do want to invest, it does have oil, it does have probably a future, but it's going to take a long time. But are you going to let the 91 million people starve to death? I mean, one of the things I was very intent on. They have water desalinization plants, very good ones. I could have knocked them out in five minutes.

[David Pakman]

Anyway. I'm not going to torture you with more of this in one day. Trump telling a reporter he shot his load, potentially soiling himself again and making even Marco Rubio cringe from standing behind him during unhinged, dilapidated rants. Oh boy, it's not getting better and it seems to be very quickly getting worse. The David Pakman show is an audience supported program and the best, most direct way to support the show is by becoming a member@join pacman.com you'll get the daily bonus show, the the daily commercial free show and plenty of other great membership perks. Get the full experience by signing up@join pacman.com Sarah Matthews was deputy White House press secretary under Donald Trump. She is no longer a fan of Trump. I did a substack live with her. Make sure you're following [e-mail] pakman.com to get these conversations live as they happen. We talked about a lot of interesting things. She made a lot of interesting disclosures and some stuff that will probably surprise you. Let's take a look.

[Interviewer]

So I want to talk about this economic campaign that Home of the Brave is doing and more generally about discussions around the state of the economy. Let's talk a little bit about the Iran deal negotiations that have been going on. One of the things I think would be really interesting for our audience to hear a little bit about is, you know, we've seen publicly the, the storyline develop into this deal doesn't seem to have that many great things in it for the United States. Iran supposedly lost the war, but they're kind of ending up ahead in some ways. We have this former nuclear deal. It's not like we have nothing to compare to. We have the old Obama nuclear deal that we can sort of compare and contrast and say, well, that deal was too weak according to Donald Trump, but this new deal appears not to even be as strong as that one was. And then the blame game starts. Hey, if this works, it's Trump who gets credit. But if it doesn't work, JD Vance gets the blame. And people like Sean Hannity and Ben Shapiro have already started to say, I don't even think Trump was involved in this thing. Talk a little bit from your experience in managing relationships with the press, how are these strategies developed? Like, is it likely people get together and go, okay, how about this? Let's blame JD if it doesn't go

[David Pakman]

well, or do these things kind of

[Interviewer]

Develop more in response to public narrat. What's the strategy behind it?

[Sarah Matthews]

I think that the strategy always comes from Trump at the top. And with him, it's if something goes right, then he gets to claim victory. And if something goes wrong, it wasn't his fault and he'll find someone else to take the fall. You know, we've seen them do that with him blaming the economy on the previous administration, saying that he inherited these prices when we know that that isn't the case, that he has only made the affordability crisis worse. So he's always going to find someone to pin the blame on when something wrong. And we're seeing that play out, like you said, with the Iran deal, where it's getting negative press coverage and people are criticizing it, and not just folks like myself, but Republicans, people in his own party are criticizing it. We saw Nikki Haley come out and say that if the details of the Iran deal that were being reported were accurate, that this would be a win for Iran. And so they know that right now that this is not being covered well for them. And so we're already seeing folks in MAGA world like Ben Shapiro and others and Sean Hannity come out and say, oh, well, actually, this really isn't the President's Fault. It was J.D. vance who was the lead negotiator, when, honestly, that's just a bunch of bs. This is what always happens with the vice President. They get the short end of the stick. And we saw it happen under the Biden administration with their mishandling of the border crisis, and they tried to pin the blame on Kamala Harris and say, well, she was the border czar. But at the end of the day, like, the buck stops with the President. So if Trump didn't like the deal that J.D. vance negotiated, then tell him to go negotiate a better deal. Then you don't just say, oh, well, this is what he negotiated. So we're just going to go with it like, you're the boss, you're the man in charge. So if you don't like what he negotiated, then have him do something better. And I'll point out, too, that I think anyone trying to say it was J.D. who was the one negotiating it. No, really, it was Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner, two realized estate developers. And then we wonder why we ended up with this shit deal that's actually much worse than the jcpoa.

[Interviewer]

The whole the buck stops with the president thing, it's. It's sometimes almost cliche, but when you really think about the Specifics. If Trump authorized whoever to negotiate, whether it was J.D. vance or it was Witkoff and Kushner, if Trump is delegating to people, negotiation, if he's promoting the MoU is a great thing, if he's claiming that the MoU is the culmination of this military, this, this war, this, these military decisions and that it is a good thing, then he does have to stand behind it. He can't say both.

[David Pakman]

Give me the credit for the fact

[Interviewer]

that this took place, but the details are someone else's to take the blame for. Are these situations difficult for people working as press secretary, deputy press secretary, to manage because they sort of require throwing someone under the bus?

[David Pakman]

Or are they.

[Interviewer]

Are these manageable situations behind the scenes in ways that may not be obvious to the audience?

[Sarah Matthews]

I think it gets difficult when no matter what it is, Trump will take a negative and try to spin it into a positive and claim victory. And, for example, with this situation, this is a crisis of his own making. It's not like we were attacked and we had to go to war, and then we're trying to end this war. He started it because I think he thought it was going to be an easier win, something like the operation in Venezuela. And I think he thought, oh, I'm going to do this again. And he was running on this high from Venezuela. And then obviously, the worst thing possible that everyone predicted would happen, the closing of the Strait of Hormuz happened. All war gaming scenarios predicted that this would likely happen. And so Trump, I think, thought that they. He was calling their bluff and it wouldn't happen. And it did. And so then, now, you know, the world economy is in a spiral because of it, and his poll numbers are tanking, and so he wants to try to claim victory on a crisis of his own making. And so we're actually worse off now than we were before the war because of his decision and incompetency to launch this attack. And that does make it difficult for the staffers of his administration, particularly press staffers then, who have to go to try to sell this to the American people and to the media and try to spin this into a positive. And. But. And then, yeah, it does probably get awkward between the president and the vice president's team. I remember when I was at the White House and we were dealing with COVID during the time I was there. I was there in the first administration, the last seven or eight months or so. So Covid was the biggest crisis that we were facing. And when Covid began, guess what? The president did he tapped the vice president to lead the COVID response? This is what always happens. They always give the vice President something that they don't want to deal with, that they know is a catastrophe. And there was a little bit of awkwardness between how the vice president's team was messaging things and how the president wanted things messaged. And so that did make it awkward between our two teams. And there would be times where the vice president's team, I remember they put out this op ed in the Wall Street Journal that we were unaware of, that we found about as the public did. And that is not how things should go in normal operations. You would usually clear something at that big of scale with the president's press team ahead of time. And it was because they were trying to make their boss look in a good light. And so I think we're already seeing that play out too, with jd, where there was leaked reporting that inside the Situation Room that before Trump launched this attack on Iran, that JD was the one voice in the room to push back on him and say, I don't think this is a good idea, but I'll be supportive of you, sir. And that is obviously coming from JD's camp. They're the ones leaking that because they are trying to set their boss up to say, hey, I didn't support this thing, and create some distance, because we all know that he is positioning himself for a 2028 run.

[Interviewer]

If we think about the next 60 days of this supposed negotiation period, the administration and Trump himself keep saying, but if they don't, then we're going to start bombing. And one of the things I think is really interesting about that, because the MOU doesn't talk about any enforcement mechanisms, is that 60 days puts us roughly in the second half of August, which seems dangerously close to an election to actually go back in and start bombing. Especially because if Trump did that, it's

[David Pakman]

not going to be two days.

[Interviewer]

It will probably go into at least when people are doing early voting, if not through Election Day. And it seems the Iranians must know this and know that now this is a point of leverage for them, which is Trump can't really go back in and start bombing without huge risk to Republicans in the election. Do you agree that that gives Iran leverage and it takes away leverage from Trump?

[Sarah Matthews]

Yeah, I think that's a really good point. That the optics of it aren't great for Trump and the Republican Party, that it would potentially line up so closely near the election. And I think that the Iranians, if they're smart they realize it. Who knows, it could just be a coincidence. But I do think that they realize that they have the upper hand in these negotiations right now. I think they, in addition to something like that, they now realize that they can control the Strait of Hormuz. This was a hypothetical before, but now they've been able to actually do it and take it over. And so they know that they can immediately do that. And once again, they have the power, they're in control. And yes, Trump can threaten to bomb them to smithereens and all these things, but at the end of the day, if you actually want to reach a conclusion that doesn't involve us getting into this kind of big scale war, it requires some diplomacy. And I just don't think that Trump is capable of that. You know, we saw how when he threatens Iran on his true social posts and he says that he's going to like bomb the shit out of their civilization and kill all these people. And it's like, I don't think that they really want to negotiate in good faith with you, but I guess also taking the Iranians at their word is also a risk. And we saw that in reporting too, with leaked reports that came out when the deal was, was put together on Monday and all throughout the week saying that even folks like Pete Hegseth and Marco Rubio and John Ratcliffe were all skeptical of this deal because you're taking the Iranians at their word. And I will point out too that this 60 day window that we're talking about where we still have to iron out the details on enforcement mechanisms and the nuclear provisions and all these things, it took the Obama administration, I believe, like two years to negotiate the jcpoa. And you're telling me that Trump is going to negotiate a better deal in the next 60 days? I mean, come on, there's just no way. And like, I wishful thinking, like I would love for it to be a better deal than the jcpoa, that would be a win for America and it would maybe make it worth it that we launch this attack. But as of now, it seems like this is a complete failure and that we're going to end up with something worse than the JCPOA at worst and at best the exact same.

[Interviewer]

It seems extraordinarily likely now. The economic effects of this war have been significant. And one of the interesting things is that there's been a sort of different approach to how much the administration is blamed for the state of the economy now versus what they were saying when Joe Biden was president and we'll look at a couple of examples. But Home of the Brave launched this campaign, Sticker Shock Summer, which is focused on connecting the dots between here's Trump administration policy and here's the effect on the economy. Now, I've been honest in the past, Sarah, where sometimes gas prices may be up or down and it has nothing to do with anything that the president did. There are limited things presidents can actually do to affect gas prices. They can do a gas tax holiday, they can release oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, or they can start a war with a country that either mediates or has supply of oil. Trump did number three. And so there's a direct connection here to what's going on with gas prices. Do you think that Americans are connecting the dots on here's why things cost what they cost and a bunch of these decisions like tariffs and the war are optional all or do you think that Republicans and the administration are doing a good or good enough job of acting as though their policy doesn't relate to what people are seeing when they check out and buy stuff?

[Sarah Matthews]

I think that this administration is trying to gaslight the American people and tell them that we inherited these prices. This is the fault of the previous administration and they trying to pin the blame on Biden when that just isn't the case. And that's why the group that you mentioned that I'm working with, Home of the Brave, we launched this Sticker Shock Summer campaign because we want to educate, immobilize the American people and show them that no, this is the direct result of Trump's disastrous policies, whether that be his asinine tariffs, whether that be him launching this war with Iran that has sent gas prices skyrocketing and caused everything else to just go up. The cost of everything. When he was the one who said that if he came into office that he would bring prices down. And instead he's out there saying things like I love the inflation and that's why we launched 16 billboards and or 16 billboards in 16 states across the country and digital ad campaigns as well, highlighting those comments from him and just pointing out to people, here's what the prices were before Trump's disastrous policies and here's what they are now as a result. So we're trying to do our part in educating the American people on this and showing them that he is the one to blame for the higher costs that you're seeing. And I think, too, that you bring up a good point about how gas prices can go up for sometimes things that are out of the president's control. We saw that happen with the Biden administration, actually. And he had to deal with Russia starting a war with Ukraine. And that's why we saw gas prices rise under his watch. And I think a lot of people just pin the blame on him without realizing that, actually, that this was why we were seeing that. And same goes for inflation. Biden was dealing with Russia's war with Ukraine and he was dealing with COVID still. And that was why inflation was so high under him. Why we're seeing inflation be so high under Trump is all because of his own doing. It's because of him imposing these tariffs. It's because of him launching this war of choice with Iran. So he is actually the one who is to blame for inflation being at the level it is. We just saw it hit its highest level in three years. And he's the one to blame for the skyrocketing gas prices that we're seeing. And I will point out, too, even if that we, this peace deal goes through, we end the war, the strait is open, all these things, it's not like the economy is just going to snap back. That's not how this works. Because of a level of this disruption, it's going to take a while before we see costs come down, before we see gas prices come down. And so that's something else to keep in mind, that they're going to say, oh, well, it's going to all come down. But it's not just like they can snap their fingers and make that happen. It's going to take a little bit before we can even reach equilibrium. And again, the tariffs are still imposed as well, even though he found a workaround despite the Supreme Court knocking them down. And so it's not like the economy is just going to be fantastic now, even if he finds a way to negotiate an end to this war that he started.

[Interviewer]

Last thing I want to talk about. As we think about the timing of the midterm elections and we look at prices, the war, et cetera, one of the things that we often hear from voters is, even if I don't like what Trump is doing, I actually think my member of the House is doing a fine job, or my senator is doing a fine job. One of the things that I've been suggesting that people consider and they might consider and decide, no, I still want to vote for my member of the House. These disaffected Republican Trump voters who are still planning to go and reelect their Republican representatives, they may not be as off putting to you as Trump is in terms of what you see day to day. But for the most part, they are publicly not saying anything about their potential disagreements with what Trump is doing. And they're still voting effectively as rubber stamps to what Donald Trump wants. So whatever side of it you end up on, fine. But I've been encouraging voters really to

[David Pakman]

think about, you know, I don't like what Trump is doing, but I have

[Interviewer]

no problem with Susan Collins if she's your senator or whoever Chip Roy is. They are mostly rubber stamping what Trump is doing, and I think it's valuable. And I'd be interested in hearing from you as someone who, who certainly to

[David Pakman]

my right, although we've talked about how

[Interviewer]

you identify politically now, these elected officials have effectively endorsed the things Trump has done by not opposing them, have they not?

[Sarah Matthews]

Yeah, we only seem to find Republicans find their voice when they're either retiring or they lose their primaries. We're seeing that with folks like John Cornyn and Bill Cassidy and Thom Tillis, where they're now speaking out against Trump. And we've seen them speak out against things like this Iran deal, like the ballroom, like the $1.8 billion slush fund, all these things that now they're being critical of the president and somehow find their spine. But the timing of it, you know, it's like, where were you the last 10 years? And so, yeah, a lot of these politicians are so scared of Trump and getting primaried and they, they're so desperate to hold on to power that they're not willing to push back on him in these instances. And yeah, like you said, they're effectively rubber stamping everything because if you're not pushing back on it or condemning it, then you're endorsing it. And so I think that I, maybe, maybe there will be folks who will find a little bit more of their voice because they see Trump as this lame duck president. But to me, that just isn't good enough. You've had all this time and watched all of this play out, and instead of doing what you know is in your constituents best interest, you just decide to stay silent. And that's what's so frustrating, is that like, so that and why Washington is so broken, that people are more concerned with staying in power and they're so scared of Trump that they would just rather stay silent. And instead of actually doing what, what they're there to do, which is represent their people. And, and I think that I've had plenty of conversations with different members, different staffers across the administration or in Congress. And privately, a lot of people say to me, Sarah, I agree with everything you're saying, or I keep up the good work. And I'm like, great. Oh, I wish more of you would join me because they know that, like, Trump is crazy. They know that the tariffs were a bad idea or launching this war was a bad idea or whatever it is. But they won't say it publicly. And so hopefully, you know, in the, in the midterms, we elect more people who are not so scared and are actual fighters and who are willing to speak up and speak out and be representatives, good representatives for their constituents. And so that hopefully that that's the case in November. But I predict that there will probably be a big blue wave because I do think that a lot of people, even people who voted for Trump, feel buyer's remorse right now at all the broken campaign promises.

[Interviewer]

It seems to be reflected in the polling, that's for sure. Sarah Matthews, former Deputy White House Press Secretary, Always good to talk to you.

[Sarah Matthews]

Yes, thanks for having me.

[Interviewer]

Talk to you soon.

[David Pakman]

If you like this show, I would love for you to get my substack writing. Each day I'll send you a rundown of what's on the show, what's happening, what matters, why it's free, no spam. Substack is also the only place where we own our data. So if we get censored on social media or on any platform, substack is going to be the only way I can tell you what is going on. Sign up now@david pakman.substack.com as we move forward on Operation Epic Surrender by Donald Trump. And it is widely criticized by anyone with a brain. Donald Trump is increasingly furious. Trump erupted overnight at 4 in the morning after the brutal destruction of whatever he was trying to do in Iran. Stroking out at 4:32am on Truth Social. And he is right to recognize that people aren't falling for this crap. Trump throwing a tantrum at 432, apparently after being up all night watching criticism even from his own allies here in the United States. Posting to Truth Social, quote, these fools who think I haven't been tough enough on Iran when the stock market just hit a record high and oil prices are tumbling down, are either jealous bad people or stupid. Make America Great Again. President Donald J. Trump. You know, even Bari Weiss's CBS is reporting the Obama nuclear deal and Trump's letter are basically the same, except now Iran gets not only sanctions relief to a greater degree than they got from the Obama deal, they also get access to this $300 billion reparations fund writing, quote, both deals ban Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. But the jcpoa, meaning the Obama deal, was far more specific about how Trump signing the surrender at Versailles. These are very interesting optics because Versailles is World War I and World War II history buffs or whatever. You just. People who are a little bit aware about World War I may remember that Versailles is sort of associated with surrender because the 1919 Peace Treaty, the Treaty of Versailles to end World War I, was signed there. Germany had lost. They were forced to accept terrible punitive terms, territorial losses under the threat of an Allied invasion. And so the optics of Donald Trump signing this thing at Versailles only sort of reinforce the optics of surrender. And look at little Marco Rubio standing behind Trump like, this is something good.

[Donald Trump]

Yes. Bravo.

[David Pakman]

Make sure to keep the pens he used to sign the surrender. Those are really keeps good, keepsakes.

[Donald Trump]

Good job. Great job.

[David Pakman]

Now, just a reminder, Donald Trump, despite all of this, all the pomp and the circumstance, Trump leaves the door open to Iran enriching uranium. And Trump goes, listen, adjoining states have it. Other people have it. You got to maybe let them do it.

[Donald Trump]

We've been pretty tough in that. You know, it's also. It is a little hard, though, when you say that somebody wants it, other people have it, other adjoining states have it, and you're not letting them have it for purposes of electricity and things like that. So it's a little tough. You have to use a little common sense, if you please.

[David Pakman]

It's sort of like diplomatic, but, mommy, he gets to play with the toy. Why don't I now remember Donald Trump Tweeting back in 2017, quote, Iran was on its last legs and ready to collapse until the US Came along and gave it a lifeline in the form of The Iran deal. $150 billion. But that was Obama. That's completely different Obama. It's different in that it was Obama. It's not different substantively. It's not different in terms of, like, listen, sanctions relief is sanctions relief, no matter which president does it. And it's not. It's not just Trump. Here is Senator Roger Marshall saying, listen, they. They've got to have some missiles, right? They do. Where were these people when Barack Obama signed the JCPOA in 2015? Where were these people when Trump terminated the JCPOA in 2018? Because it was too we. No, but now, listen, it's only fair. They got to have some missiles. And by the way, to defend themselves. From who? From us. They need missiles. What on earth is this guy talking

[Sarah Matthews]

about, Senator, are you okay with Iran having missiles?

[Senator Roger Marshall]

You know, I'm hesitating. I prefer that they not. I certainly don't want them have long distance missiles. I don't want them to have nuclear armed missiles. I would prefer they didn't. But I don't think that's the key issue here. I think that they have to be able to defend themselves. And I just kind of come back to the big picture here, is that the Middle east countries like this agreement,

[Sarah Matthews]

Iran needs to be able to defend itself.

[Senator Roger Marshall]

I do. I think that they have to be able to defend themselves. Otherwise we turn this into a forever war.

[David Pakman]

Against who though, right? I mean, that's the funny thing. We're the ones attacking Iran. And now Trump's going, no, like they should have some missiles for defense to defend themselves against your next attack on them.

[Senator Roger Marshall]

You're never going to get them short of boots on the ground of surrendering everything. An unconditional agreement, if you will. But, but again, what I'm getting at here is this agreement has the support of all, most of the countries in the Middle east. And I think that's going to give it more of a long lasting relationship, a long lasting success as well.

[David Pakman]

Now, this whole line that they've come up with, it's a very cute line. The Middle Eastern countries support this thing. There is not a shred of evidence that the Middle east countries support this thing because of anything specific about the agreement. It's not that the Middle east countries go, no, listen, we think Qatar loves the agreement because Iran gets to have some missiles. That's ridiculous. These Middle Eastern countries, whose primary interest is economic stability, have an urgent situation where Trump is so unhinged and so erratic and started this optional war that wrecked a whole bunch of their business, business that they just want any way to get the hostilities to stop. They're desperate for the hostilities to stop. It's not about the specifics of the deal. And they keep going back to this very cute line about if this is such a bad deal, why do the Middle east countries support it? They support it because they think Trump's insane. And in fact, there is reporting that Iran used Donald Trump's, quote, mental illnesses against him in these very negotiations. This is stunning. It is stunning that this is now where we're at. It's only fair that they get to do some enrichment. It's only fair that they. And listen, I'm not even arguing that there should be. These countries are allowed, and these are. I'm just comparing to the standards Donald Trump established and the standards dating back to the JCPOA of 2015 that he said must be the red lines. And now they're walking all over Donald Trump's red lines. For years, one of the most fascinating stories to me in Republican politics has been watching ambitious politicians convince themselves I can harness Donald Trump, I can control Trump, I can get aligned with Trump to be close to power. But I'm not going to suffer any of the consequences of Trump being a deranged and incompetent person. We saw it, remember, with former New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, who in 2016, after running against Trump, ultimately kissed the ring, stood behind Trump during a press conference and looked like he had bad. Had some bad clams. He looked sick to his. Sick to his stomach as Donald Trump said ever more deranged things. And it turned out Chris Christie figured out, you really can't align yourself with this guy. You just can't do it. Well, now it's Marco Rubio. Marco Rubio who thinks, listen, I'm going to get close to Trump. I'll be Secretary of State, I'll ride the wave, I'll shape policy, and eventually I could maybe inherit the MAGA coalition for myself. Marco Rubio embodies that strategy maybe more than anyone else currently around Donald Trump. Maybe J.D. vance would be up there. Marco Rubio once said Trump's a con artist. And ultimately he ended up as one one of Donald Trump's biggest defenders. So then he becomes a secretary of state. And it was a very calculated decision. Trump will be the vehicle. I, Marco, get to be one of the adults in the room. I'll be the top diplomatist, Secretary of State. And then you watch this video. Check out the look on Marco Rubio's face. He's realizing this is bad. Some element to this where you send the vice president. If it works out, great, you look like a genius for sending him.

[Senator Roger Marshall]

And if it doesn't.

[David Pakman]

Doesn't work out, it's the vice president.

[Donald Trump]

I like that idea. Sure. Well, this way, if it works out, I'm going to take the credit. If it doesn't work out, I'm blaming J.D. you better be careful, J.D. he's going to turn his plane around and get the hell out of here. Yeah, I like that idea.

[David Pakman]

So you see the look on Marco Rubio's face, and I think it's important on the one hand not to overstate what facial expressions can mean. Nobody knows exactly what Rubio is thinking, but I don't think it's Trump's a Genius. It's. It's difficult not to notice the contrast between Trump enthusiastically talking about this mou, and I'll blame JD or whatever. He's celebrating it, he's selling it. He's acting like this is some, you know, major achievement. And Marco Rubio is standing back there looking like a guy who accidentally opened the email attachment with the virus and is wishing that he hadn't done it. You know, now there is. The politics of the deal are becoming really awkward for the people around Donald Trump, because for nearly a decade, Republicans were told Obama's Iran deal is one of the worst agreements in American history. It's weak, it's appeasement, it's surrender. It's a giveaway. Trump got out of it. He's so big and strong. We're going to get something better. And then every single hour, we learn something new about the framework that Donald Trump is pursuing. And right wingers realize it's a disaster. Megyn Kelly is asking, what do we really get? Trey Gowdy is asking, what do we get here? All sorts of. Ben Shapiro is blaming Vance, which is a different strategy, which we'll get to tomorrow. And they are evaluating what is in this deal compared to what Trump said must be in a deal when he got out of the Obama deal and they realized that this thing doesn't really work. Ben Shapiro is openly criticizing the negotiations. People are wondering, if Iran lost, why do they end up better than they were before? And the United States ends up no better and probably worse. And so this is where Marco Rubio finds himself. It's a very difficult position. Not that I feel bad for him. I'm just saying, objectively, it's a difficult position because he built his foreign policy reputation on being a traditional hawk. That was Rubio's thing. Very tough on adversaries skeptical of Iran. Never give Iran anything. Maximum pressure. And now he is the top diplomat as Secretary of State, overseeing a deal that even the right is struggling to distinguish from the Obama deal, other than recognizing that it's even weaker. And this is kind of the trap. If the deal succeeds, Trump gets the credit, not Marco Rubio. And Trump has joked about that if the deal falls apart and the right continues to revolt against it, it becomes politically toxic. Yeah, Trump jokes about blaming Vance, and they'll probably try to. But Cabinet secretaries, the top diplomat, the Secretary of State, these are people who also get the blame. And next thing you know, they're sniping at each other. Trump goes, well, this person wasn't loyal enough. That person wasn't loyal enough. And there's this larger reality where when you stand behind Trump, you don't really get much of the good shrapnel, but you get all of the bad shrapnel. And we've seen MAGA Mike Johnson stand behind Trump and realize, damn, this isn't going well. We've seen Chris Christie do it. As I've said, do they defend? Do they explain? Do they wonder, damn, what did this guy do to my political future? And when you watch Rubio standing there during Trump's remarks, the I, I would love to know what he's thinking. And it's probably somewhere along the lines of, how am I supposed to defend this? How is this even remotely defensible? Because he knows that the Fox News commentaries and the right wing media commentaries are all this is completely and totally indefensible. I don't feel bad for the guy, but it is funny to see Marco Rubio's political potential collapsing in real time. Now on the bonus show today, we are learning that Luigi Mangione is going to be pursuing a mental health defense in his Manhattan murder trial over the murder of a health care executive. Will that work? We will hear legal opinions. Donald Trump is threatening to pull unemployment benefits from all states for the first time in history. All states. He is saying we will pull unemployment. And the administration wants to pay nearly nearly $800 billion. $800 million to cancel four more wind projects. Why would you pay to cancel them? Well, because they're not really thinking very well. We will have all of those stories and more on today's bonus show. You can sign up at join pacman.

[Donald Trump]

Com.